8-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Date of report (Date of earliest event reported):  February 16, 2022

Coeur Mining, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware	1-8641	82-0109423
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(Commission File Number)	(IRS Employer Identification No.)

104 S. Michigan

Suite 900

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

(312) 489-5800

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

N/A

(Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)

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

☐
Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

☐
Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

☐
Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

☐
Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))

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

Title of each class	Trading Symbol(s)	Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock (par value $.01 per share)	CDE	New York Stock Exchange

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

Emerging growth company ☐

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

Item 8.01 Other Events.

On February 16, 2022, Coeur Mining, Inc. issued technical report summaries for each of the Palmarejo Complex and the Rochester, Kensington and Wharf Mines (the “Reports”). The Reports are filed as Exhibits 96.1, 96.2, 96.3 and 96.4 to this Current Report on Form 8-K and incorporated herein by reference.

Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(d) List of Exhibits

Exhibit No.	Description
Exhibit 23.1	Consent of Qualified Person - Christopher Pascoe (Palmarejo Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.2	Consent of Qualified Person - Miller O’Prey (Palmarejo Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.3	Consent of Qualified Person – Joseph Ruffini (Palmarejo Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.4	Consent of Qualified Person - Peter Haarala (Palmarejo Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.5	Consent of Qualified Person - Christopher Pascoe (Rochester Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.6	Consent of Qualified Person - Brandon MacDougall (Rochester Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.7	Consent of Qualified Person - Matthew Bradford (Rochester Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.8	Consent of Qualified Person - Matthew Hoffer (Rochester Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.9	Consent of Qualified Person - Christopher Pascoe (Kensington Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.10	Consent of Qualified Person - Rae Keim (Kensington Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.11	Consent of Qualified Person - Peter Haarala (Kensington Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.12	Consent of Qualified Person - Christopher Pascoe (Wharf Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.13	Consent of Qualified Person - Tony Auld (Wharf Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.14	Consent of Qualified Person - Lindsay Chasten (Wharf Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.15	Consent of Qualified Person - Kenan Sarratt (Wharf Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 23.16	Consent of Qualified Person - John Key (Wharf Technical Report Summary).
Exhibit 96.1	Technical Report Summary for the Palmarejo Complex effective December 31, 2021.
Exhibit 96.2	Technical Report Summary for the Rochester Mine effective December 31, 2021.
Exhibit 96.3	Technical Report Summary for the Kensington Mine effective December 31, 2021.
Exhibit 96.4	Technical Report Summary for the Wharf Mine effective December 31, 2021.
Exhibit 104	Cover Page Interactive Data File - the cover page XBRL tags are embedded within the Inline XBRL document

SIGNATURE

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

	COEUR MINING, INC.
Date:  February 16, 2022	By:	/s/ Michael Routledge
	Name:	Michael Routledge
	Title:	Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer

EX-23.1

Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Palmarejo complex (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Christopher Pascoe
Name: Christopher Pascoe
Title: Senior Director, Technical Services

EX-23.2

Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Palmarejo complex (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Miller O’Prey
Name: Miller O’Prey
Title:  Director Exploration

EX-23.3

Exhibit 23.3

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Palmarejo complex (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Joseph Ruffini
Name: Joseph Ruffini
Title:  Manager, Resource Estimation

EX-23.4

Exhibit 23.4

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Palmarejo complex (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Peter Haarala
Name: Peter Haarala
Title: Senior Manager, Mine Planning

EX-23.5

Exhibit 23.5

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Rochester Mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Christopher Pascoe
Name: Christopher Pascoe
Title: Senior Director, Technical Services

EX-23.6

Exhibit 23.6

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Rochester Mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Brandon MacDougall
Name: Brandon MacDougall
Title: Engineering Superintendent

EX-23.7

Exhibit 23.7

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Rochester Mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Matthew Bradford
Name: Matthew Bradford
Title: Geology Superintendent

EX-23.8

Exhibit 23.8

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Rochester Mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Matthew Hoffer
Name: Matthew Hoffer
Title: Senior Manager, Geology

EX-23.9

Exhibit 23.9

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Kensington mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Christopher Pascoe
Name: Christopher Pascoe
Title:  Senior Director, Technical Services

EX-23.10

Exhibit 23.10

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Kensington mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Rae D. Keim
Name: Rae D. Keim
Title: Geology Superintendent

EX-23.11

Exhibit 23.11

Consent of Qualified Person

The undersigned consents to:

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Kensington mine (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”);

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements.

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Peter Haarala
Name: Peter Haarala
Title: Senior Manager, Mine Planning

EX-23.12

Exhibit 23.12

Consent of Qualified Person 

The undersigned consents to: 

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Wharf Operations (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”); 

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);  

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and 

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements. 

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Christopher Pascoe
Name: Christopher Pascoe
Title: Senior Director, Technical Services

EX-23.13

Exhibit 23.13

Consent of Qualified Person 

The undersigned consents to: 

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Wharf Operations (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”); 

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);  

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and 

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements. 

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Tony Auld
Name: Tony Auld
Title: Operations Manager

EX-23.14

Exhibit 23.14

Consent of Qualified Person 

The undersigned consents to: 

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Wharf Operations (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”); 

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);  

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and 

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements. 

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Lindsay Chasten
Name: Lindsay Chasten
Title: Senior Geologist

EX-23.15

Exhibit 23.15

Consent of Qualified Person 

The undersigned consents to: 

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Wharf Operations (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”); 

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);  

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and 

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements. 

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ Kenan Sarratt
Name: Kenan Sarratt
Title: Chief Geologist

EX-23.16

Exhibit 23.16

Consent of Qualified Person 

The undersigned consents to: 

a) The filing of the Technical Report Summary, effective December 31, 2021, with respect to the Wharf Operations (the “TRS”) as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”); 

b) The incorporation by reference of the TRS in the annual report on Form 10-K for Coeur Mining, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (the “10-K”), the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-256016, 033-60163, 033-72524, 333-112253, 333-125903, 333-166907, 333-204142, and 333-224751) and Form S-3 (No. 333-229973) (the “Registration Statements”);  

c) The use of and references to the undersigned’s name, including the undersigned’s status as an expert or “Qualified Person” (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in connection with the TRS, Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements; and 

d) Any extracts or summaries of the TRS included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K, the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements,  and any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by the undersigned, that the undersigned supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by the undersigned, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K and the Registration Statements. 

Dated: February 16, 2022
By:	/s/ John Key
Name: John Key
Title: Assistant General Manager/Process Operations Manager

EX-96.1

Exhibit 96.1

 

Palmarejo Operations

Mexico

Technical Report Summary

Prepared for: Coeur Mining, Inc.	Prepared by: Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME Mr. Miller O’Prey, P. Geo. Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME
Report current as at: December 31, 2021

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Date and Signature Page

The following Qualified Persons, who are employees of Coeur Mining, Inc. or its subsidiaries,  prepared this technical report summary, entitled “Palmarejo Operations, Mexico, Technical Report Summary” and confirm that the information in the technical report summary is current as at December 31, 2021 and filed on February 16, 2022.

/s/ Christopher Pascoe

Christopher Pascoe, RM SME

/s/ Miller O’Prey

Miller O’Prey, P. Geo.

/s/ Peter Haarala

Peter Haarala, RM SME

/s/ Joseph Ruffini

Joseph Ruffini, RM SME

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page a

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

CONTENTS

1.0	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	1-1
1.1	Introduction	1-1
1.2	Terms of Reference	1-1
1.3	Property Setting	1-1
1.4	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	1-2
1.5	Geology and Mineralization	1-2
1.6	History and Exploration	1-3
1.7	Drilling and Sampling	1-4
1.8	Data Verification	1-5
1.9	Metallurgical Testwork	1-5
1.10	Mineral Resource Estimation	1-6
1.10.1	Estimation Methodology	1-6
1.10.2	Mineral Resource Statement	1-7
1.10.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	1-7
1.11	Mineral Reserve Estimation	1-9
1.11.1	Estimation Methodology	1-9
1.11.2	Mineral Reserve Statement	1-9
1.11.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	1-10
1.12	Mining Methods	1-10
1.13	Recovery Methods	1-12
1.14	Infrastructure	1-12
1.15	Markets and Contracts	1-13
1.15.1	Market Studies	1-13
1.15.2	Commodity Pricing	1-13
1.15.3	Contracts	1-14
1.16	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	1-14
1.16.1	Environmental Studies and Monitoring	1-14
1.16.2	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	1-14
1.16.3	Permitting	1-14
1.16.4	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	1-15
1.17	Capital Cost Estimates	1-15
1.18	Operating Cost Estimates	1-15
1.19	Economic Analysis	1-16
1.19.1	Forward-Looking Information Caution	1-16
1.19.2	Methodology and Assumptions	1-17
1.19.3	Economic Analysis	1-17
1.19.4	Sensitivity Analysis	1-17
1.20	Risks and Opportunities	1-18
1.20.1	Risks	1-19
1.20.2	Opportunities	1-19
1.21	Conclusions	1-20
1.22	Recommendations	1-20
2.0	INTRODUCTION	2-1
2.1	Registrant	2-1
2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.2.1	Report Purpose	2-1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page i

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

2.2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.3	Qualified Persons	2-4
2.4	Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection	2-4
2.5	Report Date	2-4
2.6	Information Sources and References	2-4
2.7	Previous Technical Report Summaries	2-4
3.0	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION	3-1
3.1	Property Location	3-1
3.2	Ownership	3-1
3.3	Mineral Title	3-1
3.4	Surface Rights	3-6
3.5	Water Rights	3-6
3.6	Royalties	3-11
3.6.1	Franco-Nevada	3-11
3.6.2	Minera Azteca	3-11
3.6.3	Hernández and Gomez	3-11
3.6.4	Rascón	3-12
3.6.5	Minera Río Tinto and Astorga	3-12
3.6.6	Minera Río Tinto and Ayub	3-12
3.6.7	Minera Río Tinto and Rachasa	3-12
3.6.8	Mexican Mining Taxes	3-12
3.7	Encumbrances	3-13
3.7.1	Permitting Requirements	3-13
3.7.2	Permitting Timelines	3-13
3.7.3	Violations and Fines	3-13
3.8	Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs	3-13
4.0	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY	4-1
4.1	Physiography	4-1
4.2	Accessibility	4-1
4.3	Climate	4-1
4.4	Infrastructure	4-2
5.0	HISTORY	5-1
5.1	Project Ownership History	5-1
5.2	Exploration and Development History	5-1
6.0	GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT	6-1
6.1	Deposit Type	6-1
6.2	Regional Geology	6-1
6.3	Local Geology	6-1
6.3.1	Lithologies	6-1
6.3.2	Structure	6-2
6.3.2.1	Palmarejo District	6-2
6.3.2.2	Guazapares District	6-7
6.3.3	Alteration	6-7
6.3.4	Mineralization	6-8
6.3.4.1	Palmarejo District	6-8
6.3.4.2	Guazapares District	6-8
6.4	Property Geology	6-9
6.4.1	Guadalupe	6-9
6.4.1.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page ii

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

6.4.1.2	Lithologies	6-9
6.4.1.3	Structure	6-9
6.4.1.4	Alteration	6-10
6.4.1.5	Mineralization	6-10
6.4.2	Independencia	6-11
6.4.2.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-11
6.4.2.2	Lithologies	6-11
6.4.2.3	Structure	6-17
6.4.2.4	Alteration	6-17
6.4.2.5	Mineralization	6-17
6.4.3	La Nación	6-18
6.4.3.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-18
6.4.3.2	Lithologies	6-22
6.4.3.3	Structure	6-22
6.4.3.4	Alteration	6-22
6.4.3.5	Mineralization	6-22
7.0	EXPLORATION	7-1
7.1	Exploration	7-1
7.1.1	Grids and Surveys	7-1
7.1.2	Geological Mapping	7-1
7.1.3	Geochemistry	7-1
7.1.4	Geophysics	7-2
7.1.5	Exploration Potential	7-3
7.2	Drilling	7-4
7.2.1	Overview	7-4
7.2.2	Drilling Excluded for Estimation Purposes	7-4
7.2.3	Drill Methods	7-4
7.2.4	Logging	7-10
7.2.5	Recovery	7-11
7.2.6	Collar Surveys	7-12
7.2.7	Down Hole Surveys	7-12
7.2.8	Comment on Material Results and Interpretation	7-12
7.3	Hydrogeology	7-13
7.3.1	Groundwater Models	7-13
7.3.2	Water Balance	7-13
7.3.3	Comment on Results	7-14
7.4	Geotechnical	7-14
7.4.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-14
7.4.2	Comment on Results	7-14
8.0	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY	8-1
8.1	Sampling Methods	8-1
8.1.1	Trenches	8-1
8.1.2	RC Drilling	8-1
8.1.3	Core Drilling	8-1
8.1.4	Production Sampling	8-2
8.2	Sample Security Methods	8-2
8.3	Density Determinations	8-3
8.4	Analytical and Test Laboratories	8-3
8.5	Sample Preparation	8-5
8.6	Analysis	8-5

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page iii

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

8.7	Quality Assurance and Quality Control	8-6
8.7.1	Mexoro	8-6
8.7.2	Paramount	8-6
8.7.3	Coeur	8-6
8.7.3.1	QA/QC	8-6
8.7.3.2	Reviews	8-7
8.7.3.3	Check Assays	8-7
8.7.3.4	Down Hole Surveys	8-7
8.7.3.5	Collar Surveys	8-8
8.8	Database	8-8
8.9	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures	8-8
9.0	DATA VERIFICATION	9-1
9.1	Internal Data Verification	9-1
9.2	External Data Verification	9-2
9.3	Data Verification by Qualified Person	9-2
9.4	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	9-2
10.0	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING	10-1
10.1	Test Laboratories	10-1
10.2	Metallurgical Testwork	10-1
10.2.1	Historical Testwork	10-1
10.2.2	Guadalupe	10-1
10.2.3	Independencia	10-2
10.2.4	La Nación	10-3
10.2.5	2020–2021 Testwork	10-3
10.2.5.1	Tailings Pre-Concentration	10-4
10.2.5.2	Solid-Liquid Separation and Rheology Testing of Leach Circuit Tails Sample	10-4
10.3	Recovery Estimates	10-4
10.4	Metallurgical Variability	10-5
10.5	Deleterious Elements	10-5
10.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	10-5
11.0	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES	11-1
11.1	Introduction	11-1
11.2	Exploratory Data Analysis	11-1
11.3	Geological Models	11-1
11.4	Density Assignment	11-1
11.5	Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions	11-2
11.6	Composites	11-3
11.7	Variography	11-3
11.8	Estimation/interpolation Methods	11-4
11.9	Validation	11-4
11.10	Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimate	11-6
11.10.1	Mineral Resource Confidence Classification	11-6
11.10.2	Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification	11-6
11.11	Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction	11-6
11.11.1	Input Assumptions	11-6
11.11.2	Commodity Price	11-9
11.11.3	Cut-off	11-9
11.11.4	QP Statement	11-10
11.12	Mineral Resource Statement	11-10
11.13	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	11-13

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page iv

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

12.0	MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES	12-1
12.1	Introduction	12-1
12.2	Development of Mining Case	12-1
12.3	Designs	12-1
12.4	Input Assumptions	12-10
12.5	Ore Loss and Dilution	12-11
12.6	Commodity Price	12-12
12.7	Mineral Reserve Statement	12-12
12.8	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	12-14
13.0	MINING METHODS	13-1
13.1	Introduction	13-1
13.2	Geotechnical Considerations	13-1
13.2.1	Guadalupe	13-1
13.2.2	Independencia	13-2
13.2.3	La Nación	13-2
13.3	Hydrogeological Considerations	13-3
13.3.1	Guadalupe	13-3
13.3.2	Independencia	13-3
13.3.3	La Nación	13-4
13.4	Operations	13-4
13.4.1	Guadalupe	13-4
13.4.2	Independencia	13-5
13.4.3	La Nación	13-6
13.5	Backfill	13-6
13.6	Ventilation	13-7
13.6.1	Guadalupe	13-7
13.6.2	Independencia	13-7
13.6.3	La Nación	13-7
13.7	Blasting and Explosives	13-7
13.8	Underground Sampling and Production Monitoring	13-8
13.9	Infrastructure Facilities	13-8
13.10	Production Schedule	13-8
13.11	Equipment	13-8
13.12	Personnel	13-8
14.0	RECOVERY METHODS	14-1
14.1	Process Method Selection	14-1
14.2	Process Plant	14-1
14.3	Flowsheet	14-1
14.4	Plant Operations	14-1
14.4.1	Crushing	14-1
14.4.2	Grinding	14-3
14.4.3	Flotation	14-3
14.4.4	Flotation Concentrate Leaching	14-3
14.4.5	Flotation Tailings Leaching	14-4
14.4.6	Carbon Desorption	14-4
14.4.7	Carbon Regeneration	14-5
14.4.8	Merrill Crowe and Refining	14-5
14.4.9	Cyanide Detoxification	14-5
14.5	Equipment Sizing	14-6
14.6	Power and Consumables	14-6

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page v

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

14.7	Personnel	14-6
15.0	INFRASTRUCTURE	15-1
15.1	Introduction	15-1
15.2	Roads and Logistics	15-2
15.3	Stockpiles	15-2
15.4	Waste Rock Storage Facilities	15-4
15.5	Tailings Storage Facilities	15-4
15.6	Water Management Structures	15-4
15.7	Water Supply	15-5
15.8	Camps and Accommodation	15-5
15.9	Power and Electrical	15-6
16.0	MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS	16-1
16.1	Markets	16-1
16.2	Commodity Price Forecasts	16-1
16.3	Contracts	16-2
16.4	QP Statement	16-3
17.0	ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS	17-1
17.1	Introduction	17-1
17.2	Baseline and Supporting Studies	17-1
17.3	Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs	17-1
17.4	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	17-2
17.5	Permitting	17-2
17.5.1	Environmental Impact Statements	17-2
17.5.2	Change in Land Use Authorizations	17-3
17.5.3	Current Permits	17-4
17.6	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	17-4
17.7	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues	17-6
18.0	CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS	18-1
18.1	Introduction	18-1
18.2	Capital Cost Estimates	18-1
18.2.1	Basis of Estimate	18-1
18.2.2	Capital Cost Summary	18-2
18.3	Operating Cost Estimates	18-2
18.3.1	Basis of Estimate	18-2
18.3.2	Operating Cost Summary	18-3
18.4	QP Statement	18-4
19.0	ECONOMIC ANALYSIS	19-1
19.1	Forward-looking Information Caution	19-1
19.2	Methodology Used	19-1
19.3	Financial Model Parameters	19-1
19.3.1	Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life	19-1
19.3.2	Metallurgical Recoveries	19-2
19.3.3	Smelting and Refining Terms	19-2
19.3.4	Metal Prices	19-2
19.3.5	Capital and Operating Costs	19-2
19.3.6	Working Capital	19-2
19.3.7	Taxes and Royalties	19-2
19.3.8	Closure Costs and Salvage Value	19-2
19.3.9	Financing	19-2

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page vi

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

19.3.10	Inflation	19-3
19.4	Economic Analysis	19-3
19.5	Sensitivity Analysis	19-3
20.0	ADJACENT PROPERTIES	20-1
21.0	OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION	21-1
22.0	INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS	22-1
22.1	Introduction	22-1
22.2	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	22-1
22.3	Geology and Mineralization	22-1
22.4	Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling	22-1
22.5	Data Verification	22-2
22.6	Metallurgical Testwork	22-2
22.7	Mineral Resource Estimates	22-3
22.8	Mineral Reserve Estimates	22-3
22.9	Mining Methods	22-4
22.10	Recovery Methods	22-4
22.11	Infrastructure	22-4
22.12	Market Studies	22-5
22.13	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	22-5
22.14	Capital Cost Estimates	22-6
22.15	Operating Cost Estimates	22-6
22.16	Economic Analysis	22-6
22.17	Risks and Opportunities	22-6
22.17.1	Risks	22-6
22.17.2	Opportunities	22-7
22.18	Conclusions	22-8
23.0	RECOMMENDATIONS	23-1
24.0	REFERENCES	24-1
24.1	Bibliography	24-1
24.2	Abbreviations and Units of Measure	24-3
24.3	Glossary of Terms	24-5
25.0	RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT	25-1
25.1	Introduction	25-1
25.2	Macroeconomic Trends	25-1
25.3	Markets	25-1
25.4	Legal Matters	25-1
25.5	Environmental Matters	25-2
25.6	Stakeholder Accommodations	25-2
25.7	Governmental Factors	25-2
25.8	Internal Controls	25-2
25.8.1	Exploration and Drilling	25-2
25.8.2	Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates	25-3
25.8.3	Risk Assessments	25-4

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page vii

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

TABLES
Table 1‑1:	Summary of Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	1-8
Table 1‑2:	Summary of Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	1-8
Table 1‑3:	Summary Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	1-10
Table 1‑4:	Estimated Capital Expenditures by Year (US$ M)	1-16
Table 1‑5:	Operating Costs by Year (US$ M)	1-16
Table 1‑6:	Cashflow Summary Table	1-18
Table 1‑7:	Sensitivity Analysis (US$ M)	1-18
Table 2‑1:	QP Chapter Responsibilities	2-5
Table 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Summary Table	3-2
Table 3‑2:	Key Surface Rights Agreements	3-7
Table 3‑3:	Key Water Rights	3-10
Table 5‑1:	Project Nomenclature Over Time	5-2
Table 5‑2:	Exploration and Development History Summary Table	5-2
Table 7‑1:	Property Drill Summary Table	7-5
Table 7‑2:	Drilling used in Mineral Resource Estimations, Guadalupe	7-8
Table 7‑3:	Drilling used in Mineral Resource Estimations, Independencia	7-9
Table 7‑4:	Drilling used in Mineral Resource Estimations, La Nación	7-10
Table 8‑1:	Density Data Supporting Mineral Resource Estimation	8-4
Table 9‑1:	External Data Reviews	9-3
Table 10‑1:	LOM Metallurgical Recovery Forecasts	10-5
Table 11‑1:	Silver and Gold Cap Values per Estimation Domain	11-3
Table 11‑2:	Search Parameters by Zone and Variable	11-5
Table 11‑3:	Confidence Category Assignments	11-7
Table 11‑4:	Underground Mineable Shape Input Assumptions	11-9
Table 11‑5:	Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-11
Table 11‑6:	Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-12
Table 12‑1:	Input Parameters to Cut-off Grade Determination, Mineral Reserves	12-12
Table 12‑2:	Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	12-13
Table 13‑1:	Production Schedule	13-9
Table 13‑2:	Underground Mining Equipment	13-11
Table 13‑3:	Surface Mining Equipment	13-11
Table 14‑1:	Major Equipment List	14-7
Table 17‑1:	Granted Authorizations	17-5
Table 18‑1:	Estimated Capital Expenditures by Year (US$ M)	18-3
Table 18‑2:	Operating Costs by Year (US$ M)	18-4
Table 19‑1:	Cashflow Summary Table	19-4
Table 19‑2:	Annualized Cashflow (2022–2030)	19-5
Table 19‑3:	Sensitivity Analysis (US$ M)	19-6

FIGURES
Figure 2‑1:	Project Location Plan	2-2
Figure 2‑2:	Mining Operations Layout Plan	2-3
Figure 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Location Map	3-4
Figure 3‑2:	Deposit Locations Within Mineral Concession Areas	3-5

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page viii

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑3:	Surface Rights Plan	3-9
Figure 6‑1:	Regional Geology Map	6-3
Figure 6‑2:	Project Geology Map	6-4
Figure 6‑3:	Geologic Cross-Section	6-5
Figure 6‑4:	Stratigraphic Column	6-6
Figure 6‑5:	Geology Map, Guadalupe	6-12
Figure 6‑6:	Geologic Cross-Section, Guadalupe	6-13
Figure 6‑7:	Geologic Cross-Section, Zapata	6-14
Figure 6‑8:	Geology Map, La Patria Zone	6-15
Figure 6‑9:	Geologic Cross-Section, La Patria	6-16
Figure 6‑10:	Geology Map, Independencia	6-19
Figure 6‑11:	Geologic Cross-Section, Independencia	6-20
Figure 6‑12:	Geologic Cross-Section, La Bavisa	6-21
Figure 6‑13:	Geology Map, La Nación	6-23
Figure 6‑14:	Geologic Cross-Section, La Nación	6-24
Figure 7‑1:	Property Drill Collar Location Map	7-7
Figure 11‑1:	Palmarejo Operations with Royalty and Claims Zones Plan View	11-2
Figure 11‑2:	Example Confidence Classification, Guadalupe Main Deposit (domain 100)	11-8
Figure 12‑1:	Deposit Layout Plan	12-2
Figure 12‑2:	Guadalupe Looking Northeast	12-3
Figure 12‑3:	Zapata Looking South	12-4
Figure 12‑4:	Independencia Looking Northeast	12-5
Figure 12‑5:	La Bavisa Looking Northeast	12-6
Figure 12‑6:	La Nación Looking Southwest	12-7
Figure 12‑7:	Los Bancos Looking Northeast	12-8
Figure 12‑8:	Hidalgo Looking Northeast	12-9
Figure 12‑9:	Mine Layout Legend Key	12-10
Figure 14‑1:	Process Flowsheet	14-2
Figure 15‑1:	Infrastructure Layout Plan	15-3

APPENDICES

Appendix A:  Detailed Mineral Tenure Table and Figures

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page ix

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Mr. Miller O’Prey, P. Geo., Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, and Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME, prepared a technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Palmarejo Operations (the Palmarejo Operations or the Project), located in Mexico.

Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Mexicana S.A. de C.V. (Coeur Mexicana) is the operating entity.

1.2 Terms of Reference

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, for the Palmarejo Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported for the Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación underground mines.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.  Unless otherwise indicated, the metric system is used in this Report.  Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300) of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.  Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.  The Report uses US English.

1.3 Property Setting

The Palmarejo Operations are located approximately 420 km by road southwest of the city of Chihuahua, in the state of Chihuahua in northern Mexico.

Access to the Palmarejo Operations is from the city of Chihuahua, in the state of Chihuahua, Mexico, via paved Highways 16 and 127 to the town of San Rafael.  From San Rafael, travel is by gravel road through Temoris to the town of Palmarejo, which is directly adjacent to the processing plant.  Access from Temoris to the Palmarejo Operations is along 35 km of company-maintained gravel road, an extension of Highway 127 that continues on through to Chínipas.

An airstrip services light aircraft located at the Palmarejo Operations site.

The climate is moderate.  Rainfall occurs mainly in the summer and fall months (August through to the end of October).  Mining operations are conducted year-round.  All anticipated exploration activities can be conducted year-round.

The surface elevation above the Palmarejo deposit is about 1,150 masl, and the surface elevation of the Guadalupe and Independencia deposits is about 1,300 masl.  Hills are typically densely vegetated, steep-sided slopes with local stands of cacti.  Conifers occur at high elevations, while oak trees, cacti, and thorny shrubs dominate the vegetation at low levels.  Local ranchers and farmers graze cattle and grow corn and other vegetables on small-scale plots.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

1.4 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

The Palmarejo Operations consist of 71 mining concessions (27,227 ha).  The Guadalupe Complex mining operations are within concessions 188817 and 186009.  The Independencia Complex mining operations are within concessions 186009 and 243762.  The La Nación Complex mining operations are within concessions 221490 and 243762.

Coeur has occupancy agreements in place with selected ejidos for exploitation or exploration purposes, collectively covering an area of 15,111.19 ha.  Water rights currently held or in the process of being acquired are believed to be sufficient to support the LOM plan.

There are numerous net smelter return (NSR) royalties that cover the Palmarejo Operations area, which range from 1–3% depending on the royalty agreement.  The majority of the royalties are not payable under the LOM plan envisaged in this Report.

A Gold Purchase and Sale Agreement (the Agreement) was entered into by and among Coeur Mexicana, Franco-Nevada (Barbados) Corporation (Franco–Nevada), Ocampo Resources Inc., and Ocampo Services Inc., whereby Coeur Mexicana agreed to sell to Franco–Nevada 50% of the refined gold produced from selected mining concessions at a gold price of $800/oz, in consideration of Franco–Nevada providing investment capital for Project development.  The initial term of the Agreement (which became effective in August 2016) is 40 years.  This Agreement encumbers a large portion of the mining concessions owned or controlled by Coeur Mexicana in the Palmarejo Operations area.

1.5 Geology and Mineralization

The deposits within the Palmarejo Operations area are considered to be examples of epithermal deposits displaying both intermediate- and low-sulfidation features.

The Sierra Madre Occidental (SMO) is a large siliceous igneous province that records extensive arc volcanism spanning the Paleocene to Miocene.  Vein and fault hosted epithermal deposits in the SMO were generated during arc-related volcanic activity.

The two main mining districts within the Project area are the Palmarejo and Guazapares districts.  The Palmarejo district is underlain principally by shallow-dipping andesitic volcaniclastic rocks and flows, containing at least one mafic volcanic (basaltic) horizon, that are cut by rhyolite dikes and domes of late Oligocene to early Miocene age.  The Guazapares district includes andesite, volcaniclastic sedimentary units, and dacitic to rhyolitic intrusions, including domes that are roughly synchronous with mineralization.

Within the Palmarejo district, several common structural styles of ore controls are apparent that localize orebodies, or individual ore-shoots within them.  Most of these consist of early-formed internal heterogeneities in fault geometries (bends, steps, branches, etc.), which are areas of high permeability-porosity that localize fluids and ore-shoots.  Classic extensional fault relays at en-echelon steps in the normal fault system occur along the Guazapares–La Union fault corridor in the Guazapares district.

Mineralization exhibits vertical and lateral zoning and occurs along the principal northwest-trending faults in the two districts and is largely confined to fault-hosted veins.  The largest deposits typically occur on the faults that have the greatest displacement and strike length.  Vein systems are typically silver-rich, although differing Ag:Au ratios are noted between different deposits and at different elevations within deposits.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Silver–gold deposits within the Palmarejo district are characterized by pervasive silicification, quartz-filled breccias, and sheeted veins.  Multiple stages of mineralization produced several phases of silica, ranging from chalcedony to comb quartz, and typically two periods of silver–gold mineralization.  This strongly-zoned mineralization is characterized by pyrite, sphalerite, galena, and argentite (acanthite) deposited within the quartz vein/breccias at lower elevations and higher-grade precious-metals mineralization with fine grained, black, silver-rich sulfide bands or breccia-infill in the upper portions of the structures.

Silver–gold deposits within the Guazapares district are characterized by multi-phase quartz veins, quartz + carbonate + pyrite veinlet stockworks, silicified hydrothermal breccias, and quartz-filled expansion breccias.  Three distinct styles of mineralization are identified:  high-grade vein systems, sheeted vein/stockwork/fracture complexes, and volcanic dome complexes.  The principal sulfide minerals within the veins include sphalerite and argentite, with pyrite being less abundant.  Gold-rich veins have pyrite and traces of chalcopyrite as the principal sulfide minerals, and often represent the deeper portions of the silver-rich vein systems.

1.6 History and Exploration

Artisanal mining activity in the Project area commenced in the 1600s.  The following companies are known to have had involvement in the Project area, prior to Coeur’s Project interest: Palmarejo Mining Co., Palmarejo and Mexican GoldFields, Ltd., Minas Huruapa, S.A. de C.V., Kalahari Resources, Silver Standard Resources Inc., Alaska-Juneau Mining Company, American Smelting and Refining Company, Earth Resources Company, Industrias Peñoles, Consejo de Recursos Minerales, Noranda Exploration Inc., Kennecott Utah Copper Corp., War Eagle Mining Company Inc., Bolnisi Gold NL (Bolnisi Gold), Mexoro Minerals Ltd. (Mexoro), Palmarejo Silver and Gold Co., and Paramount Gold and Silver Corporation (Paramount).  Small-scale underground mining was conducted by various companies from the 1880s to about 1968.  Modern exploration activities included sampling of accessible workings; surface mapping and sampling; trenching; grid-based geochemical sampling; ground magnetic and induced polarization (IP) geophysical surveys; air-track, reverse circulation (RC) and core drilling; metallurgical testing; shortwave infrared (SWIR) spectral measurements; and mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation.

Coeur acquired an initial interest in what is now a portion of the Project in 2008 and acquired an adjacent land.  Since then, Coeur has conducted geological mapping and sampling; two helicopter-borne magnetic surveys; a helicopter-borne Z-axis Tipper electromagnetic (ZTEM) and magnetic survey; core drilling; metallurgical testwork; Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates; and mining activities.

Mining at the Palmarejo open pit mine and underground mines began in 2008 and milling operations and metal recovery commenced in 2009, ramping up to full capacity in 2010. Open pit mining operations ceased in 2016.  Operations began at the Guadalupe underground mine in 2014, at the Independencia underground mine in 2016 and at the La Nación underground mine in 2019.  All three operations are ongoing at the Report date.

A large part of the land package has still to receive the detailed geological field work necessary to define drill programs and remains prospective.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

1.7 Drilling and Sampling

Drilling completed on the Project includes air track, RC, and core drilling, totaling 4,284 drill holes (1,189,478 m).  Approximately 93% of all drilling completed to date at the Project has been core drilling.  There are 1,388 drill holes (395,996 m) supporting the mineral resource estimates for the Guadalupe deposits, 631 drill holes (240,571 m) supporting the mineral resource estimates for the Independencia deposits, and 261 drill holes (105,765 m) supporting the mineral resource estimate for the La Nación deposits.

Drilling that is excluded from estimation support includes historic RC; core drilling from the Mexoro and Paramount drill programs is generally not used; and underground channel samples and grade control drilling are excluded from estimation; however, these data support geological interpretations.

Depending on the drill program, geological data collected from drill hole logging included stratigraphy, vein orientation, and mineralized zones and a detailed descriptive log including rock type, alteration, structure, mineralization, and vein density/percentage.  In addition, geotechnical data such as core recovery, rock quality designation (RQD), fracture density and other parameters used to calculate the rock mass rating (RMR).  Digital photographs of wet core are taken and archived before the core is cut and sampled.

Collar survey methods varied, depending on drill campaign, operator, and district, and included, for surface drill holes, hand-held global positioning system (GPS) receivers and high-precision differential GPS survey instruments.  Underground collars are surveyed by a mine surveyor using a total station instrument.  Downhole survey methods also varied, depending on drill campaign, operator, and district.  Instrumentation, where known, included Reflex EZ-shot, Reflex non-magnetic one-shot, and Devishot non-magnetic multi-shot tools.  Measurements were taken at 25–50 m, depending on the drill campaign.

Almost all underground drilling was completed as fans of drill holes, meaning that the reported mineralized intercepts are typically longer than the true thickness of the mineralization.

Core sampling intervals varied by operator, and ranged from 0.5–2 m.  Sample lengths were variably adjusted to avoid sampling across geologic contacts and structures.  Channel sampling of all active faces is completed on a daily basis; individual samples are between 0.5–2 m in length and are defined by changes in lithology or vein type.

Density data were primarily collected using water immersion methods, with the majority of the Coeur determinations performed on wax-coated core samples.

Independent primary and umpire laboratories used, where recorded in the database, include ALS laboratories in Chihuahua and Vancouver, Bureau Veritas (formerly Acme Analytical Laboratories), and SGS de Mexico, S.A. DE C.V. Durango, Mexico (SGS).  These laboratories held accreditations for selected analytical techniques at the time used.  The Palmarejo mine laboratory is used for underground and ore control sample preparation and analysis.  The laboratory is not independent and is not accredited.

Sample preparation depended on the analytical laboratory used.  Methods included drying; crushing to 70% passing 10 mesh, 70% passing 2 mm, 60% passing 2 mm; and pulverizing to 95% passing 150 mesh, 90% passing 106 μm, and 85% passing 75 µm.

Analytical methods used included:

• Gold:  fire assay with gravimetric finish; fire assay with an atomic absorption finish; fire assay with inductively coupled plasma with atomic emission spectrophotometry (ICP-AES) finish;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Silver:  four-acid digestion with ICP-AES finish;

• Multi-element:  34 element ICP-AES.

Historically, the Mexoro and Paramount drill programs, depending on the program, inserted blanks, certified reference materials (standards), and duplicate samples into the sample stream for each sample batch, and selected samples were check assayed as part of their quality control (QC) procedures.

Coeur’s QC protocols changed over time, but currently require insertions of blanks, standards, and duplicates.  Pulp samples are currently submitted to Bureau Veritas for check analysis.

1.8 Data Verification

Data verification included internal and external database audits.  Internal verification included:  detailed review of all documentation and assay data related to each drill hole; drill hole collar audits; and QA/QC reports.  External verification was completed by third-parties.

The QP personally completed QA/QC verification, participated in programs to verify drill data prior to mineral resource estimation, checked selected gold and silver assay data, conducted drill hole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports, and signed off on 2015–present definition drill holes and the 2021 drilling.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

1.9 Metallurgical Testwork

Independent metallurgical testwork facilities used over the Project life, where recorded, included SGS Laboratories, Durango, Mexico; SGS in Lakefield, Canada (SGS Lakefield), ALS, Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada; and Corporación Química Platinum S.A. de C.V. located in Silao, Guanajuato, Mexico.  Palmarejo Operations have an on-site analytical and metallurgical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and process characterization of new ores.  The on-site laboratories are not independent and are audited with third parties.

Initial testwork was conducted to support process plant design, assuming mill feed material was from open pit sources.  Later testwork that focused on underground ores included mineralogical studies, multi-element ICP scans, whole-rock analyses, carbon and sulfur speciation analyses, comminution tests, timed grinding series, whole ore bottle roll cyanidation, rougher and bulk rougher flotation, tailing cyanidation, heavy liquid separation pre-concentration and silver deportment studies, and gravity separation tests.  The later testwork was conducted using the existing Palmarejo plant criteria.

The LOM forecast average gold blended recovery is 90%.  The LOM forecast average blended silver recovery is 82.5%.

The anticipated gold and silver recoveries are affected by alteration states.  Highly oxidized material is not responsive to the flotation process. Highly oxidized ore will significantly affect recovery if blended at a high ratio.  Ores with a high clay content increase slurry viscosity, which has a detrimental effect on precious metals recovery in flotation.  No other deleterious elements are known from the processing perspective.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

1.10 Mineral Resource Estimation

1.10.1 Estimation Methodology

Exploratory data statistics were compiled and compared for raw drill hole data, length weighted drill holes, composites, declustered composites, and capped declustered composites to ensure that the grade distribution and true mean of the system were documented and conserved through the estimation process.

The implicit modelling algorithm in Leapfrog Geo software was used to create 12 estimation domains through interpretation of relevant intervals of drill data, digitized mapping, and underground production data.

Density was estimated using inverse distance weighting to the second power (ID2).

Grade caps were determined using various methods such as histograms, probability plots and a metal loss calculation.  Grade caps ranged from 100–3,500 g/t Ag and from 0.5–70 g/t Au, depending on estimation domain.

Core samples were composited at 2 m intervals by estimation domain for gold and silver except at Los Bancos, Zapata, and La Bavisa zones where composites include the entire thickness of the domain.  This results in a single, variable length composite in each drill hole within the estimation domain.

Variogram searches were oriented along strike of the domains, with the major axis horizontal on-strike, the secondary axis down dip, and the minor axis across the width of the domain.

The various deposits were estimated using ordinary kriging (OK), with hard boundaries between geologic units.  The enveloping disseminated domain was estimated using ID2.  The search orientations were locally adjusted using dynamic anisotropy.  The Guadalupe–La Bavisa zone was estimated using ID2.  The parent block size was 2 x 25 x 25 m (X, Y, Z).  Block models were sub-celled to a minimum of 1.0 x 2.5 x 2.5 m.  Estimation took place in the parent cells, therefore, all sub-cells within a parent cell have the same grade.  The maximum number of samples was optimized by minimizing kriging variance while maximizing slope of regression, while attempting to maintain some degree of localization to improve production reconciliation.  Each domain was estimated with one set of search ranges in one pass to achieve the optimal number of samples, and to avoid estimation artifacts created when using a multiple-pass method.  A high-grade search ellipse restriction was employed for the Independencia silver estimate, which applied the restriction at 75% of the capping value.  Constant search volumes and number of samples were used for each domain.  The block model was depleted using the in-situ variable, proportionally depleting from 100 (in situ) to 0 (completely mined).

The block models were validated using some or all of the following methods:  visually by stepping through sections and comparing the raw drill data and composite data with the block values; comparison of model statistics to drill data; swath plots; and mill to model reconciliation.

Measured mineral resources are defined by proximity to ore control and production data.  This limits the classification of measured mineral resources to the area around current mining where there is very good understanding of the deposit geometry and grade distribution.  Indicated blocks were classified using a script and then manually modified using polygons (in the plane of the domain) based on geologic confidence.  All remaining estimated material is classified as inferred.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment evaluated likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting, and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal, and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.  Mineral resources are confined within conceptual underground mineable shapes.

The gold and silver prices used in resource estimation are based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The gold price forecast for the mineral resource estimate is US$1,700/oz and the silver price forecast is US$22/oz.  The QP considers these prices to be reasonable.

The mineral resources are reported using a cut-off of 1.59 to 2.21 g/t gold equivalent (AuEq).

1.10.2 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in-situ.  Estimates are reported on a 100% ownership basis.  The mineral resources are current at December 31, 2021.  Measured and indicated mineral resources are summarized in Table 1‑1, and inferred mineral resources in Table 1‑2.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

1.10.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include: metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions for underground mine designs constraining the estimates; assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑1:    Summary of Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Confidence Classification	Tonnes (kt)	Grade		Contained Ounces		Gold Equivalent Cut-off Grade (g/t AuEq)	Metallurgical Recovery
		Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag (%)	Au (%)
Measured	3,353	133	1.81	14,373	195	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1
Indicated	15,764	117	1.68	59,340	852	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1
Total measured and indicated	19,117	120	1.70	73,712	1,047	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1

Table 1‑2:    Summary of Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Confidence Classification	Tonnes (kt)	Grade		Contained Ounces		Gold Equivalent Cut-off Grade (g/t AuEq)	Metallurgical Recovery
		Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag (%)	Au (%)
Inferred	4,275	127	1.79	17,453	246	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1

Notes to accompany mineral resource tables:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in SK1300.

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

4. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  Assumption of conventional longhole underground mining; gold price of US$1,700/oz, silver price of US$22/oz; reported above a variable gold equivalent cut-off grade that ranges from 1.59–2.21 g/t AuEq; metallurgical recovery assumption of 93.1% for gold and 81% for silver; variable mining costs that range from US$36.01–US$41.75/t, surface haulage costs of US$3.52/t, process costs of US$27.29/t, general and administrative costs of US$11.00/t, and surface/auxiliary support costs of US$3.19/t.  Mineral resources exclude the impact of the Franco-Nevada gold stream agreement at Palmarejo in estimation.

5. Rounding of tonnes, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tonnes, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

1.11 Mineral Reserve Estimation

1.11.1 Estimation Methodology

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.  The mine plans assume underground mining using longhole open stoping using trackless equipment and cemented rock fill (CRF) backfill.  Target mining rates are 150,000 t/month.

Deswik mine planning software was used for the mine design, 3D modeling, and interrogation of the 3D mining model against the block model.  The surveyed “as-built” mining excavations were depleted from the designed solids and the resource block model.  Mining, geotechnical, and hydrological factors were considered in the estimation of the mineral reserves, including the application of dilution and ore recovery factors.

Mining excavations (stopes and ore development) were designed to include mineralized material above the cut-off grade.  These excavations were then assessed for economic viability.  In addition to the mining cut-off grade, an incremental cut-off grade (excluding the mining cost) was calculated to classify mineralized material mined as a result of essential development to access higher-grade mining areas.  Mineralized material below the incremental cut-off will be disposed of on surface in waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs) or will be used underground as backfill.

Gold equivalent cut-off grades were calculated for the deposits, with mineral reserves estimated and reported above this cut-off.  Gold equivalent grades were calculated using the following formula:

where AuEq, Au and Ag are the gold equivalent grade, gold grade, and silver grade, respectively, in g/t.

All mineral reserves are reported above a cut-off of 1.94 to 2.51 g/t AuEq (1.08 g/t AuEq for incremental development).  One meter of dilution was applied to the hanging wall, and 0.5 m to the footwall.  No dilution is assigned to ore development. No gold or silver grades were assigned to the rockfill (RF) dilution.  To account for potential ore losses, a factor of 5% was applied to primary, secondary and longitudinal stopes and ore development.

The gold and silver prices used in reserve estimation are based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The gold price forecast for the mineral reserve estimate is US$1,400/oz and the silver price forecast is US$20/oz.  The QP considers these prices to be reasonable.

1.11.2 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves are reported using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the process plant.  Mineral reserves are reported in Table 1‑3 and are current as at December 31, 2021.  Estimates are reported on a 100% ownership basis.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑3:    Summary Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Mineral Reserve Classification	Tonnes (kt)	Grade		Contained Ounces		Gold Equivalent Cut-off Grade (g/t AuEq)	Metallurgical Recovery
		Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag (%)	Au (%)
Proven	3,405	151	2.26	16,480	247	1.94–2.51	81.9	93.1
Probable	11,012	130	1.80	45,875	637	1.94–2.51	81.9	93.1
Total proven and probable	14,418	135	1.91	62,355	884	1.94–2.51	81.9	93.1

Notes to Accompany Mineral Reserves Table:

1. The Mineral Reserve estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions SK1300.

2. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the process plant.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional underground mining; gold price of US$1,400/oz and silver price of US$20/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 1.94–2.51 gold equivalent and an incremental development cut-off grade of 1.08 g/t AuEq; metallurgical recovery assumption of 93.1% for gold and 81.9% for silver; mining dilution assumes 1 meter of hanging wall waste dilution; mining loss of 5% was applied; variable mining costs that range from US$36.01–US$41.75/t, surface haulage costs of US$3.52/t, process costs of US$27.29/t, general and administrative costs of US$11.00/t, and surface/auxiliary support costs of US$3.19/t.  Mineral reserves exclude the impact of the Franco-Nevada gold stream agreement at Palmarejo in estimation.

4. Rounding of tonnes, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tonnes, grades, and contained metal contents.

1.11.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include:  metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions supporting for the mineable shapes constraining the estimates, including dilution forecasts; and assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

1.12 Mining Methods

The Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación mines use conventional underground mining methods and conventional equipment.  The overall production rate is approximately 165,000 t/month.  Operations commenced in 2008 from now-exhausted open pit sources, and underground mining, which is ongoing, started in 2014. Final design outlines for each of these mines can be found in Chapter 12.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Depending on the deposit, rock mass quality is variable from Poor to Good.  Modifications based on variability and updated geotechnical models were made as the mines develop.  The Palmarejo Operations technical services department maintains a Ground Control Management Plan that is overseen by the technical services department that is updated annually and provides mine personnel with operating, monitoring, and quality control/assurance guidance.  The Ground Control Management Plan specifies ground support standards and identifies where and how they are applied in the mines.

Permeability of the volcanic rock units in all mines is low to very low.  Persistent inflows are generally from larger fault structures where flows increase and decrease seasonally because of connections to the surface.  Increases in persistent inflows currently are directly related to opening new developments laterally or ramping to lower levels.  Water management consists of sumps and pumps, with water pumped to a water treatment plant on surface.

Primary access to the Guadalupe mine is from surface via two ramps.  The West Decline and East Level are located 700 m north of the deposit in the hanging wall.  A third portal for primary ventilation is the South Portal located in the deposit footwall approximately 2,200 m south–southeast from the main access portals.  The West Decline serves as the primary access for haulage, while the East provides both haulage and support access.  Both main ramps are used for primary ventilation intake while the main fans at South Portal are in operation.  The South portal is used as a primary exhaust for the mine as well as secondary escapeway for extended work areas of Guadalupe and Animas.  Two new developments at Zapata and Animas are underway as extensions of the Guadalupe mine.  The material handling system uses a load-haul-dump (LHD) and truck transport system of ore loading and hauling to a surface interim stockpile.  Ore is separated into stockpiles on surface to support blending prior to transport to the plant run-of-mine (ROM) stockpile.  Waste from development is either directly transported from development to backfilling pockets in active stopes or stockpiled underground for later use as backfill.  The mining methods used at Guadalupe include both transverse and longitudinal sublevel stoping.

Primary access to the Independencia mine is via two portals, the North and South, located approximately 270 m north of the main Guadalupe mine portals.  Two declines provide access to the deposit and provide secondary intake (south) and primary exhaust ventilation (north) for the mine.  Primary ventilation intake is from a vertical surface raise and fan system constructed in the La Nación workings and connected via dual ramps to the La Nación orebody.  Mining methods used include both transverse and longitudinal sublevel stoping.  The Independencia deposit is mined using similar equipment, personnel and mining methods as Guadalupe mine.  Preliminary designs were completed for the development of the Hidalgo extension anticipated for production in 2023.

The La Nación mine is accessed from two levels, one from the south decline ramp access from Independencia, and the other from a footwall drive at the 1260 level.  The two drifts provide access to the deposit along with primary intake and exhaust ventilation for both the La Nación and Independencia mines.  The La Nación deposit is mined using similar equipment, personnel, and mining methods as the Guadalupe mine.  However, much of the ore mining will be completed using longitudinal sublevel stoping due to the narrow width of the vein.

Backfill is a combination of cemented rock fill and straight waste fill.

Underground maintenance facilities in Guadalupe and Independencia support field and preventative maintenance activities.  Primary maintenance is conducted in joint facilities located on surface between the mine portals and a large main facility located at the Palmarejo office and plant site.  An additional facility is planned for construction in Zapata in 2023 to support ongoing operations.  An explosives magazine located underground in Guadalupe also support Zapata and Animas, and a magazine in Independencia also supports La Nación.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

The Palmarejo Operations have nine years of mine life remaining.  The Guadalupe mine has a remaining nine-year mine life with the expansion components of Zapata and Animas.  Independencia has a remaining nine-year mine life with expansions to the north and south and addition of the Hidalgo deposit.  La Nación has five years of mine life remaining.

1.13 Recovery Methods

The process design was based on a combination of metallurgical test work, study designs and industry-standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities through the operational history of the plant since startup of operations in 2007.  The design is conventional to the silver and gold industry and has no novel parameters.  The plant is designed to operate 365 days per year at 91.3% availability.  The plant design mill throughput is 6,000 t/day of ore with upgrades providing a nominal throughput up to 7,000 t/day.

The flow sheet consists of a standard crushing and grinding circuit (jaw crusher, semi-autogenous grind (SAG) mill and ball mill), followed by flotation circuit, where the flotation concentrate is directed to a sequence of clarification tanks and treated in agitated cyanidation tanks.  Floatation tailings are directed to and treated in agitated cyanidation tanks.  A Merrill Crowe circuit recovers gold and silver from the leachates of concentrate solution and tailings solution through a carbon-in-leach (CIL) absorption, desorption, recovery (ADR) system.

The average monthly electrical power consumption is 6,218 MWhrs at a cost of $0.081/kWhr.  Power is supplied by the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE).  The processing circuit uses approximately 6,650 m³ of water daily; this consists of approximately 650 m³ of fresh water from a local dam and the remaining 6,000 m³ being water reclaimed from the tailings storage facility (TSF) and reused in the mill.  Consumables used in processing include:  xanthate; frother; Aerofloat 404; sodium cyanide; lime; flocculant; activated carbon; sodium hydroxide; hydrochloric acid; zinc; diatomaceous earth; neutralite; and liquid oxygen.

1.14 Infrastructure

The key infrastructure to support the LOM plan is in place.  Facilities include:  three operating underground mines; two shotcrete mixing plants; backfill cement mixing plant; water treatment plants and associated infrastructure; ROM pads; process plant; TSF and associated infrastructure; maintenance facilities; materials storage and laydown areas; various support facilities; electrical facilities including an emergency powerhouse; gravel airstrip; and a mine permanent camp and contractor facilities and kitchens.

The Palmarejo Operations currently maintain limited ROM stockpiles with multistage load-transport-feed sequencing to manage blending at the mine and plant.

A series of WRSFs is located at the currently closed Palmarejo open pit operation.  No mine waste has been added to the WRSFs since 2015 when the pit was closed.  The waste is currently being excavated and processed to support backfill operations underground.

The TSF, a zoned downstream earthfill dam, was constructed and commissioned in 2010.  The facility has been raised through a series of stages with the current Stage 5 scheduled for completion in May 2022.  The facility is projected to reach capacity in Q1 2023 at 15.4 Mm³, by which time the operation will transition to disposal of tailings in the mined-out Palmarejo open pit.  The proposed TSF facility in the abandoned open pit will include an underdrain system in the abandoned underground mine below the pit, surface tailings discharge and pump-back systems, and a high compression thickener to provided high solids tails and increased water recovery.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

The three primary water management structures located at the TSF are a freshwater diversion dam, freshwater diversion channel, and an environmental control dam.  In 2016, a water treatment plant was constructed to treat and release excess water from the tailings pond.  Groundwater from the underground mines is pumped to a surface treatment plant, from where it is cycled back to the underground mine and to the process plant.

Electrical power is supplied from the CFE grid, via a 66 km overhead 115 kV distribution line.  Substations were constructed on the surface at the Guadalupe and Independencia mines, and underground at the La Nación mine.  The estimated capacity for Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación complexes (at full production) is approximately 5.0 MW.  An emergency powerhouse with 12 diesel generators (21.9 MW capacity) is located near the process plant and operates during main power outages.

1.15 Markets and Contracts

1.15.1 Market Studies

No market studies are currently relevant as the Palmarejo Operations consist of operating mines producing a readily-saleable commodity in the form of doré.  Gold and silver are freely traded at prices that are widely known, and the prospects for the sale of any production are well understood.

Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

Coeur sells its payable silver and gold production on behalf of its subsidiaries on a spot or forward basis, primarily to multi-national banks and bullion trading houses.  Markets for both silver and gold bullion are highly liquid, and the loss of a single trading counterparty would not impact Coeur’s ability to sell its bullion.

Coeur’s strategy on hedging silver and gold is focused on providing downside protection.  To accomplish that, the company may enter into derivative contracts to protect the selling price for a certain portion of the production if terms are attractive.

1.15.2 Commodity Pricing

Coeur uses a combination of historical and current contract pricing, contract negotiations, knowledge of its key markets from a long operations production record, short-term versus long-term price forecasts prepared by the company’s internal marketing group, public documents, and analyst forecasts when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves: $1,400 US$/oz;

• Mineral resources:  $1,700 US$/oz;

The long-term silver price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves: US$20/oz;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-13

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Mineral resources:  US$22/oz.

The price forecasts used in the cashflow analysis for gold vary from US$1,400/oz to US$1,750/oz and US$22/oz to $US24/oz for silver.

The QP considers these prices to be reasonable.

1.15.3 Contracts

Coeur Mexicana has contracts with one U.S.-based refiner and one Switzerland-based refiner that refine the Palmarejo Operations’ doré bars into silver and gold bullion that meets benchmark standards set by the London Bullion Market Association.

Currently, there are contracts in place at the Palmarejo Operations to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, raise boring, ground support suppliers and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  These contracts are periodically put up for bid or negotiated to ensure the rates remain favorable to Coeur.

1.16 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

1.16.1 Environmental Studies and Monitoring

Numerous baseline studies were performed in support of Project permitting.  These included:  air quality; weather; landscape; seismicity and natural hazards; groundwater and surface water quality; biodiversity, terrestrial and aquatic flora, and fauna; soils characteristic, uses, and potential use; noise and vibration; geochemical mineral waste characterization; archaeology/cultural heritage; and socioeconomics and cultural aspects.

Coeur Mexicana conducts routinary monitoring of physical and biological parameters required in the initial environmental impact statement (MIA) approval resolution and the MIA document itself.  These include groundwater and surface water quality, air quality, emissions to the air, biodiversity, and water discharges.

1.16.2 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

Coeur conducts an annual review of its potential reclamation responsibilities companywide.  A site-wide Closure Plan was prepared by Knight Piésold Consulting in December 2017.  This document served as the base for closure and reclamation cost estimates prepared by KC Harvey Environmental in October 2021.  The 2021 year-end closure assessment for final reclamation of  the actual disturbance at the Palmarejo Operations, is estimated at US$40.6 M.

1.16.3 Permitting

Coeur Mexicana submitted its initial environmental impact statement (MIA) for Palmarejo in March 2008 (Palmarejo Phase 1) and received its first environmental authorization from SEMARNAT in May 2008.  This first authorization was extended for an additional 6.5 years in 2017 and is valid for production through October 2023 followed by a two-year closure period.  Coeur Mexicana filed for, and received, approval for a second environmental authorization in 2010; this authorization was extended for five additional years and is valid through November 2025.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-14

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Coeur Mexicana was granted full authorization for open pit and underground gold and silver mining activities within the areas outlined in the different MIAs. This includes permits for exploration, construction, and operation of the underground gold and silver mines, and land use/disturbance.

To cover the LOM, a new environmental authorization was requested of SEMARNAT on March 23, 2021, through the presentation of a Regional MIA (MIA-R).  It is expected that the MIA-R will be approved in the first quarter of 2022.  When approved the MIA-R will add 10 additional years to the current present environmental license, will consolidate 13 different authorizations under a single global license, and will include all future facilities and the mine development expected for the LOM in this Report.

1.16.4 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur actively engages the local community with cultural, social and economic programs divided into four main categories:  local hiring and local purchases; house improvement program; social investment in vulnerable groups; and productive community programs.  The surrounding communities are supportive of the Palmarejo Operations, and the employment and benefits that the mines provide.

1.17 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  Capital costs are based on recent prices or operating data.

Capital expenditures consist largely of mining and processing equipment upgrades and replacement, capital leases, TSF construction and raises, small projects to support community or logistics, and general and administrative (G&A) support equipment, leases, and offices.

Capital expenditure for the LOM is estimated at US$167.0 M from January 1, 2022.  Estimated capital expenditures are shown in Table 1‑4.

1.18 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Operating costs were developed based on historical cost performance and first principal calculations based on current commodity costs, labor rates, and equipment costs.  The costs are provided for each major cost center: mining, processing, selling expense, and G&A.  The total operating cost estimate includes all site costs, off-site costs associated with gold and silver metal sales, gold stream payments, and corporate overheads.  The cost estimates are based on budgeted and expected LOM costs.

Operating expenditure for the LOM is estimated at US$1,500.3 M from January 1, 2022 to the planned end of the LOM in 2030.  Operating costs are summarized in Table 1‑5.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-15

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑4:    Estimated Capital Expenditures by Year (US$ M)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
Mine development	17.5	17.4	16.4	11.6	0.2	3.9	4.0	0.7	—	71.7
Infrastructure	6.4	3.6	4.7	3.4	-	2.8	0.8	0.4	—	15.8
Mobile equipment	5.2	5.2	6.5	6.5	5.3	5.3	—	—	—	34.0
GPE substation	1.8	2.5	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	4.3
Process equipment	2.7	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	2.7
Process sustaining capital	1.9	2.1	1.5	1.5	1.5	0.75	—	—	—	9.2
Mine & site capital	3.0	2.3	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	5.3
G&A & others	1.7	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.5	—	—	—	—	3.9
Tailings/water treatment	15.8	4.3	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	20.1
Total Capital Cost Estimate	49.0	37.8	29.7	23.0	8.5	12.7	5.3	1.1	—	167.0

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 1‑5:    Operating Costs by Year (US$ M)

Operating Cost Type	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
Underground mining	91.0	92.0	97.9	103.8	102.4	81.7	82.9	63.9	28.4	711.8
Surface haulage	5.7	5.9	5.9	6.0	6.0	5.7	5.5	4.8	2.8	48.2
Processing	59.3	59.7	63.6	64.3	61.8	60.2	56.5	44.7	19.9	490.1
General and administrative	27.6	27.6	28.4	28.9	28.1	28.3	26.6	21.3	10	226.8
Transportation, refining, and sales costs	2.9	3.0	3.0	3.0	2.8	2.9	2.6	2.4	0.8	23.4
Total Operating Costs	173.0	192.5	190.1	187.0	186.0	166.8	159.1	132.6	57.0	1,500.3

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

1.19 Economic Analysis

1.19.1 Forward-Looking Information Caution

Results of the economic analysis represent forward-looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of Mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-16

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals.

1.19.2 Methodology and Assumptions

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The economic analysis is reported on a 100% Project ownership basis.

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model.  The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of nine years to 2030.

1.19.3 Economic Analysis

The NPV at a discount rate of 5% is US$229.5 M.  As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

A summary of the financial results is provided in Table 1‑6.  The active mining operation ceases in 2030.  Closure costs are estimated to 2032; however, for presentation purposes, closure costs are shown in the annualized cashflow Table 19‑2 as occurring between 2027–2030.

1.19.4 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to ± 20% changes in metal prices, grade, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested and can be seen in Table 1‑7.

The Project is most sensitive to metal prices, less sensitive to grade, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-17

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑6:    Cashflow Summary Table

Item	Units	Value
Revenue
Average gold price	US$/oz	1,644
Average silver price	US$/oz	22.56
Gross revenue	US$M	2,230.0
Operating Costs
Mining	US$M	(760.0)
Processing	US$M	(490.1)
General and administrative	US$M	(226.8)
Smelting and refining	US$M	(23.4)
Total Operating Costs	US$M	(1,500.3)
Cash Flow
Operating cash flow*	US$M	729.7
Capital expenditures	US$M	(167.0)
Reclamation	US$M	(40.6)
Total Pre-Tax Cash Flow (Net Cash Flow)	US$M	522.1
30% corporate income tax	US$M	(173.0)
7.5% special mining duty	US$M	(59.5)
0.5% extraordinary mining duty	US$M	(11.2)
Total After-Tax Cashflow (Net Cash Flow)	US$M	278.4
Total After-Tax NPV (5% Discount Rate)	US$M	229.5

Note: * Operating cash flow is inclusive of the Franco Nevada encumbrance.  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 1‑7:    Sensitivity Analysis (US$ M)

Parameter	-20%	-10%	-5%	Base	5%	10%	20%
Metal price	-6.5	111.5	170.5	229.5	288.5	347.4	465.2
Operating cost	388.8	309.3	269.5	229.5	189.6	149.7	69.8
Capital cost	242.3	236.2	232.7	229.5	226.3	223.1	216.7
Grade	-0.1	114.8	172.2	229.5	286.9	344	458.3

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.  Base case is highlighted.

1.20 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 1.10 and Chapter 1.11.3 respectively and discussed in more detail in Chapter 11 and Chapter 12.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-18

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

1.20.1 Risks

Other risks noted include:

• Commodity price increases for key consumables such diesel, electricity, tires, and other consumables would negatively impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources;

• Labor cost increases or productivity decreases could also impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources, or impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserves;

• Metallurgical recovery assumptions used in planning and operations are reasonable and based on historic performance.  Any changes to metallurgical recovery assumptions could affect revenues and operating costs.  This could also require revisions to cut-off grades and mineral reserve estimates;

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  Any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

• The mineral resource and reserve estimates are sensitive to metal prices.  Lower metal prices require revisions to the mineral resource estimates;

• Changes in climate could result in drought and associated potential water shortages that could impact operating cost and ability to operate;

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Palmarejo Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates;

• Political risk from challenges to:

o Mining licenses;

o Environmental permits;

o Coeur’s right to operate;

• Changes to assumptions as to governmental tax or royalty rates, such as taxation rate increases or new taxation or royalty imposts.

1.20.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Higher metal prices than forecast could present upside sales opportunities and potentially an increase in predicted Project economics;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-19

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Ability to expand mineralization around known veins through exploration;

• Discovery and development of new exploration targets across the district;

• Potential to find or gain access to new mineralization that could be processed at the existing Palmarejo process facilities;

• Ability to add additional process plant throughput as additional mineral resources are converted to mineral reserves.  Coeur Mexicana has a track record of success on this in recent years as the mill was originally designed for a larger open pit operation.

1.21 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

1.22 Recommendations

As the Palmarejo Operations consist of operating mines, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-20

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Registrant

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Mr. Miller O’Prey, P. Geo., Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, and Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME prepared a technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Palmarejo Operations (the Palmarejo Operations or the Project), located in Mexico as shown in Figure 2‑1.

Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Mexicana S.A. de C.V. (Coeur Mexicana) is the operating entity.

2.2 Terms of Reference

2.2.1 Report Purpose

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, for the Palmarejo Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported for the Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación underground mines.

2.2.2 Terms of Reference

The Palmarejo Operations consist of the Palmarejo processing facility; the Guadalupe underground mine, located about 8 km southeast of the Palmarejo mine; the Independencia underground mine, located approximately 800 m northeast of the Guadalupe underground mine, and the La Nación underground mine, located adjacent to the Independencia underground mine.  The Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación underground mines are primarily silver and gold producers.

Mining commenced in 2008 from the Palmarejo open pit and underground mines. Milling operations and metal recovery began in 2009.  Figure 2‑2 shows the location of the current and mined-out open pits, and development prospects.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.

Unless otherwise indicated, the metric system is used in this Report.  The Report uses US English.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300) of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.  Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑1: Project Location Plan

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Large callout lower right represents zoomed in view of Project area

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑2: Mining Operations Layout Plan

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

2.3 Qualified Persons

The following Coeur employees serve as the Qualified Persons (QPs) for the Report:

• Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Senior Director, Technical Services;

• Mr. Miller O’Prey, P. Geo., Director Exploration, Coeur Mexicana;

• Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, P.E., Senior Manager, Mine Planning;

• Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME, Manager, Resource Estimation.

The QPs are responsible for, or co-responsible for, the Report Chapters set out in Table 2-1.

2.4 Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection

Mr. Pascoe most recently visited the operations from October 6–11, 2019.  During his site visit, he reviewed geology, mine planning, and operations.

Mr. O’Prey has been employed at the Palmarejo Operations since 2014, and this onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  In his current role, he provides oversight to ongoing exploration drilling programs and core logging/sampling procedures.

Mr. Haarala’s most recent site visit was December 6–10, 2021. He has been employed at Coeur since May 2021.  In his current role he is responsible for overseeing mine planning and designs for Coeur operations.  During his site visit he reviewed mine operations, mine planning and design, mineral processing, and the overall Project area.

Mr. Ruffini’s most recent site visit was from June 25 to July 1, 2021, where he reviewed the inputs, assumptions, and procedures that were used to produce the resource estimates.  He also has direct experience working on the site as the Senior Resource Geologist from February 2017 to April 2019.

2.5 Report Date

Information in the Report is current as at December 31, 2021.

2.6 Information Sources and References

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

2.7 Previous Technical Report Summaries

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

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 2‑1:    QP Chapter Responsibilities

QP Name	Chapter Responsibility
Mr. Chris Pascoe	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.9, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22; 2; 3; 4; 10; 14; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22.1, 22.2, 22.6, 22.10, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.16, 22.17, 22.18; 23; 24; 25.
Mr. Peter Haarala	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.11, 1.12, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.20, 1.22; 4; 7.3, 7.4; 12; 13; 15; 16; 17; 18; 22.1, 22.22.8, 22.9, 22.11, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.17; 23; 24; 25
Mr. Miller O’Prey	1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.20, 1.22; 2; 5; 6; 7.1, 7.2; 8; 9; 22.1, 22.3, 22.4, 22.5, 22.17; 23; 24; 25
Mr. Joseph Ruffini	1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.20, 1.22; 2; 5; 6; 7.1, 7.2; 8; 9; 11; 22.1, 22.3, 22.4, 22.5, 22.17; 23; 24; 25

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

3.1 Property Location

The Palmarejo Operations are located approximately 420 km by road southwest of the city of Chihuahua, in the state of Chihuahua in northern Mexico.

The centroid for the Project is 108^o 21.8203’ W longitude and 27^o 21.5547’ N latitude (760,781 mE, 3,028,984 mN) in the Universal Transverse Mercator (WGS 84), Zone 12R.

Centroid locations for the key Project components include in the Universal Transverse Mercator (WGS 84), Zone 12R:

• Palmarejo open pit (mined out):  108º 24.126’ W longitude and 27º 23.176’ N latitude (756,800 mE, 3,031,950 mN);

• Guadalupe:  108º 21.899’ W longitude and 27º 20.996’ N latitude (760,672 mE, 3,027,949 mN);

• Independencia:  108º 21.752’ W longitude and 27 º 22.078’ N latitude (760,873 mE, 3,029,953 m N);

• La Nación:  108º 21.809’ W longitude and 27º 21.591’ N latitude (760,797 mE, 3,029,051 mN).

The Project falls within the Instituto de Naciónal de Estadística, Geografía y Informática (INEGI) Ciudad Obregón geological sheet (G12-3) and the INEGI Guadalupe Victoria (G12B28), Chínipas de Almada (G12B38), Temoris (G12B39), Milpillas (G12B48), and the Cieneguita Lluvia de Oro topographic maps.

3.2 Ownership

The Project is held in the name of Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Mexicana.

3.3 Mineral Title

The Palmarejo Operations consist of 71 mining concessions (27,227 ha).  A summary of the claims is provided in Table 3‑1, and an overall tenure location plan provided in Table 3‑2.  Claim details are provided in Appendix A.  A map showing name, ID, and other details of the mineral tenures as well as the location of the mining complexes is also provided in Appendix A.

Locations of the areas that have current mineral resource estimates are shown in Figure 3‑2.  Detailed maps are provided in Appendix A. The Guadalupe Complex mining operations are within concessions 188817 and 186009.  The Independencia Complex mining operations are within concessions 186009 and 243762.  The La Nación Complex mining operations are within concessions 221490 and 243762.

As per Mexican requirements for grant of tenure, the mining concessions were surveyed on the ground by a licensed surveyor.  Required payments for the concessions were made as required.  Statutory reporting obligations were met as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑1:    Mineral Tenure Summary Table

No	Concession Name	Title No	Valid Through	Area (ha)	Holder	Royalty
1	Ampl. Trogan Oeste	225223	4/8/2055	1,699.99	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
2	Ampliación Trogan	224118	7/4/2055	703.2318	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
3	Caballero Azteca	209975	30/08/2049	5.051	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
4	Carmelita	209976	30/08/2049	5.343	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
5	El Risco	210163	9/9/2049	24	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
6	La Aurelia	209541	2/8/2049	10	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
7	La Buena Fe	188820	28/11/2040	60	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
8	La Buena Fe Norte	226201	28/11/2055	98.0878	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
9	La Estrella	189692	4/12/2040	59.5863	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
10	La Mexicana	212281	28/09/2050	142.141	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
11	La Moderna	225574	22/09/2055	75.8635	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
12	Lezcura	210479	7/10/2049	14.5465	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
13	Los Tajos	186009	13/12/2039	2.7043	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
14	Maclovia	167282	29/10/2030	6	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
15	Nueva Patria	167281	29/10/2030	11	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
16	Palmarejo	164465	8/5/2029	52.0755	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
17	Patria Vieja	167323	2/11/2030	4	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
18	Reyna De Oro	198543	29/11/2043	27.1791	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
19	San Carlos	188817	28/11/2040	160	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
20	San Juan De Dios	167322	2/11/2030	23	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
21	Santo Domingo	194678	6/5/2042	15.3737	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
22	Tres De Mayo	187906	21/11/2040	39.8582	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
23	Trogan	221490	18/02/2054	3,844.54	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
24	Trogan Fracción	221491	18/02/2054	7.9682	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
25	Trogan Norte 1	225278	11/8/2055	1,024.00	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
26	Trogan Norte 2	225279	11/8/2055	1,019.22	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
27	Trogan Oeste	225308	15/08/2055	2,699.07	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
28	Unificación Guerra Al Tirano	170588	1/6/2032	27.4471	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
29	Unificación Huruapa	195487	13/09/2039	213.7755	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
30	Victoria	210320	23/09/2049	76.0883	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
31	Virginia	214101	9/8/2051	12.0906	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
32	El Rosario	185236	13/12/2039	10.9568	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
33	La Curra	222319	24/06/2054	37.6593	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
34	La Currita	223292	24/11/2054	13.6805	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
35	Sulema No. 2	191332	18/12/2041	15.828	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
36	Ampliación La Buena Fe	209648	2/8/2049	40.8701	Coeur Mexicana	N/A

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

No	Concession Name	Title No	Valid Through	Area (ha)	Holder	Royalty
37	El Carmen	166426	3/6/2030	59.0864	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
38	El Rosario	166430	3/6/2030	14	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
39	Empalme	166423	3/6/2030	6	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
40	Guadalupe De Los Reyes	172225	26/10/2033	8	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
41	Las Tres B.B.B.	166427	3/6/2030	23.001	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
42	Las Tres S.S.S.	166429	3/6/2030	19.1908	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
43	San Juan	166402	3/6/2030	3	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
44	San Luis	166422	3/6/2030	4	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
45	San Miguel	166401	3/6/2030	12.9458	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
46	Sangre De Cristo	166424	3/6/2030	41	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
47	Santa Clara	166425	3/6/2030	15	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
48	Swanwick	166428	3/6/2030	70.1316	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
49	Constituyentes 1917	199402	18/04/2044	66.2411	Coeur Mexicana	1% NSR
50	Montecristo	213579	17/05/2051	38.056	Coeur Mexicana	1% NSR
51	Montecristo Fraccion	213580	17/05/2051	0.2813	Coeur Mexicana	1% NSR
52	Montecristo Ii	226590	1/2/2056	27.1426	Coeur Mexicana	1% NSR
53	Santa Cruz	186960	16/05/2040	10	Coeur Mexicana	3% NSR
54	Elyca	179842	16/12/2036	10.0924	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
55	Ampl. San Antonio	196127	22/09/2042	20.9174	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
56	Cantilito	220788	6/10/2053	37.035	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
57	Guazapares	209497	2/8/2049	30.9111	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
58	Guazapares 1	212890	12/2/2051	451.9655	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
59	Guazapares 2	226217	1/12/2055	404.0016	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
60	Guazapares 3	211040	23/03/2050	250	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
61	Guazapares 4	223664	1/2/2055	63.9713	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
62	Guazapares 5	213572	17/05/2051	88.8744	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
63	San Antonio	204385	12/2/2047	14.8932	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
64	San Antonio	222869	13/09/2054	105.1116	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
65	San Francisco	191486	18/12/2041	38.1598	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
66	Vinorama	226884	16/03/2056	474.222	Coeur Mexicana	2% NSR
67	Guazapares	232082	17/05/2057	4,242.12	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
68	Temoris Centro Fracc. 1	243762	17/05/2057	4,940.20	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
69	Temoris Centro Fracc. 2	243763	17/05/2057	2,380.00	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
70	Temoris Centro Fracc. 6 R1a	243767	17/05/2057	956.201	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
71	Temoris Fraccion 4	229553	17/05/2057	18.6567	Coeur Mexicana	N/A
				27,226.65

Note:  dates use month/day convention.  N/A = not applicable

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑1: Mineral Tenure Location Map

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑2:     Deposit Locations Within Mineral Concession Areas

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

3.4 Surface Rights

Coeur has occupancy agreements in place with selected ejidos for exploitation or exploration purposes (Table 3‑2), collectively covering an area of 15,111.19 ha (Figure 3‑3).

3.5 Water Rights

Water rights supporting exploration, mining, and processing activities are summarized in Table 3‑3.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑2:    Key Surface Rights Agreements

Eijido	Purpose	Area (ha)	Fees	Agreement Duration	Comment
Agua Salada	Exploration, exploitation and beneficiation	443.4	Annual 765,000 (MXN$)	25 years, from November 20, 2013; option to extend for an additional five years	Five scholarships to a maximum of MXN$50,000 to children of members of the ejido
Chínipas	Water pumping station and associated infrastructure	7.8	Annual 24,000 (US$)	11 years, from October 15, 2012; option to extend for an additional 11 years	Five higher-education scholarships to a maximum of MXN$50,000 to children of members of the ejido. It also provides for a contribution of MXN$120,000 annually towards meal programs for senior citizens of the ejido.  Payments subject to annual adjustment for CPI
Guazapares	Exploration, exploitation and beneficiation	1,830.6	Annual 15,432,000 (MXN$) adjusted for CPI annually	25 years, from October 20, 2013; option to extend for an additional five years	Five higher-education scholarships to a maximum of MXN$50,000 to children of members of the ejido. It also provides for a contribution of MXN$120,000 annually towards meal programs for senior citizens of the ejido and an additional MXN$120,000 annually towards school infrastructure.  Payments subject to annual adjustment for CPI
Guazapares	Exploration and the installation of ventilation infrastructure	1,778.9	One-time rent 595,000 (MXN$)	10 years, from March 29, 2015	Nominal payments made for any surface disturbance to the ejido and any affected ejiditario on a unit cost basis per drill pad, trench and meter of road construction.  Nominal payments subject to annual adjustment for CPI
Guazapares	Exploration and installation of ventilation infrastructure	5,203.0	One-time rent 595,000 (MXN$)	10 years, from March 29, 2015	Nominal payments made for any surface disturbance to the ejido and any affected ejiditario on a unit cost basis per drill pad, trench, and meter of road construction.  Nominal payments subject to annual adjustment for CPI

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Eijido	Purpose	Area (ha)	Fees	Agreement Duration	Comment
Palmarejo	Exploration, exploitation, and beneficiation	657.5	Annual 7,200,000 (MXN$) adjusted for CPI annually	17 years, from October 16, 2013; option to extend for an additional five years	Five higher-education scholarships to a maximum of MXN$50,000 to children of members of the ejido
Guerra Al Tirano	Exploration, exploitation, and beneficiation	5,190.39	One-time rent 1,500,000 (MXN$)	10 years, from March 12, 2017	Nominal payments made for any surface disturbance to the ejido and any affected ejiditario on a unit cost basis per drill pad, trench and meter of road construction.  Nominal payments subject to annual adjustment for CPI

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑3: Surface Rights Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑3:    Key Water Rights

Permit/Concession	Dates (from–to)	Comments
03CHI141177/10EBDL16	July 30, 2015 to July 30, 2025	Tailings dam permit for leased area of 42,613.49 m2
03CHI140198/10EDDL13	April 2009 to April 2024	Water treatment plant 1 discharge permit for 34,700 m3 per year
03CHI140900/10ERDL15	November 17, 2012 to November 17, 2022	Water treatment plant 2 discharge permit for 37,230 m3 per year
03CHI156149/10EMDA17	June 10, 2017 to June 10, 2027	Groundwater concession, Palmarejo water well
03CHI140154/10FAGC10	September 18, 2009 to September 18, 2029	Infiltration gallery (tunnel) at Chínipas River riverbed, facility within Federal Area, occupation permit of 1,100 m2
03CHI141257/10FDDL16	March 2, 2016 to March 2, 2026	Water treatment plant at tailings storage facility discharge permit for 2,628,000 m3 per year
03CHI155096/10FBDA15	November 16, 2014 to November 16, 2034	Concession for the extraction of 100,000 m3 per year of surface water.
03CHI141394/10EDD17	December 8, 2016 to December 8 2026	Federal Area 1630; concessional area of 4,302.066 m2
03CHI141393/10EDD17	December 8, 2016 to December 8 2026	Federal Area 1644; concessional area of 28,969.965 m2
CHI818344	December 21, 2020 to December 21, 2050	Federal Area 1654; concessional area of 3,114.020 m2
03CHI141395/10EDD17	December 8, 2016 to December 8, 2026	Federal Area 1647; concessional area of 469.15 m2
03CHI141396/10EDDL17	December 8, 2016 to December 8, 2026	Federal Area 1645; concessional area of 10,673.206 m2
03CHI141392/10EDD17	December 8, 2016 to December 8, 2026	Federal Area 1631; concessional area of 670.649 m2
03CHI141391/10EDDL17	December 8, 2016 to December 8, 2026	Federal Area 1641; concessional area of 2,518.924 m2
03CHI141390/10EDD17	December 8, 2016 to December 8, 2026	Federal Area 1642; concessional area of 2,148.414 m2
CHI832319	October 2, 2014 to October 2, 2024	Federal Area 1885; concessional area of 442,641 m2
03CHI141176/10EBDL15	May 20 2016 to May 20 2026	Environmental control dam, permit for leased area of 45,865.87 m2
03CHI800002/10FPGC10	February 22 2010 to February 22 2029	Water extraction permit of 2,000,000 m3 per year at infiltration gallery, Chínipas River.
8120017	April 16 2021 to April 16 2031	Federal Area 1649; concessional area of 3,211.45 m2

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Permit/Concession	Dates (from–to)	Comments
No Concession title 3, Tillage water	Indefinite	Extraction groundwater at Guadalupe
No Concession title 4, Tillage water	Indefinite	Extraction groundwater at Independencia

3.6 Royalties

3.6.1 Franco-Nevada

On 2 October 2014, a Gold Purchase and Sale Agreement (the Agreement) was entered into by and among Coeur Mexicana, Franco-Nevada (Barbados) Corporation (Franco–Nevada), Ocampo Resources Inc., and Ocampo Services Inc., whereby Coeur Mexicana agreed to sell to Franco–Nevada 50% of the refined gold produced from selected mining concessions at a gold price of $800/oz, in consideration of Franco–Nevada providing investment capital for Project development.

The initial term of the Agreement (which became effective in August 2016) is 40 years.  This Agreement encumbers all mining concessions owned or controlled by Coeur Mexicana except for the El Rosario (185236), La Curra (222319), La Currita (223292) and Sulema No. 2 (191332) mining concessions and the mining concessions acquired from Paramount.  There is also an area of interest (AOI), whereby any mining concessions acquired within the boundaries of the AOI are subject to the terms of the Agreement.  The AOI boundary generally follows the exterior boundary of Agrupamiento Unificación Huruapa.

This royalty is included in the LOM cashflow analysis.

3.6.2 Minera Azteca

On 10 October 2011, Coeur Mexicana purchased the Unificación Guerra al Tirano (170588), Reyna de Oro (198543), and Tres de Mayo (187906) mining concessions from Minera Azteca de Oro y Plata S.A. de C.V. (Minera Azteca).  Minera Azteca reserved a 2% net smelter returns royalty (NSR) on production, as defined in the agreement, of all gold and silver mined and produced from these three mining concessions.  Coeur Mexicana may re-acquire, at any time, up to 75% of the NSR (i.e., 1.5%), at a fixed price of US$50,000 per one-tenth of every 1%.  The maximum re-purchase price of this NSR is US$750,000.  Currently, there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves associated with this royalty.

 

3.6.3 Hernández and Gomez

Pursuant to a Convenio (Paramount Mexico Royalty Agreement) by and among Isidro Hernández Pompa and wife (Hernández), Victor Manuel Gomez Fregoso (Gomez), and Paramount Mexico, dated December 8, 2009, a 1% NSR was granted to Hernández and Gomez, over the Constituyentes 1917 (199402), Montecristo (213579), Montecristo Fraccion (213580), and Montecristo II (226590) mining concessions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Coeur Mexicana (as successor to Paramount Mexico) may purchase this NSR from the Royalty Holders at any time for US$450,000 plus value-added tax (IVA).  Under the terms of the Paramount Mexico Royalty Agreement, Coeur Mexicana (as successor to Paramount Mexico) has a US$190,000 credit against future NSR payments, if any, which may be realized by withholding 50% of the quarterly NSR payments Hernández and Gomez would have otherwise received.  Alternatively, Coeur Mexicana (as successor to Paramount Mexico) may apply the US$190,000 credit to the US$450,000 NSR royalty purchase price.  Currently, there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves associated with this royalty.

3.6.4 Rascón

The Santa Cruz (T-186960) concession is subject to a 3% NSR royalty payable to Mr. Luis Alberto Rascón Herrera.  The NSR royalty can be purchased at any time, upon the payment of US$200,000 plus value-added tax.  Currently, there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves associated with this royalty.

3.6.5 Minera Río Tinto and Astorga

The San Antonio (T-222869), San Antonio (T-204385), Ampl. San Antonio (T-196127) concessions are subject to a 0.5% NSR payable to Minera Río Tinto, S.A. de C.V. (Minera Río Tinto) and a 1.5% NSR payable to Mr. Rafael Fernando Astorga Hernández.  Currently, there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves associated with this royalty.

3.6.6 Minera Río Tinto and Ayub

The Guazapares (T-209497), Guazapares 1 (T-212890), Guazapares 2 (T-226217), Guazapares 3 (T-211040), Guazapares 4 (T-223664), Guazapares 5 (T- 213572), Cantilito (T-220788), and Vinorama (T-226884) concessions are subject to a 2% NSR payable to Minera Río Tinto and Mr. Mario Humberto Ayub Touché.  Currently, there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves associated with this royalty.

3.6.7 Minera Río Tinto and Rachasa

The San Francisco (T-191486) concession is subject to a 0.5% NSR payable to Minera Río Tinto and a 1.5% NSR payable to Minera Rachasa, S.A. de C.V. (Rachasa).  Currently, there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves associated with this royalty.

3.6.8 Mexican Mining Taxes

Mexican mining taxes include the following:

• Special Mining Duty (tax) of 7.5% (Derecho Especial Sobre Mineria) applied to income from mining activities.  The tax is calculated on the basis of earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation, and amortization (i.e., EBITDA);

• Extraordinary Mining Duty (tax) of 0.5% (Derecho Extraordinario Sobre Mineria) applied to all revenue from the gold and silver produced.

Both of these taxes are assumed to be deductible against income before the calculation of corporate income tax.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

3.7 Encumbrances

3.7.1 Permitting Requirements

The environmental permitting process in Mexico requires the presentation of two different documents at the federal level: an Environmental Impact Statement (MIA in the Spanish acronym) and a Land Use Change (CUS in the Spanish acronym).  These documents are reviewed by Mexico’s environmental authority, Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT).  In addition, authorization from Mexico’s water authority CONAGUA (Comisión  Naciónal del Agua) is needed for water use, effluent discharge, and for the construction of facilities in federal watersheds.

To cover the life-of-mine (LOM), a new environmental authorization was requested of SEMARNAT on March 23, 2021, through the presentation of a Regional MIA (MIA-R).  A MIA-R is a preventive instrument that defines the environmental and social effects of a project of regional extension which includes several watersheds and different towns or communities. The MIA-R is SEMARNAT’s preferred instrument for large-scale mining projects.

Additional information on permitting is provided in Chapter 17.

3.7.2 Permitting Timelines

In late July 2021, SEMARNAT requested additional information on the MIA-R document; this information was provided by Coeur on August 10, 2021.  It is expected that the MIA-R will be approved in the first quarter of 2022.  When granted, it will add 10 years to the current environmental license and will consolidate all existing authorizations under a single global license.  The MIA-R will also include the new facilities and mine development expected for the LOM plan presented in this Report.

No special conditions are anticipated to be imposed in the approval of the MIA-R.

3.7.3 Violations and Fines

There are no major violations or fines as understood in the United States mining regulatory context that have been reported for the Palmarejo Operations.

3.8 Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs

To the extent known to the QP, there are no other known significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the properties that comprise the Palmarejo Operations that are not discussed in this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-13

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

4.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

4.1 Physiography

The Palmarejo Operations are located on the western flank of the Sierra Madre Occidental, a mountain range that comprises the central spine of northern Mexico.

The elevation at Palmarejo is about 1,150 masl, and the elevation at Guadalupe and Independencia is about 1,300 masl.

Hills are typically densely vegetated, steep-sided slopes with local stands of cacti.  Conifers occur at high elevations, while oak trees, cacti, and thorny shrubs dominate the vegetation at low levels.

Local ranchers and farmers graze cattle and grow corn and other vegetables on small-scale plots.

4.2 Accessibility

Access to the Palmarejo Operations is from the city of Chihuahua, in the state of Chihuahua, Mexico, via paved Highways 16 and 127 to the town of San Rafael.  From San Rafael, travel is by gravel road through Temoris to the town of Palmarejo which is adjacent to the processing plant.  Access via Temoris is along 35 km of company-maintained gravel road, an extension of Highway 127 that continues on through to Chínipas.  The majority of the supplies and personnel are transported via this road from Chihuahua to the site.  Total driving time from Chihuahua is approximately seven hours.

Access to the individual mines and local exploration sites is via a company-controlled road approximately 10 km from the process plant.

The Chihuahua–Pacifico rail service operates between Chihuahua and Los Mochis (Topolobampo seaport) on the northwest coast of Mexico.  A passenger train operates weekly, and one freight train operates daily between these cities with nearest stop in Estación Temoris.  The Estación Temoris railway station is located 10 km south of Temoris.

An airstrip services light aircraft located at the Palmarejo site.

4.3 Climate

The climate is moderate, with average maximum and minimum temperatures at 34° C and 5° C, respectively.  Rainfall occurs mainly in the summer and fall months (August through to the end of October), with average annual precipitation of 620 mm (McCullagh and Hall, 2014).

Mining operations are conducted year-round.  All anticipated exploration activities can be conducted year-round.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 4-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

4.4 Infrastructure

Local and regional (state) contractors and vendors provide most of the services required to support the Palmarejo Operations.

The area around the Palmarejo Operations has moderately well-developed infrastructure and a local workforce familiar with mining operations. Four to five thousand inhabitants reside within a one-hour drive, on all-weather compacted dirt roads (Skeet, 2004).  Chínipas and Temoris are the two nearest towns.  The small village of Palmarejo lies immediately northwest of the Palmarejo mine.  Many of the employees live in these three communities.

Electrical power is supplied by the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE).

Water is sourced from the tailings storage facility (TSF), the Chínipas River, or is purchased from local municipalities.

The Palmarejo Operations currently have all infrastructure in place to support mining and processing activities (see also discussions in Chapter 13, Chapter 14, and Chapter 15 of this Report).  These Report chapters also discuss water sources, electricity, personnel, and supplies.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 4-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

5.0 HISTORY

5.1 Project Ownership History

The current Project is managed through Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary Coeur Mexicana S.A. de C.V. This Project was acquired through a combination of mergers and acquisitions starting in 2007.

From 2003 to 2007, Planet Gold S.A.de C.V. (Planet Gold), Bolnisi Gold NL’s operating company, held a majority interest in Palmarejo Silver and Gold Co., which held concessions over the Palmarejo mine, Guadalupe and Independencia Oeste deposits, and surrounding mineral concessions,

Paramount Gold and Silver Corp. (Paramount) held the San Miguel project, which included the Independencia Este, La Union Sur, San Miguel, and San Francisco deposits and prospects and surrounding mineral concessions through its operating subsidiaries, Paramount Gold de Mexico S.A. de C.V. (Paramount Mexico) and Minera Gama S.A. de C.V. (Minera Gama).  Coeur acquired Paramount in 2015.  In November 2015, Minera Gama was merged into Paramount Mexico and in October 2016, the combined Paramount Mexico was merged and incorporated into Coeur Mexicana.

5.2 Exploration and Development History

The Palmarejo Operations are located in the Temoris and Guazapares mining districts.  Silver and gold production from these districts, though poorly documented, has a long, intermittent history dating from at least Spanish colonial exploitation beginning in the 1620s.  Over the 400-year mining history, there has been consolidation and renaming of many of the key areas.  These are summarized in Table 5-1, which provides the historical names and the names that Coeur currently uses for the areas.

A summary of the Project exploration and development history is provided in Table 5-2.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 5‑1:     Project Nomenclature Over Time

Area	District	Deposit	Deposit
Palmarejo Operations	Palmarejo District	Palmarejo	La Blanca
			La Prieta
		Guadalupe	Guadalupe
			La Curra
			La Currita
			Zapata
			Las Animas
			La Patria
		Independencia	Independencia
			La Bavisa
			Hidalgo
		La Nación	La Nación
			Los Bancos
	Guazapares District	San Miguel	San Miguel
		Guazapares	La Union
			San Jose
			San Luis
			San Antonio
			Monte Cristo
			Sangre de Cristo
			San Francisco
			Canutillo

Table 5‑2:    Exploration and Development History Summary Table

Company	Year	Comment
Early artisanal mining, including by the Spanish	1620s to circa 1886	Intermittent small-scale production. Stamp mill constructed at Palmarejo mine in 1881.
Palmarejo Mining Co; later renamed Palmarejo and Mexican GoldFields, Ltd. (Palmarejo and Mexican GoldFields)	1886–1910	Purchased Palmarejo mine.  Constructed a mill located two miles east of Chínipas, an aqueduct for power, and a railroad from the mine site to the mill. Mining activity halted by Mexican Revolution.
Unknown	Unknown	Historic reports of mining at Guadalupe suggest that approximately 3,700 t grading 458 g/t Ag were mined from the deposit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Company	Year	Comment
American Smelting and Refining Company	1950s	Reportedly drilled 15 core holes in the San Luis and San Jose Mine areas.  No drill data available.
Hilos de Plata	1957	Restarted the San Luis mine.
Alaska-Juneau Mining Company	1958–1968	Evaluated the San Luis mine. Mining operations accessed via a 270 m inclined shaft, with the gold-silver ore processed in a 150 tons-per-day flotation mill.  No production records located to date.
Earth Resources Company and Industrias Peñoles	1975–1976	Joint venture over concessions in the Guazapares district.  Sampled the most accessible workings; conducted grid-based geochemical sampling; completed 39 short air-track holes (944 m) with poor sample recovery; metallurgical testwork; resource estimation.
Minas Huruapa, S.A. de C.V.	1979–1992	Restarted operations at Palmarejo mine.  Available records show production of 168,352 t grading 297 g/t Ag and 1.37 g/t Au.
Consejo de Recursos Minerales	1985–1988	District-scale sampling of underground workings in the Guazapares district.
Unknown	1985–1998	La Currita mine, located along the southeast extension of the Guadalupe area, produced at a rate of about 100 tons per day
Noranda Exploration Inc.	1990s	Optioned concessions in the Guazapares district.
Kalahari Resources	1991	Exploration drilling at La Currita; number and type of drill holes unknown.
War Eagle Mining Company Inc.	1991–2002	Completed 50 drillholes within the Guazapares 4 concession (Agrupamiento San Francisco) and on ground adjacent to that concession.  No data available.
Kennecott Utah Copper Corp.	1994–2000	Acquired the Sangre de Cristo property in July 1994, and conducted surface and underground sampling, drilled 12 reverse circulation (RC) holes (2,268 m).  Limited data available.
Silver Standard Resources Inc.	1998	Exploration drilling at La Currita; number and type of drill holes unknown.
Bolnisi	2003–2007	Reconnaissance surface mapping and underground mapping; collection of 286 underground channel samples from the 6, 7, and 8 levels of the historic La Prieta workings; collected 79 channel samples from underground workings in nine prospect areas; excavation of 180 trenches (totaling 3,960 m) over selected exploration targets; RC and core drill testing of selected exploration targets totaling 1,135 drill holes (246,830.9 m); collection of shortwave infrared (SWIR) spectral measurements; trace-element study to evaluate vertical and lateral zoning of major and trace elements in the mineralized shoots at Palmarejo and Guadalupe; Mineral Resource estimates; baseline and supporting environmental studies
Mexoro Minerals Ltd.	2006–2007	Geological mapping of San Francisco area; collected 398 rock-grab, rock-channel, and rock-chip samples of accessible workings and surface exposures of veins and silicification; 31 core holes (4,682 m) at San Francisco, primarily at Canutillo and surrounding areas

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Company	Year	Comment
Garibaldi Resources Corp.	Unknown, pre-2009	Field reconnaissance, geologic mapping, and sampling of surface exposures and old workings in the Temoris area to define drill targets
Paramount	2006–2015	Surface geologic mapping and sampling, mapping, and sampling of accessible underground workings; 92 trenches (4,851 m); ground magnetic and induced polarization (IP) geophysical surveys; RC (59 drillholes, 13,332m) and core drilling (569 drillholes, 160,837m); Mineral Resource estimates; preliminary economic assessment (PEA) mostly relating to deposits within the Guazapares district. Coeur does not consider any of these estimates or the PEA to be current and does not report any resources for deposits within the Guazapares district.
Coeur Mexicana/Coeur	2007–date	Acquired property interests of Bolnisi and Paramount; conducted helicopter-borne magnetic surveys; helicopter-borne Z-axis Tipper electromagnetic (ZTEM) and magnetic survey; reviews of available geophysical data sets; geological mapping; core and RC drilling; metallurgical testwork; Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates; mining studies; permitting activities; baseline and supporting environmental studies. Mining at the Palmarejo open pit and underground mines began in 2008 and milling operations and metal recovery commenced in 2009, ramping up to full capacity in 2010.  In late 2014, production commenced from the Guadalupe underground mine.  In late 2016, production commenced from the Independencia underground mine.  Open pit and underground mining operations from the Palmarejo deposit ceased in 2016.  Underground mining from the La Nación deposit commenced in 2019.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

6.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT

6.1 Deposit Type

The deposits within the Palmarejo Operations area are considered to be examples of epithermal deposits displaying both intermediate- and low-sulfidation features.

Epithermal mineralization is associated with hydrothermal activity related to volcanism or the resulting geothermal activity of circulating meteoric waters at relatively shallow depths and low temperatures.  Precious metal epithermal deposits may exhibit various styles of mineralization with the level of sulfidation state (high, intermediate, or low-sulfidation) referring only to sulfide mineralogy.  At Palmarejo the mineralization commonly takes the form of quartz–calcite veins or quartz vein breccias.  Mineralization is typically zoned with silver dominant mineralization in the upper parts of the system transitioning to more gold dominant and eventually base metal dominant at depth.

6.2 Regional Geology

The basement rocks to the Sierra Madre Occidental consist of Precambrian, Paleozoic, and Mesozoic rocks locally exposed in deeply-incised canyons.

The Sierra Madre Occidental hosts sequences of volcanic and plutonic rocks that are believed to reflect calc-alkaline, subduction-related, continental arc magmatism active from the Late Cretaceous-early Tertiary to the end of the Oligocene.  These sequences are divided into the Lower Volcanic Complex or Lower Volcanic Series, which consists of over 2,000 m of predominantly andesitic volcanic rocks with a few interlayered ash flows and related hypabyssal intrusions, and the Upper Volcanic Series, with >1,000 m of rhyolitic ignimbrites and flows with subordinate andesite, dacite, and basalt that unconformably overlie the Lower Volcanic Complex and were formed by a series of caldera eruptions.  Some altered acidic intrusive bodies, often associated with mineralization, may be related to early phases of this upper sequence.

The Sierra Madre Occidental hosts gold–silver districts along its entire length in at least four wide, northwest-trending structural belts.  Vein and fault hosted epithermal deposits range in age from 42–18 Ma.  Pre-30–32 Ma veins, dikes and extensional faults typically trend northeast and reflect the period when the volcanic arc was in contraction during the early Tertiary.  Post-30 Ma veins, faults and dikes typically trend northwest and reflect the period when the volcanic arc migrated back toward the current Pacific coast.

6.3 Local Geology

The two main mining districts within the Project area are the Palmarejo and Guazapares districts.

6.3.1 Lithologies

Weakly propylitically-altered andesitic rocks with lesser amounts of rhyodacitic volcanic tuffs and related hypabyssal intrusions of the Lower Volcanic Complex cover the lower elevations of the Palmarejo Operations area.  In the Guazapares mining district, the lowest exposed unit of the Lower Volcanic Complex consists of rhyolitic flows and related shallow intrusions, volcaniclastic units, including siltstones and fine-grained sandstones.  This unit is overlain by andesitic flows and epiclastic rocks with related andesitic porphyry intrusions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Cliff-forming rhyolitic ignimbrites of the Upper Volcanic Series are generally unmineralized and are well exposed in the eastern and southern parts of the Project area or along higher ridge tops. Miocene basaltic andesites and basalts locally overlie the Upper Volcanic Series immediately west of the San Miguel area.

Geology maps of the general Project area are provided in Figure 6‑1, and Figure 6‑2, a geological cross-section through the central Palmarejo area is included in Figure 6‑3 and a stratigraphic column in Figure 6‑4.

6.3.2 Structure

6.3.2.1 Palmarejo District

Within the Palmarejo district, the principal mineralized structures form part of a large sigmoidal network of faults both along strike and down dip with orebodies typically located at structural intersections.  These are areas of high permeability-porosity that localize fluids and ore-shoots and are often associated with the development of sets of sheeted quartz extension veins that expand mineralized zones where they are silver–gold bearing.

Mineralized structures occur:

• In intersections between faults, especially at fault tips, where curved faults have linked to form rhombic intersections in plan view (e.g., steeply-plunging main ore-shoots at Palmarejo, Clavo 76);

• At curves and bends in faults, where what were originally separate fault segments may have joined, multiple veins often diverge from such bends forming wider ore zones (e.g., southeastern sectors of the Guadalupe mine);

• Where minor faults splay off the principal faults.  These also occur at bends or steps in the main fault; the minor fault may accommodate some of the displacement around the irregularities (Guadalupe footwall and hanging wall veins);

• Where faults pass across or abut against more competent units (andesite and basalt at Palmarejo, rhyolite dome and hanging wall andesite at Guadalupe), resulting in a steepening of the fault surface that may allow greater dilation;

• At downward en-echelon steps and splays in the fault system (normal fault relays), which are associated with steepening and refraction across units of varying competency, a setting that hosts much of the ore at Guadalupe.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑1: Regional Geology Map

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑2: Project Geology Map

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑3: Geologic Cross-Section

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑4: Stratigraphic Column

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Extension is the dominant form of tectonics across the Palmarejo Operations area and is characterized by listric normal faults, typically parallel to the regional trend of the Sierra Madre Occidental, striking north–south to north–northwest, with west–northwest-trending flexures, as well as dilation of west–northwest-trending fractures, caused by strike-slip faulting.  Mineralization in the Palmarejo Operations is spatially associated with these faults, as well as with structural offshoots.  Although referred to as faults and often mapped as single lines, these structures are a series of sub-parallel curved faults that make up a sigmoidal network.  Several rhyodacitic dikes follow these fault zones and appear to be associated with mineralization (pre and syn).

Structural intersections and dilatational portions of fault zones, such as flexures, link veins in fault jogs, or stockwork tension veins favor development of mineralized shoots.  Throughout the Palmarejo Operations, left-stepping (west–northwest) bends in the generally northwest-trending structures are particularly favorable sites for mineral shoot development.  Increased normal fault displacement also appears to be important, and structures that have little normal fault displacement tend not to be well mineralized.

6.3.2.2 Guazapares District

Classic extensional fault relays at en-echelon steps in the normal fault system occur along the Guazapares–La Union fault corridor in the Guazapares district.  The Guazapares structure has a strike length of about 8 km and is broken into segments by small-displacement, northeast-trending faults.  A subparallel structure, the Batosegachi fault, lies about 3 km to the west of the Guazapares structure and hosts the San Miguel vein system.  Right-handed en-echelon steps in the principal fault system are associated with the development of sheeted zones of northwest-trending extensional veining.

Faults within the district generally trend north–northwest, parallel to the regional trend of the Sierra Madre Occidental.  Mineralization is spatially associated with these faults, as well as with structural offshoots.  Similar to Palmarejo, these structures are actually a series of sub-parallel curved faults that form part of the sigmoidal network.  As is seen at Palmarejo, rhyodacitic dikes follow these fault zones and appear to be associated with mineralization.

6.3.3 Alteration

Alteration zonation is apparent vertically along faults and surrounding vein systems in patterns that may aid in vectoring towards favorable structural settings and/or elevations.  In surface exposures well above mineralization (70 to >150 m), faults are generally clay-altered, with white to red–brown oxide altered clay and gouge and are often recessively weathering.  Locally, silicification affects gouge strands and the immediate wall rock with quartz veinlets typically present above more productive systems.

At greater depth and closer to productive veins (immediately surrounding veins and within tens of meters above veins along faults), alteration around quartz-dominant veins generally comprises pale grey to greenish, hard bleaching of wall rocks that can extend several meters from quartz veins.

Outcropping areas of adularia alteration are resistant to erosion and form ridges (e.g., Guadalupe South, Guazapares area veins).  In areas of abundant late calcite and Fe-oxide veins, clay alteration overprints the earlier adularia-dominant alteration associated with the quartz vein silver–gold stages.  This results in friable, clay-rich altered areas often internal to outer adularia altered areas around veins; these late clay assemblages are interpreted to be kaolinite–smectite-rich.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

6.3.4 Mineralization

6.3.4.1 Palmarejo District

Mineralization in the district is largely blind with orebody tops 50–300 m below the current surface elevations.  The major orebodies occur mainly at elevations of between 950–1300 m above sea level in the Guadalupe–Independencia area.

Mineralization within the Palmarejo district consists of epithermal, intermediate to low sulfidation, silver–gold vein and vein-breccia deposits that exhibit vertical and lateral zoning.  Mineralization occurs along the principal northwest-trending faults and is largely confined to fault-hosted veins.  The largest deposits occur on the faults that have the greatest displacement and strike length.  Veins are polyphase and comprise generations of early quartz breccia with sphalerite-pyrite-galena dominant sulfide and silver–gold phases as disseminations and bands.  Later vein generations include iron oxide and calcite fillings that overprint quartz breccia vein phases.

Veins, in most cases, are late in the fault history and are best developed in ore-shoots at structural intersections where dilation is greatest.

Silver–gold deposits in the Palmarejo district are characterized by pervasive silicification, quartz-fill expansion breccias, and sheeted veins.  Multiple stages of mineralization produced several phases of silica, ranging from chalcedony to comb quartz, and typically two periods of silver–gold mineralization.  This strongly-zoned mineralization is characterized by pyrite, sphalerite, galena, and argentite (acanthite) deposited within the quartz vein/breccias at lower elevations and higher-grade precious-metals mineralization with fine grained, black, silver-rich sulfide bands or breccia-infill in the upper portions of the structures.  There is a general sense across the Palmarejo Operations that higher gold values occur deeper in the original mineral system, while richer silver values were deposited in the upper levels of these systems.

6.3.4.2 Guazapares District

The major structures that host the mineralized veins, stockworks, and breccias generally occur in propylitically altered andesite and to a lesser extent, in rhyodacitic volcanic tuffs and related hypabyssal intrusions of the Lower Volcanic Series.  Contacts between andesitic and felsic sequences or within the more competent and brittle felsic sequences that allowed for development of through-going fractures are favorable locations.  Dilational portions of the fault zones, such as flexures, link veins in fault jogs, and stockwork tension veins appear, at least locally, to preferentially accommodate development of higher-grade mineralized shoots.

Silver–gold mineralization, with variable but typically low amounts of lead and zinc, occurs within en echelonstructural zones characterized by multi-phase quartz veining, quartz + carbonate + pyrite veinlet stockworks, silicified hydrothermal breccias, and quartz-filled expansion breccias.

Three distinct styles of mineralization are identified:  high-grade vein systems, sheeted vein/stockwork/fracture complexes, and volcanic dome complexes:

• High-grade quartz + carbonate vein systems:  trend north-northwest to northwest.  These vein systems are typically silver-rich, with an Ag:Au ratio of 100:1.  The principal sulfide minerals within the veins include sphalerite and argentite, with pyrite being less abundant.  Gold-rich veins have pyrite and traces of chalcopyrite as the principal sulfide minerals, and often represent the deeper portions of the silver-rich vein systems:

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Sheeted vein/stockwork/fracture complexes:  occur as wide zones with the potential for bulk mining.  These broad zones include various thin quartz veins, quartz-veinlet stockworks, gouge/fault breccias, and fractures and also trend northwesterly.  Silver and low levels of associated base metals tend to occur in the quartz veins at shallow depths, with potential for higher-grade gold mineralization at depth;

• Volcanic dome complexes are apparently controlled by the intersection of north-northwest- and east–northeast-trending structures.  Intrusive dacitic to andesitic bodies are common and may be related to the volcanic dome complexes.  Mineralization occurs in broad zones along the margin of the domes, typically as disseminated, low-grade gold, with alteration, zoning, and mineralization suggestive of a separate and later mineralizing event.

6.4 Property Geology

Geology descriptions are provided for the deposits that have current mineral resource estimates in this sub-section.

6.4.1 Guadalupe

The Guadalupe deposits include the principal Guadalupe deposit and a number of associated zones, the economically most important being Zapata and La Patria.

6.4.1.1 Deposit Dimensions

The principal Guadalupe deposit comprises 18 domains with a known strike extent of 4.0 km and a vertical extent of 500 m.  Individual domains are typically between 1-6 m wide, but mineralization locally reaches 25 m wide in areas of structural intersections.  The Zapata zone is located in the immediate footwall of the Guadalupe deposit and comprises 14 domains with a known strike length of 1.4 km that is open to the northwest.  The La Patria zone is approximately 2 km southwest of Guadalupe and is a sub-parallel structure comprising 12 domains with a known strike length of 2 km.  The individual domains at the Zapata and La Patria zones are typically narrower than those of the Guadalupe deposit.

6.4.1.2 Lithologies

Mineralization is preferentially hosted in a sequence of amygdaloidal andesites (Ktam) close to the base of the Lower Volcanic Group, particularly when in fault contact with younger volcaniclastics or rhyolite tuffs.  Mineralization appears to be strongest when spatially associated with rhyolite dike/dome complexes.

6.4.1.3 Structure

Mineralized veins and breccias are located along a major northwest-trending structural corridor that can be traced for over 4 km along strike.  The Guadalupe and La Patria deposits have an average dip of approximately -60° and -45° to the northeast, whereas Zapata typically dips -70°.  Mapping by Stewart (2005) indicates both normal and strike-slip offsets along the fault, with vertical displacement estimated to be at least a few hundred meters (Davies, 2007).  Secondary west–northwest- and north–northeast-trending structures were identified by surface mapping in the Guadalupe area (Laurent, 2004; Davies, 2007).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Both Guadalupe and La Patria crop out where a number of small, historic surface workings are located.  Along the remaining extents, expressions are typically characterized by essentially barren, moderately to pervasively clay-altered wall rocks and laterally discontinuous quartz veins, with thicknesses ranging from millimeters to a few meters.  Beneath the clay-rich upper zone, the breccia veins are spatially associated with quartz–carbonate–pyrite–sericite–clay–epidote–chlorite alteration in the wall rock.

6.4.1.4 Alteration

The Guadalupe vein system is surrounded by pale grey to greenish alteration that extends a few meters from veins but can widen to tens of meters where veins are more complex and ore controlling structures split into multiple strands.  Hard adularia–quartz alteration is common around quartz-rich phases of the vein system.  Greenish clays become more abundant towards surface, and in areas where late calcite veins are abundant, the latter likely overprints earlier adularia–quartz alteration phases with lower temperature clay assemblages.

6.4.1.5 Mineralization

In underground exposures mineralization occurs in polyphase veins, which display a typical paragenesis from multiple, early silver–gold-bearing quartz-rich phases of dominantly quartz breccia veins to later, often voluminous, calcite-dominant and iron oxide-bearing veins and fault fill phases that overprint and include early quartz phases as breccia fragments.

The early silver–gold-rich quartz vein phases comprise banded crustiform quartz vein fill, often with thin bands of dark gray to black sphalerite–pyrite–galena with silver–copper phases in higher-grade areas.  These are variably brecciated by younger quartz phases that contain similar metal assemblages.  Sulfides and silver–gold phases are disseminated in the breccia matrix with quartz, often as blebs, disseminations, and patches.  Many of the higher-grade breccias are fine-grained; forming diffuse, now partially recrystallized 0.5–3 cm fragments of earlier quartz set in a matrix of chalcedonic to finely crystalline quartz.  Layered breccias are locally developed, suggesting gravitational filling generated by fault displacement and hydrothermal brecciation.

The quartz-rich phases are locally overprinted by calcite.  The calcite is multi-stage and forms crystalline massive to banded, crustiform vein fillings that incorporate breccia fragments of earlier, mineralized, quartz breccia vein material.  The dark gray-brown color to the calcite may indicate a manganiferous or iron-bearing composition.  Quartz fragments and lenses in the calcite filling are often oxidized.  Silver–gold grades are typically diluted by areas of abundant calcite, with grades occurring primarily in quartz breccia fragments. Dissolution of calcite leads to formation of natural voids, particularly along the vein boundaries.

Higher-grade quartz veins locally splay off the main fault-vein system into the hanging wall in the areas of underground development, where they are less affected by later calcite–iron oxide phases and can be individually mined.

Brecciation and overprinting of vein phases by fault surfaces on the footwall of the vein system occurs in some areas.

Patterns of vein distribution that may aid in focusing ore-shoots, or higher-grade areas within larger ore-shoots, include:

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Irregularities in the strike of the vein sigmoids: bends to more northerly–north–northwesterly-trending in southern parts of the workings and east–west trends in northern parts of the workings may represent the linking segments of initially separate faults.  As these splays diverge from the main vein system, the vein system locally widens.  Local intersections of east–west and north–northwest-oriented segments are associated with widening of the vein system;

• Steepening and downward stepping/splitting of the fault system:  this is most apparent where the hanging wall diverges away from the main fault, or where the fault zone steepens below rhyolite or andesite units.

Collectively, these irregularities and linking zones of fault sets aid in focusing wider segments of the Guadalupe vein system.  Northwest trends (290 to 320º azimuth) are generally associated with the widest, higher-grade vein segments and may reflect the optimal orientation for dilation.

A geology map for Guadalupe is provided in Figure 6‑5, and cross-sections through the Guadalupe and Zapata deposits are included as Figure 6‑6 and Figure 6‑7 respectively.  A geology map for the La Patria area is shown in Figure 6‑8 and a cross-section through the deposit in Figure 6‑9.

6.4.2 Independencia

The Independencia deposits include the Independencia deposit and a number of associated zones, the economically most important being Hidalgo and La Bavisa.

6.4.2.1 Deposit Dimensions

The principal Independencia deposit consists of 12 domains with a known strike extent of 1.5 km and a vertical extent 400 m.  Individual domains are typically between 1–4 m wide, but mineralization locally reaches 15 m wide in areas of structural intersections.

Individual domains at the Hidalgo and La Bavisa zones are typically narrower than at Independencia.  The Hidalgo zone is located immediately northwest of the Independencia deposit and comprises seven domains with a known strike length of 1.5 km, remaining open to the northwest.  The La Bavisa zone is approximately 1 km northeast of Independencia and is a sub-parallel structure comprising five domains with a known strike length of 1 km.

The Independencia deposit extends off the Project area to the southeast and appears to die out to the northwest as major displacement seems to have been transferred to the Hidalgo fault.  Hidalgo remains open to the northwest and most recent drilling discovered a high-grade shoot at the presently known northwestern extent.

6.4.2.2 Lithologies

Similar to the Guadalupe deposits, mineralization is preferentially hosted in a sequence of amygdaloidal andesites (Ktam) close to the base of the Lower Volcanic Group, particularly when in faulted contact with younger volcaniclastics or rhyolite tuffs.  Mineralization appears to be strongest when spatially associated with rhyolite dike/dome complexes.  The role of syn-mineral rhyolitic dikes appears to be more important at Independencia.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑5: Geology Map, Guadalupe

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑6: Geologic Cross-Section, Guadalupe

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-13

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑7: Geologic Cross-Section, Zapata

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-14

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑8: Geology Map, La Patria Zone

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-15

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑9: Geologic Cross-Section, La Patria

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-16

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

6.4.2.3 Structure

Faults are common within the Independencia fault-vein system, although many areas of late, iron-oxide breccia that have been classified as faults in mine mapping likely instead represent dissolution and hydrothermal breccias.  Quartz veins locally have silicified cataclastic breccias on their margins that represent syn-vein fault surfaces overprinted by later breccia phases.  Iron-oxide matrix breccias often contain fault strands that are late in the paragenetic history and may be present on vein and breccia margins with mine maps currently implying that most of the iron-oxide matrix breccias are fault related.

Fault surfaces are in general within, and parallel to, main vein strands or occur in wall rocks just beside the veins with northwest trends and steep dips.  Some minor fault surfaces were observed to be oblique to the main vein, but these occur within the vein zone and may join, and not extend beyond the principal fault surfaces.

6.4.2.4 Alteration

Mineralized zones are typically surrounded by several meters to more than 15 m of alteration that varies in style and overall geotechnical competency.

In the northwestern sector of the vein system, a greenish alteration likely represents a combination of crystalline illite and adularia with disseminated pyrite.  Adularia ± quartz is present and most abundant where the alteration is hardest (most competent) close to veins.

Younger clay phases have also developed along fractures, surrounding and affecting wall rock fragments within iron-oxide matrix breccias.  To the southeast more pervasive alteration surrounds the mineralized zone with a higher kaolinite–smectite content.

6.4.2.5 Mineralization

Mineralization in the Independencia vein system is thickest where the zone trends northwest, thinning rapidly and dropping silver–gold grades to the north of the main ore-shoot, where the sigmoidal geometries result in pinching down and a change in strike to a more northerly trend.  A second ore-shoot further north suggests the vein sigmoids result in a zone of opening and a change back to more favorable northwesterly trends.  The lack of significant obliquely intersecting post-mineral faults, and the wholesale change in orientation of the Independencia structure suggest that these changes in vein thickness and orientation are primary, and not the result of post-mineral displacement on late faults that may offset or obliquely intersect the vein system.

Significant variations occur in vein style across the width of the vein.  The highest-grade areas are associated with grey quartz breccia and veins that form the earliest vein phases.  The veins consist of chalcedonic to crystalline quartz, and locally calcite ± probable adularia.  Sulfide–silver phases form breccia fragments implying early deposition and brecciation, but the breccia matrix also contains disseminated silver-bearing minerals and sulfides indicating multiple phases of sulfide deposition.  Quartz is locally partially recrystallized so that boundaries between quartz matrix and quartz in the diffuse sulfide-rich fragments are generally gradational, and the fragments themselves are sometimes poorly defined.  Shallowly dipping, gravitational layering of breccias is locally apparent within otherwise steeply dipping veins, indicating significant, rapid brecciation events and fragment settling.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-17

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Quartz vein phases are overprinted by widespread, often voluminous younger calcite and iron-oxide matrix breccia phases.  These later vein phases locally form much of the width of the Independencia vein system at its widest points (>10 m thick).  Calcite phases may be intergrown with quartz phases forming alternating bands, and iron–manganese oxides occur as bands or fragments within the calcite.

Iron–manganese oxide matrix breccias are abundant in the Independencia orebody and form much of the southeast portions of the vein system.  The combination of high clay and manganese content is associated with poor ground conditions and may also contribute to the lower process recoveries for ore from this area.

These calcite and iron oxide events (albeit with less manganese) are also present along much of the currently known extents of the Hidalgo zone but tend to be absent in the La Bavisa zone.  Significantly more adularia locally occurs in the La Bavisa zone than occurs at any other deposit and is at least spatially related to significantly lower precious metal content.

The Independencia and Hidalgo structures are surrounded by a fringe of extensional quartz and calcite veinlets that trend northwest, generally parallel in strike, with, steep or opposing dips to the main fault–vein system.  These seldom carry sufficient silver–gold grades and/or widths for mining in the current areas of development but have the potential to form broadened mineralized zones if quartz-rich varieties occur in high density with silver–gold phases.

A geology map is provided in Figure 6‑10 and cross-sections through the Independencia and La Bavisa deposits are shown in Figure 6‑11 and Figure 6‑12 respectively.

6.4.3 La Nación

The La Nación deposits include the La Nación deposit and the Los Bancos zone.

6.4.3.1 Deposit Dimensions

The La Nación deposit consists of six domains with a known strike extent of 1.5 km and a vertical extent of 250 m.  Individual domains are typically between 1-4 m wide, but mineralization is locally 12 m wide in areas of structural intersections.

The Los Bancos zone is located to the approximately 400 m northwest of the La Nación deposit and comprises five domains with a known strike length of 400 m.  The individual domains at the Los Bancos zones are much narrower than at La Nación.

Both La Nación and Los Bancos are considered to be well constrained by drilling in both dip and strike extents and only limited infill drill programs are planned.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-18

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑10: Geology Map, Independencia

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-19

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑11: Geologic Cross-Section, Independencia

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-20

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑12: Geologic Cross-Section, La Bavisa

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-21

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

6.4.3.2 Lithologies

The geology surrounding the La Nación deposits is the same as that at the nearby, larger Independencia and Guadalupe deposits, and similar lithological controls on mineralization define the location of higher-grade, wider mineralization.

6.4.3.3 Structure

La Nación and Los Bancos form a northwest-trending and southwest-dipping fault–vein corridor that is subsidiary to, and between Independencia and Guadalupe.  It is possible that at significant depth this vein corridor splays off the hanging wall of the Guadalupe fault system.  Lithological offsets across the La Nación and Los Bancos fault–vein systems indicate normal displacement locally exceeding 100 m, which diminishes northward into the Los Bancos area.

Although La Nación and Los Bancos are separate veins, overall field relationships support a connection between them within the same fault corridor.  These include the continuity of fault displacement between the two zones, and the continuity of intersections and exposures of north–northwest-trending faulting and adularia–silica alteration that forms ridges between La Nación and Los Bancos.  The latter forms a prominent, resistant zone that is partially intruded by rhyolite dikes between the two areas.

As with other vein systems in the area, La Nación and Los Bancos may represent initially separate but now connected fault segments that had non-planar and locally curved geometry.  Ore shoots, as in other local vein systems, occur in northwest-trending segments, consistent with formation during northeast–southwest regional extension that is also indicated on shear sense indicators and implies syn-vein extension in the vein system.

6.4.3.4 Alteration

Alteration at upper elevations in the La Nación area is dominated by clay assemblages.  At lower elevations along the creek between La Nación and Los Bancos, while the structure is clay filled, rocks around it are resistant and are adularia–quartz altered based on K-feldspar (Na-cobaltinitrite) staining.  Such patterns are visible in drill core, with a hard, gray-colored alteration noted in proximity to the veins.

Early adularia–quartz alteration may form a competent host for vein development, as opposed to clay-altered areas.

6.4.3.5 Mineralization

In the La Nación area, the best mineralized portions typically occur between elevations of 1050 m and 1200 m.  Drilling in this area suggests that the vein system dips steeply to the southwest. Above the productive vein levels, the structure is present as a fault without significant vein development as in other vein systems in the area.  Mineralization is best developed where the Ktam (amygdaloidal basalt) unit is present in the vein hanging wall, where the zone widens into multiple subparallel partially vein-filled faults defining a probable fault relay.

Rhyolite dikes are common in the corridor close to the La Nación and Los Bancos structures, and directly intrude the structures hosting the vein systems in several areas, particularly in the Los Bancos area. These typically predate the vein development since they are affected by alteration and overprinted by veining but generally form a poor host to vein development.  The largest dike, in the hanging wall of the structure in the Los Bancos area, continues up slope to the west of the vein and may feed the flow dome on the ridge top above.

A geology map for La Nación is provided in Figure 6‑13, and a cross-section is included as Figure 6-14.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-22

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑13: Geology Map, La Nación

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-23

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑14: Geologic Cross-Section, La Nación

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-24

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

7.0 EXPLORATION

7.1 Exploration

7.1.1 Grids and Surveys

Coeur uses the UTM Zone 12 WGS-84 datum for the capture and projection of all geo-referenced data, including drill collars and surface/ trench sample locations.

Surface topography is based on a 1 m digital elevation model calculated from satellite imagery acquired in 2021 with a 0.5m pixel resolution.  All surface drill collars are surveyed by a certified surveyor using a differential global positioning system (GPS) instrument.  All underground mine workings and drill collars are surveyed with a total station instrument, from a fixed, georeferenced point on surface.

7.1.2 Geological Mapping

Exploration included geological mapping and sampling of known surface fault and vein occurrences, prospecting for new fault and vein occurrences and visible argillic alteration or “clay-blooms”.

In 2014, Coeur commenced a detailed 1:1,000 scale field mapping campaign initially focused on the areas around the Independencia and Guadalupe deposits, with the aim of better understanding the geology and identifying new structural targets to drill test at depth.  This program has now been extended to cover other areas of the Project and is ongoing at present. It will likely take several more years to complete coverage of the entire Project area.

The majority of new exploration targets, particularly in the Guadalupe–Independencia area, are typically blind as the surface elevations are above the known mineralized horizon; therefore, structures that show little surface indication of mineralization are considered drill targets if they are associated with a significant fault system and alteration at surface.  Proximity to rhyolite dikes and dome complexes is also considered important.

All underground faces are mapped and sampled at 1:250 scale. The maps are then digitized for inclusion in the geological model.

7.1.3 Geochemistry

Although the surface geochemical expression of blind mineralization is typically subdued, rock sampling has indicated some correlation with certain elements, such as barium, antimony and certain clay assemblages including muscovite- sericite.  Surface channel chip sampling is routine over areas of surface alteration, particularly related to northwest trending structures and brecciation.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

In 2020 Coeur commenced a detailed soil sampling program over the Bavisa area.  All samples were analyzed by modern ultra-low level inductively-coupled plasma (ICP) techniques and individual hypersprectral analytical methods, both completed by ALS Minerals.  Preliminary results suggest that kaolinite crystallinity may be an important vector towards more prospective areas along mapped faults.

Limited trenching and associated trench mapping and sampling were completed in areas of poor outcrop exposure, specifically over portions of the La Patria, Guadalupe and La Union deposits.

A tire-mounted hydraulic backhoe with a 24-inch-wide bucket was used, and trenches were excavated approximately perpendicular to the structures.  Excavation length was dependent on the suspected width of mineralization, topography, and local ground conditions.  Trenches were dug as deep as the bedrock hardness would allow, generally to a depth of 1.5–2.5 m, rarely to 3.5 m.  The endpoints and inflection points of all trenches were surveyed.  All trenches were mapped for lithology, alteration, structural controls of mineralization, and oxidation, and sampled in detail.

Accessible underground workings have mostly been mapped and channel sampled throughout the Project area.  Most legacy workings would require extensive rehabilitation to permit safe access and therefore have not been entered or sampled.

7.1.4 Geophysics

Paramount commissioned Quantec Geoscience USA Inc. to conduct ground magnetic and induced polarization (IP) geophysical surveys over selected target areas.  The primary purpose of the IP survey was to map chargeability and conductor signatures to depths of 150 m or more with sufficient resolution to assist in the definition of drill targets.  Lines were approximately east–west, with a line separation of 100–200 m and station intervals of 50 m.  Ground magnetic data were collected on 72 lines using a 12.5 m station separation. Total coverage was approximately 255.5 line-km.

MPX Geophysics Ltd. (MPX) completed a helicopter-borne magnetic survey in 2012 on behalf of Coeur over the western Project area.  Lines were flown east–west at 75 m spacing, with tie lines every 750 m.  A total of 2,571.5 line-km were flown.  In 2014, SRK reviewed the data collected (SRK, 2014), as part as a larger study, and concluded that the survey identified the location and along-strike continuity of faults.

In 2015, MPX completed a similar survey over the eastern Project area that was later merged with the 2012 dataset.  A total of 6,823.5 line-km were flown along east-west lines at 200 m spacing, with tie-lines every 2 km.  This survey highlighted the continuation of northwest-trending structures, and as well as the importance of long-lived northeast structures. These structures appear to act both as a focus for mineralization, when they intersect northwest structures, but also appear to offset mineralization.

In 2014, Geotech Ltd. flew a helicopter-borne Z-axis Tipper electromagnetic and magnetic survey over the western Project area.  Lines were flown east-west at 200m spacing with tie lines every 2km. A total of 1,130 line-km were flown.  Condor Consulting provided data interpretations.  The electromagnetic data provide useful information on geology using resistivity contrasts, while magnetometer data provide additional information on geology and structure using magnetic susceptibility contrasts.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Exploration Information collected by Coeur is in line with standard industry practices for the exploration of epithermal precious metal deposits in a semi-arid climate.

As a result of the approximately 15 years of exploration at the Project, Coeur identified a number modifying factors that appear to be important in the generation of mineral deposits in the district. These include the presence of northwest trending structures with large displacements (whether they be mapped or interpreted from geophysical surveys), surficial areas of clay dominant alteration, favorable lithologies in the typical mineralized horizon, surface elevation to ensure preservation of the system and surface geochemical indicators.  Coeur developed a detailed multi-layer GIS based analysis by giving different weightings to the individual characteristics. Targets are then defined and prioritized based on areas where there is the most superposition.  Surface mapping and sampling of the individual targets is then completed to define areas/structures for initial drill testing. Results are included in the GIS project to update/ refine the different parameters used in the targeting exercise.

Vein patterns, particularly associated with extensional fault linkage features, steps, and bends, form prospective sites for ore shoot development where ore-hosting structures trend west-northwest to northwest in optimal extensional orientations, with ore thinning where more east-west and north–northwest trends are present.

Tracking of vein and fault patterns and stratigraphic offsets to trace the distribution of faults, along with assessing relative position in the system with associated alteration and stratigraphic position can aid in vectoring to target elevations and sites along prospective structures.

Given the geologically blind nature of the majority of new deposits, field mapping with surface geochemical sampling (rocks and soils) is considered to be the best methodology to develop high priority targets and define drill programs.  Drilling remains the ultimate exploration technique to determine the economic viability of any target.

In the underground areas of the Independencia and Guadalupe mines, better definition of vein texture and breccia generations from core logging and underground development mapping have aided in the modeling of higher-grade textural types that can lead to efficiency in ore definition, stope design, and extraction.

7.1.5 Exploration Potential

A large part of the land package has still to receive the detailed geological field work necessary to define drill programs, including many of the targets identified in the GIS targeting exercise.

New targets developed for drill testing include the La Carmela area to the south of the Guazapares district, the Palmarejo North area located to the northwest of the legacy open pit operation and the southeastern projection of the La Patria zone.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

7.2 Drilling

7.2.1 Overview

Drilling completed on the Project includes air track, RC, and core drilling, totaling 4,284 drill holes (1,189,478 m).  Air track and RC drilling was employed in the early years of exploration (2009 and prior), with the exception of four RC drill holes completed in 2014.  Approximately 93% of all drilling completed to date at the Project has been core drilling.  Drilling is summarized in Table 7‑1.  A Project-wide drill collar location map is provided in Figure 7‑1.

There are 1,388 drill holes (395,996 m) supporting the mineral resource estimates for the Guadalupe deposits (Table 7‑2), 631 drill holes (240,571 m) supporting the mineral resource estimates for the Independencia deposits (Table 7‑3), and 261 drill holes (105,765 m) supporting the mineral resource estimate for the La Nación deposits (Table 7‑4).  Locations of the drill holes on the individual deposits were included in the geologic maps for the deposits in Chapter 6.

7.2.2 Drilling Excluded for Estimation Purposes

Historic RC drilling may be used to inform exploration modeling and drill targeting but is not used for mineral resource estimates.

Core and RC drill data from the Mexoro and Paramount drill programs do not currently support mineral resource estimates, with the exception of the Independencia East area (core drilling only).

Underground channel samples and grade control drilling are excluded from mineral resource estimation; however, these data are used to support the geological interpretation.

7.2.3 Drill Methods

Where known, drill companies included G4 Forage Drilling of Val-d‘Or, Quebec, Layne de Mexico S.A. de C.V., Dateline, S.A de C.V.; Major Drilling, S.A. de C.V.; Perforaciones Godbe de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Jorder Lyons Drilling, Landdrill, Maza Diamond Drilling and Ingenieria, Excavaciones y Perforaciones de Palmarejo.

Rigs, where known, included a skid-mounted Atlas Copco CS1000 drill rig, track-mounted Atlas Copco CS1500 for core drilling, a Prospector W-750 RC drill, Drill Systems W-750 buggy-mounted all-terrain rig, Drill Systems track drill MPD-1500 all-terrain drill, CS-1000 skid-mounted wireline rig, Schramm-685 all-terrain rig, Prospector buggy-mounted all-terrain drill, Boyles 20 (B-20) skid-mounted wireline core-rig, Longyear 44, Boart Longyear 38, a skid-mounted Sandvik UDR 200 wireline core-rig, a track-mounted HTM-2500 core drill, a track-mounted Versa-1400 rig and various man-portable rigs such as the Mancore-600.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑1:    Property Drill Summary Table

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Meters
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	RC	24	2,874
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	RC–core	4	547
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	Core	31	5,817
Paramount	Exploration	2005	Core	9	183
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	RC	142	27,569
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	RC–core	3	865
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	Core	64	17,707
Paramount	Exploration	2006	Core	50	7,022
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC	100	24,407
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC–core	4	1,411
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	Core	92	36,304
Paramount	Exploration	2007	RC	2	515
Paramount	Exploration	2007	Core	106	20,807
Coeur	Exploration	2008	Core	53	19,409
Coeur	Infill	2008	Core	50	5,298
Coeur	Infill	2008	RC	41	280
Paramount	Exploration	2008	RC	3	753
Paramount	Exploration	2008	Core	55	19,218
Coeur	Exploration	2009	Core	76	23,944
Coeur	Infill	2009	Core	136	18,208
Coeur	Infill	2009	RC	157	4,450
Paramount	Exploration	2009	RC	1	250
Paramount	Exploration	2009	Core	24	8,505
Coeur	Exploration	2010	Core	80	24,840
Coeur	Infill	2010	Core	186	33,640
Paramount	Exploration	2010	RC	53	14,814
Paramount	Exploration	2010	Core	44	14,310
Coeur	Exploration	2011	Core	132	37,327
Coeur	Infill	2011	Core	182	43,305
Paramount	Exploration	2011	Core	105	27,897
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	146	58,375
Coeur	Infill	2012	Core	139	45,859

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Meters
Paramount	Exploration	2012	Core	106	31,715
Coeur	Exploration	2013	Core	192	35,970
Coeur	Infill	2013	Core	144	39,218
Paramount	Exploration	2013	Core	26	12,463
Coeur	Exploration	2014	Core	72	24,595
Coeur	Infill	2014	Core	102	25,403
Coeur	Infill	2014	RC	4	96
Paramount	Exploration	2014	Core	44	18,717
Coeur	Exploration	2015	Core	53	19,898
Coeur	Infill	2015	Core	28	14,438
Coeur	Exploration	2016	Core	62	22,922
Coeur	Infill	2016	Core	158	29,650
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	157	68,282
Coeur	Infill	2017	Core	111	23,392
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	99	40,267
Coeur	Infill	2018	Core	139	33,595
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	62	30,312
Coeur	Infill	2019	Core	81	29,941
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	74	40,428
Coeur	Infill	2020	Core	106	27,290
Coeur	Exploration	2021	Core	63	31,756
Coeur	Infill	2021	Core	107	42,421
Total				4,284	1,189,478

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑1: Property Drill Collar Location Map

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑2:    Drilling used in Mineral Resource Estimations, Guadalupe

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Meters
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	RC	18	2,054
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	RC–core	4	547
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	Core	31	5,817
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	RC	88	18,096
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	RC–core	3	865
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	Core	54	15,299
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC	74	16,839
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC–core	4	1,411
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	Core	92	36,306
Coeur	Exploration	2008	Core	53	19,413
Coeur	Exploration	2009	Core	71	22,182
Coeur	Exploration	2010	Core	61	20,621
Paramount	Exploration	2010	Core	4	663
Coeur	Exploration	2011	Core	120	33,931
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	78	31,498
Coeur	Exploration	2013	Core	109	18,664
Coeur	Infill	2013	Core	21	5,916
Coeur	Infill	2014	Core	17	7,153
Coeur	Infill	2015	Core	25	11,657
Coeur	Infill	2016	Core	60	11,639
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	52	18,839
Coeur	Infill	2017	Core	49	9,718
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	70	25,844
Coeur	Infill	2018	Core	90	19,604
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	26	11,292
Coeur	Infill	2019	Core	35	9,676
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	11	4,493
Coeur	Infill	2020	Core	48	10,565
Coeur	Infill	2021	Core	20	5,394
Total				1,388	395,996

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑3:    Drilling used in Mineral Resource Estimations, Independencia

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Meters
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	RC	18	2,054
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	RC–core	4	547
Bolnisi	Exploration	2005	Core	31	5,817
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	RC	88	18,096
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	RC–core	3	865
Bolnisi	Exploration	2006	Core	54	15,299
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC	74	16,839
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC–core	4	1,411
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	Core	92	36,304
Coeur	Exploration	2008	Core	53	19,409
Coeur	Exploration	2009	Core	71	22,182
Coeur	Exploration	2010	Core	61	20,620
Paramount	Exploration	2010	Core	4	663
Coeur	Exploration	2011	Core	120	33,931
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	78	31,498
Coeur	Exploration	2013	Core	109	18,664
Coeur	Infill	2013	Core	21	5,916
Coeur	Infill	2014	Core	15	7,096
Coeur	Infill	2015	Core	22	11,195
Coeur	Infill	2016	Core	60	11,639
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	52	18,839
Coeur	Infill	2017	Core	48	9,670
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	70	25,844
Coeur	Infill	2018	Core	87	19,306
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	25	10,971
Coeur	Infill	2019	Core	32	9,195
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	11	4,493
Coeur	Infill	2020	Core	48	10,565
Total				1,355	388,927

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑4:    Drilling used in Mineral Resource Estimations, La Nación

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Meters
Bolnisi	Exploration	2007	RC	20	5,741
Coeur	Exploration	2009	Core	5	1,762
Coeur	Exploration	2011	Core	2	1,073
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	11	6,021
Paramount	Exploration	2014	Core	8	4,723
Coeur	Exploration	2015	Core	51	19,121
Coeur	Infill	2015	Core	1	300
Coeur	Exploration	2016	Core	34	9,873
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	63	27,625
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	17	9,144
Coeur	Infill	2019	Core	49	20,382
Total				261	105,765

PQ-size (85 mm core diameter), HQ (63.5 mm) and NQ (47.6 mm) core is used for surface programs, with HQ and NQ used for underground.  Core holes that are collared at the surface initially recover HQ or PQ core, unless the intersection of voids or downhole drilling problems were encountered, in which case the drillers reduce to NQ or HQ, respectively. Depending on the type of drill rig employed, it may be necessary to reduce to NQ at depth. Core tails, which were drilled when RC holes were terminated prematurely due to encountering groundwater and/or downhole problems, recovered NQ or HQ core.

Core barrels are a maximum of 3 m in length and reducing to 1.5 m in length near projected structures to ensure minimum deviation of the hole.  RC drilling used 4.75-inch diameter bits.  Current grade control drilling uses NQ or ATK diameter bits.

More recently, HQ3/NQ3 (or triple tube core barrels) has been used to ensure maximum core recovery.  This is considered particularly important as ore zones in certain deposits/areas locally contain significant broken ground and also because of the risk of washing of fine gold present in the hematite matrix to quartz breccias, if drilling conditions were not optimal.

7.2.4 Logging

All drill core from the Mexoro program was digitally photographed and logged, and geotechnical data were gathered prior to sampling.  No information on the logging protocols is available.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

During all Paramount core drilling programs filled core boxes were removed from the drill site by company personnel and taken to a secure core logging and sampling facility that was rented in the village of Guazapares.  At the facility, the core was cleaned, and the broken core pieces reassembled to a best fit and aligned in the boxes.  Geotechnical data collected included core recovery and rock quality designation (RQD).  Geological logging was originally completed on paper as a graphic log of stratigraphy, vein orientation, and mineralized zones and a detailed descriptive log including rock type, alteration, structure, mineralization, and vein density/percentage.  Data were later entered into a proprietary database.  Core was digitally photographed.  An ASD FieldSpec 3 NIR spectrometer was used on selected drill core samples to identify alteration mineralogy.

For all Coeur programs, core is transported from the drill site to a logging facility, where the core is laid on wooden tables and pieced together by a geologist or technician, with any orientation mark facing up.

Geotechnical data collected includes core recovery, rock quality designation (RQD), fracture density and other parameters used to calculate the rock mass rating (RMR).  Geological logging is completed directly into Coeur’s acQuire database and includes a descriptive log recording rock type, alteration, structure, mineralization, and vein density/percentage.

An ASD FieldSpec 3 NIR spectrometer is used on selected core samples to identify alteration mineralogy.

Cut lines are traced along the core axis and sample intervals marked.

Digital photographs of wet core are taken and archived before the core is cut and sampled.  A second photo of the half core is taken after cutting in order to clearly show the vein intercept angle. Individual photos are taken of all samples used for density calculations.

7.2.5 Recovery

Core recoveries in the Mexoro campaign averaged over 86% for all drill holes, with a high of 96% (Besserer, 2008).

Core recoveries during the different Paramount drill programs were typically greater than 90%, although they varied depending on the deposit or zone being drilled.  For example, the San Miguel deposit typically had worse recoveries than the La Union zone.

Core recoveries during the different Coeur drill programs have improved over the life of the Project, partly due to improved drilling technologies, such as the introduction of triple tube core barrels and also because the drillers now have a better understanding of the geological conditions/ rock quality in different deposits/zones.  Natural, open space voids are present in all areas, which can significantly complicate both drilling and mining operations.  Coeur has worked extensively over the past few years to develop a better understanding of the location/causes of these voids to help guide drilling and mining decisions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

7.2.6 Collar Surveys

The drill hole collar coordinates and elevations for drilling completed in the Guazapares district were initially located using hand-held global positioning system (GPS) receivers in UTM coordinates, Zone 12, (NAD27 Mexico datum).  Upon completion of drill holes in 2006 through part of the 2009 drilling program, the collars were resurveyed by contractor Lopez Olivas and Associates of Hermosillo, Sonora, using a high-accuracy DGPS survey instrument.  In 2009–2011 drill hole collars were surveyed by a Paramount technician using a DGPS Trimble Geo XT (GeoExplorer Series), with the collected data downloaded into the database by hand.  Contractor Lopez Olivas and Associates resurveyed the 2010–2011 drill collars using two R3 and two Trimble 4600LS devices, and these data replaced those collected by the Paramount technician.  Lopez Olivas and Associates completed all drill-hole collar surveys for the 2012–2014 drill holes.

Surface collar surveys for the current operations and Coeur drill holes are conducted using a differential GPS.  Collars are usually not preserved because monuments are not built, and the marks are typically washed away by rain or covered when building access roads.  Underground collars are surveyed by a mine surveyor using a total station instrument.

7.2.7 Down Hole Surveys

Layne completed down hole directional surveys on all core drill holes in the Guazapares district at approximately 50-m intervals.  Initial drill holes were surveyed using a single-shot camera system. After November 2008, down hole surveys were completed with a Reflex EZ-shot single-shot digital survey tool.

Coeur has used a Reflex non-magnetic single-shot system or similar systems, and a “Devishot” non-magnetic multi-shot system instrumentation for downhole surveying.

Reflex system measurements were taken at 21 m and then approximately every 50 m to the bottom of the hole.  Devishot measurements are taken at 21 m and then at approximately every 50 m and finally the bottom of the drill hole.  Upon completion of the drillhole, multi-shot readings are taken every 25 m, so that they can be compared with the single-shot readings to ensure no significant differences.

Results from the downhole surveying show a minor increase in the hole dip due to the droop from the weight of the rods, especially in holes drilled to depths of 400 m or greater.  Historically, the greatest change in dip and bearing has been found in drill holes that have drilled through workings, which often re-enter the footwall at a greater dip and slight change of bearing in a counter-clockwise direction.

7.2.8 Comment on Material Results and Interpretation

Almost all underground drilling has been completed as fans of drill holes, meaning that the reported mineralized intercepts are typically longer than the true thickness of the mineralization.

Drilling from surface is a mixture of fan drilling from certain platforms that permitted acceptable intercept angles both in strike and dip and drilling from individual platforms designed to intersect the structures as perpendicular as possible.

Drill protocols employed are in line with current industry best practices and the QP considers the quality of all data related to the core drilling programs to be appropriate for use in Mineral Resource estimates.  Assay results from historic RC drilling, grade control drilling and underground sampling should not be used in mineral resource estimations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

7.3 Hydrogeology

Hydrogeology on site varies across different work areas.  Overall, the site manages a significant negative water balance.  Site water is primarily soured from the underground mines, but seasonal rain is also collected, and offsite sources provide additional water through a collection system located on within the Rio Fuerte drainage in Chínipas.  The volcanic units hosting the deposits are of low permeability and low storage.

Mine dewatering is conducted using a sump-and-pump system with inflows limited to vertical development and early storage release.  Local models have been developed to support mining at Guadalupe and Independencia.  Additional groundwater modeling was completed from 2017–2019 to support tailing storage facility (TSF) permitting in the now abandoned Palmarejo pit and underground complex.

Monitoring consists of documenting outflows from the mines, groundwater levels in and around the tailings and plant site, and groundwater elevations in the TSF and freshwater storage ponds.  Water discharged through the treatment plant is additionally tracked to support permit reporting requirements.

7.3.1 Groundwater Models

Global Resource Engineering Ltd. (GRE) prepared a hydrogeological model for the mine operations in 2017 and predicted that the largest inflows for Guadalupe will occur in year 2022 and result in a total flow of approximately 800 m³/day.  From Independencia the highest predicted flow was in 2021, of 2,600 m³/day.  No regional model has been constructed due to the nature of the volcanic geology.  Quantification of overall water levels due to low permeability rock mass, structural complexity, and distances between mines, tailings, and pits will require more local models.  See also discussion on water ingress in the mining operations in Chapter 13.

Groundwater models were developed by Golder Associates during 2017 and updated by Klohn Crippen in 2019 to support TSF permitting and development of an in-pit storage facility in the abandoned Palmarejo pit.  This facility is scheduled to be in operation starting in 2023.

7.3.2 Water Balance

Water balance tracking and reports are maintained for mining, process, and permitting purposes.  A preliminary water balance of local subsurface flow is not well developed or maintained since permeability and recharge are very low.  Water balances for process and permitting actively track inflow related to rainfall and the process cycle to track water consumption and usage.  Balances include and document outflows and transient flow at designated and permitted offsite discharge points where reporting to the Mexican environmental authority is required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-13

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

7.3.3 Comment on Results

The Project area lithologies are low permeability and low storage, resulting in most of the water being sourced from underground operations.  Groundwater models were first developed in 2017 and used for Project permitting purposes.

The hydrological data and hydrogeological models developed from those data are suitable for use in mine planning.

7.4 Geotechnical

The geotechnical characterization of the rock mass is determined as part of the logging process during drilling of all core holes drilled as part of infill and exploration drilling on site.  A standard operating procedure was developed to support this work using standard rock mass rating (RMR) following Bieniawski, 1973, which consists of measurement and qualification of mechanical and structural properties of the rock providing and quantified range between 0 and 100.

The host rock volcanic rocks in the and around the current active and exploration areas consist of Moderate to High quality ranging from 45 to 100 RMR.  Due to alteration, structure, and brecciation the rock quality ranges from Poor to Moderate within the ore zones, generally ranging from 25 to 55 RMR with local variability ranging lower to <25 in areas of Independencia and La Nación.

For mine operations and design the RMR data were used to develop a geotechnical block model for each mining areas.  This model is reconciled and updated with mapping and drilling data as the mines develop.  For determining support options and requirements, the RMR values are consolidated into five types ranging from 1 (Very Good) to 5 (Poorest) with mandatory minimum support requirements attached to each type.

7.4.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

Core samples were collected and tested for intact rock strength for principal units within the orebody and probable development areas.  Uniaxial compressive strength testing was conducted.

7.4.2 Comment on Results

Geotechnical data and geotechnical models developed from those data are suitable for use in mine planning.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-14

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

8.0 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY

8.1 Sampling Methods

8.1.1 Trenches

Trenches sampled in the Guazapares district were marked by the geologist, and the samples were collected from near the base of the trench wall. In rock that did not appear mineralized, the sample interval was two meters.  In mineralized rock, the maximum sample interval was 1 m.  Shorter intervals were often sampled in areas with prominent veining, old workings, or structural zones.  Samples were cut with a pick as a continuous chip sample near the base of the trench wall.

8.1.2 RC Drilling

No information is available on the sampling methods for the Mexoro drill holes.

In the Paramount drill programs, RC holes were sampled at 1 m intervals.  The entire sample interval was split at the drill site with a Gilson splitter into two samples.  One sample was sent for assay, and the other was archived at a fenced compound operated by Paramount in Guazapares.  Field duplicates were collected from the original 50% split, splitting it in half by pouring it over a Gilson-type splitter.  Slurry was poured into a large strainer.  The strained material and material remaining in the bucket were combined for a final primary sample.

RC drilling was a major part of the initial drilling campaigns prior to Coeur’s acquisition of Bolnisi.  RC holes were sampled every 1.52 m down the hole.  Holes drilled in greenfield areas were sampled along the entire length of the hole, while infill or closed spaced drilling was sampled every 1.52 m, through zones of suspected mineralization.  Standard procedure was to only sample during dry drilling.  Once water was encountered, the RC hole was terminated and continued with a core tail.  Depth to groundwater was recorded by the supervising geologist.

The entire sample was collected in a cyclone and then released into a hopper and then into a Gilson-type riffle-type splitter.  The sample was initially split so that half of the material was discarded.  The remaining half was split in half again, and each of these quarter splits were poured directly from the splitter pans into buckets lined with sample bags.  One of the one-quarter splits was used as the sample for assaying and the other one-quarter split was stored as an archive duplicate.

8.1.3 Core Drilling

Mexoro drill core was either cut or sawn in half, with one half of the core sent for geochemical analyses and assaying.  No other information is currently available to Coeur.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

For the Paramount drill programs, sample intervals were generally based on geologic contacts, alteration, and mineralization.  The sample interval was typically about 1 m, with intervals ranging from 0.5–2 m, but rarely exceeding 1.5 m.  Where a geologist interpreted that strongly mineralized zones could be present, sample breaks were made at significant changes, such as vein or breccia margins, which frequently resulted in intervals <1 m in length.

Core drilled by Coeur in the Palmarejo district is only sampled on intervals suspected to contain precious metal mineralization.  Sample intervals are marked on the core and the intervals are assigned sample numbers.  The sample lengths for wall rock average 1.5–2 m. Suspected mineralized zones were sampled at intervals averaging 0.5 m, prior to the acquisition of Bolnisi Gold, and 0.5–1.5 m following the acquisition.  Sample length is adjusted to avoid sampling across geologic contacts and structures.  The half of the core to the right of the orientation line is selected for assaying and placed in a numbered bag along with a sample tag.  A duplicate tag is kept in a sample tag book and archived at the field office.  The left side of the core is retained in core boxes in a secure facility on site.  Poor RQD or recovery may necessitate sampling of the entire core. When core is very broken and cutting is not possible the samples are manually split though a homogenization and quartering process.

8.1.4 Production Sampling

Channel sampling of all active faces is completed on a daily basis.  After thoroughly cleaning the face, the geologist delimits the channel across the face at waist height. Similar to sampling of drill core, individual samples are between 0.5–2 m in length and are defined by changes in lithology or vein type.  A handheld saw is used to cut the top and bottom of the channel, with the material being removed by hammer and chisel, ensuring as complete and consistent sampling as possible.  All information related to each sample is recorded in the acQuire database.

Underground mapping and sampling are used as part of the geological modeling process (shape designs) but are not used in mineral resource estimates.

8.2 Sample Security Methods

Samples are staged and prepared for shipment to the ALS preparation facility in Chihuahua.  ALS collects the samples on site where they are reviewed by a laboratory representative and chain of custody is transferred.  Chain-of-custody documentation is maintained throughout the shipping and receiving process. Samples typically reach the ALS facility the same day they leave site.

Drill core from sampled intervals of all deposits is stored in secure warehouses at the Palmarejo Operations.  In recent years most drill core from mined-out deposits or mined-out portions of deposits has been discarded, with the exception of select drill holes kept for future reference.  Drill core from non-sampled intervals is retained on site in an open-air environment if it is from unmined areas and is used for geotechnical purposes.

Drill core from programs completed by Paramount is currently stored either in a secure facility in Guazapares, for projects drilled within the Guazapares district or a similar facility located at the exploration office in Guadalupe.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

8.3 Density Determinations

Paramount personnel collected bulk density measurements on half-core samples approximately 10 cm in length using water immersion methods.  Prior to 2011, the core samples were uncoated.  This changed in 2011 to wax coating samples due to the presence of natural cavities in veins and veinlets that host gold and silver mineralization.  There are about 3,980 determinations available for the deposits in the Guazapares district.  The bulk density in mineralization ranges from about 2.40–2.51 g/cm³, and in waste ranges from approximately 2.37–2.48 g/cm³.

The method used by Coeur for obtaining bulk density values for the Palmarejo Operations is the standard wax immersion method for determining the bulk density of fractured materials.  This method was selected due to the porous and absorbent nature of some of the rocks and mineralized breccias.  Measurements are taken on whole core samples typically between 10-15 cm in length. The method used is ASTM C914-09 (re-approved 2015), published by the American Society for Testing and Materials and obtained under license by Coeur.

Bulk density data have been collected by Coeur personnel over most years of exploration activity in the Palmarejo Operations area.  Samples of all mineralized zones, structures, and lithologies are tested.  The ASTM C914-09 (Reapproved 2015) test method covers the basic procedure for determining the bulk density and volume of fractured material.  This test is applicable to all rock types, independent of the composition or method of formation.  It is particularly suitable to determine the apparent density and volume of irregular shapes.

A summary of the available density data is provided in Table 8‑1.

8.4 Analytical and Test Laboratories

The majority of the laboratories used over the long exploration and development history have not been recorded in the database.

The following laboratories have been used:

• ALS (formerly Chemex/ALS Chemex):  used for the Mexoro 2006–2007 drill programs; used for all Paramount programs from 2006–2013; used for all Coeur drilling to date.  ALS in Chihuahua (ALS Chihuahua) has been the primary sample preparation laboratory used by Coeur since 2005.  ALS in Vancouver, Canada (ALS Vancouver) has been the primary analytical laboratory used by Coeur since 2005.  Independent of Mexoro, Paramount and Coeur.  ALS is ISO:9001:2000 accredited and holds ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations for selected analytical techniques;

• Bureau Veritas (formerly Acme Analytical Laboratories):  used for all Paramount programs from 2013–2015 and used as secondary laboratory for Coeur campaigns since 2013.  Independent of Paramount and Coeur.  Currently holds ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations for selected analytical techniques;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 8‑1:    Density Data Supporting Mineral Resource Estimation

Deposit	Number of Determinations	Comment
Guadalupe	2,092	The mean density is 2.52 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.47 g/cm3 and 2.53 g/cm3. There is little variation in the dataset for each domain
Zapata	582	The mean density is 2.55 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.50 g/cm3 and 2.61 g/cm3.  The higher values are related to sulfides in the high-density samples.
La Patria	459	The mean density is 2.52 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.47g/cm3 and 2.63 g/cm3.  The variation is related to voids/porosity for the low-density samples and sulfides in the high-density samples.
Independencia	2,176	The mean density is 2.50 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.32 g/cm3 and 2.56 g/cm3.  The extreme values are related to voids/porosity for the low-density samples and sulfides in the high-density samples.
La Bavisa	373	The mean density is 2.57 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.55 g/cm3 and 2.58 g/cm3.  There is very little variation in the dataset for each domain.
Hidalgo	429	The mean density is 2.54 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.51 g/cm3 and 2.55 g/cm3.  There is very little variation in the dataset for each domain.
La Nación	634	The mean density is 2.54 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.52 g/cm3 and 2.59 g/cm3.  The higher values are related to sulfides in the high-density samples.
Los Bancos	215	The mean density is 2.52 g/cm3 for the total dataset, with the individual estimation domains varying between 2.49 g/cm3 and 2.53 g/cm3.  There is very little variation in the dataset for each domain.
Total	6,960	The mean density is 2.52 g/cm3 for the entire dataset, with the individual deposit averages varying between 2.50 g/cm3 and 2.57 g/cm3.

• SGS de Mexico, S.A. DE C.V. Durango, Mexico (SGS):  used as secondary laboratory for Paramount programs from 2013–2015 and Coeur campaigns up to 2012.  Independent of Paramount and Coeur.  Currently holds ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations for selected analytical techniques.

The Palmarejo mine laboratory is used for underground and ore control sample preparation and analysis.  The laboratory is not independent and does not hold accreditations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

8.5 Sample Preparation

Sample preparation methods included:

• Chemex:  Mexoro campaigns; drying, crushing to 70% passing 10 mesh, and pulverizing to 95% passing 150 mesh;

• Chemex:  early Paramount and Coeur campaigns; drying, crushing to 60% passing 2 mm, and pulverizing to 90% passing 106 μm;

• Chemex:  later Paramount campaigns; crushing to 60% passing 2 mm (Tyler 9 mesh) followed by grinding to 85% passing 75 µm;

• ALS Chemex, ALS Minerals, ALS Chihuahua:  later Coeur campaigns; drying, crushing to better than 70% passing 2 mm; and pulverizing to 85% passing 75 µm.

The Palmarejo mine laboratory crushes and sieves to the same specifications as ALS Chihuahua and also follows QA/QC processes and procedures to confirm the quality of the sample preparation.

8.6 Analysis

Analytical methods used at Chemex, ALS Chemex, ALS Minerals, ALS Vancouver included:

• Gold and silver:

o Mexoro campaigns:  fire assay with gravimetric finish on 30 g samples; The lower detection limits were 0.05 g/t Au and 5 g/t Ag. Overlimits by fire assay;

o Early Paramount campaigns:  fire assay with gravimetric finish or fire assay with atomic absorption (AA) finish, with samples exceeding 3 g/t Au being re-analyzed.  Protocol changes in 2009 to AA, with samples exceeding 10 g Au/t being re-analyzed by fire assay with gravimetric finish.  The limit of the AA gold analyses that triggered re-assaying was lowered to 7 g/t Au in 2011;

o Later Paramount and Coeur campaigns:  fire assay with inductively coupled plasma with atomic emission spectrophotometry (ICP-AES) finish for gold.  The detection limit was 0.001 g/t Au; the upper limit was 10 g/t Au, and the trigger limit for reanalysis is 8 g/t Au.  Silver analyses were completed by four-acid digestion with an ICP-AES finish.  Overlimits completed using a fire assay with a gravimetric finish;

• Multi-element suite:  34 element ICP-AES.

Gold analyses for the Paramount drill campaigns were completed by Acme using fire assay with AA finish.  The detection limit was 0.002 g/t Au; the upper limit was 10 g/t Au, and the trigger limit for reanalysis was 8 g/t Au.  Silver and other element analyses were completed using a 33-element ICP emission spectroscopy (ES) method.  Fire assay with gravimetric finish was used for silver analysis if the overlimit value of 100 g/t Ag was reached.

The check assays conducted by Bureau Veritas on the Coeur campaigns consisted of gold analyses completed by fire assay with ICP-AES finish.  Over limits were completed by fire assay fusion with gravimetric finish.  Silver analyses were completed by four-acid digestion with ICP-AES finish.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

SGS analyzed gold by fire assay with AA finish, with overlimit samples (>10 g/t Au) being reanalyzed by fire assay with gravimetric finish.  Silver is analyzed by three-acid digestion, aqua regia digestion and ICP, or fire assay with gravimetric finish.

The mine laboratory uses fire assay with AA finish for gold and two-acid digestion with AA finish for silver.

8.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

8.7.1 Mexoro

Mexoro performed quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures, including the insertion of blanks, certified reference materials (standards), and duplicate samples into the sample stream for each sample batch, and analyses of selected samples were repeated.  Mexoro's certified standards were obtained from Rocklabs Ltd.  Mexoro requested that any batches falling outside a 5% deviation of the standards be re-analyzed.

8.7.2 Paramount

Paramount used 24 standards sourced from Rocklabs, Geostats Pty Ltd (Geostats) and CDN Resource Laboratories Ltd.  Other QA/QC measures included the insertion of preparation blanks, preparation duplicates, rig duplicates and check assays.

8.7.3 Coeur

8.7.3.1 QA/QC

The QA/QC program for gold and silver assays has changed since Coeur implemented the program in 2003.  Initially, the reference samples were inserted into the sample stream at a 1:200 ratio, whereby one reference sample was inserted for every 200 samples. Starting mid-2005, the proportion was increased to approximately 1:25, to ensure that every fire-assay furnace lot contained reference samples.  In late 2007, the following protocols were implemented for exploration and development drilling: one reference standard is inserted for every 20 field samples; one blank sample is inserted for every 20 field samples; and, one field duplicate is collected for every 20 field samples.  Additionally, 5% of the sample pulps are sent to a different laboratory for check analysis.  In 2012, a new protocol for exploration and development was initiated: one standard and one blank for every 20 field samples, but one duplicate is collected for every 40 field samples.

In 2018, a new protocol for exploration and development drilling was implemented.  Standards are selected to match the grade range of the sample of interest, i.e., high-grade standards are inserted into areas of probable high-grade sampling.  A sequence of a fine and then a coarse blank is inserted into the sample stream after the mineralized structures to better understand contamination during preparation and analysis stages.  Duplicate samples are inserted into areas of economic interest to assess analytical precision.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

8.7.3.2 Reviews

Coeur uses the acQuire data management system to store and analyze QA/QC results as they are made available.  Results are not released until QC has been completed and confirmed on each assay certificate.

QA/QC results are examined for each batch of assays received from the laboratory.  Failures are defined for standards by the certified values provided by the certifying laboratory.  A standard fails when the value exceeds or falls short of ± three standard deviations of the certified value.  Prior to 2016, a blank failed when the value exceeded five times the lower detection limit of the assay method; in 2016, this was changed to 10 times the lower detection limit.

Failure of standard or blank samples requires re-submitting of pulps on either side of the failure, back to or up to the next passing standard or blank.  The original results associated with the failure are entered into the acQuire database as rejected results.  If the results from the re-analysis pass QA/QC, they are entered in the acQuire database, as approved.  All sample re-runs are given precedence over the original results when used in resource estimation. If the re-run analysis also fails, the geologist may choose to send the samples to the secondary laboratory for a third analysis, or to accept the original results.  Results are reviewed quarterly, and elements of the QC program are adjusted, as necessary.

8.7.3.3 Check Assays

Pulp samples are currently submitted to Bureau Veritas for check analysis.  The samples are submitted in batches that contain multiple projects.  The total sample count equates to a 10% check rate, which is acceptable per Coeur protocols. Gold and silver fire assays indicate low biases and acceptable correlation.  Silver analyses by acid digestion indicates a positive bias towards the umpire laboratory, with acceptable correlation.  Silver results by fire assay and gravimetric finish have excellent correlations and no significant biases.  Prior to 2013 pulp samples were submitted to SGS following the procedures.  No significant biases were identified in the results.

8.7.3.4 Down Hole Surveys

Downhole survey instruments are calibrated once a week at a fixed “borehole” constructed from a PVC pipe set in concrete.  Six readings are taken per instrument and uploaded automatically into the acQuire database where the information is reviewed quarterly to ensure no instrument drift or bias over time.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

8.7.3.5 Collar Surveys

At Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación, audits conducted by external, certified surveyors have not found any errors in the collar coordinates determined by Coeur personnel.

8.8 Database

Once collected, all data are entered into an acQuire database and all supporting digital documentation is securely stored on the Company’s servers.  The data are also exported into 3D modeling software for further understanding of the geology and mineral controls.  The original physical documents for each drill hole are archived and stored in the Chihuahua or Palmarejo exploration offices.

A unique resource database was created in 2014 for those areas that Paramount was reporting Mineral Resource estimates.  The databases were constructed from digital data provided by Paramount.  Following the acquisition of Paramount, all information associated with the previous drilling campaigns was uploaded to the Coeur acQuire database, with adaptations made to the geology to be consistent with Coeur methodology.  Detailed QA/QC review (and corrective actions if necessary) was completed for all the priority Paramount deposits/prospects near current mine infrastructure but remains to be completed for the remainder of the deposits in the Guazapares district.

8.9 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures

Sample collection, preparation, analysis and security for RC and core drill programs are in line with industry-standard methods for gold–silver deposits.

Drill programs included insertion of blank, duplicate, and standard reference material samples.  QA/QC program results do not indicate any problems with the analytical programs.

Data are subject to validation, which includes checks on surveys, collar co-ordinates, and assay data.  The checks are appropriate, and consistent with industry standards.

The QP is of the opinion that the quality of the gold and silver analytical data collected by Coeur and Paramount in the Palmarejo district are sufficiently reliable to support Mineral Resource estimation without limitations on Mineral Resource confidence categories.

Gold and silver analytical data collected by Paramount in the Guazapares district is not currently used to support Mineral Resource estimates and is still in the validation phase.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

9.0 DATA VERIFICATION

9.1 Internal Data Verification

A detailed review of all documentation and assay data related to each drill hole is completed as part of the drill hole “lock down” procedure in acQuire.  The final review is conducted and signed off by the QP once final assay results are available.  A digital file of all supporting documentation for each drill hole is created and stored on Coeur’s servers.

Coeur routinely conducts drill hole collar audits with an external, qualified surveyor with any discrepancies reviewed and corrected where necessary.

Downhole survey measurements are taken every 50 m as the drillhole advances and at final depth.  Measurements are also taken every 25 m after completion of each drillhole.  The latter measurements are considered highest priority for use in geological modeling and subsequent work, although these are compared against the 50 m measurements to ensure no significant deviation is occurring downhole.  Survey instruments are also calibrated weekly using a fixed, surface structure with constant azimuth and dip.  All measurements are imported to the Company’s acQuire database.

Coeur monitors balance sensitivities on a daily basis with the use of metal bars with fixed weights. One reading is taken before any drill core is weighed and a second after.  All data are imported to an acQuire database.

Coeur prepares quarterly QA/QC reports for internal review by the QP and personnel in the corporate Technical Services department.  Any issues identified during this process are reviewed and the required corrective actions are taken.  The QP routinely reviews on site procedures to ensure compliance with the company’s protocols based on industry-accepted practices.

Prior to the involvement of the QP, the following checks were performed by Coeur personnel:

• Imported and conducted QA/QC on all assay data from 2008–2013;

• Quarterly QA/QC reports of gold and silver assay data in 2013;

• All geologic data logged and entered into acQuire from 2008–2013;

• Conducted a 10% check of gold and silver assays with an independent laboratory in 2013.

The PalmarejoOperations staff perform monthly, quarterly, and annual reconciliation evaluations.  Results indicate that the tonnages and grades of the long-term model are controlled within acceptable limits.

The QPs requested that information, conclusions, and recommendations presented in the body of this Report be reviewed by Coeur experts or experts retained by Coeur in each discipline area as a further level of data verification.  Checks completed by the subject matter experts could include cross-checks of data, checks on consistency of presentation of information between the different Report chapters, checks for data omissions, verification that any errors or inconsistencies identified during the reviews were either addressed or had mitigation planned, and checks on the applicability and appropriateness of the QP’s opinions, interpretations, recommendations, and conclusions based on the subject matter experts’ Project and discipline knowledge.  Feedback from the subject matter experts was incorporated into the Report as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

9.2 External Data Verification

External reviews of the Project were undertaken and are summarized in Table 9‑1.

9.3 Data Verification by Qualified Person

The QP personally performed the following data verification:

• Imported and conducted QA/QC on all assay data from 2014–present;

• Quarterly QA/QC reports of gold and silver assay data from 2014–present;

• All geologic data logged and entered into acQuire from 2014–present;

• Conducted a 10% check of gold and silver assays with an independent laboratory from 2014–present;

• Participated in the 2021 database merge project to combine mine and exploration databases;

• Conducted drillhole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports that the QP signed off;

• Working at site of the Palmarejo Operation from 2014–present.

9.4 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

The process of data verification for the Project was performed by external consulting firms from 2005 to present, and by Coeur personnel, including the QP.  The QP reviewed the appropriate reports.  The QP considers that a reasonable level of verification has been completed, and that no material issues would have been left unidentified from the programs undertaken.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 9‑1:    External Data Reviews

Company	Year	Note
Applied Geoscience LLC	2005–2008	Data reviewed included reference sample results, duplicate sample, duplicate assay results, and second-laboratory check assays.  No major issues with the data were noted
Delve Consultants, LLC	2006–2009	Data review in support of technical reports on the Guazapares district area.  No major issues with the data were noted
A.C.A. Howe International Limited	2008	Reviewed QA/QC data in support of a technical report.  QC results indicated that there were no major problems with the accuracy and precision of the analyses, and the sampling and analytical protocols were appropriate. Collected witness samples.  Gold and silver grades from this sampling were consistent with the grades returned from drill holes at San Miguel.
AMEC International (Chile) S.A	2008	Drill data and QA/QC review. No major issues with the data were noted.
Mine Development Associates	2011–2012	No major issues with the data were noted.  Recommendations made on improvements to the QA/QC programs.
Metal Mining Consultants Inc.	2013–2014	The project data were considered acceptable for use in resource estimation.
KPMG	Pre 2016	Accounting firm reviewed assay data for select drill holes chosen by them at random as part of Coeur’s general audit process required by its NYSE listing
Grant Thornton	2016 to date	Accounting firm reviewed assay data for select drill holes chosen by them at random as part of Coeur’s general audit process required by its NYSE listing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

10.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

10.1 Test Laboratories

Independent metallurgical test work facilities used over the Project life included SGS Laboratories, Durango, Mexico; SGS in Lakefield, Canada (SGS Lakefield), ALS, Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada; and Corporación Química Platinum S.A. de C.V. located in Silao, Guanajuato, Mexico.

Palmarejo Operations have an on-site analytical and metallurgical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and process characterization of new ores.  The on-site laboratories are not independent and are audited with third parties.

There is no international standard of accreditation provided for metallurgical testing laboratories or metallurgical testing techniques and selection of laboratories is based on experience and reputation within the industry.

10.2 Metallurgical Testwork

10.2.1 Historical Testwork

The focus of the historical test work was to obtain representative metallurgical samples; conduct mineralogy examinations; determine the most favorable processing routes; collect sufficient design information to select equipment that fit the preferred processing flow sheet; and provide guidance for operating performance.

Major testwork conducted included:

• Comminution:  Bond work index (BWi) test work, unconfined compressive strength (UCS) testing, advanced media competency (AMC) testing, JK Drop weight (DWi) and Steve Morrell Pty Ltd (SMC) testing used for modeling.

• Flotation:  conducted at batch scale on Palmarejo ores, followed by locked cycle testing, and finally, pilot plant scale tests to produce intermediate products for cyanidation of flotation concentrates and solutions for Merrill-Crow and electrowinning.

• Leaching:  conducted to optimize reagent additions and define the plant extractions.

These parameters were used to construct the process plant as outlined in Chapter 14.

10.2.2 Guadalupe

Test programs were conducted from 2007–2014.  These included mineralogical studies, whole ore bottle roll cyanidation, rougher flotation followed by tailing cyanidation, and gravity separation.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Electrum and native gold were the primary gold species.  Acanthite, argentite, and native silver were the primary silver species.  Sulfides included sphalerite, galena, chalcopyrite, chalcocite, enargite, bornite, and tennantite–tetrahedrite.

Of the methods tested, the best results were achieved by flotation followed by tailing leaching.  Whole ore cyanidation was shown to be less suitable because of lower recoveries.  The poorest overall recovery was found with the gravity concentrate method.

The 2013 flotation test results indicated that the Guadalupe ore sample achieved an average gold and silver recovery of 80.4% and 78.3%.  Flotation, followed by tails leaching results, indicates that gold and silver recoveries could be improved.  The achieved overall recoveries were 94.8% and 95.6%, respectively.

The 2014 test work on Guadalupe North ores were amenable direct agitated cyanidation treatment at nominal P80 = 75 µm feed size with minor conversion of plant parameters required with the transition for Palmarejo ore to Guadalupe.  Gold and silver recoveries tended to increase with increasing grade.  Gold and silver recoveries were improved significantly after flotation tailings were subjected to whole cyanidation.  Global Gold laboratory recoveries for flotation/tailings cyanidation unadjusted for plant solution losses ranged from 94.2% to 98.1% and averaged 95.7%.  Global Silver laboratory recoveries for flotation/tailings cyanidation unadjusted for plant solution losses ranged from 93.6% to 97.2% and averaged 97.2%.

10.2.3 Independencia

Testwork on the Independencia Oeste and Este deposits was conducted from 2014–2015.  Work completed included mineralogy, multi-element ICP scan, whole-rock analyses, and carbon and sulfur speciation analyses, BWi, timed grinding series, bulk rougher flotation tests, and bottle roll tests, matching Palmarejo plant specifications.

Independencia Oeste mineralization was found to contain 68% silver–copper sulfide, 19% acanthite/argentite, 6% native silver/electrum, 5% silver–copper–arsenic sulfide, and the remaining 2% comprises various sulfides.  The BWi was estimated to be 16.4 kWh/t.  This value was considered to be moderate to hard for ball milling and within the operating capabilities of the Palmarejo grinding circuit.  The master composite flotation test recovered 90% of the silver and 89% of the gold into a bulk concentrate that pulled 21% of the initial mass.  Duplicate bottle roll cyanidation leach tests averaged 81% silver and 86% gold extraction in solution.  As is common for cyanidation, silver leached slower than gold.

Independencia Este flotation test results showed the mass pulls were generally 15–23%; silver recoveries were variable.  Flotation response demonstrated that flotation could separate silver and gold into a rougher concentrate with low concentrate to bulk ore ratios.  The kinetic extraction curves from the bottle roll tests demonstrated typical rapid gold extraction and slower silver extraction.  Cyanidation extraction values were better than the flotation lab results.  This observation agreed with similar test results using both flotation and cyanidation for the Independencia master composite.  Composites responded well to bulk conventional flotation treatment at a P80 minus 106 μm feed size.  Combined (flotation + tailings cyanidation) proved to be more effective on recoveries above recoveries obtained by separate whole ore cyanidation or flotation circuits.  Leach cyanide consumption rates were low on flotation tailings.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

10.2.4 La Nación

Testwork was performed in 2016–2019, on samples from the La Nación, La Nación Central, and La Nación Sur areas, using the Palmarejo plant specifications and mineralogy, bottle roll tests, head analysis, multi-element ICP scan and carbon sulfur speciation analyses, and whole ore cyanidation tests were performed.

The La Nación composites tested in 2016 were amenable to whole ore milling cyanidation treatment with respect to gold recovery but were more varied with respect to silver extraction and recovery.  Silver solution extraction rates were slower than for gold.

La Nación composites tested in 2017 were amenable to whole ore milling cyanidation treatment with respect to gold recovery.  Gold leach rates were generally rapid and substantially peaked the first eight hours of leaching.  Gold in solution obtained from the 72-hour leach tests ranged from 81.0–99.8% and averaged 94.3%.  Composites were more varied with respect to silver extraction in solution by whole ore milling cyanidation.   Silver extractions obtained from the 72-hour leach tests ranged from 43.6–96.6% and averaged 86.0%.  Whole ore leaching cyanide consumptions were generally high and ranged from 2.8–4.0 kg/t NaCN ore (3.42 kg/t NaCN ore, avg.) for the 72-hour tests.  No strong evidence of the high cyanide consumption was related to sulfide content in the evaluated composites.  pH control lime requirements were low and averaged 1.08 kg/t ore.

Tests on material from La Nación Central and Sur were conducted in 2019.  Eight size fractions from La Nación Central were subject to mineralogical study.  The predominant silver mineral in each of the size fractions was argentite, with small quantities of stromeyerite and native silver.  Argentite was primarily associated with quartz in each of the size fractions.  Silver liberation was not detected in the size fractions >37 µm.  Gold was found only in the 44 and 53 µm size fractions, as electrum associated with quartz with a size of <1 µm.

Mineralogy test work on La Nación Sur composites was performed on eight size fractions.  The predominant silver mineral in each of the size fractions was argentite.  The argentite was primarily associated with quartz with less than 10% associated with pyrite in the coarse size fractions.  Liberation was relatively low in the coarse fractions (<5% liberated in particle sizes >53 µm).  The liberation increased with reducing particle size with a 70% liberation in the +37-micron size fraction and 98% liberation in the -37 µm fraction.  Gold was found only in the +74 and +53 µm size fractions in the form of electrum associated with quartz with a size of <2 µm.

The manganese minerals psilomelane and coronadite were present throughout all size fractions at La Nación Central and Sur.  These minerals can potentially lead to lower silver recovery.  Sulfide minerals present in minor quantities included galena, sphalerite, and covellite.

10.2.5 2020–2021 Testwork

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

10.2.5.1 Tailings Pre-Concentration

A sample from the Palmarejo milling circuit tails stream was submitted to SGS Lakefield for bulk mineralogy, heavy liquid separation preconcentration and silver deportment studies in early 2020.  The flotation tails sample contained a relatively high grade at 1.64 g/t Au and 45.6 g/t Ag.  Bulk mineralogy was completed using quantitative evaluation of minerals by scanning electron microscopy (QEMSCAN) analysis and supported by X-ray diffraction analysis.  The primary minerals were quartz and calcite, with minor amounts of potassium feldspar, clays, iron oxides and trace amounts of dolomite, chlorite.

Results from the preconcentration showed that it would not be an effective method.

The microscopic silver examination of the tails composite sample showed 49.1% of the silver being liberated, 37.6% exposed and 13.2% locked.  The primary silver minerals were acanthite, naumannite and jalpaite with minor amounts of electrum, aguilarite, native silver and others.  The exposed and locked silver minerals were primarily associated with quartz with moderate amounts associated with lead oxide, and minor amounts associated with willemite, iron oxide, dolomite, and calcite.

10.2.5.2 Solid-Liquid Separation and Rheology Testing of Leach Circuit Tails Sample

A tails slurry sample from the Palmarejo circuit was submitted for solid-–liquid separation, rheology testing, and counter-current decantation washing modeling as part of 2020 testwork conducted by SGS Lakefield.  Flocculant scoping tests were performed to match flocculant to sample recovery and thickening/clarification results.  Additional dynamic tests were conducted to compare outcomes.  Even at higher flocculant dosage the current flocculant could not achieve similar clarity or comparable total suspended solids levels.  Other competitive flocculants were tested with variable dosage to test dosage to overflow total suspended solids rates.  The solution densities on the underflow and yield stress were also calculated and tracked during the process providing results ranging from 57.1–58.2% solids depending on solids loading and residence time.

The critical solids density was calculated to be approximately 54% solids at a shear stress of 40Pa under unsheared flow conditions and 15 Pa under sheared conditions.

The resulting samples following the previous testwork were used to for various counter-current decantation modeling scenarios, using fixed parameters of cyanide leached discharge at 42% solids, silver and gold tenor in feed solution at 26 mg/L and 1.3mg/L, underflow on thickener at 55% solids, and perfect mixing at each wash stage.  The results showed that the best response was achieved using a tested market flocculant at fixed dosage.  Underflow slurry characteristics were within specifications for pumping.

10.3 Recovery Estimates

Current recovery estimates for each deposit are summarized in Table 10‑1.

The LOM forecast average gold blended recovery is 90%.  The LOM forecast average blended silver recovery is 82.5%.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑1:    LOM Metallurgical Recovery Forecasts

Deposit	Forecast LOM average Au Recovery (%)	Forecast LOM average Ag Recovery (%)
Guadalupe	88.0	80.0
Independencia Oeste	91.0	77.0
Independencia Este	90.0	57.0
La Nación	90.0	83.0
Los Bancos	93.5	84.5
Zapatas	90.0	84.0
La Baviza	89.0	80.0

10.4 Metallurgical Variability

Samples selected for metallurgical testing were representative of the various locations, ore types, and minerology.  Additional samples were selected at periods during mining to test or reconcile results.  Individual and composite tests were selected and taken to provide sufficient sample mass.

10.5 Deleterious Elements

The anticipated gold and silver recoveries could be affected by alteration states.  Highly oxidized material is not responsive to the flotation process. Highly oxidized ore will significantly affect recovery if blended at a high ratio.  Ores that have a high clay content increase slurry viscosity, which has a detrimental effect on precious metals recovery in flotation.

No other deleterious elements are known from the processing perspective.

10.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

Industry-standard studies were performed as part of process development and initial plant designs.  Subsequent production experience and focused investigations, as well as marketing requirements, have guided process improvements and changes.

Testwork programs, both internal and external, continue to be performed to support current operations and potential improvements.

Current metallurgical test work confirms the material to be mined as having similar response to the flotation-leach process as historically mined ores.  Metal recovery assumptions are derived from past performance of the plant.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

The QPs reviewed the information compiled by Coeur, as summarized in this Chapter, and performed a review of the reconciliation data available to verify the information used in the LOM plan.

Based on these checks, in the opinion of the QPs the metallurgical testwork results and production data support the estimation of mineral resources and mineral reserves and can be used in the economic analysis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

11.1 Introduction

Mineral Resources are estimated for the following deposits.  The database closeout date for all estimates was July 13, 2021.

• Guadalupe:  Main, Zapata, and La Patria Zones;

• Independencia:  Main, La Bavisa, and Hidalgo Zones;

• La Nación:  Main Zone and Los Bancos Zone.

11.2 Exploratory Data Analysis

Composites exhibit near log normal distributions.  Statistics were compiled and compared for raw drill hole data, length weighted drill holes, composites, declustered composites, and capped declustered composites to ensure that the grade distribution and true mean of the system were documented and conserved through the estimation process.  The coefficient of variation was analyzed to determine if domaining produced sufficient stationarity for the estimate.

11.3 Geological Models

Mineralization is hosted in primary northwest-trending, northeast- and southwest-dipping structures, and secondary diverging structures.  The main mineralization type is defined by epithermal quartz vein breccias surrounded by a low-grade halo, consisting of various types of mineralized structures including discontinuous splays and vein arrays.  Many of the deposits consist of various anastomosing quartz vein breccias with a sigmoidal geometry.  There is also a broad geotechnical domain, used to estimate rock mass rating, or RMR.

A plan view, showing the estimation domains, with royalties applicable to each model, is provided in Figure 11‑1.

The implicit modelling algorithm in Leapfrog Geo software was used to create all the estimation domains through interpretation of relevant intervals of drill data, digitized mapping, and underground production data.

11.4 Density Assignment

The density determinations discussed in Chapter 8.3 were used in interpolation.  Density was estimated using inverse distance weighting to the second power (ID2).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑1: Palmarejo Operations with Royalty and Claims Zones Plan View

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

11.5 Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions

Caps for each estimation domain were determined using various methods such as histograms, probability plots and a metal loss calculation.  Histograms and probability plots were examined for changes in slope and data distribution, while metal loss was calculated to keep the effect of capping to a maximum metal loss of 10%.  The ranges of applied capping values are provided in Table 11‑1.  Grade caps ranged from 100–3,500 g/t Ag and from 0.5–70 g/t Au, depending on estimation domain.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑1:    Silver and Gold Cap Values per Estimation Domain

Estimate	Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)
Guadalupe; Main Zone	200–4,000	4–70
Guadalupe; Zapata Zone	100–900	2–14
Guadalupe; La Patria Zone	100–1,000	2–25
Independencia; Main Zone	300–2,000	1–70
Independencia; La Bavisa Zone	100–500	1–5
Independencia; Hidalgo Zone	250–1,000	3.5–10
La Nación; Main Zone	200–1,200	2–20
La Nación; Los Bancos Zone	200–1,000	0.5–5

11.6 Composites

Core samples were composited at 2 m intervals by estimation domain for gold and silver.  The composite length was chosen as one of the most common sample lengths and reduces the amount of sample splitting during the compositing process.  Unsampled intervals were given a value of 0.001 ppm, as these intervals were deemed to be waste by the logging geologist and were not assayed.  Composites were broken at domain boundaries, and composites <2 m at boundaries were distributed to the other composites within the domain.  Natural rock caverns and drill intervals with no recovery, logged as “voids”, were omitted from the estimate.

Los Bancos, Zapata, and La Bavisa zones are full thickness composites within the domain.  This resulted in a single variable length composite per drill hole within the estimation domain.  This method of compositing is useful for discrete planar deposits of relatively consistent and narrow width, as it allows for the execution of a two-dimensional estimate.

11.7 Variography

Variogram searches were oriented along strike of the domains, with the major axis horizontal on-strike, the secondary axis down dip, and the minor axis across the width of the domain.  Silver and gold variograms for each of the 12 estimation domains were created.  Orthogonal variograms were fitted for gold and silver, consisting of three variograms oriented along the anisotropy.  Downhole variograms were also fitted to provide the nugget.  Where orthogonal variograms were not possible, omni-directional variograms were used.

Two and three structure, general relative, pairwise relative, and semi-variogram models were fitted to the experimental variograms.  The Guadalupe–La Bavisa zone does not employ variography as it was estimated using ID2.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

11.8 Estimation/interpolation Methods

The various deposits were estimated using ordinary kriging (OK), with hard boundaries between geologic units.  The enveloping disseminated domain was estimated using ID2.  Search orientations were locally adjusted using dynamic anisotropy.  The Guadalupe–La Bavisa zone was estimated using ID2.

Block models were constrained using the estimation domains.  Models were rotated in two dimensions to represent the general strike and dip of the deposits.  The parent block size was 2 x 25 x 25 m (X, Y, Z). The block size was based on the minimum mining width, composite length, and the average drill spacing of 40–50 m in the Y–Z plane.  The block size was generally selected as one-half to one-third of the drill spacing.  To provide a volumetric fit when filling the wireframes, the block models were sub-celled to a minimum of 1.0 x 2.5 x 2.5 m.  Estimation took place in the parent cells, therefore, all sub-cells within a parent cell have the same grade.  The estimation used a discretization grid of 1 x 5 x 5, which was based on the discrete dimensions in the X direction, and that a discretization of >5 in the Y and Z dimensions was inefficient and did not improve the block variance.

The full thickness model parent block size was set to the variable width of the vein in the X-dimension, and 30 x 30 m in the Y–Z dimensions.  These models are not sub-celled and use a discretization grid of 1 x 3 x 3 m.

The search parameters for the estimate are summarized in Table 11‑2.  The maximum number of samples was optimized by minimizing kriging variance while maximizing slope of regression, while attempting to maintain some degree of localization to improve production reconciliation.  Each domain was estimated with one set of search ranges in one pass to achieve the optimal number of samples, and to avoid estimation artifacts created when using a multiple-pass method.

A high-grade search ellipse restriction was employed for the Independencia silver estimate, which applied the restriction at 75% of the capping value.  Constant search volumes and number of samples were used for each domain.

The block model was depleted using the in-situ variable, proportionally depleting from 100 (in situ) to 0 (completely mined).

11.9 Validation

The grade estimates were validated visually by stepping through sections and comparing the drill data and composites with the block values.  Local bias validation was completed using swath plots.  Reconciliation factors for mill to model reconciliation were used for global bias validation, as well as to drive iterative improvements in the estimation parameters.  Geologic interpretation was validated and improved through underground mapping, channel sampling, and ore control drilling.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑2:    Search Parameters by Zone and Variable

	Variable	Ellipse Ranges (m)			Sample Count		Discretization			Max Samples per Drill Hole
		X	Y	Z	Min	Max	X	Y	Z
Guadalupe; Main Zone	Ag	250-200	200-100	30	9	12	1	5	5	3
	Au	200	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Density	500	500	500	2	5	1	5	5	—
Guadalupe; Zapata Zone	Ag	130	80	30	6	12	1	3	3	—
	Au	130	80	30	6	12	1	3	3	—
	Density	250	200	100	3	6	1	3	3	—
Guadalupe; La Patria Zone	Ag	150	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Au	150	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Density	500	500	500	2	5	1	5	5	—
Independencia; Main Zone	Ag	200	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Au	200	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Density	1,000	600	300	2	5	1	5	5	—
Independencia; La Bavisa Zone	Ag	150	100	30	3	9	1	3	3	—
	Au	150	100	30	3	9	1	3	3	—
	Density	200	150	50	3	5	1	3	3	—
Independencia; Hidalgo Zone	Ag	200	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Au	200	100	30	9	15	1	5	5	3
	Density	1,000	600	300	2	5	1	5	5	—
La Nación; Main Zone	Ag	150	100	30	3	9	3	1	3	—
	Au	150–250	100–150	30	3-6	9-12	3	1	3	—
	Density	200	150	50	3	6	3	1	3	—
La Nación; Los Bancos Zone	Ag	100	80	30	3	6	3	1	3	—
	Au	130	80	30	3	6	3	1	3	—
	Density	150	150	150	3	6	3	1	3	—

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

11.10 Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimate

11.10.1 Mineral Resource Confidence Classification

The classification is based primarily on the data spacing and geological confidence.  To estimate a block, a minimum of nine samples from at least three separate drill holes must be consulted, or for the full thickness models three composites from three separate drillholes.  The confidence classifications are summarized in Table 11‑3.  An example showing the confidence classifications in Guadalupe domain 100 is provided in Figure 11‑2.

The measured classifications are based on proximity to ore control and production data.  This limits the classification of measured material to the area around current mining where there is a very good understanding of the deposit geometry and grade distribution.

Indicated blocks were classified using a script and then manually modified using polygons (in the plane of the domain) based on geologic confidence.

All remaining estimated material is classified as inferred, as the geological solids are considered conservative and do not extrapolate unsupported distances beyond or between data points.

Classification distances are based on variable grade continuity for each zone quantified with variography.

11.10.2 Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification

Following analysis that classified the mineral resource estimates into the measured, indicated, and inferred confidence categories, uncertainties regarding sampling and drilling methods, data processing and handling, geological modelling, and estimation were incorporated into the classifications assigned.  The areas with the most uncertainty were assigned to the inferred category, and the areas with fewest uncertainties were classified as measured.

11.11 Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction

11.11.1 Input Assumptions

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was undertaken that assessed likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting, and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal, and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.

Mineral resources are confined within conceptual mineable shapes that use the assumptions in Table 11‑4.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑3:    Confidence Category Assignments

Deposit	Confidence Classification	Criteria
Guadalupe; Main Zone	Measured	Based on volumetric control derived from grade control mapping, i.e., if a block is within 5 m of grade control data; and if the block was first classed as indicated
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤60 m; and if the closest sample is within 45 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material
Guadalupe; Zapata Zone	Measured	N/A
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤70 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material
Guadalupe; La Patria Zone	Measured	N/A
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤60 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drillholes
	Inferred	Material within a central corridor in which the historic drillholes have been sufficiently validated with a modern drill campaign
Independencia; Main Zone	Measured	Based on volumetric control derived from grade control mapping, i.e., if a block is within 3 m of grade control data; and if the block was first classed as indicated
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤60 m; and if the closest sample is within 45 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material
Independencia; La Bavisa Zone	Measured	N/A
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤60 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material
Independencia; Hidalgo Zone	Measured	N/A
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤60 m; and if the closest sample is within 45 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material
La Nación; Main Zone	Measured	Based on volumetric control derived from grade control mapping, i.e., if a block is within 5 m of grade control data; and if the block was first classed as Indicated
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤75 m; and if the closest sample is within 45 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Deposit	Confidence Classification	Criteria
La Nación; Los Bancos Zone	Measured	N/A
	Indicated	If the average sample distance is ≤55 m; and if the estimate uses at least three drill holes
	Inferred	Remaining estimated material

Note:  NA = not applicable

Figure 11‑2: Example Confidence Classification, Guadalupe Main Deposit (domain 100)

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Red is measured, orange is indicated, and blue is inferred.  Section looks west.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑4:    Underground Mineable Shape Input Assumptions

Parameter	Units	Range (from–to)
Gold price	$/oz	1,700
Silver price	$/oz	22
Gold mining duty & refining cost	$/oz Au	0.491
Silver mining duty & refining cost	$/oz Ag	0.491
Gold recovery	%	93.1
Silver recovery	%	81.9
Gold payable	%	99.88
Silver payable	%	99.86
Au:Ag value ratio	Au:Ag	89.86
Mine cost	$/t	36.01–41.75
Surface mineralized material haulage	$/t	3.52
Process	$/t	27.29
G&A	$/t	11.00
Support, aux equipment	$/t	3.19
AuEq cut-off grade	g/t	1.59-2.21

11.11.2 Commodity Price

The gold and silver prices used in resource estimation are based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The estimated timeframe used is the eight-year LOM that supports the mineral reserves estimates.  The gold price forecast for the mineral resource estimate is US$1,700/oz and the silver price is US$22/oz.  The QP reviewed the forecasts as outlined in Chapter 16.

11.11.3 Cut-off

The mineral resources are reported using a cut-off of 1.59 to 2.21 g/t gold equivalent (AuEq).  Gold equivalent cut-off grades were calculated for the deposits, with mineral resources estimated and reported above this cut-off.  The AuEq cut-off was calculated as follows:

Where mining, processing and G&A are costs expressed as US dollars per tonne, and gold price and refining costs are expressed as US dollars per troy ounce.  The payability refers to the percentage of metal payable after refining.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

A gold:silver value ratio was used to convert silver grades to gold equivalent grades and is calculated using the following formula:

Gold equivalent grades were calculated using the following formula:

where AuEq, gold and silver are the gold equivalent grade, gold grade, and silver grade, respectively, in g/t.

The input parameters to the cut-off grades and the resulting grade cut-off for mineral resources reporting was provided in Table 11‑4.

11.11.4 QP Statement

The QP is of the opinion that any issues that arise in relation to relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction can be resolved with further work.  The mineral resource estimates are performed for deposits that are in a well-documented geological setting.  Coeur is very familiar with the economic parameters required for successful operations in the Palmarejo area; and Coeur has a history of being able to obtain and maintain permits, social license and meet environmental standards.  There is sufficient time in the four-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecast for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, testwork and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates.

11.12 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ.

Measured and indicated mineral resources are summarized in Table 11‑5 and inferred mineral resources in Table 11‑6.  Mineral resources are current at December 31, 2021.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑5:    Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Zone/Deposit	Mineral Resource Classification	Tonnes (kt)	Grade		Contained Ounces		Gold Equivalent Cut-off Grade (g/t AuEq)	Metallurgical Recovery
			Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag (%)	Au (%)
Guadalupe	Measured	2,580	116	1.74	9,625	144	1.62–2.21	81.9	93.1
	Indicated	9,519	102	1.92	31,241	586	1.62–2.21	81.9	93.1
	Subtotal measured and indicated	12,099	105	1.88	40,867	731	1.62–2.21	81.9	93.1
Independencia	Measured	588	189	2.19	3,578	41	1.64–1.71	81.9	93.1
	Indicated	5,075	127	1.33	20,794	217	1.64–1.71	81.9	93.1
	Subtotal measured and indicated	5,664	134	1.42	24,373	258	1.64–1.71	81.9	93.1
La Nación	Measured	185	197	1.59	1,169	9	1.59–1.63	81.9	93.1
	Indicated	1,171	194	1.30	7,304	49	1.59–1.63	81.9	93.1
	Subtotal measured and indicated	1,355	194	1.34	8,473	58	1.59–1.63	81.9	93.1
Total measured and indicated mineral resources	Total Measured	3,353	133	1.81	14,373	195	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1
	Total Indicated	15,764	117	1.68	59,340	852	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1
	Total measured and indicated	19,117	120	1.70	73,712	1,047	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑6:    Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Zone/Deposit	Mineral Resource Classification	Tonnes (kt)	Grade		Contained Ounces		Gold Equivalent Cut-off Grade (g/t AuEq)	Metallurgical Recovery
			Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag (%)	Au (%)
Guadalupe	Inferred	1,469	102	2.42	4,798	114	1.62–2.21	81.9	93.1
Independencia	Inferred	2,400	130	1.40	10,048	108	1.64–1.71	81.9	93.1
La Nación	Inferred	406	200	1.81	2,607	24	1.59–1.63	81.9	93.1
Total inferred mineral resource	Inferred	4,275	127	1.79	17,453	246	1.59–2.21	81.9	93.1

Notes to accompany mineral resource tables:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ.  The estimate is current at December 31, 2021.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Joseph Ruffini, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

4. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  Assumption of conventional longhole underground mining; gold price of US$1,700/oz, silver price of US$22/oz; reported above a variable gold equivalent cut-off grade that ranges from 1.59–2.21 g/t AuEq; metallurgical recovery assumption of 93.1% for gold and 81% for silver; variable mining costs that range from US$36.01–US$41.75/t, surface haulage costs of US$3.52/t, process costs of US$27.29/t, general and administrative costs of US$11.00/t, and surface/auxiliary support costs of US$3.19/t.  Mineral resources exclude the impact of the Franco-Nevada gold stream agreement at Palmarejo in estimation.

5. Rounding of tonnes, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tonnes, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

11.13 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:

• Metal price and exchange rate assumptions;

• Changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent grade cut-off grade;

• Changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones;

• Changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions;

• Density and domain assignments;

• Changes to geotechnical, mining, and metallurgical recovery assumptions;

• Changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain underground mining designs that constrain the estimates;

• Assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-13

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

12.1 Introduction

Mineral reserves are estimated at Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación mines (Figure 12‑1 to Figure 12‑9).  All estimates envisage underground mining methods.  Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.  The mine plans assume underground mining using longhole open stoping using trackless equipment and cemented rock fill (CRF) backfill.  Target mining rates are 150,000 t/month.

12.2 Development of Mining Case

The mineral reserve estimate is based on the following inputs and considerations:

• Mineral resource block model, with estimated tonnage, gold, and silver grades;

• Cut-off grade calculations;

• Stope and development designs;

• Geotechnical and hydrogeological information;

• Estimates for mining recovery and dilution;

• Depletion from previous mining;

• Consideration of other modifying factors.

Deswik mine planning software was used for the mine design, 3D modeling, and interrogation of the 3D mining model against the block model.

The surveyed “as-built” mining excavations were depleted from the designed solids and the resource block model.

Mining, geotechnical, and hydrological factors were considered in the estimation of the mineral reserves, including the application of dilution and ore recovery factors.

12.3 Designs

Mining excavations (stopes and ore development) were designed to include mineralized material above the cut-off grade.  These excavations were then assessed for economic viability.  In addition to the mining cut-off grade, an incremental cut-off grade (excluding the mining cost) was calculated to classify mineralized material mined as a result of essential development to access higher grade mining areas.  Mineralized material above this cut-off grade will add value, and is therefore, included as process plant feed.  Mineralized material below the incremental cut-off will be disposed of on surface in waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs) or will be used underground as backfill.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure12‑1: Deposit Layout Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑2:          Guadalupe Looking Northeast

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑3: Zapata Looking South

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑4: Independencia Looking Northeast

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑5: La Bavisa Looking Northeast

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑6: La Nación Looking Southwest

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑7: Los Bancos Looking Northeast

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑8: Hidalgo Looking Northeast

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2020.  Legend key included as Figure 12‑9.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑9: Mine Layout Legend Key

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

All designed excavations in the Mineral Reserve meet or exceed the cut-off grade. However, other costs not included in the cut-off grade calculation, will be incurred, such as costs related to capital development, underground infrastructure installations, capital equipment purchases, and sustaining capital. In addition to these costs, there are taxes and royalties that are payable based on net income.

The resulting mine plan was analyzed in a financial model and is economically viable.

12.4 Input Assumptions

Stope designs were generated for the planned mining methods using the cut-off grade to target material for inclusion.  Stope designs were completed using the Deswik Stope Optimizer software.  Centerlines representing ore development drives were digitized to represent ore development and were used to create a 3D solid model.  The stope solids were cut using the ore development solids, using Boolean routines in the planning software.  The resulting 3D model formed the basis of the mineral reserve estimate.

Gold equivalent (AuEq) cut-off grades were calculated for the deposits, with mineral reserves estimated and reported above this cut-off.  The AuEq cut-off was calculated as follows:

where mining, processing and G&A are costs expressed as US$ per tonne, and gold price and refining costs are expressed as US$ per troy ounce and do not reflect the realized gold price from the Franco-Nevada royalty.  The payability refers to the percentage of metal payable after refining.

A gold:silver value ratio was used to convert silver grades to gold equivalent grades and is calculated using the following formula:

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Gold equivalent grades were calculated using the following formula:

where AuEq, Au and Ag are the gold equivalent grade, gold grade, and silver grade, respectively, in g/t.

The input parameters to the cut-off grades and the resulting grade cut-off for Mineral Reserves reporting is provided in Table 12‑1.

12.5 Ore Loss and Dilution

The following sources of dilution were identified:

• Overbreak into the hanging wall or footwall rocks following drilling and blasting operations;

• Rock failures (slough) from rock walls adjacent to the stope boundaries as a result of weak rock mass characteristics;

• Unconsolidated rockfill (backfill) from over mucking into the stope floor.

Operational experience shows that dilution from the cemented rockfill (CRF) material is negligible, and this has not been considered as a dilution source.

Ore dilution factors to account for overbreak and wall slough (waste rock dilution) from the hanging wall and footwall surfaces were estimated based on the consideration of geotechnical information and stope reconciliations and were applied to stope shapes in the stope optimization software.  One meter of dilution was applied to the hanging wall, and 0.5 m to the footwall.  No dilution is assigned to ore development.  No gold or silver grades were assigned to the rockfill (RF) dilution.

CRF and RF are used to backfill mined-out stopes in order to enhance ore recovery, provide mine stability, and eliminate the need for permanent ore pillars to be left.

Ore losses can occur during mining as a result of:

• Stope under-break and unrecoverable bridging;

• Unrecovered ore stocks due to flat dipping footwalls and stope draw point geometry;

• Misclassification of material resulting in ore hauled inadvertently to waste dumps; and

• Abandoned ore stocks due to excessive dilution from stope wall failures.

To account for potential ore losses, a factor of 5% was applied to primary, secondary, and longitudinal stopes, and ore mine development.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑1: Input Parameters to Cut-off Grade Determination, Mineral Reserves

Parameter	Units	Value/Value Range (from/to)
Gold price	$/oz	1,400
Silver price	$/oz	20.00
Gold mining duty and refining cost	$/oz Au	0.491
Silver mining duty and refining cost	$/oz Ag	0.491
Gold recovery	%	93.1
Silver recovery	%	81.9
Gold payable	%	99.88
Silver payable	%	99.86
Au:Ag value ratio	Au:Ag	81.59
Mining cost	$/t	36.01–41.75
Surface ore haulage	$/t	3.52
Processing	$/t	27.29
G&A	$/t	11.00
Other	$/t	3.19
AuEq cut-off grade	g/t	1.94–2.51
Marginal development AuEq cut-off grade	g/t	1.08

12.6 Commodity Price

The gold and silver prices used in mineral reserve estimation are based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The estimated timeframe used is the nine-year LOM that supports the mineral reserves estimates.  The gold price forecast for the mineral resource estimate is US$1,400/oz, and the silver price forecast is US$20/oz. The QP reviewed the forecast as outlined in Chapter 16.

12.7 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves are reported using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the process plant.  Mineral reserves are reported in Table 12‑2.  Mineral reserves are current at December 31, 2021.  Estimates are reported on a 100% basis.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑2: Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Zone/Deposit	Mineral Reserve Classification	Tonnes (kt)	Grade		Contained Ounces		Gold Equivalent Cut-off Grade (g/t AuEq)	Metallurgical Recovery
			Ag (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag (%)	Au (%)
Guadalupe	Proven	2,005	120	2.09	7,736	135	1.97–2.51	81.9	93.1
	Probable	6,527	121	1.82	25,412	381	1.97–2.51	81.9	93.1
	Subtotal proven and probable	8,532	121	1.88	33,147	516	1.97–2.51	81.9	93.1
Independencia	Proven	1,044	190	2.68	6,377	90	1.99–2.07	81.9	93.1
	Probable	3,551	137	1.76	15,588	201	1.99–2.07	81.9	93.1
	Subtotal proven and probable	4,595	149	1.97	21,965	291	1.99–2.07	81.9	93.1
La Nación	Proven	357	206	1.96	2,367	22	1.94–1.98	81.9	93.1
	Probable	934	162	1.81	4,876	54	1.94–1.98	81.9	93.1
	Subtotal proven and probable	1,291	175	1.85	7,242	77	1.94–1.98	81.9	93.1
Total proven and probable mineral reserves	Total proven	3,405	151	2.26	16,480	247	1.94–2.51	81.9	93.1
	Total probable	11,012	130	1.80	45,875	637	1.94–2.51	81.9	93.1
	Total proven and probable	14,418	135	1.91	62,355	884	1.94–2.51	81.9	93.1

Notes to Accompany Mineral Reserves Table:

1. The Mineral Reserve estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the process plant.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional underground mining; gold price of US$1,400/oz and silver price of US$20/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 1.94–2.51 gold equivalent and an incremental development cut-off grade of 1.08 g/t AuEq; metallurgical recovery assumption of 93.1% for gold and 81.9% for silver; mining dilution assumes 1 meter of hanging wall waste dilution; mining loss of 5% was applied; variable mining costs that range from US$36.01–US$41.75/t, surface haulage costs of US$3.52/t, process costs of US$27.29/t, general and administrative costs of US$11.00/t, and surface/auxiliary support costs of US$3.19/t.  Mineral reserves exclude the impact of the Franco-Nevada gold stream agreement at Palmarejo in estimation.

4. Rounding of tonnes, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tonnes, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-13

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

12.8 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the Mineral Reserve estimates include:

• Commodity prices:  the mineral reserve estimates are most sensitive to metal prices.  Coeur’s current strategy is to sell most of the metal production at spot prices, exposing the company to both positive and negative changes in the market, both of which are outside of the company’s control.  Gold is subject to a streaming agreement with Franco-Nevada where 50% of the gold ounces produced from a portion of the Project are sold to Franco-Nevada at US$800/oz;

• Metallurgical recovery:  long term changes in metallurgical recovery could also have an impact on the mineral reserve estimates.  For example, a 10% change in metallurgical recovery has approximately the same impact as a 10% change in metal prices.  However, the metallurgy is well understood, and as a result, the mineral reserve estimates are considered to be less sensitive to long-term factors affecting metallurgical recovery, compared to the sensitivity to metal prices, which tend to have greater variances;

• Mining method will change from transverse to longitudinal longhole stoping over time as narrower portions of veins are mined which could result in higher cost, lower productivities and higher dilution quantities which can impact grade. All of these factors could impact cut-off grades, reserve estimates and economics;

• Operating costs:  higher or lower operating costs than those assumed could also affect the mineral reserve estimates.  While the trend over 2014 to 2020 showed operating cost reductions at the Palmarejo Operations, this trend could reverse and costs could increase over the life of the Project, due to factors outside of the company’s control.  However, of the factors discussed in this section, the QP considers the mineral reserve to be least sensitive to changes in operating costs;

• Dilution:  additional dilution has the effect of increasing the overall volume of material mined, hauled and processed.  This results in an increase in operating costs and could result in mineral reserve losses if broken stocks are diluted to the point where it is uneconomic to muck, haul, and process the material and the broken stocks are abandoned.  The operations have developed a number of methods to control dilution, including the installation of stope support, a flexible mine plan with the ability to limit stope wall spans, and good development practices that avoid undercutting the stope hanging wall.  To assist in these efforts, site geotechnical reviews are regularly completed by external consultants, and a geotechnical engineer is employed by the mine.  In the opinion of the QP, sufficient controls are in place at the Palmarejo Operations to manage dilution, and the risk of material changes to the mineral reserve from dilution above the amounts used in the mineral reserve estimate is low.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-14

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Geotechnical: geotechnical issues could lead to additional dilution, difficulty accessing portions of the ore body, or sterilization of broken or in situ ore.  In addition to the controls discussed in the dilution section there are significant management controls in place to effectively mitigate geotechnical risks.  Designed openings are evaluated for stability using the Modified Stability Graph method.  There is regular underground geotechnical mapping, and comprehensive geotechnical reviews are held on a weekly basis.  The QP considers that sufficient controls are in place at the Palmarejo Operations to effectively manage geotechnical risk, and the risk of significant impact on the mineral reserve estimate is low.

• Hydrogeological: unexpected hydrogeological conditions could cause issues with access and extraction of areas of the Mineral Reserve due to higher than anticipated rates of water ingress.  The QP considers the risk of encountering hydrogeological conditions that would significantly affect the mineral reserve estimate is low.

• Geological and structural interpretations: changes in the underlying geology model including changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones, changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions, and density and domain assignments could result in changes to the geology model upon which mineral reserve estimate is based.

• Permitting and social license: inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain social license to operate could result in the inability to extract some or all of the mineral reserves.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-15

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

13.0 MINING METHODS

13.1 Introduction

The Guadalupe, Independencia and La Nación mines use conventional underground mining methods and conventional equipment.  The overall production rate is approximately 165,000 t/month.

13.2 Geotechnical Considerations

The Palmarejo Operations technical services department maintains a Ground Control Management Plan that is updated annually and serves to provide mine personnel with operating, monitoring, and quality control/assurance guidance.  The Ground Control Management Plan specifies ground support standards and identifies where there are applicable in the mines.

13.2.1 Guadalupe

Golder Associates (Golder) performed a geotechnical assessment of the mine area in 2011 and provided guidance on developing RMR logging procedures and calculated rock mass rating (RMR₇₆).  Most of the rock types show similar RMR₇₆ values, with the bulk of the values in the range of 40–60, or a “Fair” rock quality.

Ingeroc SpA of Chile (Ingeroc) was commissioned in 2015 to perform additional geotechnical characterizations and provide onsite engineering support.  Starting in 2017, this was replaced with an inhouse geotechnical team to support onsite engineering, planning and operations.

Pakalnis and Associates of Canada performed geotechnical design and operations reviews from 2011–2019.  In 2019, Ingeroc was contracted to provide operations support with biannual reviews.

Due to highly variable rock mass quality and the intersection of dissolution voids during early development and operations, a geotechnical block model was developed in 2018.  This model is continually updated with infill drilling and development mapping to support geotechnical design and mine planning.  The model provides RMR ranges demarcated by six quality types which are then matched to minimum support requirements as part of the design and planning process.  These ranges are represented by color coded blocks in a three-dimensional computer model and documented in the Ground Control Management Plan, matching minimum ground support requirements to the material classification.

Initial stope dimensions were developed using the Modified Stability Graph method, which predicts equivalent linear overbreak slough values (Pakalnis, 2016).  Modifications based on variability and update geotechnical models were made as the mine developed.  Updated designs are modelled using two and three-dimensional numerical simulation software to provide final design for each access and stope.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Based on the calculated modified stability number (N’) values, the majority of the planned stope surfaces at Guadalupe are estimated to have equivalent linear overbreak slough values of <1.0 m for unsupported stope hanging wall surfaces and <0.5 m for unsupported stope footwall surfaces for stope spans of up to 14 m along strike.  Primary and secondary stope spans range from 10–14 m, and longitudinal stopes can range from 14 m along strike up to 20 m, depending on vein dimensions, structural interpretation, and rock quality locally.

Standard ground support initially consisted of pattern welding wire mesh pinned by rock bolting.  With advanced development, and installation of a modernized shotcrete plant in 2020, fibercrete and bolting is currently replacing bolts and mesh in areas of higher quality rock.  In poor ground, hanging wall support, or at intersections, the option of 6 m length cable bolts is available and installed in addition to shotcrete and mesh.

The most recent geotechnical review was conducted in June 2021 to review updated support methods, maximum allowable stable stope spans, mining sequence, and overall mine stability.

13.2.2 Independencia

Pakalnis provided geotechnical inputs for startup design and operation from 2015–2019 with Ingeroc providing ongoing operational review support from 2019 to present.  A geotechnical model was developed in 2017 due to poorer overall rock quality encountered in Independencia versus earlier development in Guadalupe.

Most stope surfaces at Independencia were designed to have equivalent linear overbreak slough values of <1.0 m for unsupported stope hanging wall surfaces, and <0.5 m for unsupported stope footwall surfaces.  Rock quality in Independencia is considered to range between very low to moderate quality with variability requiring local changes to design to maintain stability.  Similar support methods are available between mines following range classification as outlined in the Ground Control Management Plan that covers the operation.  Common to Independencia, areas of Very Poor-quality rock typically require installation of horizontal steel spilling bars in advance of development for perimeter control, followed by reinforced shotcrete arches in addition to typical mesh and bolting standard support.

The most recent geotechnical review was conducted in June 2021 to review updated support methods, maximum allowable stable stope spans, mining sequence, and overall mine stability.

13.2.3 La Nación

The geotechnical conditions at La Nación are classified with rock qualities ranging from Poor to Good.  Conditions are similar to Guadalupe with most geotechnical concerns controlled by structure versus Poor rock quality.  Pakalnis (2017) provided guidance and approval to increase stope heights from 20 m in Guadalupe and Independencia to 25 m in La Nación based on the orebody geometry and rock quality.  This increase in stope height was implemented, and extraction has been proven effective.

Based on the calculated N’ values, stopes at La Nación were designed initially to have equivalent linear overbreak slough values of <1.0 m for unsupported stope hanging wall faces.  Transverse stopes have a maximum primary/secondary exposure of 20 m for ore with >55% RMR, and a maximum hanging wall exposure of 32 m for hanging wall material with >65% RMR.  Longitudinal stoping has a maximum hanging wall exposure of 32 m for hanging wall material with >65% RMR.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Similar methods of support are available to La Nación as other areas of operation following the Ground Control Management Plan released in 2016 and updated annually.

The most recent geotechnical review was conducted in June 2021 to review updated support methods, maximum allowable stable stope spans, mining sequence, and overall mine stability.

13.3 Hydrogeological Considerations

13.3.1 Guadalupe

Permeability of the volcanic rock units in all mines is low to very low.  Persistent inflows generally occur within larger fault structures.  Flows increase and decrease seasonally if the structure is connected to the surface.  Access ramps encountered significant water inflows from these structural features during early development; however, over time, inflows into the mine have diminished as local storage is removed.  Increases in flow currently are directly related to opening new developments laterally or ramping downward to lower levels.  A primary sump and pumping station is located on the 1,140 m level and fed by a series of level and ramp sumps that allow final settling before pumping from the mine to the water treatment plant on surface.

GRE prepared a hydrogeological model for the operations in 2017.  The largest predicted inflows for Guadalupe will occur in year 2022 and result in a total flow of approximately 800 m³/day coinciding with the maximum lateral development of new mines at Animas and Zapata.  Through 2021, flows are matching predicted values.

13.3.2 Independencia

Water inflows tend to occur mainly where the development intersects larger scale structures, such as faults and shear zones.  These structures are typically located in the footwall accesses and ore zones with generally higher flows than other mines due to the higher degree of brittle fracture and permeability along structures.  Initial development encountered highest flows that diminished over time as local storage is drained.  Outside of structures, similar host rock types of low overall permeability and storage to Guadalupe are present.

The primary sump and a pumping station is located on the 1090 m level to manage these inflows from satellite sumps and pumping systems located on various levels.  The central pump station sends the water from settling sumps to the water treatment plant on surface for further sediment removal.

GRE prepared a hydrogeological model for the mine in 2017 with the highest predicted flow expected to be in 2021 of 2,600 m³/day.  Actual water inflows in 2021 were slightly off the predicted flow estimate with a peak at 2,100 m³/day.  This may increase through to 2023 with the development of the lower levels and Independencia and access development laterally to the north for the Hidalgo mine.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

13.3.3 La Nación

La Nación is located midway between the Guadalupe and Independencia mines.  Hydrological conditions in the mine were affected by the development and dewatering of the two adjacent mines.  Zones of intermediate inflow into the mine were intercepted along structures similar to those encountered in both Guadalupe and Independencia, but at much lower rates.  This had little effect on mine development rates.  Mine dewatering in the area is accomplished using satellite sumps on each level that drain down to the 1140 m level entry ramp access.  Water collected from the 1140 m level sump is drained back to the primary sump and pump station on the 1090 m level in Independencia for transfer to the water treatment plant.

13.4 Operations

13.4.1 Guadalupe

Primary access to the Guadalupe mine is from surface via two ramps.  The West (Poniente) Decline and East (Oriente) Level are located 700 m north of the deposit in the hanging wall.  A third portal for primary ventilation is the South Portal (Portal Sur) which is situated on the southern strike extent of the the deposit footwall approximately 2,200 m south–southeast from the main access portals.  The West Decline serves as the primary access for haulage, while the East provides both haulage and support access.  Both main ramps are used for primary ventilation intake while the main fans at South Portal are in operation.  When the South Portal fans are down for maintenance, a secondary system is engaged providing intake on the East and exhaust on the South and West.  The South portal is used as a primary exhaust for the mine as well as secondary escapeway for extended work areas of Guadalupe and Animas.

Two new developments at Zapata and Animas are underway as extensions of the Guadalupe mine.  The Zapata deposit is located approximately 250 m from the footwall of Guadalupe.  Two accesses have been developed to connect the Guadalupe ramp system to the Zapata ramp system.  First ore development from Zapata was in 2021.  The Animas extension is located at the far south end of the Guadalupe mine and is accessed via a single ramp.  Development will have extended to first ore in late 2021.  Ventilation and secondary egress will be provided via a ventilation raise to surface and an escapeway.

Mine access drifts were advanced through the ore structure and into the footwall where ramps were developed for vertical access to the level footwall drives.  The access ramps are designed at 5.5 m high x 5.0 m wide and have been driven at 15% grades.

Key input parameters to the mine design include mechanized diesel and electric drill, load, and haulage systems.  A preliminary production rate of 150,000 t/month was increased to 165,000 t/month in 2021 with the development of new orebodies and accelerated development rates.  The material handling system uses a load-haul-dump (LHD) and truck transport system of ore loading and hauling to an interim surface stockpile.  Ore is separated at surface into stockpiles to support blending prior to transport to the plant run-of-mine (ROM) stockpile.  Waste from development is either directly transported from development to backfilling pockets in active stopes or stockpiled underground for later use as backfill.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Mining methods used at Guadalupe include both transverse and longitudinal sublevel stoping.  The operation has changed from principally transverse longhole stoping from startup in 2014 where veins were wider to narrow vein longitudinal stoping in 2021.  The continuous nature of the mineralized zones, significant orebody thickness, favorable deposit geometry and generally good ground conditions resulted in productive longhole stoping with low costs.

Access to transverse stoping areas is via footwall drives developed parallel to the orebody strike.  Drawpoints are developed perpendicular to the footwall sublevels to access the stopes.  A sequence of primary and secondary stopes is developed and extracted in sequence along strike of the vein.  The primary stopes (roughly 10 m of strike) are excavated and backfilled with cemented backfill providing pillar support for the extraction of the secondary.  The secondaries are then backfilled with waste to support ramping up to the next level.  Access to longitudinal stopes is along and within the ore zones where drifts are driven along strike within the vein and extraction is in sequence from level to level in 15–20 m increments depending on ground conditions.  The open stope is backfilled, and the extraction continues in sequence.  Level or stope heights in Guadalupe are generally 20 m.

Lateral development is completed using conventional mechanized drilling and blasting methods.  Drift rounds are drilled using twin boom, electric/hydraulic drill jumbos.  Ground support is installed using mechanical/electrical bolting machines and (when required) shotcrete is applied with a shotcrete machine.  Mine services (air, water, compressed air, electrical and communication cables) are extended to the working areas.

Longhole production drilling of stopes is completed using electric/hydraulic vertical hammer drill rigs.  Production drilling is mainly done in pattern format in a down dip configuration, with the holes drilled parallel to the dip of the orebody.

13.4.2 Independencia

The North and South declines provide access to the deposit and provide secondary intake (south) and primary exhaust ventilation (north) for the mine.  The access ramps are designed at 5.5 m high x 5.0 m wide and have been driven at a grade of -15%.  Primary ventilation intake is from a vertical surface raise and fan system constructed in the La Nación Mine and connected via dual ramps to the La Nación orebody on the 1140 and 1260 levels.

The design philosophy and key mine design parameters for the Independencia mine are similar to those described for the Guadalupe mine.  Mine access drifts were advanced through the ore structure and into the footwall where ramps were developed for vertical access to the level footwall drives.  The access ramps were designed at 5.5 m high x 5.0 m wide and were driven at 15% grade.  Starting in 2021, ramps and accesses were reduced to 5.3 x 5.0 m to provide support for increased development rates and reduced unit costs.

Mining methods used at Independencia include both transverse and longitudinal sublevel stoping.  The operation transitioned from principally transverse longhole stoping from startup in 2016 where veins were wider to narrow vein longitudinal stoping in 2021.  Due to the sinusoidal nature of the mineralized zones, reduced orebody thickness, and generally poorer ground conditions, productive longhole stoping has been achieved, but at higher costs due to slower development and mining rates and increased support requirements.  Stope and level heights in Independencia are 20 m.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Preliminary designs were completed for the development of the Hidalgo extension anticipated for production in 2023.  The plans call for dual access ramps, one from Independencia along the north extension and the second located from surface approximately 200 m north of Independencia north portal.  Current designs are in conceptual, with final designs to be completed in early 2022.

13.4.3 La Nación

The mine can be accessed from two levels, one from the south decline ramp access on the 1140 level from Independencia, and the other from the footwall drive at the 1260 level.

The two drifts provide access to the deposit along with primary intake and exhaust ventilation for both the La Nación and Independencia mines.  The access ramps are designed at 5.5 m high x 5.0 m wide with a gradient of 2%.  The access ramps from Independencia are connected via a spiral ramp developed in the footwall of the La Nación orebody to connect the lower and upper part of the orebody and access to the sublevels.

The La Nación deposit is mined using similar equipment, personnel, and mining methods as the adjacent Independencia and Guadalupe mines.  Much of the ore mining will be completed using longitudinal sublevel stoping due to the narrow width of the vein.  Mine level and stope heights were increased to 25 m following a rock mechanics study supporting increasing the stope heights.

13.5 Backfill

Primary stopes as extracted using transverse sublevel method are filled with cemented rock fill once the ore is drilled, blasted, and extracted.  The cemented rock fill is produced on surface directly from a 3000 t/d mixing plant and hauled underground to the stope location.  The majority of cemented backfill is used specifically for this method with secondary placement required for sill pillars and curtains where longitudinal retreat extraction method is applied.  Sill pillars require the backfill of cemented fill along the entire length of the sublevel.  All three active mines have completed sill pillars within the vertical profile of the orebody.

Curtains are designed and backfilled in those areas where longitudinal retreat mining requires the installation of a curtain to allow backfilling of the stope prior to continuing stope extraction.  This curtain is required every 15–25 m depending on the design span distance as determined from a calculated hydraulic radius.  In areas where the Avoca method is applied, cemented backfill is limited or not required.

Waste rock backfill from development mining is the principal backfill for secondary transverse stopes and for longitudinal stopes.  In most cases, the rock fill is loaded on to trucks from waste development headers outside the orebody and delivered directly to the stope.  Extra material is stored underground on previously-mined levels to be used later where needed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

13.6 Ventilation

13.6.1 Guadalupe

The primary ventilation system is powered by two 224 kW central fans located at the South Portal.  A second set of fans is installed in the East Portal for contingency and are only activated when the primary is down.  When the central fans are active, air is drawn from the East and West portals and vented out the South portal directing air from north to south along the length of the orebody.  Secondary ventilation is directed through booster fans installed on levels and directed through sublevel raises vertically and laterally along horizontal drives to the work areas.  Vertical raises are installed level to level using a raisebore.

The capacity of the primary ventilation circuit is approximately 250 m³/sec.

13.6.2 Independencia

The primary ventilation fans consist of two 224 kW fresh air intake fans installed in a ventilation bypass drift developed in the South ramp, and two 224 kW fans installed on the 1260 level in La Nación that pull air from a raisebored shaft connected to surface.  The North portal provides a single exhaust exit from the mine for both intake points.  Additional booster fans are installed underground to direct intake air to the active mining blocks.  Ventilation raises are developed by longhole drill and blast methods or bored with a raisebore machine.

The capacity of the primary ventilation circuit is approximately 300 m³/sec when three of the four primary fans are operating.

13.6.3 La Nación

The mine ventilation is designed and configured to support both Independencia and La Nación.  Two access drifts developed from the Independencia mine provide exhaust routes from the mine.  A vertical raise was constructed from the lower 1140 level through to surface as part of early development to support ventilation for the entire mine.  The main fans are located on the 1260 level and consist of two 224 kW fans in parallel.  During the early stages of development and operation, a single fan is in operation.  As both La Nación and Independencia mature, and mining distances increase the second fan will be brought online.

13.7 Blasting and Explosives

Longhole drilling of stope production holes are completed using electric/hydraulic downhole hammer drills.  Drill and blast design is customized to match individual conditions found in each stope and development headings.  Blasting is conducted using controlled spacing and timing method via a central electronic timing and detonation system.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

13.8 Underground Sampling and Production Monitoring

Preliminary in situ channel sampling is conducted across the vein intercepts by the geologists to support preliminary ore control.  Follow-up samples are taken during and post extraction from individual stope stockpiles on surface to support blending and reconciliation with the plant on a continuous basis as part of day-to-day operations.

13.9 Infrastructure Facilities

Infrastructure for the operation is discussed in Chapter 15.  All underground operations share the same surface infrastructure excluding stockpiles and compressed air and ventilation systems.

Underground maintenance facilities in Guadalupe and Independencia support field and preventative maintenance activities.  Primary maintenance is conducted in joint facilities located on surface between the mine portals and a large main facility located at the Palmarejo office and plant site.  An additional facility is planned for construction in Zapata in 2023 to support ongoing operations.

Underground magazines in Guadalupe support Zapata and Animas, and in Independencia support La Nación.

13.10 Production Schedule

The Palmarejo Operations have nine years of mine life remaining overall.  The Guadalupe mine has a remaining nine-year mine life with the expansion components of Zapata and Animas.  Independencia has a remaining nine-year mine life with expansions to the north and south and addition of the Hidalgo deposit.  La Nación has five years of mine life remaining.

A production schedule is provided in Table 13‑1.

13.11 Equipment

The equipment listed in Table 13‑2 is shared between the three underground mines.

Surface mining equipment consists of trucks, loaders, drills, and dozers.  Some ex-open pit equipment is used for ore haulage from the underground mines to the ROM pad; as well as ore blending, backfill operations, road construction, and road maintenance.  The main surface equipment assets are listed in Table 13‑3.

The equipment on site is sufficient to meet LOM plan requirements.

13.12 Personnel

Mining operations are forecast to employ approximately 330 persons over the LOM.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑1: Production Schedule

	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	LOM
Underground Guadalupe
Ore mined	kt	941	962	940	983	1,251	1,329	1,226	681	218	8,532
Silver grade mined	g/t	118.5	126.1	98.6	116.4	115.2	123.4	121.4	146.2	157.5	120.8
Gold grade mined	g/t	1.9	2.0	1.6	1.9	2.0	2.2	2.0	1.6	0.3	1.9
Silver contained metal	koz	3,583	3,903	2,980	3,679	4,637	5,273	4,786	3,199	1,106	33,147
Gold contained metal	koz	57	61	49	60	79	92	80	34	2	516
Vent Rise	m	386	275	168	128	—	—	—	—	—	957
Meters capital cost	m	3,180	2,791	2,140	1,985	—	185	—	—	—	10,280
Meters operating cost waste	m	1,157	1,091	1,773	937	848	673	145	—	—	6,625
Meters operating cost ore	m	2,909	4,094	3,630	3,513	2,687	1,570	249	—	—	18,652
Waste mined	kt	303	266	267	197	63	63	13	—	—	1,171
Underground Independencia
Ore mined	kt	547	516	561	795	511	435	405	573	251	4,595
Silver grade mined	g/t	176.2	155.0	148.7	138.1	131.6	143.9	141.6	158.7	140.5	148.7
Gold grade mined	g/t	2.5	2.1	2.1	1.9	2.1	2.1	1.7	1.5	1.6	2.0
Silver contained metal	koz	3,102	2,570	2,680	3,532	2,164	2,015	1,845	2,923	1,135	21,965
Gold contained metal	koz	43	35	38	49	34	29	22	27	13	291
Vent Rise	m	21	141	271	151	-	394	515	36	—	1,528
Meters capital cost	m	856	2,662	2,982	1,608	63	836	1,012	212	—	10,230
Meters operating cost waste	m	396	414	497	1,043	352	95	522	51	—	3,369
Meters operating cost ore	m	834	1,422	2,539	2,781	748	959	1,260	590	—	11,133
Waste mined	kt	86	202	230	171	26	77	124	19	—	934
Underground La Nación
Ore mined	kt	313	326	410	156	86	—	—	—	—	1,291
Silver grade mined	g/t	141.2	187.5	200.2	182.9	108.8	—	—	—	—	174.5

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	LOM
Gold grade mined	g/t	1.5	2.1	2.2	1.6	0.7	—	—	—	—	1.9
Silver contained metal	koz	1,420	1,967	2,641	914	300	—	—	—	—	7,242
Gold contained metal	koz	15	22	29	8	2	—	—	—	—	77
Vent Rise	m	247	30	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	278
Meters capital cost	m	1,543	189	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	1,732
Meters operating cost waste	m	453	81	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	534
Meters operating cost ore	m	1,992	422	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	2,414
Waste mined	kt	146	19	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	165
Underground Total
Ore mined	kt	1,801	1,804	1,911	1,934	1,848	1,765	1,632	1,253	470	14,418
Silver grade mined	g/t	140.0	145.5	135.1	130.7	119.5	128.5	126.4	151.9	148.4	134.5
Gold grade mined	g/t	2.0	2.0	1.9	1.9	1.9	2.1	1.9	1.5	1.0	1.9
Silver contained metal	koz	8,106	8,440	8,301	8,126	7,100	7,288	6,631	6,122	2,241	62,355
Gold contained metal	koz	116	118	117	118	115	122	102	62	15	884
Vent Rise	m	654	446	439	279	-	394	515	36	—	2,763
Meters capital cost	m	5,578	5,641	5,122	3,593	63	1,021	1,012	212	—	22,242
Meters operating cost waste	m	2,006	1,586	2,270	1,980	1,200	768	667	51	—	10,529
Meters operating cost ore	m	5,734	5,938	6,169	6,294	3,435	2,530	1,510	590	—	32,199
Waste mined	kt	534	487	496	368	89	140	137	19	—	2,270

Note:  numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑2: Underground Mining Equipment

Equipment Type	Make/Model	Peak Number
Wheel loader	Caterpillar R1700G, R1600G, R1700K; Sandvik Toro 006, Toro 1400; Atlas Copco ST1030	21
Articulated truck	Caterpillar AD45B, AD30; Sandvik T40D;	19
Mine truck	Atlas Copco MT42	4
Boltecs	Atlas Copco B235, Boltecs	11
Boltmaster	Atlas Copco RDH, 200EH	1
Drills	Atlas Copco 1254, M4CITH, J281, J282, S1D; Redpath 40S; Boart Longyear Stope Mate; Termite AQTK; Ingetrol 60E, 75E, Minitroner	22
Cabletec	Atlas Copco Cabletec LC	2
ANFO	Getman A64; RDH 150H	5
Concrete/shotcrete	EJC concrete mixer, 415; RDH 600R; Normet LF600, SB307, BS7622; Kubota; Transcrete P20 pump;	21
Auxiliary (pallet, scissor, utili lifts)	Getman A64; Marcotte M40; RDH 600R; Normet MF540	12
Motor grader	Caterpillar 120K	1
Telehandler	Caterpillar TL1255, TL1255D	11
Backhoe loader	Caterpillar 430D, 450E, 420F
Lube truck	Getman A64; RDH	3
Pallet handler	Getman A64	1
Forklift	Caterpillar R80T	1

Table 13‑3: Surface Mining Equipment

Item	Manufacturer	Model	Number
Loader	Caterpillar	988H	2
Loader	Caterpillar	992G, 992K	3
Truck	Caterpillar	777F	11
Truck	Caterpillar	740E	4
Water Truck	Caterpillar	770F	1
Lube Truck	Caterpillar	725E	1
Grader	Caterpillar	140H, 140M, 14H	3
Excavator	Caterpillar	315D, 330D, 336D2, 365C	4
Dozer	Caterpillar	D10T, D4G, D5K2, D9T	7
Compactor	Caterpillar	CS536D, E	2
Integrated Tool Carrier	Caterpillar	IT62H	1
Mobile Crusher	Metso	LT106	2
Backhoe Loader	Caterpillar	420F2	2
Drill	Atlas Copco	CM780	1
Telehandler	Caterpillar, JCB	Various models	5
Forklift	Caterpillar	DP40K, P5000	3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

14.0 RECOVERY METHODS

14.1 Process Method Selection

The process design is based on a combination of metallurgical test work, study designs and industry-standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities through the operational history of the plant since operations startup in 2007.  The design is conventional to the silver and gold industry and has no novel parameters.

14.2 Process Plant

The processing plant is located immediately south and overlooks the village of Palmarejo at an elevation of approximately 880 m.  The plant is designed to operate 365 days per year at 91.3% availability.  The plant design mill throughput is 6,000 t/day of ore with upgrades providing a nominal throughput up to 7,000 t/day.

14.3 Flowsheet

A schematic of the flowsheet is provided as Figure 14‑1.

14.4 Plant Operations

The flow sheet consists of a standard crushing and grinding circuit (jaw crusher, semi-autogenous grind (SAG) mill and ball mill), followed by flotation circuit, where the flotation concentrate is directed to a sequence of clarification tanks then to agitated cyanidation tanks.  Floatation tailings are directed to and treated in agitated cyanidation tanks.  A Merrill Crowe circuit is used to recover gold and silver from the leachates of concentrate and tailings solutions through a carbon in leach (CIL)- absorption, desorption, recovery (ADR) system.

14.4.1 Crushing

Ore is delivered from the underground mines to a ROM stockpile located adjacent to the primary crusher area and feed to the primary crusher dump hopper.  The dump hopper has a fixed grizzly on top with an approximate opening of 51 cm and an apron feeder at the discharge.  The ROM is fed with a front-end loader with secondary breakage using a rockhammer for oversize to the crusher.  The primary crusher is a Nordberg C-140 jaw crusher with an approximate opening of 1.1 m x 1.4 m capable of handling 350 t/hr at a 12.7 cm close side setting.

Crushed ore is discharged vertically from the jaw crusher onto a conveyor and delivered to a 1,250-t capacity interim coarse ore stockpile.  Two variable vibrating feeders reclaim the crushed ore through a vertical feed onto a belt conveyor for delivery to the SAG mill for grinding.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 14‑1: Process Flowsheet

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

14.4.2 Grinding

Coarse ore from the primary crusher is directly fed to the grinding circuit from the interim crushed ore stockpile.  The grinding circuit consists of a SAG mill and a ball mill operating in a circuit with a series of cyclones for classification and passing to flotation or return to grind.  Both mills are 6.7 m in diameter and 7.5 m long equipped with 2,500 kW motors.  The grinding circuit feed and product is controlled and varied depending on ore type and blend from the mines.

The cyclone battery consists of nine 203 cm Krebs cyclones with an apex opening of 10.8 cm and vortex opening of 15.2 cm.  Cyclone operational pressure is maintained in a range from 96–110 kPa.  The cyclone battery underflow reports to the ball mill to maintain a recirculating load to have better control of the flotation feed size, while the cyclone overflow reports to flotation.

14.4.3 Flotation

The ball mill cyclone overflows at a nominal P80 minus 75 µm in size with a pulp density of 30% solids flows by gravity to the rougher flotation conditioner tank, where the slurry is conditioned with Aero 404 and potassium amyl xanthate (PAX).  The conditioner tank overflows to feed a bank of five 100 m³ capacity rougher flotation cells.  Rougher flotation occurs at the first bank of two tank cells, and scavenger flotation occurs sequentially down the bank.  Frother and PAX are added to rougher feed and during the scavenging flotation.

Rougher flotation concentrates report either to the cleaner concentrate tank, where they are combined with the cleaner concentrate, or to the scavenger concentrate tank, where they are combined with the scavenger concentrate.  Scavenger concentrate reports to a bank of two 17 m³ capacity cells where the first cleaner stage is provided.  The first cleaner concentrate reports to a conditioning tank for additional reagents adjustment, and then flows to a bank of three 17 m³ capacity cells, where the final cleaner flotation is obtained.  The final cleaner concentrate is pumped to the concentrate thickener for dewatering.  The concentrate thickener overflow reports to the grinding circuit as recycled water.  The thickener underflow, at approximately 65% solids, is pumped to the concentrate leach circuit for intense cyanide mixing and agitation.  The blended solution is passed to the clarifiers for final processing as discussed in Chapter 14.4.4.

Cleaner flotation tailings are recycled to the rougher flotation conditioner tank or alternatively to the 3^rd rougher cell for additional treatment.

Flotation underflow is transferred to a thickener for dewatering with the fluid overflow reporting back to the grinding circuit as recycled water.  Thickener underflow, at approximately 60% solids, is transferred to an agitated leach circuit for cyanide leaching and dissolution of residual gold and silver values to be recovered in the ADR circuit discussed in Chapter 14.4.6.

14.4.4 Flotation Concentrate Leaching

The concentrate leaching circuit is located in the leaching/recovery area of the mill facilities and is comprised of four agitated leach tanks, each with a nominal capacity of 200 m^3, providing a total average leaching time of roughly 48 hours.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Thickened flotation concentrate is diluted from 65% solids to approximately 50% solids and sodium cyanide solution is added to maintain a concentration of 10 g/L NaCN.  The plant switched from air injection using compressors prior to 2019 to liquid oxygen which is injected into the concentrate solution to enhance the silver-CN bonding process at lower cyanidation rates resulting in lower cyanide consumption and reduced power.

The mixed concentrate is pumped from the concentrate leach circuit to a triple stage countercurrent clarification (CCD) circuit to recover the gold and silver bonded to the cyanide in solution.  Each stage consists of a high-rate, 9.0 m diameter clarifier-thickener and an inter-stage mixing tank to enhance washing efficiency.  Pregnant solution containing the recoverable metal is collected from the overflow at the first CCD thickener. This solution is pumped to the pregnant solution tank for delivery to the Merrill Crowe circuit at the refinery building for metal extraction.  Thickened underflow from the final CCD thickener is pumped to an agitated leach circuit with the flotation underflow for additional leaching and potential recovery of residual metal values.

14.4.5 Flotation Tailings Leaching

The flotation tailings leaching circuit is also located in the leaching/recovery area of the mill facilities.

The leach circuit comprises a total of eight leach tanks.  The tanks each have different capacities, ranging from 2,000 m³ to 1,162 m³ for tanks No. 1 and No. 8, respectively, providing an overall retention time of 24 hours.

Activated carbon is introduced to the last four tanks of the circuit (tanks 4 to 8) with the main objective of capture dissolved gold and silver values content in solution before it is transferred to the final tailing thickener.  The loaded carbon is washed, bagged, and shipped to an outside refinery facility for processing.

Thickened flotation tails are pumped to the tailings leach circuit.  The slurry is combined with the concentrate leached residue; the slurry is diluted to approximately 42% solids, and the sodium cyanide solution and lime slurry are added along with injected oxygen through the agitator shafts in Tank No. 1 and compressed air for tanks No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, No. 5 and No. 7.

Liquid oxygen is injected in tank No. 1.  The liquid oxygen has proven success enhancing silver-cyanide leaching reaction resulting in additional silver values extraction and a significant cyanide consumption reduction.  The leaching circuit tailings slurry is transferred to the cyanide detoxification circuit.

14.4.6 Carbon Desorption

This circuit was re-introduced the second quarter of 2018.  Prior to this the carbon was shipped to external refineries from 2016–2018. The circuit was upgraded with an ADR stripping circuit to support recovery improvement efforts on the flotation tailings circuit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

14.4.7 Carbon Regeneration

As part of the carbon desorption and ADR project in 2018, a carbon regeneration furnace was added to reduce carbon consumption by reactivating stripped carbon.  This system was active through 2021.

14.4.8 Merrill Crowe and Refining

Pregnant solution from the flotation concentrate leach CCD first thickener overflow is pumped to one of three batch solution tanks, and then pumped to the primary Merrill Crowe system.  The primary Merrill Crowe circuit capacity is 83 m³/hr.

A secondary Merrill Crowe unit handles low-grade pregnant solution from the floatation tailings leach circuit.  The final tailings thickener overflow is the source of this low-grade pregnant solution, which is pumped throughout the secondary Merrill Crowe circuit.  The secondary Merrill Crowe circuit has a capacity of 175 m³/hr.  The secondary Merrill Crowe system was designed to handle higher grade pregnant solution from the flotation concentrate leach CCD circuit.

In the Merrill Crowe process, total suspended solids are first removed from the pregnant solution using a series of clarification filters.  The clarified pregnant solution is routed to a deaeration tower to impact a bed of high-surface area plastic tower packing. As the solution travels down the packing, dissolved oxygen is removed from the solution and routed through the vacuum system piping to the vacuum pump, and then to the atmosphere.  The dissolved oxygen is removed to a concentration of approximately to <0.7 ppm.  Once the pregnant solution has been clarified and de-aerated, it is ready for precious metal precipitation by zinc cementation.  The precipitated gold and silver resulting from the zinc cementation reactions are routed to the precipitate filters.  The spent solution is pumped back to different points of the flotation tailings leaching circuit and/or the concentrate leach circuit for slurry washing and dilution.

The precipitate produced by Merrill Crowe is dried in two electrical dryer ovens before being smelted in a 600 kg/hr capacity electric induction furnace and poured into 30 kg doré ingots.  Dore ingots are shipped directly to an offsite refinery.

14.4.9 Cyanide Detoxification

Flotation tailings leaching slurry at approximately 48% solids is transferred to a tailings thickener for water and cyanide recovery purposes, prior to delivery to the cyanide detoxification circuit.  Thickener overflow is pumped to the secondary Merrill Crowe circuit or recycled back to the leaching circuit, while the thickened underflow is pumped to two 534 m³ capacity agitated tanks in series for detoxification.

The final tailings detoxification circuit is based on the use of trademarked cyanide destruction reagents and oxygen for neutralization of slurry prior to final thickening and disposal in the tailing's facility.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

14.5 Equipment Sizing

The equipment is sized for a design plant throughput of 5,500–7,000 t/d mill feed.  Variability is built into the design to address ranges of grade and grind indices.

The major equipment list is provided in Table 14‑1.

14.6 Power and Consumables

The average monthly electrical power consumption is 6,218 MWhrs at a cost of $0.081/kWhr.  Power is supplied by the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE).

The processing circuit cycles approximately 6,650 m³ of water daily; this consists of approximately 650 m³ of fresh water from a local dam and the remaining 6,000 m³ being water reclaimed from the TSF and reused in the mill.

The consumables used in the process include:

• Xanthate;

• Frother;

• Aerofloat 404;

• Sodium cyanide;

• Lime;

• Flocculant;

• Activated carbon;

• Sodium hydroxide;

• Hydrochloric acid;

• Zinc;

• Diatomaceous earth;

• Neutralite;

• Liquid oxygen.

14.7 Personnel

The personnel requirements in the process plant for the LOM total 128.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑1: Major Equipment List

Area	Equipment
Primary crusher	Jaw crusher is a Nordberg C-140 (350 t/hr)
Grinding area	Allis Chalmer SAG and Ball mills, 6.7 m in diameter and 7.5 m length (250 t/hr)
Classification area	Cyclone battery consists of nine 203cm Krebs cyclones
Flotation area	Six 100 m3 capacity tank cells.  Rougher flotation occurs at the first bank of two tank cells, and scavenger flotation occurs sequentially down the bank. The cleaners bank consists of two 17 m3 capacity cells where the first cleaner stage is provided. Then the first cleaner concentrate reports to a conditioning tank for additional reagents adjustment, and then flows to a bank of three 17 m3 capacity cells
Flotation concentrate leaching	The leach area is comprised of four agitation leach tanks for flotation concentrate, each with a nominal capacity of 200 m3.  Leached slurry from the concentrate leach circuit is then pumped to a triple-stage countercurrent decantation circuit. Each stage consists of a high rate, 9.0 m diameter clarifier
Flotation tailings leaching	The leach circuit comprises a total of eight leach tanks.  The tanks each have different capacities, ranging from 2,000 m3 to 1,162 m3 for tanks No. 1 and No. 8, respectively. Leached slurry from the tailing leach circuit is then pumped to a double stage countercurrent decantation. Each stage consists of a high rate, 23.0 m diameter clarifier (thickener)
ADR circuit	The ADR comprises an acid wash column, elution column, and regeneration kiln, for process 4 of carbon tons per cycle.
Merrill Crowe	Pregnant solution from the flotation concentrate leach countercurrent decantation is pumped to a Merrill Crowe system (#1) at a flow rate ranging from 85–92 m3/hr. Pregnant solution from the flotation tailing leach countercurrent decantation is pumped to a second Merrill Crowe system (#2), at a flow rate ranging from 285–295 m3/hr.
Cyanide detoxification	Thickened underflow is pumped to two 534 m3 capacity agitated tanks in series

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

15.0 INFRASTRUCTURE

15.1 Introduction

Infrastructure to support operations is in place, and includes:

• Three operating underground mines:

o Underground ventilation systems, including ventilation fans, raises, primary bulkheads, airlock doors and booster fans;

o Settling sumps and primary pump stations;

o Blasting agent and explosives magazines;

o Electrical substations and switch gears;

o High and low voltage electrical cabling;

o Mine communications system leaky feeder and fiber optic;

o Cabling for central blasting system;

o Underground lunchrooms and portable refuge stations;

o Underground maintenance facilities (electrical and equipment);

o Secondary egress raises with ladders;

o Mine services (piping for dewatering, process water and compressed air);

o Compressed air plant;

• Two shotcrete mixing plants;

• Backfill cement mixing plant;

• ROM pads at the mine portal areas and plant;

• Process plant;

• TSF and associated tailings pipelines, pumps and tailings water return infrastructure;

• Heavy and lift vehicle maintenance facilities (underground and surface);

• Materials storage areas and laydown facilities;

• Various support facilities including warehouse, administration, contractor and temporary offices, raw water storage, fuel storage, core processing facilities, clinic and emergency response facilities, gatehouse, change rooms, personnel training facilities, information technology (IT) communications setups and towers, environmental monitoring facilities, sewage treatment plants, and reagents shed;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Electrical substations and power transmission lines, including an overhead high voltage power line from the main substation near the Palmarejo process plant to the Guadalupe substation and associated electrical substations and switch gear;

• Emergency powerhouse with 12 diesel generators;

• Gravel airstrip;

• Water treatment plant;

• Water pipelines and pumping stations;

• Mine permanent camp and contractor facilities and kitchens.

An infrastructure layout map is provided as Figure 15‑1.

15.2 Roads and Logistics

Road access to the operations is discussed in Chapter 4.2.

The state road between San Rafael and Palmarejo was upgraded in late 2007 for the mobilization of equipment and construction materials.  Coeur Mexicana maintains this road on an on-going basis to support majority of logistic material delivery to support operations along this route.  A secondary poorly maintained route exists to the west through Chínipas to the state of Sonora, which provides limited access for material and site personnel.  Coeur also constructed and maintains the access/ore haulage road from the Guadalupe and Independencia portals to the Palmarejo process plant.  The road allows CAT 777F haul truck transit used as primary transport or ore from the mine portals to the ROM stockpiles located at the process plant.

15.3 Stockpiles

The Palmarejo Operations currently maintain limited ROM stockpiles with multistage load-transport-feed sequencing to manage blending at the mine and plant.  A set of stockpiles are located at the mine portals at Independencia and Guadalupe. And larger pad areas are located to the south of the primary crusher at the plant site.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Figure 15‑1: Infrastructure Layout Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2020.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

15.4 Waste Rock Storage Facilities

A series of WRSFs are located at the currently closed Palmarejo open pit operation.  No mine waste has been added to the WRSFs since 2015 when the pit was closed.  Waste is currently being excavated and processed to support backfill operations underground.  Following the current LOM underground plan these WRSFs will continue to be excavated to support waste rock and cemented backfill requirements underground and surface projects, including tailings raises, road works, and various civil projects to support on-going operations.

15.5 Tailings Storage Facilities

The TSF was constructed and commissioned in 2010.  It is a zoned downstream earthfill dam with progressively coarser fill zones to reduce seepage and facilitate seepage collection with the finest zone adjacent to the upstream slope and the coarsest zone adjacent to the downstream slope.  The upstream slope is constructed at 2H:1V and lined with a high-density polyethylene geomembrane and keyed into the foundation materials.  The downstream slope is also 2H:1V.  Instrumentation installed include vibrating wire piezometers, vibrating wire settlement plates, and survey prisms.  The facility has been raised through a series of stages with the current Stage 5 scheduled for completion in May, 2022.  An emergency spillway was constructed in mid-2021 to support final design and closure requirements.

The initial stage created a crest elevation of 790 m and was raised to 818 m in four stages using the downstream construction method.  The fifth stage is currently being constructed to raise the crest elevation to 823 m in three stages (5a, 5b, and 5c) using a modified-centerline construction method.  The facility is projected to reach capacity in Q1 2023 at a capacity of 15.4 Mm³, by which time the operation will transition to disposal of tailings in the mined-out Palmarejo open pit.  A follow-up design of Stage 6 was completed to support a 1.5 m raise and eight months of storage capacity as contingency to support this transition.

The proposed TSF facility in the abandoned open pit will include an underdrain system within the abandoned underground below the pit, surface tailings discharge and pump-back systems, and a high compression thickener to provided high solids tails and increased water recovery.

15.6 Water Management Structures

The three primary water management structures located at the TSF are a freshwater diversion dam, freshwater diversion channel, and an environmental control dam.

The freshwater diversion dam is a zoned earthfill dam constructed to divert a large drainage around the tailings basin and provide limited permitted water support to the plant.  A bituminous geomembrane is installed on the upstream face of the freshwater diversion dam as erosion protection and seepage control.  Construction of the freshwater diversion dam was completed in 2009 and filling of the freshwater diversion dam basin commenced immediately thereafter.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

The freshwater diversion channel was constructed to convey stormwater from the freshwater diversion dam basin around the tailings pond to the environmental control dam basin located downstream of the tailings facility.  Construction of the freshwater diversion channel was completed in 2009–2010.  The channel apex is located approximately 10 m below the top of the freshwater diversion dam to accommodate and control flood release during heavy rain events.

The environmental control dam is a roller-compacted concrete dam constructed to provide a single collection and discharge location for all potentially impacted flow from the diversion and lateral streams entering the basin.  The dam was designed as an overtopping structure with a stepped spillway constructed on the downstream face under high flow conditions.  The facility is managed dry during most of the year with underflow pipe to manage and release smaller flows and maintain flow through within the basin.  Construction of the environmental control dam was completed in June 2009.  Since the dam was constructed, flow over the environmental control dam spillway has occurred serval times periodically during the wet season.  Since 2018, the underflow drain has remained open to eliminate long term storage and limit the topping to a single event.

In 2016, a water treatment plant was constructed to treat and release excess water from the tailings pond.  A water discharge permit obtained from the Mexican National Water Regulatory Agency (CONAGUA) allows discharge of a maximum of 2.0 Mm³/a of treated water into a downstream creek.  The water treatment system can treat the outstanding water over balance in the TSF and comply with water quality requirements as per the CONAGUA permit.

Groundwater from the underground mines is collected in level sumps constructed in the underground mines.  The collected water is drained and pumped to central collection sumps in each mine to allow suspended solids to settle before it is pumped to a surface treatment plant, constructed in 2019, for further clarification.  The water is then cycled both back to the underground mine to support operations, and to the plant, via a pipeline constructed in 2020, to support process at the plant.

15.7 Water Supply

Water for the process facilities is obtained from a variety of sources.  Reclaimed water from the wet tailings including underflow collection is recycled back to the plant from the TSF.  When needed, additional make-up water is pumped from the underground mines, additional subsurface sources from areas wells, limited permit options from the freshwater diversion dam, and a pump station located at the Chínipas River.

Domestic use water is purchased from local municipalities or is trucked to site from various stations that hold water sourced from the Chínipas River.  All gray water is stored and blended for use in the process cycle at the plant.

15.8 Camps and Accommodation

The mine camp facilities and kitchen support the requirements of the workforce.  Contractors and employees live at the camp while working on site.  The camp has a capacity of 532 beds.  Satellite camp complexes accommodate housekeeping, security, and kitchen staff with a capacity of 126 beds.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

15.9 Power and Electrical

The main substation for the Palmarejo Operations has a 115 kV/13.8 kV transformer, with capacity of 20/25 mVA (one in back up).  The system includes a 66 km overhead 115 kV distribution line ceded to the CFE that was built in 2009.  The process plant and all other electrical loads are connected to this grid.  The overall power requirement for the operation is 18 MW, and the maximum capacity of the current infrastructure is 21 MW.

A 5.9 km-long power line is in place from the main substation to the Guadalupe and Independencia mines, with capacity for 115 kV, although it is currently operating on 13.8 kV.  This infrastructure will allow for power capacity expansion in the future.  Substations have been constructed on the surface at the Guadalupe and Independencia mines, and underground at the La Nación mine.  The estimated capacity for Guadalupe, Independencia, and La Nación complexes (at full production) is approximately 5.0 MW.

An emergency powerhouse is located near the process plant and contains 12 diesel generators that operate during main power outages.  The total installed emergency power capacity is 21.9 MW, which is sufficient for LOM requirements.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

16.0 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

16.1 Markets

No market studies are currently relevant as the Palmarejo Operations consist of operating mines producing a readily-saleable commodity in the form of doré.  Gold and silver are freely traded, at prices that are widely known, and the prospects for the sale of any production are well understood.

Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

There are no agency relationships relevant to the marketing strategies used.

Product valuation is included in the economic analysis in Chapter 19 and is based on a combination of the metallurgical recovery, commodity pricing, and consideration of processing charges.

Coeur sells its payable silver and gold production on behalf of its subsidiaries on a spot or forward basis, primarily to multi-national banks and bullion trading houses.  Markets for both silver and gold bullion are highly liquid, and the loss of a single trading counterparty would not impact Coeur’s ability to sell its bullion.

Coeur’s strategy on hedging silver and gold is focused on providing downside protection.  To accomplish that, the company may enter into derivative contracts to protect the selling price for a certain portion of the production if terms are attractive.

To mitigate the risks associated with gold and silver price fluctuations, Coeur may enter into option contracts to hedge future production.  Coeur is targeting to hedge up to 50% of expected gold production through 2021 and 2022 and may in the future layer on additional hedges as circumstances warrant.

16.2 Commodity Price Forecasts

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves: US$1,400 US$/oz;

• Mineral resources:  US$1,700 US$/oz;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

The long-term silver price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves: US$20.00/oz;

• Mineral resources:  US$22.00/oz.

The price forecasts used in the cashflow analysis for gold vary from US$1,400/oz to US$1,750/oz and US$22/oz to $US24/oz for silver.

All commodity prices are advised by the corporate investment committee and revised as necessary throughout the budget and forecast process.  This guidance is used to keep all sites using the same basis for revenue.  The sites do not advise prices or deviate from the prices provided.

16.3 Contracts

The Palmarejo Operations produce silver and gold doré, which is transported from the mine site to the refinery by a secure transportation provider.  The transportation cost consists of a fixed charge plus a liability charge based on the declared value of the shipment and is approximately $0.065/oz of doré shipped.

Coeur Mexicana has contracts with one U.S. based refiner and one Switzerland-based refiner, which refine the Palmarejo Operations’ doré bars into silver and gold bullion. The bullion meets certain benchmark standards set by the London Bullion Market Association, which regulates the acceptable requirements for bullion traded in the London precious metals markets.  The terms of these contracts include:

• A treatment charge based on the weight of the doré bars received at the refinery;

• A metal return percentage applied to recoverable gold;

• A metal return percentage applied to recoverable silver;

• Penalties charged for deleterious elements contained in the doré bars.  The total of these charges can range from $0.30–$0.40/oz doré.

Currently, there are contracts in place at the Palmarejo Operations to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, raise boring, ground support suppliers and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  These contracts are periodically put up for bid or negotiated to ensure the rates remain favorable to Coeur.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

16.4 QP Statement

For the purposes of the gold and silver price forecasts used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, the QPs reviewed the corporate pricing provided by Coeur, and accepted these prices as reasonable.  The reviews included checking the pricing used in technical reports recently filed with Canadian regulatory authorities, pricing reported by major mining company peers in recent public filings, the current spot gold and silver pricing, and three-year trailing average pricing.

The US$1,400/oz Au and US$20/oz Ag prices are considered to be a reasonable forecast for the nine-year mine life envisaged in the mine plan.  The US$1,700/oz Au and US$22/oz Ag mineral resource price is, as noted, selected to ensure that the mineral reserves are a subset of the mineral resources and assume that there is sufficient time in the nine-year mine life forecast for the mineral reserves for the mineral resources to potentially be converted to mineral reserves.

Overall, the QPs conclude that there is sufficient time in the nine-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecasts for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, testwork and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates or upgrade the confidence categories that are currently assigned.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

17.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS

17.1 Introduction

The environmental permitting process in Mexico requires the presentation of two different documents at the federal level: an Environmental Impact Statement (MIA in the Spanish acronym) and a Land Use Change (CUS in the Spanish acronym).  These documents are reviewed and approved by Mexico’s environmental authority SEMARNAT.  In addition, authorization from CONAGUA is needed for water use, effluent discharge, and for the construction of facilities in federal watersheds.

17.2 Baseline and Supporting Studies

Baseline studies and monitoring reports were required for each mine permit obtained.

Several environmental studies were completed in support of permitting activities.  These studies included:

• Air quality;

• Weather;

• Landscape;

• Seismicity and natural hazards;

• Groundwater and surface water quality;

• Biodiversity, terrestrial and aquatic;

• Soils characteristic, uses, and potential use;

• Noise and vibration;

• Geochemical mineral waste characterization;

• Archaeology/cultural heritage;

• Socioeconomics and cultural aspects.

17.3 Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs

Coeur Mexicana conducts routine monitoring of physical and biological parameters required in the MIA approval resolution and the MIA document itself.  These include groundwater and surface water quality, air quality, emissions to the air, biodiversity, water discharges, etc.  Results from these monitoring activities are presented to the authorities through their official digital platform.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

As part of the environmental management program of the Palmarejo Operations, there is a continuous evaluation of the acid rock drainage (ARD) potential for waste rock and tailings in the extraction process.  The initial ARD testing by Environmental Geochemistry International Pty Ltd. in 2005 indicated a very low ARD potential for waste rock and tailings.

In 2012, a long-term humidity cell test was conducted on composite tailings samples to assess the potential for the generation of acid.  Results from testing conclusively indicate that pre-2012 tailings deposited in the TSF will not present problems with acid generation.  Additional studies conducted in 2016 and 2017 indicate that the potential for acid generation of the tailings in the TSF is low and that the tailings are essentially anoxic and incapable of oxidizing while inundated with water.

In November 2017, Knight Piésold collected samples from tailings and waste rock as part of their Site Wide Closure Plan, including samples from Guadalupe and Independencia.  From their study, Knight Piésold concluded that the samples collected are not potentially acid generating nor metal leaching and do not pose a threat to the environment.

Coeur continuously updates the information with data from the material mined from the underground operations.  Concurrent sampling and paste pH testing of the underground works at Guadalupe and Independencia support the absence of ARD and the strong neutralization potential of the waste rock.

Wildlife and biodiversity monitoring is conducted by CIMA Consultores, a Chihuahua-based consulting firm, four times during the year.  The most recent study was conducted in August and reported on September 2021.

17.4 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

The SEMARNAT Environmental and Forestry Authorizations for the Project and NOM-141-SEMARNAT-2003 requires a restoration and monitoring program for mining areas that will recover the soil for landscape restitution and restore pre-mining land-use and ecosystem conditions.

Coeur conducts an annual review of its potential reclamation responsibilities company wide.  A site-wide Closure Plan was prepared by Knight Piésold Consulting in December 2017.  This document served as the base for potential closure and reclamation cost estimation, prepared by KC Harvey Environmental in October 2021.  The 2021 year-end closure assessment for the actual disturbance for final reclamation at the Palmarejo Operations, is estimated at US$40.6 M.

17.5 Permitting

17.5.1 Environmental Impact Statements

Coeur Mexicana submitted its initial MIA for Palmarejo in March 2008 (Palmarejo Phase 1) and received its first environmental authorization from SEMARNAT in May 2008 for a period of 13 years (including 11 years of operation and two years for closure and reclamation).  This authorization covered the Palmarejo Phase 1 project that included all production facilities (process plant, tailings area, most waste deposits, open pit and underground facilities), for a total of 378 ha.  Under the first environmental license, Coeur was authorized to operate Palmarejo until May 2017, followed by two years of reclamation activities until May 2019.  This first authorization was extended for an additional 6.5 years in 2017 and is valid for production through October 2023 followed by a two-year closure period.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Coeur Mexicana filed for, and received, approval for a second environmental authorization (Palmarejo Phase 2) for an additional 290.34 ha, which was issued in 2010 for 10 years, ending in December 2020.  This authorization was extended for five additional years and is valid through November 2025.

Coeur Mexicana submitted separate MIAs for some aspects of the Palmarejo Operations, including:

• Development of the Guadalupe and Independencia mines for an additional 43.93 ha, expiring on November 2023 plus the closure stage;

• Construction of a haul road between Palmarejo and Guadalupe covering 4.38 ha, expires November 2027;

• The power line and electric substation for Guadalupe, covering 6.47 ha, expires October 2025;

• The Guadalupe and Independencia South Portal, expires June 2027;

• Water treatment plant, expires May 2023;

• Los Gavilanes–El Guamuchil aqueduct, expires December 2028.

As noted in Chapter 3.7.1, Coeur has initiated the process of obtaining an MIA-R.  In late July 2021, SEMARNAT requested additional information to the MIA-R document.  This was supplied by Coeur on August 10, 2021.  It is expected that the MIA-R will be approved in the first quarter of 2022.  When approved the MIA-R will add 10 additional years to the current present environmental license, will consolidate 13 different authorizations under a single global license, and will include all new facilities and mine development expected for the LOM in this Report.

17.5.2 Change in Land Use Authorizations

Following the acceptance of the various MIAs, a vegetation disturbance permit or change in land use authorization (Cambio de Uso de Suelo, or CUS) was applied for.  The original Palmarejo Phase I CUS was approved in 2008 for a period of 10 years, and then extended in 2016 for five additional (Dec 2021) years covering 327.3 ha for land disturbance.  Concurrently, Palmarejo Phase II has a CUS approval for 290.34 ha, granted in 2010 for a seven-year period, extended for additional 3.5 years until December 2021.  To date, the Project has CUS approval for mining activities over a total of 723 ha, including 668 ha for Palmarejo, 43 ha for Guadalupe, and 12 ha for other related facilities.  The operations also have CUS approval for 3.8 ha for exploration activities at La Patria.

The Phase I MIA and corresponding CUS authorizations were extended by SEMARNAT through a relatively simple notification procedure for additional time equivalent to one-half of the initial authorized period.  In the case of Palmarejo Phase I MIA, this represents 6.5 years of additional environmental authorization, starting May 2019.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

The CUS is an authorization to clear natural vegetation and within the Phase I and Phase II areas, required areas were cleared during the construction phase. There is no need to further extend these authorizations. If additional land disturbance for mining activities is required, it can be added through a new CUS request.  Payment to the Forestry Fund, in accordance with the additional disturbance, would be required.

17.5.3 Current Permits

Coeur Mexicana was granted full authorization for open pit and underground gold and silver mining activities within the areas outlined in the different MIAs.  This includes permits for exploration, construction, and operation of the underground gold and silver mines, and land use/disturbance permits.  The key authorizations and their terms are summarized in Table 17‑1.  The authorizations required for production are in good standing.

Current permitting includes the cyanide leaching process, refining and cyanide detoxification of the tailings prior to TSF discharge.  In 2012, SEMARNAT set a specific limit for cyanide concentrations in the tailings disposed in the TSF; this limit is consistent with other Coeur operations at 50 ppm weakly acid-dissociable cyanide.  Coeur continues to meet the standards recommended in the International Cyanide Management Code.

All MIAs will expire prior to the planned end of mine life except one, “MIA Culvert extension at GPE”.  Coeur is in the process of obtaining a new environmental license, MIA-R (refer to discussion in Chapter 17.5.1), to cover the remining LOM.

17.6 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur actively engages with the local community with a series of cultural social and economic programs divided into four main categories:

• Local hiring and local purchases:  through the apprentice program, local youth are trained for different job opportunities and several of the apprentices are hired by the company. Priority is given to local providers and contractors;

• House improvement program:  the community relations group together with the projects department has developed the house improvement program that consists of community house roof and floor repair, installation of rainwater collection systems, backyard vegetable gardens, fruit tree donations, and hen coops for egg supply;

• Social investment in vulnerable groups:  families with vulnerable members are supported through a series of social programs: a) the 65+ program for vulnerable elderly through the sale of scrap metal, b) grocery donation programs;

• Productive community programs: a) handcrafted soap and shampoo, b) herbs and medicinal plants/ointments and creams.

The surrounding communities are supportive of the Palmarejo Operations, and the employment and benefits that the mines provide.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑1: Granted Authorizations

Authorization Name	Granting Authority	Date Granted	Term Granted	Comment
MIA Palmarejo I	SEMARNAT	23-May-06	29-Oct-25	Extended for 7.5 years.  Production until May 29, 2023, followed by closure period up to Oct 29, 2025.
CUS Palmarejo I	SEMARNAT	14-Jul-08	31-Dec-21
MIA Palmarejo II	SEMARNAT	7-Dec-10	16-Nov-25	Extended for 5 years.  Operative until Nov 16th 2023 plus 2 year closure up to Nov 16 2025
CUS Palmarejo II	SEMARNAT	3-Nov-10	03-Nov-21
MIA Guadalupe I	SEMARNAT	24-Sep-10	26-Nov-23	Plus 2 years of closure stage.
CUS Guadalupe I	SEMARNAT	26-Nov-10	26-Nov-19	No extension required. No additional soil use changes necessary.
CUS Guadalupe II	SEMARNAT	27-Feb-13	16-Apr-17	No extension required. No additional soil use changes necessary.
MIA Hauling Road I	SEMARNAT	30-May-11	11-Jan-15	New MIA approved on 11 Nov 2015 for hauling road expansion.
CUS Hauling Road I	SEMARNAT	11-Jul-11	11-Jul-16	No extension required
CUS Hauling Road II	SEMARNAT	8-May-14	8-May-16	No extension required
MIA WTP FTD	SEMARNAT	31-May-13	31-May-23	Authorization for PTAR 3 operation, located at FTD, not included in previous MIAs
MIA ICA/GPE S Portal	SEMARNAT	4-Mar-16	16-Jun-27
CUS ICA/GPE S Portal	SEMARNAT	16-Jun-16	16-Jun-26
MIA Power Line GPE	SEMARNAT	19-Mar-15	15-Oct-25
CUS Power Line GPE	SEMARNAT	23-Jun-15	15-Oct-17	No extension required
MIA Water line Gavilanes-Guamuchil	SEMARNAT	5-Dec-08	5-Dec-28
MIA Borrow Materials Area	SEMARNAT	6-Feb-18	6-Feb-22	3.5 ha), to use in FTD Stage 5 construction in 2018.  No extension required.
CUS Borrow Materials Area	SEMARNAT	8-Aug-18	8-Aug-22
MIA PJO-GPE Hauling Road Expansion	SEMARNAT	11-Nov-15	19-Nov-27
CUS PJO-GPE Haul Road Expansion	SEMARNAT	13-Aug-18	13-Aug-21	No extension required
MIA Deposit dredged material from ECD	SEMARNAT	10-Apr-18	10-Apr-28	Material dredged from environmental control dam and freshwater diversion channel stabilization
CUS Deposit dredged material from ECD	SEMARNAT	13-Aug-18	13-Aug-21	No extension required
MIA Culvert extension at GPE	SEMARNAT	6-Jun-18	6-Jun-48
CUS Culvert extension at GPE	SEMARNAT	28-Aug-18	28-Aug-20	No extension required
CUS Spillway construction	SEMARNAT	30-Apr-19	30-Apr-20	No extension required
CUS modification for Spillway	SEMARNAT	30-Apr-19	30-Apr-20	No extension required
Water extraction permit, location change	CONAGUA	16-Nov-14	16-Nov-34	Water extraction license modification, relocation from environmental control dam embankment to freshwater dam embankment.
Water well	CONAGUA	9-Jun-17	9-Jun-27	Water extraction license for 189,216 m3/year. Valid for 10 years.
Water discharge permit, PTAR 3	CONAGUA	25-Feb-16	25-Feb-26	Discharge permit for Palmarejo tailings area, water treatment plant PTAR3. Authorized discharge volume: 2,628,000 m3/year
Water discharge permit, PTAR 1	CONAGUA	28-Jan-09	28-Jan-24	water treatment plant authorized discharge volume: 34,700 m3/year
Water discharge permit, PTAR 2	CONAGUA	3-Aug-12	3-Aug-22	Water treatment plant authorized discharge volume: 37,250 m3/year
Explosive use and storage	SEDENA	1-Jan-21	31-Dec-22	Secretaria de la Defensa Naciónal (SEDENA) Permit # 4361-Chih.
Sanitary Landfill	SEDUE	23-Apr-19	30-Apr-24	Secretaría de Desarrrollo Urbano y Ecológico (SEDUE)

Note:  Acronyms used in table:  MIA: Manifestación de Impacto Ambiental or Environmental Impact Statement; CUS: Cambio de uso del suelo or soil change use for vegetation clearing; GPE: Guadalupe mine; ICA: Independencia mine; FTD: Final tailings dam

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Coeur Mexicana received the distinguished Social Responsibility Award from the Mexican Center of Philanthropy-CEMEFI on February 26, 2021.  This award is bestowed on companies that have demonstrated a commitment to promoting social responsibility within the company as well as in the communities in which the company operates.  This is the 11^th year that Coeur Mexicana was an award recipient.

17.7 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues

Based on the information provided to the QP by Coeur (see Chapter 25), there are no material issues known to the QP that will require mitigation activities or allocation of remediation costs in respect of environmental, permitting, closure or social license considerations beyond what is included in the existing plans. Currently Coeur Mexicana is a mature mining operation that has demonstrated its ability to maintain environmental compliance, attain permits in a timely manner and has a strong social license to operate within its local communities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

18.0 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

18.1 Introduction

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

18.2 Capital Cost Estimates

18.2.1 Basis of Estimate

Major LOM capital costs include, but are not limited to mine development, plant expansions or upgrades, equipment replacement, and tailings storage.

Capital costs are based on recent prices or operating data.  No allowance for contingency is included.

The basis of the capital estimates is derived from expected equipment needs and Project plans and is determined with the assistance of vendor and contractor quotes, previous buying experience and/or experience with construction of similar projects using Owner equipment and labor.  The capital cost estimate includes consideration of historical capital cost estimates reconciled where Owner equipment and labor are used.

Capital expenditures consist largely of mining and processing equipment upgrades and replacement, capital leases, TSF construction and raises, small projects to support community or logistics, and general and administrative (G&A) support equipment, leases, and offices.  Capital costs are split into:

• Sustaining capital:  Costs support the existing LOM plan.

• Non-sustaining capital:  Costs are for a long-term structure or external project that does not necessarily relate directly to the mine plan.  Non-sustaining capital allocations include TSF raises and closure costs, as well as community support projects.

Labor assumptions for capital projects are based on third-party contractor costs, internal employee wage rates plus benefits, or a combination of the two where combined support is required.

Material costs are based on current prices for consumables without market or inflation rate assumed.

Owner labor costs to support mechanical rebuilds or internal projects that are included in capital costs at operating rates.  Where the labor is to be provided by a contracted entity, contractor labor costs are included in the estimate.

Mine capital costs are estimated based on historic and reconciled Owner operating cost-plus adjustments.  Rebuilds and equipment replacement costs are estimated based on current material and part costs.  Major mine equipment fleet replacements are assumed to be conducted on an as-needs basis, depending on equipment condition, utilization, and hours.  A capital cost of US$167.0 M is estimated for the LOM.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

A major sustaining capital cost at Palmarejo is underground development for a LOM total of US$71.1 M.

Process capital costs include estimates of approximately US$2.7 M plus another average of US$1.5 M per year for process sustaining capital for a total of US$9.2 M.  The LOM mobile equipment capital is estimated at US$34.0 M.   The TSF and in-pit tailing disposal facilities have US$20.1 M estimated capital spend remaining over the Project life.

General and administrative capital costs average US$0.7 M per year in sustaining capital costs.  Total general and administrative capital costs are US$3.9 M over the LOM.

The total reclamation and closure capital cost is estimated at US$40.6 M, with costs spread over the last four years of mine life.

18.2.2 Capital Cost Summary

Capital expenditure for the LOM is estimated at US$167.0 M from January 1, 2022.  Estimated capital expenditures are shown in Table 18‑1.

18.3 Operating Cost Estimates

18.3.1 Basis of Estimate

Operating costs were developed based on historical cost performance and first principal calculations based on current commodity costs, labor rates, and equipment costs.  The costs are provided for each major cost center: mining, processing, selling expense, and G&A.  The total operating cost estimate includes all site costs, off-site costs associated with gold and silver metal sales, gold stream payments, and corporate overheads.  The cost estimates are based on budgeted and expected LOM costs.

Mine operating costs are estimated by area, based on an average mining rate of approximately 5,000 t/d.  Mine and transport unit costs are estimated at US$53.80/t milled.

Processing costs include all activities related to crushing, grinding, flotation concentrate and tailings leaching, carbon elution and regeneration, cyanide destruction, electrowinning and refining, tailings storage facility, water reclaim, reagent systems, and the metallurgical laboratory.  Processing costs are modelled as variable and period costs.  Variable costs are costs that change with throughput rate, consisting largely of consumables/supplies and power costs, as well as maintenance and other allocations.  Period costs are time related costs incurred regardless of production, including labor, contractors, and a portion of maintenance and other distributed costs.  Total process costs vary year over year depending on the operational plan.  The process operating cost is estimated to average US$34.05/t milled over the process LOM.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑1: Estimated Capital Expenditures by Year (US$ M)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
Mine development	17.5	17.4	16.4	11.6	0.2	3.9	4.0	0.7	—	71.7
Infrastructure	6.4	3.6	4.7	3.4	-	2.8	0.8	0.4	—	15.8
Mobile equipment	5.2	5.2	6.5	6.5	5.3	5.3	—	—	—	34.0
GPE substation	1.8	2.5	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	4.3
Process equipment	2.7	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	2.7
Process sustaining capital	1.9	2.1	1.5	1.5	1.5	0.75	—	—	—	9.2
Mine & site capital	3.0	2.3	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	5.3
G&A & others	1.7	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.5	—	—	—	—	3.9
Tailings/water treatment	15.8	4.3	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	20.1
Total Capital Cost Estimate	49.0	37.8	29.7	23.0	8.5	12.7	5.3	1.1	—	167.0

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Infrastructure and other distributable costs such as power, light vehicles, maintenance, fuel, travel, and camp are distributed through the mining, processing, and site general costs as applicable.

General and administrative costs are modelled as period costs.  These include period costs for administrative labor and supplies costs, information technology services, health and safety, environmental, security, supply chain, and accounting costs.  Total G&A costs vary year over year depending on the operational plan.  The G&A cost is projected to average $11.37/t milled.

General and administrative costs are modelled as period costs.  These include period costs for administrative labor and supplies costs, information technology services, health and safety, environmental, security, supply chain, and accounting costs.  Total G&A costs vary year over year depending on the operational plan.  The G&A cost is projected to average US$15.76/t milled.

Selling expenses include treatment and refining costs of the doré and product transport from site to refinery for a LOM total of US$23.4 M for an average of US$0.44/oz Ag.

18.3.2 Operating Cost Summary

Operating expenditure for the LOM is estimated at $US1,500.3 M from January 1, 2022 to forecast end of the LOM in 2030.

Operating costs are summarized in Table 18‑2.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑2: Operating Costs by Year (US$ M)

Operating Cost Type	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
Underground mining	91.0	92.0	97.9	103.8	102.4	81.7	82.9	63.9	28.4	711.8
Surface haulage	5.7	5.9	5.9	6.0	6.0	5.7	5.5	4.8	2.8	48.2
Processing	59.3	59.7	63.6	64.3	61.8	60.2	56.5	44.7	19.9	490.1
General and administrative	27.6	27.6	28.4	28.9	28.1	28.3	26.6	21.3	10.0	226.8
Transportation, refining, and sales costs	2.9	3.0	3.0	3.0	2.8	2.9	2.6	2.4	0.8	23.4
Total Operating Costs	173.0	192.5	190.1	187.0	186.0	166.8	159.1	132.6	57.0	1,500.3

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

18.4 QP Statement

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  The estimate accuracies and ranges comply with the stated accuracy and contingency ranges required to meet a pre-feasibility level of study under SK1300.  The QPs considered the risks associated with the engineering estimation methods used when stating the accuracy and contingency ranges and preparing the cost estimate forecasts.

The capital and operating cost estimates are presented for an operating mine, with an 11 year production history.  Analogues to prior similar environments are not relevant to the Palmarejo Operations given the production history and that the mine was in production as at year-end December 31, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

19.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

19.1 Forward-looking Information Caution

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage.

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals.

19.2 Methodology Used

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model, which was built on a zero-based budgeting process that was validated through a historical cost comparison from the previous financial year.  All the figures in this section are LOM averages and may vary from year to year depending on capital and production needs.

The gold price used in the financial analysis varies from US$1,750 to $1,400/oz Au and the silver price varies from US$24.00 to $22.00/oz Ag.

19.3 Financial Model Parameters

19.3.1 Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life

The mineral resources are discussed in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserves in Chapter 12.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of nine years to 2030.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

19.3.2 Metallurgical Recoveries

Forecast metallurgical recoveries are provided in Chapter 10.

19.3.3 Smelting and Refining Terms

Smelting and refining terms for the gold concentrates are outlined in Chapter 16.

19.3.4 Metal Prices

Metal price assumptions are provided in Chapter 16.

19.3.5 Capital and Operating Costs

Capital and operating cost forecasts price assumptions are outlined in Chapter 18.

19.3.6 Working Capital

Working capital is based upon historical trends for movement in payables and receivables.  This is adjusted year over year for changes in spending levels.  Inventory movement is also adjusted annually for production levels. In future years the working capital is adjusted from recent historical values based upon the timing of the remaining mine life.

19.3.7 Taxes and Royalties

Royalties are discussed in Chapter 3.7.  The Franco-Nevada agreement is included in the cashflow analysis.  No other royalties are included in the cashflow analysis as there are no mineral resources or mineral reserves within the other royalties referenced in Chapter 3.7.

The economic model includes the Extraordinary Mining duty of 0.5% applied to all metal sales, and the Special Mining Duty of 7.5% applied to the pre-tax cash flow.

The income tax rate is 30%.

19.3.8 Closure Costs and Salvage Value

The 2021 year-end closure assessment for the actual disturbance for final reclamation at the Palmarejo Operations, is estimated at US$40.6 M and is discussed in Chapter 17.4.

No salvage value is assumed or included in the economic analysis.

19.3.9 Financing

The economic analysis is reported on a 100% Project ownership basis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

19.3.10 Inflation

The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

19.4 Economic Analysis

The NPV 5% is US$229.5 M.

As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk to December 31, 2021, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

A summary of the financial results is provided in Table 19‑1.  An annualized cashflow statement is provided in Table 19‑2.

The active mining operation ceases in 2030; however, closure costs are estimated to be paid out the last four years of operation for the purposes of the financial model.

19.5 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to ± 20% changes in metal prices, grade, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested and can be seen in Table 19‑3.

The Project is most sensitive to metal prices, less sensitive to grade, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑1: Cashflow Summary Table

Item	Units	Value
Revenue
Average gold price	US$/oz	1,644
Average silver price	US$/oz	22.56
Gross revenue	US$M	2,230.0
Operating Costs
Mining	US$M	(760.0)
Processing	US$M	(490.1)
General and administrative	US$M	(226.8)
Smelting and refining	US$M	(23.4)
Total Operating Costs	US$M	(1,500.3)
Cash Flow
Operating cash flow*	US$M	729.7
Capital expenditures	US$M	(167.0)
Reclamation	US$M	(40.6)
Total Pre-Tax Cash Flow (Net Cash Flow)	US$M	522.1
30% corporate income tax	US$M	(173.0)
7.5% special mining duty	US$M	(59.5)
0.5% extraordinary mining duty	US$M	(11.2)
Total After-Tax Cashflow (Net Cash Flow)	US$M	278.4
Total After-Tax NPV (5% Discount Rate)	US$M	229.5

Note: * Operating cash flow is inclusive of the Franco Nevada encumbrance.  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑2: Annualized Cashflow (2022–2030)

Item	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Revenue
Gross revenue*	US$M	306.7	315.6	302.3	284.3	268.8	271.9	239.6	186.9	53.9
Operating Costs
Mining	US$M	(96.7)	(97.9)	(103.8)	(102.4)	(96.5)	(87.4)	(82.9)	(63.9)	(28.4)
Processing	US$M	(59.3)	(59.7)	(63.6)	(64.3)	(61.8)	(60.2)	(56.5)	(44.7)	(19.9)
General and administrative	US$M	(27.6)	(27.6)	(28.4)	(28.9)	(28.1)	(28.3)	(26.6)	(21.3)	(10.0)
Smelting and refining	US$M	(2.9)	(3.0)	(3.0)	(3.0)	(2.8)	(2.9)	(2.6)	(2.4)	(0.8)
Total operating costs	US$M	(186.5)	(188.3)	(198.8)	(198.7)	(189.2)	(178.8)	(168.6)	(132.3)	(59.2)
Cash Flow
Operating cash flow	US$M	120.2	127.4	103.5	85.6	79.6	93.1	71.0	54.7	(5.3)
Capital expenditures	US$M	(49.0)	(37.8)	(29.7)	(23.0)	(8.5)	(12.7)	(5.3)	(1.1)
Reclamation	US$M						(10.0)	(10.0)	(10.0)	(10.6)
Total pre-tax cash flow (net cash flow)	US$M	71.2	89.6	73.7	62.6	71.1	70.4	55.7	43.6	(15.9)
30% corporate income tax	US$M	(28.6)	(29.6)	(23.8)	(20.9)	(19.6)	(22.7)	(16.3)	(11.6)	—
7.5% special mining duty	US$M	(9.5)	(10.1)	(8.4)	(7.0)	(6.6)	(7.5)	(5.8)	(4.5)	—
0.5% extraordinary mining duty	US$M	(1.5)	(1.6)	(1.5)	(1.4)	(1.3)	(1.4)	(1.2)	(0.9)	(0.3)
Total after-tax cashflow (net cash flow)	US$M	31.6	48.2	40.0	33.3	43.7	38.8	32.3	26.5	(16.2)

Note:  * Gross revenue includes Franco-Nevada encumbrance. Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑3: Sensitivity Analysis (US$ M)

Parameter	-20%	-10%	-5%	Base	5%	10%	20%
Metal price	-6.5	111.5	170.5	229.5	288.5	347.4	465.2
Operating cost	388.8	309.3	269.5	229.5	189.6	149.7	69.8
Capital cost	242.3	236.2	232.7	229.5	226.3	223.1	216.7
Grade	-0.1	114.8	172.2	229.5	286.9	344	458.3

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.  Base case is highlighted.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

20.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 20-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

21.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 21-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

22.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

22.1 Introduction

The QPs note the following interpretations and conclusions within their areas of expertise, based on the review of data available for this Report.

22.2 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Mexicana, as the operating entity.

The Palmarejo Operations consist of 71 mining concessions (27,227 ha).

Coeur has occupancy agreements in place with selected ejidos for exploitation or exploration purposes, collectively covering an area of 15,111.19 ha.

Water rights held are sufficient to support the LOM plan.

There are numerous net smelter return (NSR) royalties that cover the Palmarejo Operations area and range from 1–3% depending on the royalty agreement.  The majority of the royalties are not payable under the LOM plan envisaged in this Report.

Coeur Mexicana agreed to sell to Franco–Nevada 50% of the refined gold produced from selected mining concessions at a gold price of $800/oz, in consideration of Franco–Nevada providing investment capital for Project development.  The Agreement has a 40-year term, starting in 2016.

22.3 Geology and Mineralization

The deposits within the Palmarejo Operations area are considered to be examples of epithermal deposits displaying both intermediate- and low-sulfidation features.

The geological understanding of the settings, lithologies, and structural and alteration controls on mineralization is sufficient to support estimation of mineral resources.

22.4 Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling

The exploration programs completed by Coeur to date and predecessor companies are appropriate for the mineralization styles.

The quantity and quality of the lithological, collar and down hole survey data collected in the exploration program completed are sufficient to support mineral resource estimation.  No drilling, sampling, or core recovery issues that could materially affect the accuracy or reliability of the core samples have been identified.

The collected sample data adequately reflect deposit dimensions, true widths of mineralization, and the deposit style.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Sampling is representative of the gold and silver values, reflecting areas of higher and lower grades.

The independent analytical laboratories used by Coeur and predecessor companies, where known, are accredited for selected analytical techniques.

Sample preparation used procedures and protocols that are/were standard in the industry and has been adequate throughout the history of the Project.  Sample analysis uses procedures that are standard in the industry.

The QA/QC programs adequately address issues of precision, accuracy and contamination, and indicate that the analytical results are adequately accurate, precise, and contamination free to support mineral resource estimation.

The sample preparation, analysis, and security procedures are adequate for use in the estimation of mineral resources.

22.5 Data Verification

The QP undertook QA/QC verification, participated in programs to verify drill data prior to mineral resource estimation, checked selected gold and silver assay data, conducted drill hole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports, and signed off in 2014–present definition drill holes and the 2021 drilling.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

22.6 Metallurgical Testwork

Metallurgical testwork was conducted by reputable laboratories and is supported by nearly a decade of production data.  Test results were used as a guideline for plant design.  Metallurgical testing results were consistent in the recommended methods of process design, extraction and recovery estimates.

Recovery factors estimated are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data.  Recovery factors are appropriate to the mineralization types and the selected process route.  The LOM forecast average gold blended recovery is 90%.  The LOM forecast average blended silver recovery is 82.5%.

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

22.7 Mineral Resource Estimates

The mineral resource estimate is reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves. The reference point for the estimate is in situ.  The estimate is current at December 31, 2021.

The estimate is primarily supported by core drilling.  The estimate was constrained using reasonable prospects of economic extraction that assumed longhole stoping underground mining methods.

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include: metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions for the underground mine designs constraining the estimates; assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

22.8 Mineral Reserve Estimates

The mineral reserve estimate is reported using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK-1300.  The reference point for the estimate is the point of delivery to the process facilities.  Mineral reserves are current at December 31, 2021.

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.  The mine plans assume underground mining using longhole open stoping using trackless equipment and cemented rock fill backfill.  Target mining rates are 150,000 t/month.

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for the mineable shapes constraining the estimates; and assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

22.9 Mining Methods

The Palmarejo Operations use conventional underground equipment and mining methods.  The underground operations have been active since 2014.

Geotechnical conditions are reasonably understood.  Depending on the deposit, rock mass quality is variable, and ranges from Poor to Good.  Modifications based on variability and update geotechnical models were made as the mines developed.

There are few hydrogeological aspects to be considered beyond natural inflow of water to the workings.  The permeability of the volcanic rock units in all mines is low to very low.

Stoping and cemented rock backfill mining methods were selected and implemented based on the orebody location, ground conditions and geological settings.  Mining design assumptions for each mining region are typically standardized for each area and mining method assumed.

Ventilation is provided by fans and ventilation raises.

Backfill is a combination of CRF and straight waste fill.

The Palmarejo Operations have nine years of mine life remaining.  The Guadalupe mine has a remaining nine-year mine life with the expansion components of Zapata and Animas.  Independencia has a remaining nine-year mine life with expansions to the north and south and addition of the Hidalgo deposit.  La Nación has five years of mine life remaining.

22.10 Recovery Methods

The process plant design was based on a combination of metallurgical testwork, study designs and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the mill was operational.  The design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.

22.11 Infrastructure

All major infrastructure required to support operations has been constructed and is operational.  Facilities include:  three operating underground mines; two shotcrete mixing plants; backfill cement mixing plant; water treatment plants and associated infrastructure; ROM pads; process plant; TSF and associated infrastructure; maintenance facilities; materials storage and laydown areas; various support facilities; electrical facilities including an emergency powerhouse; gravel airstrip; and a mine permanent camp and contractor facilities and kitchens.

The Palmarejo Operations currently maintain limited ROM stockpiles.  Waste is currently excavated from the WRSFs around the former open pit and used underground as backfill.

The TSF, a zoned downstream earthfill dam, is projected to reach capacity in Q1 2023 at a capacity of 15.4 Mm³, by which time the operation will transition to disposal of tailings in the mined-out Palmarejo open pit.

Water treatment plants treat water pumped from underground to the surface, and water from the tailings pond.

Electrical power is supplied by the Mexican grid.  A backup power generating facility is on site.

Water for the process facilities is obtained from a variety of sources, including wet tailings, the underground mines, additional subsurface sources from areas wells, limited permit options from the freshwater diversion dam, and a pump station located at the Chínipas River.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

22.12 Market Studies

Coeur sells its payable silver and gold production on behalf of its subsidiaries on a spot or forward basis, primarily to multi-national banks and bullion trading houses.  Markets for both silver and gold bullion are highly liquid, and the loss of a single trading counterparty would not impact Coeur’s ability to sell its bullion.

To mitigate the risks associated with gold and silver price fluctuations, Coeur may enter into option contracts to hedge future production.

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

Coeur Mexicana has contracts with one U.S. based refiner and one Switzerland-based refiner, which refine the Palmarejo Operations’ doré bars into silver and gold bullion that meet certain benchmark standards set by the London Bullion Market Association.

Currently, there are contracts in place at the Palmarejo Operations to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, raise boring, ground support suppliers and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  These contracts are periodically put up for bid or negotiated.

22.13 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

Baseline studies and monitoring were required in support of Project permitting.

The 2021 year-end closure assessment for the actual disturbance for final reclamation at the Palmarejo Operations, is estimated at US$40.6 M.

All required local, state, and federal permits for operation have been issued.  The authorizations required for production are in good standing.

Coeur initiated the process of obtaining an MIA-R.  In late July 2021, SEMARNAT requested additional information to the MIA-R document.  This was supplied by Coeur on August 10, 2021.  It is expected that the MIA-R will be approved in the first quarter of 2022.  When approved the MIA-R will add 10 additional years to the current present environmental license, consolidate 13 different authorizations under a single global license, and include all new facilities and mine development expected for the LOM in this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Coeur actively engaged with the local community with a series of cultural, social, and economic programs.  The surrounding communities are supportive of the Palmarejo Operations, and the employment and benefits that the mines provide.

Coeur Mexicana received the distinguished Social Responsibility Award from the Mexican Center of Philanthropy-CEMEFI on February 26, 2021, the eleventh time the company has been so recognized.

22.14 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Capital expenditure for the LOM is estimated at US$167.0 M from January 1, 2022.

22.15 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Operating expenditure for the LOM is estimated at $US1,500.3 M from January 1, 2022, to the end of the LOM in 2030.

22.16 Economic Analysis

The mineral reserves support a mine life of nine years to 2030.

The NPV at a discount rate of 5% is US$229.5 M.  As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, mined grade, exchange rate, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a range of 20% above and below the base case values.  The Project is most sensitive to metal price, less sensitive to grade, less sensitive to operating cost, and least sensitive to capital cost

22.17 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 11 and Chapter 12.

22.17.1 Risks

Other risks noted include:

• Commodity price increases for key consumables such diesel, electricity, tires and other consumables would negatively impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Labor cost increases or productivity decreases could also impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources, or impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserves;

• Mining method will change from transverse to longitudinal longhole stoping over time as narrower portions of veins are mined which could result in higher cost, lower productivities and higher dilution quantities which can impact grade. All of these factors could impact cut-off grades, reserve estimates and economics;

• Metallurgical recovery assumptions used in planning and operations are reasonable and based on historic performance. Any changes to metallurgical recovery assumptions could affect revenues and operating costs. This could also require revisions to cut-off grades and mineral reserve estimates;

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  Any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

• The mineral resource and reserve estimates are sensitive to metal prices.  Lower metal prices require revisions to the mineral resource estimates;

• Changes in climate could result in drought and associated potential water shortages that could impact operating cost and ability to operate;

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Palmarejo Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates;

• Political risk from challenges to:

o Mining licenses;

o Environmental permits;

o Coeur’s right to operate;

• Changes to assumptions as to governmental tax or royalty rates, such as taxation rate increases or new taxation or royalty imposts.

22.17.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Higher metal prices than forecast could present upside sales opportunities and potentially an increase in predicted Project economics;

• Ability to expand mineralization around known veins through exploration;

• Discovery and development of new exploration targets across the district;

• Potential to find or gain access to new mineralization that could be processed at the existing Palmarejo process facilities;

• Ability to add additional process plant throughput as additional mineral resources are converted to mineral reserves.  Coeur Mexicana has a track record of success on this in recent years as the mill was originally design for a larger open pit operation.

22.18 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

23.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

As the Palmarejo Operations consist of operating mines, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 23-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

24.0 REFERENCES

24.1 Bibliography

Ammtec Ltd., 2005:  Comminution Testwork Conducted Upon Samples of Ore from the Palmarejo Gold and Silver Deposit:  report prepared for Bolnisi Gold NL, Report Number A9848, September, 2005.

Coeur, 2012:  Coeur Expl_QAQC Procedures and Protocols:  version 01_31_2012_Final_Spanish, 2012.

Condor Consulting, Inc., 2014: Processing, Analysis & Interpretation of a ZTEM airborne EM and magnetics survey, Palmarejo project, Chihuahua, Mexico: report prepared for Coeur Mining, Inc., October, 2014

Davies, R.C., "Guadalupe Project Structural Study", internal memorandum of Bolnisi Gold NL, 2007.

Galvan, V., 2012: Palmarejo Carbonate - Base Metal Epithermal Ag-Au District, Chihuahua, México: PhD dissertation, Mar. 2012

KC Harvey Environmental, 2021: 2021 Reclamation and Closure Annual Asset Retirement Obligation for the Palmarejo, Guadalupe, Independencia, and South Guadalupe Mines, October 2021

Knight Piésold, 2017, Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V. Palmarejo Mine Site-wide Closure Plan, 2017, October 2017

Laurent, I., “Palmarejo/Trogan Project: Annual Technical Report, 1st July 2003 – 30th June 2004”, internal report of Planet Gold, S.A. de C.V., 2004.

Mahar, A.L., Goodell, P.C., Ramirez, A., and Garcia, J., 2019: Timing and Origin of Silici Volcanism in Northwestern Mexico:  Insights from Zircon U–Pb Geochronology, Hf Isotopes and Geochemistry of Rhyolite Ignimbrites from Palmarejo and Guazapares in Southwest Chihuahua: Lithos 324–325, pp. 246–264, 2019.

Molina, C., 2016: Geology and mineralization controls surrounding the Palmarejo mining district - a compilation of remote and hands on exploration techniques: PhD dissertation, Dec. 2016

Murray, B.P., and Busby, C.J., 2015:  Epithermal Mineralization Controlled by Synextensional Magmatism in the Guazapares Mining District of the Sierra Madre Occidental Silicic Large Igneous Province, Mexico:  Journal of South American Earth Sciences 58.

Murray, B.P., Busby, C.J., Ferrari, L., and Solari, L.A., 2013:  Synvolcanic Crustal Extension During the Mid-Cenozoic Ignimbrite Flare-Up in the Northern Sierra Madre Occidental, Mexico: Evidence from the Guazapares Mining District Region, Western Chihuahua:  Geosphere published online 13 September 2013

Orway Mineral Consultants Pty. Ltd., undated:  Analysis and Comminution Circuit Modeling: draft report prepared for Planet Gold.

Pakalnis & Associates, 2016:  Independencia/Guadalupe Mine Operations – Site Visit/Technical Review:  October 2016.

Pakalnis & Associates, 2017:  La Nación Geotechnical Assessment:  December 2017.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Melchor, A., 2010:  Mineralogy of Guadalupe Au-Ag Vein Deposit:  report prepared by Petrolab Laboratorio de InveStigaciones Geologicas, January, 2010.

Rhys, D., 2017: Geological observations regarding ore controls and new exploration target areas in the Palmarejo district: report prepared by Panterra Geoservices Inc. for Coeur Mining, Inc., May 24, 2017

Rhys, D., Lewis, P., and Rowland, J., 2020: Structural controls on ore localization in epithermal gold-silver deposits: A mineral systems approach: in Reviews in economic geology, Applied structural geology of ore-forming hydrothermal systems: Jan, 1, 2020

Stewart, H. H., "Progress report for the Guadalupe/Las Animas Target May 3, 2005", internal memorandum of Bolnisi Gold NL, 2005.

Sillitoe, R.H., 2010:  Comments on Geology and Exploration of the Palmarejo Epithermal Silver-Gold Deposit and Environs, Chihuahua, Mexico: report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, August 2010.

SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc., 2014: Geological Mapping Program and Aeromagnetic Interpretation of the Palmarejo Property, Chihuahua State, Mexico: report prepared for Coeur Mining, Inc., September 6, 2014

Wilson, S., Gustin, M., and Pennstrom, W., 2014: Technical report and Preliminary Economic Assessment for the San Miguel project, Guazapares mining district, Chihuahua, Mexico: report prepared by Metal Mining Consultants Inc. for Paramount Gold and Silver Corp., August 22, 2014

Weis, T., 2021: Palmarejo project, Magnetic Interpretation, Geophysical Report: report prepared by Thomas Weis and Associates Inc. for Coeur Mining, Inc., May, 14, 2021

Zesati, C., 2016: GIS and Remote Sensing applied to generate targets of exploration in Epithermal Deposits, Case Study: Palmarejo Mining District, Chihuahua, Mexico: MSc dissertation, Mar. 2016.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

24.2 Abbreviations and Units of Measure

Abbreviation/Symbol	Term
'	minutes (geographic)
"	seconds (geographic)
#	number
%	percent
<	less than
>	greater than
µm	micrometer (micron)
g	gram
g/t	gram per tonne

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Term
HQ	2.5 inch core size
in	inches
km	kilometer
koz	thousand ounces
kV	kilovolt
kW	kilowatt
kWhr	kilowatt hour
m	meter
Ma	million years ago
masl	meters above sea level
mesh	size based on the number of openings in one inch of screen
MW	megawatts
NQ	1.87 inch core size
º	degrees
oz	ounce/ounces (troy ounce)
pH	measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a solution
ppm	parts per million
PQ	3.35 inch core size
t/d	tons per day
t/day	Tons per day
t/hr	tons per hour
AA	atomic absorption spectroscopy
ARD	acid-rock drainage
AuEq	gold equivalent
CRF	cemented rock fill
DGPS	differential global positioning system
EIS	Environmental Impact Statement
GPS	global positioning system
ICP	inductively-coupled plasma
ICP ES	inductively-coupled plasma emission spectroscopy

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Term
ICP-OES	inductively-coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry
ID2	inverse distance interpolation; number after indicates the power, e.g., ID2 indicates inverse distance to the 2nd power.
LOM	life-of-mine
NSR	net smelter return
OK	ordinary kriging
QA/QC	quality assurance and quality control
QP	Qualified Person
RC	reverse circulation
RMR	rock mass rating
ROM	Run-of-mine
RQD	rock quality designation
SAG	semi-autogenous grind

24.3 Glossary of Terms

Term	Definition
acid rock drainage/ acid mine drainage	Characterized by low pH, high sulfate, and high iron and other metal species.
adjacent property	A property in which the issuer does not have an interest; has a boundary reasonably proximate to the property being reported on; and has geological characteristics similar to those of the property being reported on
argillic alteration	Introduces any one of a wide variety of clay minerals, including kaolinite, smectite and illite.  Argillic alteration is generally a low temperature event, and some may occur in atmospheric conditions
azimuth	The direction of one object from another, usually expressed as an angle in degrees relative to true north.  Azimuths are usually measured in the clockwise direction, thus an azimuth of 90 degrees indicates that the second object is due east of the first.
ball mill	A piece of milling equipment used to grind ore into small particles.  It is a cylindrical shaped steel container filled with steel balls into which crushed ore is fed.  The ball mill is rotated causing the balls themselves to cascade, which in turn grinds the ore.
Bond work index	A measure of the energy required to break an ore to a nominal product size, determined in laboratory testing, and used to calculate the required power in a grinding circuit design.
bullion	Unrefined gold and/or silver mixtures that have been melted and cast into a bar or ingot.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-5

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
comminution/crushing/grinding	Crushing and/or grinding of ore by impact and abrasion. Usually, the word "crushing" is used for dry methods and "grinding" for wet methods. Also, "crushing" usually denotes reducing the size of coarse rock while "grinding" usually refers to the reduction of the fine sizes.
concentrate	The concentrate is the valuable product from mineral processing, as opposed to the tailing, which contains the waste minerals. The concentrate represents a smaller volume than the original ore
cut-off grade	The grade (i.e., the concentration of metal or mineral in rock) that determines the destination of the material during mining. For purposes of establishing “prospects of economic extraction,” the cut-off grade is the grade that distinguishes material deemed to have no economic value (it will not be mined in underground mining or if mined in surface mining, its destination will be the waste dump) from material deemed to have economic value (its ultimate destination during mining will be a processing facility). Other terms used in similar fashion as cut-off grade include net smelter return, pay limit, and break-even stripping ratio.
cyanidation	A method of extracting gold or silver by dissolving it in a weak solution of sodium cyanide.
data verification	The process of confirming that data has been generated with proper procedures, has been accurately transcribed from the original source and is suitable to be used for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation
decline	A sloping underground opening for machine access from level to level or from the surface.  Also called a ramp.
density	The mass per unit volume of a substance, commonly expressed in grams/ cubic centimeter.
depletion	The decrease in quantity of ore in a deposit or property resulting from extraction or production.
development	Often refers to the construction of a new mine or; Is the underground work carried out for the purpose of reaching and opening up a mineral deposit. It includes shaft sinking, cross-cutting, drifting and raising.
dilution	Waste of low-grade rock which is unavoidably removed along with the ore in the mining process.
dip
drift	A horizontal mining passage underground.  A drift usually follows the ore vein, as distinguished from a crosscut, which intersects it.
easement	Areas of land owned by the property owner, but in which other parties, such as utility companies, may have limited rights granted for a specific purpose.
electrowinning.	The removal of precious metals from solution by the passage of current through an electrowinning cell.  A direct current supply is connected to the anode and cathode.  As current passes through the cell, metal is deposited on the cathode.  When sufficient metal has been deposited on the cathode, it is removed from the cell and the sludge rinsed off the plate and dried for further treatment.
elution	Recovery of the gold from the activated carbon into solution before zinc precipitation or electro-winning.
encumbrance	An interest or partial right in real property which diminished the value of ownership, but does not prevent the transfer of ownership.  Mortgages, taxes and judgements are encumbrances known as liens.  Restrictions, easements, and reservations are also encumbrances, although not liens.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-6

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
exploration information	Geological, geophysical, geochemical, sampling, drilling, trenching, analytical testing, assaying, mineralogical, metallurgical, and other similar information concerning a particular property that is derived from activities undertaken to locate, investigate, define, or delineate a mineral prospect or mineral deposit
feasibility study	A feasibility study is a comprehensive technical and economic study of the selected development option for a mineral project, which includes detailed assessments of all applicable modifying factors, as defined by this section, together with any other relevant operational factors, and detailed financial analysis that are necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable. The results of the study may serve as the basis for a final decision by a proponent or financial institution to proceed with, or finance, the development of the project. A feasibility study is more comprehensive, and with a higher degree of accuracy, than a pre-feasibility study. It must contain mining, infrastructure, and process designs completed with sufficient rigor to serve as the basis for an investment decision or to support project financing.
flotation	Separation of minerals based on the interfacial chemistry of the mineral particles in solution. Reagents are added to the ore slurry to render the surface of selected minerals hydrophobic. Air bubbles are introduced to which the hydrophobic minerals attach. The selected minerals are levitated to the top of the flotation machine by their attachment to the bubbles and into a froth product, called the "flotation concentrate." If this froth carries more than one mineral as a designated main constituent, it is called a "bulk float". If it is selective to one constituent of the ore, where more than one will be floated, it is a "differential" float.
flowsheet	The sequence of operations, step by step, by which ore is treated in a milling, concentration, or smelting process.
footwall	The wall or rock on the underside of a vein or ore structure.
frother	A type of flotation reagent which, when dissolved in water, imparts to it the ability to form a stable froth
gravity separation	Exploitation of differences in the densities of particles to achieve separation. Machines utilizing gravity separation include jigs and shaking tables.
hanging wall	The wall or rock on the upper or top side of a vein or ore deposit.
indicated mineral resource	An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling.  The term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty. The level of geological certainty associated with an indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.
inferred mineral resource	An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling.  The term limited geological evidence means evidence that is only sufficient to establish that geological and grade or quality continuity is more likely than not. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. A qualified person must have a reasonable expectation that the majority of inferred mineral resources could be upgraded to indicated or measured mineral resources with continued exploration; and should be able to defend the basis of this expectation before his or her peers.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-7

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
internal rate of return (IRR)	The rate of return at which the Net Present Value of a project is zero; the rate at which the present value of cash inflows is equal to the present value of the cash outflows.
liberation	Freeing, by comminution, of particles of specific mineral from their interlock with other constituents of the ore.
life of mine (LOM)	Number of years that the operation is planning to mine and treat ore, and is taken from the current mine plan based on the current evaluation of ore reserves.
locked cycle flotation test	A standard laboratory flotation test where certain intermediate streams are recycled into previous separation stages and the test is repeated across a number of cycles.  This test provides a more realistic prediction of the overall recovery and concentrate grade that would be achieved in an actual flotation circuit, compared with a simpler batch flotation test.
measured mineral resource	A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling.  The term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.
merger	A voluntary combination of two or more companies whereby both stocks are merged into one.
Merrill-Crowe (M-C) circuit	A process which recovers precious metals from solution by first clarifying the solution, then removing the air contained in the clarified solution, and then precipitating the gold and silver from the solution by injecting zinc dust into the solution. The valuable sludge is collected in a filter press for drying and further treatment
mill	Includes any ore mill, sampling works, concentration, and any crushing, grinding, or screening plant used at, and in connection with, an excavation or mine.
mineral reserve	A mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted. The determination that part of a measured or indicated mineral resource is economically mineable must be based on a preliminary feasibility (pre-feasibility) or feasibility study, as defined by this section, conducted by a qualified person applying the modifying factors to indicated or measured mineral resources. Such study must demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The study must establish a life of mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, which will be the basis of determining the mineral reserve. The term economically viable means that the qualified person has determined, using a discounted cash flow analysis, or has otherwise analytically determined, that extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The term investment and market assumptions includes all assumptions made about the prices, exchange rates, interest and discount rates, sales volumes, and costs that are necessary to determine the economic viability of the mineral reserves. The qualified person must use a price for each commodity that provides a reasonable basis for establishing that the project is economically viable.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-8

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
mineral resource	A mineral resource is a concentration or occurrence of material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality, and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction. The term material of economic interest includes mineralization, including dumps and tailings, mineral brines, and other resources extracted on or within the earth’s crust.  It does not include oil and gas resources as defined in Regulation S-X (§210.4-10(a)(16)(D) of this chapter), gases (e.g., helium and carbon dioxide), geothermal fields, and water. When determining the existence of a mineral resource, a qualified person, as defined by this section, must be able to estimate or interpret the location, quantity, grade or quality continuity, and other geological characteristics of the mineral resource from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling; and conclude that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction of the mineral resource based on an initial assessment, as defined in this section, that he or she conducts by qualitatively applying relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction.
modifying factors	The factors that a qualified person must apply to indicated and measured mineral resources and then evaluate in order to establish the economic viability of mineral reserves. A qualified person must apply and evaluate modifying factors to convert measured and indicated mineral resources to proven and probable mineral reserves. These factors include, but are not restricted to: mining; processing; metallurgical; infrastructure; economic; marketing; legal; environmental compliance; plans, negotiations, or agreements with local individuals or groups; and governmental factors. The number, type and specific characteristics of the modifying factors applied will necessarily be a function of and depend upon the mineral, mine, property, or project.
net present value (NPV)	The present value of the difference between the future cash flows associated with a project and the investment required for acquiring the project.  Aggregate of future net cash flows discounted back to a common base date, usually the present.  NPV is an indicator of how much value an investment or project adds to a company.
net smelter return royalty (NSR)	A defined percentage of the gross revenue from a resource extraction operation, less a proportionate share of transportation, insurance, and processing costs.
open pit	A mine that is entirely on the surface. Also referred to as open-cut or open-cast mine.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-9

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
open stope	In competent rock, it is possible to remove all of a moderate sized ore body, resulting in an opening of considerable size.  Such large, irregularly-shaped openings are called stopes.  The mining of large inclined ore bodies often requires leaving horizontal pillars across the stope at intervals in order to prevent collapse of the walls.
ounce (oz) (troy)	Used in imperial statistics.  A kilogram is equal to 32.1507 ounces.  A troy ounce is equal to 31.1035 grams.
plant	A group of buildings, and especially to their contained equipment, in which a process or function is carried out; on a mine it will include warehouses, hoisting equipment, compressors, repair shops, offices, mill or concentrator.
portal	The surface entrance to a tunnel or adit
preliminary feasibility study, pre-feasibility study	A preliminary feasibility study (prefeasibility study) is a comprehensive study of a range of options for the technical and economic viability of a mineral project that has advanced to a stage where a qualified person has determined (in the case of underground mining) a preferred mining method, or (in the case of surface mining) a pit configuration, and in all cases has determined an effective method of mineral processing and an effective plan to sell the product. A pre-feasibility study includes a financial analysis based on reasonable assumptions, based on appropriate testing, about the modifying factors and the evaluation of any other relevant factors that are sufficient for a qualified person to determine if all or part of the indicated and measured mineral resources may be converted to mineral reserves at the time of reporting. The financial analysis must have the level of detail necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable
probable mineral reserve	A probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.  For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The lower level of confidence is due to higher geologic uncertainty when the qualified person converts an indicated mineral resource to a probable reserve or higher risk in the results of the application of modifying factors at the time when the qualified person converts a measured mineral resource to a probable mineral reserve.  A qualified person must classify a measured mineral resource as a probable mineral reserve when his or her confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors to the measured mineral resource is lower than what is sufficient for a proven mineral reserve.
propylitic	Characteristic greenish color.  Minerals include chlorite, actinolite and epidote.  Typically contains the assemblage quartz–chlorite–carbonate
proven mineral reserve	A proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality.  A proven mineral reserve can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-10

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
qualified person	A qualified person is an individual who is a mineral industry professional with at least five years of relevant experience in the type of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and in the specific type of activity that person is undertaking on behalf of the registrant; and an eligible member or licensee in good standing of a recognized professional organization at the time the technical report is prepared. For an organization to be a recognized professional organization, it must: (A)          Be either: (1)          An organization recognized within the mining industry as a reputable professional association, or (2)          A board authorized by U.S. federal, state or foreign statute to regulate professionals in the mining, geoscience or related field; (B)          Admit eligible members primarily on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience; (C)          Establish and require compliance with professional standards of competence and ethics; (D)          Require or encourage continuing professional development; (E)          Have and apply disciplinary powers, including the power to suspend or expel a member regardless of where the member practices or resides; and; (F)          Provide a public list of members in good standing.
raise	A vertical or inclined underground working that has been excavated from the bottom upward
reclamation	The restoration of a site after mining or exploration activity is completed.
refining	A high temperature process in which impure metal is reacted with flux to reduce the impurities.  The metal is collected in a molten layer and the impurities in a slag layer.  Refining results in the production of a marketable material.
rock quality designation (RQD)	A measure of the competency of a rock, determined by the number of fractures in a given length of drill core.  For example, a friable ore will have many fractures and a low RQD.
royalty	An amount of money paid at regular intervals by the lessee or operator of an exploration or mining property to the owner of the ground. Generally based on a specific amount per tonne or a percentage of the total production or profits. Also, the fee paid for the right to use a patented process.
run-of-mine	A term used to describe ore of average grade for the deposit, typically used for the ore pile adjacent the process plant.
semi-autogenous grinding (SAG)	A method of grinding rock into fine powder whereby the grinding media consists of larger chunks of rocks and steel balls.
shaft	A vertical or inclined excavation for the purpose of opening and servicing a mine. It is usually equipped with a hoist at the top, which lowers and raises a conveyance for handling men and material
specific gravity	The weight of a substance compared with the weight of an equal volume of pure water at 4°C.
stope	An excavation in a mine, other than development workings, made for the purpose of extracting ore.
strike length	The horizontal distance along the long axis of a structural surface, rock unit, mineral deposit or geochemical anomaly.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-11

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
sublevel stoping	A large-scale open stoping method.  Access is provided to the ore body at various sub-intervals between the main haulage levels to drill and blast the intervening ore
tailings	Material rejected from a mill after the recoverable valuable minerals have been extracted.
uniaxial compressive strength	A measure of the strength of a rock, which can be determined through laboratory testing, and used both for predicting ground stability underground, and the relative difficulty of crushing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-12

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

25.0 RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT

25.1 Introduction

The QPs fully relied on the registrant for the guidance in the areas noted in the following sub-sections.  As the operations have been in production for 11 years, the registrant has considerable experience in this area.

The QPs took undertook checks that the information provided by the registrant was suitable to be used in the Report.

25.2 Macroeconomic Trends

• Information relating to inflation, interest rates, discount rates, taxes.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.3 Markets

• Information relating to market studies/markets for product, market entry strategies, marketing and sales contracts, product valuation, product specifications, refining and treatment charges, transportation costs, agency relationships, material contracts (e.g. mining, concentrating, smelting, refining, transportation, handling, hedging arrangements, and forward sales contracts), and contract status (in place, renewals).

This information is used when discussing the market, commodity price and contract information in Chapter 16, and in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.4 Legal Matters

• Information relating to the corporate ownership interest, the mineral tenure (concessions, payments to retain, obligation to meet expenditure/reporting of work conducted), surface rights, water rights (water take allowances), royalties, encumbrances, easements and rights-of-way, violations and fines, permitting requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits

This information is used in support of the property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-1

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

25.5 Environmental Matters

• Information relating to baseline and supporting studies for environmental permitting, environmental permitting and monitoring requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits, emissions controls, closure planning, closure and reclamation bonding and bonding requirements, sustainability accommodations, and monitoring for and compliance with requirements relating to protected areas and protected species.

This information is used when discussing property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.6 Stakeholder Accommodations

• Information relating to social and stakeholder baseline and supporting studies, hiring and training policies for workforce from local communities, partnerships with stakeholders (including national, regional, and state mining associations; trade organizations; fishing organizations; state and local chambers of commerce; economic development organizations; non-government organizations; and, state and federal governments), and the community relations plan.

This information is used in the social and community discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.7 Governmental Factors

• Information relating to taxation and royalty considerations at the Project level, monitoring requirements and monitoring frequency, and bonding requirements.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.8 Internal Controls

25.8.1 Exploration and Drilling

Internal controls are discussed where required in the relevant chapters of the technical report summary.  The following sub-sections summarize the types of procedures, protocols, guidance and controls that Coeur has in place for its exploration and mineral resource and reserve estimation efforts, and the type of risk assessments that are undertaken.

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for exploration data:

• Written procedures and guidelines to support preferred sampling methods and approaches; periodic compliance reviews of adherence to such written procedures and guidelines;

• Maintenance of a complete chain-of-custody, ensuring the traceability and integrity of the samples at all handling stages from collection, transportation, sample preparation and analysis to long-term sample storage;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-2

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

• Geological logs are checked and verified, and there is a physical sign-off to attest to the validation protocol required;

• Quality control checks on collar and downhole survey data for errors or significant deviations;

• Appropriate types of quality control samples are inserted into the sample stream at appropriate frequencies to assess analytical data quality;

• Third-party fully certified labs are used for assays used in public disclosure or resource models

• Regular inspection of analytical and sample preparation facilities by appropriately experienced Coeur personnel;

• QA/QC data are regularly verified to ensure that outliers sample mix-ups, contamination, or laboratory biases during the sample preparation and analysis steps are correctly identified, mitigated or remediated.  Changes to database entries are required be documented;

• Database upload and verification procedures to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the data being entered into the Project database(s).  These are typically performed using software data-checking routines.  Changes to database entries are required to be documented.  Data are subject to regular backups.

25.8.2 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation:

• Prior to use in mineral resource or mineral reserve estimation, the selected data to support estimation are downloaded from the database into a project file and reviewed for improbable entries and high values;

• Written procedures and guidelines are used to support estimation methods and approaches;

• Completion of annual technical statements on each mineral resource and mineral reserve estimate by qualified persons.  These technical statements include evaluation of modifying and technical factors, incorporate available reconciliation data, and are based on a cashflow analysis;

• Internal reviews of block models, mineral resources and mineral reserves using a “layered responsibility” approach with Qualified Person involvement at the site and corporate levels;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-3

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

25.8.3 Risk Assessments

Coeur has established mine risk registers that are regularly reviewed and maintained.  The registers record the risk type, the nature of the impact if the risk occurred, the frequency or probability of the risk occurrence, planned mitigation measures, and record of progress of the mitigation undertaken.  Risks are removed from the registers if mitigation measures are successful or added to the registers as a new risk is recognized.

Other risk controls include aspects such as:

• Active monitoring programs such as mill performance, geotechnical networks, water sampling, waste management;

• Regular review of markets, commodity and price forecasts by internal specialists; reviews of competitor activities;

• Regular reviews of stakeholder concerns, accommodations to stakeholder concerns and ongoing community consultation;

• Monitoring of key permits and obligations such as tenures, surface rights, mine environmental and operating permits, agreements and regulatory changes to ensure all reporting and payment obligations have been met to keep those items in good standing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-4

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

APPENDIX A

No.	Title No.	Concession Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Expiry Date	Hectares	Acres	Annual Holding Costs	Royalty	Group
1	164465	Palmarejo	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2029-05-08	52.0755	128.681	$18,320.00	N/A	Huruapa
2	167281	Nueva Patria	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-10-29	11.0000	27.181	$3,870.00	N/A	Huruapa
3	167282	Maclovia	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-10-29	6.0000	14.826	$2,110.00	N/A	Huruapa
4	167322	San Juan de Dios	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-11-02	23.0000	56.834	$8,092.00	N/A	Huruapa
5	167323	Patria Vieja	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-11-02	4.0000	9.884	$1,408.00	N/A	Huruapa
6	170588	Unificación Guerra al Tirano	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2032-06-01	27.4471	67.823	$9,656.00	2%NSR	Huruapa
7	185236	El Rosario	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2039-12-13	10.9568	27.075	$3,854.00	N/A	Huruapa
8	186009	Los Tajos	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2039-12-13	2.7043	6.682	$952.00	N/A	Huruapa
9	187906	Tres de Mayo	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2040-11-21	39.8582	98.491	$14,022.00	2%NSR	Huruapa
10	188817	San Carlos	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2040-11-28	160.0000	395.367	$56,288.00	N/A	Huruapa
11	188820	La Buena Fe	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2040-11-28	60.0000	148.263	$21,108.00	N/A	Huruapa
12	189692	La Estrella	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2040-12-04	59.5863	147.240	$20,962.00	N/A	Huruapa
13	191332	Sulema No. 2	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2041-12-18	15.8280	39.112	$5,568.00	N/A	Huruapa
14	194678	Santo Domingo	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2042-05-06	15.3737	37.989	$5,408.00	N/A	Huruapa
15	195487	Unificación Huruapa	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2039-09-13	213.7755	528.249	$75,206.00	N/A	Huruapa
16	198543	Reyna de Oro	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2043-11-29	27.1791	67.161	$9,562.00	2%NSR	Huruapa
17	209541	La Aurelia	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-08-02	10.0000	24.710	$3,518.00	N/A	Huruapa
18	209648	Ampliación La Buena Fe	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-08-02	40.8701	100.992	$14,378.00	N/A	Huruapa
19	209975	Caballero Azteca	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-08-30	5.0510	12.481	$1,776.00	N/A	Huruapa
20	209976	Carmelita	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-08-30	5.3430	13.203	$1,880.00	N/A	Huruapa
21	210163	El Risco	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-09-09	24.0000	59.305	$8,444.00	N/A	Huruapa
22	210320	Victoria	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-09-23	76.0883	188.018	$26,768.00	N/A	Huruapa
23	210479	Lezcura	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-10-07	14.5465	35.945	$5,118.00	N/A	Huruapa
24	212281	La Mexicana	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2050-09-28	142.1410	351.237	$50,006.00	N/A	Huruapa
25	214101	Virginia	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2051-08-09	12.0906	29.876	$4,254.00	N/A	Huruapa
26	221490	Trogan	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2054-02-18	3,844.5413	9,500.031	$1,352,510.00	N/A	Huruapa
27	221491	Trogan Fracción	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2054-02-18	7.9682	19.690	$2,804.00	N/A	Huruapa
28	222319	La Curra	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2054-06-24	37.6593	93.058	$13,248.00	N/A	Huruapa
29	223292	La Currita	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2054-11-24	13.6805	33.805	$4,812.00	N/A	Huruapa

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

No.	Title No.	Concession Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Expiry Date	Hectares	Acres	Annual Holding Costs	Royalty	Group
30	224118	Ampliación Trogan	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-04-07	703.2318	1,737.717	$247,396.00	N/A	Huruapa
31	225223	Ampl. Trogan Oeste	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-08-04	1,699.9939	4,200.760	$598,058.00	N/A	Huruapa
32	225278	Trogan Norte 1	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-08-11	1,024.0000	2,530.349	$360,244.00	N/A	Huruapa
33	225279	Trogan Norte 2	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-08-11	1,019.2222	2,518.543	$358,562.00	N/A	Huruapa
34	225308	Trogan Oeste	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-08-15	2,699.0748	6,669.533	$949,534.00	N/A	Huruapa
35	225574	La Moderna	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-09-22	75.8635	187.462	$26,688.00	N/A	Huruapa
36	226201	La Buena Fe Norte	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-11-28	98.0878	242.379	$34,508.00	N/A	Huruapa
37	166401	San Miguel	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	12.9458	31.990	$4,554.00	N/A	None
38	166402	San Juan	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	3.0000	7.413	$1,056.00	N/A	None
39	166422	San Luis	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	4.0000	9.884	$1,408.00	N/A	None
40	166423	Empalme	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	6.0000	14.826	$2,110.00	N/A	None
41	166424	Sangre De Cristo	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	41.0000	101.313	$14,424.00	N/A	None
42	166425	Santa Clara	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	15.0000	37.066	$5,278.00	N/A	None
43	166426	El Carmen	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	59.0864	146.005	$20,786.00	N/A	None
44	166427	Las Tres B.B.B.	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	23.0010	56.836	$8,092.00	N/A	None
45	166428	Swanwick	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	70.1316	173.298	$24,672.00	N/A	None
46	166429	Las Tres S.S.S.	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	19.1908	47.421	$6,752.00	N/A	None
47	166430	El Rosario	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2030-06-03	14.0000	34.595	$4,926.00	N/A	None
48	172225	Guadalupe De Los Reyes	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2033-10-26	8.0000	19.768	$2,814.00	N/A	None
49	179842	Elyca	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2036-12-16	10.0924	24.939	$3,550.00	N/A	None
50	186960	Santa Cruz	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2040-05-16	10.0000	24.710	$3,518.00	3%NSR	None
51	199402	Constituyentes 1917	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2044-04-18	66.2411	163.685	$23,304.00	1%NSR	None
52	213579	Montecristo	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2051-05-17	38.0560	94.038	$13,388.00	1%NSR	None
53	213580	Montecristo Fraccion	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2051-05-17	0.2813	0.695	$98.00	1%NSR	None
54	226590	Montecristo II	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2056-02-01	27.1426	67.071	$9,548.00	1%NSR	None
55	191486	San Francisco	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2041-12-18	38.1598	94.295	$13,424.00	2%NSR	None
56	196127	Ampl. San Antonio	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2042-09-22	20.9174	51.688	$7,358.00	2%NSR	None
57	204385	San Antonio	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2047-02-12	14.8932	36.802	$5,240.00	2%NSR	None
58	209497	Guazapares	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2049-08-02	30.9111	76.383	$10,874.00	2%NSR	None
59	211040	Guazapares 3	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2050-03-23	250.0000	617.761	$87,950.00	2%NSR	None
60	212890	Guazapares 1	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2051-02-12	451.9655	1,116.827	$159,002.00	2%NSR	None
61	213572	Guazapares 5	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2051-05-17	88.8744	219.613	$31,266.00	2%NSR	None

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

No.	Title No.	Concession Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Expiry Date	Hectares	Acres	Annual Holding Costs	Royalty	Group
62	220788	Cantilito	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2053-10-06	37.0350	91.515	$13,028.00	2%NSR	None
63	222869	San Antonio	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2054-09-13	105.1116	259.735	$36,978.00	2%NSR	None
64	223664	Guazapares 4	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-02-01	63.9713	158.076	$22,506.00	2%NSR	None
65	226217	Guazapares 2	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2055-12-01	404.0016	998.306	$142,128.00	2%NSR	None
66	226884	Vinorama	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2056-03-16	474.2220	1,171.823	$166,832.00	2%NSR	None
67	229553	Temoris Fracción 4	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2057-05-17	18.6567	46.102	$6,564.00	N/A	None
68	232082	Guazapares	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2057-05-17	4,242.1190	10,482.463	$1,492,378.00	N/A	None
69	243762	Temoris Centro Fracc. 1	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2057-05-17	4,940.1997	12,207.451	$1,737,962.00	N/A	None
70	243763	Temoris Centro Fracc. 2	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2057-05-17	2,380.0000	5,881.085	$837,284.00	N/A	None
71	243767	Temoris Centro Fracc. 6 R1A	Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.	Concesión Minera	2057-05-17	956.2010	2,362.815	$336,392.00	N/A	None
	Totals					27,226.6466	67,278.24	$9,578,336.00

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Palmarejo Operations Mexico Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

EX-96.2

Exhibit 96.2

Rochester Operations

Nevada

Technical Report Summary

Prepared for: Coeur Mining, Inc.	Prepared by: Mr Christopher Pascoe, RM SME Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E. Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME Mr. Matthew Hoffer, P.G.
Report current as at: December 31, 2021

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Date and Signature Page

The following Qualified Persons, who are employees of Coeur Mining, Inc. or its subsidiaries,  prepared this technical report summary, entitled “Rochester Operations, Nevada, Technical Report Summary” and confirm that the information in the technical report summary is current as at December 31, 2021 and filed on February 16, 2022.

/s/ Christopher Pascoe

Christopher Pascoe, RM SME

/s/ Brandon MacDougall

Brandon MacDougall, P.E.

/s/ Matthew Bradford

Matthew Bradford, RM SME

/s/ Matthew Hoffer

Matthew Hoffer, P.G.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 a

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

CONTENTS
1.0	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	1-1
1.1	Introduction	1-1
1.2	Terms of Reference	1-1
1.3	Property Setting	1-1
1.4	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	1-2
1.5	Geology and Mineralization	1-2
1.6	History and Exploration	1-3
1.7	Drilling and Sampling	1-3
1.8	Data Verification	1-4
1.9	Metallurgical Test Work	1-5
1.10	Mineral Resource Estimation	1-6
1.10.1	Estimation Methodology	1-6
1.10.2	Mineral Resource Statement	1-7
1.10.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	1-8
1.11	Mineral Reserve Estimation	1-9
1.11.1	Estimation Methodology	1-9
1.11.2	Mineral Reserve Statement	1-9
1.11.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	1-10
1.12	Mining Methods	1-10
1.13	Recovery Methods	1-11
1.14	Infrastructure	1-12
1.15	Markets and Contracts	1-13
1.15.1	Market Studies	1-13
1.15.2	Commodity Pricing	1-13
1.15.3	Contracts	1-14
1.16	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	1-14
1.16.1	Environmental Studies and Monitoring	1-14
1.16.2	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	1-14
1.16.3	Permitting	1-14
1.16.4	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	1-15
1.17	Capital Cost Estimates	1-15
1.18	Operating Cost Estimates	1-15
1.19	Economic Analysis	1-18
1.19.1	Forward-Looking Information Caution	1-18
1.19.2	Methodology and Assumptions	1-18
1.19.3	Economic Analysis	1-18
1.19.4	Sensitivity Analysis	1-19
1.20	Risks and Opportunities	1-19
1.20.1	Risks	1-19
1.20.2	Opportunities	1-21
1.21	Conclusions	1-21
1.22	Recommendations	1-21
2.0	INTRODUCTION	2-1
2.1	Registrant	2-1
2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.2.1	Report Purpose	2-1
2.2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.3	Qualified Persons	2-4
2.4	Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection	2-4

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  i

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

2.5	Report Date	2-4
2.6	Information Sources and References	2-5
2.7	Previous Technical Report Summaries	2-5
3.0	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION	3-1
3.1	Property Location	3-1
3.2	Ownership	3-1
3.3	Mineral Title	3-1
3.3.1	Tenure Holdings	3-1
3.3.2	Tenure Maintenance Requirements	3-1
3.4	Property Agreements	3-4
3.4.1	Pershing County Road Maintenance Agreement	3-4
3.4.2	Pipeline, Electric Power Line, and Telephone Line License	3-4
3.4.3	Rights of Way	3-4
3.5	Surface Rights	3-5
3.6	Water Rights	3-5
3.7	Royalties	3-5
3.7.1	Asarco Royalty	3-5
3.7.2	Nelsen, Stice, and Kilrain Royalty	3-7
3.7.3	Davis Royalty	3-7
3.7.4	Midway Gold US Inc. and Barrick Royalty	3-7
3.8	Encumbrances	3-7
3.8.1	Credit Agreement	3-7
3.8.2	Permitting Requirements	3-8
3.8.3	Permitting Timelines	3-8
3.8.4	Permit Conditions	3-8
3.8.5	Violations and Fines	3-8
3.9	Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs	3-8
4.0	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY	4-1
4.1	Physiography	4-1
4.2	Accessibility	4-1
4.3	Climate	4-1
4.4	Infrastructure	4-2
5.0	HISTORY	5-1
5.1	Project Ownership History	5-1
5.2	Exploration and Development History	5-1
6.0	GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT	6-1
6.1	Deposit Type	6-1
6.2	Regional Geology	6-1
6.3	Local Geology	6-3
6.3.1	Lithologies	6-3
6.3.2	Structure	6-6
6.3.3	Metamorphism and Alteration	6-6
6.3.4	Mineralization	6-6
6.4	Property Geology	6-7
6.4.1	Rochester	6-7
6.4.1.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-7
6.4.1.2	Lithologies	6-7
6.4.1.3	Structure	6-7
6.4.1.4	Alteration	6-8
6.4.1.5	Mineralization	6-8

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  ii

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

6.4.2	Nevada Packard	6-11
6.4.2.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-11
6.4.2.2	Lithologies	6-11
6.4.2.3	Structure	6-11
6.4.2.4	Alteration	6-11
6.4.2.5	Mineralization	6-11
7.0	EXPLORATION	7-1
7.1	Exploration	7-1
7.1.1	Grids and Surveys	7-1
7.1.2	Geological Mapping	7-1
7.1.3	Geochemistry	7-1
7.1.4	Geophysics	7-2
7.1.5	Qualified Person’s Interpretation of the Exploration Information	7-2
7.1.6	Exploration Potential	7-2
7.2	Drilling	7-4
7.2.1	Overview	7-4
7.2.2	Drilling Excluded For Estimation Purposes	7-4
7.2.3	Drill Methods	7-4
7.2.4	Logging	7-16
7.2.5	Recovery	7-18
7.2.6	Collar Surveys	7-18
7.2.7	Down Hole Surveys	7-18
7.2.8	Comment on Material Results and Interpretation	7-18
7.3	Hydrogeology	7-19
7.3.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-19
7.3.2	Hydrogeology	7-19
7.3.3	Comment on Results	7-20
7.3.4	Groundwater Models	7-20
7.3.5	Water Balance	7-21
7.4	Geotechnical	7-21
7.4.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-21
7.4.2	Comment on Results	7-22
8.0	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY	8-1
8.1	Sampling Methods	8-1
8.1.1	Reverse Circulation	8-1
8.1.2	Core	8-1
8.1.3	Grade Control	8-1
8.2	Sample Security Methods	8-2
8.3	Density Determinations	8-2
8.4	Analytical and Test Laboratories	8-2
8.5	Sample Preparation	8-3
8.5.1	Pre-2008	8-3
8.5.2	2008–Current	8-3
8.6	Analysis	8-3
8.6.1	Coeur Pre-2008	8-3
8.6.2	2008–2011	8-4
8.6.3	2012–Current	8-4
8.6.4	Multi-element Analysis	8-6
8.6.5	Alio Gold	8-7
8.7	Quality Assurance and Quality Control	8-7
8.7.1	Coeur Pre-2008	8-7

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  iii

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

8.7.2	2008–2015	8-8
8.7.3	2016–Current	8-8
8.7.4	Alio Gold Results	8-9
8.8	Database	8-9
8.9	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures	8-9
9.0	DATA VERIFICATION	9-1
9.1	Internal Data Verification	9-1
9.1.1	Rochester Review	9-1
9.1.2	Nevada Packard Review	9-2
9.1.3	Nevada Packard Stockpiles	9-3
9.1.4	South and Charlie Stockpiles	9-4
9.1.5	Rochester In-Pit Stockpile	9-4
9.2	External Data Verification	9-4
9.3	Data Verification by Qualified Person	9-5
9.4	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	9-5
10.0	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING	10-1
10.1	Test Laboratories	10-1
10.2	Metallurgical Test Work	10-1
10.2.1	Rochester	10-1
10.2.2	Packard	10-1
10.2.3	Current Metallurgical Testing	10-2
10.3	Recovery Estimates	10-3
10.4	Metallurgical Variability	10-7
10.5	Deleterious Elements	10-7
10.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	10-8
11.0	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES	11-1
11.1	Introduction	11-1
11.2	Geological Model	11-1
11.3	Exploratory Data Analysis	11-3
11.4	Density	11-3
11.5	Composites	11-3
11.6	Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions	11-4
11.7	Variography	11-4
11.8	Interpolation	11-4
11.9	Block Model Validation	11-8
11.10	Classification of Mineral Resources	11-9
11.10.1	Mineral Resource Confidence Classification	11-9
11.10.2	Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification	11-9
11.11	Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction	11-9
11.11.1	Input Assumptions	11-9
11.11.2	Commodity Price	11-13
11.11.3	Cut-off	11-14
11.11.4	QP Statement	11-14
11.12	Mineral Resource Statement	11-15
11.13	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	11-20
12.0	MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES	12-1
12.1	Introduction	12-1
12.2	Development of Mining Case	12-1
12.3	Designs	12-1
12.4	Input Parameters	12-1
12.5	Net Smelter Return Cut-off	12-2

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  iv

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

12.6	Cut-Off Grades	12-2
12.7	Surface Topography	12-3
12.8	Density and Moisture	12-3
12.9	Dilution and Mine Losses	12-3
12.10	Mineral Reserve Statement	12-4
12.11	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	12-4
13.0	MINING METHODS	13-1
13.1	Introduction	13-1
13.2	Geotechnical Considerations	13-1
13.3	Hydrogeological Considerations	13-1
13.4	Design Considerations	13-2
13.5	Blasting and Explosives	13-3
13.6	Grade Control and Production Monitoring	13-3
13.7	Waste Rock and Backfill	13-6
13.8	Production Schedule	13-6
13.9	Equipment	13-11
13.10	Personnel	13-11
14.0	RECOVERY METHODS	14-1
14.1	Process Method Selection	14-1
14.2	Flowsheet	14-1
14.3	Process Plant	14-1
14.3.1	Overview	14-1
14.3.2	Heap Leach Pads	14-4
14.3.3	Merrill-Crowe Plant	14-5
14.4	Equipment Sizing	14-6
14.5	Power and Consumables	14-6
14.6	Personnel	14-6
15.0	INFRASTRUCTURE	15-1
15.1	Roads and Logistics	15-3
15.2	Stockpiles	15-3
15.3	Waste Rock Storage Facilities	15-5
15.4	Water Management	15-5
15.5	Water Supply	15-5
15.6	Power and Electrical	15-6
15.7	Fuel	15-7
16.0	MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS	16-1
16.1	Markets	16-1
16.2	Commodity Price Forecasts	16-1
16.3	Contracts	16-2
16.4	QP Statement	16-3
17.0	ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS	17-1
17.1	Baseline and Supporting Studies	17-1
17.2	Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs	17-1
17.2.1	Environmental Protection Measures	17-1
17.2.2	Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters of the United States	17-2
17.3	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	17-2
17.4	Permitting	17-5
17.4.1	Current Permits	17-5
17.4.2	POA 11	17-5
17.5	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	17-5

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  v

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

17.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues	17-8
18.0	CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS	18-1
18.1	Introduction	18-1
18.2	Capital Cost Estimates	18-1
18.2.1	Basis of Estimate	18-1
18.2.2	Capital Cost Summary	18-2
18.3	Operating Cost Estimates	18-2
18.3.1	Basis of Estimate	18-2
18.3.2	Operating Cost Summary	18-2
18.4	QP Statement	18-5
19.0	ECONOMIC ANALYSIS	19-1
19.1	Forward-looking Information Caution	19-1
19.2	Methodology Used	19-1
19.3	Financial Model Parameters	19-1
19.3.1	Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life	19-1
19.3.2	Metallurgical Recoveries	19-1
19.3.3	Smelting and Refining Terms	19-2
19.3.4	Metal Prices	19-2
19.3.5	Capital and Operating Costs	19-2
19.3.6	Working Capital	19-2
19.3.7	Taxes and Royalties	19-2
19.3.8	Closure Costs and Salvage Value	19-2
19.3.9	Financing	19-2
19.3.10	Inflation	19-3
19.4	Economic Analysis	19-3
19.5	Sensitivity Analysis	19-3
20.0	ADJACENT PROPERTIES	20-1
21.0	OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION	21-1
22.0	INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS	22-1
22.1	Introduction	22-1
22.2	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	22-1
22.3	Geology and Mineralization	22-1
22.4	Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling	22-1
22.5	Data Verification	22-2
22.6	Metallurgical Test Work	22-2
22.7	Mineral Resource Estimates	22-3
22.8	Mineral Reserve Estimates	22-3
22.9	Mining Methods	22-4
22.10	Recovery Methods	22-4
22.11	Infrastructure	22-4
22.12	Market Studies	22-5
22.13	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	22-6
22.14	Capital Cost Estimates	22-6
22.15	Operating Cost Estimates	22-7
22.16	Economic Analysis	22-7
22.17	Risks and Opportunities	22-7
22.17.1	Risks	22-7
22.17.2	Opportunities	22-8
22.18	Conclusions	22-9
23.0	RECOMMENDATIONS	23-1
24.0	REFERENCES	24-1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  vi

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

24.1	Bibliography	24-1
24.2	Abbreviations and Units of Measure	24-2
24.3	Glossary of Terms	24-6
25.0	RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT	25-1
25.1	Introduction	25-1
25.2	Macroeconomic Trends	25-1
25.3	Markets	25-1
25.4	Legal Matters	25-1
25.5	Environmental Matters	25-1
25.6	Stakeholder Accommodations	25-2
25.7	Governmental Factors	25-2
25.8	Internal Controls	25-2
25.8.1	Exploration and Drilling	25-2
25.8.2	Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates	25-3
25.8.3	Risk Assessments	25-3

TABLES
Table 1‑1:	Summary of Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	1-8
Table 1‑2:	Summary of Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price))	1-8
Table 1‑3:	Summary of Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Estimates, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	1-11
Table 1‑4:	Capital Cost Estimate Summary	1-16
Table 1‑5:	Operating Cost Estimate Summary	1-17
Table 1‑6:	Summary Cashflow Table	1-19
Table 1‑7:	NPV Sensitivity	1-20
Table 2‑1:	QP Chapter Responsibilities	2-5
Table 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Summary Table	3-2
Table 5‑1:	Exploration and Development History	5-2
Table 7‑1:	Property Drill Summary Table	7-5
Table 7‑2:	Drill Summary Table, Rochester	7-11
Table 7‑3:	Drill Summary Table, Nevada Packard	7-12
Table 8‑1:	Historical Primary and Secondary Laboratory Analysis Methods (2008–2011)	8-5
Table 10‑1:	Metallurgical Test Work Summary Table	10-3
Table 10‑2:	Leach Pad Recoveries to Date	10-4
Table 10‑3:	Historical Crushed and ROM Product Recoveries	10-4
Table 10‑4:	Stage III Crushed and ROM Product Recoveries	10-6
Table 10‑5:	Stage VI Recovery Confidence Intervals	10-6
Table 10‑6:	Ultimate Recovery Summary by Ore Type	10-8
Table 11‑1:	Capping Statistics for Rochester Silver Composites	11-5
Table 11‑2:	Capping Statistics for Rochester Gold Composites	11-6
Table 11‑3:	Capping Statistics for Nevada Packard Silver Composites	11-7
Table 11‑4:	Capping Statistics for Nevada Packard Gold Composites	11-7
Table 11‑5:	Confidence Classifications	11-10
Table 11‑6:	Operating Cost and Cut-offs for Mineral Resource Estimates	11-13
Table 11‑7:	Metallurgical Process Recoveries Used in Rochester Mineral Resources NSR Cutoff Calculations	11-15

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  vii

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑8:	Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-16
Table 11‑9:	Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-16
Table 11‑10:	Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-16
Table 11‑11:	Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-17
Table 11‑12:	Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester Stockpile (South-Charlie and In-pit), as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-17
Table 11‑13:	Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester Stockpile (South-Charlie and In-pit), as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-17
Table 11‑14:	Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard Stockpile as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-18
Table 11‑15:	Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard Stockpile Inferred Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-18
Table 11‑16:	Summary of Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)	11-19
Table 11‑17:	Summary of Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price))	11-19
Table 12‑1:	Pit Shell Input Parameters	12-2
Table 12‑2:	LOM Operating Cost and Cut-offs for Mineral Reserve Estimates	12-3
Table 12‑3:	Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Rochester, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	12-5
Table 12‑4:	Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Nevada Packard, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	12-5
Table 12‑5:	Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Rochester Stockpile (South and Charlie) as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	12-6
Table 12‑6:	Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Nevada Packard Stockpile, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	12-6
Table 12‑7:	Summary of Gold and Silver Mineral Reserve Estimates, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)	12-7
Table 13‑1:	Rochester Zone Solid Pit Slope Design Criteria	13-2
Table 13‑2:	Nevada Packard Pit Slope Design Criteria by Material Type	13-2
Table 13‑3:	Pit Design Assumptions	13-3
Table 13‑4:	Rochester LOM Production Schedule (2022–2028)	13-7
Table 13‑5:	Rochester LOM Production Schedule (2029–2034)	13-8
Table 13‑6:	Nevada Packard LOM Production Schedule	13-9
Table 13‑7:	Combined LOM Production Schedule, Rochester and Nevada Packard	13-10
Table 13‑8:	LOM Equipment List	13-11
Table 14‑1:	Approximate Heap Leach Volumes	14-5
Table 14‑2:	Stage IV Heap Leach Pad Design Criteria	14-6
Table 14‑3:	Major Process Equipment	14-7
Table 14‑4	Power Requirements	14-8
Table 17‑1:	Monitoring Components, Permit, Plans and Agencies	17-3
Table 17‑2:	Rochester Pit Waste Rock Management Procedures	17-4
Table 18‑1:	Estimated Capital Expenditures by Year ($M)	18-3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  viii

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑2:	Operating Costs by Year ($M)	18-4
Table 19‑1:	Tax Rates for Primary Taxes	19-3
Table 19‑2:	Cashflow Summary Table	19-4
Table 19‑3:	Annualized Cashflow (2022–2035)	19-5
Table 19‑4:	Annualized Cashflow (2036–2040)	19-6
Table 19‑5:	NPV Sensitivity	19-7

FIGURES
Figure 2‑1:	Project Location Plan	2-2
Figure 2‑2:	Mining Operations Layout Plan	2-3
Figure 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Location Map	3-3
Figure 3‑2:	Claims Subject to Royalties Plan	3-6
Figure 6‑1:	Regional Geology Plan	6-2
Figure 6‑2:	Project Geology Plan	6-4
Figure 6‑3:	Stratigraphic Column	6-5
Figure 6‑4:	Geological Plan, Rochester	6-9
Figure 6‑5:	Geological Cross Section, Rochester	6-10
Figure 6‑6:	Geological Plan, Nevada Packard	6-12
Figure 6‑7:	Geological Cross Section, Nevada Packard	6-13
Figure 7‑1:	Exploration Prospects	7-3
Figure 7‑2:	Project Drill Collar Location Plan	7-10
Figure 7‑3:	Drill Collar Location Plan, Rochester	7-13
Figure 7‑4:	Drill Collar Location Plan, Nevada Packard	7-14
Figure 7‑5:	Rochester Stockpile Drill Collar Location Map	7-15
Figure 7‑6:	Nevada Packard Stockpile Drill Collar Location Map	7-16
Figure 11‑1:	Rochester and Nevada Packard Model Areas	11-2
Figure 11‑2:	Cross-Sectional View Of Rochester Model Classification	11-11
Figure 11‑3:	Cross-Sectional View Of South-Charlie Stockpile Model Classification	11-11
Figure 11‑4:	Cross-Sectional View Of Rochester In Pit Stockpile Model Classification	11-12
Figure 11‑5:	Cross-sectional View Of Nevada Packard Model Classification	11-12
Figure 11‑6:	Cross-sectional View Of Nevada Packard Stockpile Model Classification	11-13
Figure 13‑1:	2020 Rochester LOM Pit Design (final pit outline)	13-4
Figure 13‑2:	2020 Nevada Packard LOM Pit Design (final pit outline)	13-5
Figure 14‑1:	Process Flowsheet, Rochester	14-2
Figure 15‑1:	POA 11 Authorized Facilities at Rochester	15-4

APPENDICES

Appendix A:  Mineral Tenure

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  ix

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E., Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME, and Mr. Matthew Hoffer, P.G., prepared a technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Rochester Gold Operations (the Rochester Operations or the Project), located in Nevada.

Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Rochester, Inc. (Coeur Rochester) is the operating entity.

1.2 Terms of Reference

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates, for the Rochester Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported for Rochester and Nevada Packard.  Mineral reserves are also estimated for material in stockpiles.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.  Unless otherwise indicated, the US customary system is used in this Report.  Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).  Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.  The Report uses US English.

1.3 Property Setting

The Rochester Operations are located in the Humboldt Range of northwestern Nevada, approximately 13 miles east of Interstate 80 from the Oreana–Rochester exit, and 26 miles northeast of the City of Lovelock in Pershing County, Nevada.  Lovelock, located approximately 90 miles northeast of Reno, Nevada, is the nearest town.

Primary access to Rochester is by way of the Limerick Canyon Road from Interstate Highway 80 (I-80) at the Oreana-Rochester exit (Exit 119).  Primary access to Nevada Packard is by way of a two-mile haulage road from the Rochester Pit located on land controlled by Coeur Rochester.

The climate in the Rochester Operations area is typical of north–central Nevada, with hot summers and cold winters.  Operations are conducted year-round.

The Rochester Operations are located within the basin-and-range physiographic province in the north–south trending Humboldt Range.  The operations area encompasses elevations ranging from 4,960 ft at the Nevada Packard deposit, to approximately 7,090 ft at the highest point of the Rochester Operations.  Vegetation is sparse, consisting of high desert grasses and shrubs with a sparse assortment of trees in the higher elevations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.4 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

The entire Project area covers 17,004 net acres, consisting of 761 owned and 13 leased federal unpatented lode claims and six (6) owned federal unpatented placer claims, totalling 11,625 net acres of public land owned and 269 net acres of public land leased, in total 11,894 acres of public land; 21 patented lode claims consisting of 357 acres; and interests owned in 4,793 gross acres of additional real property.

The federal mining claims and fee lands provide Coeur with the required surface rights to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan.

An agreement is in place with Pershing County for road maintenance.  Coeur also has a nonexclusive pipeline, electric power line, and telephone line license in place, which is maintained with an annual fee payment.  Coeur also holds a number of rights-of-way granted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

Coeur holds a number of water right permits issued by the Nevada Division of Water Resources.  These permits allow Coeur to appropriate water in the Buena Vista Valley Hydrographic Sub-Basin and the Packard Valley Sub-Basin.  The water right permits held by Coeur are sufficient to operate under the current LOM plan.

There are a number of royalties payable on the claims.  However, the only royalty that would be payable in the current LOM plan is to Asarco, and that royalty is tied to the silver price.  The royalty is payable when the average quarterly market price of silver equals or exceeds $26.58/oz Ag, indexed for inflation, up to a maximum rate of 5% with the condition that the Rochester mine achieves positive cash flow for the applicable year.  If cash flow is negative in any calendar year, the maximum royalty payable is $250,000.

The Rochester property is secured pursuant to Coeur’s revolving credit facility.

1.5 Geology and Mineralization

Mineralization in the Rochester district exhibits characteristics of both low-sulfidation and intermediate-sulfidation precious metal systems, complicated by supergene enrichment processes and significant oxidation.

The Rochester and Nevada Packard mines are located on the southern flank of the Humboldt Range within the Basin-and-Range province, where late Tertiary extension created large listric normal faults bounding generally north–south-trending mountain ranges and adjacent down-dropped valleys.  Tertiary volcanism produced the Limerick, Rochester, and Weaver Formations of the Koipato Group.  Both the Rochester and Nevada Packard deposits are hosted in predominately rhyolitic flows and tuffs of the Koipato Group.

A major structural feature within the southern portion of the Humboldt Range is the Black Ridge fault system, which is an extensive shear zone that is, in places, hundreds of feet wide.  Most of the Rochester silver–gold mineralization occurs in hanging wall faults, splays, and cross-faults within the Black Ridge system.

Mineralization is structurally controlled.  Economic mineralization is hosted mainly in the oxide zone, where the Rochester–Weaver Formation contact is the primary host for silver–gold mineralization, followed and influenced by mineralized fault zones with associated fracture, stockwork and disseminated mineralization away from the faults.  The contact is extensively brecciated and healed by silica in both the Rochester and Weaver Formations.  Quartz veins and veinlets typically exhibit both parallel and cross-cutting features, indicating multiple mineralizing events.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Acanthite and chlorargyrite are the most abundant oxide silver phases.  Below the oxidation zone, the hypogene profile is preserved, with the main minerals including pyrite, sphalerite, galena, argentiferous tetrahedrite, chalcopyrite, arsenopyrite, and pyrargyrite.

1.6 History and Exploration

Mineralization was discovered in the area in the early 1900s.  Where known, the following companies have had involvement in the Project area, prior to Coeur’s Project interest:  Rochester Hills Mining Co., Rochester Mines Co., Nevada Packard Mines Co., Rochester Silver Corp., Nenzel Crown Point Mining Co., Rochester Consolidated Mines Co., Western Properties Co., Silver State Mines Co., Asarco, Nevada Packard Mines Company, Cordero Mining Company, D.Z. Exploration, the Nevada Packard Joint Venture, Wharf Resources, Rye Patch Gold, and Alio Gold.  Work completed included production from underground workings during the earlier 20^th century, grab sampling, mud rotary, percussion, and reverse circulation (RC) drilling, metallurgical test work, production scale heap leach test work, and permitting activities.

Coeur acquired the Rochester property from Asarco in 1983, and the Nevada Packard property in 1996, from local prospectors.  Work completed includes geological mapping, geochemical sampling (soil, rock chip, stream sediment), ground and airborne geophysical surveys (induced polarization, gravity, magnetic) RC and limited core drilling, mining studies, permitting activities, metallurgical test work, mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, open pit mining, and heap leaching.  Mining commenced in 1986 from the Rochester open pit and in 2003 from the Nevada Packard open pit.

The Rochester deposit remains open at depth in areas where earlier drilling terminated in potentially economic grades.  Several structural trends are being explored where the structures exit the pit walls.  These areas are targeted based on grade and structural mapping.  The area northwest of the pit is considered to have the most potential.

1.7 Drilling and Sampling

The drill database for the Project area contains 3,461 drill holes (1,563,181 ft).  These data are primarily reverse circulation (RC) holes with limited core drilling.  Core and RC drilling supports mineral resource estimation.

There are 588 drillholes completed by multiple operators that are flagged in the acQuire drill hole database to be excluded from the resource estimates.  The drill holes are excluded due to unvalidated collar, survey, and/or analytical data.  Of these drill holes, 529 are excluded from the Rochester model, 42 are excluded from the Nevada Packard model, and two are excluded from the stockpile model.

Depending on the drill program and drill type, geological data that could be collected from drill hole logging included location details, recovery data, rock character, lithology, alteration (type/degree), quartz veining, sulfide presence, oxidation intensity, structural indicators, and accessory mineralogy.  Geotechnical data are collected from core holes.  Currently, RC chip trays are retained, and core is photographed.

Core recovery is generally good.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Collar survey methods varied, depending on drill campaign, operator and deposit, and could include Total Station and global positioning system (GPS) instruments.

Prior to 1995, drill holes were sporadically down-hole surveyed with gyroscopic instruments. Downhole surveys were used after 1995 for all angled holes and for vertical holes >400 ft deep using either surface recording gyroscopic, Maxibor, or North Seeker gyroscopic instruments.

Coeur samples RC drill cuttings on either 5 ft or 10 ft intervals.  Core logging and sampling intervals ranged from a minimum of 1 ft. to a maximum of 10 ft., based on geologic characteristics.

A density of 0.078 st/ft³ was used for both Rochester and Nevada Packard.  This density was confirmed by the on-going mining operations and third-party studies.

Independent primary and umpire laboratories used, and where recorded in the database, include American Assay Laboratories in Sparks, Nevada, ALS Chemex, located in Sparks, Nevada (ALS); Pinnacle Laboratories, located in Lovelock, Nevada; Inspectorate/Bureau Veritas Laboratory, located in Sparks, Nevada; Skyline Laboratories, located in Tucson, Arizona; and McClelland Laboratories Inc., located in Sparks, Nevada (McClelland).  Depending on the laboratory and time used, accreditations could include ISO17025:2005, ISO9001 and ISO9002.  Samples were also submitted to the Rochester mine laboratory, which was not independent and was not ISO-certified.  The Rochester mine laboratory is primarily used for grade control analysis.

Sample preparation depended on the analytical laboratory used.  Methods included drying; crushing to -⅜ in, primary crushing to ¼ in, secondary crushing to 10 mesh, crushing to 10 mesh (70% passing) and pulverizing to -100 mesh, 150 mesh or 200 mesh (85% or 80% passing).

Analytical methods included:

• Gold:  one assay ton fire assay, atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS); fire assay with gravimetric finish; inductively-coupled plasma (ICP) finish

• Silver:  fire assay with AAS finish; fire assay with gravimetric finish; ICP finish; ICP atomic emission spectroscopy (AES) finish; ICP emission spectroscopy (ES) finish; ICP optical emission spectroscopy (OES) finish;

• Total sulfur:  LECO;

• Multi-element:  33-element suite using ICP-ES; 35 element suite using ICP-ES; 45-element suite using ICP-ES or ICP mass spectrometry (MS).

Prior to 2008, Coeur inserted blanks, duplicates and standard reference materials (standards) into the sample stream.  From 2008–2015, insertions included a minimum of 5% standards, 5% blanks, and 7.5% duplicates. On a quarterly basis, 11% of all samples were selected (10% from pulps and 1% from coarse rejects) and sent to ALS for analysis as umpire samples.  From 2016 onward, the quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) program included insertion of blanks, duplicates and standards into the sample stream, and check assaying of selected samples at either Bureau Veritas or McClelland.

1.8 Data Verification

Data verification included internal and external database audits.  Internal verification included:  a detailed review of all documentation and assay data related to each drill hole; drill hole collar audits; and QA/QC reports.  External verification was undertaken by third-parties.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The QP personally undertook selected QA/QC verification and participated in programs to verify selected drill data prior to mineral resource estimation.  The QP also works on site, and is familiar with the ongoing operations.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

For a portion of the drilling in the Nevada Packard stockpile area where no physical collar or downhole surveys were conducted, the confidence classification for blocks not supported by other drill holes was restricted to inferred.

1.9 Metallurgical Test Work

Independent metallurgical test work facilities used over the Project life include McClelland Laboratories, Kappes, Cassiday & Assoc., Newfields, FLSmidth and Eagle Engineering.  Test work conducted included permeability testing, column leach and bottle roll leach test work. Additionally, bench-top high pressure grind roll (HPGR) test work as well as clay and mineralogical categorization have been performed.

The Rochester Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays process solutions, crusher and run-of-mine (ROM) ore samples, and refinery samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for column leach test, bottle roll tests, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

Current metallurgical test work can include:

• Daily samples:  contained moisture, size fractions and assayed for precious metal content.  Data generated from these daily samples is used to characterize daily production; dry tons produced from each ore source and gold and silver quantities delivered to the leach pad from each ore source;

• Monthly column leach tests and bottle roll leach tests:  recovery trends for gold and silver, size by grade recovery, reagent consumption, and permeability.  Results are used to forecast leach pad recoveries.

Metallurgical test work at Rochester, in coordination with modern heap leach modeling programs, continues to refine and confirm expected metal recovery rates and ultimate recovery values.  This testing provides better understanding of process optimization of the leach pads, metal inventory in the leach pads, potential cost reduction, increase crusher throughput, and to provide engineering support on future operational planning.  Ultimate recovery of Rochester ore is assumed to be 20 years from the date leaching commences.

Coeur uses heap leach recovery models and recovery curves based on test work and operations to forecast recovered gold and silver production from actual and/or forecasted mineralized product placed on the leach pads.  The models apply recovery rates to the product type (crushed, ROM), tonnage, depth to liner, contained ounces placed on each leach pad, and various kinetic factors to determine the expected recovered production in each month.  The predicted values are compared to actual production to ensure accuracy and provide confidence in the models’ ability to predict ounce production.

Metallurgical test results obtained from several test work programs conducted during the past three years show relatively low variability between several different locations with respect to gold and silver recovery assuming the sulfur content is below 0.7% and the crush size is held constant.

Based on extensive operating experience and test work, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.  None of the deposits contain sufficient quantities of sulfide minerals, organic carbon or silica encapsulation to be categorized as refractory ore

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.10 Mineral Resource Estimation

1.10.1 Estimation Methodology

Mineral resources were estimated for Rochester and Nevada Packard, and for the Rochester in-pit, Charlie, South, and Nevada Packard stockpiles.

Geologic modeling can include inputs from in-pit geologic mapping, drill log interpretation and surface mapping.  A total of 37 domains were generated for Rochester, seven for Nevada Packard.  No domaining was used for the Charlie and South stockpiles.  The Nevada Packard stockpile has four zones assigned, based on stockpile location, not geology.

All deposits were subject to exploratory data analysis methods, which included histograms, cumulative probability plots, box and whisker plots, and contact analysis.  In general, domains were treated as soft for mineral resource estimation purposes.

Rock types were assigned a density of 0.078 st/ft³ at Rochester and Nevada Packard.  The density assumption for stockpile material also 0.078 st/ft³, with a 37% swell factor applied.

All of the models use 10 ft composites.  Review of outlier data indicated that gold and silver grade caps should be imposed at Rochester, Nevada Packard, and the South and Charlie stockpiles but no caps were required for the Rochester in-pit and Nevada Packard stockpiles.

Variography was performed on all models in Supervisor to obtain search distances and directions for interpolation.

Ordinary kriging (OK) was selected as the estimation method for all silver and gold domains in the Rochester model.  A single pass estimate was completed for each domain.  The Rochester search distances varied by domain.  All domains were informed by a minimum of two composites, but the maximum number of composites used could vary from 20–32.  The maximum number of composites per drill hole was set at four.  The minimum number of octants was set at two, and the maximum number of composites per octant was set at eight.

The resource model for the South and Charlie stockpiles uses inverse distance weighting to the second power (ID2) interpolation with 10 ft composites and a 120 ft search distance, using 3–15 samples, with a limit of three samples per drill hole.  A minimum of one drill hole was allowed for interpolation.  A second estimation pass was applied to blocks that fell outside of the blocks that were estimated in the first pass.  The second pass estimate used a search distance of 1,500 ft and a minimum of one sample and maximum of five samples to estimate outlier blocks.

The resource model for the Rochester in-pit stockpile uses a single pass ID2 interpolation with 10 ft composites and a 300 ft search distance, using 3–15 samples, with a limit of three samples per drill hole.  A minimum of one drill hole was allowed for interpolation.

OK was selected as the reported estimation method for all silver and gold domains in the Nevada Packard estimate.  A single pass estimation was completed for each domain.  All domains were informed by a minimum of two composites, but the maximum number of composites used could vary from 24–40.  The maximum number of composites per drill hole was set at four.  The minimum number of octants was set at two, and the maximum number of composites per octant was set at eight.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The estimation method chosen for the Nevada Packard stockpile model uses ID2 interpolation with 10 ft composites and a 100 x 100 x 50 ft horizontal search ellipse using 1–12 samples, with a limit of two samples per drill hole.  A second pass model was created to estimate outlier blocks using an ID2 interpolation with a 200 x 200 x 50 ft search ellipse using the same sample restrictions as the primary pass.

Model validation included visual validation, construction of grade–tonnage curves and comparison of the grade–tonnage curves to the original estimate, swath plots, comparison of block model statistics to the sample assay and composite statistics, and reconciliation with available blast-hole data by comparing the resource OK estimate to an ID2 blast-hole model for the Rochester and Nevada Packard models.  No material biases or errors were noted from the reviews.

Mineral resources were classified based on a combination of the variogram range, distance to the nearest composite, number of composites used in the estimate, and number of drill holes used in the estimate.

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was undertaken that assessed likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal, and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.

Mineral resources amenable to open pit mining were constrained within conceptual pit shells. Stockpile material was estimated within the stockpile dimensions.

The gold price used in resource estimation is based on long-term analyst and bank forecasts, supplemented with research by Coeur’s internal specialists.  The estimated timeframe used is the 13-year LOM that supports the mineral reserve estimates. The forecast is US$1,700/oz Au and US$22/oz Ag for the mineral resource estimate.

The NSR cutoff used to tabulate resources within a constraining pit is not required to consider the mining costs and is only required to pay for the process and G&A costs.  At Rochester, this equates to a NSR cutoff of $2.55 for oxides and $2.65 for sulfides (≥0.7% total sulfur).  At Nevada Packard, this equates to a single NSR cutoff of $3.70 for all material because there are currently no sulfides estimated within the mineral resources there.

1.10.2 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300.The reference point for the estimate is in situ for those estimates within conceptual open pit outlines, and within stockpiles for those estimates of stockpiled material.

Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves in Table 1‑1 and Table 1‑2.  The estimates are current as at December 31, 2021.  Estimates are reported on a 100% ownership basis.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑1:          Summary of Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off (US$/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag		Au	Ag
Measured	191,889,000	0.002	0.29	372,000	56,573,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0
Indicated	39,565,000	0.002	0.33	74,000	12,932,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0
Total measured and indicated	231,454,000	0.002	0.30	443,000	69,505,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0

Table 1‑2:          Summary of Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price))

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off (US$/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag		Au	Ag
Inferred	128,410,000	0.002	0.30	243,000	38,626,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–59.5

Notes to accompany mineral resource estimates:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021, and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ and stockpile.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves on a 100% ownership basis.

4. Mineral resources for Rochester and Nevada Packard are tabulated within a confining pit shell that uses the following input parameters: metal price Au = $1,700/oz and Ag = $22/oz; oxide recovery Au = 77.7–93.7% and Ag = 59–61%; sulfide recovery Au = 15.2–77.7% and Ag = 0.0–59% with a net smelter return cutoff of $2.55–$3.70/st oxide and $2.65/st sulfide, where the NSR is calculated as resource net smelter return (NSR) = silver grade (oz/ton) * silver recovery (%) * [silver price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)] + gold grade (oz/ton) * gold recovery (%) * [gold price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)]; and variable pit slope angles that approximately average 43º over the life-of-mine.

5. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

1.10.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent grade cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; additional drilling, which may change confidence category classification in the pit margins from those assumed in the current pit optimization; additional sampling that may redefine the silver and/or gold grade estimates in certain areas of the resource estimation; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; Changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for open pit mining or stockpile rehandling constraining the estimates; and assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.11 Mineral Reserve Estimation

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.

1.11.1 Estimation Methodology

Mining rates are primarily driven by crusher capabilities based on their physical configuration and environmental permit limits.  The selective mining unit is sized at 50 x 50 x 30 ft.  The LOM plan mines material below the water table, which is considered in the existing permitting.

Pit optimizations were done using the Lerchs–Grossmann algorithm using Whittle software.  Appropriate cost and mining schedules were applied using cost estimates forecast for the LOM.

Cut-off grades were based on NSR equations.  The break-even NSR cutoff grade is equal to the total estimated long-term processing costs (including general and administrative (G&A) costs.  Mining costs are a sunk cost for blocks contained inside an economic pit limit and therefore do not need to be included in the break-even cutoff grade.  If a given block meets or exceeds the processing cost, it should report to the crusher.  If a block is placed in a low-grade stockpile, it must have an NSR value high enough to meet the break-even cutoff grade plus the cost of rehandle.  If it does not, it is placed in a sub-grade stockpile that is effectively treated as waste.

The densities used for the mineral reserve estimate are:

• In situ (open pit): 0.078 ton/ft³;

• Stockpile: 0.057 ton/ft³.

The assigned in situ moisture is 3–5% and stockpile material is forecast to average 5% moisture.

No loss or dilution was modelled in the pit optimization runs.  Due to the disseminated nature of the deposit, the margins around the orebody are mineralized waste, reducing the impacts of dilution during mining.

Break-even cut-offs are:

• Rochester:  oxide:  US$2.55/st; sulfide US$2.65/st;

• Nevada Packard:  oxide:  US$3.70/st.  There is no sulfide material mined at Nevada Packard.

1.11.2 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves have been classified using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported on a 100% ownership basis.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facilities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Mineral reserves are current as at December 31, 2021.  Mineral reserves are reported in Table 1‑3.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E., a Coeur Rochester employee.

1.11.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  predicted commodity prices; metallurgical recovery forecasts; operating cost assumptions; geotechnical and hydrological assumptions; and permitting and social license assumptions.

1.12 Mining Methods

Mineral reserves are exploited using conventional open pit methods and equipment.

Mining operations at Rochester are currently at planned capacity under the current crusher configuration.  The LOM plan will increase production levels in line with the 11^th Plan of Operations Amendment (POA 11), which was issued in 2020.  POA 11 allows for additional pad capacity, additional waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs), construction of new crushing and process facilities, and extensions of the Rochester pit and continued operations through the end of planned mine life.

Pit slope designs are based on evaluations and reports prepared by third-party consultants.  The pit slope design parameters for Rochester and Nevada Packard assume overall pit slope angles that range from 20–51º and 37–52.4º respectively.

Groundwater pumping requirements to support ongoing mine and process operations are anticipated to be completed as needed through existing production wells.  As such, hydrogeologic factors have not been considered in this report.

Detailed pit designs and phase plans are based on the economic pit limits and are used to generate a mining production schedule for both pits.  Designs assumed 30 ft bench heights, double lane haul road design widths of 88 ft, single lane haul road design widths of 65 ft, and maximum haul road gradients of 10%.

Blasting services are contracted out, and the contractor is responsible for obtaining, securing explosive agents, loading blast holes, and initiating the blasts.

As part of the approved Plan of Operations (PoO), there is a waste rock management plan.  All waste rock is placed either inside the pit perimeter as backfill, or outside the pit in approved WRSFs.  All waste rock is evaluated to determine if it is potentially acid-generating (PAG).

Rochester annual crusher throughputs for 2022 through to Q3 2023 are based on the limitations of existing crushing facilities and are estimated at 13.9 Mst/a.  Crusher throughputs are anticipated to increase to 32.0 Mst/a with the addition of a new crushing system in 2023.  Rochester operations are expected to continue through late-2034, a mine life of approximately 12 years.  Low grade stockpiles will be processed through the crushing system at the end of mine life during 2033-2034.  The Nevada Packard production schedule is based on an assumed crusher throughput of 6 Mst/a.  The anticipated LOM for the Nevada Packard deposit 6 years.  Nevada Packard stockpiles will be processed at the end of mine life during years 6-7.

Equipment is conventional to open pit operations.  The primary equipment fleet includes front-end loaders, hydraulic shovels, blasthole drills and haul trucks.

The personnel requirement for the remaining LOM averages 175 persons.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-10

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑3:          Summary of Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Estimates, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (Mst)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (koz)		NSR Cut-off (US$/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Ag	Au	Ag	Au		Ag	Au
Total proven	386,008	0.388	0.003	149,652	998	2.55–2.65	27–61	71-95
Total probable	31,769	0.365	0.003	11,593	82	2.55–2.65	27–61	71-95
Total Proven & Probable	417,777	0.386	0.003	161,245	1,080	2.55–2.65	27–61	71-95

Notes to accompany mineral reserve estimates:

6. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021, and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

7. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facilities.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E., a Coeur Rochester employee.

8. Mineral reserve estimates are tabulated within a confining pit shell and use the following input parameters:  gold price of US$1,400/oz Au and silver price of US$20/oz Au; Rochester oxide recovery Au = 85% and Ag = 59%; Nevada Packard oxide recovery Au = 95% and Ag = 61%; ROM recovery Au = 71% and Ag = 27%; with a Rochester net smelter return cutoff of $2.55/st oxide and US$2.65/st sulfide, and a Packard net smelter return cutoff of $3.70, where the NSR is calculated as resource net smelter return (NSR) = silver grade (oz/ton) * silver recovery (%) * [silver price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)] + gold grade (oz/ton) * gold recovery (%) * [gold price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)]; variable pit slope angles that approximately average 43º over the life-of-mine.

9. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents

1.13 Recovery Methods

Silver and gold recovery at Rochester is via heap leach with a Merrill-Crowe process to recover metal from the leach solutions.  The process design was based on a combination of metallurgical test work, study designs and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the leach pads were operational.  The design is conventional to the gold and silver industry and has no novel parameters.

From 1986 through mid-2019, Coeur used a three-stage crushing circuit with cone crushing in the tertiary position to produce a nominal ⅜-in product.

In 2019 Coeur adopted high-pressure grind roll crushing technology to replace cone crushers in the tertiary position. The product gradation and operational parameters of the high-pressure grind roll are being optimized for gradation, permeability, and recovery.  Crushed material, and at times ROM ore, is placed on heap leach pads.

The crushing circuit currently consists of a jaw crusher followed by cone crusher and an HPGR in the tertiary position.  The crusher is directly truck dump fed.  The HPGR product is conveyed to the loadout where it is loaded into haul trucks and truck dumped onto the Stage IV heap leach pad.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-11

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Cyanide heap leaching is used to extract silver and gold from the ore.  Metal-laden pregnant leach solution is then collected from a drain system and Merrill-Crowe processing is used to recover the precious metal.

The Merrill-Crowe facility is operating and assumptions in this Report were made with reference to actual operational results.  Metal production is done using furnace flux-smelt refining.  Active leaching of new ore and metal recovery is currently taking place on the Stage II, III and IV heap leach pads from material produced through crushing and ROM placement.

Future processing facilities include the Limerick Merrill-Crowe process plant that is planned to be in operation from 2023 through approximately 2035.  This process plant is being sized for 13,750 gpm to process solution and recover ounces from the Stage VI leach pad facility, which has a design capacity of 300 Mst.

Metallurgical recovery forecasts are variable by source and destination, and over the LOM plan silver recoveries will range 27.1%-61.4% and gold recoveries will range 71.2%-95.9%.  Full details of the various ore sources and destinations can be found in Table 10-6.

Power is supplied from an electrical grid, with generator backup.  Water is supplied from production wells.  Major consumables include lime, cyanide and zinc. The plant also consumes antiscalant, diatomaceous earth and refinery flux.

Current personnel requirements are approximately 67 persons for crushing and 70 persons for process.  As POA 11 comes online Coeur will require approximately 73 persons for crushing and 93 persons for process.  This ramp-up will occur over multiple years as equipment and processes are commissioned.

1.14 Infrastructure

The majority of the infrastructure required to support operations has been constructed and is operational.  This includes:  two open pits (Rochester and Nevada Packard); crusher and conveyor system; three active heap leach pads (Stage II, Stage III, and Stage IV), one reclaimed heap leach pad (Stage I), one heap leach pad under construction (Stage VI), and one permitted heap leach pad (Stage V); seven waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs); powerlines; production and monitoring water wells; contingency ponds; potable water treatment plant; water pipelines; site buildings; access, light vehicle, and haul roads; consumables storage; security and fencing; explosives magazines; upper and lower parking areas; and data and communications infrastructure.

Additional infrastructure that will be required to support the LOM plan as envisaged in the approved POA 11 consists of the following major areas: expansion of the two open pits; expansion of selected WRSFs; construction of the Stage VI leach pad; Limerick and Nevada Packard Merrill-Crowe process facilities; Limerick crushing and screening facility; installation of a crusher at Nevada Packard; construction of additional water diversion structures, roads, and pipelines; and upgrades to the electrical system.  Low-grade ore is stockpiled in the West WRSF and is segregated from the waste rock for potential future processing.

Seven WRSFs have been constructed.  POA 11 includes expansions to existing WRSFs with sufficient capacity to handle all expected waste material over the LOM plan.

When mining activities necessitate removal of spent ore from existing leach pads, the spent ore is moved to one of the other heap leach pad facilities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-12

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The Rochester Operations are a zero-discharge facility and has no on-site water treatment facilities.  Non-contact stormwater is diverted around process components in permitted conveyances.  Water supply for operations comes from three production wells.  There is also a potable water well that supplies potable water to the site.

Power is supplied by NV Energy via a 60 kV transmission line that runs through Rochester Canyon.  Power is initially received at the Sage Hen substation and terminates at a second mine-site substation located in American Canyon.  Step-down transformers are located at the crushing facilities, the maintenance shop and warehouse building, the process building, and several locations along the Stage III leach pad overland conveyor.  Motor control centers, which are located adjacent to these transformers, supply all additional electrical requirements.

Upgrades to the electrical utility system will be required to accommodate the proposed infrastructure associated with POA 11.  NV Energy’s existing 60 kV transmission line will need upgrades to meet the load increase associated with the proposed Limerick Canyon and Nevada Packard process plants and associated crushing and conveying systems.  The proposed upgrade will include service from NV Energy’s 120 kV system at the Oreana substation and approximately 10 miles of new transmission line.  A new substation, the Panama substation, will be constructed in Limerick Canyon, on the west side of the proposed Stage VI heap leach pad.

1.15 Markets and Contracts

1.15.1 Market Studies

Coeur has established contracts and buyers for the silver and gold doré product from the Rochester Operations and has an internal marketing group that monitors markets for its key products.  Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

Coeur sells its payable silver and gold production on behalf of its subsidiaries on a spot or forward basis, primarily to multi-national banks and bullion trading houses.  Markets for both silver and gold bullion are highly liquid, and the loss of a single trading counterparty would not impact Coeur’s ability to sell its bullion.

1.15.2 Commodity Pricing

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts. 

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are US$1,400/oz Au and US$20/oz Ag for mineral reserves and US$1,700/oz Au and US$22/oz Ag for mineral resources.  The QP considers the price forecasts to be reasonable.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-13

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.15.3 Contracts

Coeur has a contract with a U.S.-based refiner that refines the doré into silver and gold bullion.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, fuel, and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

1.16 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

An initial PoO was approved by the BLM and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) in February 1986.  After the approval of the initial PoO, 11 amendments were submitted from 1988–2017, the most recent being POA 11.  POA 11 was considered complete by the BLM in September 2017, which initiated an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  A Record of Decision (ROD) was issued by the BLM on March 30, 2020.  A Reclamation Permit for the POA 11 expansion was issued by NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (BMRR) on November 5, 2020, with the surety bond in place with the BLM on November 25, 2020.

1.16.1 Environmental Studies and Monitoring

Baseline studies and monitoring were required for each mine permit obtained.  Groundwater discharge plans and waste rock management plans are in place.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a determination on October 16, 2018 that there are no Waters of the United States within and surrounding the Project area.  This determination is valid until October 16, 2023.

As the mine plans change, permits will be updated as required.  Air permits currently limit production through the crushing circuits to 21.9 Mst/a.

1.16.2 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

Financial surety sufficient to reclaim mine and processing facilities is up to date and held by the BLM, the primary federal agency responsible for regulatory oversight.  The Reclamation Plan associated with the financial surety was updated in 2020 and accepted by both the BLM and NDEP–BMRR.

The reclamation cost estimate for Rochester Operations is approximately $163.7 M based on the 2020 Reclamation Cost Estimate.  There is an additional approximate $11.4 M added to account for new disturbances within Nevada Packard.  This would bring the total reclamation cost estimate to approximately $175.1 M using 2021 cost models.

1.16.3 Permitting

The Rochester mine has been in operation since 1986 and obtained the required environmental permits and licenses from the appropriate county, state and federal agencies.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-14

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Operational standards and best management practices were established to maintain compliance with applicable county, state and federal regulatory standards and permits.

Under POA 11, early works construction began in September 2020 in Limerick Canyon and the construction will be completed in stages.

1.16.4 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur Rochester has consistently positively impacted the local community and its economy for more than 30 years.  The Rochester Operations generate nearly 1,000 direct and indirect jobs, making it the largest employer in Pershing County.

In 2021, Coeur developed a Communication, Community & Government Engagement Strategy to develop new relationships with local communities and leverage existing support during permit actions or other activities influenced by public opinion.

Coeur supports future local leaders through multiple partnerships, including Lowry High School, Nevada Mining Association's Educational Committee, and Build NV.  In addition to scholarship funds, Coeur is helping to develop programs that will prepare students for the workforce. 

The company is committed to helping preserve Native American cultural heritage while developing mutually beneficial partnerships. Coeur Rochester has also assisted tribes in obtaining vital personal protective equipment to help reduce the spread of COVID-19.

1.17 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The basis of the capital estimates are derived from expected equipment needs and project plans and are determined with the assistance of vendor quotes, previous buying experience and/or experience with construction of similar projects.  The capital cost estimate includes consideration of historical capital cost estimates.

Major LOM capital costs include, but are not limited to, POA 11 crusher, Merrill-Crowe plant, heap leach pad construction, new crusher, new tertiary screening, and other infrastructure improvements.  The POA 11 mine expansion is expected be completed in 2023.  Development of the Nevada Packard mine is expected to break ground in 2025 with production commencing in 2027.  This mine will also include a new crusher, Merrill-Crowe plant, heap leach facility, mobile equipment and supporting infrastructure.

Capital expenditure for the LOM is estimated at $641 M.  Estimated capital expenditures are summarized in Table 1‑4.

1.18 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Operating costs were developed based on historical cost performance and first principal calculations based on current commodity costs, labor rates, and equipment costs.  The costs are provided for each major cost center: mining, processing, selling expense, and general and administrative (G&A).

Estimated operating costs are summarized in Table 1‑5.  The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$2,246.6 M or US$5.38/t placed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-15

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑4:          Capital Cost Estimate Summary ($k)

Years	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
POA 11/Development	237,356	151,114
Sustaining	27,850	45,449	32,624	55,800	28,679	21,530	4,689	1,680	1,744
Nevada Packard				7,305	41,394	359	359	359	359
New Leases	(32,245)
Total	232,961	196,563	32,624	63,105	70,073	21,889	5,048	2,039	2,103
Years	2031	2032	2033	2034	2035	2036	2037	2038	Total
POA 11/Development									388,470
Sustaining	8,695	1,619	1,700	1,500					233,559
Nevada Packard	359	359	359						51,212
New Leases									(32,245)
Total	9,054	1,978	2,059	1,500					640,996

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-16

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑5:          Operating Cost Estimate Summary

Years	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Mining	$US (1,000)	46,021	59,732	68,656	64,648	81,575	71,916	94,129	70,171	97,726
	$/st moved	1.90	1.46	1.39	1.41	1.35	1.46	1.38	1.44	1.36
Process	$US (1,000)	60,201	65,016	74,159	71,679	67,936	80,098	80,662	81,666	82,341
	$/st placed	3.54	4.29	2.31	2.23	2.07	2.09	2.09	2.14	2.16
G&A	$US (1,000)	21,503	21,654	22,280	22,600	21,944	22,972	22,326	22,314	22,804
	$/st placed	1.26	1.43	0.70	0.70	0.67	0.60	0.58	0.59	0.60
Selling Cost	$US (1,000)	1,205	1,422	2,240	2,829	2,834	2,084	2,035	2,367	2,885
Total Operating Costs	$US (1,000)	128,503	147,823	167,335	161,819	174,289	177,131	199,291	176,671	205,883
	$/st placed	7.58	9.76	5.22	5.03	5.30	4.62	5.15	4.64	5.40
Years		2031	2032	2033	2034	2035	2036	2037	2038	Total
Mining	$US (1,000)	125,072	71,804	71,649	27,417					949,796
	$/st moved	1.30	1.31	1.35	1.10					1.38
Process	$US (1,000)	81,313	83,235	70,248	53,202	13,947	6,626	2,126	2,133	976,624
	$/st placed	2.10	2.17	2.11	2.13					2.34
G&A	$US (1,000)	22,038	22,358	21,296	19,293	2,749	915	692	374	290,112
	$/st placed	0.57	0.58	0.64	0.77					0.69
Selling Cost	$US (1,000)	2,671	2,772	2,093	1,795	1,148	211	17	1	30,027
Total Operating Costs	$US (1,000)	230,666	179,450	165,340	101,725	17,844	7,752	2,872	2,508	2,247,329
	$/st placed	5.97	4.67	4.98	4.07					5.38

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-17

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.19 Economic Analysis

1.19.1 Forward-Looking Information Caution

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here. 

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage. 

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals.

1.19.2 Methodology and Assumptions

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model.  The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.  The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of 13 years with mining complete in 2034 and processing and gold–silver production continuing to 2037.  Smelting and refining costs are defined by contract.

The active mining operation ceases in 2034; however, closure costs are estimated to be US$ 175.1 M.  For the purposes of the financial model, all costs incurred beyond 2040 are included in the cash flow in 2040.

1.19.3 Economic Analysis

The NPV at 5% is US$ 348.1 M.  As the cashflow is based on existing operations, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

The cashflow is summarized in Table 1‑6.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-18

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑6:          Summary Cashflow Table ($M)

	LOM Total
Gross Revenue	3,800.2
Operating Costs
Mining	(949.8)
Process	(976.6)
G&A	(290.1)
Selling	(30.0)
Total Operating Costs	(2,246.6)
Other Costs	(1.2)
Operating Cashflow	1,552.5
Capital Expenditures	(641.0)
Reclamation	(175.1)
Cash Flow bef. Taxes	736.4
Tax	(48.9)
Total Free Cash Flow	687.5
NPV (5%)	348.1

1.19.4 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, metallurgical recovery, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a range of 20% above and below the base case values.  The NPV sensitivity to these parameters is illustrated in Table 1‑7.

The Project is most sensitive to metal prices, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs.  Grade sensitivity mirrors the sensitivity to metal price.

1.20 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 1.10.3 and Chapter 1.11.3 respectively and discussed in more detail in Chapter 11 and Chapter 12.

1.20.1 Risks

Risks include:

• Changes to metallurgical recovery assumptions could affect revenues and operating costs. These changes could be due to inability to produce a crushed product with the HPGR that meets specification in terms of top-size or particle size distribution, or other material properties of the ore are different than base case assumptions. This could require revisions to cut-off grades and mineral reserve estimates or could require additional capital cost to upgrade the planned ore flow system;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-19

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑7:          NPV Sensitivity ($M)

Parameter	-20%	-10%	-5%	Base	5%	10%	20%
Metal price	(144.8)	101.8	224.9	348.1	470.0	591.5	833.2
Operating cost	661.3	505.2	426.8	348.1	268.7	189.3	30.4
Capital cost	459.6	403.9	376.0	348.1	320.1	292.0	235.9
Grade	(156.5)	96.0	222.0	348.1	472.9	597.4	844.5

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

• Coeur’s ability to timely complete POA 11, Nevada Packard or other future mine expansion and mine life extension projects on budget is dependent on numerous factors, many of which are outside of our control, including, among others, availability of funding on acceptable terms, timing of receipt of permits and approvals from regulatory authorities, extreme weather events, obtaining materials and equipment and construction, engineering and other services at favorable prices and terms, and disputes with third-party providers of materials, equipment or services.  The construction services related to POA 11 will be performed by contractors, which creates a risk of delays or additional costs to the project resulting from inability of contractor to complete work;

• Commodity price increases for key consumables such diesel, electricity, tires and other consumables could negatively impact operating costs and also the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources;

• Labor cost increases or productivity decreases could also impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources, or impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserves;

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  As the mine gets deeper, any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

• Changes in climate could result in drought and associated potential water shortages that could impact operating cost and ability to operate.

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Rochester Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates;

• Political risk from challenges to:

o Mining licenses;

o Environmental permits;

o Coeur’s right to operate;

• Changes to assumptions as to governmental tax or royalty rates, such as taxation rate increases or new taxation or royalty imposts.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-20

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1.20.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all of the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all of the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Exploration of the broader district for additional silver and gold targets;

• Higher metal prices than forecast could present upside sales opportunities and potentially an increase in predicted Project economics;

• Potential to find or gain access to new ore sources that could be processed at the existing Limerick Canyon leach pad.

1.21 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

1.22 Recommendations

As the Rochester Operations is an operating mine, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 1-21

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Registrant

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E., Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME, and Mr. Matthew Hoffer, P.G., prepared a technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Rochester Gold and Silver Operations (the Rochester Operations or the Project), located in Nevada as shown in Figure 2‑1.

Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Rochester, Inc. (Coeur Rochester) is the operating entity.

2.2 Terms of Reference

2.2.1 Report Purpose

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, for the Rochester Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources are reported for Rochester and Nevada Packard.

Mineral reserves are reported for Rochester and Nevada Packard.  Mineral reserves are also estimated for material in stockpiles.

2.2.2 Terms of Reference

The Rochester Operations consist of the Rochester and Nevada Packard open pits and associated stockpiles.

Mining commenced in 1986 from the Rochester open pit and in 2003 from the Nevada Packard open pit.  Figure 2‑2 shows the location of the current and mined-out open pits, and development prospects.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.

Unless otherwise indicated, the US customary system is used in this Report.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.

The Report uses US English.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  2-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑1:          Project Location Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2020.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  2-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑2:          Mining Operations Layout Plan

Note:  RDS = WRSF; HLP = heap leach pad.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  2-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

2.3 Qualified Persons

The following Coeur or Coeur Rochester employees serve as the Qualified Persons (QPs) for the Report:

• Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Senior Director, Technical Services;

• Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E., Engineering Superintendent; Coeur Rochester

• Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME, Geology Superintendent; Coeur Rochester

• Mr. Matthew Hoffer, P.G., Senior Manager, Geology.

The QPs are responsible for, or co-responsible for, the Report Chapters set out in Table 2‑1.

2.4 Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection

Mr. Pascoe’s most recent site visit was December 7, 2021.  He had previously visited the site on a number of occasions from 2015–2021.  During the site visits he reviewed mineral resource estimates, mine planning, metallurgy, and the overall operations.

Mr. MacDougall has been employed at the Rochester Operations since 2015, and this onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  During his time at the Rochester Operations, Brandon has been involved in the capacities of long/short range planner, mine shift supervisor, mine operations general supervisor, acting mine operations superintendent, and mine engineering superintendent.  In his current role he is responsible for the mine engineering group where he oversees all mine design and planning activities.

Mr. Bradford has been employed as the Geology Superintendent at the Rochester Operations since 2021, and this onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  Prior to this position, Mr. Bradford worked for Coeur from 2017–2021 in multiple capacities including data validation, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC), and resource modeling.  In his current role, he is responsible for the mine geology and geotechnical engineering groups together with mineral resource modeling.

Mr. Hoffer has been employed at Coeur since 2014.  Mr. Hoffer spent several months onsite at the Rochester Operations in 2021 as the Interim Exploration Manager.  His most recent site visit occurred in July 2021.  This onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  During his time at the operations, Matthew inspected site geology, exploration activities, drilling activities, and supervised the geological data collection.

2.5 Report Date

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

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  2-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 2‑1:          QP Chapter Responsibilities

QP Name	Chapter Responsibility
Mr. Chris Pascoe	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.9,1.13,1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22, 2,, 3,4, 10,14,16,17,18, 19, 20, 21, 22.1, 22.2, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.16, 22.17, 22.18, 22.6, 23, 24, 25.
Mr. Brandon MacDougall	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.11, 1.12, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.20, 1.22, 4, 5, , 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22.1, 22.2, 22.8, 22.9, 22.11, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.17, 23, 24, 25
Mr. Matthew Hoffer	1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.20, 1.22, 2, 5, 7, 22.1, 22.4, 22.17, 23, 24, 25
Mr. Matthew Bradford	1.1, 1.2, 1.10, 1.20, 1.22, 2, 6, 8, 9, 11, 22.1, 22.3, 22.5, 22.7, 22.17, 23, 24, 25

2.6 Information Sources and References

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

2.7 Previous Technical Report Summaries

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

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021  2-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

3.1 Property Location

The Rochester Operations are located in the Humboldt Range of northwestern Nevada, approximately 13 miles east of Interstate 80 from the Oreana-Rochester exit, and 26 miles northeast of the City of Lovelock in Pershing County, Nevada.

The centroid for the Project is 400600 E, 4460300 N, UTM Zone 11T.

Centroid locations for the key Project components include:

• Rochester open pit:  402045 E, 4460050 N, UTM Zone 11T;

• Nevada Packard open pit:  400600 E, 4456675 N, UTM Zone 11T.

3.2 Ownership

The Project is held in the name of Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Rochester.

3.3 Mineral Title

3.3.1 Tenure Holdings

The Rochester Operations are located within the following sections, which are located within the Mt. Diablo meridian, Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, and 35 of T28N, R34E, and Section 5 of T27N, R34E.

The entire Project area covers 17,004 net acres, consisting of 761 owned and 13 leased federal unpatented lode claims and six (6) owned federal unpatented placer claims, totalling 11,625 net acres of public land owned and 269 net acres of public land leased, in total 11,894 acres of public land; 21 patented lode claims consisting of 357 acres; and interests owned in 4,793 gross acres of additional real property.

A summary of the claims is provided in Table 3‑1, and an overall tenure location plan provided in Figure 3‑2.  Claim details are provided in Appendix A.

3.3.2 Tenure Maintenance Requirements

The federal unpatented lode claims are maintained by the timely annual payment of claim maintenance fees, which are $165.00 per claim, payable to the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), on or before September 1.  Should the annual claim maintenance fee not be paid by that time, the unpatented lode claim(s) are, by operation of law, rendered forfeited. As of the effective date of this Report, all such payments were up to date.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑1:          Mineral Tenure Summary Table

Claims Group	Claim Type	Number of Claims	Area (net acres)
Coeur Rochester Owned	Patented lode	21	357
	Federal unpatented placer	6	120
	Federal unpatented lode	761	11,625
	Federal unpatented mill site	0	0
	Fee Lands	35	4,793
Coeur Rochester Leased	Patented lode	0	0
	Patented mill site	0	0
	Federal unpatented mill site	0	0
	Federal unpatented lode	13	269
	Fee Lands	0	00

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑1:          Mineral Tenure Location Map

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The patented lode claims are private land, and therefore not subject to federal claim maintenance requirements.  However, as private land, they, and Coeur Rochester’s additional real property, are subject to ad valorem property taxes assessed by Pershing County, Nevada, which are due annually on the third Monday of August.  As of the effective date of this Report, all payments were up to date.

Coeur located new federal unpatented lode claims on grounds previously covered by those that were subject to lease agreements.  Coeur has continued to pay lease fees to the lessors according to the rates set forth in the lease agreements.  Coeur is not currently mining within any of these new claims; instead, it uses the property primarily to facilitate access to other portions of the Rochester Operations area and to provide space for infrastructure.

3.4 Property Agreements

3.4.1 Pershing County Road Maintenance Agreement

A Road Maintenance Agreement dated January 3, 2011 was entered into by Pershing County, Nevada, and Coeur Rochester, for the maintenance of a 13-mile segment of the county-owned Limerick Canyon Road from Oreana to the Rochester mine site.  The agreement has no expiry date.

The agreement allows for Pershing County to use its equipment, materials, and personnel to maintain and repair the road, with Coeur paying half of the annual materials costs.

Coeur is responsible for removing snow and ice from the segment of the road that is subject to the road agreement, using its own personnel and equipment; however, Pershing County supplies the sand and salt for snow removal.

3.4.2 Pipeline, Electric Power Line, and Telephone Line License

A nonexclusive pipeline, electric power line, and telephone line license granted by a predecessor in interest to Nevada Land and Resource Company, LLC. to Coeur covers 250 acres, and is located in Section 3, Township 28N, Range 34E Mount Diablo base and meridian.

The licence, which was granted on February 14, 1986, can be renewed annually, and is subject to an annual licence fee payment, which was $3,225.30 for the 2021 term.

3.4.3 Rights of Way

A 30-year right-of-way grant was conveyed by the BLM to Coeur on December 6, 1985.  The right-of-way was amended in 2016 to remove sections of land that were now within the plan of operations, and to extend the right-of-way for a further 20 years.  The right-of-way covers a 3.41 acre area within Section 4, Township 28N, Range 34E Mount Diablo base and meridian. The right-of-way is subject to an annual lease payment, which was $118.27 for the 2021 term.

A 30-year right-of-way grant was conveyed by the BLM to Coeur on June 15, 1989, covering an area of 0.459 acres.  The right-of-way is within Section 18, Township 27N, Range 31E Mount Diablo base and meridian, and is subject to an annual lease payment.  The annual lease payment was $2,531.06 in 2021.  The right-of-way was renewed in 2019, with an expiration date of December 31, 2050.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

A non-exclusive right-of-way easement was granted by Coeur to Barrick Gold Exploration, Inc. (Barrick) while Barrick negotiated with the BLM for a right-of-way in its name. The right of way is located within Sections 3, 10 and 11 of Township 28N, Range 34E Mount Diablo base and meridian.  The agreement envisages that if the BLM-granted right-of-way is obtained, the non-exclusive right-of-way agreement will continue for as long as the BLM-granted right-of-way is in effect.

3.5 Surface Rights

The federal mining claims and fee lands provide Coeur with the required surface rights to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan.

3.6 Water Rights

Coeur holds 13 water right permits issued by the Nevada Division of Water Resources.  These permits allow Coeur to appropriate water in the Buena Vista Valley Hydrographic Sub-Basin for mining, milling, domestic and dewatering which can be applied to beneficial use not to exceed 1,927 acre-feet per annum with a discharge rate of 1,198.38 gpm.

Coeur also has permits to appropriate water in the Packard Valley Sub-Basin for mining, milling and dewatering which can be applied to beneficial use not to exceed 967.3 acre-feet per annum with a discharge rate of 725 gpm.

The water right permits held by Coeur are sufficient to operate under the current LOM plan.

3.7 Royalties

A location map showing the locations of claims subject to royalties is provided in Figure 3‑2.

3.7.1 Asarco Royalty

An Agreement of Sale, Assignment and Purchase, dated November 30, 1983 was entered into by Asarco Inc. (Asarco) and Coeur.  Under that agreement, an overriding royalty is payable to Asarco on a quarterly basis on all ores, concentrates, metals, or other valuable mineral products produced and sold from portions of federal unpatented lode claims and patented lode claims located within township 28N, range 34E, Mount Diablo base and meridian, in the portions of S ½ of S ½ of S ½ of 03; portions of S ½ of S ½ of SE ¼ of 04 E ½, E ½ of SW ¼, of 09, 10, NW ¼; portions of SE ¼ of NW ¼ and W ½ of SW ¼, 15, E ¾, NW ¼ of SW ¼ of 16, NE ¼, E ½ of NW ¼; portions of N ½ of S ½ of 21, and N ¾ of 22.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑2:          Claims Subject to Royalties Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The royalty is calculated on the percentage of net amounts paid by any smelter, refinery, or other buyer of said products after deduction of usual and customary charges and freight and insurance charges from the claims to a buyer’s plant.  The overriding royalty varies according to the “adjusted price of silver”, as defined in the agreement.  The royalty is payable when the average quarterly market price of silver equals or exceeds $26.58/oz Ag, indexed for inflation, up to a maximum rate of 5% with the condition that the Rochester mine achieves positive cash flow for the applicable year.  If cash flow is negative in any calendar year, the maximum royalty payable is $250,000.

3.7.2 Nelsen, Stice, and Kilrain Royalty

The Canyon and Canyon No. 1 (M.S. 4158, Pat. 469396) patented lode claims are subject to a net smelter return (NSR) royalty of 5.0% that is payable to Gladys L. Nelsen (aka Gladys N. Stice), Pamela M. Kilrain, and Maurice A. Nelsen, as a result of a sales deed dated August 19, 1988.

No mineralization within these claims is included in the life-of-mine (LOM) plan described in this Report.

3.7.3 Davis Royalty

The Joplin No. 1, Joplin No. 2, Joplin No. 3, Joplin No. 4, Joplin No. 5, Joplin No. 6, Joplin Fraction, and Baltimore (M.S. 4395, Pat. 886486) patented lode claims are subject to a 2½% NSR payable to L.E. Davis and Anne C. Davis, as a result of a sales deed dated August 10, 1956.

No mineralization within these claims is included in the LOM plan described in this Report.

3.7.4 Midway Gold US Inc. and Barrick Royalty

The 101 Spring Valley unpatented lode claims are subject to a 3.0% NSR, payable to Midway Gold US Inc. and Barrick, under a quitclaim deed dated December 16, 2015.

No mineralization within these claims is included in the LOM plan described in this Report.

3.8 Encumbrances

3.8.1 Credit Agreement

Under a September 29, 2017 Credit Agreement by and between Coeur Mining, Inc., certain subsidiaries of Coeur Mining, Inc. (including Coeur Rochester), and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, and the other lenders party to the agreement (as amended, the Credit Agreement), a lien was placed upon the legal and beneficial title in and to the lands comprising the Rochester Property, securing a loan under the Credit Agreement, in an aggregate principal amount of up to $300,000,000.  The Credit Agreement matures in March 2025.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

3.8.2 Permitting Requirements

Permits in place for operations are discussed in Chapter 17.4.

3.8.3 Permitting Timelines

All permits required for operations are currently in place.

3.8.4 Permit Conditions

Permits are discussed in Chapter 17.4.

3.8.5 Violations and Fines

There are no major violations or fines as understood in the United States mining regulatory context that have been reported for the Rochester Operations. 

3.9 Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs

To the extent known to the QP, there are no other known significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the properties that comprise the Rochester Operations that are not discussed in this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 3-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

4.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

4.1 Physiography

The Rochester Operations are located within the basin-and-range physiographic province in the north–south trending Humboldt Range.  The basin-and-range province consists of narrow, short mountain ranges of moderate to high relief, separated by broad alluvial valleys or basins.  The Humboldt Range is bounded on the east by the Buena Vista Valley and to the west by the Humboldt River Valley.

The Rochester Operations area encompasses elevations ranging from 4,960 ft at the Nevada Packard deposit, to approximately 7,090 ft  at the highest point of the Rochester Operations.

Vegetation is sparse, consisting of high desert grasses and shrubs with a sparse assortment of trees in the higher elevations.

4.2 Accessibility

Lovelock, Nevada, located approximately 90 miles northeast of Reno, Nevada, is the nearest town to the Rochester Operations.

Primary access to Rochester is by way of the Limerick Canyon Road from Interstate Highway 80 (I-80) at the Oreana-Rochester exit (Exit 119).  Pershing County maintains the county road from I-80 to the cattle guard at the Limerick Canyon Summit/Spring Valley Pass.  Coeur maintains, and will continue to maintain, the paved road from the Unionville Road cut-off to Rochester throughout the active mine life and post-mining responsibility period.

Primary access to Nevada Packard is by way of a two-mile haulage road from the Rochester Pit located on land controlled by Coeur Rochester.  Road maintenance is performed using Rochester equipment.

4.3 Climate

The climate in the Rochester Operations area is typical of north–central Nevada, with hot summers and cold winters.

Precipitation in the form of snow and rain occurs mostly in the winter and spring months, and averages 13 inches.  Evapo-transpiration is estimated at 53.6 inches per year, based on a site elevation of 6,400 ft.  Average monthly temperatures range from 20.5–69.4ºF.

Operations are conducted year-round.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 4-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

4.4 Infrastructure

Mining vendors in Reno, Nevada, Winnemucca, Nevada, and Elko, Nevada provide most of the services required to support the Rochester Operations.

The Rochester Operations have a well-developed mine infrastructure and a local workforce with extensive experience in mining operations.  Rochester is within a reasonable commuting distance from the Nevada cities of Lovelock, Winnemucca, Fernley, and Fallon.

Electrical power is supplied by NV Energy.

Water is sourced from three production wells and one potable water well located within the permitted mine boundary.

The Rochester Operations currently have all infrastructure in place to support mining and processing activities (see also discussions in Chapter 13, Chapter 14, and Chapter 15 of this Report).  These Report chapters also discuss water sources, electricity, personnel, and supplies.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 4-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

5.0 HISTORY

5.1 Project Ownership History

A high-grade silver deposit was discovered on Nenzel Hill in 1912 and mined primarily through underground methods by various operators until the closure of the Rochester Mill in 1929.  Attempts were made to identify additional high-grade areas within the existing mines into the 1970’s with no success.

Asarco discovered a large tonnage, low-grade silver deposit at Nenzel Hill in the early 1980s.  Coeur purchased Asarco’s Rochester area interests in 1983, and established its subsidiary company, Coeur Rochester.

The Nevada Packard area has been held by the Nevada Packard Mines Company, Cordero Mining Company, D.Z. Exploration, the Nevada Packard Joint Venture, and Wharf Resources.  Coeur obtained a project interest in 1996 and purchased a 100% interest in 1999.

5.2 Exploration and Development History

A summary of the exploration and development history for the Rochester Operations is provided in Table 5‑1.  A summary of known total drill footage is provided in Chapter 7 of this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 5-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 5‑1:       Exploration and Development History

Year	Operator	Comment
1860s	Unknown	Rochester District discovered, mining in district commenced.  Initial focus on underground exploitation, later on placer mining.
1911– 1912	Joseph Nenzel	Discovered high-grade silver mineralization on west slope of Nenzel Hill
1912	Dick Keyworth and partners	Discovered high-grade silver mineralization at Nevada Packard, sold interest to Frank Margrave Et. Al.
1912– 1917	Rochester Hills Mining Co., Rochester Mines Co., Nevada Packard Mines Co.	Four mining areas established within Rochester District, Nenzel Hill at the eastern head of Rochester Canyon; Lincoln and Independence Hills; north and south slopes of the lower end of Rochester Canyon; and the Nevada Packard Mine south of Rochester Canyon
1918– 1935	Rochester Silver Corp., Nenzel Crown Point Mining Co.,	Production of silver, gold, lead, copper, zinc, antimony, tungsten, dumortierite, and andalusite.  Nevada Packard mill closed in 1923, Lower Rochester mill closed in 1929.
1935– 1961	Rochester Consolidated Mines Co., Western Properties Co.	Limited development and exploration, no production
1961– 1969	Silver State Mines Co.	Expansion of historic underground workings, grab sample campaign, limited drilling
1969– 1980	Cordero Mining Company	Exploration campaign using a mud rotary drill at Rochester
1969– 1983	Asarco	Exploration drilling in the Nenzel Hill area of Rochester.  Drilling consisted of mud rotary and RC drill holes.
1970s	Cordero Mining Company	Cordero Mining Company holds Nevada Packard property under bond and lease, performs reconnaissance exploration at Nevada Packard
	D.Z. Exploration	Exploration using a percussion drill rig at Rochester
1977– 1978	D.Z. Exploration	Drilling in Nevada Packard area.  Completed production scale heap leach test work on historical dump material, with facilities to crush, agglomerate, and refine
1979	D.Z. Exploration	Nevada Packard mine permitting initiated
1980– 1983	D.Z. Exploration	Production scale metallurgical test work on a 100,000 st test was performed in 1981 on 70,000 st of newly-mined material and 30,000 st of historical dump material.  Recoveries were lower than expected and the mine was placed on hold. Eight 1,600 st heaps were constructed through 1983, which tested the recoveries of different sized crushed ore, agglomerated with and without cyanide.
1983	Coeur	Coeur acquired the Rochester property from Asarco
1983– 2021	Coeur	Coeur completes several exploration drilling campaigns at Rochester.
1986	Coeur	An initial Plan of Operations (PoO) was approved by the BLM and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP).  Coeur commenced mining operations at the Rochester project in September.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 5-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

1987	Nevada Packard Joint Venture	Daile Scholz leased Nevada Packard surface and mineral rights from Frank (Jr.) and Wilton Margrave.
	Nevada Packard Joint Venture and Wharf Resources	Exploration drilling consisting of RC holes and HQ core holes at Nevada Packard; Economic studies indicated a negative return with the addition of crushing and processing facilities.  Wharf Resources subsequently terminated the agreement.
1996	Coeur	Coeur Rochester entered into lease agreements with Scholz and Margrave for the Nevada Packard project area.
1997		Mapping and sampling program at Nevada Packard; results not encouraging.  Focus shifted to shallower mineralization potential
1998		Initiated a development/confirmation drill program to check assay data generated by Scholz and Margrave.  Silver grades were confirmed, but average gold grades dropped from 0.0074 oz/t Au to 0.0044 oz/t Au.  Entered into buyout negotiations with Scholz.  Completed mineral resource estimate.
1999		Buyout negotiations were completed for Nevada Packard area
2000– 2021		Additional drilling in Nevada Packard area
2007– 2011		Coeur shuts down operations at Rochester and Packard and begins residual leaching of existing heap leach pads
2011		Coeur resumes active mining operations at Rochester
2012	Rye Patch Gold	Completed exploration holes on the Nevada Packard deposit; information subsequently acquired by Coeur in 2018 following acquisition of Alio Gold.
2012- 2021	Coeur	Coeur maintains mining operations

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 5-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

6.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT

6.1 Deposit Type

Mineralization in the Rochester district exhibits characteristics of both low-sulfidation and intermediate-sulfidation precious metal systems, complicated by supergene enrichment processes and significant oxidation.

Epithermal mineralization associated with hydrothermal activity related to volcanism or the resulting geothermal activity of circulating meteoric waters at relatively shallow depths and low temperatures.  Precious metal epithermal deposits may exhibit stockworks, breccia pipes, and disseminated mineralization.  The level of sulfidation (high, intermediate, or low-sulfidation) refers only to sulfide mineralogy.  Pyrite, chalcopyrite, arsenopyrite, polybasite, acanthite, and at depth, other base metals (including the minerals galena and sphalerite) are common.

Supergene enrichment is commonly found in porphyry copper deposits, but recent work has shown supergene enrichment in silver-rich deposits (Anderson, 2016).  This appears to be the case at Rochester.

Rochester has few directly comparable deposits.  Deposits that share some features include nearby Comstock, Nevada, and Tonopah, Nevada, which are intermediate sulfidation deposits (Sillitoe and Hedenquist, 2003). The degree of oxidation, depth of oxidation, contained metal, average grade, and amount of enrichment vary greatly among these deposits.  These deposits have some characteristics in common with Rochester, including acanthite and usually polybasite as a hypogene mineral and native silver occurring as a supergene mineral (Sillitoe, 2009).

6.2 Regional Geology

The Rochester and Nevada Packard mines are located on the southern flank of the Humboldt Range (Figure 6‑1).  The Humboldt Range lies within the Basin-and-Range province, where late Tertiary extension created large listric normal faults bounding generally north–south-trending mountain ranges and adjacent down-dropped valleys.

Volcanic activity in the Humboldt Range began in the Permian, in association with the Sonoma orogeny (Silberling, 1973).  Initial eruptions were mafic in composition, transitioning to felsic composition in the early Triassic.  The Limerick, Rochester, and Weaver Formations of the Koipato Group represent the Triassic volcanism.  Interbedded sandstone and siltstone occur near the top of the Triassic volcanic rocks, in some cases capping the rhyolite flows.

Large intrusions of leucogranite, accompanied by quartz–sericite–pyrite alteration, intruded the Limerick and Rochester Formations (but not the Weaver Formation) in early Triassic time (Vikre, 1981).  Coeval with deposition of the lower Weaver Formation, intrusions of feldspar porphyry (LeLacheur and others, 2011) intruded Rochester and Weaver Formation rhyolitic ignimbrites and flows.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑1:          Regional Geology Plan

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2020.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

A thick sequence of marine sediments dominated by limestones, was deposited on top of the transitional sandstones and siltstones of the Triassic units, forming the Star Peak Group and Grass Valley Formation.

During a mid-Jurassic orogeny, the southernmost Humboldt Range was intruded by an extensive gabbro lopolith and related dikes, and compressional tectonics related to the Luning-Fencemaker Thrust likely occurred at this time (Wyld et al., 2003).

In the mid-Mesozoic the tectonic regime changed with the onset of plate subduction at the western North America continental margin, resulting in back arc volcanism and formation of large batholiths, such as the Sierra Nevada, and time equivalent smaller intrusions in the Humboldt Range (gabbro).  During the Cretaceous, granodiorite stocks intruded older rock units in west-central Nevada, including the Humboldt Range (Vikre 1981, Crosby 2012).  Faulting, folding, and uplift throughout the region accompanied subduction.

A period of significant erosion began in the Tertiary, with Miocene gravels deposited in the area of the Humboldt Range.  Bimodal volcanism also occurred at this time.  After the Miocene, basin-and-range extension became dominant.  Uplift was a result with widespread erosion.   Most of the Tertiary and Mesozoic rocks in the area were removed at this time, including some of the mineralized lithologies at Rochester (Vikre, 1981).

6.3 Local Geology

Both the Rochester and Nevada Packard deposits are hosted in predominately rhyolitic flows and tuffs of the Permian–Triassic Koipato Group (Figure 6‑2).  A stratigraphic column showing the geology is provided in Figure 6‑3.

6.3.1 Lithologies

The oldest unit in the Project area is the Limerick Formation, which consists of andesitic flows altered to greenstone, lithic to crystal tuffs, and volcaniclastic siltstones.  It is overlain by the Rochester Formation, comprising felsic to intermediate, poorly to strongly welded tuffs, rhyolitic ash flow tuffs, quartz latite to rhyolitic tuffs; and minor interbedded volcaniclastic rocks, siltstones, and conglomerates.  The Weaver Formation unconformably overlies the Rochester Formation and consists of rhyolitic flows, tuffaceous, and volcaniclastic sediments.

Unconsolidated alluvium, colluvium, and minor lacustrine sediments in the Rochester area are limited in extent and deposited in a non-alluvial fan environment.  At the Nevada Packard Mine, the area west of the pit is underlain by alluvial fan sediments along the northern margin of the Nevada Packard Flat.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑2:          Project Geology Plan

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑3:          Stratigraphic Column

Note: Figure modified from Chadwick and Harvey, 2001.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

6.3.2 Structure

The mid-Jurassic Luning–Fencemaker fold and thrust belt is likely responsible for compressional features evident throughout the Humboldt Range, including the north–south-trending anticlinorium upon which the Rochester Mine is located.  A number of low-angle thrust faults and related drag folds, are cut by younger, high-angle basin-and-range normal faults. These structures are interpreted to originally be related to the Luning–Fencemaker tectonism.

A major structural feature within the southern portion of the Humboldt Range is the Black Ridge fault system, which is an extensive shear zone that is, in places, hundreds of feet wide.  Most of the Rochester silver–gold mineralization occurs in hanging wall faults, splays, and cross-faults within the Black Ridge system.  Renewed movements during the late Tertiary uplifted the core of the Humboldt Range along its principal anticlinal axis.

A final tectonic event was related to basin-and-range tectonism.  This event formed a graben block bounded by the Black Ridge Main Fault on the east side and the parallel West Graben Fault on the west side.

6.3.3 Metamorphism and Alteration

Weaver Formation lithologies can display a phyllitic texture, which is interpreted to be a product of greenschist facies regional metamorphism associated with the Luning–Fencemaker structure.

A hydrothermal quartz–sericite–pyrite alteration occurs throughout the Rochester district, associated with leucogranite intrusive bodies.

6.3.4 Mineralization

Mineralization is structurally controlled.  Economic mineralization is hosted mainly in the oxide zone, where the Rochester–Weaver Formation contact is the primary host for silver–gold mineralization, followed and influenced by mineralized fault zones with associated fracture, stockwork and disseminated mineralization away from the faults.  The contact is extensively brecciated and healed by silica in both the Rochester and Weaver Formations.  Quartz veins and veinlets typically exhibit both parallel and cross-cutting features, indicating multiple mineralizing events.

Supergene oxide minerals present include acanthite (Ag₂S), chlorargyrite (AgCl), embolite (Ag(Cl, Br), hematite, kaolinite, halloysite (Al₂Si₂O₅(OH)₄), goethite, amorphous iron oxides, chalcanthite (CuSO₄•5H₂O), chalcophanite ((Zn,Fe,Mn)Mn₃O₇ 3H₂O), melanterite (FeSO₄•7H₂O), jarosite, manganese oxides, and native silver.  Acanthite and chlorargyrite are the most abundant oxide silver phases.

Below the oxidation zone, the hypogene profile is preserved, consisting of pyrite, sphalerite, galena, argentiferous tetrahedrite, chalcopyrite, arsenopyrite, pyrargyrite (Ag₃SbS₃), and possibly pyrrhotite and owyheeite (Pb₇Ag₂(Sb,Bi) 8S₂0).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

6.4 Property Geology

6.4.1 Rochester

6.4.1.1 Deposit Dimensions

Mineralization is discontinuous over an area of 5,100 ft. north to south and 6,000 ft. east to west. Mineralization dips westerly at an average of 30°, and mineralization is nearly parallel with topography, with an average true depth of 700 ft.

6.4.1.2 Lithologies

No mineralization is known to occur in the Limerick Formation.

The Rochester Formation, as exposed in the Rochester open pit, shows little continuity in the volcanic stratigraphy, either laterally or vertically, and is typically mapped as undifferentiated Rochester tuffs and flow banded rhyolites.  Erratic intervals of conglomerate-breccia as thick as 100 ft, occur at various places in the stratigraphy.  The Rochester Formation is extremely fractured in the mine area.

After deposition of the Rochester Formation, leucogranite stocks intruded the stratigraphic sequence.

The contact between the Rochester and Weaver Formations is marked by a discontinuous lithic tuff with up to cobble-sized clasts.  A discontinuous lens-shaped ash layer (W1a) that is not a favourable host for mineralization is occasionally found along the base of the Weaver Formation.   volcaniclastic unit (W1c) lies stratigraphically above W1a and is relatively thin, approximately 60 ft. in thickness. Unit W1c is composed of sandstones interbedded with lithic tuffs and minor siltstone.  Overlying W1c is a siltstone unit (W2), followed by the uppermost Weaver unit (W3), which is a predominately dark siltstone with a discontinuous spherulitic tuff at its base.

In the mine area, spherulitic tuffs, ash-fall and water-lain ash, shale/siltstone, fine-grained volcaniclastic rocks, tuffs, and lithic tuffs comprise the Weaver Formation.  Basal units of the Weaver Formation (W1t, W1lt) are the most favorable mineralized host rocks. 

6.4.1.3 Structure

The Rochester deposit geology is characterized by penetrative reverse and normal faults overprinted by a complex structural system of high-angle fracture sets.  Mineralization occurs along high- and low-angle faults, related breccias and veins, and can extend as far as 500 ft. laterally away from the structures in the vicinity of the Weaver–Rochester Formation contact.  Vein intersections form the largest zones of mineralization, with triple point intersections (i.e., intersecting veins in conjunction with the Weaver–Rochester Formation contact) forming the largest volumes of mineralization.

Fracture intensity is poorly developed in the upper two units of the Weaver Formation (W2 and W3).  The lack of fracturing resulted in poor mineralization in these units.  Basal Weaver (W1t) and upper Rochester units (Rt) are extremely fractured which prepared these units for mineral deposition by allowing hydrothermal fluids extensive access in these hosts.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

6.4.1.4 Alteration

Silicification is common, and well-developed in the conglomerate-breccia that occurs at the Rochester–Weaver Formation contact.

Distinct zones of sericitization occur throughout the deposit, including sericitization in some breccia matrices, although zones of breccias are more commonly healed by silica.

Hydrothermal clay alteration, other than sericite, also occurs and consists of clay minerals such as kaolinite and halloysite.  However, the presence of some clays is likely the result of the movement of meteoric water and subsequent oxidation of primary pyrite, particularly in the broken hanging wall of high angle normal faults.  Hydrothermal clay zones extend as far as 50 ft. from the fault zones.

6.4.1.5 Mineralization

High-grade precious metal mineralization at Rochester occurs in discontinuous and anastomosing veins within compressional and extensional fault structures that range in thickness from a few inches to 3 ft.  These veins are steeply dipping at the surface (>60°) but at depth become shallower dipping (<30°) and lower grade.

Lower-grade precious metal mineralization occurs in fractures, narrow veins, stockwork breccia stockwork and in disseminated zones associated with structures.  In plan view, veins strike north and northeast with dominate orientations at approximately 0, 10, 30, 55 and 70° azimuth.  The highest-grade, best-developed historical underground silver stopes were located on the East Vein, a conjugate 30°-striking shear between splays of the 10°- or northerly-striking Black Ridge Fault.  In cross-section, mineralization associated with faults dips at 35–65° west, while mineralization occurring near the formational contact exhibits shallow dips (0–30°) both to the east and west.

Low-grade mineralization is controlled by hypogene processes and possible supergene enrichment.  These low-grade systems vary in width (both along strike and down dip) from tens to hundreds of feet.  Below the oxidation zone, metal grade typically drops off, but high grades of silver–gold with minor base metal content can be found in narrow quartz veins.  The deposit is strongly oxidized to a depth of 200–500 ft. from the current pit bottom and partially oxidized to a depth of over 700 ft.   Silver mineralization becomes erratic with increasing distance from favorable fault intersections, unit contacts, and structures.

Supergene processes are responsible for the remobilization and enrichment of silver at Rochester.

A geological plan of the Rochester deposit is included as Figure 6‑4, and a cross-section through the deposit geology is provided as Figure 6‑5.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑4:          Geological Plan, Rochester

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑5:          Geological Cross Section, Rochester

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-10

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

6.4.2 Nevada Packard

6.4.2.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Nevada Packard mineralized zones are broad, but in general, smaller than those at Rochester, typically no larger than 200 ft wide.  The discontinuous mineralized zones cover an area of 2,500 ft by 2,300 ft and as deep as 600 ft.  Silver and gold mineralization below 300 ft. rapidly decrease in tenor.

6.4.2.2 Lithologies

Nevada Packard is situated in the same lithologies as described for Rochester.  Units W2 and W3 of the Weaver Formation do not host mineralization at Rochester, but unit W3 is the dominant host at the Nevada Packard deposit, particularly the spherulitic tuff facies.  Unit W3 at Nevada Packard shows much greater structural preparation, although it exhibits a similar structural domain when compared to the same unit at Rochester.

6.4.2.3 Structure

The structural setting as described for Rochester is similar to that of Nevada Packard.

6.4.2.4 Alteration

The alteration styles as described for Rochester is similar to that of Nevada Packard.

6.4.2.5 Mineralization

Precious metal mineralization at Nevada Packard is like that at Rochester in that northeast-trending, west-dipping faults with associated disseminated metal, veins, and fractures, are the most dominant controls.

One difference in the Nevada Packard mineralization is that silver tends to be of higher grade than at Rochester, while the gold grades tend to be lower.

A geological plan of the Nevada Packard deposit is included as Figure 6‑6, and a cross-section through the deposit geology is provided as Figure 6‑7.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-11

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑6:          Geological Plan, Nevada Packard

 

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-12

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑7:          Geological Cross Section, Nevada Packard

 

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 6-13

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

7.0          EXPLORATION

7.1 Exploration

7.1.1 Grids and Surveys

Survey data are collected using longitude and latitude in radians and converted into the coordinates of the current mine grid.  The reference location of the mine grid is on Black Knob, south of the Nevada Packard pit.  The mine grid covers the entire mine property and is used throughout the Rochester Operations.

All final survey coordinates used for exploration and near mine work are surveyed using Trimble GPS equipment converted to a local mine grid.  Topography used for resource estimates is updated at year end.  All active mining and waste rock storage facilities (WRSF) are surveyed on a regular basis.  A final survey is completed at the end of each year.  Topography contours updated in May 2020 outside the active surveyed areas are obtained from semi-annual orthophotos and photogrammetry.  These contours are merged with the surveyed contours.

7.1.2 Geological Mapping

Coeur has combined information from historical geologic maps with mapping conducted by Coeur staff and consultants retained by Coeur to produce a comprehensive property wide geologic map at 1:11,992 scale.  The compilation was augmented by digitized archival materials such as pit mapping data.

Highwall pit mapping is completed in hardcopy and/or directly into ESRI arcMap at a scale of 1:480.  Highwall mapping includes the collection of lithologic, alteration, and structural data.  Bench mapping is collected on all blastholes, drilled on 16 foot centers and includes the collection of material properties of the cuttings piles, alteration, oxidation and sulfide content.

7.1.3 Geochemistry

Previous exploration programs in outlying targets such as Plainview, LM, Sunflower Ridge, Weaver Canyon, Woody Canyon, and South Mystic, included soil and rock geochemical sampling, and bulk leach extractable gold (BLEG) stream sediment sampling.  These programs identified targets that were investigated post 2008.

An extensive soil geochemistry sample grid was collected in the Rochester district by Rye Patch Gold and that dataset became available to Coeur in 2016

No significant soil and rock geochemical sampling campaigns have been completed by Coeur Mining since 2008.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

7.1.4 Geophysics

An induced polarization (IP) resistivity survey was conducted in 1999 by Zonge Geoscience. Lines were run in a northwest direction across the Packard Deposit into Packard Flat in between Packard Wash and Woody Canyon.  The objective was to identify sulfide mineralization in the Triassic Weaver formation (Ellis, 2013).

A high-resolution helicopter magnetic survey was flown in 2011 by New Sense Geophysics Ltd.  The flight line direction was N90W, with lines spaced 75 m apart.  The objective was to identify structures and map the late Cretaceous granodiorite intrusions (Ellis, 2013).

A gravity survey was completed by Magee Geophysical Services LLC (MGS) in 2011.  The station interval was variable but a 200m (656 ft) spacing was attempted.  Significant coverage was achieved in mineralized areas.  No official report was provided by MGS (Ellis, 2013).

In 2013 EGC, Inc was contracted to document and interpret the geophysical datasets through inversion modeling of the gravity and aeromagnetic surveys.  The result was a three-dimensional (3D) solid of individual cells with assigned magnetic susceptibility which can be used in a number of two-dimensional (2D) and 3D software visualization packages.

7.1.5 Qualified Person’s Interpretation of the Exploration Information

The Rochester Operations area has been the subject of modern exploration and development activities since the late 1960s, and a considerable information database has been developed as a result of ongoing exploration activities.  Procedures are consistent with industry-standard practices at the time the work was performed.

7.1.6 Exploration Potential

The Rochester deposit remains open at depth in areas where earlier drilling terminated in potentially economic grades, stopping typically after drilling encountered un-oxidized rock.  Several structural trends are being explored where the structures exit the pit walls.  These areas are targeted based on grade and structural mapping.  The area northwest of the pit is considered to have the most potential.  Exploration will target structures and known precious metal mineralization in the Plainview Mines and the Limerick Canyon project areas (Figure 7‑1).

The East Rochester zone is adjacent to the eastern margin of the Rochester pit, located under an existing leach pad and crushed material conveyer system.  The zone was identified in 2015 and is open both to the north and the south, providing potential for continued near-pit exploration.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑1:          Exploration Prospects

 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Limited drilling in 2017 tested the extents of the East Rochester zone, with a focus on the area under the Stage 1 leach pad, and the northern and southern extensions of the zone.  Drilling in 2019 through 2021 defined a significant zone of mineralization at East Rochester.

Regional mapping, conducted in 2016, indicates favorable lithologic and structural targets between the Rochester and Nevada Packard pits.  These targets were drill tested in 2021 with final results and geological interpretation pending.

The hanging wall of the Black Ridge fault, south of the Rochester pit in the Woody Canyon area, has been identified as another potential host of precious metals within Coeur’s land position.

7.2 Drilling

7.2.1 Overview

The drill database for the Project area contains 2,938 drill holes (1,556,662.5 ft).  These data are primarily reverse circulation (RC) holes with limited core drilling.

Drilling is summarized in Table 7‑1.  A project-wide drill collar location plan is provided in Figure 7‑2.

Core and RC drilling supports mineral resource estimation.  Drilling that supports each mineral resource estimate is summarized in Table 7‑2 and Table 7‑3.  Collar location maps for drilling in the areas that support mineral resource estimation are provided in Figure 7‑3 to Figure 7‑6.

7.2.2 Drilling Excluded For Estimation Purposes

There are 588 drillholes completed by multiple operators which are flagged in the acQuire drillhole database to be excluded from the resource estimates.  The holes are excluded due to unvalidated collar, survey, and/or analytical data.  Of these drill holes, 529 are excluded from the Rochester model, 42 are excluded from the Nevada Packard model, and two are excluded from the stockpile model.

7.2.3 Drill Methods

Where recorded in the database, drill companies have included Boart Longyear, Delong, Eklund, Hackworth, HD Drilling, Layne Christensen, Major, National EWP, O’Keefe, and Timberline.

Core diameter was typically HQ (2.5 in. core diameter). RC drilling used 5.5–7.75-inch bits. In 2021 triple tube HQ3 (2.4 in core diameter) drilling was completed to provide better sample quality in fractured formations.  In 2021 PQ (3.4 in core diameter) drilling was completed for metallurgical testing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑1:          Property Drill Summary Table

Year	Operator	Area	Number of Sonic Holes	Sonic Footage	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
Unknown	Unknown	Rochester	—	—	4	1,681	3	870
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	104	18,011
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	107	18,881
Pre-1971	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
1971	Asarco	Rochester	—	—	—	—	3	1,120
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	3	1,120
1972–1979	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
1980	Asarco	Rochester	—	—	—	—	5	2,010
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	5	2,010
1981–1985	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
1986	Unknown	Rochester	—	—	—	—	6	3,350
	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	14	5,040
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	20	8,390
1987	Unknown	Rochester	1	580	—	—	103	48,015
	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	86	32,755
		Sub-total	1	580	—	—	189	80,770
1988	Unknown	Rochester	—	—	—	—	159	82,861
		Rochester	—	—	—	—	58	26,075
	Coeur	Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	16	6,380
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	233	115,316
1989	Unknown	Rochester	—	—	—	—	130	79,630
		Rochester	—	—	—	—	107	53,063
	Coeur	Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	3	830
		Sub-total	—	—	–	–	240	133,523

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Year	Operator	Area	Number of Sonic Holes	Sonic Footage	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
1990	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	159	75,706
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	159	75,706
1991	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	75	53,120
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	75	53,120
1992	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
1993	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	1	500
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	1	500
1994	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
1995	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	1	460	—	—
		Sub-total	—	—	1	460	—	—
1996	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
1997	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	10	3,114	6	2,300
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	11	9,720
		Sub-total	—	—	10	3,114	17	12,020
1998	Coeur	Nevada Packard	—	—	3	437	—	—
		Sub-total	—	—	3	437	—	—
1999	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	5	2,500
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	5	2,500
2000	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	25	9,940
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	25	9,940
2001	Unknown	Rochester	—	—	4	1,942	—	—
	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	2	700
		Sub-total	—	—	4	1,942	2	700

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Year	Operator	Area	Number of Sonic Holes	Sonic Footage	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
2002	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	5	1,800
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	5	1,800
2003	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	1	280
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	1	280
2004	N/A	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
2005	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	10	4,780
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	10	4,780
2006	NA	N/A	—	—	—	—	—	—
2007	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	7	3,005	—	—
		Sub-total	—	—	7	3,005	—	—
2008	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	5	2,045
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	1	415
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	6	2,460
2009	Coeur	Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	2	1,080
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	2	1,080
2010	Coeur	Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	33	13.750
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	33	13,750
2011	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	5	3,770	56	36,495
		Nevada Packard	—	—	1	2,121	96	43,650
		Stockpile	—	—	—	—	122	16,219
		Sub-total	—	—	6	5,890	274	96,364

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Year	Operator	Area	Number of Sonic Holes	Sonic Footage	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
2012	RPG	Rochester	—	—	—	—	26	21,900
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	38	20,765
		Rochester	—	—	—	—	65	31,620
	Coeur	Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	22	10,170
		Stockpile	40	7,591	—	—	420	88,680
		Sub-total	40	7,591	—	—	571	173,135
2013	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	56	39,810
		Stockpile	—	—	—	—	750	127,280
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	806	167,090
2014	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	5	3,457	156	138,160
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	22	16,050
		Sub-total	—	—	5	3,457	178	154,210
2015	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	52	38,710
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	38	34,620
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	90	73,330
2016	Coeur	Rochester	—	—		8,786	119	82,600
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	10	7,960
		Sub-total	—	—		796	129	90,560
2017	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	2	2,118	47	42,740
		Sub-total	—	—	2	2,118	47	42,740
2018	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	—	—	62	35,590
		Nevada Packard	—	—	—	—	9	6,520
		Sub-total	—	—	—	—	71	42,110
2019	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	7	7,171	—	—
		Sub-total	—	—	7	7,171	—	—

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Year	Operator	Area	Number of Sonic Holes	Sonic Footage	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
2020	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	22	25,697	40	31,310
		Sub-total	—	—	22	25,697	40	31,310
2021	Coeur	Rochester	—	—	19	18, 882	61	59,934
		Nevada Packard	—	—	8	6,502	21	19,005
		Sub-total	—	—	26	23,561	79	75,565
All	All	Rochester	1	580	91	78,402	1,700	1,044,455
		Nevada Packard	—	—	15	9,059	322	190,915
		Stockpile	40	7,591	—	—	1,292	232,179
		Total	41	8,171	106	87,461	3,314	1,467,549

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑2:          Project Drill Collar Location Plan

 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-10

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑2:          Drill Summary Table, Rochester

Year	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
Unknown	5	1,882	554	249,812
1986	—	—	14	7,020
1987	—	—	182	79,100
1988	—	—	216	108,506
1989	—	—	221	125,563
1990	—	—	158	75,106
1991	—	—	75	53,120
1993	—	—	1	500
1995	1	460	—	—
1997	10	3,114	6	2,300
1999	—	—	5	2,500
2000	—	—	24	9,540
2001	3	1,681	3	962
2002	—	—	5	1,800
2003	—	—	1	280
2005	—	—	10	4,780
2007	2	1,123	—	—
2008	—	—	5	2,045
2011	3	2,145	55	36,035
2012	—	—	62	30,060
2013	—	—	55	39,810
2014	5	3,457	156	138,160
2015	—	—	52	38,710
2016	9	8,786	119	82,600
2017	2	2,118	47	42,740
2018	—	—	51	29,900
2019	7	7,171	—	—
2020	20	24,725	38	29,060
2021	6	3,585	34	36,900
All	73	60,247	2,149	1,226,909

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-11

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑3:          Drill Summary Table, Nevada Packard

Year	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage
Unknown	1	142	457	121,825
1988	—	—	16	6,380
1989	—	—	3	830
1997	—	—	10	8,820
1998	3	437	—	—
2010	—	—	30	12,290
2011	3	1,298	80	34,530
2012	—	—	34	17,805
2014	—	—	22	16,050
2015	—	—	38	34,620
2016	—	—	10	7,960
2018	—	—	9	6,520
All	7	1,877	709	267,630

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-12

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑3:          Drill Collar Location Plan, Rochester

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-13

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑4:          Drill Collar Location Plan, Nevada Packard

 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-14

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑5:          Rochester Stockpile Drill Collar Location Map

 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-15

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑6:          Nevada Packard Stockpile Drill Collar Location Map

 

7.2.4 Logging

Prior drilling and sampling were conducted from 1969 through 1983 by Cordero Exploration, D.Z Exploration, Nevada Packard Joint Venture (NPJV), Wharf Resources, and Asarco.

Coeur geologists or contract geologists trained and supervised by Coeur personnel, performed the logging of the drill samples, beginning in 1987.

Geologists for Coeur and Asarco recorded detailed sample descriptions of standardized paper drill log forms.  Descriptions included location details, recovery problems, rock character, lithology, alteration (type/degree), quartz veining, sulfide presence, oxidation intensity, structural indicators, and accessory mineralogy.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-16

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

RC cuttings were logged by Coeur personnel for lithology, mineralization, alteration, structure, and oxide mineralogy.  Chip trays are stored off-site at the exploration facility in Lovelock, NV.

RC cuttings from stockpile drilling completed from 2011–2013 was logged variably for only lithology information.

Coeur core samples are recovered in 5 ft. intervals using a triple tube core barrel.  The core is removed from the split tube core barrel by the drillers and placed in a split PVC pipe.  The length of the recovered core was measured, recorded, and written on a wooden core marker and placed at the end of the run by the drillers.  The core remains in split PVC pipe until photographs are taken and field geotechnical data collection is completed for each run.  Geotechnical data collected for each run at the drill rig includes:

• Total recovery;

• Solid core recovery;

• Rock quality designation (RQD);

• Natural fracture count;

• ISRM strength index;

• Weathering/alteration index;

• Footage of zones of breccia, gouge and/or broken core.

After geotechnical logging, the core is placed in plastic core boxes.  From 2008 to 2015, the full core boxes were picked up by a geologist or geotechnician and delivered to the geology core logging facilities before the end of each drill shift.  Beginning in 2016, boxed core was transported to the core logging facilities by the drill crew before the end of each drill shift.

The core is photographed in the boxes and logged for:

• Lithology;

• Mineralization;

• Alteration;

• Structure;

• Veining;

• Oxide mineralization;

• Detailed discontinuity attributes.

Upon completion of geologic and geotechnical logging, the core is split in half and one half is split into quarters.

All logging data are stored in an acQuire database.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-17

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

7.2.5 Recovery

Drilling and sampling on the Project was historically from RC with limited core drilling completed from 1997–2021.  The drill hole database indicates that recovery data was collected on 64 core holes from 2014–2021.  The total footage logged with recovery data is 57,794 ft with a total recovery of 54,130 ft, which equates to a 6% core loss recorded over the life of the Project.

7.2.6 Collar Surveys

Prior to 2008 drill hole locations were surveyed using Total Station survey equipment.

After 2008 drill hole locations, were designed using Geovia GEMS software.  The planned coordinates were staked out by mine survey personnel using a Trimble SPS882 GNSS Smart Antenna.  Completed drill hole locations were surveyed with a Trimble GPS system by the Survey department.  Geology personnel used an identical Trimble system to double check drill hole location coordinates.

As drilling and mining activities often occurred near each other, some drill holes did not receive a final survey by either the Survey or Geology departments.  The database does not contain collar survey information on holes drilled prior to 2001, or on how non-surveyed holes were handled. Since 2001, geology personnel have attempted to find collar locations of any completed drill holes that did not have a final survey.  If the collar location could not be located, the planned hole location coordinates in the database were used as final coordinates.  This method was used on 1.8% of holes drilled from 2001–2015.  In 2016, only three final surveys were not completed on drill holes.  In 2017–2021, all completed drillholes had final collar surveys collected.

Stockpile drill holes completed between 2011–2013 were planned and located in the field using the standard practices described above.  When available, final collar locations were surveyed with a Trimble GPS and the information is stored in the database.  When surveyed coordinates were not collected, planned coordinates were used in the database.

7.2.7 Down Hole Surveys

Prior to 1995, drill holes were sporadically down-hole surveyed with gyroscopic instruments.

Downhole surveys were used after 1995 for all angled holes and for vertical holes >400 ft deep using either surface recording gyroscopic, Maxibor, or North Seeker gyroscopic instruments.

7.2.8 Comment on Material Results and Interpretation

The general orientation of ore zones is well understood at Rochester and drill orientations are targeted to intercept the ore body to best determine true thickness of the ore zone.  In new exploration targets, core drilling is used to gain structural information to estimate accurate true thickness.

In the opinion of the QP, the quantity and quality of existing drilling data are sufficient for resource estimation of silver and gold, excluding rotary drilling samples collected by companies prior to Coeur’s Project ownership.  Asarco, Wharf, Cordero, and D.Z. Exploration data are not used in Mineral Resource estimation for the Rochester Mine.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-18

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The QP acknowledges that a limited number of downhole surveys and collar surveys have been completed on the property.  However, the drill hole spacing and generally shallow drill depths support the use of the drill hole data in estimation.  The QP also acknowledges the inherent differences between RC drill sample quality and core sample quality.

7.3 Hydrogeology

7.3.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

Monitoring wells are the primary method of collecting hydrogeological data in support of mining operations.  From 1985–2013 a total of 125 hydrologic drill holes were completed in the Rochester Mine and Nevada Packard mine areas, and the Buena Vista Valley area.  During 2017, 10 piezometer wells were drilled and completed in Limerick Canyon. Two monitoring wells were completed and installed downgradient of the Stage VI heap leach pad in 2021.  Currently, there are 62 active monitoring wells and piezometers.

Monitoring wells are sampled on a quarterly basis and analyses ran for the State of Nevada Profile I suite at a certified analytical laboratory, currently Coeur Rochester uses Western Environmental Testing Laboratory, located in Reno.  Drill holes that have piezometers installed are monitored for piezometric head. There are also seeps and springs that are sampled on a quarterly basis as required by various permits.  These requirements are detailed in Chapter 17.

7.3.2 Hydrogeology

Hydrogeologic units identified in the Rochester Mine include alluvial deposits and bedrock units.  Groundwater flow at the Rochester Mine predominantly occurs in the Black Ridge Fault and adjacent bedrock groundwater system.  Outside of the Black Ridge Fault, groundwater flow is slower and occurs through low hydraulic conductivity bedrock units. Comparatively less groundwater flow occurs within Quaternary alluvium in American Canyon and South American Canyon due to the limited saturated thickness and low hydraulic conductivity of the alluvial deposits.

Alluvial groundwater is not continuous within the Rochester Mine.  The area north of the Stage I heap leach pad is not hydraulically connected to the American Canyon Spring or Lower American Canyon Spring.  The area north of the Stage I heap leach pad hosts shallow, discrete, perched groundwater zones in alluvium composed of low permeability silt and clay materials with laterally discontinuous, poorly sorted sandy silt and gravelly silt deposits.  These perched water zones occur at differing elevations with limited hydraulic communication.

Groundwater elevations in alluvial wells in the South American Canyon area indicate eastward groundwater flow towards South American Canyon Springs then towards Buena Vista Valley. Groundwater flow in Limerick Canyon alluvium is west towards the springs.  Alluvial groundwater elevations in shallow Spring Valley wells suggest a southeast groundwater flow direction towards Buena Vista Valley.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-19

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The area to the north of the Stage I heap leach pad contains shallow, discrete, perched groundwater zones with limited hydraulic communication.  Groundwater flow is generally towards the pumpback wells and towards the underdrains below the pregnant ponds.  Data suggest the alluvial groundwater in the Stage I heap leach pad area is hydraulically separate from the bedrock aquifers.

Groundwater discharge in bedrock aquifers underlying the Project area is through structures, including faults, fractures, and jointing.  The Black Ridge Fault is the primary bedrock groundwater discharge conduit in the Project area.  Groundwater discharges towards the Black Ridge Fault from both the west and the east, primarily through northeast-trending structures.  After intersection with the more permeable Black Ridge Fault, groundwater discharge is re-directed to the north or the south depending on where the structures intersect the basin divide.  Groundwater flow in the Black Ridge Fault is northward from this basin divide towards Spring Valley.  Groundwater flow in the Black Ridge Fault is southward from the basin divide towards Packard Flat.

The Black Ridge Fault zone is a key hydrogeologic feature in the Project area.  Most of the groundwater flow within the Project area occurs in this zone and the adjacent bedrock groundwater system.  Outside the Black Ridge Fault zone are numerous north–northeast-trending structures parallel to the Black Ridge Fault.  These parallel features are believed to influence local groundwater flow directions because the groundwater flow is fracture dominated.  However, the transmissivity and volume of water in storage in these parallel northeast trending structures in the Rochester Pit area is much lower than within the Black Ridge Fault zone (SWS 2015a).

The flow direction in the alluvial system south of the Packard Pit is primarily to the west–southwest (Piteau, 2019).  The horizontal gradient in this area is approximately five percent, which is steep for alluvium.  Bedrock piezometric levels and horizontal gradient mirror those observed in alluvium with a horizontal gradient of approximately 5%.  Water levels show that alluvial levels are lower than bedrock levels and both levels are below land surface.  The source of Black Knob Spring 1 and Black Knob Spring 2 is likely from bedrock to the northwest, perhaps associated with a splay or parallel structure associated with the northwest-striking fault located a few thousand feet to the northwest of the springs.

7.3.3 Comment on Results

The hydrological data and hydrogeological models developed from those data are suitable for use in mine planning.

7.3.4 Groundwater Models

The conceptual and numerical flow models were updated in 2019 (Piteau, 2019) to include the key incremental changes expected for the 11^th amendment to the Plan of Operations Amendment (POA 11).  The groundwater flow model was calibrated using over 30 years of available data and captures the drawdown response in the Black Ridge Fault and also the lack of drawdown outside the flow model.  The proposed water supply pumping rates are expected to be sufficient to maintain a dry Rochester Pit throughout the LOM for POA 11.  Installation of dewatering wells will not be required as part of POA 11.  By the end of mining, the water level will be approximately 100 ft below the bottom of the Rochester Pit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-20

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

7.3.5 Water Balance

NewFields Companies, LLC produced a revised and updated site wide water balance in 2021 that incorporates information on planned mining rates, the Stage VI heap pad and processing facility, and the existing site water balance.  The water balance accounts for production wells, meteoric water, evaporative losses and production requirements for process, mining and ancillary operations.

7.4 Geotechnical

Geotechnical data are collected from purpose-drilled geotechnical drill holes as required.  Information from these drill holes are used for interpretation of structure and lithology in the pit walls.

7.4.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

Geotechnical logging of oriented core holes is an integral part of collecting rock mass data. Some of the information collected during logging include rock and structural type, weathering and alteration, total and solid core recovery, RQD, natural fracture count, average joint condition rating and estimated intact rock strength index.  Televiewer surveys for structural orientation and cell mapping details included discontinuity type, length, spacing, orientation, structure frequency etc.  RC chips provide limited geotechnical data so most of this information are collected from core holes and in-pit mapping.

Laboratory testing performed include direct shear test, triaxial test, unconfined compressive strength (UCS), splitting disk tensile (Brazilian) test and soil index test on selected core samples by Golder’s Lakewood, Colorado soil and rock testing laboratory, Advanced Terra Testing, Inc. in Lakewood, Colorado and Construction Materials Engineers, Inc. in Reno, Nevada.  These laboratories are independent of Coeur.  There is currently no recognized international accreditation for geotechnical tests.

Field point load testing was also conducted on core samples.

Structural orientation data from televiewer survey, geotechnical logging, point load, laboratory testing, and cell mapping data are used for geotechnical and structural characterization to support pit walls by defining geotechnical units or sectors to develop strength models and generate design parameters for the units or sectors.  Evaluating the groundwater conditions in the geotechnical units also includes characterization of the groundwater pore pressure conditions in the rock mass.

Coeur currently has a prism monitoring system in place to detect any slope movement or disturbance.  Coeur has recently procured real time monitoring radar, Robotic total stations, Seismographs, GPS, and Canary systems to improve existing monitoring processes.  Installation should be completed by end of first quarter 2022.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-21

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

7.4.2 Comment on Results

A combination of historical and current geotechnical data, together with mining experience, is used in the operations.  There is an existing geotechnical hazard map to track all historic and current slope failures and rockfall.  The daily field inspection tracking form is also additional tool for assessing active mining areas and keeping track of daily slope observations, including overall slope, highwall, pit crest, active crest, and active toe.  The blast vibration analysis database will serve as a register to keep records on blast vibration effect on slopes after the equipment is received on site.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 7-22

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

8.0 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY

8.1 Sampling Methods

8.1.1 Reverse Circulation

There is no record of how previous operators such as Wharf and Asarco collected samples during their drill campaigns.

Due to the fine nature of the mineralization at Rochester and Nevada Packard, all of Coeur’s RC drilling is completed with wet drilling methods.  The wet rotary splitter continuously splits drill cuttings, producing samples that are equivalent to approximately 20% of the entire drill run.

Coeur samples RC drill cuttings on either 5 ft or 10 ft intervals.  Drill samples are collected in porous cloth bags that drain water without losing fine material.  The cyclone is cleaned between samples.  Field duplicate samples are collected from a second port on the cyclone.

Filled sample bags are placed on the ground near the drill rig so that residual water can drain.  Before the sample bags are removed from the drill site, the bags are inventoried and checked off a sample list to eliminate the possibility of incorrect sampling.  Filled sample bags and RC chip trays are picked up at least once a day.  Sample bags are placed in a 48 ft³ plastic sample bin, and delivered to a holding area, where they are allowed to continue draining until the bins are placed on a transport vehicle to be taken to the assay laboratory.  Chip trays are delivered to the geology logging facilities.

8.1.2 Core

Core logging and sampling intervals ranged from a minimum of 1 ft. to a maximum of 10 ft., based on geologic characteristics.

After logging, core was cut, and split for assay.  One quarter of the core was sent to the analytical laboratory for assaying; another quarter was used for metallurgical testing.  The remaining half core was archived.

Photographs were taken of the core prior to splitting for a permanent record.  These photographs are stored in binders at the Coeur Rochester geology facilities.

8.1.3 Grade Control

Grade control samples are collected with a through-the-deck pipe sampler that collects blast hole drill cuttings in openings along the side of the pipe.  While the blast holes are being drilled, a portion of the sample cuttings go through the openings and fall down the pipe into a labeled sample bag that encases the bottom portion of the pipe.  Prior to moving to the next blast hole, the driller pulls the pipe and the sample up to the drill deck.  At the end of each drill row, the samples are left in organized piles where they are picked up by the survey team and delivered to the on-site laboratory for analysis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

8.2 Sample Security Methods

Samples were staged and prepared for shipment to a commercial analytical laboratory.  The geotechnician either transports the samples directly to the laboratory or the contracted laboratory picks up the samples at the mine site where they are reviewed by a laboratory representative and chain of custody is transferred.  Chain-of-custody documentation was maintained throughout the shipping and receiving process.

Core samples, RC trays, standard reference materials (standards), coarse rejects and returned pulps are stored with restricted access in the geology core shed/warehouse or outside covered with tarpaulins.

Pulps, RC trays, and core samples are retained for the duration of the project.  Coarse rejects are retained for one to three years depending on resource relevance.

8.3 Density Determinations

A dry bank density of 0.078 st/ft³ was used for all Rochester lithologies.  This density was confirmed by the on-going mining operations and third-party studies completed in 1992 and 2002.  These studies looked at the total dry bank tonnage for a known volume of material to calculate the dry bank density.

Good monthly reconciliation data between the modeled tonnage, as predicted from the dry bank density of 0.078 st/ft³, and dry loose tonnage, as measured by scales along the conveyor system of the crushing circuit, provide additional confirmation for the density values.

This same density was applied to Nevada Packard lithologies because of the proximity of the Nevada Packard deposit to Rochester, and similar lithologies in both pits.  The density was supported by good monthly reconciliation data when the pit was in operation.  There are currently no density determinations that are specific to the Nevada Packard pit.

Historically, no density samples were collected other than data collected for geotechnical studies.

A program of collecting and testing core samples from specific lithologies and alteration types in different regions of the Rochester and Nevada Packard pits began in 2021.  However, no data were processed in time for use in this Report.

8.4 Analytical and Test Laboratories

Prior to 2008, exploration and development drill samples collected by Coeur were analyzed by Inspectorate America Laboratory (Inspectorate) and American Assay Laboratories, both of which are independent of Coeur and accredited by to ISO 9002.  Samples were also submitted to the Rochester mine laboratory, which was not independent and was not ISO-certified.

A number of primary and secondary laboratories were used from 2008 onward to analyze core and RC samples.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• American Assay Laboratories, located in Sparks, Nevada; independent of Coeur and had ISO-IEC 17025 accreditations;

• ALS Chemex, located in Sparks, Nevada (ALS); independent of Coeur and had ISO 9001 accreditations;

• Pinnacle Laboratories, located in Lovelock, Nevada; independent of Coeur and had ANSI/ISO/IEC Standard 17025:2005; Testing Laboratory TL-484 accreditations;

• Inspectorate/Bureau Veritas Laboratory, located in Sparks, Nevada; independent of Coeur and had ISO-ISD 9002 accreditations;

• Skyline Laboratories, located in Tucson, Arizona; independent of Coeur and had ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations;

• McClelland Laboratories Inc., located in Sparks, Nevada (McClelland); independent of Coeur and had ISO 17025:2005; Testing Laboratory TL-466 accreditations.

All grade control samples are analyzed by the Rochester mine laboratory.

8.5 Sample Preparation

8.5.1 Pre-2008

The sample preparation method used by the Rochester mine laboratory consisted of drying the sample, crushing to -⅜ in, and pulverizing to a -100-mesh product.

Sample preparation at Inspectorate and American Assay Laboratories consisted of drying, primary crushing to ¼ in, secondary crushing to 10 mesh, and pulverizing to 150 mesh.

8.5.2 2008–Current

RC and core samples are weighed, dried, crushed to 10 mesh (70% passing), split, and pulverized to 200 mesh (85% passing).

Grade control samples are weighed, dried, crushed, split, and pulverized to 200 mesh (80% passing).

8.6 Analysis

8.6.1 Coeur Pre-2008

Samples were analyzed at the Rochester site laboratory with a one assay ton fire assay using a traditional lead oxide flux with a silver inquart.  Doré were parted and dissolved in sodium cyanide solution.  The analysis was finished using atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

8.6.2 2008–2011

During the initial period of time when third-party laboratories were used, there were multiple laboratory changes between primary and secondary laboratories.  The decisions that led to changing laboratories include lack of certification (Rochester laboratory), poor turn-around times, laboratory closure (Pinnacle), and quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) issues that necessitated excessive re-assay.  Table 8‑1 shows the laboratories used during 2008–2011, together with the analytical methods.

8.6.3 2012–Current

Most of samples were analyzed using a 30 g fire assay with AAS finish.  Due to the lower grade of stockpiled ore, 2012 stockpile inventory drill samples were analyzed using a 30 g fire assay for gold by AAS finish, and a two-acid digestion with AAS finish for silver.  Assays >0.5 ppm Au and >50 ppm Ag were checked by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.

Beginning in 2012, Skyline was the primary laboratory.  Four assay methods were used:

• Silver: Ag FA-3 (gravimetric finish; 0.001 lower detection limit; 29.2 oz/st upper detection limit) and Ag FA-9 (inductively-coupled plasma (ICP) finish; 0.003 oz/st lower detection limit, 2.92 oz/st upper detection limit);

• Gold: Au FA-2 (gravimetric finish; 0.005 oz/st lower detection limit, 29.2 oz/st upper detection limit) and Au FA-9 (ICP finish; 0.001 oz/st lower detection limit, 0.088 oz/st upper detection limit).

McClelland was selected as the primary laboratory after Skyline closed their Reno laboratory in mid-2015.  Initially, McClelland used a palladium rather than silver inquart for fire assaying.  The use of the palladium inquart method of fire assaying was discontinued by Coeur in August 2016.  McClelland continued as the primary laboratory until early August 2016.

Four assay methods were used by McClelland:

• Silver:  4A-AA (0.03 oz/st lower detection limit, 2.92 oz/st upper detection limit), four-acid digestion with AAS finish, and GV-AuAg, (0.10 oz/st lower detection limit, 292.0 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish;

• Gold:  FA-30-AA-Au (0.001 oz/st lower detection limit, 0.234 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with AAS finish and GV-AuAg, (0.005 oz/st lower detection limit, 292.0 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 8‑1:          Historical Primary and Secondary Laboratory Analysis Methods (2008–2011)

Laboratory	Element	Analysis Name	Analysis Methodology	Lower Detection Limit (oz/st)	Upper Detection Limit (oz/st)
Inspectorate Reno	Ag	AR-TR	Aqua regia 2-acid digest (AA finish)	0.003	5.83
Inspectorate Reno	Ag	AuAg-1AT-ICP	1AT fire assay (ICP Finish)	0.03	2.92
Inspectorate Reno	Ag	AuAg-1AT-GV	1AT fire assay (grav finish)	0.146	291.7
Inspectorate Reno	Au	AuAg-1AT-AA	1AT fire assay (AA finish)	0.0001	0.29
Inspectorate Reno	Au	AuAg-1AT-ICP	1AT fire assay (ICP finish)	0.001	0.29
Inspectorate Reno	Au	AuAg-1AT-GV	1AT fire assay (grav finish)	0.029	29.17
American Assay	Ag	D4A	4-acid digest (ICP-OES finish)	0.006	2.92
American Assay	Ag	Ag(G)_GRAV	30 g Fire Assay (grav finish)	0.2	29167
American Assay	Au	FA30	30 g fire assay (aa finish)	0.0001	0.29
American Assay	Au	Au(G)_GRAV	30 g fire assay (grav finish)	0.001	29167
ALS-Chemex	Ag	Ag-AA61	4-acid digest (AAS finish)	0.001	2.92
ALS-Chemex	Ag	Ag-GRA21	30 g fire assay (grav finish)	0.146	291.7
ALS-Chemex	Au	AA23	30 g fire assay (AA finish)	0.0001	0.29
ALS-Chemex	Au	Au-GRA21	30 g fire assay (grav finish)	0.001	291.7
Pinnacle	Ag	AAS-2A-Ag	Aqua Regia 2-acid digest (AA finish)	0.01	0.29
Pinnacle	Ag	Ag-FAG-30	30 g fire assay (grav finish)	0.1	291.7
Pinnacle	Au	Au-FA-30	30 g fire assay (AA finish)	0.001	0.29
Pinnacle	Au	Au-FAG-30	30 g fire assay (grav finish)	0.005	291.7

Notes:  AA = atomic absorption; AT = assay ton; ICP = inductively coupled plasma; grav = gravimetric; OES = optical emission spectroscopy; AAS = atomic absorption spectroscopy.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

In early August 2016, ALS became the primary laboratory.  Four assay methods were used by ALS:

• Silver:  Ag-GRA21 (0.1 oz/st lower detection limit, 292 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish, and Ag-OG62b, (0.03 oz/st lower detection limit, 21.9 oz/st upper detection limit), four-acid digestion with ICP atomic emission spectroscopy (AES) finish;

• Gold:  Au-GRA21 (0.001 oz/st lower detection limit, 292 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish and Au-AA23, (0.0001 oz/st lower detection limit, 0.292 z/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with AAS finish.

From the beginning of 2017 through the first quarter of 2018 Bureau Veritas/Inspectorate was the primary laboratory for all analysis and McClelland was the secondary laboratory for failed reruns and umpire samples.  Four assay methods were used by Bureau Veritas:

• Silver:  MA300 (0.15 oz/st lower detection limit, 58.3 oz/st upper detection limit), four-acid digestion with ICP emission spectroscopy (ES) finish, and FA530, (5.83 oz/st lower detection limit, 292.0 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish;

• Gold:  FA430 (0.001 oz/st lower detection limit, 2.92 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with AA finish, and FA530, (0.26 oz/st lower detection limit, 291.7 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish.

Beginning in the second quarter of 2018 through the first quarter of 2021, McClelland was the primary laboratory with Bureau Veritas serving as secondary laboratory and doing the multi-element analysis.  Beginning in the first quarter of 2021 through the effective date of this Report, Bureau Veritas was the primary laboratory for all analysis with McClelland serving as the secondary laboratory.

An additional analysis method was used for silver analysis at Bureau Veritas during this time:

• Silver:  MA401 (0.029 oz/st lower detection limit, 23.3 oz/st upper detection limit), four-acid digestion with AAS finish.

Grade control samples are analyzed at the Rochester site laboratory.  Each sample was fire-assayed with a one assay ton sample using a traditional lead oxide flux with a silver inquart.  Doré are parted and dissolved in nitric acid.  The analysis is finished using AAS.  Assays >5 ppm are checked by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.

8.6.4 Multi-element Analysis

Beginning in 2016, samples were analyzed for total sulfur through LECO analysis.  This began with a selection of samples in 2016 being shipped to SVL Analytical.  From 2017 through the effective date of this Report, Bureau Veritas has conducted the majority of the LECO analysis as well as multi-assay elemental analysis.  These analyses were conducted under the following analysis methods:

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• TC000:  LECO analysis for total sulfur and total carbon;

• MA300:  Multi-acid digestion with ICP-ES finish for 35 elements;

• MA200:  Multi-acid digestion with ICP-ES/mass spectrometry (MS) finish for 45 elements.

For a period of time in 2018, these analyses were conducted by ALS Laboratories. ALS used the following analysis method:

• ME-ICP61:  Four-acid digestion with ICP-ES finish for 33 elements.

8.6.5 Alio Gold

The 38 holes acquired from Alio Gold from the Nevada Packard deposit were analyzed at American Assay. Three assay methods were used:

• Silver:  D4A (0.006 oz/st lower detection limit, 2.92 oz/st upper detection limit), four-acid digestion with ICP optical emission spectroscopy (OES) finish, and Ag(G)-GRAV, (0.20 oz/st lower detection limit, no limit to upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish;

• Gold:  FA30 (0.0001 oz/st lower detection limit, 0.29 oz/st upper detection limit), 30 g fire assay with AAS finish.

8.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

8.7.1 Coeur Pre-2008

Three standard samples were collected from the Rochester area so that those materials had the same rock matrix as the samples being submitted for assay and represented typical Rochester mineralization.  The standards were evaluated using a round-robin assay program, and splits of these standards were inserted into each fire assay tray to monitor the analytical quality and precision at Inspectorate and American Assay Laboratories.

Blanks were inserted into each development drill sample lot at regular downhole intervals to monitor potential sample contamination during sample preparation.  The blank was sourced off-site, and assayed by several different laboratories to confirm very low or non-detectable levels of gold and silver.  If the barren sample returned an anomalous value, the lot was considered invalid and the laboratory was instructed to prepare the coarse reject for re-assay.  The re-assay value for the sample interval inserted into the database if the batch passed QA/QC guidelines.

Duplicate field samples were collected from random drill intervals.

At the Rochester mine laboratory, in addition to each load of 38 samples, two blanks (inquart, flux and silica sand), four duplicate samples, and one standard were included as QC samples (seven total per load).  Every month, while in production, the Rochester mine laboratory randomly selected samples, either blast hole or metallurgical (e.g., column test sample), and sent them to third-party commercial laboratories for check assaying to evaluate the Rochester site laboratory precision and accuracy.  It has been recorded these laboratories were accredited. However, there is no record of which laboratories were used.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

8.7.2 2008–2015

Prior to 2010, check assays were completed by Inspectorate.  From 2010–2016, ALS completed check assays.  From 2017 through the effective date of this Report the secondary laboratory switched between McClelland and Bureau Veritas three times.  The changes to the secondary laboratory conforms with the changes to the primary laboratories.

Prior to sample pick-up at site by the assay laboratory, QC samples were inserted into the sample stream.  Those consisted of a minimum of 5% standards, 5% blanks, and 7.5% duplicates.  When results were received, the assay certificate was imported directly into acQuire.  After importing an assay certificate, QA/QC reports for the certificate were immediately generated.  Potential issues with assay quality were identified via failed standards, blanks, and duplicate assays.

A standard was considered to have failed if it fell outside three standard deviations from the expected value.  A standard was also considered unacceptable if two standards in sequence fell between two and three standard deviations on the same side of the mean (showing bias).

A failed blank was any blank that assayed >5x the detection limit of the analysis method.

A pulp duplicate was considered a failure if it was not within ±10% of the original assay.   A crush/preparation duplicate was considered to have failed if it was not within ±15% of the original.

Assays associated with any failed QC samples were quarantined from the database so they were not unintentionally used before they passed Coeur’s QA/QC guidelines.  Failed QC samples and their associated samples were rerun by the assay laboratory and the results were imported into the database.  If the rerun assays passed the QA/QC guidelines, they were accepted and could be used for downstream activities.

On a quarterly basis, 11% of all samples were selected (10% from pulps and 1% from coarse rejects) and sent to ALS for analysis as umpire samples.

QA/QC procedures, along with the sample collection and submission process at Coeur, were unchanged from 2010–2015.

In addition to the standards and blanks submitted to the laboratory by Coeur personnel, each laboratory inserted their own standards, blanks, and duplicates into the sample stream.  These consisted of a >10% insertion rate for duplicate and standard samples.

8.7.3 2016–Current

After importing an assay certificate and generating QA/QC reports for the certificate, samples are rejected primarily based on failing standards and blanks.  Failed duplicates are considered but are not strictly used as a basis to reject samples.

When choosing which associated samples to rerun because of a standard or blank failure, the batch now consists of all assays both up and down the assay stream to, but not including, the next passing standard (in case of a failed standard) or blank (in case of a failed blank).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Umpire samples were not taken on a quarterly basis in 2016.  In mid-December 2016, at the completion of drilling for the year, umpire samples were chosen at the same rate as previous years and sent to ALS for analysis.  In 2017, umpire samples were sent out to the McClelland on a quarterly basis.  From 2018 through Q1 of 2021, umpire samples were sent to Bureau Veritas. From Q1 2021 to the effective date of this Report, umpire samples were sent to McClelland.  These changes to the secondary laboratory correspond to changes to the primary laboratories.

8.7.4 Alio Gold Results

Review of QA/QC results of the 38 Alio Gold drill holes purchased in 2018 showed a lower insertion rate for standards and blanks than Coeur’s internal QA/QC policy.  The review also noted that the criteria for failing batches of assays were less restrictive than Coeur’s internal QA/QC policy.  To ensure the accuracy of these data, 176 out of 4,093 samples were sent for umpire analysis.  This equates to 5% of the total dataset and ~15% of the dataset filtered to ≥0.2 oz/st Ag.  The results of the umpire analysis show excellent correlation to the original analysis, and the 38 Alio Gold drill holes were included in the resource estimate database with no confidence restrictions.

8.8 Database

An acQuire SQL Server database was implemented at Rochester in 2010.  The system is secured using Windows based logins for data input and export privileges.  Access to the SQL Server is restricted to Coeur Information Technology personnel and the database administrator at the Corporate level.  An automated daily backup of the system is completed on-site.

8.9 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures

In the opinion of the QPs, the sample preparation, analyses and security for the samples used in mineral resource estimation are acceptable, meet industry-standard practice, and are acceptable for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation and mine planning purposes.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 8-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

9.0          DATA VERIFICATION

9.1 Internal Data Verification

Data used for the Rochester open pit and stockpile resource estimates were exported from the Rochester acQuire database prior to verification.  The data in the site acQuire database has been subjected to multiple reviews since its implementation in 2010.  The database is currently under a thorough lockdown review by the Rochester Geology department.

The lockdown process is a detailed audit that involves reviewing all available data associated with each drill hole.  All records are reviewed and compared to the records in the database.  This includes collar survey records, downhole survey records, analytical certificates, and geologic logging.  All hard copies are electronically scanned, and the data package associated with each drill hole is organized in an easily queried folder structure.  Additional drill hole data stored include QA/QC reports along with any comments on missing data or data quality.  There are currently 550 drill holes in the database that have been fully locked-down in this manner.

As part of any modelling exercise, the data associated with any new drilling is considered for data validation.  In the case of data that has been subjected to Coeur’s QA/QC policy and procedures, ~10% of the drilling is randomly selected and the database records are reviewed for correctness/completeness against hard and/or electronic copies.  In the case of new data coming from a source not subjected to the Coeur’s QA/QC policy and procedures, the entire dataset is investigated for correctness and completeness against hard and/or electronic copies.

9.1.1 Rochester Review

Several major data reviews were conducted on the Rochester area drilling data.  The most recent, in 2014, included a review of all drill holes in the Rochester resource area.  The review included spatial verification and assay certificate verification.  Based on this review, 384 Asarco drill holes were removed from the resource model dataset.  Ten drill holes completed by Coeur Rochester since 1982, were removed from the resource dataset based on failed verification against original assays certificates.

Seventy-nine drill holes in the Limerick resource area were reviewed in 2014.  No drill holes were found to have obvious collar, dip, or azimuth inconsistencies.

A total of 10% of the 83 drill holes completed at Rochester between 2018–2020 were selected for review against original assay certificates, while all assays were reviewed in cross-section.  No significant issues were identified for these drill results.  Hard copies of data exist for all drill holes reviewed and the data are properly stored.

A total of 73 drill holes completed between 2020–2021 were considered for assay review as part of the Rochester drilling campaigns.  Ten percent of the drill holes were chosen for review against original assay certificates, while all assays were reviewed in cross-section.  No significant issues were identified for these drill results. Hard copies of data exist for all drill holes reviewed and the data are properly stored.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 9-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

All collar locations and downhole surveys for data used in the current resource estimate but acquired since the last resource estimate were investigated in 3D space as well as 100 ft spaced east–west and north–south cross-sections.  Drill hole dip and direction were compared with surrounding assay results and interpreted geologic model structures.  Issues were seen in the downhole survey records of 51 drill holes.  Of these 51 issues, the majority (50 out of 51) were drill holes without a downhole survey.  These were vertical holes that were not downhole surveyed.  A typographic error in a single downhole survey record was the cause of error for the remaining hole.

Four East Rochester RC drill holes were twinned with core drilling in 2019.  Detailed statistical analysis along with downhole comparison plots show no significant bias between the core and RC results.  The analysis also shows little evidence of downhole contamination below the water table.  The results compare very well between the datasets and there is no reason to discount the classification confidence for material below the water table.  This had been the procedure for material below the table prior to these twin holes being completed.

Additional validation was completed in 2021 that focused on comparing the pre-2008 samples to more modern samples collected post-2008 that were quality controlled under modern industry standard practices.  This comparison included a nearest neighbor search of 20 ft that paired samples from the two datasets.  If the samples were within 20 ft of each other, they were deemed a pair and used in the comparison.  These data were analyzed using similar statistical methods to those used in the twin hole analysis. These data compared well, and no significant issues were noted.

9.1.2 Nevada Packard Review

A complete review of the Nevada Packard area (all drilling south of the Rochester pit) assay data was conducted as of March 30, 2016.  A total of 678 drill holes were reviewed.  A total of 189 of those drill holes were completed by Wharf Resources.  Documentation for these data is not available.  Only visual validation was completed.  A total of 281 drill holes completed by Coeur between 1988 and 2005, were validated.  Data are available in hard copy only.  A total of 208 drill holes were completed in the area between 2010–2015.

Assay validation showed the most significant problem was ‘mis-keyed’ data entry of historic assays from hard copy and inconsistent data entry and flagging of detection limit values.  Visual review of the assay data in cross-section found inconsistencies in some of the 2011 drilling regarding surrounding drill hole intercepts and structural geology models.  This led to 15 drill holes being removed from the resource dataset until remedial work was completed on the data to qualify them for inclusion in the resource estimate.  Four drill holes (pre-1990) were removed after visual inspection of the results against geology and surrounding drilling results.

Review of collar surveys shows that the Wharf Resources drill hole locations appeared to be generated on several drilling grids and probably were not surveyed after completion.  Wharf Resources drill hole locations were compared against historic topographic surfaces.  Collars for the Wharf Resources drilling were not corrected back to the topographic surface and were considered reasonably correct.  Drill hole collars for all Coeur drilling completed between 1990–2010 appear correct.  Not all drilling completed in 2011 was surveyed after completion; 60 of the 2011 drill holes used planned coordinates.  All the 2014 and 2015 drill hole locations appear to be correct regarding topography and geologic structures.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 9-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Downhole survey information was reviewed for drilling completed since 1990.  Review of the 2014–2015 drill hole downhole surveys found several drill holes did not have downhole survey information entered.

Review of the data for 38 drill holes purchased from Alio Gold in 2018 together with the 19 drill holes completed by Coeur between 2016–2020 was completed in 2020.  Ten percent of the Coeur drill holes were chosen for assay review against original certificates.  All the 38 Alio Gold holes were reviewed against original certificates.  All assays, collars, and downhole surveys were reviewed in cross-section.  The database data were compared to hard copy or electronic assay reports.  No significant issues were identified for these drill results.  Hard copies of data exist for all drill holes reviewed and are properly stored.  These Alio samples were also subjected to an additional umpire check described in Chapter 8.7.4.  The results showed excellent correlation to the original analysis. All 38 drill holes were included in the resource estimation with no confidence restrictions.

Collar locations and downhole surveys for all recent drill holes included in the resource estimate were confirmed in 3D space as well as on 100 ft spaced east–west and north–south cross-sections.  Drill hole collars were validated against the topographic surface.  Drill hole dip and direction were compared with surrounding assay results and interpreted geologic model structures.

Two RC drill holes were twinned with RC drilling in 2011.  Results of the twin comparison are inconclusive.  The original drill hole samples were assayed at American Assay Laboratories, while the twin was analyzed at Pinnacle Laboratory.  For the purposes of resource interpretation, the original drill holes were retained, while the twins were removed from the dataset.

9.1.3 Nevada Packard Stockpiles

Forty-six drill holes were considered for review.  Initially, 105 drill holes were examined, but it was determined that the remaining 59 drill holes were not of sufficient quality to be used for resource estimation.  Eleven drill holes from the original dataset of 105 drill holes were reviewed against the hardcopy certificate.  No problems were found with regard to original assay certificates.

Seven drill hole locations were re-surveyed as a validation check in April 2015.  Eleven of the 46 drill holes used in the resource estimate do not have final collar surveys.  All drill holes were shifted vertically to the final topography for consistency and the original survey elevation was retained in the database for future review.

Drill holes range in length from 40–220 ft.  No downhole surveys were performed.  This drilling is used in the mineral resource estimate, but because no physical collar or downhole surveys were conducted, the confidence classification for blocks not supported by other drill holes is restricted to inferred.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 9-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

9.1.4 South and Charlie Stockpiles

Collar locations and downhole surveys were reviewed in tabular format and 3D plots to determine the following:

• Location correlated with surrounding drill holes;

• Vertical location relative to topographic surfaces;

• Downhole dip and azimuth deviation.

Minor corrections were made during the review period.  Final collar surveys were not available for 26 of the drill holes and planned coordinates were used in these cases.  All drill holes were used in the mineral resource estimate.

Downhole surveys were completed for 38 drill holes.  No obvious dip and azimuth inconsistencies were discovered.

Sixteen twin drill holes were recorded for the South stockpile area.  Of these, 15 pairs were analyzed.  The remaining twinned drill hole was not included due to a discrepancy in collar surveys.  During the time between the original and the twin drill holes completion, the primary assay laboratory was changed from Inspectorate to Skyline Laboratory.  The twin data compare well with the original data.

9.1.5 Rochester In-Pit Stockpile

Twenty-four drill holes were used for the Rochester in-pit stockpile estimate.  All collars and downhole surveys were investigated in tabular format as well as 3D space.  All drill holes had final collars surveyed and all but three of them had downhole surveys.  The three drill holes without downhole surveys were vertical holes less than 500 ft long.

The drill holes used for this estimate were designed to drill through the stockpile and test in-situ mineralization at-depth.  The stockpile and in-situ samples were completely segregated from each other to avoid any influence on the other’s estimation.

Although the 24 drill holes used in this estimate would fall under the umbrella of existing in-situ data reviews, three were selected for review against their respective hard copy certificates.  No problems were found with regard to original assay certificates and all 24 drill holes were used in the resource estimate.

9.2 External Data Verification

External data verifications take place on an annual basis as part of the company’s annual auditing process.  External auditors randomly select 25 samples, drilled during the calendar year, and require a full chain of custody from assay certificates to QA/QC reports to screen shots of the samples in the modeling software.  Any issues that come from this audit are promptly addressed. Persistent issues will prompt an additional sample review along with a full internal audit for all drilling conducted during the calendar year.

These audits have taken place annually since 2011.  KPMG was Coeur Mining’s external auditor from 2011–2015 with Grant-Thornton taking over from 2016 to present.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 9-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

9.3 Data Verification by Qualified Person

Internal validation work described above was either reviewed or completed by the QP.  The specific data verification completed by the QP include any analyses generated from year-end 2018 to the Report effective date.  This includes the twin hole analysis from 2019, the validation for all drilling added to the resource models from year-end 2018 to the Report effective date, the validation of the entire Alio dataset utilized at Nevada Packard, validation of the Rochester In-pit stockpile dataset, and the comparison of pre- and post-2008 samples.  The QP has also worked at  the Coeur Rochester Operation since April 2021.

The data verification reviewed, but not completed, by the QP includes data validation conducted prior to year-end 2018, together with validation of the South-Charlie and Nevada Packard stockpile data.

9.4 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

The process of data verification for the Project was performed by the QP and other Coeur personnel.  The QP considers that a reasonable level of verification has been completed, and that no material issues would have been left unidentified from the programs undertaken.

The QPs who rely upon this work have reviewed the appropriate reports and are of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

For a portion of the drilling in the Nevada Packard stockpile area where no physical collar or downhole surveys were conducted, the confidence classification for blocks not supported by other drill holes was restricted to inferred.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 9-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

10.0          MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

10.1 Test Laboratories

Independent metallurgical test work facilities used over the Project life include McClelland Laboratories, Kappes, Cassiday & Assoc., Newfields, FLSmidth and Eagle Engineering.  Test work conducted included permeability testing, column leach and bottle roll leach test work. Additionally, bench-top high pressure grind roll (HPGR) test work as well as clay and mineralogical categorization have been performed.

The Rochester Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays process solutions, crusher and run-of-mine (ROM) ore samples, and refinery samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for column leach test, bottle roll tests, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

There is no international standard of accreditation provided for metallurgical testing laboratories or metallurgical testing techniques.

10.2 Metallurgical Test Work

10.2.1 Rochester

Coeur has operated the Rochester Merrill-Crowe circuit since 1986.  Merrill-Crowe is a widely accepted industry standard recovery method for silver in solution.  The plant has operated efficiently since installation and has undergone some improvements.  In 2013, an additional deaerator tower was added to accommodate increased flow and to increase the oxygen removal efficiency.  A second zinc feeder was added in 2014.

10.2.2 Packard

Metallurgical test work on Nevada Packard mineralization was conducted by previous mine owners/operators in the period 1988–1990.

In 1981 a 100,000 st production-scale heap leach test was conducted using about 70,000 st of newly mined mineralization and 30,000 st of previously-leached dump and surface mineralization.  The material head grade was 1.73 oz/st Ag and 0.010 oz/st Au.  The crush size of the test material was 70%, passing ⅝ in.  The material was agglomerated with cement and heaped by stacker conveyor in 14 ft lifts.  The material produced recovery values of 33% and 51% for silver and gold, respectively.  Low recoveries were attributed to “crushing to too coarse a size especially for deeper ore where there is a higher proportion of acanthite” (N.L. Tribe, 1990).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

In January 1988, Bateman Metallurgical Laboratories conducted column tests on several different rock types taken from core crushed to minus ⅜ in and found the average recoveries of 12 columns, containing 10 different rock types, were 87% for gold and 58% for silver.

In 1997, Coeur performed several column tests on HQ core and two column tests on stockpiled material.  The material was crushed to match the size gradations typically seen from tertiary-crushed material at Rochester (nominal ⅜ in).

Average recoveries were concluded to be similar to Rochester oxidized material from a cone crushing product and projected to be 95.9% for gold and 61.4% for silver after 20 years.

The QP is unable to comment on the representative nature of the mineralized material samples used in test work conducted by previous mine owners and/or operators.  It is presumed these material samples, having been obtained from the Nevada Packard stockpiles and pit, would provide representative test results consistent with the Nevada Packard mineralization.

10.2.3 Current Metallurgical Testing

A summary of the test work that may currently be performed is provided in Table 10‑1.

Material delivered to each leach pad from the crushing facilities and/or ROM stockpile is sampled and composited daily.  Each sample is evaluated for contained moisture, size fractions and assayed for precious metal content to determine the dry tonnage, silver and gold content delivered to the leach pads.  Daily laboratory bulk samples are categorized and split into proportionate test samples.  One split of each ore type (crushed or ROM) is crushed, pulverized, divided and fire assayed to produce a set of values for contained silver and gold.  The second split is used for moisture determination and screen analysis.  A third split is used to generate monthly composites of ROM and crushed ore for metallurgical analysis using column leaching and bottle roll leaching.  Data generated from these daily samples is used to characterize daily production; dry tons produced from each ore source and gold and silver quantities delivered to the leach pad from each ore source.

Monthly column leach tests and bottle roll leach tests are run in a manner that is analogous with production heap conditions and provide test results intended to correlate well with expected heap leach production performance.  Results include recovery trends for gold and silver, size by grade recovery, reagent consumption, and permeability.  Monthly metallurgical columns date back to 1986 and have been used as a resource to confirm historical recovery rates.  Since 2011, metallurgical data have been used to forecast future recovery rates of the active leach pads.

Metallurgical test work at Rochester, in coordination with modern heap leach modeling programs, continues to refine and confirm expected metal recovery rates and ultimate recovery values.  This testing provides better understanding of process optimization of the leach pads, metal inventory in the leach pads, potential cost reduction, increase crusher throughput, and to provide engineering support on future operational planning.  Ultimate recovery of Rochester ore is assumed to be 20 years from the date leaching commences.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑1:          Metallurgical Test Work Summary Table

In House Test work	Daily Composite	Monthly Composite
Au/Ag assay	X	X
Gradation	X	X
% moisture	X	X
Permeability		X
Column leach		X
Bottle roll		X

10.3 Recovery Estimates

Coeur uses heap leach recovery models and recovery curves based on test work and operations to forecast recovered gold and silver production from actual and/or forecasted mineralized product placed on the leach pads.  The models apply recovery rates to the product type (crushed, ROM), tonnage, depth to liner, contained ounces placed on each leach pad, and various kinetic factors to determine the expected recovered production in each month.  The cumulative sum of prior months of placed production at that respective recovery rate in time determines the total ounces expected to be recovered each month.  The predicted values are compared to actual production to ensure accuracy and provide confidence in the models’ ability to predict ounce production.

Historically, silver recovery averages about 58% and gold recovery averages about 90%.  Project-to-date metallurgical recoveries calculated from contained ounces delivered to the pads, and recovered settled ounces are shown in Table 10‑2.

Coeur is continuing to define and refine HPGR product recovery rates for gold and silver ore types.  Continuing metallurgical test work, both in house and with third parties, is optimizing gradation from mining and mineral processing methods to achieve desired heap leach performance.  Future HPGR product mineralization placed on the Stage VI pad is assigned recovery rates that are indicative of operational crush size and potential recovery rates derived from available metallurgical data.

Monthly metallurgical gold and silver recovery information from column tests are compared against historical recoveries of crushed and ROM products.  Historical crushed material recovery rates are provided in Table 10‑3 and were derived from third party verification of in-house metallurgical test results, crusher production and heap leach production results from 1986 through 2004 (KD Engineering Co., Inc., 2004).  The historical recoveries are applied to cone crushed product from 1986 through 2019.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑2:          Leach Pad Recoveries to Date

Leach Pad	Contained Gold (oz)	Gold Recovered (oz)	Gold Recovery (%)	Silver Contained (oz)	Silver Recovered (oz)	Silver Recovery (%)
Stage I (complete)	260,008	235,743	91	39,497,785	22,186,395	56
Stage II (in-progress)	430,459	421,225	98	64,400,171	39,219,857	61
Stage III (in-progress)	303,191	285,494	94	51,853,943	24,998,071	48
Stage IV (in-progress)	1,053,351	902,262	86	135,328,128	81,379,587	60
Total	2,047,009	1,844,724	90	291,080,027	167,783,910	58

Table 10‑3:          Historical Crushed and ROM Product Recoveries

Leaching Years	Leaching Days	Cone Crushed Ore		Historical ROM Ore		Packard Crushed Ore
		% Recovery				% Recovery
		Ag	Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Au
	30	30.5	73.1	10.4	51.0	30.5	73.1
	60	35.5	76.0	12.5	53.5	35.5	76.0
	90	38.2	77.7	13.7	55.0	38.2	77.7
	180	42.6	80.6	15.8	57.6	42.6	80.6
1	365	46.8	83.5	18.0	60.2	46.8	83.5
2	730	50.6	86.4	20.1	62.7	50.6	86.4
5	1,825	55.2	90.2	22.9	66.1	55.2	90.2
10	3,650	58.4	93.0	25.0	68.7	58.4	93.0
20	7,300	61.4	95.9	27.1	71.2	61.4	95.9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

From mid-2019 through the current period all material from Rochester is assumed to be HPGR crushed at which point HPGR recovery rates are applied. Since the Rochester oxide deposit is relatively consistent, the gold and silver recovery trends have also been consistent over the life of Rochester.  As new minerology is identified metallurgical characterization and recovery determinations will be updated.  Recovery rates of gold and silver can be directly related to material particle size delivered to the leach pad and not contained gold and silver head grades.

As a result, the historical cone crushing circuits, operated in open configuration, targeted a product size of P80 3/8” to achieve optimal recovery rates of gold and silver while maximizing throughput.  Historical crushed recovery rates are applied to crushed product placed on Stage II and IV heap leach pads and for X-pit product placed on Stage IV from 2017–2019.  ROM product recovery rates, interpreted and historically adjusted from the same report, are applied to ROM product placed on Stage II and IV heap leach pads.

The Stage III heap leach pad was built in 2011 and continuous metallurgical sampling, test work and modeling evaluations provided updated recovery values for this leach pad.  Coeur conducted an extensive study of ROM product via column tests and test heaps to further understand recoveries of material placed on Stage III heap leach pad since 2011.  Historically, interpreted ROM recoveries were 27% Ag and 71% Au but this was for the traditional in situ ROM, which was different from the actual mineralized material characteristics hauled to Stage III for leaching.  ROM delivered to the Stage III leach pad from 2013–2018 was mined from historical stockpiles and the natural material segregation of the piles provided fine ROM material.  This mineralized material was sorted and delivered to the leach pad as an opportunity during mine operations with slightly better recoveries than the traditional ROM recovery rates.

These adjusted, improved, and applied recovery values can be seen in Table 10‑4.  Any variation using the dynamic modeling software from these crushed and ROM values are minimal and ultimate recoveries have been consistent.

In 2019 Coeur Rochester adopted HPGR technology to replace tertiary cone crushing.  The HPGR circuit was initially operated in an open circuit configuration and was being optimized for gradation and recovery.  During this time the unit was producing material at a P80 of ⅝”, however, it was determined that operating the unit in open circuit configuration at this P80 could produce material that did not display optimum permeability on the leach pad.

In response to this, additional flowsheet options were analyzed to determine if a pre-screen option that would allow the fines to bypass the HPGR would produce a permeable product.

Crusher modeling was performed to determine the product gradation of a pre-screen system as well as a pre-screen plus edge protection system.  The P80s were as follows:  current 1”, pre-screen ¾” and pre-screen plus edge protection ⅝”.Based on this modeling the recoveries shown in Table 10‑5 are assumed for HPGR material.

In addition to the P80 calculations confidence intervals were also determined around the Stage VI ultimate recoveries.  Table 10‑5 provides a summary of these determinations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑4:          Stage III Crushed and ROM Product Recoveries

Leaching Years	Leaching Days	Stage 3 Crushed		Stage 3 ROM
		% Recovery
		Ag	Au	Ag	Au
	30	26.3	76.4	1.7	65.0
	60	31.1	78.8	6.2	68.2
	90	33.9	80.1	8.8	70.0
	180	38.7	82.5	13.3	73.1
1	365	43.6	84.9	17.9	76.3
5	1,826	54.8	90.4	28.4	83.6
10	3,653	59.6	92.8	32.9	86.7
20	7,305	64.5	95.2	37.4	89.8

Table 10‑5:          Stage VI Recovery Confidence Intervals

Leaching Years	Leaching Days	% Recovery Stage VI
		25th Percentile		50th Percentile		75th Percentile
		Ag	Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Au
	30	51.3%	82.9%	46.2%	78.4%	42.2%	75.1%
	60	57.4%	86.1%	51.8%	81.5%	47.2%	78.0%
	90	59.9%	87.3%	54.0%	82.6%	49.3%	79.1%
	180	62.6%	88.6%	56.5%	83.8%	51.5%	80.3%
1	365	64.2%	89.3%	57.9%	84.5%	52.8%	81.0%
2	730	65.0%	89.7%	58.6%	84.9%	53.5%	81.3%
5	1825	65.5%	89.9%	59.1%	85.1%	53.9%	81.5%
10	3650	65.7%	90.0%	59.2%	85.2%	54.0%	81.6%
20	7300	65.9%	90.1%	59.4%	85.3%	54.2%	81.7%

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Based on historic Rochester performance, as shown in Table 10‑2, the 50% confidence recovery of 59.4% for silver and the 25% confidence recovery of 85.3% Au was used for forecasting production on Stage VI (pre-screen plus edge protection).  The 25% confidence recovery was chosen because gold performance tends to outperform model predictions and gold recoveries in Stages I–IV all have recoveries (Table 10‑2) that are higher than plan, and the 50% confidence recovery.

Based on this modeling the ultimate recoveries shown in Table 10‑6 are assumed for HPGR material based on the configuration of the crusher, the leach pads the material is placed on and the resultant P80.

10.4 Metallurgical Variability

Metallurgical test results obtained from several test work programs conducted during the past three years show relatively low variability between several different locations with respect to gold and silver recovery assuming the sulfur content is below 0.7% and the crush size is held constant.

Potentially acid-generating (PAG) ore is part of the mineral reserve estimate at Rochester.  Historically, Coeur estimated the recoveries for all sulfide materials to be 61% silver and 60% gold from in-house prior test work and results.  However, based on more recent test work the following discount equations are applied to ore over the 0.7% sulfur cut off where TS is equivalent to total sulfur in %.

• Ag: Recovery = (59.4)(-1.89*TS^2+1.81*TS+.667);

• Au: Recovery = (85.3)(-0.267*TS+1.09).

Metallurgical test work and characterization is continuously performed in parallel with ongoing operations.  Gold and silver recoveries from the operational leach pads are continually being compared again with metallurgical column test work to further refine expected recovery profiles.

10.5 Deleterious Elements

Based on extensive operating experience and test work, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

None of the deposits contain sufficient quantities of sulfide minerals, organic carbon or silica encapsulation to be categorized as refractory ore.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑6:          Ultimate Recovery Summary by Ore Type

Ore Product	Ultimate Recovery (20 Years)
	Silver (%)	Gold (%)
Historical cone crushed product	61.4	95.9
Packard cone crushed product	61.4	95.9
Traditional ROM	27.1	71.2
Stage 3 ROM	37.4	89.8
Stage 4 current config.	56.1	82.4
Stage 4 HPGR post pre-screen and side plate	59.4	85.3
Stage 6 HPGR	59.4	90.1

10.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

Current and ongoing metallurgical test work confirms the material to be mined presents a similar response to the heap leaching process to previously mined ores.  The ultimate metal recovery assumptions are derived from historic and actual performance of the leaching operation, historical and ongoing metallurgical test work, and use of heap leach modeling tools.

Additional test work and operational optimizations will continue to refine high pressure grind roll recovery from operational heap leach pads and ore sources.

Crusher gradation, mineralization minerology, and heap leach kinetics have an impact on overall gold and silver recovery from heap leach operations.  These factors are being evaluated to understand their impact on the overall recovery of current and future operations.

The QP is not aware of any other processing factors or deleterious elements that could have a significant impact on the economic extraction under similar and historic operating conditions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 10-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

11.0          MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

11.1 Introduction

The Rochester mineral resource estimate was updated to include drilling completed and acquired in 2020 and 2021.  The models were built and estimated using Hexagon Mining’s HxGN MinePlan V15.60-1 software (previously known as MineSight).  Geostatistical work, including variography, was completed in Snowden Supervisor V8.13.

The mineral resource estimate for Rochester consists of five parts:

• Rochester mine mineral resource estimate (amenable to open pit mining methods), updated October 5, 2021 (effective date December 31, 2021);

• Rochester in-pit stockpile mineral resource estimate completed October 5, 2021 (effective date December 31, 2021);

• South and Charlie stockpile mineral resource estimate completed December 31, 2013. Re-blocking exercise was completed September 30, 2020 to go from a model framework of 50 x 50 x 25 ft to 50 x 50 x 30 ft (effective date December 31, 2021);

• Nevada Packard mineral resource (amenable to open pit mining methods), updated August 31, 2020 (effective date December 31, 2021);

• Nevada Packard stockpile mineral resource estimate completed December 31, 2015. Re-blocking exercise was completed August 31, 2020 to go from a model framework of 50 x 50 x 25 ft to 50 x 50 x 30 ft (effective date December 31, 2021).

Figure 11‑1 shows the location of the five models.

11.2 Geological Model

Geologic modeling of the Rochester deposit incorporates in-pit geologic mapping, drill log interpretation and surface mapping.  A total of 37 unique domain combinations were generated; however, seven domains were associated with greenstone and leucogranite lithologies that are considered non-mineralized and were not modeled.

The South and Charlie stockpiles along with the Rochester in-pit stockpile are approximately 250 ft thick.  There are no domains delineated within these volumes of material.  Both stockpiles are treated as distinct volumes of material with no domains segregated within them.

The Nevada Packard geological model incorporates historic pre-mine surface mapping, pit mapping and drill log interpretation. Seven domains were interpreted.

Four domains (Zones 1 through 4) were defined for the Nevada Packard stockpile material based on geographic location.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑1:          Rochester and Nevada Packard Model Areas

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

11.3 Exploratory Data Analysis

All deposits were subject to exploratory data analysis methods, which included histograms, cumulative probability plots, box and whisker plots, and contact analysis.

Several domains in the Rochester model were merged based on silver data, resulting in 11 domains used for estimation purposes. All domains were treated as soft for the purposes of the model estimate.

Five of the seven domains defined at Nevada Packard were considered sufficiently unique to remain separate domains.  The two westernmost domains, 100 and 800, were merged.  This resulted in a total of six domains used for estimation.  There was a strong correlation to the domains in the silver data at Nevada Packard, with a very weak correlation to any domain in the gold data. All domains were treated as soft for model estimation purposes.

Silver and gold values in the Charlie and South stockpiles had relatively high standard deviations.  Ninety-nine percent of the gold values above the detection limit were <0.010 oz/st Au.

Silver and gold values in the Rochester in-pit stockpile had low standard deviations, which resulted in low coefficients of variation (CVs) in both datasets.  Ninety-eight percent of the gold values above the detection limit were <0.010 oz/st Au.

Silver in the Nevada Packard stockpile has a bimodal distribution for Zones 1 and 3, while Zone 4 has a slightly positive skewed distribution.  Gold values are highly skewed for all zones.  Zone 1 contains five drill holes sampled on 10-ft intervals, approximately 100 ft apart.  Given the volume of material and position of drilling, a resource estimate was not completed for Zone 1.  Zone 2 contains five drill holes sampled on 10-ft intervals.  Four drill holes are clustered within 75 ft of each other, while the fifth is approximately 125 ft from the cluster.  Modeling parameters and classification parameters from Zones 3 and 4 were applied to Zone 2.  Drilling completed in Zones 3 and 4 was spaced 60–250 ft apart.  Sampling was completed on 10-ft intervals. All domains were treated as soft for purposes of the model estimate.

11.4 Density

Rock types were assigned a density of 0.078 st/ft³ at Rochester and Nevada Packard.  This density was confirmed by mining operations and third-party studies in 1992 and 2002.

The density assumption for stockpile material also 0.078 st/ft³, with a 37% swell factor applied.

Density samples from varying lithologies and alteration styles in the core drilling have been collected for additional analysis.  However, no results had been returned at Report effective date.

11.5 Composites

All of the models use 10 ft composites.  End-of-hole composite fractions <10 ft. long were retained and used in the estimate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

11.6 Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions

To limit the over-extrapolation of high-grade samples, population statistics for composites were examined using histograms and cumulative probability plots.  Results for each methodology were reviewed for their effect on the coefficient of variation and metal-at-risk.  The method for capping was to look for disruptions in the distribution in the upper 1-2 % of the data as well as reducing the CV to approximately 2.0, if necessary.

The capping statistics for silver and gold in the Rochester model are summarized in Table 11‑1, respectively.

A silver grade cap of 2.29 oz/st and gold grade cap of 0.020 oz/st were used for the South and Charlie stockpiles.

Review of the data distribution for the Rochester in-pit stockpile material indicated that capping was not required for silver or gold.

The capping statistics for silver and gold in the Nevada Packard model are summarized in Table 11‑3 and Table 11‑4, respectively.

Review of the data distribution for the Nevada Packard stockpile material indicated that capping was not required for silver or gold.

11.7 Variography

Variography was performed on all models in Supervisor to obtain search distances and directions for interpolation.

Variography conducted on the Nevada Packard stockpile composites was inconclusive and indicated heterogeneity of the sample population.

11.8 Interpolation

Ordinary kriging (OK) was selected as the estimation method for all silver and gold domains in the Rochester model.  A single pass estimate was completed for each domain.  All domains were estimated using octants to help reduce negative kriging weights.  Additional nearest neighbor (NN) and inverse distance squared (ID2) estimates were run for validation purposes.  Search distances, min/max samples, min/max samples per octant, and discretization were all fine-tuned with kriging neighborhood analysis and experimentation.

The Rochester search distances varied by domain.  All domains were informed by a minimum of two composites, but the maximum number of composites used could vary from 20–32.  The maximum number of composites per drill hole was set at four.  The minimum number of octants was set at two, and the maximum number of composites per octant was set at eight.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑1:          Capping Statistics for Rochester Silver Composites

Domain	7100	7221	7200	7300	7400	7500	7600	7630	7700	7800	7830	Total
Composite cap	22.25	0.3	9.0	NA	4.12	14.2	NA	5.0	8.4	1.2	NA	NA
Total samples	63,179	1,792	11,257	428	17,223	9,964	847	2,061	10,478	2,903	1,000	121,131
Samples capped	2	11	8	0	13	4	0	6	3	8	0	55
Raw mean	0.528	0.031	0.259	0.045	0.207	0.389	0.120	0.260	0.253	0.060	0.287	0.392
Raw STDEV	0.957	0.075	0.635	0.086	0.362	0.807	0.267	0.591	0.505	0.270	0.498	0.802
Raw CV	1.812	2.423	2.453	1.899	1.745	2.076	2.234	2.273	1.997	4.484	1.734	2.044
Capped mean	0.527	0.029	0.255	0.045	0.205	0.387	0.120	0.254	0.252	0.053	0.287	0.391
Capped STDEV	0.916	0.047	0.565	0.086	0.327	0.753	0.267	0.513	0.474	0.112	0.498	0.762
Capped CV	1.739	1.622	2.214	1.899	1.591	1.948	2.234	2.020	1.882	2.104	1.734	1.949
% data affected	0.0	0.7	0.1	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.05
% mean change	-0.2	-7.3	-1.3	0.0	-1.0	-0.6	0.0	-2.3	-0.5	-11.9	0.0	-0.4
% CV change	-4.1	-33.1	-9.7	0.0	-8.8	-6.2	0.0	-11.1	-5.8	-53.1	0.0	-4.6

Note:  STDEV = standard deviation; CV = coefficient of variation

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑2:          Capping Statistics for Rochester Gold Composites

Domain	7100	7221	7200	7300	7400	7500	7600	7630	7700	7800	7830	Total
Composite cap	0.15	NA	0.08	NA	0.05	0.101	NA	0.025	0.07	0.025	0.025	NA
Total samples	63,199	1,792	11,257	428	17,223	9,964	847	2,081	10,451	2,903	1,000	121,172
Samples capped	62	0	62	0	37	12	0	11	19	1	5	209
Raw mean	0.004	0.001	0.005	0.001	0.002	0.003	0.001	0.002	0.002	0.001	0.002	0.003
Raw STDEV	0.016	0.001	0.037	0.002	0.009	0.020	0.001	0.030	0.010	0.001	0.004	0.018
Raw CV	3.961	1.713	7.834	1.320	4.681	7.399	2.167	14.303	4.647	1.492	2.212	5.524
Capped mean	0.004	0.001	0.003	0.001	0.002	0.002	0.001	0.001	0.002	0.001	0.002	0.003
Capped STDEV	0.009	0.001	0.009	0.002	0.004	0.005	0.001	0.003	0.005	0.001	0.003	0.008
Capped CV	2.395	1.713	2.526	1.320	2.248	2.226	2.167	2.180	2.341	1.279	1.820	2.546
% data affected	0.1	0.0	0.6	0.0	0.2	0.1	0.0	0.5	0.2	0.0	0.5	0.2
% mean change	-4.7	0.0	-27.0	0.0	-11.0	-11.0	0.0	-37.0	-8.5	-0.8	-4.9	-9.1
% CV change	-39.5	0.0	-67.8	0.0	-52.0	-69.9	0.0	-84.8	-49.6	-14.2	-17.7	-53.9

Note:  STDEV = standard deviation; CV = coefficient of variation

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑3:          Capping Statistics for Nevada Packard Silver Composites

Domain	100_800	200	300	400	500	700	Total
Composite cap	4.65	17.6	3.9	6.8	6.65	1.75	NA
Total samples	4,823	7,324	3,548	3,488	1,916	4,802	25,901
Samples capped	5	4	4	3	6	13	35
Raw mean	0.172	0.574	0.179	0.212	0.398	0.084	0.292
Raw STDEV	0.461	1.307	0.369	0.529	1.544	0.287	0.899
Raw CV	2.680	2.279	2.066	2.492	3.878	3.423	3.074
Capped mean	0.168	0.567	0.175	0.209	0.357	0.077	0.285
Capped STDEV	0.367	1.170	0.314	0.472	0.772	0.158	0.735
Capped CV	2.186	2.062	1.792	2.255	2.161	2.046	2.583
% data affected	0.1%	0.1%	0.1%	0.1%	0.3%	0.3%	0.14%
% mean change	-2.6%	-1.1%	-1.9%	-1.5%	-10.3%	-8.0%	-2.65%
% CV change	-18.4%	-9.5%	-13.3%	-9.5%	-44.3%	-40.2%	-16.0%

Note:  STDEV = standard deviation; CV = coefficient of variation

Table 11‑4:          Capping Statistics for Nevada Packard Gold Composites

Domain	100_800	200	300	400	500	700	Total
Total Samples	4,629	6,753	3,301	3,325	1,856	4,753	24,617
Composite cap	NA	0.09	0.03	0.026	0.027	0.012	NA
Samples capped	0	7	8	14	6	4	39
Raw mean	0.001	0.003	0.001	0.001	0.002	0.000	0.001
Raw STDEV	0.002	0.008	0.004	0.007	0.003	0.002	0.005
Raw CV	2.513	2.896	3.235	5.730	2.202	6.233	3.759
Capped mean	0.001	0.003	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.000	0.001
Capped STDEV	0.002	0.006	0.003	0.002	0.003	0.001	0.004
Capped CV	2.513	2.308	2.255	2.455	1.981	2.628	2.790
% data affected	0.0	0.1	0.2	0.4	0.3	0.1	0.16
% mean change	0.0	-3.2	-5.9	-18.4	-2.6	-9.0	-5.04
% CV change	0.0	-20.3	-30.3	-57.2	-10.0	-57.8	-25.8

Note:  STDEV = standard deviation; CV = coefficient of variation

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Since 2016, all Rochester exploration samples have been analyzed for total sulfur percent.  While early estimates of total sulfur were relegated to the edges of the pit, sufficient data covering the pit were collected in 2020 and 2021 to provide a reliable estimate of the entire resource area.  Total sulfur was estimated using an inverse distance to the sixth power (ID6) interpolation using the available drill holes and blastholes.  This is estimate is currently being used to determine the delineation of oxide and sulfide, which determines the ultimate recoveries assigned to the blocks. Recoveries are described in greater detail in Chapter 10.3.

The resource model for the South and Charlie stockpiles uses ID2 interpolation with 10 ft composites and a 120 ft search distance, using 3–15 samples, with a limit of three samples per drill hole.  A minimum of one drill hole was allowed for interpolation.  A second estimation pass was applied to blocks that fell outside of the blocks that were estimated in the first pass.  The second pass estimate used a search distance of 1,500 ft and a minimum of one sample and maximum of five samples to estimate outlier blocks.

The resource model for the Rochester in-pit stockpile uses a single pass ID2 interpolation with 10 ft composites and a 300 ft search distance, using 3–15 samples, with a limit of three samples per drill hole.  A minimum of one drill hole was allowed for interpolation. Additional OK and NN estimates were run for validation purposes.  The search distance and min/max samples were all fine-tuned with experimentation.

OK was selected as the reported estimation method for all silver and gold domains in the Nevada Packard estimate.  A single pass estimation was completed for each domain.  All domains were estimated using octants to help reduce negative kriging weights.  Additional NN and ID2 estimates were run for validation purposes.  Search distances, min/max samples, min/max samples per octant, and discretization were all fine-tuned with kriging neighborhood analysis and experimentation.  The search distances varied by domain.  All domains were informed by a minimum of two composites, but the maximum number of composites used could vary from 24–40.  The maximum number of composites per drill hole was set at four.  The minimum number of octants was set at two, and the maximum number of composites per octant was set at eight.

The estimation method chosen for the Nevada Packard stockpile model uses ID2 interpolation with 10 ft composites and a 100 x 100 x 50 ft horizontal search ellipse using 1–12 samples, with a limit of two samples per drill hole.  A second pass model was created to estimate outlier blocks using an ID2 interpolation with a 200 x 200 x 50 ft search ellipse using the same sample restrictions as the primary pass.

11.9 Block Model Validation

The block models were validated using the following methods:

• Visual validation of model results to composites completed by stepping through east-west and north–south cross- sections spaced 100 ft apart as well as plan view sections placed at mid-block elevations (30 ft spacing);

• Grade-tonnage curves looking at the average grade of OK, NN, and ID2 estimates at a 0.00 oz/st cut-off;

• X, Y, Z swath plots;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• Comparison of block model statistics to the sample assay and composite statistics;

• Comparison of grade-tonnage curves to the original estimate;

• Reconciliation with available blast-hole data by comparing the resource OK estimate to an ID2 blast-hole model for the Rochester and Nevada Packard models.

No material biases or errors were noted from the reviews.

11.10 Classification of Mineral Resources

11.10.1 Mineral Resource Confidence Classification

Mineral resources were classified based on a combination of the distance to the nearest composite, number of composites used in the estimate, and number of drill holes used in the estimate.  The specific details for these parameters are unique to each deposit and the domains delineated within them.  They are determined through a variety of methods including variogram ranges, reconciliation to production data, and operational history.  The final classification criteria are summarized in Table 11‑5.  Cross-sections showing examples of the block classifications for each of the mineral resources are provided in Figure 11‑2 to Figure 11‑6.

11.10.2 Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification

Following analysis that classified the mineral resource estimates into the measured, indicated and inferred confidence categories, uncertainties regarding sampling and drilling methods, data processing and handling, geological modelling, and estimation were incorporated into the classifications assigned.  The areas with the most uncertainty were assigned to the inferred category, and the areas with fewest uncertainties were classified as measured.

11.11 Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction

11.11.1 Input Assumptions

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was undertaken that assessed likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal, and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.

Mineral resources amenable to open pit mining were constrained within conceptual pit shells.  Stockpile material was estimated within the stockpile dimensions.

Estimated mining, processing, and general and administrative (G&A) costs are summarized in Table 11‑6.  These costs, together with Coeur’s resource metal price guidance of $22/oz Ag and $1,700/oz Au, were applied to a Lerchs–Grossmann pit optimization, which also considers recoveries and pit slope parameters.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑5:          Confidence Classifications

Model	Confidence Classification	Criteria
Rochester	Measured	Distances from nearest composite of 60–135 ft, min 8 composites, min 5 drill holes
	Indicated	Distances from nearest composite of 100–175 ft, min 5 composites, min 3 drill holes
	Inferred	Distances from nearest composite of 195–330 ft, min 2 composites, min 1 drill hole
South and Charlie stockpile	Measured	Distance from nearest composite of ≤80 ft, min 3 drill holes
	Indicated	Distance from nearest composite of ≤160 ft, min 2 drill holes
	Inferred	Distance from nearest composite of >160 ft, min 2 drill holes; any block estimated in second pass
Rochester in-pit stockpile	Measured	Distance from nearest composite of ≤80 ft, min 3 drill holes
	Indicated	Distance from nearest composite of ≤160 ft, min 2 drill holes
	Inferred	Distance from nearest composite of >160 ft, min 1 drill hole
Nevada Packard	Measured	Distances from nearest composite of 75–100 ft, min 12 composites, min 5 drill holes
	Indicated	Distances from nearest composite of 105–160 ft, min 7 composites, min 3 drill holes
	Inferred	Distances from nearest composite of 165–280 ft, min 3 composites, min 1 drill hole
Nevada Packard stockpile	Indicated	Distances from nearest composite of <100 ft, >3 composites, >2 drill holes
	Inferred	Distances from nearest composite of <200 ft, >1 composite, >1 drill hole; any block estimated in second pass

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-10

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑2:          Cross-Sectional View Of Rochester Model Classification

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Section shown prior to depletion.

Figure 11‑3:          Cross-Sectional View Of South-Charlie Stockpile Model Classification

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Section shown prior to depletion.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-11

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑4:          Cross-Sectional View Of Rochester In Pit Stockpile Model Classification

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Section shown prior to depletion.

Figure 11‑5:          Cross-sectional View Of Nevada Packard Model Classification

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Section shown prior to depletion.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-12

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑6:          Cross-sectional View Of Nevada Packard Stockpile Model Classification

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Section shown prior to depletion.

Table 11‑6:          Operating Cost and Cut-offs for Mineral Resource Estimates

Item	Unit	Rochester	Nevada Packard
Mining	$/ton	1.30	1.30
Crushing and processing oxide	$/ton crushed	2.05	3.50
Crushing and processing sulfide	$/ton crushed	2.15	N/A
Processing ROM	$/ton	1.00	N/A
G&A	$/ton crushed	0.50	0.20
Break-even NSR cut-off, oxide	$/ton	2.55	3.70
Break-even NSR cut-off, sulfide	$/ton	2.65	n/a
Break-even NSR cut-off, ROM	$/ton	1.50	n/a

The Rochester Engineering Department provided the Lerchs–Grossmann optimized pit that was used to constrain the mineral resources.

11.11.2 Commodity Price

Commodity prices used in resource estimation are based on long-term analyst and bank forecasts, supplemented with research by Coeur’s internal specialists.  An explanation of the derivation of the commodity prices is provided in Chapter 16.2.  The estimated timeframe used for the price forecasts is the three-year LOM that supports the mineral reserve estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-13

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

11.11.3 Cut-off

Reporting of mineral resources within the optimized pit is based on silver and gold price, associated metallurgical process recoveries, and refining costs.  This produces the following NSR equation:

• Resource net smelter return (NSR) = silver grade (oz/ton) * silver recovery (%) * [silver price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)] + gold grade (oz/ton) * gold recovery (%) * [gold price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)].

The metal prices used in the formula are provided in Chapter 11.11.1 and Chapter 11.11.2.  The refining costs for both silver and gold are estimated at $0.35 per ounce.  Table 11‑7 summarizes the metallurgical process recoveries for silver and gold for the different ore types at the Rochester mineral resources.  The Rochester pit also has an additional run-of-mine (ROM) ore stream.  The ROM ore stream is sub-grade crusher ore that has sufficient grade to be economical when crushing costs are not required.

The Nevada Packard mineral resources are currently hosted entirely in oxide ore and there is no ore stream for ROM.  This lack of ore type variability yields a single recovery for silver and a single recovery for gold.  These recoveries are 61% and 92%, respectively.

The optimized resource constraining pit determines what volume of material can be economically extracted making the mining costs sunk.  Therefore, the NSR cutoffs used to tabulate resources within the constraining pits are set to the “Break even NSR costs” for the respective material types.  For Rochester mineral resources, this equates to a NSR cutoff of $2.55 for oxides, $2.65 for sulfides (≥0.7% total-sulfur), and $1.50 for ROM.  For Nevada Packard mineral resources, this equates to a single NSR cutoff of $3.70 for oxide material because there are currently no sulfide or ROM mineral resources estimated.

11.11.4 QP Statement

The QP is of the opinion that any issues that arise in relation to relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction can be resolved with further work.  The mineral resource estimates are performed for deposits that are in a well-documented geological setting.  Coeur is very familiar with the economic parameters required for successful operations in the Rochester area; and Coeur has a history of being able to obtain and maintain permits, social licence and meet environmental standards.  There is sufficient time in the three-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecast for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, test work and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-14

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑7:          Metallurgical Process Recoveries Used in Rochester Mineral Resources NSR Cutoff Calculations

Material	Ag Recovery (Crusher Ore)	Au Recovery (Crusher Ore)	Ag Recovery (ROM)	Au Recovery (ROM)
Oxide	59.4%	= (85.3%)*(-0.267*Total-Sulfur+1.09)	27.1%	71.2%
Sulfide (≥0.7% Total-Sulfur)	= (59.4%)*(-1.89*Total-Sulf^2+ 1.81*Total-Sulf+0.667)		0.0%

11.12 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 on a 100% ownership basis.  Mineral resources are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ for those estimates within conceptual open pit outlines, and within stockpiles for those estimates of stockpiled material.  Mineral resource estimates are current as at December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves as follows:

• Rochester:  Table 11‑8 and Table 11‑9;

• Nevada Packard:  Table 11‑10 and Table 11‑11;

• Rochester stockpiles (South-Charlie and in-pit): Table 11‑12 and Table 11‑13;

• Nevada Packard stockpiles:  Table 11‑14 and Table 11‑15;

Table 11‑16 and Table 11‑17 summarize the mineral resource estimates for all of the areas.  These two tables are not additive to Table 11‑8 to Table 11‑15.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Bradford, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-15

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑8:          Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade		Contained Ounces		NSR Cut-off ($/st)			Recovery (%)
		(oz/st)		(oz)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Sulfide	ROM	Au	Ag
Measured	155,049,000	0.002	0.29	313,000	44,695,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	15.2–93.7	0.0–59.5
Indicated	24,325,000	0.002	0.34	51,000	8,353,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	41.6–93.7	0.0–59.5
Total measured and indicated	179,374,000	0.002	0.30	363,000	53,048,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	15.2–93.7	0.0–59.5

Table 11‑9: Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off ($/st)			Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Sulfide	ROM	Au	Ag
Inferred	104,833,000	0.002	0.29	201,000	30,307,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	40.8–93.7	0.0–59.5

Table 11‑10:          Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut- off ($/st)	Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Au	Ag
Measured	20,558,000	0.002	0.33	39,000	6,754,000	3.70	92.0	61.0
Indicated	2,060,000	0.002	0.25	5,000	509,000	3.70	92.0	61.0
Total measured and indicated	22,618,000	0.002	0.32	43,000	7,263,000	3.70	92.0	61.0

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-16

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑11:          Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off ($/st)	Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Au	Ag
Inferred	5,287,000	0.002	0.36	11,000	1,913,000	3.70	92.0	61.0

Table 11‑12:          Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester Stockpile (South-Charlie and In-pit), as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off ($/st)			Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Sulfide	ROM	Au	Ag
Measured	16,282,000	0.001	0.31	20,000	5,124,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	93.7	59.0
Indicated	12,946,000	0.001	0.31	18,000	3,960,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	93.7	59.0
Total measured and indicated	29,228,000	0.001	0.31	37,000	9,084,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	93.7	59.0

Table 11‑13:          Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester Stockpile (South-Charlie and In-pit), as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off ($/st)			Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Sulfide	ROM	Au	Ag
Inferred	17,233,000	0.002	0.34	29,000	5,884,000	2.55	2.65	1.50	93.7	59.0

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-17

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑14:          Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard Stockpile as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off ($/st)	Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Au	Ag
Measured	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Indicated	234,000	—	0.47	—	110,000	3.70	92.0	61.0
Total measured and indicated	234,000	—	0.47	—	110,000	3.70	92.0	61.0

Table 11‑15:          Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Nevada Packard Stockpile Inferred Mineral Resource Statement as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off ($/st)	Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag	Oxide	Au	Ag
Inferred	1,057,000	0.002	0.49	2,000	522,000	3.70	92.0	61.0

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-18

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑16:          Summary of Gold and Silver Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off (US$/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag		Au	Ag
Measured	191,889,000	0.002	0.29	372,000	56,573,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0
Indicated	39,565,000	0.002	0.33	74,000	12,932,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0
Total measured and indicated	231,454,000	0.002	0.30	443,000	69,505,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0

Table 11‑17:          Summary of Gold and Silver Inferred Mineral Resources, Rochester, Nevada Packard, and Stockpiles, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price and US$22/oz silver price))

Category	Tons (st)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (oz)		NSR Cut-off (US$/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Au	Ag	Au	Ag		Au	Ag
Inferred	128,410,000	0.002	0.30	243,000	38,626,000	1.50–2.65	15.2–93.7	0–61.0

Notes to accompany mineral resource estimates:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021, and are reported using the definitions in SK1300.

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ and stockpile.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Matthew Bradford, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of mineral reserves on a 100% ownership basis.

4. Mineral resources for Rochester and Nevada Packard are tabulated within a confining pit shell that uses the following input parameters: metal price Au = $1,700/oz and Ag = $22/oz; oxide recovery Au = 77.7%-93.7% and Ag = 59%-61%; sulfide recovery Au = 15.2%-77.7% and Ag = 0.0%-59% with a net smelter return cutoff of $2.55–$3.70/st oxide and $2.65/st sulfide, where the NSR is calculated as resource net smelter return (NSR) = silver grade (oz/ton) * silver recovery (%) * [silver price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)] + gold grade (oz/ton) * gold recovery (%) * [gold price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)]; and variable pit slope angles that approximately average 43º over the life-of-mine.

5. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-19

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

11.13 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:

• Metal price and exchange rate assumptions;

• Changes to the assumptions used to generate the NSR grade cut-off grade;

• Changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones;

• Changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions;

o Additional drilling, which may change confidence category classification in the pit margins from those assumed in the current pit optimization;

o Additional sampling that may redefine the silver and/or gold grade estimates in certain areas of the resource estimation;

• Density and domain assignments;

• Changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions;

• Changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for open pit mining or stockpile rehandling constraining the estimates;

• Assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 11-20

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

12.0          MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

12.1 Introduction

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources using a detailed pit design and estimated 2021 year-end topography and block model.

12.2 Development of Mining Case

Mining rates are primarily driven by crusher capabilities based on their physical configuration and environmental permit limits.  The current operating crushing rate is 13.87 Mst/a, increasing to 32 Mst/a when the Limerick crusher becomes operational in 2023.  Air permits limit production to 21.9 Mst/a (refer to discussion in Chapter 17).  Based on historical experience, the QP considers it a reasonable expectation that this permit can be modified prior to the Limerick crusher becoming operational.

The selective mining unit is sized at 50 x 50 x 30 ft.

The LOM plan mines material below the water table, which is considered in the existing permitting.

12.3 Designs

Pit optimizations were done using the Lerchs–Grossmann algorithm using Whittle software.  Whittle software uses the operating and processing costs in conjunction with a range of selling costs for the metal to produce a set of nested pits.  Nested pits begin at the lowest metal price and get successively larger as the metal price is increased.  If the pits are mined in order, they will generate the maximum value.

The nested pits generated from the Whittle software are brought into mine planning software and used as a template to design pits and laybacks.  The individual pits are phased by the Coeur Rochester, Inc. engineering staff and consideration is given to mining the highest-grade areas first.  Pits are designed in 30 ft vertical increments, designing in the toe, crest, and catch benches for the appropriate geotechnical domains.

Design input parameters used in the pit optimizations are summarized in Table 12‑1.

12.4 Input Parameters

Input parameters used in the pit designs were summarized in Table 12‑1.

Geotechnical assumptions are discussed in Chapter 13.2.  Hydrological assumptions are included in Chapter 13.3.

NSR and cut-off grade considerations are provided in Chapter 12.6 and Chapter 12.7 respectively.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑1:          Pit Shell Input Parameters

Parameter	Rochester	Nevada Packard	Backfill
Bench height (ft.)	30	30	30
Batter angle (degrees)	Variable	Variable	45
Catch bench (ft.)	Variable	Variable	20
Minimum mining width (ft.)	80
Road design width (ft.)	88
Haul road grade (maximum; %)	10

12.5 Net Smelter Return Cut-off

Cut-off grades are based on the following NSR equation:

• NSR = ((gold price – refining cost) * gold recovery * gold block grade) + ((silver price – refining cost) * silver recovery * silver block grade)

o Gold price:  US$1,400/oz;

o Silver price:  US$20/oz;

o Gold recovery:  Rochester in oxide: 85%; in sulfide: Variable according to total sulfur percentage, expressed as Recovery = (86 X (-0.267 xTotal Sulfur + 1.09))/100; Nevada Packard in oxide: 95%;

o Silver recovery:  Rochester in oxide: 59%; in sulfide:  Variable according to total sulfur percentage, expressed as Recovery = (59 X (-1.89 x Total Sulfur^2 + 1.81 x Total Sulfur + 0.667))/100; Nevada Packard in oxide: 61%;

o Refining cost:  $0.35/oz.

12.6 Cut-Off Grades

Coeur annually determines the estimated metal prices used for mineral reserve and mineral resource reporting estimates at each of its operations.  Corporate metal price guidance for the Mineral Reserves for this Report was $1,400/oz Au and $20.00/oz Ag (see discussion in Chapter 16.2).

The break-even NSR cutoff grade is equal to the total estimated long-term processing costs (including general and administrative (G&A) costs.  Mining costs are a sunk cost for blocks contained inside an economic pit limit and therefore do not need to be included in the break-even cutoff grade.  If a given block meets or exceeds the processing cost, it should report to the crusher.  If a block is placed in a low-grade stockpile, it must have an NSR value high enough to meet the break-even cutoff grade plus the cost of rehandle.  If it does not, it is placed in a sub-grade stockpile that is effectively treated as waste.

Costs and NSR cutoffs are summarized in Table 12‑2.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑2:          LOM Operating Cost and Cut-offs for Mineral Reserve Estimates

Item	Unit	Rochester	Nevada Packard
Crushing and processing oxide	$/ton crushed	2.05	3.50
Crushing and processing sulfide	$/ton crushed	2.15	n/a
G&A	$/ton crushed	0.55	0.20
Break even NSR cut-off, oxide	$/ton	2.55	3.70
Break even NSR cut-off, sulfide	$/ton	2.65	n/a
Rehandle cost	$/ton	0.98	1.05
Sub-NSR cut-off	$/ton	3.53	4.75

12.7 Surface Topography

The topography used for reserve calculation was an extrapolated 2021 year-end surface that considers estimated depletion measured from the design date to year-end 2021.  A survey of all active mining areas and WRSFs was completed at the end of October 2021, which was used to update the topography in active mining areas.  Topography outside the active surveyed areas is obtained from orthophotos and photogrammetry.  These two topographic sets were merged to create the surface used as the starting point for the extrapolated year end surface.

12.8 Density and Moisture

The densities used for the mineral reserve estimate are:

• In-situ (open pit):  0.078 ton/ft³.

• Stockpile:  0.057 ton/ft³;

The assigned in situ moisture is 3–5% and stockpile material is forecast to average 5% moisture.

Mineral reserve tonnages are reported as dry bank tons.

12.9 Dilution and Mine Losses

Due to the disseminated nature of the deposit, the margins around the orebody are mineralized waste, reducing the impacts of dilution during mining.

Reconciliation of the resource model to ore control is completed weekly and monthly.  Reconciliation indicates that the actual mined material and projected mined material correlate with less than a 5% difference in tonnage.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

12.10 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves have been classified using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported on a 100% ownership basis.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facilities.  Mineral reserve estimates are current as at December 31, 2021.

Mineral reserves are reported as follows:

• Rochester:  Table 12‑3;

• Nevada Packard:  Table 12‑4;

• Rochester stockpiles (South-Charlie and in-pit): Table 12‑5;

• Nevada Packard stockpiles:  Table 12‑6;

Table 12‑7 summarizes the mineral reserve estimates for all of the areas.  This table is not additive to Table 12‑3 to Table 12‑6.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. MacDougall, P.E., a Coeur Rochester employee.

12.11 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include:

• Commodity prices:  the mineral reserve estimates are sensitive to metal prices.  Coeur’s current strategy is to sell most of the metal production at spot prices, exposing the company to both positive and negative changes in the market, both of which are outside of the company’s control;

• Metallurgical recovery:  changes in metallurgical recovery could also have an impact on the mineral reserve estimates;

• Operating costs:  higher or lower operating costs than those assumed could also affect the mineral reserve estimates.  Operating costs could increase over the life of the Project, due to factors outside of the company’s control;

• Geotechnical:  unforeseen geotechnical issues could lead to additional dilution, difficulty accessing portions of the orebody, or sterilization of broken or in situ ore.  There are sufficient management controls in place to effectively mitigate geotechnical risks.  Designed pit slopes have been evaluated for stability in several geotechnical studies and are regularly evaluated by the engineering group at the mine.  The QP considers that sufficient controls are in place for the Rochester Operations to effectively manage geotechnical risk, and the risk of significant impact on the mineral reserve estimate is low;

• Hydrogeological:  unexpected hydrogeological conditions could cause issues with access and extraction of areas of the mineral reserve due to higher than anticipated rates of water ingress.  The QP considers the risk of encountering hydrogeological conditions which would significantly affect the mineral reserve estimate over the remaining LOM is low;

• Permitting and social license:  inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain social license to operate could result in the inability to extract some or all of the mineral reserve.

• A crushing circuit using HPGR technology was commissioned in 2019, and, in 2020, the operation obtained permitting for, and began construction of POA 11, which is a significant additional expansion, including the construction of a new leach pad, a crushing facility equipped with two HPGR units, processing facilities and related infrastructure to support the extension of Rochester’s mine life.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑3:          Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Rochester, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (Mst)	Average Grade		Contained Ounces		NSR Cut- off ($/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Ag (oz/st)	Au (oz/st)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag	Au
Proven	338,323	0.376	0.003	127,340	884	2.55–2.65	27-59	71-85
Probable	22,174	0.349	0.003	7,730	60	2.55–2.65	27-59	71-85
Total proven and probable	360,497	0.375	0.003	135,070	944	2.55–2.65	27-59	71-85

Table 12‑4:          Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Nevada Packard, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (Mst)	Average Grade		Contained Ounces		NSR Cut- off ($/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Ag (oz/st)	Au (oz/st)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag	Au
Proven	34,231	0.502	0.002	17,183	84	3.70	61	95
Probable	1,014	0.363	0.002	368	2	3.70	61	95
Total proven and probable	35,245	0.498	0.002	17,551	86	3.70	61	95

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑5:          Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Rochester Stockpile (South and Charlie) as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (Mst)	Average Grade		Contained Ounces		NSRCut- off ($/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Ag (oz/st)	Au (oz/st)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag	Au
Proven	13,454	0.381	0.002	5,129	30	2.55–2.65	27-59	71-85
Probable	7,035	0.381	0.003	2,683	18	2.55–2.65	27-59	71-85
Total proven and probable	20,489	0.381	0.002	7,812	48	2.55–2.65	27-59	71-85

Table 12‑6:          Gold and Silver Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves, Nevada Packard Stockpile, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (Mst)	Average Grade		Contained Ounces		NSR Cut-off ($/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Ag (oz/st)	Au (oz/st)	Ag (koz)	Au (koz)		Ag	Au
Proven	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Probable	1,546	0.525	0.001	812	2	3.70	61	95
Total proven and probable	1,546	0.525	0.001	812	2	3.70	61	95

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑7:          Summary of Gold and Silver Mineral Reserve Estimates, as at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price and US$20/oz silver price)

Category	Tons (Mst)	Average Grade (oz/st)		Contained Ounces (koz)		NSR Cut-off (US$/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
		Ag	Au	Ag	Au		Ag	Au
Total proven	386,008	0.388	0.003	149,652	998	2.55–2.65	27–61	71-95
Total probable	31,769	0.365	0.003	11,593	82	2.55–2.65	27–61	71-95
Total Proven & Probable	417,777	0.386	0.003	161,245	1,080	2.55–2.65	27–61	71-95

Notes to accompany mineral reserve estimates:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021, and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

1. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facilities.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Brandon MacDougall, P.E., a Coeur Rochester employee.

2. Mineral reserve estimates are tabulated within a confining pit shell and use the following input parameters:  gold price of US$1,400/oz Au and silver price of US$20/oz Au; Rochester oxide recovery Au = 85% and Ag = 59%; Nevada Packard oxide recovery Au = 95% and Ag = 61%; ROM recovery Au = 71% and Ag = 27%; with a Rochester net smelter return cutoff of $2.55/st oxide and US$2.65/st sulfide, and a Packard net smelter return cutoff of $3.70, where the NSR is calculated as resource net smelter return (NSR) = silver grade (oz/ton) * silver recovery (%) * [silver price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)] + gold grade (oz/ton) * gold recovery (%) * [gold price ($/oz) - refining cost ($/oz)]; variable pit slope angles that approximately average 43º over the life-of-mine.

3. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 12-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

13.0          MINING METHODS

13.1 Introduction

Mineral reserves are exploited using conventional open pit methods and equipment.

Mining operations at Rochester are currently at capacity and will increase under POA 11, which was issued in 2020.  POA 11 allows for additional pad capacity, additional WRSF facilities, and extensions of the Rochester pit and continued operations through the end of planned mine life.

13.2 Geotechnical Considerations

Several geotechnical studies and reports were completed by various independent third-party contractors. The most recent study, conducted in 2020-2021 by Golder Associates in the southeastern region of the current pit, assessed the highwall structures, and was documented in a 2021 engineering report. Prior to the 2020-2021 Golder study, Golder assessed the highwall structures in the southern region of the current pit in 2015, Call and Nicholas, Inc., performed geotechnical analyses and evaluations related to highwall slope and WRSF stability in 2006, 2011, and 2012. Other studies from Golder Associates (1990) and Steffen Robertson & Kirsten (2002) are still used as a basis for mining at Rochester.

Pit walls are subject to regular inspection as part of ongoing operations. No major pit wall issues have been detected and pit wall design parameters have been consistently validated.

The pit slope design parameters for Rochester and Nevada Packard are provided in Table 13‑1 and Table 13‑2 respectively.

The detailed pit designs adhere to the different domains and the pit slope angles recommended by Golder and Associates (1990, 2015 and 2021) and Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (2002) except for Sector 3 of the Rochester pit.  The azimuth attributes for Sector 3 were no longer relevant in the pit design and the area that sector 3 covered displayed similar azimuth attributes to Sector 2.  Coeur Rochester applied the recommended inter ramp angle and bench face angle for Sector 2 to the area previously covered by Sector 3.  The geotechnical assumptions are also based on 37 years of production experience with no major concerns.

13.3 Hydrogeological Considerations

Ground water was encountered around the 5,975 ft elevation during mining operations in 2007 and the pit was subsequently backfilled to 6,175 ft.  The POA 11 pit expansion will extend the Rochester Pit below the existing groundwater level and dewatering will be required.  Under the currently identified strategic mine plan, assuming the current mining rate is maintained for the Rochester Pit expansion, Coeur Rochester anticipates that mining would encounter saturated areas associated with the BRF, in year 2030 or 2031.  Dewatering activities are projected to be initiated in 2029, if necessary. Dewatering will primarily be accomplished with operation of existing vertical production wells.  As such, Coeur Rochester does not anticipate any hydrogeological issues during LOM operations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑1:          Rochester Zone Solid Pit Slope Design Criteria

Zone Solid Description	Overall Slope (º)	Catch Bench Width (ft.)	Bench Face Angle (º)	Inter-Ramp Angle (º)
Undefined	20	0	0	0
North wall	47	20	70	57
North to east transition	45	25	70	55
East wall	49	20	70	52
South sector 1	45	25	70	49
South sector 2 Weaver	34	25	59	42
South sector 2 Rochester	39	25	64	45
South sector 3	51	23	70	51
West sector	42	20	70	52
West to north transition	40	20	65	49
Internal	45	25	64	45
Backfill/leach, unconsolidated	27	20	62	27
Default	45	25	64	45

Table 13‑2:          Nevada Packard Pit Slope Design Criteria by Material Type

Material Description	Overall Slope (º)	Catch Bench Width (ft.)	Bench Face Angle (º)	Inter-Ramp Angle (º)
In-situ (oxide)	52.4	25	70	52.4
Unconsolidated (backfill/stockpile)	37	25	47	37

Note:  there are no haul roads located in the highwall therefore the inter-ramp angle is equivalent to the overall angle.

13.4 Design Considerations

Coeur Rochester developed detailed pit designs and phase plans based on the economic pit limits and used these to generate a mining production schedule for both pits.  Coeur Rochester ran economic sensitivities and financial modeling on the tons, grades, and equipment hours in the production schedules.

Design input considerations are summarized in Table 13‑3.  Mine designs also assumed:

• Shift schedule: two-12-hour shifts/day, seven days/week, 52 weeks/year

• Operating standby time: 1.8 hours/shift.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑3:          Pit Design Assumptions

Item	Unit	Rochester	Nevada Packard
Bench height	ft	30	30
Catch bench vertical spacing	ft	30–60	60
Minimum mining width between phases	ft	120	240
Double lane haul road design width	ft	88	88
Single lane haul road design width	ft	65	65
Max haul road gradient	%	10	10
Rolling resistance	%	2	2

The final pit outlines are provided in Figure 13‑1 and Figure 13‑2 for Rochester and Nevada Packard, respectively.

13.5 Blasting and Explosives

Blasting services are contracted out, and the contractor is responsible for obtaining and securing explosive agents, loading blast holes, and initiating the blasts.

Blast patterns and locations are designed by Coeur Rochester engineers and uploaded to an onboard GPS system in the drills. Blast hole drilling rigs are used to drill the typical square blast pattern of 16 x 16 ft on a 30 ft-high bench, with a 2 ft sub-drill.

Current blasting practices at the Rochester Operations employ the use of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil (ANFO).  Emulsion blends are used where necessary.  Electronic detonators are used for initiating and timing the blast.  Stemming depth with crushed rock varies but is typically 14 to 15 ft deep.

13.6 Grade Control and Production Monitoring

Samples for material routing are collected while the blast patterns are being drilled. The blast hole drill rigs use onboard GPS systems to ensure holes are drilled to correct design specifications. Drill hole cuttings are collected in a plastic sample bag that is attached to a through the deck sampler.  Hole numbers are written on the bags and delivered to the on site laboratory once per day.

Assay data from the blast hole samples is submitted to the Rochester engineering department where it is imported into Geovia GEMS mining software. Engineers create the ore control polygons within GEMS based on gold and silver grade as well as percent total sulfide.  Ore control shapes are staked in the field by the survey group as well as imported into the onboard grade control system in the loading equipment. Grade values estimated within the ore control polygons are compared against crusher sample grade values at the end of each month.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 13‑1:          2021 Rochester LOM Pit Design (final pit outline)

 

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 13‑2:          2021 Nevada Packard LOM Pit Design (final pit outline)

Note: Figure Prepared by Coeur, 2021.

The Rochester Operations engineering department also uses the Blast Movement Technologies Blast Movement Monitoring System in two to four blasts per month to quantify blast induced movement within ore polygons.  Directional transmitters are placed in unloaded drillholes spaced throughout the pattern, following a blast the transmitters are located using a detector and the location data are uploaded to BMM Explorer software which calculates the 3D movement of each BMM.  Ore control polygons are adjusted based on the movement estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

13.7 Waste Rock and Backfill

A waste rock management plan is included as part of the approved PoO.  All waste rock is placed either inside the pit perimeter as backfill, or outside the pit in approved WRSFs.  Waste rock is defined as material below cut-off; however, it can still contain some mineralization.  All waste rock is evaluated to determine if it is PAG.  If it is PAG, it is placed inside the West WRSF at a height of 50 ft above native topography and then covered with 20 ft of non-PAG material at closure.  Actual scheduled waste tons do not necessarily fill all locations to maximum capacity.

When mining activities necessitate removal of spent ore from existing leach pads, the spent ore is moved to one of the remaining heap leach pad facilities.

13.8 Production Schedule

Coeur Rochester based the production schedules on equipment requirements and availability, crusher production requirements, and permit constraints.  A generalized long-range haul road network was used to develop cycle times for all major mining activities in both pits.  The primary scheduling objective was set to maximize the NPV; however, the software routine did not include capital costs and therefore the pits were optimized on operating costs only.

Production schedules use dynamic cut-off grade optimization with low-grade and sub-grade stockpiles available. In any given period, material that is above cut-off grade but still could be considered “low-grade” material can be sent to the appropriate stockpile.  If it can pay the rehandle cost, it is reclaimed as required to meet crusher throughput targets or with reclaim deferred to the end of the mine life.

The Rochester production schedule is provided in Table 13‑4 and Table 13‑5.  The Nevada Packard production schedule is provided in Table 13‑6.  The tables only include mineral reserve material reporting as ‘ore to crusher’.  Table 13‑7 shows the combined Rochester and Nevada Packard production schedule that is used in the cashflow analysis in Chapter 19.

Rochester annual crusher throughputs for 2022 through to Q3 2023 are based on the limitations of existing crushing facilities and are estimated at 13.9 Mst/a.  Crusher throughputs are anticipated to increase to 32.0 Mst/a with the addition of a new crushing system in 2023.  Rochester operations are expected to continue through 2034, a mine life of approximately 13 years.  Low-grade stockpiles will be processed through the crushing system primarily at the end of mine life in 2034.

The Nevada Packard production schedule for 2027 through Q1 2033 is based on an assumed crusher throughput of 6 Mst/a.  The anticipated LOM for the Nevada Packard deposit is roughly six years.  Nevada Packard stockpiles will be processed at the end of mine life in 2032 and 2033

The Rochester and Nevada Packard production profiles were used as the basis for the economic analysis discussed in Chapter 9

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑4:          Rochester LOM Production Schedule (2022–2028)

	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028
Crusher ore	t x 1,000	11,602	14,937	29,644	30,048	30,137	30,860	30,225
To stockpile	t x 1,000	3,600	15,626	5,032	3,112	1,993	1,189	1,800
ROM ore	t x 1,000	5,411	205	36	190	870	308	679
Spent leach	t x 1,000	—	—	1,758	5,441	10,672	—	—
Waste	t x 1,000	3,668	10,259	10,395	5,080	14,812	5,800	23,965
Total mined tons	t x 1,000	24,281	41,028	46,865	43,870	58,485	38,157	56,669
Rehandle	t x 1,000	—	—	2,356	1,952	1,863	1,140	1,775
Total moved tons	t x 1,000	24,281	41,028	49,221	45,822	60,348	49,297	68,444
Crushed ore	t x 1,000	11,602	14,937	32,000	32,000	32,000	32,000	32,000
ROM ore	t x 1,000	5,411	205	36	190	870	308	679
Total placed ore	t x 1,000	17,013	15,143	32,036	32,190	32,870	32,308	32,679
Silver grade	oz/st	0.39	0.42	0.45	0.53	0.34	0.39	0.26
Placed silver	oz x 1,000	6,705	6,304	14,377	16,990	11,157	12,573	8,572
Gold grade	oz/st	0.003	0.003	0.002	0.003	0.003	0.004	0.002
Placed gold	oz x 1,000	56	46	75	99	84	124	58

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑5:          Rochester LOM Production Schedule (2029–2034)

	Units	2029	2030	2031	2032	2033	2034	LOM Total
Crusher ore	t x 1,000	29,236	32,000	28,014	32,000	30,921	—	329,623
To stockpile	t x 1,000	955	2,043	306	169	—	—	35,824
ROM ore	t x 1,000	101	102	662	445	432	—	9,442
Spent leach	t x 1,000	75	16,093	-	-	-	—	34,040
Waste	t x 1,000	7,775	14,598	56,092	10,269	19,189	—	181,903
Total mined tons	t x 1,000	38,142	64,837	85,073	42,883	50,542	—	590,832
Rehandle	t x 1,000	2,764	—	3,986	—	1,079	25,004	41,920
Total moved tons	t x 1,000	48,850	71,814	96,054	54,072	53,202	25,004	687,437
Crushed ore	t x 1,000	32,000	32,000	32,000	32,000	32,000	25,004	371,543
ROM ore	t x 1,000	101	102	662	445	432	—	9,442
Total placed ore	t x 1,000	32,101	32,102	32,662	32,445	32,432	25,004	380,985
Silver grade	oz/st	0.36	0.47	0.38	0.39	0.27	0.23	0.38
Placed silver	oz x 1,000	11,461	14,994	12,370	12,768	8,829	5,782	142,881
Gold grade	oz/st	0.002	0.002	0.002	0.003	0.003	0.002	0.003
Placed gold	oz x 1,000	69	74	78	102	86	40	991

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑6:          Nevada Packard LOM Production Schedule

	Units	2027	2028	2029	2030	2031	2032	2033	Total
Crusher ore	t x 1,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	790	36,790
To stockpile	t x 1,000	2,079	2,958	869	0	—	—	—	5,907
ROM ore	t x 1,000	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Waste	t x 1,000	1,921	1,042	1,074	977	995	72	—	6,080
Total mined tons	t x 1,000	10,000	10,000	7,943	6,977	6,995	6,072	790	48,778
Rehandle	t x 1,000	—	—	—	—	—	5,117	790	5,907
Total moved tons	t x 1,000	10,000	10,000	7,943	6,977	6,995	11,189	1,581	54,685
Crushed ore	t x 1,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	790	36,790
ROM ore	t x 1,000	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Total placed ore	t x 1,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	790	36,790
Silver grade	oz/st	0.44	0.74	0.63	0.44	0.44	0.34	0.28	0.50
Placed silver	oz x 1,000	2,670	4,410	3,765	2,652	2,624	2,018	224	18,363
Gold grade	oz/st	0.002	0.002	0.002	0.003	0.003	0.002	0.001	0.002
Placed gold	oz x 1,000	13	15	14	17	17	11	1	88

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑7:          Combined LOM Production Schedule, Rochester and Nevada Packard (2022-2028)

	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028
Crusher ore	t x 1,000	11,602	14,937	29,644	30,048	30,137	36,860	36,225
To stockpile	t x 1,000	3,600	15,626	6,790	8,553	12,665	3,268	4,758
ROM ore	t x 1,000	5,411	205	36	190	870	308	679
Waste	t x 1,000	3,668	10,259	10,395	5,080	14,812	7,721	25,007
Total mined tons	t x 1,000	24,281	41,028	46,865	43,870	58,485	48,157	66,669
Rehandle	t x 1,000	-	-	2,356	1,952	1,863	1,140	1,775
Total moved tons	t x 1,000	24,281	41,028	49,221	45,822	60,348	49,297	68,444
Crushed ore	t x 1,000	11,602	14,937	32,000	32,000	32,000	38,000	38,000
ROM ore	t x 1,000	5,411	205	36	190	870	308	679
Total placed ore	t x 1,000	17,013	15,143	32,036	32,190	32,870	38,308	38,679
Silver grade	oz/st	0.39	0.42	0.45	0.53	0.34	0.40	0.34
Placed silver	oz x 1,000	6,705	6,304	14,377	16,990	11,157	15,242	12,982
Gold grade	oz/st	0.003	0.003	0.002	0.003	0.003	0.004	0.002
Placed gold	oz x 1,000	56	46	75	99	84	137	72

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-10

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑8:          Combined LOM Production Schedule, Rochester and Nevada Packard (2029-LOM)

	Units	2029	2030	2031	2032	2033	2034	LOM Total
Crusher ore	t x 1,000	35,236	38,000	34,014	38,000	31,711	0	366,414
To stockpile	t x 1,000	1824	2,043	306	169	0	0	41,731
ROM ore	t x 1,000	101	102	662	445	432	0	9,441
Spent leach	t x 1,000	75	16,093	0	0	0	0	34,039
Waste	t x 1,000	8,849	15,575	57,087	10,341	19,189	0	187,983
Total mined tons	t x 1,000	46,085	71,814	92,068	48,955	51,332	0	639,609
Rehandle	t x 1,000	2,764	0	3,986	5117	1,869	25,004	47,826
Total moved tons	t x 1,000	56,793	78,791	103,049	65,261	54,783	25,004	742,122
Crushed ore	t x 1,000	38,000	38,000	38,000	38,000	32,790	25,004	408,333
ROM ore	t x 1,000	101	102	662	445	432	0	9,441
Total placed ore	t x 1,000	38,101	38,102	38,662	38,445	33,222	25,004	417,775
Silver grade	oz/st	0.40	0.46	0.39	0.38	0.27	0.23	0.39
Placed silver	oz x 1,000	15,226	17,646	14,994	14,786	9,053	5,782	161,245
Gold grade	oz/st	0.002	0.002	0.002	0.003	0.003	0.002	0.003
Placed gold	oz x 1,000	83	91	95	113	87	40	1,079

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

13.9 Equipment

The LOM peak equipment list is provided in Table 13‑9.

13.10 Personnel

Mining personnel requirements for the LOM total 175 persons.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-11

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑9:          LOM Equipment List

Item	Number of Units
Loading unit	4
Haul truck (160 st capacity)	29
Blasthole drill	4
Track dozer	4
Water truck	2
Road grader	3
Rubber tired dozer	1
Utility loader	1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 13-12

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

14.0          RECOVERY METHODS

14.1 Process Method Selection

Silver and gold recovery at Rochester is via heap leach with a Merrill-Crowe process to recover metal from the leach solutions.

The process design was based on a combination of metallurgical test work, study designs and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the leach pads were operational.  The design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.

The Limerick facility will use the same method to recover gold and silver as the Rochester facility.  A heap leach pad with a Merrill-Crowe process to recover the metal from the leach solutions.  This new facility will operate at a slightly increased capacity compared to the original Rochester plant but the processing methodology is the same.

14.2 Flowsheet

A summary process flowsheet is included as Figure 14‑1 for Rochester and Figure 14-2 for Limerick.

14.3 Process Plant

14.3.1 Overview

From 1986 through mid-2019, Coeur used a three-stage crushing circuit with cone crushing in the tertiary position to produce a nominal ⅜-in product.

In 2019 Coeur adopted high-pressure grind roll crushing technology to replace cone crushers in the tertiary position. The product gradation and operational parameters of the high-pressure grind roll are being optimized for gradation, permeability, and recovery.  Crushed material, and at times ROM ore, is placed on heap leach pads.

The crushing circuit currently consists of a jaw crusher followed by cone crusher and an HPGR in the tertiary position.  The crusher is directly truck dump fed.  The HPGR product is conveyed to the loadout where it is loaded into haul trucks and truck dumped onto the Stage IV heap leach pad.

Cyanide heap leaching is used to extract silver and gold from the ore.  Metal-laden pregnant leach solution is then collected from a drain system and Merrill-Crowe processing is used to recover the precious metal.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 14‑1:          Process Flowsheet, Rochester

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 14-2: Process Flowsheet Limerick

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The Merrill-Crowe facility is operating and assumptions in this Report were made with reference to actual operational results.  Metal production is done using furnace flux-smelt refining.  Table 14‑1 summarizes the approximate total tons placed on Stage I, II, III, IV heap leach pads and future pad capacities.  Active leaching of new ore and metal recovery is currently taking place on the Stage II, III and IV heap leach pads from material produced through crushing and ROM placement.

Future processing facilities include the Limerick Merrill-Crowe process plant that is planned to be in operation from 2023 through approximately 2035.  This process plant is being sized for 13,750 gpm to process solution and recover ounces from the Stage VI leach pad facility, which has a design capacity of 300 Mst.

14.3.2 Heap Leach Pads

Currently, there are four dedicated valley-fill heap leach pads, Stages I, II, III, and IV, at the Rochester mine.  The leach pads are typically constructed in 30–60 ft lifts with ultimate heights ranging from 200–400 ft above the pad liner.

Stages I and II are filled to their design capacity and Stage I has been recontoured and reclaimed with native topsoil and vegetation.  Stage II is periodically leached.

The Stage III leach pad has a final design capacity of approximately 90 Mst.  It is in the early residual leaching period, with no fresh ore currently being stacked.  Leaching is expected to continue for another 4–6 years.

An expansion to the existing Stage IV leach pad was completed in 2017 and fresh ore is currently being stacked on Stage IV.  Leaching on Stage IV is expected to continue for 4–6 years.

Future and expected leach pads to be constructed include Stage V and Stage VI expansions.  The Stage IV and V expansion permitting was approved in July 2016 as part of the tenth amendment to the POA (POA 10) expansion, but Stage V was deferred due to anticipated lower capacity than the Stage IV leach pad at similar financial costs.

As part of POA 11, the Stage VI leach pad is permitted to contain 300 Mst of material and be put into operation in 2023.  Stage VI has been engineered with sufficient capacity to contain all mineral reserves that are currently estimated within the LOM plan.  An additional expansion of the Stage IV and Stage VI pads is being contemplated to accommodate some additional tonnage towards the end of mine life (2032+) and will be permitted at a later date.

Leaching on the heap leach pads uses a cyanide solution that is applied via drip tube at a rate of ~0.004 gpm/ft² and allowed to percolate down through the crushed material to extract metals.  Efficient silver extraction occurs at a pH near 10.0.  Metal-laden pregnant solution percolates downward to pad liner and migrates via gravity drain lines to a collection point.  The pregnant solution from each of the active leach pads is processed through a Merrill-Crowe plant.  Table 14‑2 summarizes the heap leach pad design criteria for Stage IV.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑1:          Approximate Heap Leach Volumes

Leach Pad Volume	Contained Tons (Mst)	Design Tons (Mst)	Remaining Capacity (%)
Stage I (complete)	23.8	23.8	0
Stage II (in-progress)	47.3	47.3	0
Stage III (in-progress)	91.8	91.8	0
Stage IV (in-progress)	153.3	180	15
Stage V (future)	0	50	100
Stage VI (future)	1.8	300	99
Nevada Packard (future)	0	60	100
Total	318	752.9	58

14.3.3 Merrill-Crowe Plant

The Merrill-Crowe process is a separation method for removing dissolved metals from cyanide solution.  At the plant, leaf filter clarifiers remove suspended solid contaminants from the pregnant solution, and dissolved oxygen is removed using two vacuum de-aerator towers (Crowe towers).  Following clarification and de-aeration, zinc dust is added to the solution, causing precious metals to form solid precipitates.  Precious metal precipitates are separated from solution using plate and frame filter presses in the refinery operation.

The refining of metal begins when the metal precipitates are removed from the filter presses, placed into trays, and retorted to remove moisture and extract mercury.  Retorting is followed by batch flux-smelting using a propane-fired furnace.  Slag impurities are skimmed from the top of the molten metal and the final product is poured from the furnace into doré bars.

Since 2011, several improvements to the Merrill-Crowe plant were completed with the goal of increasing process capacity and recovery rates.  Over the course of the upgrades the process plant has improved in solution flow from 5,400 gpm to >12,000 gpm at improved gold and silver recovery rates of nearly 99% and 99% respectively from precious metal in solution.

Similar Merrill-Crowe processing will be incorporated into the POA 11 expansion for recovery of gold and silver from the Stage VI leach pad.  This process plant is being designed for 13,750 gpm and will operate from 2022 through 2038 which includes residual leaching in the years beyond active stacking of material on the leach pad.  Refining of precipitate and production of doré will take place at the existing refinery at Rochester.

The new processing facility will operate in the same manner as the Rochester facility; however, it will be sized to process an additional 1,750 gpm of solution.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑2:          Stage IV Heap Leach Pad Design Criteria

Parameter	Unit	Value
Capacity	st	300,000,000
Phases		3
Max depth to liner	ft	400
Leach cycle	Days	30
Max application rate	gal/min/ft2	0.005
Pregnant solution flow	gpm	13,750

14.4 Equipment Sizing

Table 14‑3 summarizes the major process equipment for Rochester and Limerick.

14.5 Power and Consumables

Power supply for the process areas is discussed in Chapter 15.6.

Auxiliary generators are located throughout the area.  Generator fuel is stored on the skids with the generators in secondary containment.

Updates to the existing Rochester power system are included under the scope of POA 11.  These updates include the installation of new power distribution lines and relocation of existing lines that interfere with planned LOM operations and facilities.

The current and future LOM estimated power requirements on an annual basis are shown in Table 14‑4.

There are currently three production wells that supply water to the process plant and storage tanks for dust abatement and other uses.  There is also a potable water well that supplies potable water to the site.  A water treatment plant, which was updated in 2014, processes potable water to ensure it is safe for consumption.

Major consumables include lime, cyanide and zinc. The plant also consumes anti-scalant, diatomaceous earth and refinery flux.

14.6 Personnel

Current personnel requirements are approximately 67 persons for crushing and 70 persons for process.  As POA 11 comes online Coeur will require approximately 73 persons for crushing and 93 persons for process.  This ramp-up will occur over multiple years as equipment and processes are commissioned.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑3:          Major Process Equipment

 

Rochester Plant and Leach	Rochester Crusher	Limerick Plant and Leach	Limerick Crusher
Press feed pump 1	Primary crusher	Press feed pump A	Gyratory
Press feed pump 2	Primary crusher MCC	Press feed pump B	Primary discharge CV
East Deaerator Pump	Metal removal MCC	Press feed pump C	Primary discharge apron FDR
West deaerator pump	Secondary crusher MP800	Press feed pump standby	Coarse ore stockpile CV
Barren booster pump	Secondary MCC	Vacuum pump A	Coarse ore stockpile reclaim CV
Clarifier feed pump	Secondary crusher MP1000	Vacuum pump B	Coarse Ore Reclaim Apron FDR
North vacuum pump	Old tertiary crusher MCC	Vacuum pump Standby	Secondary crusher (MP1000)
South vacuum pump	MRS apron feeder	Deaerator FDR pump A	Secondary crusher (MP1000)
Retorts	MRS CV-1	Deaerator FDR pump B	Secondary crushing product CV
Barren pump P1A	Primary apron feeder	Precoat pump	Secondary screen FDR #1
Barren pump P2	Primary A-belt	Barren wash pump	Secondary screen FDR #2
Barren pump P1B	Secondary vibrating grizzly	Preg pump A	Secondary screen #1
Stage IV north pump	Secondary feeder belt	Preg pump B	Secondary screen #2
Stage IV south pump	Secondary B-belt	Preg pump C	Secondary crushed reclaim CV
	Secondary stacker	Preg pump D - standby	Secondary crushed reclaim FDR
	Tertiary CV-104	Barren pump A	HPGR #1 feeder
	Tertiary CV-105	Barren pump B	HPGR #2 feeder
	Tertiary CV-106	Barren pump C	Tertiary HPGR #1 float motor
	HPGR fixed drive motor	Barren pump D - standby	Tertiary HPGR #1 fixed motor
	HPGR float drive motor		Tertiary HPGR #2 float motor
	HPGR MCC Misc		Tertiary HPGR #2 fixed motor
	Tertiary CV-107		Tertiary HPGR #1 cooler
	Tertiary CV-108		Tertiary HPGR #2 cooler

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Overland CV-118	Tertiary crushing product CV
Overland CV-119	Tertiary HPGR #1 hydraulic
Overland CV-120	Tertiary HPGR #2 hydraulic
Overland CV-121	Final Product Loadout CV
	Final product loadout reclaim FDR

Note:  MCC = motor control center, CV = conveyor; FDR = feeder

Table 14‑4           Power Requirements

Location	Estimated Power in KWH
	2022	2023	2024
Rochester crusher	31,113,027	24,771,715	-
Rochester process plant totals	10,804,122	9,263,509	9,288,888
Rochester leaching totals	36,020,307	23,263,850	9,319,739
Limerick crusher totals	—	21,761,324	73,067,796
Limerick process plant totals	—	7,604,046	16,565,956
Limerick leaching totals	—	13,197,038	31,569,386

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 14-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

15.0          INFRASTRUCTURE

The existing operations infrastructure includes:

• Two open pits (Rochester and Nevada Packard)

• Crusher and conveyor system;

• 3 active heap leach pads (Stage II, Stage III, and Stage IV), 1 reclaimed heap leach pad (Stage I), 1 heap leach pad under construction (Stage VI), and 1 permitted heap leach pad (Stage V);

• 7 waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs);

• Powerlines;

• Production and monitoring water wells;

• Contingency ponds;

• Potable water treatment plant;

• Water pipelines;

• Site buildings, including:

o Administration offices;

o Security shacks;

o Maintenance buildings (crusher, process, electro/mechanical and mobile equipment);

o Warehouse;

o Ambulance barn;

o Laboratory (assay and metallurgical);

o Geology core shed;

o Merrill-Crowe processing plant;

o Refinery;

• Access, light vehicle, and haul roads;

• Consumables storage;

• Security and fencing;

• Explosives magazines;

• Upper and lower parking areas;

• Data and communications infrastructure.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Additional infrastructure that will be required to support the LOM plan as envisaged in the approved POA 11 consists of:

• Expansion of the existing permitted disturbance area by 2,815.4 acres;

• Expansion of the Rochester pit and the Nevada Packard pit.  The bottom of the Rochester pit will extend below groundwater;

• Removal of a portion of the existing Stage I heap leach pad and a portion of the Stage II heap leach pad, along with relocation of the existing solution pipelines and utilities from the Stage III heap leach pad to the existing process plant.  Spent ore will be relocated to one of the remaining heap leach pads;

• Expansion of the South and West WRSFs to provide 297 Mst of additional storage capacity and expansion of the Nevada Packard WRSF to add 45 Mst of waste rock storage capacity;

• Construction and operation of the Limerick Canyon Stage VI heap leach pad, designed to provide 300 Mst of leaching capacity, and the Nevada Packard heap leach pad that will accommodate 60 Mst of leaching capacity;

• Construction and operation of the Rochester Stage VI and Nevada Packard Merrill- Crowe process facilities, designed for an application rate on the heap leach pads of 13,750 gpm and 5,000 gpm, respectively;

• Construction and operation of the Stage VI crushing and screening facility, designed to handle 60,000 st of ore.  Associated infrastructure includes the Stage VI heap leach pad conveyor system, truck loadout, and ore stockpile;

• Installation of a crusher at Nevada Packard and construction and operation of a conveyor system, associated loadout, and ore stockpile;

• Construction and maintenance of new stormwater diversions sized to convey the 100-year, 24-hour storm event, with sediment collection basins;

• Construction of a new Stage VI haul road to from the Stage IV heap leach pad to allow placement of material on the new heap leach plant;

• Construction of a barren distribution pipeline from the Stage IV heap leach pad to the proposed Stage VI barren line to respond to process solution demands, reduce the drain-down in existing heap leach pads, and improve closure efficiency.  The pipeline will follow the proposed Stage VI haul road corridor;

• Construction of a light vehicle access road from the Stage VI crushing and screening facility to the Stage VI truck loadout, and construction of a light vehicle access road along the perimeter of Stage VI heap leach pad from the truck loadout to the Stage VI process facility

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• Construction and maintenance of a haul road from the Nevada Packard pit to the Packard crushing and screening facility and a light vehicle access road from the Nevada Packard process facility to the existing access road northeast of the Nevada Packard pit;

• Widening and partial relocation of the existing Packard Flat Road;

• Installation of a new water conveyance pipeline from existing production wells to the closed process circuit and installation of a new production water well to support the Nevada Packard operations;

• Construction of six new growth media stockpiles;

• Upgrades to the electrical utility system to support the proposed infrastructure at Limerick Canyon and Nevada Packard;

• Construction and operation of ancillary facilities associated with the Limerick Canyon and Nevada Packard operations.

An infrastructure layout plan for the Rochester Operations is provided in Figure 2‑2.  Figure 15‑1 shows the layout of the proposed Stage VI heap leach and attached facilities as approved in POA 11.  Construction of a mine at Nevada Packard requires an additional, permitted, heap leach pad, the location of which is also shown in Figure 15‑1.

15.1 Roads and Logistics

Rochester is accessed by a three-mile-long arterial branch of Unionville–Lovelock County Road.  This arterial branch leaves Unionville-Lovelock County Road nine miles from where the county road converges with Interstate 80 (I-80) at the Oreana–Rochester exit, which is located 13 miles north of Lovelock.  Pavement terminates at the security building and gate that controls access to the mine.  The county road is maintained for continuous access from I-80 to the security gate in all weather conditions by Coeur, and through a right-of-way agreement (N-042727) with the BLM and a road maintenance agreement with the Pershing County Road Department.

Active mining and processing areas are fenced to maintain perimeter safety and security.

15.2 Stockpiles

Low-grade ore is stockpiled in the West WRSF and is segregated from the waste rock for potential future processing.  As at end 2021, the stockpile contained 6 Mst of low-grade material and had remaining capacity for an additional 19 Mst.  This capacity is sufficient for the LOM.

Material is truck dumped into the stockpile and managed with a track dozer.  Stockpiles are inspected regularly for geotechnical issues by mine operations supervisors and geotechnical engineers.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Figure 15‑1:          POA 11 Authorized Facilities at Rochester

Note:  RDS = WRSF; HLP = heap leach pad.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

15.3 Waste Rock Storage Facilities

Seven WRSFs have been constructed.  These include the North, South, Charlie, East, West, Packard, and the low-grade stockpile.  All current material placement is conducted in accordance with the authorized Waste Rock Management Plan (WRMP) as discussed in Chapter 17.2.

Between 1995–2010, seven geochemical characterization studies of the waste rock from the Rochester Pit.  The purpose of these programs, which included standard acid-base accounting (ABA) via the LECO furnace method, net acid generation (NAG) pH testing, meteoric water mobility procedure testing, synthetic precipitation leaching procedure testing, and kinetic testing using humidity cells was to assess the potential for the waste rock placed in the WRSFs and the waste rock grade rock left in the pit walls to degrade Waters of the State.  Characterization studies were conducted to assess the geochemistry of waste rock and pit wall rock associated with the proposed POA 11 Rochester Pit and Packard Pit expansions and to determine if changes to the WRMP were required.

The existing South and West WRSFs are proposed to be expanded during POA 11 to accommodate placement of the waste rock associated with the Rochester Pit expansion.  The designed storage capacity of the South WRSF expansion will be approximately 163 Mst, while the West WRSF expansion will accommodate placement of an additional 134 Mst of waste rock, for a total WRSF capacity of approximately 297 Mst. Therefore, the capacity of the proposed WRSF expansions will be sufficient to store the estimated 220 Mst of waste rock generated by the proposed Rochester Pit expansion.

The WRSFs are constructed by end dumping in lifts to create slopes that stand at the natural angle of repose.  Approximately 255 Mst of waste rock were placed in the Rochester WRSFs; some portions have been and are planned to be re-mined as ore.  POA 11 includes expansions to existing WRSFs with sufficient capacity to handle all expected waste material over the LOM plan.

15.4 Water Management

Rochester is a zero-discharge facility which means that any fluid that enter the process circuit are not discharged to outside sources.  Since there are no discharges, there are no water treatment plants on-site.  Non-contact stormwater is diverted around process components in permitted conveyances.

15.5 Water Supply

There are currently three production wells that supply water to the process plant and storage tanks for dust abatement and other uses.  There is also a potable water well that supplies potable water to the site.  A potable water treatment plant, which was updated in 2014 and 2019, processes potable water to ensure it is safe for consumption.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

15.6 Power and Electrical

Power is supplied by NV Energy via a 60 kV transmission line that runs through Rochester Canyon (ROW N-043389).  Power is distributed throughout the site under NV Energy rights-of way numbers N-065285 and N-058336.

Power is initially received at the Sage Hen substation and terminates at a second mine-site substation located in American Canyon.  Electrical power exits at 5 kV substation.  NV Energy is responsible for the maintenance of these Project area transmission lines and substations.  Step-down transformers are located at the crushing facilities, the maintenance shop and warehouse building, the process building, and several locations along the Stage III leach pad overland conveyor.  Motor control centers, which are located adjacent to these transformers, supply all additional electrical requirements.

Auxiliary generators are located throughout the area.  Generator fuel is stored on the skids with the generators in secondary containment.

Upgrades to the electrical utility system will be required to accommodate the proposed infrastructure associated with POA 11.  NV Energy’s existing 60 kV transmission line will need upgrades to meet the load increase associated with the proposed Limerick Canyon and Packard Flat process plants and associated crushing and conveying systems.  The existing American Canyon and Sage Hen Flat substations do not have the capacity to serve the load increases, and the 4160 V distribution voltage cannot provide rated voltage with the longer feeder lengths.

The proposed upgrade will include service from NV Energy’s 120 kV system at the Oreana substation and approximately 10 miles of new transmission line.  The proposed transmission line will follow the existing NV Energy 60 kV line that currently provides service to the mine, or another viable utility or transportation corridor to the Project area.  After the line reaches the Project area, it will be constructed within the proposed POA 11 boundary.

A new substation, the Panama substation, will be constructed in Limerick Canyon, on the west side of the proposed Stage VI heap leach pad.  The Panama substation will be located inside the proposed POA 11 boundary while still being outside of the mine fence to allow easy access by NV Energy and contract service workers for maintenance and repair.  The Panama substation will transform the upgraded 120 kV transmission voltage to the new upgraded 24.9 kV distribution voltage.  New power lines will be routed on the north side of the proposed Stage VI heap leach pad at Limerick Canyon.

Approximately 9.8 miles of new 24.9 kV power line will need to be constructed with fiber optic cable for communication and controls.  The new 24.9 kV distribution lines will supply power to all the major load locations including to the proposed Packard Flat process facility.  The Packard Flat distribution transformers will require one tap position to increase the output voltage to 2.5%.

The existing loads that are distributed from the American Canyon and Sage Hen Flat substations will be fed with 4160 V distribution transformers at the existing substation locations.  Approximately 10 new distribution transformers will be installed, nine with a 4160 V service and one with a 480 V service.

As a consequence of the proposed Stage VI heap leach pad construction and West WRSF expansion, 4.2 miles of power line will be removed.  Two 60 kV transformers at American Canyon and Sage Hen Flat substations, and six distribution transformers will also be removed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

15.7 Fuel

There are currently two fuel storage facilities.  The first facility includes one 7,050-gallon unleaded gasoline above-ground storage tank.  The second fuel storage facility is located at the ready-line west of the primary crusher and consists of three above-ground diesel fuel storage tanks, two with capacities of 10,000 gallons and one with a capacity of 50,000 gallons.  These tanks are located within a concrete secondary containment unit that is designed to contain at least 110% of the volume of the largest tank.  Two fuel stations (gasoline and dyed diesel) will be added to the Limerick area, and fuel storage facility will be added in the Packard Flat area.

Auxiliary generators are located throughout the area.  Generator fuel is stored on the skids with the generators in secondary containment.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 15-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

16.0          MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

16.1 Markets

Coeur has established contracts and buyers for the gold concentrate product from the Rochester Operations and has an internal marketing group that monitors markets for its key products.  Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

There are no agency relationships relevant to the marketing strategies used.

Product valuation is included in the economic analysis in Chapter 19, and is based on a combination of the metallurgical recovery, commodity pricing, and consideration of processing charges.

Coeur sells its payable silver and gold production on behalf of its subsidiaries on a spot or forward basis, primarily to multi-national banks and bullion trading houses.  Markets for both silver and gold bullion are highly liquid, and the loss of a single trading counterparty would not impact Coeur’s ability to sell its bullion.

16.2 Commodity Price Forecasts

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves:

o US$1,400/oz Au;

o US$20/oz Ag;

• Mineral resources:

o US$1,700/oz Au;

o US$22/oz Ag.

The economic analysis in Chapter 19 uses a reverting price curve.  All commodity prices are advised by the Coeur and revised as necessary throughout the budget and forecast process.  This guidance is used to keep all sites using the same basis for revenue.  The sites do not advise prices or deviate from the prices provided.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 16-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

16.3 Contracts

The Rochester Operations produce doré containing gold and silver, which is transported from the mine site to the refinery by a secure transportation provider.  Transportation costs, which consist of a fixed charge plus a liability charge based on the declared value of the shipment, equate to approximately $1.15/oz of material shipped.

Coeur Rochester has a contract with a U.S.-based refiner that refines the doré into gold and silver bullion to meet certain benchmark standards set by the London Bullion Market Association, which regulates the acceptable requirements for bullion traded in the London precious metals markets.  Coeur Rochester also uses a secondary refiner for the “slag” product, which is a by-product of the melting process that contains silver and gold that cannot be recovered by processes used by the primary refiner.  By agreement, penalties in the metal processing are incurred for quantities of elements above specific levels.  These elements include mercury, arsenic, lead, selenium nickel, zinc, iron and copper.  Quantities of these elements above non-penalty limits are not commonly found in the doré shipped to the refiner. There are no penalties, per se, imposed by the secondary refinery who handles the slag product.  If the material is above agreed limits of mercury it is returned to Coeur Rochester for treatment to reduce the mercury levels. The shipment and return cost is at Coeur Rochester’s expense.

Contract terms include: a treatment charge based on the weight of the doré bars received at the refinery; a metal return percentage applied to recoverable gold; a metal return percentage applied to recoverable silver; and, penalties charged for deleterious elements contained in the doré.  The total of these charges can range from $1.00–$1.50/oz of doré based on the silver and gold grades of the doré, as well as the contained amount of deleterious elements.

In addition to the contracted terms, there are other uncontracted losses experienced through the refining of the Rochester Operations doré, including the loss of precious metals during the doré melting process as well as differences in assays between Coeur Rochester and the refiner.  For the purposes of the cashflow analysis in Chapter 19, the QP assumed that uncontracted losses averaged $2.00–$4.00/oz doré received by the refiner.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, fuel, and drilling contractors.  Engineering, construction and commissioning of the POA 11 facilities and infrastructure are being completed by specialist contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 16-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

16.4 QP Statement

For the purposes of the gold and silver price forecasts used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, the QPs reviewed the corporate pricing provided by Coeur, and accepted these prices as reasonable.  The reviews included checking the pricing used in technical reports recently filed with Canadian regulatory authorities, pricing reported by major mining company peers in recent public filings, the current spot gold and silver pricing, and three-year trailing average pricing.

The US$1,400/oz Au and US$20/oz Ag prices are considered to be a reasonable forecast for the nine year mine life envisaged in the mine plan.  The US$1,700/oz Au and US$22/oz Ag mineral resource price is, as noted, selected to ensure that the mineral reserves are a subset of the mineral resources and assume that there is sufficient time in the nine-year mine life forecast for the mineral reserves for the mineral resources to potentially be converted to mineral reserves.

Overall, the QPs conclude that there is sufficient time in the nine-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecasts for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, test work and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates or upgrade the confidence categories that are currently assigned.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 16-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

17.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS

17.1 Baseline and Supporting Studies

Baseline studies and monitoring were required for each mine permit obtained.

An initial PoO was approved by the BLM and NDEP in February 1986.  After the approval of the initial PoO, 11 amendments were submitted from 1988–2017, the most recent being POA 11.  POA 11 was considered complete by the BLM in September 2017, which initiated an EIS under NEPA.  A ROD was issued by the BLM on March 30, 2020.  A Reclamation Permit for the POA 11 expansion was issued by NDEP BMRR on November 5, 2020, with the surety bond in place with the BLM on November 25, 2020.

17.2 Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs

17.2.1 Environmental Protection Measures

Design features were developed as a way of minimizing or avoiding environmental impacts. These environmental protection measures are part of Coeur Rochester’s commitments for the mine operation.  Environmental protection measures have been implemented for:

• Cultural resources;

• Native American religious concerns;

• Paleontological resources;

• Survey monuments;

• Air quality;

• Drill hole abandonment;

• Noxious weeds and non-native weed species;

• Growth media management;

• Fire protection;

• Wildlife including Special Status Species and migratory birds;

• Safety and security;

• Waste management;

• Erosion, sedimentation, and surface water quality;

• Acid rock drainage;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• Spills and releases;

• Reclamation;

• Visual resources and lighting.

Table 17‑1 summarizes the various monitoring activities performed under the granted permits and plans.

The site groundwater and air monitoring are outlined in detail in the Water Pollution Control Permit (WPCP) #NEV0050037, the Class II Air Quality Operating Permit (AQOP) #AP1044-0063, and Mercury Operating Permit to Construct (MOPTC) #AP1044-2242.

Coeur Rochester currently manages waste rock as per the WRMP that was approved by the NDEP–BMRR.  All waste is reviewed and classified in accordance with the plan (Table 17‑2), and any PAG waste is placed as per the plan requirements.

17.2.2 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters of the United States

On October 31, 2011, Coeur submitted a request for a Waters of the United States jurisdictional determination to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  The 2011 survey mapped 1.36 acres of ephemeral drainages and 4.23 acres of wetlands as isolated features with no interstate commerce use.  On June 6, 2012, Coeur received concurrence that there are no waters regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers within the Project area and surrounding site.

An expanded survey completed by SRK in 2016 inventoried previously verified aquatic resources and additional aquatic resources not previously inventoried.  The new aquatic resources not previously inventoried include 199,979 linear feet of ephemeral drainages and 2.73 acres of wetlands.  The 2017 survey reaffirmed previous determinations that the Project area does not contain any jurisdictional Waters of the United States.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a determination on October 16, 2018 that there are no Waters of the United States within and surrounding the Project area.  This determination is valid until October 16, 2023.

As the mine plans change, permits will be updated as required.  Air permits currently limit production through the crushing circuits to 21.9 Mst/a.  Based on historical experience, the QP considers it a reasonable expectation that this permit can be modified prior to the Limerick crusher becoming operational to meet operational rates.

17.3 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

Financial surety sufficient to reclaim mine and processing facilities is up to date and held by the BLM, the primary federal agency responsible for regulatory oversight.  The Reclamation Plan associated with the financial surety was updated in 2020 and accepted by both the BLM and NDEP–BMRR.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑1:          Monitoring Components, Permit, Plans and Agencies

Monitoring Component	Permit/Plan and Agency
Air quality	Throughput, Emissions, Fuel Use, and Stack Testing NDEP Bureau of Air Pollution Control
Solid waste	Landfill Visual Inspections (when in use) NDEP Solid Waste Branch
Hazardous waste	90-Day Storage Area Weekly Visual Inspections Satellite Storage Area Weekly Visual Inspections RCRA Container Storage Area Weekly Visual Inspections NDEP Bureau of Sustainable Materials Management
Explosives	Weekly Visual Magazine Inspection Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Water	Process Water, Surface Water and Groundwater Quality and Quantity NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation Inspection of Stormwater BMPs NDEP Bureau of Water Pollution Control Water Usage Nevada Division of Water Resources
Noxious weeds	Periodic Noxious Weed Surveys and Weed Management Plan BLM – under the Plan of Operations
Reclamation	Reclamation Revegetation Success NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation – under the Reclamation Permit BLM – under the Plan of Operations
Slope stability	Visual Inspections BLM and NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation
Waste and ore rock chemistry	Waste Rock and Ore Analysis NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation BLM – under the Plan of Operations
Wildlife	Wildlife Mortality Wildlife Protection Measures (fencing, bird balls, barriers) Nevada Department of Wildlife

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑2:          Rochester Pit Waste Rock Management Procedures

Classification	Management
PAG	Ex-pit WRSFs – encapsulate with non-PAG
	In-pit WRSFs above saturated zone1 – encapsulate with non-PAG
Non-PAG	Ex-pit WRSFs
	In-pit PAG encapsulation amended to achieve ANP:AGP > 3
	In-pit WRSFs above saturated zone1
	Used as construction material
Non-PAG w/< 0.05 wt% Total Sulfur	Ex-pit WRSFs
	In-pit PAG encapsulation without amendment
	In-pit WRSFs above saturated zone1
	Pit backfill within saturated zone1 amended to achieve ANP:AGP > 3
	Used as construction material

Note:  1.  Saturated zone within pit is defined as the area below the pre-mining groundwater elevation (6,175 ft amsl).

The reclamation cost estimate for Rochester Operations is approximately $163.7 M based on the 2020 Reclamation Cost Estimate.  There is an additional approximate $11.4 M added to account for new disturbances within Nevada Packard.  This would bring the total reclamation cost estimate to approximately $175.1 M using 2021 cost models.

Coeur is required to provide an Asset Retirement Obligation (ARO) estimate under Internal Financial Reporting Standards, IAS 16.  Reclamation and closure activities are established by mine operation permits and in compliance with environmental laws and regulations.  POA 11 Standardized Reclamation Cost Estimator (SRCE), a regulatory agency-approved model used for calculation of bonding requirements, was used for the 2021 ARO liability statements.

The total estimated cost, which is still under review, to reclaim the Rochester Mine in its current configuration is $135.5 M.

The facility-wide reclamation plan is a combination of site-specific reclamation plans for each part of the mine facility that are required under the PoO for closure (Knight Piesold, 2013).  Coeur also has an approved Final Plan for Permanent Closure.  The Final Plan for Permanent Closure has the objective for a secure, low-risk closure, that maximizes as much as practical the reliance upon passive management in closure to return the mine to a sustainable, productive post-mining land use.  This encompasses a strategy of source flow minimization for the heap leach pads using two different types of covers to reduce drain down to a quantity that can be managed on-site, in evaporation cells, and with provision of pumping capability under contingency circumstances.  The Final Plan for Permanent Closure will be periodically reviewed, updated, and submitted to NDEP and BLM for approval; during this process the need for various included elements, such as pumping capability, will be revisited and changes made in response to collection and review of new field data.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

17.4 Permitting

17.4.1 Current Permits

The Rochester mine has been in operation since 1986 and obtained the required environmental permits and licenses from the appropriate county, state and federal agencies.  Table 17-3 presents a list of the active permits, authorizations and approvals maintained by Coeur for the Project area.

Operational standards and best management practices were established to maintain compliance with applicable county, state and federal regulatory standards and permits.

17.4.2 POA 11

Early works construction began in September 2020 in Limerick Canyon and the construction will be completed in stages.

17.5 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur Rochester has consistently positively impacted the local community and its economy for more than 30 years.  The operations generate nearly 1,000 direct and indirect jobs, making it the largest employer in Pershing, County.

In 2021, Coeur developed a Communication, Community & Government Engagement Strategy to develop new relationships with local communities and leverage existing support during permit actions or other activities influenced by public opinion.

Coeur Rochester supports future local leaders through multiple partnerships, including Lowry High School, Nevada Mining Association's Educational Committee, and Build NV.  In addition to scholarship funds, Coeur is helping to develop programs that will prepare students for the workforce.

The Nevada Mining Association's Educational Committee equips teachers to educate their students about modern mining while meeting educational standards.  Lowry High School efforts include career expositions to job-shadowing opportunities. Additionally, Coeur Rochester awards scholarships to high school students across the region.

The company is committed to helping preserve Native American cultural heritage while developing mutually beneficial partnerships. Rochester has also assisted tribes in obtaining vital personal protective equipment to help reduce the spread of COVID-19.

Coeur Rochester helped clean up several properties in Lovelock increasing the opportunity for reinvestment.  The company also completed an agreement with the Lovelock Meadows Water District related to the operation’s impact on water users or the environment.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑3:          Active Permits and Approvals

Agency	Permit or Approval	Expiration Date
NDEP Bureau of Air Pollution Control	Class II Air Permit #AP1044-0063	April 6, 2025
	Mercury Control Program #AP1044-2242	Life of Project
	Surface Area Disturbance Permit #AP1629-4340	February 11, 2026
NDEP Bureau of Air Quality Planning	Open Burn Variances	Applied for as needed
NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation	Reclamation Permit #0087 (Rochester)	Life of Project
	Reclamation Permit #0270 (Wilco Exploration)	Life of Project
	Water Pollution Control Permit #NEV0050037	July 1, 2025
NDEP Bureau of Safe Drinking Water	Public Water System #PE-3076-12NTNC	Annual renewal (Oct)
	Potable Water Treatment System Permit #PE-3076-TP02-12NTNC	Annual renewal (Oct)
	Temporary Potable System for POA 11 Construction #PE-0006603-20A	Annual renewal (Oct)
NDEP Bureau of Sustainable Materials Management	Hazardous Waste ID #NVD-986767572	Life of Project
	Solid Waste Class III Landfill Waiver #SWMI-14-30	Life of Project
NDEP Bureau of Water Pollution Control	General Stormwater Permit #NVR300000-MSW166	February 28, 2018 (Administratively continued by NDEP)
	General Septic Permit #GNEVOSDS09-L0028	May 8, 2014 (Administratively continued by NDEP)
	Temporary Septic Holding Tanks Permit POA 11 Project Trailer #GNEVTHT09-0018	February 26, 2022
	Temporary Septic Holding Tanks Permit POA 11 Washrooms & Breakrooms #GNEVTHT09-0019	December 14, 2021
	Permanent Septic Holding Tank Permit to Construct - Process Facilities #GNEVPHT09-0034	May 14, 2022
	Permanent Septic Holding Tank Permit to Construct - Primary Crushing Control Room #GNEVPHT09-0033	May 14, 2022

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Agency	Permit or Approval	Expiration Date
Nevada Department of Wildlife	Industrial Artificial Pond Permit Rochester #40341	June 30, 2025
	Industrial Artificial Pond Permit Limerick #40632	April 30, 2026
Nevada Division of Water Resources	Water Right #87503 (Well PW-2B)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2022
	Water Right #87509 (Well PW-4A)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2022
	Water Right #87504 (Well PW-3A)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2024
	Water Right #87505 (C-4 Corridor)	Life of Project – POC & PBU EOT due July 31, 2023
	Water Right #87506 (SAC)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2024
	Water Right #87507 (CBC)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2024
	Water Right #87508 (Well PW-1B)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2022
	Water Right #81234 (New Packard)	Life of Project – POC & PBU EOT due Sept. 4, 2023
	Water Right #81235 (Packard Well)	Life of Project – PBU EOT filed Sept. 15, 2021
	Water Right #87510 (Stage V Underdrain)	Life of Project – POC & PBU EOT due July 31, 2023
	Water Right #87511 (Stage IV Underdrain)	Life of Project - PBU EOT due July 31, 2024
	Temporary Water Right #91142T	Filed Sept. 17, 2021
	Temporary Water Right #91143T	Filed Sept. 17, 2021
	Temporary Water Right #91144T	Filed Sept. 17, 2021
	Stage III Contingency Pond Dam Safety Permit #J-721	Life of Project
	Stage V Contingency Pond Dam Safety Permit to Construct #J-723	February 4, 2022
	Stage VI Contingency Pond Dam Safety Permit to Construct #J-771	April 9, 2022
	Temporary Discharge Waiver #DW-177	June 25, 2022
Nevada Board for the Regulation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas	Class 5 License #5-3875-01	Annual renewal (Jan)
Nevada State Fire Marshall	Hazardous Materials Permit #FDID 14000	Annual renewal (Feb)

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Agency	Permit or Approval	Expiration Date
Nevada State Business License	Business License #NV19851018129	Annual renewal (Oct)
Pershing County Business License	Business License #5270	Annual renewal (Jun)
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management, Winnemucca District Office	Rochester Mine Plan of Operations Casefile#NVN-064629	Life of Project
	Reclamation Bond NVN-064629	Life of Project
	Lincoln Hill Exploration Plan of Operations Casefile #NVN-100074	Undergoing NEPA
	ROW – Microwave Comm Site #NVN-050235	December 31, 2050
	ROW – Access Road #NVN-042727	December 31, 2035
	Notice – Buena Vista Playa Exploration #NVN-089944	July 24, 2022
	Notice – Gold Ridge #NVN-089244	Expired – Not released
	Notice – Lincoln Hill Exploration #NVN-098613	September 14, 2023
	Programmatic Agreement - Cultural Resources	Life of Project
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Jurisdictional Determination #SPK-2000-25123	October 16, 2023
U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives	User of Explosives Permit #9-NV-027-33-3E-92862	May 1, 2022
U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration	Hazardous Materials Transportation General Permit HM Company ID #051785	June 30, 2024
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	Toxic Release Inventory #89419CRRCH180EX - Form R’s	Annual Report (July 1)
	Toxic Substances Control Act - Form U’s	September 30, 2026 (Report)
	RCRA #NVD-986767572 – EPA Hazardous Waste ID Number	Life of Project
	RCRA #NVD-986767572 - Biennial Report	March 1, 2022 Biennial report
U.S. Federal Communications Commission	Radio Station Authorization - Call sign #WNFH594	December 18, 2030
	Microwave Authorization - Call sign #WQWW580	December 9, 2025
	Microwave Authorization - Call sign #WQWW582	December 9, 2025
	Microwave Authorization - Call sign #WQWW583	December 9, 2025
	Microwave Authorization - Call sign #WQWW584	December 9, 2025
	Radio Service - Call sign #WQGA721	November 29, 2021
	Radio Service - Call sign #WQIZ530	August 27, 2026

17.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues

Based on the information provided to the QP by Coeur (see Chapter 25), there are no material issues known to the QP that will require mitigation activities or allocation of remediation costs in respect of environmental, permitting, closure or social license considerations.

There are no environmental studies disclosing adverse effects known to the QP that would impact the ability to extract the mineral resources or mineral reserves.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 17-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

18.0 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

18.1 Introduction

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The Rochester Operations have been in production since 1986 using the same mining and processing methods and the site has a history of successful project expansion.

18.2 Capital Cost Estimates

18.2.1 Basis of Estimate

The basis of the capital estimates is derived from expected equipment needs and project plans and are determined with the assistance of vendor quotes, previous buying experience and/or experience with construction of similar projects.  The capital cost estimate includes consideration of historical capital cost estimates.

Labor assumptions for capital projects are based on third-party contractor costs, internal employee wage rates plus benefits, or a combination of the two.

Material costs are based on current prices for consumables with no market or inflation rate assumed.  POA 11 capital was re-baselined in 2021 to adjust for schedule delay and addition of tertiary pre-screening.

Major LOM capital costs include, but are not limited to, POA 11 crusher, Merrill-Crowe plant, heap leach pad construction, new crusher, and other infrastructure improvements.

The POA 11 mine expansion is expected be completed in 2023.  Development of the Nevada Packard mine is expected to break ground in 2025 with production commencing in 2027.  This mine will also include a new crusher, Merrill-Crowe plant, heap leach facility, mobile equipment and supporting infrastructure.

There is additional expansion capital planned for the construction of a new satellite crushing plant, Merrill-Crowe plant, leach pads, and infrastructure for Nevada Packard in 2025-2026, with planned commencement of production in 2027.

Sustaining mine capital costs consist of capital expenditures required to overhaul or replace mining equipment, access or preventative access to the mine property.

Process sustaining capital costs are solely capital expenditures required to maintain or increase processing plant capacity, crushing plant repairs and replacements, expand leach pads,  and repair or replace leach system components.

Infrastructure capital costs are limited to minor new construction or additions to existing facilities, i.e., employee break rooms, warehouse, offices, etc.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 18-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Other sustaining capital costs consist of technology related purchases, light vehicles, and other general or administrative expenditure.

Capital needs and timing are subject to change with the needs of the mine plan.

18.2.2 Capital Cost Summary

Capital expenditure for the LOM is estimated at US$641 M and is shown in Table 18‑1.

18.3 Operating Cost Estimates

18.3.1 Basis of Estimate

Operating costs were developed based on historical cost performance and first principal calculations based on current commodity costs, labor rates, and equipment costs.  The costs are provided for each major cost center: mining, processing, selling expense, and G&A.

Consolidated mining costs, including Rochester and Nevada Packard, were based on the total costs to mine all ore and waste material as well as the internal stockpile rehandle costs where applicable and includes delivery to the crusher or stockpile destination.  This includes drilling, blasting, loading, haulage, and mobile maintenance.  Unit costs generally decrease over time due to economies of scale associated with higher production rates.  There are fluctuations in costs depending on the ore source and the specific haulage requirement of the time.  Mining costs decrease at the end of mine life due to mining of stockpile only.

Process costs include crushing (primary, secondary, and tertiary), conveyors, placement of crushed ore onto leach pads with trucks, and leaching of the ore.  Operating costs decrease once the Limerick Canyon crusher is commissioned, and production rate is scaled to 32.0 Mst/a.

G&A costs include overhead costs, purchasing, warehousing, safety, environmental, accounting, IT, and other indirect costs.  G&A costs are generally flat across the mine life, but there is a slight increase during the construction of POA 11.

Selling expenses include treatment and refining costs of the doré and product transport.

18.3.2 Operating Cost Summary

Operating costs are summarized in Table 18‑2.  The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$2,247.3M or US$5.38/t placed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 18-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑1:          Estimated Capital Expenditures by Year ($k)

Years	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
POA 11/Development	237,356	151,114
Sustaining	27,850	45,449	32,624	55,800	28,679	21,530	4,689	1,680	1,744
Nevada Packard				7,305	41,394	359	359	359	359
New Leases	(32,245)
Total	232,961	196,563	32,624	63,105	70,073	21,889	5,048	2,039	2,103
Years	2031	2032	2033	2034	2035	2036	2037	2038	Total
POA 11/Development									388,470
Sustaining	8,695	1,619	1,700	1,500					233,559
Nevada Packard	359	359	359						51,212
New Leases									(32,245)
Total	9,054	1,978	2,059	1,500					640,996

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 18-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑2:          Operating Costs by Year

Years	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Mining	$US (1,000)	46,021	59,732	68,656	64,648	81,575	71,916	94,129	70,171	97,726
	$/st moved	1.90	1.46	1.39	1.41	1.35	1.46	1.38	1.44	1.36
Process	$US (1,000)	60,201	65,016	74,159	71,679	67,936	80,098	80,662	81,666	82,341
	$/st placed	3.54	4.29	2.31	2.23	2.07	2.09	2.09	2.14	2.16
G&A	$US (1,000)	21,503	21,654	22,280	22,600	21,944	22,972	22,326	22,314	22,804
	$/st placed	1.26	1.43	0.70	0.70	0.67	0.60	0.58	0.59	0.60
Selling Cost	$US (1,000)	1,205	1,422	2,240	2,829	2,834	2,084	2,035	2,367	2,885
Total Operating Costs	$US (1,000)	128931	147,823	167,335	161,819	174,289	177,070	199,152	176,517	205,775
	$/st placed	7.58	9.76	5.22	5.03	5.30	4.62	5.15	4.63	5.40
Years		2031	2032	2033	2034	2035	2036	2037	2038	Total
Mining	$US (1,000)	125,072	71,804	71,649	27,417					949,796
	$/st moved	1.30	1.31	1.35	1.10					1.38
Process	$US (1,000)	81,313	83,235	70,248	53,202	13,947	6,626	2,126	2,133	976,624
	$/st placed	2.10	2.17	2.11	2.13					2.34
G&A	$US (1,000)	22,038	22,358	21,296	19,293	2,749	915	692	374	290,112
	$/st placed	0.57	0.58	0.64	0.77					0.69
Selling Cost	$US (1,000)	2,671	2,772	2,093	1,795	1,148	211	17	1	30,027
Total Operating Costs	$US (1,000)	230,551	179,349	165,286	101,706	17,844	7,752	2,872	2,508	2,246,559
	$/st placed	5.96	4.67	4.98	4.07					5.38

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 18-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

18.4 QP Statement

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  The estimate accuracies and ranges comply with the stated accuracy and contingency ranges required to meet a pre-feasibility level of study under SK1300.  The QPs considered the risks associated with the engineering estimation methods used when stating the accuracy and contingency ranges and preparing the cost estimate forecasts.

The capital and operating cost estimates are presented for an operating mine, with a 37-year production history.  Analogues to prior similar environments are not relevant to the Rochester Operations given the production history and that the mine was in production as at year-end December 31, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 18-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

19.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

19.1 Forward-looking Information Caution

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage.

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals.

19.2 Methodology Used

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model, which was built on a zero-based budgeting process that was validated through a historical cost comparison from the previous financial year. All the figures in this section are LOM averages and may vary from year to year depending on capital and production needs.

19.3 Financial Model Parameters

19.3.1 Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life

The mineral resources are discussed in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserves in Chapter 12.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of 13 years to 2034.

19.3.2 Metallurgical Recoveries

Forecast metallurgical recoveries are provided in Chapter 10.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

19.3.3 Smelting and Refining Terms

Smelting and refining terms for the gold and silver dore are outlined in Chapter 16.

19.3.4 Metal Prices

Metal price assumptions are provided in Chapter 16.

19.3.5 Capital and Operating Costs

Capital and operating cost forecasts price assumptions are outlined in Chapter 18.

19.3.6 Working Capital

Working capital is based upon historical trends for movement in payables and receivables.  This is adjusted year over year for changes in spending levels.  Inventory movement is also adjusted annually for production levels. In future years the working capital is adjusted from recent historical values based upon the timing of the remaining mine life.

19.3.7 Taxes and Royalties

Royalties are discussed in Chapter 3.7.  With the use of the reserve metal pricing or with the metal price assumptions used in the evaluation model, the Asarco royalty is not being triggered at this time.

Mining companies doing business in Nevada are primarily subject to the Net Proceeds of Minerals Tax, sales and use tax, tax on real property and personal property, and employer unemployment insurance contributions (Table 19‑1).  The state of Nevada has no corporate income tax.  Recently, the State of Nevada has added a revenue-based excise tax on gold and silver.

Currently, Coeur pays no federal income tax due to historic net operating losses.

19.3.8 Closure Costs and Salvage Value

The 2021 year-end closure assessment for the actual disturbance for final reclamation at the Rochester Operations, is estimated at US$175.1 M and is discussed in Chapter 17.4.  No salvage value is assumed or included in the economic analysis

19.3.9 Financing

The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑1:          Tax Rates for Primary Taxes

Tax Type	Tax Rate
Net Proceeds of Minerals Tax	5%
Sales & Use Tax	7.1%
Nevada Unemployment Insurance Rate	1.5% for wages up to $26,900
Mining Property Tax	3.0968%
Modified Business Tax	1.17% on total wages more than $62,500
NV Gold and Silver Mining Excise Tax	0.75% of revenue above $20 million upto $150 million
	1.1% of revenue above $150 million

19.3.10 Inflation

The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

19.4 Economic Analysis

The NPV5% is $348.1 M.  As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk to December 31, 2021, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

A summary of the financial results is provided in Table 19‑2.  An annualized cashflow statement is provided in Table 19‑3 and Table 19‑4.

The active mining operation ceases in 2034; however, closure costs are estimated to 2039.

19.5 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, exchange rate, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a range of 20% above and below the base case values.  The NPV sensitivity to these parameters is illustrated in Table 19‑4.

The Project is most sensitive to metal prices, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs.  Grade sensitivity mirrors the sensitivity to metal price.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑2:          Cashflow Summary Table ($M)

	LOM Total
Gross Revenue	3,800.2
Operating Costs
Mining	(949.8)
Process	(976.6)
G&A	(290.1)
Selling	(30.0)
Total Operating Costs	(2,246.6)
Other Costs	(1.2)
Operating Cashflow	1,552.5
Capital Expenditures	(641.0)
Reclamation	(175.1)
Cash Flow bef. Taxes	736.4
Tax	(48.9)
Total Free Cash Flow	687.5
NPV (5%)	348.1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑3:          Annualized Cashflow (2022–2035) ($M)

	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	2031	2032	2033	2034	2035
Gross Revenue	146.2	191.9	259.4	330.3	349.1	290.3	260.4	279.5	331.6	247.7	333.3	276.6	297.8	172.6
Operating Costs
Mining	(46.0)	(59.7)	(68.7)	(64.6)	(81.6)	(71.9)	(94.1)	(70.2)	(97.7)	(125.1)	(71.1)	(71.6)	(27.4)	0.0
Process	(60.2)	(65.0)	(74.2)	(71.7)	(67.9)	(80.1)	(80.7)	(81.7)	(82.3)	(81.3)	(83.2)	(70.2)	(53.2)	(13.9)
G&A	(21.5)	(21.7)	(22.3)	(22.6)	(21.9)	(23.0)	(22.3)	(22.3)	(22.8)	(22.0)	(22.4)	(21.3)	(19.3)	(2.7)
Selling	(1.2)	(1.4)	(2.2)	(2.9)	(2.8)	(2.1)	(2.0)	(2.4)	(2.9)	(2.1)	(2.7)	(2.1)	(1.8)	(1.1)
Total Operating Costs	(128.9)	(147.8)	(167.3)	(161.8)	(174.3)	(177.1)	(199.2)	(176.5)	(205.8)	(230.6)	(179.3)	(165.3)	(101.7)	(17.8)
Other Costs	(0.9)	(0.1)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)
Operating Cashflow	16.4	44.0	92.1	168.5	174.8	113.2	61.2	103.0	125.8	17.1	153.9	111.3	196.1	154.8
Capital Expenditures	(233.0)	(196.6)	(32.6)	(63.1)	(70.1)	(21.9)	(5.0)	(2.0)	(2.1)	(9.1)	(2.0)	(2.1)	(1.5)	0.0
Reclamation	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	(1.5)	(2.1)	(12.0)	(13.3)	(14.1)	(17.7)	(16.8)	(7.8)	(4.8)	(7.4)
Cash Flow bef. Taxes	(216.6)	(152.6)	59.4	105.4	103.2	89.2	44.2	87.6	109.6	(9.6)	135.2	101.4	189.8	147.4
Tax	(11.5)	(7.6)	0.1	(3.1)	(4.6)	(1.6)	(1.2)	(0.5)	(0.2)	(1.3)	0.6	(1.0)	(7.3)	(7.4)
Total Free Cash Flow	(228.1)	(160.2)	59.6	102.3	98.5	87.7	43.0	87.0	109.4	(10.9)	135.8	100.5	182.5	140.0

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑4:          Annualized Cashflow (2036–2040) ($M)

	2036	2037	2038	2039	2040	LOM
Gross Revenue	30.9	2.5	0.1	0.0	0.0	3,800.2
Operating Costs
Mining	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	(949.8)
Process	(6.6)	(2.2)	(2.1)	(0.0)	0.0	(976.6)
G&A	(0.9)	(0.7)	(0.4)	0.0	0.0	(290.1)
Selling	(0.2)	(0.0)	(0.0)	(0.0)	0.0	(30.0)
Total Operating Costs	(7.8)	(2.9)	(2.5)	(0.0)	0.0	(2,246.6)
Other Costs	(0.0)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	(1.2)
Operating Cashflow	23.2	(0.4)	(2.4)	0.0	0.0	1,552.5
Capital Expenditures	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	(641.0)
Reclamation	(4.9)	(12.0)	(11.9)	(11.3)	(37.5)	(175.1)
Cash Flow bef. Taxes	18.3	(12.4)	(14.2)	(11.3)	(37.5)	736.4
Tax	(2.3)	0.0	(0.0)	(0.1)	0.0	(48.9)
Total Free Cash Flow	15.9	(12.4)	(14.3)	(11.4)	(37.5)	687.5

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑5:          NPV Sensitivity ($M)

Parameter	-20%	-10%	-5%	Base	5%	10%	20%
Metal price	(144.8)	101.8	224.9	348.1	470.0	591.5	833.2
Operating cost	661.3	505.2	426.8	348.1	268.7	189.3	30.4
Capital cost	459.6	403.9	376.0	348.1	320.1	292.0	235.9
Grade	(156.5)	96.0	222.0	348.1	472.9	597.4	844.5

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 19-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

20.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 20-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

21.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 21-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

22.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

22.1 Introduction

The QPs note the following interpretations and conclusions within their areas of expertise, based on the review of data available for this Report.

22.2 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

The operating entity is Coeur Rochester.

The entire Project area covers 17,004 net acres, consisting of 761 owned and 13 leased federal unpatented lode claims and six (6) owned federal unpatented placer claims, totalling 11,625 net acres of public land owned and 269 net acres of public land leased, in total 11,894 acres of public land; 21 patented lode claims consisting of 357 acres; and interests owned in 4,793 gross acres of additional real property.

The federal mining claims and fee lands provide Coeur with the required surface rights to support the LOM plan.

The mineral tenures are subject to a number of royalties; however all but one is outside the LOM plan area.  There is a royalty payable to Asarco that is based on the “adjusted price of silver”.

Agreements are in place for road maintenance and there is a current pipeline, electric power line, and telephone line license.  Rights-of way-were conveyed by the BLM to Coeur and have a 30-year term, which is renewable.

Coeur holds water rights in the Buena Vista Valley Hydrographic Sub-Basin and the Packard Valley Sub-Basin.  The water right permits held by Coeur are sufficient to operate under the current LOM plan.

22.3 Geology and Mineralization

Mineralization in the Rochester district exhibits characteristics of both low-sulfidation and intermediate-sulfidation precious metal systems, complicated by supergene enrichment processes and significant oxidation.

The geological understanding of the settings, lithologies, and structural and alteration controls on mineralization is sufficient to support estimation of mineral resources.

22.4 Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling

The exploration programs completed by Coeur to date and predecessor companies are appropriate for the mineralization styles.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

The quantity and quality of the lithological, collar and down-hole survey data collected in the exploration program completed are sufficient to support mineral resource estimation.  No drilling, sampling, or core recovery issues that could materially affect the accuracy or reliability of the core samples have been identified.

The collected sample data adequately reflect deposit dimensions, true widths of mineralization, and the deposit style.

Sampling is representative of the gold and silver values, reflecting areas of higher and lower grades.

The independent analytical laboratories used by Coeur and predecessor companies, where known, are accredited for selected analytical techniques.

Sample preparation has used procedures and protocols that are/were standard in the industry and has been adequate throughout the history of the Project.  Sample analysis uses procedures that are standard in the industry.

The QA/QC programs adequately address issues of precision, accuracy and contamination, and indicate that the analytical results are adequately accurate, precise, and contamination free to support mineral resource estimation.

The sample preparation, analysis, and security procedures are adequate for use in the estimation of mineral resources.

22.5 Data Verification

The QP personally undertook selected QA/QC verification and participated in programs to verify selected drill data prior to mineral resource estimation.  The QP also works on site and is familiar with the ongoing operations.

The data verification programs concluded that the data collected from the Project adequately support the geological interpretations and constitute a database of sufficient quality to support the use of the data in mineral resource estimation.

For a portion of the drilling in the Nevada Packard stockpile area where no physical collar or downhole surveys were conducted, the confidence classification for blocks not supported by other drill holes was restricted to inferred.

22.6 Metallurgical Test Work

The Rochester Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays process solutions, crusher and run-of-mine (ROM) ore samples, and refinery samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for column leach test, bottle roll tests, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

Current and ongoing metallurgical test work confirms the material to be mined presents a similar response to the heap leaching process to previously mined ores.  The ultimate metal recovery assumptions are derived from historic and actual performance of the leaching operation, historical and ongoing metallurgical test work, and use of heap leach modeling tools.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Forecast metallurgical recoveries range from 27.1–61.4% Ag and 71.2–95.9% Au, depending on geological characteristics and crush size.

Based on extensive operating experience and test work, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

22.7 Mineral Resource Estimates

The mineral resource estimate is reported using the definitions set out in SK-1300, and is reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ or in stockpiles.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.

The estimate is primarily supported by RC drilling.  The estimate was constrained using reasonable prospects of economic extraction that assumed open pit mining methods.  Stockpiled material also supports estimation.

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent grade cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; additional drilling, which may change confidence category classification in the pit margins from those assumed in the current pit optimization; additional sampling that may redefine the silver and/or gold grade estimates in certain areas of the resource estimation; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; Changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for open pit mining or stockpile rehandling constraining the estimates; and assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate

22.8 Mineral Reserve Estimates

The mineral reserve estimate is reported using the definitions set out in SK-1300.  The reference point for the estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facilities.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources using a detailed pit design and block model.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.  The mine plans assume open pit mining, and a conventional truck and loader fleet.  Mining rates are predominantly dictated by the crusher throughput.  Break-even cut-offs are:

• Rochester:  oxide:  US$2.55/st; sulfide US$2.65/st;

• Nevada Packard:  oxide:  US$3.70/st.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  predicted commodity prices; metallurgical recovery forecasts; operating cost assumptions; geotechnical and hydrological assumptions; and permitting and social license assumptions.

22.9 Mining Methods

The current geotechnical design configurations were based on recommendations from third-party experts.

Rochester annual crusher throughputs for 2022 through to Q3 2023 are based on the limitations of existing crushing facilities and are estimated at 13.9 Mst/a.  Crusher throughputs are anticipated to increase to 32.0 Mst/a with the addition of a new crushing system in 2023.

Rochester operations are expected to continue through 2034.  Low-grade stockpiles will be processed through the crushing system at the end of mine life in 2033 through 2034.

The Nevada Packard production schedule is based on an assumed crusher throughput of 6 Mst/a. The anticipated LOM for the Nevada Packard deposit is 2027 through Q1 2033.  Nevada Packard stockpiles will be processed at the end of mine life in years 2032-2033.

Equipment is conventional to open pit operations.

22.10 Recovery Methods

Silver and gold recovery at Rochester is via heap leach with a Merrill-Crowe process to recover metal from the leach solutions.  Coeur has operated the Rochester Merrill-Crowe circuit since 1986.

The process design was based on a combination of metallurgical test work, study designs and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the leach pads were operational.  The design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.

Active leaching of new ore and metal recovery is currently taking place on the Stage II, III and IV heap leach pads from material produced through crushing and ROM placement.

Future processing facilities include the Limerick Merrill-Crowe process plant that is planned to be in operation from 2023 through approximately 2035.  This process plant is being sized for 13,750 gpm to process solution and recover ounces from the Stage VI leach pad facility, which has a design capacity of 300 Mst.

22.11 Infrastructure

The majority of the infrastructure required to support operations has been constructed and is operational.  This includes:  two open pits (Rochester and Nevada Packard); crusher and conveyor system; three active heap leach pads (Stage II, Stage III, and Stage IV), one reclaimed heap leach pad (Stage I), one heap leach pad under construction (Stage VI), and one permitted heap leach pad (Stage V); seven waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs); powerlines; production and monitoring water wells; contingency ponds; potable water treatment plant; water pipelines; site buildings; access, light vehicle, and haul roads; consumables storage; security and fencing; explosives magazines; upper and lower parking areas; and data and communications infrastructure.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Additional infrastructure that will be required to support the LOM plan as envisaged in the approved POA 11 consists of the following major areas: expansion of the two open pits; expansion of selected WRSFs; construction of the Limerick heap leach pad; Rochester Stage VI and Nevada Packard Merrill- Crowe process facilities; Stage VI crushing and screening facility; installation of a crusher at Nevada Packard; construction of additional water diversion structures, roads, and pipelines; and upgrades to the electrical system.

Low-grade ore is stockpiled in the West WRSF and is segregated from the waste rock for potential future processing.

Seven WRSFs have been constructed.  POA 11 includes expansions to existing WRSFs with sufficient capacity to handle all expected waste material over the LOM plan.

When mining activities necessitate removal of spent ore from existing leach pads, the spent ore is moved to one of the other existing heap leach pad facilities.

Non-contact stormwater is diverted around process components in permitted conveyances.

Process and potable water is provided by wells.

Electrical power is supplied by NV Energy.  Upgrades to the electrical utility system will be required to accommodate the proposed infrastructure associated with POA 11.

22.12 Market Studies

Coeur Rochester has contracts in place with several refiners for the silver and gold doredore from the Rochester Operations and has an internal marketing group that monitors this market.Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

Coeur uses a combination of historical and current contract pricing, contract negotiations, knowledge of its key markets from a long operations production record, short-term versus long-term price forecasts prepared by the company’s internal marketing group, public documents, and analyst forecasts when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.  Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, fuel, and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

22.13 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

Baseline studies and monitoring were required for permitting.  Design features were developed as a way of minimizing or avoiding environmental impacts. These environmental protection measures are part of the Coeur’s commitments for the mine operation.  As the mine plans change, permits will be updated as required.

The reclamation cost estimate for Rochester Operations is approximately $163.7 M based on the 2020 Reclamation Cost Estimate.  There is an additional approximate $11.4 M added to account for new disturbances within Nevada Packard.  This would bring the total reclamation cost estimate to approximately $175.1 M using 2020 cost models.

The Rochester mine has been in operation since 1986 and obtained the required environmental permits and licenses from the appropriate county, state and federal agencies.  Operational standards and best management practices were established to maintain compliance with applicable county, state and federal regulatory standards and permits.

Early works construction for infrastructure included in POA 11 began in September 2020 in Limerick Canyon and the construction will be completed in stages.

Coeur Rochester has consistently positively impacted the local community and its economy for more than 30 years.  The Rochester Operations generate nearly 1,000 direct and indirect jobs, making it the largest employer in Pershing County.

In 2021, Coeur developed a Communication, Community & Government Engagement Strategy to develop new relationships with local communities and leverage existing support during permit actions or other activities influenced by public opinion.

Coeur Rochester supports future local leaders through multiple partnerships, including Lowry High School, Nevada Mining Association's Educational Committee, and Build NV.  In addition to scholarship funds, Coeur is helping to develop programs that will prepare students for the workforce.

The company is committed to helping preserve Native American cultural heritage while developing mutually beneficial partnerships. Coeur Rochester has also assisted tribes in obtaining vital personal protective equipment to help reduce the spread of COVID-19.

22.14 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  In later years, capital estimates are based on estimated annual operating requirements and are considered as sustaining capital.

The total LOM capital cost estimate is $641.0 M.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

22.15 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$2,247.1 M or US$5.38/t placed.

22.16 Economic Analysis

The mineral reserves support a mine life of 13 years with mining complete in 2034 and processing and gold–silver production continuing to 2038.

The active mining operation ceases in 2034; however, closure costs are estimated to 2039.  For the purposes of the financial model, all costs incurred beyond 2040 are included in the cash flow in the same year.

The NPV at 5% is US$348.1 M.  As the cashflow is based on existing operations, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, metallurgical recovery, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a range of 20% above and below the base case values.

The Project is most sensitive to metal prices, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs.  Grade sensitivity mirrors the sensitivity to metal price.

22.17 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 11.13 and Chapter 12.11 respectively.

22.17.1 Risks

Risks include:

• Changes to metallurgical recovery assumptions could affect revenues and operating costs. These changes could be due to inability to produce a crushed product with the HPGR that meets specification in terms of top-size or particle size distribution, or other material properties of the ore are different than base case assumptions. This could require revisions to cut-off grades and mineral reserve estimates or could require additional capital cost to upgrade the planned ore flow system;

• Coeur’s ability to timely complete POA 11, Nevada Packard or other future mine expansion and mine life extension projects on budget is dependent on numerous factors, many of which are outside of our control, including, among others, availability of funding on acceptable terms, timing of receipt of permits and approvals from regulatory authorities, extreme weather events, obtaining materials and equipment and construction, engineering and other services at favorable prices and terms, and disputes with third-party providers of materials, equipment or services.  The construction services related to POA 11 will be performed by contractors, which creates a risk of delays or additional costs to the project resulting from inability of contractor to complete work;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• Commodity price increases for key consumables such diesel, electricity, tires and other consumables could negatively impact operating costs and also the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources;

• Labor cost increases or productivity decreases could also impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources, or impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserves;

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  As the mine gets deeper, any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

• Changes in climate could result in drought and associated potential water shortages and extreme weather events such as greater-than-100-year storm events as occurred in October 2021 that could impact operating cost and ability to operate.

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Rochester Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates;

• Political risk from challenges to:

o Mining licenses;

o Environmental permits;

o Coeur’s right to operate;

• Changes to assumptions as to governmental tax or royalty rates, such as taxation rate increases or new taxation or royalty imposts.

22.17.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all of the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all of the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Exploration of the broader district for additional silver and gold targets;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• Higher metal prices than forecast could present upside sales opportunities and potentially an increase in predicted Project economics;

• Potential to find or gain access to new ore sources that could be processed at the existing Limerick Canyon leach pad.

22.18 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 22-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

23.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

As the Rochester Operations is an operating mine, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 23-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

24.0 REFERENCES

24.1 Bibliography

Anderson, T.L., 2016:  Testing Silver Mobility: An investigation into supergene enrichment at the Rochester Mine in Pershing County, Nevada:  M.Sc. thesis, University of Nevada Reno, 113 p

Chadwick, T.H. and Harvey, D., 2001:  Internal report for Coeur Explorations, Inc., Rochester Group.

Crosby, B.L., 2012:  Gold and Base Metal Mineralization, Hydrothermal Alteration, and Vein Paragenesis in the Spring Valley Deposit, Pershing County, Nevada:  M.Sc. thesis, University of Nevada Reno, 172 p.

Golder Associates, 1990:  Review of Geotechnical Program Coeur Rochester Mine:  report prepared for Coeur Rochester Inc.

Golder Associates, 2015:  South Highwall Pit Slope Design Study:  report prepared for Coeur Rochester Inc.

KD Engineering Co., Inc., 2004:  Process Audit and Assessment:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corp., 64 p.

LeLacheur, E., Harris, D., Mosch, D., Edelen, J., and McMillin, S., 2009:  Spring Valley Project, Nevada, NI 43-101 Technical Report:  report prepared by MGC Resources Inc. for Midway Gold Corp.

N.L. Tribe and Associates Ltd., 1990:  Update on Feasibility Studies Nevada Packard Silver Project: report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corp.

Piteau Associates, 2019: POA 11 Water Quantity and Quality Impacts Assessment Report, prepared for Coeur Rochester, Inc., March 2019, Project No: 3767.

Scholz Minerals Engineering Inc., 1984:  Mine Design, Nevada Packard Mine; report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corp.

Silberling, N.J., 1973:  Geologic events during Permian-Triassic time along the Pacific margin of the United States:  in The Permian and Triassic Systems and Their Mutual Boundary, Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 2, pp. 345–362.

Sillitoe, R.H., 2009:  Supergene Silver Enrichment Reassessed:  Society of Economic Geologists, Special Publication n. 14, p. 15-32.

Sillitoe, R.H., and Hedenquist, J.W., 2003:  Linkages Between Volcanotectonic Settings, Ore-Fluid Compositions, and epithermal Precious Metal Deposits:  Society of Economic Geologists, Special Publication 10, 29 p.

Steffen Robertson & Kirsten, 2002:  Design of Ultimate Pit Slopes:  report prepared for Coeur Rochester, Inc.

Vikre, P.G., 1981:  Silver Mineralization in the Rochester District, Pershing County, Nevada:  Economic Geology, v. 76, pp. 580–609.

Wyld, S.J., Rogers, J.W. and Copeland, P., 2003:  Metamorphic Evolution of the Luning–Fencemaker Fold-Thrust Belt, Nevada: Illite crystallinity, Metamorphic Petrology, and 40Ar/39Ar Geochronology:  The Journal of Geology, v. 111, pp. 17–38.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

24.2 Abbreviations and Units of Measure

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
'	seconds (geographic)
'	foot/feet
"	minutes (geographic)
"	inches
#	number
%	percent
/	per
<	less than
>	greater than
µm	micrometer (micron)
a	annum/ year
Å	angstroms
asl	above sea level
BQ	1.44 inch core size
c.	circa
d	day
d/wk	days per week
dmt	dry metric tonne
fineness	parts per thousand of gold in an alloy
ft	feet
ft3	cubic foot/cubic feet
ft3/ton	cubic feet per ton
g	gram
Ga	billion years ago
HP	horsepower
HQ	2.5 inch core size
in	inches
km	kilometer
koz	thousand ounces
kV	kilovolt
kVA	kilovolt–ampere
kW	kilowatt
kWh	kilowatt hour
lb	pound
M	million

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
m	meter
Ma	million years ago
mesh	size based on the number of openings in one inch of screen
Mft	million feet
mi	mile/miles
Mlb	million pounds
Moz	million ounces
Mt	million tons
Mt/a	million tons per annum
MW	megawatts
NQ	1.87 inch core size
º	degrees
ºC	degrees Celsius
ºF	degrees Fahrenheit
oz	ounce/ounces (troy ounce)
oz/t	ounces per ton
pH	measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a solution
pop	population
ppb	parts per billion
ppm	parts per million
PQ	3.35 inch core size
t	US ton (short ton), 2000 pounds
t/a	tons per annum (tons per year)
t/d	tons per day
t/h	tons per hour
TDS	total dissolved solids
TSS	total suspended solids
wt%	weight percent
®	registered name
AA	atomic absorption spectroscopy
ANC	acid-neutralizing capacity
ANP	acid-neutralizing potential
ARD	acid-rock drainage
AuAA	cyanide-soluble gold
AuEq	gold equivalent
AuFA	fire assay
AuPR	Preg-rob gold
AuSF	screen fire assay
AusIMM	Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
BFA	bench face angle
BLM	US Bureau of Land Management
C.P.G.	Certified Professional Geologist
Capex	Capital expenditure
CIL	carbon-in-leach
CIM	Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
CNwad	acid-dissociable cyanide
CRM	certified reference material
CST	cleaner scavenger tailings
CTOT	carbon total
Cu Eq	copper equivalent
CuCN	cyanide-soluble copper
E	east
EIS	Environmental Impact Statement
EOM	end of month
EOY	End-of-year
GPS	global positioning system
GSM	Groupe Spécial Mobile
H	horizontal
HPGR	high pressure grinding rolls
ICP	inductively-couple plasma
ICP-MS	inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry
ICP-OES	inductively-coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry
ID	inverse distance interpolation; number after indicates the power, eg ID6 indicates inverse distance to the 6th power.
JCR	joint condition rating
JORC	The Joint Ore Reserves Committee of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Minerals Council of Australia
KV	kriging variance
L–G	Lerchs–Grossman
LOM	life-of-mine
LSK	large-scale kinetic
MAusIMM	Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
MIK	multiple-indicator kriging
MWMS	Mine Water Management System
MWMT	meteoric water mobility testing
N	north
NAG	net acid generation/net acid generating
NAPP	net acid-producing potential

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-4

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
NI 43-101	Canadian National Instrument 43-101 “Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Companies”
NN	nearest-neighbor (
NNP	net neutralizing potential
NSR	net smelter return
NW	northwest
OK	ordinary kriging
Opex	Operating expenditure
P.Eng.	Professional Engineer
P.Geol	Professional Geologist
PAG	potentially acid-generating (
PLI	point load index
PoO	Plan of Operations
PSI	yield strength
QA/QC	quality assurance and quality control
QLT	quick leach test
QP	Qualified Person
RAB	rotary air blast
RC	reverse circulation
RMR	rock mass rating
ROM	Run-of-mine
RQD	rock quality designation
S	south
SAG	semi-autogenous grind
SE	southeast
SEIS	Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
SG	specific gravity
SMU	selective mining unit
SRM	standard reference material
SS	sulfide sulfur
ST	scavenger tailings
STOT	Sulphur total
SX-EW	solvent extraction–electrowin
TF	tonnage factor
Topo	topography
UHF	ultra-high frequency
USGS	United States Geological Survey
V	Vertical
VHF	very high frequency

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-5

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
W	west
XRD	X-ray diffraction
XRF	X-ray fluorescence

24.3 Glossary of Terms

Term	Definition
acid rock drainage/ acid mine drainage	Characterized by low pH, high sulfate, and high iron and other metal species.
adit	A passageway or opening driven horizontally into the side of a hill generally for the purpose of exploring or otherwise opening a mineral deposit.  An adit is open to the atmosphere at one end, a tunnel at both ends.
adjacent property	A property in which the issuer does not have an interest; has a boundary reasonably proximate to the property being reported on; and has geological characteristics similar to those of the property being reported on
advanced argillic alteration	Consists of kaolinite + quartz + hematite + limonite.  feldspars leached and altered to sericite.  The presence of this assemblage suggests low pH (highly acidic) conditions.  At higher temperatures, the mineral pyrophyllite (white mica) forms in place of kaolinite
advanced property	A means a property that has mineral reserves, or mineral resources the potential economic viability of which is supported by a preliminary economic assessment, a pre-feasibility study or a feasibility study.
alluvium	Unconsolidated terrestrial sediment composed of sorted or unsorted sand, gravel, and clay that has been deposited by water.
amphibolite facies	one of the major divisions of the mineral-facies classification of metamorphic rocks, the rocks of which formed under conditions of moderate to high temperatures (500° C, or about 950° F, maximum) and pressures.  Amphibole, diopside, epidote, plagioclase, almandine and grossular garnet, and wollastonite are minerals typically found in rocks of the amphibolite facies
ANFO	A free-running explosive used in mine blasting made of 94% prilled aluminum nitrate and 6% No. 3 fuel oil.
aquifer	A geologic formation capable of transmitting significant quantities of groundwater under normal hydraulic gradients.
argillic alteration	Introduces any one of a wide variety of clay minerals, including kaolinite, smectite and illite.  Argillic alteration is generally a low temperature event, and some may occur in atmospheric conditions
arroyo	A steep-sided and flat-bottomed gulley in an arid region that is occupied by a stream only intermittently, after rains.
autoclave	A special reaction vessel designed for high pressure and temperature hydrometallurgical reactions, for example in the treatment of refractory ores

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-6

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
autogenous grinding	The process of grinding in a rotating mill which uses as a grinding medium large pieces or pebbles of the ore being ground, instead of conventional steel balls or rods.
Avoca	An underground mining method where stopes are advanced according to ground stability conditions, and progressively backfilled in conjunction with the mining.  This avoids separate cycles for mining and backfilling activities in a stope location.
azimuth	The direction of one object from another, usually expressed as an angle in degrees relative to true north.  Azimuths are usually measured in the clockwise direction, thus an azimuth of 90 degrees indicates that the second object is due east of the first.
background concentration	Naturally-occurring concentrations of compounds of environmental concern
ball mill	A piece of milling equipment used to grind ore into small particles.  It is a cylindrical shaped steel container filled with steel balls into which crushed ore is fed.  The ball mill is rotated causing the balls themselves to cascade, which in turn grinds the ore.
beneficiation	Physical treatment of crude ore to improve its quality for some specific purpose. Also called mineral processing.
bio-oxidation	A hydrometallurgical process where bacteria assist in the oxidation of sulphide minerals.
block caving	Large massive ore bodies may be broken up and removed by this method with a minimum of direct handling of the ore required.  Generally, these deposits are of such a size that they would be mined by open-pit methods if the overburden were not so thick.  Application of this method begins with the driving of horizontal crosscuts below the bottom of the ore body, or below that portion which is to be mined at this stage.  From these passages, inclined raises are driven upward to the level of the bottom of the mass which is to be broken.  Subsequently, a layer is mined so as to undercut the ore mass and allow it to settle and break up.  Broken ore descends through the raises and can be dropped into mine cars for transport to the surface.  When waste material appears at the outlet of a raise it signifies exhaustion of the ore in that interval.  If the ore extends to a greater depth, the entire process can be continued by mining out the mass which contained the previous working passage.
Bond work index (BWi)	A measure of the energy required to break an ore to a nominal product size, determined in laboratory testing, and used to calculate the required power in a grinding circuit design.
bullion	Unrefined gold and/or silver mixtures that have been melted and cast into a bar or ingot.
carbon-in-column (CIC)	A method of recovering gold and silver from pregnant solution from the heap leaching process by adsorption of the precious metals onto fine carbon suspended by up-flow of solution through a tank.
carbon-in-leach (CIL)	A method of recovering gold and silver from fine ground ore by simultaneous dissolution and adsorption of the precious metals onto fine carbon in an agitated tank of ore solids/solution slurry. The carbon flows counter currently to the head of the leaching circuit.
carbon-in-pulp (CIP)	A method of recovering gold and silver from fine ground ore by adsorption of the precious metals onto fine carbon in an agitated tank of ore solids/solution slurry. This recovery step in the process follows the leaching process which is done in similarly agitated tanks, but without contained carbon.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-7

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
carbonaceous	Containing graphitic or hydrocarbon species, e.g. in an ore or concentrate; such materials generally present some challenge in processing, e.g. preg-robbing characteristics.
Caro’s acid	A reagent (H2SO5)generated through the combination of hydrogen peroxide and sulfuric acid, used in cyanide destruction and detoxification.
comminution/crushing/grinding	Crushing and/or grinding of ore by impact and abrasion. Usually, the word "crushing" is used for dry methods and "grinding" for wet methods. Also, "crushing" usually denotes reducing the size of coarse rock while "grinding" usually refers to the reduction of the fine sizes.
concentrate	The concentrate is the valuable product from mineral processing, as opposed to the tailing, which contains the waste minerals. The concentrate represents a smaller volume than the original ore
counter-current decantation (CCD)	A process where a slurry is thickened and washed in multiple stages, where clean water is added to the last thickener, and overflows from each thickener are progressively transferred to the previous thickener, countercurrent to the flow of thickened slurry.
critical path	Sequence of activities through a project network from start to finish, the sum of whose durations determines the overall project duration.  Note: there may be more than one such path. (The path through a series of activities, taking into account interdependencies, in which the late completion of activities will have an impact on the project end date or delay a key milestone.)
crosscut	A horizontal opening driven across the course of a vein or structure, or in general across the strike of the rock formation; a connection from a shaft to an ore structure.
crown pillar	An ore pillar at the top of an open stope left for wall support and protection from wall sloughing above
cut and fill stoping	If it is undesirable to leave broken ore in the stope during mining operations (as in shrinkage stoping), the lower portion of the stope can be filled with waste rock and/or mill tailings. In this case, ore is removed as soon as it has been broken from overhead, and the stope filled with waste to within a few feet of the mining surface. This method eliminates or reduces the waste disposal problem associated with mining as well as preventing collapse of the ground at the surface.
cut-off grade	A grade level below which the material is not “ore” and considered to be uneconomical to mine and process. The minimum grade of ore used to establish reserves.
cyanidation	A method of extracting gold or silver by dissolving it in a weak solution of sodium cyanide.
data verification	The process of confirming that data has been generated with proper procedures, has been accurately transcribed from the original source and is suitable to be used for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation
decline	A sloping underground opening for machine access from level to level or from the surface.  Also called a ramp.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-8

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
density	The mass per unit volume of a substance, commonly expressed in grams/ cubic centimeter.
depletion	The decrease in quantity of ore in a deposit or property resulting from extraction or production.
development	Often refers to the construction of a new mine or; Is the underground work carried out for the purpose of reaching and opening up a mineral deposit. It includes shaft sinking, cross-cutting, drifting and raising.
development property	a property that is being prepared for mineral production or a material expansion of current production, and for which economic viability has been demonstrated by a pre-feasibility or feasibility study.
diabase	US terminology for an intrusive rock whose main components are labradorite and pyroxene, and characterized by an ophiolitic texture.  Corresponds to a diorite.
diamictite	A poorly or non-sorted conglomerate or breccia with a wide range of clasts, up to 25% of them gravel sized (greater than 2 mm)
dilution	Waste of low-grade rock which is unavoidably removed along with the ore in the mining process.
disclosure	Any oral statement or written disclosure made by or on behalf of an issuer and intended to be, or reasonably likely to be, made available to the public in a jurisdiction of Canada, whether or not filed under securities legislation, but does not include written disclosure that is made available to the public only by reason of having been filed with a government or agency of government pursuant to a requirement of law other than securities legislation.
discounted cash flow (DCF)	Concept of relating future cash inflows and outflows over the life of a project or operation to a common base value thereby allowing more validity to comparison of projects with different durations and rates of cash flow.
drift	A horizontal mining passage underground.  A drift usually follows the ore vein, as distinguished from a crosscut, which intersects it.
early-stage exploration property	A property for which the technical report being filed has no current mineral resources or mineral reserves defined; and no drilling or trenching proposed
easement	Areas of land owned by the property owner, but in which other parties, such as utility companies, may have limited rights granted for a specific purpose.
effective date	With reference to a technical report, the date of the most recent scientific or technical information included in the technical report.
electrowinning.	The removal of precious metals from solution by the passage of current through an electrowinning cell.  A direct current supply is connected to the anode and cathode.  As current passes through the cell, metal is deposited on the cathode.  When sufficient metal has been deposited on the cathode, it is removed from the cell and the sludge rinsed off the plate and dried for further treatment.
elution	Recovery of the gold from the activated carbon into solution before zinc precipitation or electro-winning.
EM	Geophysical method, electromagnetic system, measures the earth's response to electromagnetic signals transmitted by an induction coil

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-9

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
encumbrance	An interest or partial right in real property which diminished the value of ownership, but does not prevent the transfer of ownership.  Mortgages, taxes and judgements are encumbrances known as liens.  Restrictions, easements, and reservations are also encumbrances, although not liens.
exploration information	Geological, geophysical, geochemical, sampling, drilling, trenching, analytical testing, assaying, mineralogical, metallurgical, and other similar information concerning a particular property that is derived from activities undertaken to locate, investigate, define, or delineate a mineral prospect or mineral deposit
feasibility study	A comprehensive study of a mineral deposit in which all geological, engineering, legal, operating, economic, social, environmental, and other relevant factors are considered in sufficient detail that it could reasonably serve as the basis for a final decision by a financial institution to finance the development of the deposit for mineral production.
flotation	Separation of minerals based on the interfacial chemistry of the mineral particles in solution. Reagents are added to the ore slurry to render the surface of selected minerals hydrophobic. Air bubbles are introduced to which the hydrophobic minerals attach. The selected minerals are levitated to the top of the flotation machine by their attachment to the bubbles and into a froth product, called the "flotation concentrate." If this froth carries more than one mineral as a designated main constituent, it is called a "bulk float". If it is selective to one constituent of the ore, where more than one will be floated, it is a "differential" float.
flowsheet	The sequence of operations, step by step, by which ore is treated in a milling, concentration, or smelting process.
footwall	The wall or rock on the underside of a vein or ore structure.
free milling	Ores of gold or silver from which the precious metals can be recovered by concentrating methods without resort to roasting or chemical treatment.
frother	A type of flotation reagent which, when dissolved in water, imparts to it the ability to form a stable froth
gangue	The fraction of ore rejected as tailing in a separating process.  It is usually the valueless portion, but may have some secondary commercial use
geosyncline	A major downwarp in the Earth's crust, usually more than 1000 kilometers in length, in which sediments accumulate to thicknesses of many kilometers.  The sediments may eventually be deformed and metamorphosed during a mountain-building episode.
gravity separation	Exploitation of differences in the densities of particles to achieve separation. Machines utilizing gravity separation include jigs and shaking tables.
gravity recoverable gold	A term that describes the portion of gold in an ore that is practically recoverable by gravity separation, determined through a standard laboratory test procedure.
greenschist facies	one of the major divisions of the mineral facies classification of metamorphic rocks, the rocks of which formed under the lowest temperature and pressure conditions usually produced by regional metamorphism. Temperatures between 300 and 450 °C (570 and 840 °F) and pressures of 1 to 4 kilobars are typical. The more common minerals found in such rocks include quartz, orthoclase, muscovite, chlorite, serpentine, talc, and epidote

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-10

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
hanging wall	The wall or rock on the upper or top side of a vein or ore deposit.
heap leaching	A process whereby valuable metals, usually gold and silver, are leached from a heap or pad of crushed ore by leaching solutions percolating down through the heap and collected from a sloping, impermeable liner below the pad.
high pressure grinding rolls (HPGR)	A type of crushing machine consisting of two large studded rolls that rotate inwards and apply a high pressure compressive force to break rocks.
historical estimate	An estimate of the quantity, grade, or metal or mineral content of a deposit that an issuer has not verified as a current mineral resource or mineral reserve, and which was prepared before the issuer acquiring, or entering into an agreement to acquire, an interest in the property that contains the deposit
hydrometallurgy	A type of extractive metallurgy utilizing aqueous solutions/solvents to extract the metal value from an ore or concentrate. Leaching is the predominant type of hydrometallurgy.
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.
initial public offering (IPO)	A corporation’s first offering of stock to the public, usually by subscription from a group of investment dealers
internal rate of return (IRR)	The rate of return at which the Net Present Value of a project is zero; the rate at which the present value of cash inflows is equal to the present value of the cash outflows.
IP	Geophysical method, induced polarization; used to directly detect scattered primary sulfide mineralization.  Most metal sulfides produce IP effects, e.g. chalcopyrite, bornite, chalcocite, pyrite, pyrrhotite
JORC code	The Australasian Code for Reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves prepared by the Joint Ore Reserves Committee of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Mineral Council of Australia, as amended.  Provides minimum standards for public reporting to ensure that investors and their advisers have all the information they would reasonably require for forming a reliable opinion on the results and estimates being reported.  Adopted by the ASX for reporting ore body size and mineral concentrations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-11

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
Knelson concentrator	a high-speed centrifuge that combines centrifugally enhanced gravitational force with a patented fluidization process to recover precious metals
leucogabbro	Light-colored gabbro
leucotroctolite	A plutonic rock, equivalent to a gabbro, composed primarily of calcic plagioclase, light-colored
lherzolite	A plutonic rock, in which olivine is dominant over orthopyroxene and clinopyroxene, a two-pyroxene peridotite.
liberation	Freeing, by comminution, of particles of specific mineral from their interlock with other constituents of the ore.
life of mine (LOM)	Number of years that the operation is planning to mine and treat ore, and is taken from the current mine plan based on the current evaluation of ore reserves.
lithogeochemistry	The chemistry of rocks within the lithosphere, such as rock, lake, stream, and soil sediments
lixiviant	A leach liquor used to dissolve a constituent in an ore, for example a cyanide solution used to dissolve gold.
locked cycle flotation test	A standard laboratory flotation test where certain intermediate streams are recycled into previous separation stages and the test is repeated across a number of cycles.  This test provides a more realistic prediction of the overall recovery and concentrate grade that would be achieved in an actual flotation circuit, compared with a more simple batch flotation test.
lopolith	Large, concordant, typically layered igneous intrusion, usually lenticular in shape.
magnetic separation	Use of permanent or electro-magnets to remove relatively strong ferromagnetic particles from para- and dia-magnetic ores.
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.
melagabbro	A plutonic rock in which the plagioclase content divided by the total plagioclase, olivine and pyroxene content is between 10 and 35.
merger	A voluntary combination of two or more companies whereby both stocks are merged into one.
Merrill-Crowe (M-C) circuit	A process which recovers precious metals from solution by first clarifying the solution, then removing the air contained in the clarified solution, and then precipitating the gold and silver from the solution by injecting zinc dust into the solution. The valuable sludge is collected in a filter press for drying and further treatment

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-12

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
mill	Includes any ore mill, sampling works, concentration, and any crushing, grinding, or screening plant used at, and in connection with, an excavation or mine.
mineral project	Any exploration, development or production activity, including a royalty or similar interest in these activities, in respect of diamonds, natural solid inorganic material, or natural solid fossilized organic material including base and precious metals, coal, and industrial minerals
Mineral Reserve	A Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of a Measured or Indicated Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study.  This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.  A Mineral Reserve includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined.
Mineral Resource	A Mineral Resource is a concentration or occurrence of diamonds, natural solid inorganic material, or natural solid fossilized organic material including base and precious metals, coal, and industrial minerals in or on the Earth’s crust in such form and quantity and of such a grade or quality that it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction.  The location, quantity, grade, geological characteristics and continuity of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge.
mining claim	A description by boundaries of real property in which metal ore and/or minerals may be located.
Monte Carlo simulation	A technique used to estimate the likely range of outcomes from a complex process by simulating the process under randomly selected conditions a large number of times.
net present value (NPV)	The present value of the difference between the future cash flows associated with a project and the investment required for acquiring the project.  Aggregate of future net cash flows discounted back to a common base date, usually the present.  NPV is an indicator of how much value an investment or project adds to a company.
net smelter return royalty (NSR)	A defined percentage of the gross revenue from a resource extraction operation, less a proportionate share of transportation, insurance, and processing costs.
open pit	A mine that is entirely on the surface. Also referred to as open-cut or open-cast mine.
open stope	In competent rock, it is possible to remove all of a moderate sized ore body, resulting in an opening of considerable size.  Such large, irregularly-shaped openings are called stopes.  The mining of large inclined ore bodies often requires leaving horizontal pillars across the stope at intervals in order to prevent collapse of the walls.
orogeny	A process in which a section of the earth's crust is folded and deformed by lateral compression to form a mountain range
ounce (oz) (troy)	Used in imperial statistics.  A kilogram is equal to 32.1507 ounces.  A troy ounce is equal to 31.1035 grams.
overburden	Material of any nature, consolidated or unconsolidated, that overlies a deposit of ore that is to be mined.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-13

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
pebble crushing	A crushing process on screened larger particles that exit through the grates of a SAG mill.  Such particles (typically approx. 50 mm diameter) are not efficiently broken in the SAG mill and are therefore removed and broken, typically using a cone crusher.  The crushed pebbles are then fed to a grinding mill for further breakage.
penalty elements	Elements that when recovered to a flotation concentrate, attract a penalty payment from the smelting customer.  This is because those elements are deleterious, and cause quality, environmental or cost issues for the smelter.  Includes elements such as As, Hg and Pb.
peridotite	A plutonic rock which has a mafic content equal to or greater than 90, and the olivine content, divided by the total plagioclase, orthopyroxene and clinopyroxene content is greater than 40.
petrography	Branch of geology that deals with the description and classification of rocks.
phyllic alteration	Minerals include quartz-sericite-pyrite
plant	A group of buildings, and especially to their contained equipment, in which a process or function is carried out; on a mine it will include warehouses, hoisting equipment, compressors, repair shops, offices, mill or concentrator.
portal.	The surface entrance to a tunnel or adit
potassic alteration	A relatively high temperature type of alteration which results from potassium enrichment.  Characterized by biotite, K-feldspar, adularia.
poudinge	Local DRC name for conglomerate unit
preg-robbing	A characteristic of certain ores, typically that contain carbonaceous species, where dissolved gold is reabsorbed by these species, leading to an overall reduction in gold recovery.  Such ores require more complex treatment circuits to maximize gold recovery.
preliminary economic assessment	A study, other than a pre-feasibility or feasibility study, that includes an economic analysis of the potential viability of mineral resources
preliminary feasibility study, pre-feasibility study	A comprehensive study of the viability of a mineral project that has advanced to a stage where the mining method, in the case of underground mining, or the pit configuration, in the case of an open pit, has been established and an effective method of mineral processing has been determined, and includes a financial analysis based on reasonable assumptions of technical, engineering, legal, operating, economic, social, and environmental factors and the evaluation of other relevant factors which are sufficient for a qualified person, acting reasonably, to determine if all or part of the mineral resource may be classified as a mineral reserve
Probable Mineral Reserve	A ‘Probable Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of an Indicated and, in some circumstances, a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study.  This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.
producing issuer	An issuer with annual audited financial statements that disclose gross revenue, derived from mining operations, of at least $30 million Canadian for the issuer’s most recently completed financial year; and gross revenue, derived from mining operations, of at least $90 million Canadian in the aggregate for the issuer’s three most recently completed financial years

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-14

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
propylitic	Characteristic greenish colour.  Minerals include chlorite, actinolite and epidote.  Typically contains the assemblage quartz-chlorite-carbonate
Proven Mineral Reserve	A ‘Proven Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study.  This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.
pyrometallurgy	A type of extractive metallurgy where furnace treatments at high temperature are used to separate the metal values from an ore or concentrate.  The waste product is removed as slag and/or gases.  Smelting and refining are common pyrometallurgical processes.
quebrada	Gorge or ravine
raise	A vertical or inclined underground working that has been excavated from the bottom upward
reclamation	The restoration of a site after mining or exploration activity is completed.
refining	A high temperature process in which impure metal is reacted with flux to reduce the impurities.  The metal is collected in a molten layer and the impurities in a slag layer.  Refining results in the production of a marketable material.
refractory	Gold mineralization normally requiring more sophisticated processing technology for extraction, such as roasting or autoclaving under pressure.
Resistivity	Observation of electric fields caused by current introduced into the ground as a means of studying earth resistivity in geophysical exploration. Resistivity is the property of a material that resists the flow of electrical current
right-of-way	A parcel of land granted by deed or easement for construction and maintenance according to a designated use.  This may include highways, streets, canals, ditches, or other uses
roasting	A high temperature oxidation process for refractory ores or concentrates.  The material is reacted with air (possibly enriched with oxygen) to convert sulfur in sulfides to sulfur dioxide.  Other constituents in ore (e.g. C, Fe) are also oxidized.  The resulting calcine can then be leached with cyanide, resulting in economic gold recoveries.
rock quality designation (RQD)	A measure of the competency of a rock, determined by the number of fractures in a given length of drill core.  For example, a friable ore will have many fractures and a low RQD.
rod mill	A rotating cylindrical mill which employs steel rods as a grinding medium.
room and pillar	This method is suitable for level deposits that are fairly uniform in thickness.  It consists of excavating drifts (horizontal passages) in a rectilinear pattern so that evenly spaced pillars are left to support the overlying material.  A fairly large portion of the ore (40–50%) must be left in place.  Sometimes the remaining ore is recovered by removing or shaving the pillars as the mine is vacated, allowing the overhead to collapse or making future collapse more likely

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-15

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
royalty	An amount of money paid at regular intervals by the lessee or operator of an exploration or mining property to the owner of the ground. Generally based on a specific amount per tonne or a percentage of the total production or profits. Also, the fee paid for the right to use a patented process.
run-of-mine	A term used to describe ore of average grade for the deposit.
semi-autogenous grinding (SAG)	A method of grinding rock into fine powder whereby the grinding media consists of larger chunks of rocks and steel balls.
shaft	A vertical or inclined excavation for the purpose of opening and servicing a mine. It is usually equipped with a hoist at the top, which lowers and raises a conveyance for handling men and material
shrinkage stoping	In this method, mining is carried out from the bottom of an inclined or vertical ore body upwards, as in open stoping.  However, most of the broken ore is allowed to remain in the stope in order both to support the stope walls and to provide a working platform for the overhead mining operations.  Ore is withdrawn from chutes in the bottom of the stope in order to maintain the correct amount of open space for working.  When mining is completed in a particular stope, the remaining ore is withdrawn, and the walls are allowed to collapse.
solvent extraction-electrowinning (SX-EW)	A metallurgical technique primarily applied to copper ores, in which metal is dissolved from the rock by organic solvents and recovered from solution by electrolysis.
specific gravity	The weight of a substance compared with the weight of an equal volume of pure water at 4°C.
Squid TEM	Geophysical method.  High temperature superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometers have been developed in a collaborative project between BHP and CSIRO specifically for application in airborne time domain electromagnetic (TEM) surveying to improve the performance of the system in detection of conductors with longer decay time constants, particularly in the presence of a conductive overburden
stope	An excavation in a mine, other than development workings, made for the purpose of extracting ore.
strike length	The horizontal distance along the long axis of a structural surface, rock unit, mineral deposit or geochemical anomaly.
strip ratio	The ratio of waste tons to ore tons mined calculated as total tonnes mined less ore tonnes mined divided by ore tonnes mined.
stripping ratio	The ratio of tonnes removed as waste, to the number of tonnes of ore removed from an open pit mine.
sublevel caving	In this method, relatively small blocks of ore within a vertical or steeply sloping vein are undercut within a stope and allowed to settle and break up. The broken ore is then scraped into raises and dropped into mine cars.
supergene	Mineral enrichment produced by the chemical remobilization of metals in an oxidised or transitional environment.
t10	A parameter determined in a standard breakage test (the Drop Weight test) used to predict the size of a SAG mill.
tailings	Material rejected from a mill after the recoverable valuable minerals have been extracted.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-16

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
taxitic	Volcanic rock texture that appears to be of clastic derivation because of the mixture of materials of varying texture and structure from the same flow.
tillite	Sedimentary rock that consists of consolidated masses of unweathered blocks (large, angular, detached rock bodies) and glacial till.
total free cashflow	Revenue less operating costs, selling expences, capital, reclamation and taxes.
tunnel	A horizontal underground passage that is open at both ends; the term is loosely applied in many cases to an adit, which is open at only one end
uniaxial compressive strength	A measure of the strength of a rock, which can be determined through laboratory testing, and used both for predicting ground stability underground, and the relative difficulty of crushing.
VTEM	Geophysical method, versatile time-domain electromagnetic system, used to detect conductive substances at shallow depths in the Earth's crust
wacke	A sandstone that consists of a mixed variety of angular and unsorted (or poorly sorted) mineral and rock fragments within an abundant matrix of clay and fine silt.
World Geodetic Reference System of 1984 (WGS-84)-	The United States Defense Mapping Agency's Datum. This datum is a global datum based on electronic technology which is still to some degree classified. Data on the relationship of as many as 65 different datums to WGS-84 is available to the public. As a result, WGS-84 is becoming the base datum for the processing and conversion of data from one datum to any other datum. The Global Positioning System (GPS) is based on this datum.
written disclosure	Any writing, picture, map, or other printed representation whether produced, stored or disseminated on paper or electronically, including websites.
XYZ coordinates	A grouping of three numbers which designate the position of a point in relation to a common reference frame. In common usage, the X and Y coordinate fix the horizontal position of the point, and Z refers to the elevation.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 24-17

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

25.0 RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT

25.1 Introduction

The QPs fully relied on the registrant for the guidance in the areas noted in the following sub-sections.  As the operations have been in production for more than 35 years under Coeur management, the registrant has considerable experience in this area.

The QPs took undertook checks that the information provided by the registrant was suitable to be used in the Report.

25.2 Macroeconomic Trends

• Information relating to inflation, interest rates, discount rates, taxes.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.3 Markets

• Information relating to market studies/markets for product, market entry strategies, marketing and sales contracts, product valuation, product specifications, refining and treatment charges, transportation costs, agency relationships, material contracts (e.g. mining, concentrating, smelting, refining, transportation, handling, hedging arrangements, and forward sales contracts), and contract status (in place, renewals).

This information is used when discussing the market, commodity price and contract information in Chapter 16, and in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.4 Legal Matters

• Information relating to the corporate ownership interest, the mineral tenure (concessions, payments to retain, obligation to meet expenditure/reporting of work conducted), surface rights, water rights (water take allowances), royalties, encumbrances, easements and rights-of-way, violations and fines, permitting requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits

This information is used in support of the property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.5 Environmental Matters

• Information relating to baseline and supporting studies for environmental permitting, environmental permitting and monitoring requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits, emissions controls, closure planning, closure and reclamation bonding and bonding requirements, sustainability accommodations, and monitoring for and compliance with requirements relating to protected areas and protected species.

This information is used when discussing property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 25-1

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

25.6 Stakeholder Accommodations

• Information relating to social and stakeholder baseline and supporting studies, hiring and training policies for workforce from local communities, partnerships with stakeholders (including national, regional, and state mining associations; trade organizations; state and local chambers of commerce; economic development organizations; non-government organizations; and, state and federal governments), and the community relations plan.

This information is used in the social and community discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.7 Governmental Factors

Information relating to taxation and royalty considerations at the Project level, monitoring requirements and monitoring frequency, and bonding requirements.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.8 Internal Controls

25.8.1 Exploration and Drilling

Internal controls are discussed where required in the relevant chapters of the technical report summary.  The following sub-sections summarize the types of procedures, protocols, guidance and controls that Coeur has in place for its exploration and mineral resource and reserve estimation efforts, and the type of risk assessments that are undertaken.

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for exploration data:

• Written procedures and guidelines to support preferred sampling methods and approaches; periodic compliance reviews of adherence to such written procedures and guidelines;

• Maintenance of a complete chain-of-custody, ensuring the traceability and integrity of the samples at all handling stages from collection, transportation, sample preparation and analysis to long-term sample storage;

• Geological logs are checked and verified, and there is a physical sign-off to attest to the validation protocol required;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 25-2

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

• Quality control checks on collar and downhole survey data for errors or significant deviations;

• Appropriate types of quality control samples are inserted into the sample stream at appropriate frequencies to assess analytical data quality;

• Third-party fully certified labs are used for assays used in public disclosure or resource models

• Regular inspection of analytical and sample preparation facilities by appropriately experienced Coeur personnel;

• QA/QC data are regularly verified to ensure that outliers sample mix-ups, contamination, or laboratory biases during the sample preparation and analysis steps are correctly identified, mitigated or remediated.  Changes to database entries are required be documented;

• Database upload and verification procedures to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the data being entered into the Project database(s).  These are typically performed using software data-checking routines.  Changes to database entries are required to be documented.  Data are subject to regular backups.

25.8.2 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation:

• Prior to use in mineral resource or mineral reserve estimation, the selected data to support estimation are downloaded from the database into a project file and reviewed for improbable entries and high values;

• Written procedures and guidelines are used to support estimation methods and approaches;

• Completion of annual technical statements on each mineral resource and mineral reserve estimate by qualified persons.  These technical statements include evaluation of modifying and technical factors, incorporate available reconciliation data, and are based on a cashflow analysis;

• Internal reviews of block models, mineral resources and mineral reserves using a “layered responsibility” approach with Qualified Person involvement at the site and corporate levels;

25.8.3 Risk Assessments

Coeur has established mine risk registers that are regularly reviewed and maintained.  The registers record the risk type, the nature of the impact if the risk occurred, the frequency or probability of the risk occurrence, planned mitigation measures, and record of progress of the mitigation undertaken.  Risks are removed from the registers if mitigation measures are successful or added to the registers as a new risk is recognized.

Other risk controls include aspects such as:

• Active monitoring programs such as mill performance, geotechnical networks, water sampling, waste management;

• Regular review of markets, commodity and price forecasts by internal specialists; reviews of competitor activities;

• Regular reviews of stakeholder concerns, accommodations to stakeholder concerns and ongoing community consultation;

• Monitoring of key permits and obligations such as tenures, surface rights, mine environmental and operating permits, agreements and regulatory changes to ensure all reporting and payment obligations have been met to keep those items in good standing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 25-3

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

APPENDIX A:  MINERAL TENURE

Rochester Claims

Serial Number	Lead File Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101452332	NV101452332	NMC39595	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	CROWN HILLS NO. 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	8/22/1972	21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101493000	NV101493000	NMC39574	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	CROWN HILLS NO. 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	8/22/1972	21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											SE
NV101498910	NV101498910	NMC39594	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	CROWN HILLS NO. 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	8/22/1972	21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
NV101542019	NV101542019	NMC39593	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	CROWN HILLS NO. 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	8/22/1972	21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
NV101459582	NV101459582	NMC140863	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	12/5/1979	21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
NV101478182	NV101478182	NMC140862	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	12/5/1979	21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
NV101480081	NV101480081	NMC140864	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	12/5/1979	21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
NV101345410	NV101345410	NMC140941	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 84	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	1/24/1980	21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
NV101499467	NV101499467	NMC140942	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	HMS 85	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	1/24/1980	21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
NV101454239	NV101454239	NMC140944	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 87	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	1/25/1980	21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101547449	NV101547449	NMC140943	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 86	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	1/25/1980	21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101304801	NV101304801	NMC349508	3% NSR (Solidus)	SDB-1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/1985	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101348715	NV101348715	NMC349510	3% NSR (Solidus)	SDB-3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/1985	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101479231	NV101479231	NMC349511	3% NSR (Solidus)	SDB-4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/1985	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101755547	NV101755547	NMC349509	3% NSR (Solidus)	SDB-2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/1985	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101303111	NV101303111	NMC349512	3% NSR (Solidus)	SDB-5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/6/1985	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101478101	NV101478101	NMC349513	3% NSR (Solidus)	SDB-6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/6/1985	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101301769	NV101301769	NMC364282	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
NV101302768	NV101302768	NMC364286	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE
NV101305162	NV101305162	NMC364284	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
NV101349904	NV101349904	NMC364288	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE
NV101405719	NV101405719	NMC364290	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE
											NW
NV101406736	NV101406736	NMC364292	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NW
NV101520828	NV101520828	NMC364295	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	NW
											SW
NV101602899	NV101602899	NMC364293	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SW
NV101609073	NV101609073	NMC364291	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
											SW
NV101731204	NV101731204	NMC364289	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
NV101731513	NV101731513	NMC364283	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
NV101756716	NV101756716	NMC364285	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
NV101758195	NV101758195	NMC364287	3% NSR (Solidus)	IDA #17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/11/1986	21 0280N 0340E 017	NE
NV101401214	NV101401214	NMC364392	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/18/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
											SW
NV101479506	NV101479506	NMC364365	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/18/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
NV101607345	NV101607345	NMC364364	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/18/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
NV101301257	NV101301257	NMC364386	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/19/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
NV101302915	NV101302915	NMC364384	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/19/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101304393	NV101304393	NMC364390	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/19/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
NV101305061	NV101305061	NMC364388	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/19/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
NV101460198	NV101460198	NMC364363	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/19/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
											SW
NV101608367	NV101608367	NMC364394	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/19/1986	21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
NV101453173	NV101453173	NMC364370	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
NV101453344	NV101453344	NMC364371	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101458053	NV101458053	NMC364372	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
NV101495583	NV101495583	NMC364368	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101601776	NV101601776	NMC364367	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
NV101604000	NV101604000	NMC364366	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
											SW
NV101752967	NV101752967	NMC364369	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO #9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
NV101340729	NV101340729	NMC371073	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	NE
NV101345612	NV101345612	NMC371079	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
NV101348210	NV101348210	NMC371082	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
											SW
NV101400907	NV101400907	NMC371076	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
											SW
NV101403311	NV101403311	NMC371072	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	NE
											NW
NV101403911	NV101403911	NMC371078	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
											SW
NV101405483	NV101405483	NMC371074	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	NE
											NW
NV101459683	NV101459683	NMC371075	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101496977	NV101496977	NMC371077	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
NV101508064	NV101508064	NMC371081	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
NV101600985	NV101600985	NMC371080	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPINE # 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/20/1986	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
											SW
NV102524546	NV102524546	NMC925039	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 146	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/11/2006	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
NV101318354	NV101318354	NMC925200	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 327	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/15/2006	21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
											SW
NV101318355	NV101318355	NMC925201	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 328	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											NW
NV101318356	NV101318356	NMC925202	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 329	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
NV101318357	NV101318357	NMC925203	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 330	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101318358	NV101318358	NMC925204	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 331	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
NV101318359	NV101318359	NMC925205	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 332	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101318360	NV101318360	NMC925206	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 333	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
NV101318361	NV101318361	NMC925207	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 334	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101318362	NV101318362	NMC925208	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 335	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
NV101319584	NV101319584	NMC925209	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 336	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 005	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
NV101319589	NV101319589	NMC925214	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 341	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NW
NV101319590	NV101319590	NMC925215	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 342	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NW
											SW
NV101319591	NV101319591	NMC925216	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 343	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101319592	NV101319592	NMC925217	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 344	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101319593	NV101319593	NMC925218	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 345	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101319594	NV101319594	NMC925219	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 346	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
NV101319595	NV101319595	NMC925220	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 347	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101319596	NV101319596	NMC925221	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 348	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
NV101319597	NV101319597	NMC925222	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 349	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101319598	NV101319598	NMC925223	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 350	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
NV101319599	NV101319599	NMC925224	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 351	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
NV101319600	NV101319600	NMC925225	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 352	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
NV101319601	NV101319601	NMC925226	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 353	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
NV101319602	NV101319602	NMC925227	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 354	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101313556	NV101313556	NMC925109	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 216	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/17/2006	21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
NV101313557	NV101313557	NMC925110	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 217	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
NV101313558	NV101313558	NMC925111	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 218	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NE
NV101313559	NV101313559	NMC925112	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 219	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 001	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
NV101313560	NV101313560	NMC925113	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 220	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 001	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 012	NW
NV101319603	NV101319603	NMC925228	3% NSR (Solidus)	SV 355	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	4/13/2006	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101651280	NV101651280	NMC1034799	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO 5A	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/1/2010	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 003	NW
NV101651281	NV101651281	NMC1034800	3% NSR (Solidus)	HMS 4A	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
NV101651279	NV101651279	NMC1034798	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO 4A	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/8/2010	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
NV101502550	NV101502550	NMC1062742	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/18/2011	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											NW
NV101502551	NV101502551	NMC1062743	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
NV101508610	NV101508610	NMC1061421		N 433	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	12/13/2011	21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101508611	NV101508611	NMC1061424		N 436	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE
NV101757864	NV101757864	NMC1066726		X 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	1/9/2012	21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101757865	NV101757865	NMC1066727		X 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101759022	NV101759022	NMC1066728		X 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	1/9/2012	21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101759023	NV101759023	NMC1066729		X 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101759024	NV101759024	NMC1066730		X 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											NW
NV101759025	NV101759025	NMC1066731		X 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101759026	NV101759026	NMC1066732		X 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759027	NV101759027	NMC1066733		X 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759028	NV101759028	NMC1066734		X 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759029	NV101759029	NMC1066735		X 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759030	NV101759030	NMC1066736		X 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759031	NV101759031	NMC1066737		X 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759032	NV101759032	NMC1066738		X 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759033	NV101759033	NMC1066739		X 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101759034	NV101759034	NMC1066740		X 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101759035	NV101759035	NMC1066741		X 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101759036	NV101759036	NMC1066742		X 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
											SW
NV101759037	NV101759037	NMC1066743		X 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 033	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SW
NV101759038	NV101759038	NMC1066744		X 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
											SW
NV101759039	NV101759039	NMC1066745		X 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SW
NV101759040	NV101759040	NMC1066746		X 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101759041	NV101759041	NMC1066747		X 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SW
NV101759042	NV101759042	NMC1066748		X 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
											SW
NV101759043	NV101759043	NMC1066749		X 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NE
											NW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SW
NV101780422	NV101780422	NMC1066750		X 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101780423	NV101780423	NMC1066751		X 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
											SW
NV101780424	NV101780424	NMC1066752		X 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											SE
NV101780425	NV101780425	NMC1066753		X 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
NV101780426	NV101780426	NMC1066754		X 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											SE
NV101780427	NV101780427	NMC1066755		X 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 003	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
NV101780428	NV101780428	NMC1066756		X 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											SE
NV101780429	NV101780429	NMC1066757		X 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
										21 0270N 0340E 003	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
NV101780430	NV101780430	NMC1066758		X 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											SE
NV101780431	NV101780431	NMC1066759		X 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
NV101780432	NV101780432	NMC1066760		X 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101780433	NV101780433	NMC1066761		X 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SW
NV101865210	NV101865210	NMC1096902	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/14/2013	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
NV101865450	NV101865450	NMC1096912	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/28/2013	21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
NV101865451	NV101865451	NMC1096913	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
											SW
NV101865208	NV101865208	NMC1096900	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/29/2013	21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
NV101865209	NV101865209	NMC1096901	3% NSR (Solidus)	SVB 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101354525	NV101354525	NMC1094138	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
NV101354526	NV101354526	NMC1094139	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101354527	NV101354527	NMC1094140	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101354528	NV101354528	NMC1094141	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101354529	NV101354529	NMC1094142	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101354530	NV101354530	NMC1094143	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											NW
NV101354531	NV101354531	NMC1094144	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101354532	NV101354532	NMC1094145	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101354533	NV101354533	NMC1094146	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101354534	NV101354534	NMC1094147	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101354535	NV101354535	NMC1094148	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101354536	NV101354536	NMC1094149	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
											SW
NV101355357	NV101355357	NMC1094150	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
											SW
NV101355358	NV101355358	NMC1094151	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
											SW
NV101355359	NV101355359	NMC1094152	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
											SW
NV101355360	NV101355360	NMC1094153	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101355361	NV101355361	NMC1094154	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											SE
NV101355362	NV101355362	NMC1094155	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											SE
NV101355363	NV101355363	NMC1094156	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											SE
NV101355364	NV101355364	NMC1094157	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											SE
NV101355365	NV101355365	NMC1094158	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
NV101355366	NV101355366	NMC1094159	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
NV101355367	NV101355367	NMC1094160	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
NV101355368	NV101355368	NMC1094161	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
NV101355369	NV101355369	NMC1094162	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
NV101355370	NV101355370	NMC1094163	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101355371	NV101355371	NMC1094164	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
NV101355372	NV101355372	NMC1094165	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
NV101355373	NV101355373	NMC1094166	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
NV101355374	NV101355374	NMC1094167	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
NV101355375	NV101355375	NMC1094168	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101355376	NV101355376	NMC1094169	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101355377	NV101355377	NMC1094170	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101356351	NV101356351	NMC1094171	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101356352	NV101356352	NMC1094172	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											NW
NV101356353	NV101356353	NMC1094173	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101356354	NV101356354	NMC1094174	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101356355	NV101356355	NMC1094175	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101356356	NV101356356	NMC1094176	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DREADNOUGHT 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101356362	NV101356362	NMC1094182	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
NV101356363	NV101356363	NMC1094183	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
NV101356364	NV101356364	NMC1094184	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
NV101356365	NV101356365	NMC1094185	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101357342	NV101357342	NMC1094192	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											SE
NV101357343	NV101357343	NMC1094193	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											SE
NV101357344	NV101357344	NMC1094194	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											SE
NV101357345	NV101357345	NMC1094195	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											SE
NV101357351	NV101357351	NMC1094201	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
NV101357352	NV101357352	NMC1094202	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
NV101357353	NV101357353	NMC1094203	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
NV101357354	NV101357354	NMC1094204	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
NV101357355	NV101357355	NMC1094205	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
NV101357361	NV101357361	NMC1094211	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101357362	NV101357362	NMC1094212	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101358339	NV101358339	NMC1094213	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101485532	NV101485532	NMC1094291	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											NW
NV101485533	NV101485533	NMC1094292	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101485534	NV101485534	NMC1094293	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101485535	NV101485535	NMC1094294	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101485536	NV101485536	NMC1094295	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101485537	NV101485537	NMC1094296	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101486522	NV101486522	NMC1094297	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101486523	NV101486523	NMC1094298	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101486524	NV101486524	NMC1094299	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101486525	NV101486525	NMC1094300	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
NV101486526	NV101486526	NMC1094301		SABRE 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101486527	NV101486527	NMC1094302	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101486528	NV101486528	NMC1094303	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101486529	NV101486529	NMC1094304	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101486530	NV101486530	NMC1094305	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101486531	NV101486531	NMC1094306	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											SE
NV101486532	NV101486532	NMC1094307	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											SE
NV101486533	NV101486533	NMC1094308	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											SE
NV101486534	NV101486534	NMC1094309	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											SE
NV101486535	NV101486535	NMC1094310		SABRE 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
NV101486536	NV101486536	NMC1094311	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
NV101486537	NV101486537	NMC1094312	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
NV101486538	NV101486538	NMC1094313	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101486539	NV101486539	NMC1094314	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
											SW
NV101486540	NV101486540	NMC1094315	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
NV101486541	NV101486541	NMC1094316	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
NV101486542	NV101486542	NMC1094317	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
NV101487529	NV101487529	NMC1094318	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	SABRE 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/7/2013	21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
NV101354556	NV101354556	NMC1094484	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/8/2013	21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101354557	NV101354557	NMC1094485	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101355378	NV101355378	NMC1094486	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/8/2013	21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101355379	NV101355379	NMC1094487	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101355380	NV101355380	NMC1094488	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											NW
NV101355381	NV101355381	NMC1094489	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101355382	NV101355382	NMC1094490	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101355383	NV101355383	NMC1094491	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
NV101355384	NV101355384	NMC1094492	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	NW
NV101355385	NV101355385	NMC1094493	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
											SW
NV101355386	NV101355386	NMC1094494	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
											SW
NV101355387	NV101355387	NMC1094495	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
											SW
NV101355388	NV101355388	NMC1094496	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
											SW
NV101355389	NV101355389	NMC1094497	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101355390	NV101355390	NMC1094498	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											SE
NV101355391	NV101355391	NMC1094499	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											SE
NV101355392	NV101355392	NMC1094500	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											SE
NV101355393	NV101355393	NMC1094501	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	NW
											SW
NV101355394	NV101355394	NMC1094502	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
NV101355395	NV101355395	NMC1094503	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
NV101356376	NV101356376	NMC1094511	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/8/2013	21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101356377	NV101356377	NMC1094512	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101487530	NV101487530	NMC1094319	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/8/2013	21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487531	NV101487531	NMC1094320	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487532	NV101487532	NMC1094321	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487533	NV101487533	NMC1094322	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487534	NV101487534	NMC1094323	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487535	NV101487535	NMC1094324	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											NW
NV101487536	NV101487536	NMC1094325	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101487537	NV101487537	NMC1094326	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
NV101487538	NV101487538	NMC1094327	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
NV101487539	NV101487539	NMC1094328	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
NV101487540	NV101487540	NMC1094329	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487541	NV101487541	NMC1094330	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487542	NV101487542	NMC1094331	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487543	NV101487543	NMC1094332	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487544	NV101487544	NMC1094333	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
NV101487545	NV101487545	NMC1094334	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											NW
NV101487546	NV101487546	NMC1094335	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
NV101487547	NV101487547	NMC1094336	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
NV101487548	NV101487548	NMC1094337	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
NV101487549	NV101487549	NMC1094338	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
NV101488537	NV101488537	NMC1094339	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/8/2013	21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
											SW
NV101488538	NV101488538	NMC1094340	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
											SW
NV101488539	NV101488539	NMC1094341	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101488540	NV101488540	NMC1094342	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
											SW
NV101488541	NV101488541	NMC1094343	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NW
											SW
NV101488542	NV101488542	NMC1094344	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101488543	NV101488543	NMC1094345	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											SE
NV101488544	NV101488544	NMC1094346	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											SE
NV101488545	NV101488545	NMC1094347	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											SE
NV101488546	NV101488546	NMC1094348	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NW
											SW
NV101488547	NV101488547	NMC1094349	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
NV101488548	NV101488548	NMC1094350	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101488549	NV101488549	NMC1094351	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101488550	NV101488550	NMC1094352	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101488551	NV101488551	NMC1094353	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NW
NV101488552	NV101488552	NMC1094354	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											NW
NV101488553	NV101488553	NMC1094355	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101488554	NV101488554	NMC1094356	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101488555	NV101488555	NMC1094357	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101488556	NV101488556	NMC1094358	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	LEONIDAS 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 010	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
NV101351587	NV101351587	NMC1094422		RAMPART 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 018	SE
NV101352558	NV101352558	NMC1094423		RAMPART 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
NV101352559	NV101352559	NMC1094424		RAMPART 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
NV101352560	NV101352560	NMC1094425		RAMPART 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
NV101352561	NV101352561	NMC1094426		RAMPART 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
NV101352562	NV101352562	NMC1094427		RAMPART 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
											SW
NV101352563	NV101352563	NMC1094428		RAMPART 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
NV101352564	NV101352564	NMC1094429		RAMPART 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
NV101352565	NV101352565	NMC1094430		RAMPART 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
NV101352566	NV101352566	NMC1094431		RAMPART 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
NV101352567	NV101352567	NMC1094432		RAMPART 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 018	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 019	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101352568	NV101352568	NMC1094433		RAMPART 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101352569	NV101352569	NMC1094434		RAMPART 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101352570	NV101352570	NMC1094435		RAMPART 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101352571	NV101352571	NMC1094436		RAMPART 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101352572	NV101352572	NMC1094437		RAMPART 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101352573	NV101352573	NMC1094438		RAMPART 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101352574	NV101352574	NMC1094439		RAMPART 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101352575	NV101352575	NMC1094440		RAMPART 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101352576	NV101352576	NMC1094441		RAMPART 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101355396	NV101355396	NMC1094504		KING SOLOMON 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
NV101355397	NV101355397	NMC1094505		KING SOLOMON 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
NV101355398	NV101355398	NMC1094506		KING SOLOMON 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
											SW
NV101356357	NV101356357	NMC1094177	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
NV101356358	NV101356358	NMC1094178		DAUNTLESS 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
NV101356359	NV101356359	NMC1094179	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
NV101356360	NV101356360	NMC1094180	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
NV101356361	NV101356361	NMC1094181	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 009	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											NW
NV101356366	NV101356366	NMC1094186	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101356367	NV101356367	NMC1094187	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
											SW
NV101356368	NV101356368	NMC1094188	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
											SW
NV101356369	NV101356369	NMC1094189	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
NV101356370	NV101356370	NMC1094190	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
NV101356371	NV101356371	NMC1094191	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											NW
NV101356372	NV101356372	NMC1094507	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
NV101356373	NV101356373	NMC1094508	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
NV101356374	NV101356374	NMC1094509	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
NV101356375	NV101356375	NMC1094510	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
NV101356378	NV101356378	NMC1094513	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101356379	NV101356379	NMC1094514	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101356380	NV101356380	NMC1094515	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
											NW
NV101356381	NV101356381	NMC1094516	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101356382	NV101356382	NMC1094517	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101356383	NV101356383	NMC1094518	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101356384	NV101356384	NMC1094519	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	KING SOLOMON 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101357346	NV101357346	NMC1094196	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
NV101357347	NV101357347	NMC1094197	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
NV101357348	NV101357348	NMC1094198	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
NV101357349	NV101357349	NMC1094199	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
NV101357350	NV101357350	NMC1094200	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
											SW
NV101357356	NV101357356	NMC1094206		DAUNTLESS 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101357357	NV101357357	NMC1094207	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101357358	NV101357358	NMC1094208	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101357359	NV101357359	NMC1094209	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101357360	NV101357360	NMC1094210	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	DAUNTLESS 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											NW
NV101358340	NV101358340	NMC1094214		DAUNTLESS X	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/9/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101358341	NV101358341	NMC1094215		DAUNTLESS Y	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
											SW
NV101350559	NV101350559	NMC1094381		INDOMITABLE 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 028	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101350560	NV101350560	NMC1094382		INDOMITABLE 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
											NW
NV101350561	NV101350561	NMC1094383		INDOMITABLE 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
NV101350562	NV101350562	NMC1094384		INDOMITABLE 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101350563	NV101350563	NMC1094385		INDOMITABLE 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
NV101350564	NV101350564	NMC1094386		INDOMITABLE 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
NV101350565	NV101350565	NMC1094387		INDOMITABLE 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101350566	NV101350566	NMC1094388		INDOMITABLE 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101350567	NV101350567	NMC1094389		INDOMITABLE 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101350568	NV101350568	NMC1094390		INDOMITABLE 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101350569	NV101350569	NMC1094391		INDOMITABLE 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
											NW
NV101350570	NV101350570	NMC1094392		INDOMITABLE 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
NV101350571	NV101350571	NMC1094393		INDOMITABLE 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
NV101350572	NV101350572	NMC1094394		INDOMITABLE 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
											SW
NV101350573	NV101350573	NMC1094395		INDOMITABLE 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
											SW
NV101350574	NV101350574	NMC1094396		INDOMITABLE 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
											SW
NV101356385	NV101356385	NMC1094520		SIR WINSTON 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101356386	NV101356386	NMC1094521		SIR WINSTON 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
NV101356387	NV101356387	NMC1094522		SIR WINSTON 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
NV101356388	NV101356388	NMC1094523		SIR WINSTON 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101356389	NV101356389	NMC1094524		SIR WINSTON 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101356390	NV101356390	NMC1094525		SIR WINSTON 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
NV101356391	NV101356391	NMC1094526		SIR WINSTON 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
NV101356392	NV101356392	NMC1094527		SIR WINSTON 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
NV101357363	NV101357363	NMC1094528		SIR WINSTON 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											NW
NV101357364	NV101357364	NMC1094529		SIR WINSTON 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101357365	NV101357365	NMC1094530		SIR WINSTON 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101357366	NV101357366	NMC1094531		SIR WINSTON 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101357367	NV101357367	NMC1094532		SIR WINSTON 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101357368	NV101357368	NMC1094533		SIR WINSTON 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
											SW
NV101357369	NV101357369	NMC1094534		SIR WINSTON 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
											SW
NV101357370	NV101357370	NMC1094535		SIR WINSTON 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101357371	NV101357371	NMC1094536		SIR WINSTON 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											SE
NV101357372	NV101357372	NMC1094537		SIR WINSTON 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											SE
NV101357373	NV101357373	NMC1094538		SIR WINSTON 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											SE
NV101357374	NV101357374	NMC1094539		SIR WINSTON 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											SE
NV101357375	NV101357375	NMC1094540		SIR WINSTON 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											SE
NV101357376	NV101357376	NMC1094541		SIR WINSTON 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101357377	NV101357377	NMC1094542		SIR WINSTON 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
NV101357378	NV101357378	NMC1094543		SIR WINSTON 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
											SW
NV101357379	NV101357379	NMC1094544		SIR WINSTON 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
NV101357380	NV101357380	NMC1094545		SIR WINSTON 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
NV101357381	NV101357381	NMC1094546		SIR WINSTON 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
NV101357382	NV101357382	NMC1094547		SIR WINSTON 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101358342	NV101358342	NMC1094216		MINUTEMEN 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0330E 024	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 025	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 019	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358343	NV101358343	NMC1094217		MINUTEMEN 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358344	NV101358344	NMC1094218		MINUTEMEN 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358345	NV101358345	NMC1094219		MINUTEMEN 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358346	NV101358346	NMC1094220		MINUTEMEN 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358347	NV101358347	NMC1094221		MINUTEMEN 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											NW
NV101358348	NV101358348	NMC1094222		MINUTEMEN 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101358349	NV101358349	NMC1094223		MINUTEMEN 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101358350	NV101358350	NMC1094224		MINUTEMEN 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101358351	NV101358351	NMC1094225		MINUTEMEN 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101358352	NV101358352	NMC1094226		MINUTEMEN 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358353	NV101358353	NMC1094227		MINUTEMEN 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358354	NV101358354	NMC1094228		MINUTEMEN 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358355	NV101358355	NMC1094229		MINUTEMEN 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358356	NV101358356	NMC1094230		MINUTEMEN 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
NV101358357	NV101358357	NMC1094231		MINUTEMEN 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											NW
NV101358358	NV101358358	NMC1094232		MINUTEMEN 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101358359	NV101358359	NMC1094233		MINUTEMEN 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101359369	NV101359369	NMC1094234		MINUTEMEN 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101359370	NV101359370	NMC1094235		MINUTEMEN 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
NV101359371	NV101359371	NMC1094236		MINUTEMEN 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
											SW
NV101359372	NV101359372	NMC1094237		MINUTEMEN 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
											SW
NV101359373	NV101359373	NMC1094238		MINUTEMEN 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
											SW
NV101359374	NV101359374	NMC1094239		MINUTEMEN 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NW
											SW
NV101359375	NV101359375	NMC1094240		MINUTEMEN 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101359376	NV101359376	NMC1094241		MINUTEMEN 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101359377	NV101359377	NMC1094242		MINUTEMEN 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											SE
NV101359378	NV101359378	NMC1094243		MINUTEMEN 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											SE
NV101359379	NV101359379	NMC1094244		MINUTEMEN 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											SE
NV101359380	NV101359380	NMC1094245		MINUTEMEN 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	NE
											SE
NV101359381	NV101359381	NMC1094246		MINUTEMEN 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NW
NV101359382	NV101359382	NMC1094247		MINUTEMEN 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NW
NV101359383	NV101359383	NMC1094248		MINUTEMEN 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NW
NV101359384	NV101359384	NMC1094249		MINUTEMEN 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NW
NV101359385	NV101359385	NMC1094250		MINUTEMEN 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
											NW
NV101359386	NV101359386	NMC1094251		MINUTEMEN 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
NV101359387	NV101359387	NMC1094252		MINUTEMEN 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
NV101359388	NV101359388	NMC1094253		MINUTEMEN 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
NV101359389	NV101359389	NMC1094254		MINUTEMEN 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 030	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
NV101360393	NV101360393	NMC1094255		MINUTEMEN 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 030	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101488557	NV101488557	NMC1094359		INDOMITABLE 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101489537	NV101489537	NMC1094360		INDOMITABLE 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/10/2013	21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101489538	NV101489538	NMC1094361		INDOMITABLE 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101489539	NV101489539	NMC1094362		INDOMITABLE 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101489540	NV101489540	NMC1094363		INDOMITABLE 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											NW
NV101489541	NV101489541	NMC1094364		INDOMITABLE 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101489542	NV101489542	NMC1094365		INDOMITABLE 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101489543	NV101489543	NMC1094366		INDOMITABLE 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101489544	NV101489544	NMC1094367		INDOMITABLE 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101489545	NV101489545	NMC1094368		INDOMITABLE 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101489546	NV101489546	NMC1094369		INDOMITABLE 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
											SW
NV101489547	NV101489547	NMC1094370		INDOMITABLE 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
											SW
NV101489548	NV101489548	NMC1094371		INDOMITABLE 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
											SW
NV101489549	NV101489549	NMC1094372		INDOMITABLE 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
											SW
NV101489550	NV101489550	NMC1094373		INDOMITABLE 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101489551	NV101489551	NMC1094374		INDOMITABLE 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											SE
NV101489552	NV101489552	NMC1094375		INDOMITABLE 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											SE
NV101489553	NV101489553	NMC1094376		INDOMITABLE 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101489554	NV101489554	NMC1094377		INDOMITABLE 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											SE
NV101489555	NV101489555	NMC1094378		INDOMITABLE 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101489556	NV101489556	NMC1094379		INDOMITABLE 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101489557	NV101489557	NMC1094380		INDOMITABLE 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 028	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
NV101350575	NV101350575	NMC1094397		TOMAHAWK 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/11/2013	21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101350576	NV101350576	NMC1094398		TOMAHAWK 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101350577	NV101350577	NMC1094399		TOMAHAWK 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101350578	NV101350578	NMC1094400		TOMAHAWK 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
NV101350579	NV101350579	NMC1094401		TOMAHAWK 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
											NW
NV101351567	NV101351567	NMC1094402		TOMAHAWK 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/11/2013	21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101351568	NV101351568	NMC1094403		TOMAHAWK 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101351569	NV101351569	NMC1094404		TOMAHAWK 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101351570	NV101351570	NMC1094405		TOMAHAWK 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											SE
NV101351571	NV101351571	NMC1094406		TOMAHAWK 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
											SW
NV101351572	NV101351572	NMC1094407		TOMAHAWK 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
											SW
NV101351573	NV101351573	NMC1094408		TOMAHAWK 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
											SW
NV101351574	NV101351574	NMC1094409		TOMAHAWK 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101351575	NV101351575	NMC1094410		TOMAHAWK 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101351576	NV101351576	NMC1094411		TOMAHAWK 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
											SE
NV101351577	NV101351577	NMC1094412		TOMAHAWK 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
											SE
NV101351578	NV101351578	NMC1094413		TOMAHAWK 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101351579	NV101351579	NMC1094414		TOMAHAWK 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101351580	NV101351580	NMC1094415		TOMAHAWK 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101351581	NV101351581	NMC1094416		TOMAHAWK 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101351582	NV101351582	NMC1094417		TOMAHAWK 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101351583	NV101351583	NMC1094418		TOMAHAWK 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
											NW
NV101351584	NV101351584	NMC1094419		TOMAHAWK 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101351585	NV101351585	NMC1094420		TOMAHAWK 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101351586	NV101351586	NMC1094421		TOMAHAWK 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
NV101358360	NV101358360	NMC1094548		ARCHON 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/11/2013	21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358361	NV101358361	NMC1094549		ARCHON 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358362	NV101358362	NMC1094550		ARCHON 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101358363	NV101358363	NMC1094551		ARCHON 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358364	NV101358364	NMC1094552		ARCHON 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358365	NV101358365	NMC1094553		ARCHON 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358366	NV101358366	NMC1094554		ARCHON 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											NW
NV101358367	NV101358367	NMC1094555		ARCHON 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
NV101358368	NV101358368	NMC1094556		ARCHON 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
NV101358369	NV101358369	NMC1094557		ARCHON 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 029	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
NV101358370	NV101358370	NMC1094558		ARCHON 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358371	NV101358371	NMC1094559		ARCHON 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358372	NV101358372	NMC1094560		ARCHON 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358373	NV101358373	NMC1094561		ARCHON 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358374	NV101358374	NMC1094562		ARCHON 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
NV101358375	NV101358375	NMC1094563		ARCHON 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											NW
NV101358376	NV101358376	NMC1094564		ARCHON 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
NV101358377	NV101358377	NMC1094565		ARCHON 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
NV101358378	NV101358378	NMC1094566		ARCHON 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
NV101358379	NV101358379	NMC1094567		ARCHON 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101359390	NV101359390	NMC1094568		ARCHON 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/11/2013	21 0280N 0340E 031	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
											SW
NV101359391	NV101359391	NMC1094569		ARCHON 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
											SW
NV101359392	NV101359392	NMC1094570		ARCHON 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
											SW
NV101359393	NV101359393	NMC1094571		ARCHON 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
											SW
NV101359394	NV101359394	NMC1094572		ARCHON 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NW
											SW
NV101359395	NV101359395	NMC1094573		ARCHON 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101359396	NV101359396	NMC1094574		ARCHON 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											SE
NV101359397	NV101359397	NMC1094575		ARCHON 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											SE
NV101359398	NV101359398	NMC1094576		ARCHON 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											SE
NV101359399	NV101359399	NMC1094577		ARCHON 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											SE
NV101359400	NV101359400	NMC1094578		ARCHON 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NW
											SW
NV101359549	NV101359549	NMC1094579		ARCHON 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 031	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101359550	NV101359550	NMC1094580		ARCHON 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101359551	NV101359551	NMC1094581		ARCHON 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101359552	NV101359552	NMC1094582		ARCHON 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101359553	NV101359553	NMC1094583		ARCHON 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101359554	NV101359554	NMC1094584		ARCHON 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
											SW
NV101359555	NV101359555	NMC1094585		ARCHON 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101359556	NV101359556	NMC1094586		ARCHON 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101359557	NV101359557	NMC1094587		ARCHON 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101359558	NV101359558	NMC1094588		ARCHON 41	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101450538	NV101450538	NMC1094589		ARCHON 42	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/11/2013	21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	SW
NV101450539	NV101450539	NMC1094590		ARCHON 43	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101450540	NV101450540	NMC1094591		ARCHON 44	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101450541	NV101450541	NMC1094592		ARCHON 45	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101450542	NV101450542	NMC1094593		ARCHON 46	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101450543	NV101450543	NMC1094594		ARCHON 47	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NE
											NW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SW
NV101450544	NV101450544	NMC1094595		ARCHON 48	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
											SW
NV101450545	NV101450545	NMC1094596		ARCHON 49	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101450546	NV101450546	NMC1094597		ARCHON 50	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101450547	NV101450547	NMC1094598		ARCHON 51	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 005	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
NV101450548	NV101450548	NMC1094599		ARCHON 52	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 004	NW
										21 0270N 0340E 005	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101450549	NV101450549	NMC1094600		ARCHON 53	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 004	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 032	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	SW
NV101352577	NV101352577	NMC1094442	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/14/2013	21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101352578	NV101352578	NMC1094443	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 015	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101353537	NV101353537	NMC1094444		WAR EMBLEM 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101353538	NV101353538	NMC1094445	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101353539	NV101353539	NMC1094446	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101353540	NV101353540	NMC1094447	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101353541	NV101353541	NMC1094448	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											NW
NV101353542	NV101353542	NMC1094449	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101353543	NV101353543	NMC1094450	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101353544	NV101353544	NMC1094451	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101353545	NV101353545	NMC1094452	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
NV101353546	NV101353546	NMC1094453	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
NV101353547	NV101353547	NMC1094454		WAR EMBLEM 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
											SW
NV101353548	NV101353548	NMC1094455	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
											SW
NV101353549	NV101353549	NMC1094456	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
											SW
NV101353550	NV101353550	NMC1094457	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
											SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101353551	NV101353551	NMC1094458	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101353552	NV101353552	NMC1094459	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											SE
NV101353553	NV101353553	NMC1094460	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											SE
NV101353554	NV101353554	NMC1094461	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											SE
NV101353555	NV101353555	NMC1094462	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											SE
NV101353556	NV101353556	NMC1094463	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	NW
											SW
NV101353557	NV101353557	NMC1094464		WAR EMBLEM 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
NV101354537	NV101354537	NMC1094465	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/14/2013	21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
NV101354538	NV101354538	NMC1094466	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
NV101354539	NV101354539	NMC1094467	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
NV101354540	NV101354540	NMC1094468	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
											SW
NV101354541	NV101354541	NMC1094469	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
NV101354542	NV101354542	NMC1094470	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
NV101354543	NV101354543	NMC1094471	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	WAR EMBLEM 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
NV101354544	NV101354544	NMC1094472		WAR EMBLEM 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
NV101354545	NV101354545	NMC1094473		WAR EMBLEM 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
NV101354546	NV101354546	NMC1094474		WAR EMBLEM 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101354547	NV101354547	NMC1094475		WAR EMBLEM 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101354548	NV101354548	NMC1094476		WAR EMBLEM 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101354549	NV101354549	NMC1094477		WAR EMBLEM 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
NV101354550	NV101354550	NMC1094478		WAR EMBLEM 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
											NW
NV101354551	NV101354551	NMC1094479		WAR EMBLEM 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101354552	NV101354552	NMC1094480		WAR EMBLEM 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101354553	NV101354553	NMC1094481		WAR EMBLEM 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101354554	NV101354554	NMC1094482		WAR EMBLEM 41	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101354555	NV101354555	NMC1094483		WAR EMBLEM 42	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 021	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 022	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NE
NV101360394	NV101360394	NMC1094256		PHALANX 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/14/2013	21 0280N 0340E 019	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101360395	NV101360395	NMC1094257		PHALANX 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101360396	NV101360396	NMC1094258		PHALANX 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101360397	NV101360397	NMC1094259		PHALANX 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101360398	NV101360398	NMC1094260		PHALANX 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
NV101360399	NV101360399	NMC1094261		PHALANX 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101360400	NV101360400	NMC1094262		PHALANX 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101450525	NV101450525	NMC1094263		PHALANX 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/14/2013	21 0280N 0340E 020	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101450526	NV101450526	NMC1094264		PHALANX 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
NV101450527	NV101450527	NMC1094265		PHALANX 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
NV101450528	NV101450528	NMC1094266		PHALANX 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
											SW
NV101450529	NV101450529	NMC1094267		PHALANX 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
											SW
NV101450530	NV101450530	NMC1094268		PHALANX 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
											SW
NV101450531	NV101450531	NMC1094269		PHALANX 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
											SW
NV101450532	NV101450532	NMC1094270		PHALANX 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NW
											SW
NV101450533	NV101450533	NMC1094271		PHALANX 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101450534	NV101450534	NMC1094272		PHALANX 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
											SE
NV101450535	NV101450535	NMC1094273		PHALANX 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
											SE
NV101450536	NV101450536	NMC1094274		PHALANX 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
											SE
NV101450537	NV101450537	NMC1094275		PHALANX 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	NW
											SW
NV101485517	NV101485517	NMC1094276		PHALANX 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/14/2013	21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
NV101485518	NV101485518	NMC1094277		PHALANX 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
NV101485519	NV101485519	NMC1094278		PHALANX 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101485520	NV101485520	NMC1094279		PHALANX 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
NV101485521	NV101485521	NMC1094280		PHALANX 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SW
NV101485522	NV101485522	NMC1094281		PHALANX 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
											SW
NV101485523	NV101485523	NMC1094282		PHALANX 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
NV101485524	NV101485524	NMC1094283		PHALANX 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
NV101485525	NV101485525	NMC1094284		PHALANX 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
NV101485526	NV101485526	NMC1094285		PHALANX 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
NV101485527	NV101485527	NMC1094286		PHALANX 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
											NW
NV101485528	NV101485528	NMC1094287		PHALANX 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101485529	NV101485529	NMC1094288		PHALANX 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101485530	NV101485530	NMC1094289		PHALANX 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101485531	NV101485531	NMC1094290		PHALANX 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 020	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 021	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 029	NE
NV101358798	NV101358798	NMC1095352		TOLSTOY 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/31/2013	21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
NV101358799	NV101358799	NMC1095353		TOLSTOY 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
NV101358800	NV101358800	NMC1095354		TOLSTOY 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 019	SE
NV101359780	NV101359780	NMC1095355		TOLSTOY 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/31/2013	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101359791	NV101359791	NMC1095366		TOLSTOY 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/31/2013	21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101359792	NV101359792	NMC1095367		TOLSTOY 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101359793	NV101359793	NMC1095368		TOLSTOY 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101359794	NV101359794	NMC1095369		TOLSTOY 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101359795	NV101359795	NMC1095370		TOLSTOY 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101359781	NV101359781	NMC1095356	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/1/2013	21 0280N 0340E 011	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
NV101359782	NV101359782	NMC1095357	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 011	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
NV101359783	NV101359783	NMC1095358	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 011	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
NV101359784	NV101359784	NMC1095359	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
NV101359785	NV101359785	NMC1095360	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
NV101359786	NV101359786	NMC1095361	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
NV101359787	NV101359787	NMC1095362	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101359788	NV101359788	NMC1095363		TOLSTOY 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101359789	NV101359789	NMC1095364	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101359790	NV101359790	NMC1095365	(ASARCO) Sliding Scale NSR 1% - 5%	TOLSTOY 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101864048	NV101864048	NMC1096127		EMISSARY 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/19/2013	21 0280N 0330E 025	SW
										21 0280N 0330E 026	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 035	NE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864049	NV101864049	NMC1096128		EMISSARY 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864050	NV101864050	NMC1096129		EMISSARY 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101864051	NV101864051	NMC1096130		EMISSARY 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864052	NV101864052	NMC1096131		EMISSARY 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864053	NV101864053	NMC1096132		EMISSARY 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											NW
NV101864054	NV101864054	NMC1096133		EMISSARY 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
NV101864055	NV101864055	NMC1096134		EMISSARY 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
NV101864056	NV101864056	NMC1096135		EMISSARY 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
NV101864057	NV101864057	NMC1096136		EMISSARY 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
NV101864058	NV101864058	NMC1096137		EMISSARY 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 025	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 030	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NW
NV101864059	NV101864059	NMC1096138		EMISSARY 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 035	NE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864060	NV101864060	NMC1096139		EMISSARY 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864061	NV101864061	NMC1096140		EMISSARY 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864062	NV101864062	NMC1096141		EMISSARY 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864443	NV101864443	NMC1096142		EMISSARY 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/19/2013	21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
NV101864444	NV101864444	NMC1096143		EMISSARY 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											NW
											SE
NV101864445	NV101864445	NMC1096144		EMISSARY 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											SE
NV101864446	NV101864446	NMC1096145		EMISSARY 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101864447	NV101864447	NMC1096146		EMISSARY 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											SE
NV101864448	NV101864448	NMC1096147		EMISSARY 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											SE
NV101864449	NV101864449	NMC1096148		EMISSARY 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	NW
											SW
NV101864450	NV101864450	NMC1096149		EMISSARY 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 035	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
											SW
NV101864451	NV101864451	NMC1096150		EMISSARY 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
											SW
NV101864452	NV101864452	NMC1096151		EMISSARY 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
											SW
NV101864453	NV101864453	NMC1096152		EMISSARY 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
											SW
NV101864454	NV101864454	NMC1096153		EMISSARY 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	NW
											SW
NV101864455	NV101864455	NMC1096154		EMISSARY 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
											SW
NV101864456	NV101864456	NMC1096155		EMISSARY 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864457	NV101864457	NMC1096156		EMISSARY 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864458	NV101864458	NMC1096157		EMISSARY 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864459	NV101864459	NMC1096158		EMISSARY 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864460	NV101864460	NMC1096159		EMISSARY 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	SW
NV101864461	NV101864461	NMC1096160		EMISSARY 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NW
										21 0280N 0330E 035	SE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SW
NV101864462	NV101864462	NMC1096161		EMISSARY 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101864463	NV101864463	NMC1096162		EMISSARY 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SW
NV101864822	NV101864822	NMC1096163		EMISSARY 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/19/2013	21 0270N 0330E 001	NW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SW
NV101864823	NV101864823	NMC1096164		EMISSARY 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NE
											NW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SW
NV101864824	NV101864824	NMC1096165		EMISSARY 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
											SW
NV101864825	NV101864825	NMC1096166		EMISSARY 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864826	NV101864826	NMC1096167		EMISSARY 41	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864827	NV101864827	NMC1096168		EMISSARY 42	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NE
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864828	NV101864828	NMC1096169		EMISSARY 43	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0330E 001	NE
										21 0270N 0340E 006	NW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
NV101864829	NV101864829	NMC1096170		EMISSARY 44	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 006	NW
										21 0280N 0330E 036	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 031	SW
NV101865384	NV101865384	NMC1100571		TOLSTOY 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/7/2014	21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 023	NE
											NW
NV101865385	NV101865385	NMC1100572		TOLSTOY 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	NE
NV101865386	NV101865386	NMC1100573		TOLSTOY 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 013	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 024	NW
NV101864737	NV101864737	NMC1101232		TOLSTOY 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	4/3/2014	21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NE
											NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101864738	NV101864738	NMC1101233		TOLSTOY 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NE
NV101864739	NV101864739	NMC1101234		TOLSTOY 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 011	NE
NV101355815	NV101355815	NMC1102375		CENTURION 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	4/29/2014	21 0280N 0340E 022	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101355816	NV101355816	NMC1102376		CENTURION 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101355817	NV101355817	NMC1102377		CENTURION 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101355818	NV101355818	NMC1102378		CENTURION 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101355819	NV101355819	NMC1102379		CENTURION 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101355820	NV101355820	NMC1102380		CENTURION 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											NW
NV101355821	NV101355821	NMC1102381		CENTURION 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101355822	NV101355822	NMC1102382		CENTURION 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101355823	NV101355823	NMC1102383		CENTURION 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101355824	NV101355824	NMC1102384		CENTURION 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 023	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 024	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 025	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101355825	NV101355825	NMC1102385		CENTURION 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
NV101355826	NV101355826	NMC1102386		CENTURION 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101356777	NV101356777	NMC1102387		CENTURION 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	4/29/2014	21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101356778	NV101356778	NMC1102388		CENTURION 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101356779	NV101356779	NMC1102389		CENTURION 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
NV101356801	NV101356801	NMC1102390		CENTURION 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											NW
NV101356802	NV101356802	NMC1102391		CENTURION 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101356803	NV101356803	NMC1102392		CENTURION 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101356804	NV101356804	NMC1102393		CENTURION 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101356805	NV101356805	NMC1102394		CENTURION 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 025	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
NV101356806	NV101356806	NMC1102395		CENTURION 21	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	NE
											SE
NV101356807	NV101356807	NMC1102396		CENTURION 22	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
											SW
NV101356808	NV101356808	NMC1102397		CENTURION 23	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
											SW
NV101356809	NV101356809	NMC1102398		CENTURION 24	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
											SW
NV101356810	NV101356810	NMC1102399		CENTURION 25	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NW
											SW
NV101356811	NV101356811	NMC1102400		CENTURION 26	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101356812	NV101356812	NMC1102401		CENTURION 27	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											SE
NV101356813	NV101356813	NMC1102402		CENTURION 28	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											SE
NV101356814	NV101356814	NMC1102403		CENTURION 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101356815	NV101356815	NMC1102404		CENTURION 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 025	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	NE
											SE
NV101356816	NV101356816	NMC1102405		CENTURION 31	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 027	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101356817	NV101356817	NMC1102406		CENTURION 32	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101356818	NV101356818	NMC1102407		CENTURION 33	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101357773	NV101357773	NMC1102408		CENTURION 34	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	4/29/2014	21 0280N 0340E 026	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101357774	NV101357774	NMC1102409		CENTURION 35	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NW
NV101357775	NV101357775	NMC1102410		CENTURION 36	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NE
											NW
NV101357776	NV101357776	NMC1102411		CENTURION 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NE
NV101357777	NV101357777	NMC1102412		CENTURION 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NE
NV101357778	NV101357778	NMC1102413		CENTURION 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 026	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NE
NV101357779	NV101357779	NMC1102414		CENTURION 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 025	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 026	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 036	NW
NV101351053	NV101351053	NMC1102873		MAVERICK 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/5/2014	21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NW
NV101351054	NV101351054	NMC1102874		MAVERICK 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101351055	NV101351055	NMC1102875		MAVERICK 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NW
NV101351056	NV101351056	NMC1102876		MAVERICK 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
											SW
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											NW
NV101351057	NV101351057	NMC1102877		MAVERICK 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
NV101351058	NV101351058	NMC1102878		MAVERICK 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
NV101351059	NV101351059	NMC1102879		MAVERICK 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
NV101351060	NV101351060	NMC1102880		MAVERICK 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
NV101351061	NV101351061	NMC1102881		MAVERICK 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 001	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
										21 0270N 0340E 012	NW
NV101351062	NV101351062	NMC1102882		MAVERICK 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 010	NE
											SE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NW
											SW
NV101351063	NV101351063	NMC1102883		MAVERICK 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NW
											SW
NV101351064	NV101351064	NMC1102884		MAVERICK 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NW
											SW
NV101351065	NV101351065	NMC1102885		MAVERICK 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NW
											SW
NV101351066	NV101351066	NMC1102886		MAVERICK 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
NV101351067	NV101351067	NMC1102887		MAVERICK 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											SE
NV101351068	NV101351068	NMC1102888		MAVERICK 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											SE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101351069	NV101351069	NMC1102889		MAVERICK 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											SE
NV101351070	NV101351070	NMC1102890		MAVERICK 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											SE
NV101351071	NV101351071	NMC1102891		MAVERICK 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 011	NE
											SE
										21 0270N 0340E 012	NW
											SW
NV101490022	NV101490022	NMC1102852		BLOCKADE 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	6/5/2014	21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
											SW
										21 0270N 0340E 003	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
NV101490023	NV101490023	NMC1102853		BLOCKADE 2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SW
NV101490024	NV101490024	NMC1102854		BLOCKADE 3	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SW
NV101490025	NV101490025	NMC1102855		BLOCKADE 4	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SW
NV101490026	NV101490026	NMC1102856		BLOCKADE 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NW
											SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SW
NV101490027	NV101490027	NMC1102857		BLOCKADE 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NE
											NW
											SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101490028	NV101490028	NMC1102858		BLOCKADE 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SE
											SW
NV101490029	NV101490029	NMC1102859		BLOCKADE 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SE
NV101490030	NV101490030	NMC1102860		BLOCKADE 9	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SE
NV101490031	NV101490031	NMC1102861		BLOCKADE 10	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 001	NW
											SW
										21 0270N 0340E 002	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 035	SE
NV101490032	NV101490032	NMC1102862		BLOCKADE 11	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 003	SE
NV101490033	NV101490033	NMC1102863		BLOCKADE 12	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
NV101490034	NV101490034	NMC1102864		BLOCKADE 13	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
NV101490035	NV101490035	NMC1102865		BLOCKADE 14	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
NV101490036	NV101490036	NMC1102866		BLOCKADE 15	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
											SW
NV101490037	NV101490037	NMC1102867		BLOCKADE 16	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
NV101490038	NV101490038	NMC1102868		BLOCKADE 17	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
NV101490039	NV101490039	NMC1102869		BLOCKADE 18	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
NV101490040	NV101490040	NMC1102870		BLOCKADE 19	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
NV101490041	NV101490041	NMC1102871		BLOCKADE 20	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 001	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 002	SE
NV101490042	NV101490042	NMC1102872		MAVERICK 1	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0270N 0340E 002	SW
										21 0270N 0340E 003	SE
										21 0270N 0340E 010	NE
										21 0270N 0340E 011	NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Serial Number	Lead File  Number	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101450895	NV101450895	NMC1103419		DREADNOUGHT 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	7/17/2014	21 0280N 0340E 015	NE
											SE
NV101487294	NV101487294	NMC1105695		X 37	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	8/20/2014	21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 028	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 033	NE
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101488307	NV101488307	NMC1105696		X 38	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	8/20/2014	21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101488308	NV101488308	NMC1105697		X 39	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101488309	NV101488309	NMC1105698		X 40	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 027	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 034	NW
NV101488310	NV101488310	NMC1105699		LYN 84 R	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/8/2014	21 0280N 0330E 002	NE
NV101352180	NV101352180	NMC1104442		TOLSTOY 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/25/2014	21 0280N 0340E 014	NW
											SW
NV101352181	NV101352181	NMC1104443		TOLSTOY 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SW
NV101330776	NV101330776	NMC1119848	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO 66	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/10/2016	21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
											SW
NV101883155	NV101883155	NMC1169409		ELLISON #1	PERSHING	FILED	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/27/2018	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101883158	NV101883158	NMC1169412		ELLISON #4	PERSHING	FILED	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/27/2018	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101883156	NV101883156	NMC1169410		ELLISON #2	PERSHING	FILED	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/28/2018	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101883157	NV101883157	NMC1169411		ELLISON #3	PERSHING	FILED	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101883159	NV101883159	NMC1169413		ELLISON #5	PERSHING	FILED	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022	3/28/2018	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101883928	NV101883928	NMC1169414		ELLISON #6	PERSHING	FILED	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101471339	NV101471339	NMC1154550	3% NSR (Solidus)	SHO 61B	PERSHING	FILED	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/13/2017	21 0280N 0340E 003	SE
											SW
NV101471340	NV101471340	NMC1154551	3% NSR (Solidus)	PORCUPIINE 28A	PERSHING	FILED	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022		21 0280N 0340E 014	SE
NV101508612	NV101508612	NMC1061499		LH 29	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/27/2011	21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
											SW
NV101508613	NV101508613	NMC1061500		LH 30	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	10/27/2011	21 0280N 0340E 008	SE
										21 0280N 0340E 009	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 016	NW
										21 0280N 0340E 017	NE

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Rochester Leased Claims

Serial Number	Claimant	Legacy Serial Number	Royalty	Claim Name	County	Case Disposition	Claim Type	Next Payment Due Date	Date Of Location	Meridian Township Range Section	Quadrant
NV101319569	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925188	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 315	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/17/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101319570	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925189	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 316	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/17/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
NV101319571	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925190	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 317	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/17/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
NV101319572	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925191	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 318	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/17/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NE
											NW
NV101319585	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925210	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 337	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/15/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101319586	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925211	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 338	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/15/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
NV101319587	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925212	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 339	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/15/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101319588	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC925213	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	SV 340	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	2/15/2006	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
										21 0280N 0340E 009	NW
NV101361491	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC965332	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	DUFFY 5	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/2007	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101361492	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC965333	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	DUFFY 6	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/2007	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
NV101361493	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC965334	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	DUFFY 7	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/2007	21 0280N 0340E 004	SW
NV101361494	Genevieve Duffy Pierce	NMC965335	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	DUFFY 8	PERSHING	ACTIVE	LODE CLAIM	9/1/2022	9/5/2007	21 0280N 0340E 004	SE
											SW
NV101605673	Dale and Diana Chabino	NMC780754	3% NSR (Outside of Mine Plan)	FREEDOM #2	PERSHING	ACTIVE	PLACER CLAIM	9/1/2022	11/3/1997	21 0280N 0340E 008	NE
											NW

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Federal Patented Claims

Claim Name	Federal Patent №	Assessor’s Parcel №
Akron Quartz Mine	959332	15-020-37
Baltimore	886486	15-020-36
Canyon	469396
Canyon No. 1	469396	15-020-30
Crown Hills	537044	15-020-35
Crown Point No. 1	537044	15-020-35
Crown Wedge Fraction	537044	15-020-35
Dorothea	959332	15-020-37
Iditarod	959332	15-020-37
Joplin No. 1	886486	15-020-36
Joplin No. 2	886486	15-020-36
Joplin No. 3	886486	15-020-36
Joplin No. 4	886486	15-020-36
Joplin No. 5	886486	15-020-36
Joplin No. 6	886486	15-020-36
Joplin Fraction	886486	15-020-36
Packard No. 1	959332	15-020-37
Packard No. 2	959332	15-020-37
Packard No. 3	959332	15-020-37
Packard Fraction959332	15-020-37	Packard Fraction959332
West Slope	1112519	15-020-35

Real Property Owned

The Surface Estate, together with rock, sand, clay, gravel, and placer minerals only, in and to the following parcels of land: Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 015-460-01, 015-460-02, 015-460-04, 015-050-32.

The Surface Estate and Mineral Estate in the following parcels of land: Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 015-020-24, 015-020-13, 015-430-01, 015-430-02, 015-430-03, 015-430-04, 015-430-05, 015-430-06, 015-430-07, 015-430-08, 015-020-18, 015-020-28, 015-020-39, 015-020-38, 015-020-16, 015-020-17, 015-020-21, 015-020-20, 015-020-19, 015-020-23, 015-020-22, 015-020-12.

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Maps

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

Rochester Operations Nevada Technical Report Summary

Date:  February 2022 Appendix A

EX-96.3

Exhibit 96.3

 

Kensington Gold Operations

Alaska

Technical Report Summary

Prepared for: Coeur Mining, Inc.	Prepared by: Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME Ms. Rae Keim, P. Geo Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME
Report current as at:  December 31, 2021

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Date and Signature Page

The following Qualified Persons, who are employees of Coeur Mining, Inc or its subsidiaries,  prepared this technical report summary, entitled “Kensington Gold Operations, Alaska, Technical Report Summary” and confirm that the information in the technical report summary is current as at  December 31, 2021 and filed on February 16, 2022.

/s/ Christopher Pascoe

Christopher Pascoe, RM SME

/s/ Rae Keim

Rae Keim, P. Geo

/s/ Peter Haarala

Peter Haarala, RM SME

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page a

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

CONTENTS

1.0	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	1-1
1.1	Introduction	1-1
1.2	Terms of Reference	1-1
1.3	Property Setting	1-1
1.4	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	1-2
1.5	Geology and Mineralization	1-3
1.6	History and Exploration	1-4
1.7	Drilling and Sampling	1-4
1.8	Data Verification	1-5
1.9	Metallurgical Testwork	1-6
1.10	Mineral Resource Estimation	1-7
1.10.1	Estimation Methodology	1-7
1.10.2	Mineral Resource Statement	1-8
1.10.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	1-8
1.11	Mineral Reserve Estimation	1-9
1.11.1	Estimation Methodology	1-9
1.11.2	Mineral Reserve Statement	1-10
1.11.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	1-11
1.12	Mining Methods	1-12
1.13	Recovery Methods	1-13
1.14	Infrastructure	1-14
1.15	Markets and Contracts	1-15
1.15.1	Market Studies	1-15
1.15.2	Commodity Pricing	1-15
1.15.3	Contracts	1-15
1.16	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	1-16
1.16.1	Environmental Studies and Monitoring	1-16
1.16.2	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	1-16
1.16.3	Permitting	1-16
1.16.4	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	1-16
1.17	Capital Cost Estimates	1-16
1.18	Operating Cost Estimates	1-17
1.19	Economic Analysis	1-17
1.19.1	Forward-Looking Information Caution	1-17
1.19.2	Methodology and Assumptions	1-19
1.19.3	Economic Analysis	1-19
1.19.4	Sensitivity Analysis	1-20
1.20	Risks and Opportunities	1-20
1.20.1	Risks	1-20
1.20.2	Opportunities	1-21
1.21	Conclusions	1-21
1.22	Recommendations	1-21
2.0	INTRODUCTION	2-1
2.1	Registrant	2-1
2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.2.1	Report Purpose	2-1
2.2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page i

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

2.3	Qualified Persons	2-4
2.4	Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection	2-4
2.5	Report Date	2-4
2.6	Information Sources and References	2-4
2.7	Previous Technical Report Summaries	2-4
3.0	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION	3-1
3.1	Introduction	3-1
3.2	Ownership	3-1
3.3	Mineral Title	3-1
3.3.1	Tenure Holdings	3-1
3.3.2	Tenure Maintenance Requirements	3-1
3.4	Surface Rights	3-5
3.5	Water Rights	3-5
3.6	Agreements and Royalties	3-5
3.6.1	Hyak Agreement	3-5
3.6.2	Hyak Working Agreement	3-7
3.6.3	Hyak Upland Mining Lease	3-7
3.6.4	Stoll/Mydske Lease	3-7
3.6.5	Slate Creek Cove Tideland Lease	3-8
3.6.6	Yankee Cove Lease	3-9
3.6.7	Comet Beach Right-of-Way	3-9
3.6.8	Jualin Mine Road Right-of-Way	3-9
3.6.9	Echo Bay	3-9
3.7	Encumbrances	3-10
3.7.1	Permitting Requirements	3-10
3.7.2	Permitting Timelines	3-10
3.7.3	Violations and Fines	3-10
3.8	Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs	3-11
4.0	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY	4-1
4.1	Physiography	4-1
4.2	Accessibility	4-1
4.3	Climate	4-1
4.4	Infrastructure	4-1
5.0	HISTORY	5-1
6.0	GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT	6-1
6.1	Deposit Type	6-1
6.2	Regional Geology	6-1
6.3	Local Geology	6-1
6.3.1	Lithologies	6-3
6.3.2	Structure	6-3
6.3.3	Alteration	6-4
6.3.4	Mineralization	6-4
6.3.4.1	Discrete Veins	6-4
6.3.4.2	Extension Veins	6-5
6.3.4.3	Horizontal Veins	6-5
6.3.4.4	Mineralization	6-6
6.4	Property Geology	6-6
6.4.1	Kensington	6-6
6.4.1.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-6
6.4.1.2	Lithologies	6-6

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page ii

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

6.4.1.3	Structure	6-6
6.4.1.4	Alteration	6-6
6.4.1.5	Mineralization	6-7
6.4.2	Eureka	6-7
6.4.2.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-7
6.4.2.2	Lithologies	6-8
6.4.2.3	Structure	6-8
6.4.2.4	Alteration	6-8
6.4.2.5	Mineralization	6-8
6.4.3	Raven	6-8
6.4.3.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-8
6.4.3.2	Lithologies	6-9
6.4.3.3	Structure	6-9
6.4.3.4	Alteration	6-9
6.4.3.5	Mineralization	6-9
6.4.4	Jualin	6-9
6.4.4.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-9
6.4.4.2	Lithologies	6-9
6.4.4.3	Structure	6-11
6.4.4.4	Alteration	6-11
6.4.4.5	Mineralization	6-11
6.4.5	Elmira	6-11
6.4.5.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-11
6.4.5.2	Lithologies	6-11
6.4.5.3	Structure	6-11
6.4.5.4	Alteration	6-12
6.4.5.5	Mineralization	6-12
7.0	EXPLORATION	7-1
7.1	Exploration	7-1
7.1.1	Grids and Surveys	7-1
7.1.2	Geological Mapping	7-1
7.1.3	Geochemistry	7-1
7.1.4	Geophysics	7-1
7.1.5	Qualified Person’s Interpretation of the Exploration Information	7-2
7.1.6	Exploration Potential	7-2
7.2	Drilling	7-4
7.2.1	Overview	7-4
7.2.2	Drilling Excluded for Estimation Purposes	7-4
7.2.3	Drilling Completed Since Database Close-out Date	7-4
7.2.4	Drill Methods	7-4
7.2.5	Logging	7-15
7.2.6	Recovery	7-16
7.2.7	Collar Surveys	7-16
7.2.8	Down Hole Surveys	7-16
7.2.9	Comment on Material Results and Interpretation	7-16
7.3	Hydrogeology	7-17
7.3.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-17
7.3.2	Comment on Results	7-17
7.4	Geotechnical	7-17
7.4.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-17
7.4.2	Comment on Results	7-17

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page iii

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

8.0	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY	8-1
8.1	Sampling Methods	8-1
8.1.1	Muck	8-1
8.1.2	Channel	8-1
8.1.3	Core	8-1
8.2	Sample Security Methods	8-2
8.3	Density Determinations	8-2
8.4	Analytical and Test Laboratories	8-2
8.5	Sample Preparation	8-4
8.6	Analysis	8-4
8.7	Quality Assurance and Quality Control	8-5
8.8	Database	8-6
8.9	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures	8-6
9.0	DATA VERIFICATION	9-1
9.1	Internal Data Verification	9-1
9.2	External Data Verification	9-1
9.3	Data Verification by Qualified Person	9-2
9.4	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	9-2
10.0	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING	10-1
10.1	Test Laboratories	10-1
10.2	Metallurgical Testwork	10-1
10.2.1	Historical Testwork	10-1
10.2.2	Jualin Testwork	10-1
10.3	Recovery Estimates	10-2
10.4	Metallurgical Variability	10-3
10.5	Deleterious Elements	10-3
10.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	10-3
11.0	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES	11-1
11.1	Introduction	11-1
11.2	Exploratory Data Analysis	11-1
11.3	Geological Models	11-1
11.4	Density Assignment	11-8
11.5	Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions	11-8
11.6	Composites	11-8
11.7	Variography	11-9
11.8	Estimation/Interpolation Methods	11-9
11.9	Validation	11-10
11.10	Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimate	11-11
11.10.1	Mineral Resource Confidence Classification	11-11
11.10.2	Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification	11-12
11.11	Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction	11-12
11.11.1	Input Assumptions	11-12
11.11.2	Commodity Price	11-12
11.11.3	Cut-off	11-12
11.11.4	QP Statement	11-13
11.12	Mineral Resource Statement	11-13
11.13	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	11-16
12.0	MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES	12-1
12.1	Introduction	12-1
12.2	Development of Mining Case	12-1
12.3	Designs	12-1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page iv

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

12.4	Input Assumptions	12-2
12.5	Ore Loss and Dilution	12-2
12.6	Cut-off Grades	12-2
12.7	Commodity Price	12-4
12.8	Mineral Reserve Statement	12-4
12.9	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	12-4
13.0	MINING METHODS	13-1
13.1	Introduction	13-1
13.2	Geotechnical Considerations	13-1
13.3	Hydrogeological Considerations	13-1
13.4	Mine Access	13-2
13.5	Mining Method Selection	13-2
13.5.1	Kensington	13-2
13.5.2	Raven	13-3
13.5.3	Jualin	13-3
13.5.4	Elmira	13-6
13.6	Blasting and Explosives	13-7
13.7	Underground Sampling and Production Monitoring	13-7
13.8	Production Schedule	13-8
13.9	Backfill	13-8
13.10	Ventilation	13-8
13.11	Underground Infrastructure Facilities	13-10
13.12	Equipment	13-10
13.13	Personnel	13-10
14.0	RECOVERY METHODS	14-1
14.1	Process Method Selection	14-1
14.2	Flowsheet	14-1
14.3	Plant Design	14-1
14.3.1	Ore Sorting	14-2
14.3.2	Crushing	14-3
14.3.3	Grinding	14-3
14.3.4	Flotation	14-3
14.3.5	Dewatering	14-3
14.3.6	Tailings	14-4
14.4	Equipment	14-4
14.5	Power and Consumables	14-4
14.5.1	Power	14-4
14.5.2	Water	14-4
14.5.3	Consumables	14-5
14.6	Personnel	14-5
15.0	INFRASTRUCTURE	15-6
15.1	Introduction	15-6
15.2	Dumps and Leach Pads	15-6
15.2.1	Existing Waste Rock Stockpiles	15-6
15.2.2	Additional Waste Rock Stockpiles	15-8
15.2.3	Waste Rock Barged Offsite	15-8
15.3	Tailings Treatment Facility	15-8
15.4	Water Management	15-9
15.4.1	Domestic Water/Wastewater Plants Overview	15-9
15.4.2	Comet Water Treatment Facility and Process Background	15-10
15.5	Camps and Accommodation	15-10

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page v

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

15.6	Power and Electrical	15-10
15.7	Fuel	15-10
16.0	MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS	16-1
16.1	Markets	16-1
16.2	Commodity Price Forecasts	16-1
16.3	Contracts	16-1
16.4	QP Statement	16-2
17.0	ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS	17-1
17.1	Baseline and Supporting Studies	17-1
17.2	Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs	17-1
17.3	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	17-1
17.4	Permitting	17-2
17.5	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	17-2
17.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues	17-4
18.0	CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS	18-1
18.1	Introduction	18-1
18.2	Capital Cost Estimates	18-1
18.2.1	Basis of Estimate	18-1
18.2.2	Capital Cost Summary	18-2
18.3	Operating Cost Estimates	18-2
18.3.1	Basis of Estimate	18-2
18.3.2	Operating Cost Summary	18-2
18.4	QP Statement	18-2
19.0	ECONOMIC ANALYSIS	19-1
19.1	Forward-looking Information Caution	19-1
19.2	Methodology Used	19-1
19.3	Financial Model Parameters	19-1
19.3.1	Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life	19-1
19.3.2	Metallurgical Recoveries	19-1
19.3.3	Smelting and Refining Terms	19-2
19.3.4	Metal Prices	19-2
19.3.5	Capital and Operating Costs	19-2
19.3.6	Taxes and Royalties	19-2
19.3.7	Closure Costs and Salvage Value	19-3
19.3.8	Financing	19-3
19.3.9	Inflation	19-3
19.4	Economic Analysis	19-3
19.5	Sensitivity Analysis	19-3
20.0	ADJACENT PROPERTIES	20-1
21.0	OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION	21-1
22.0	INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS	22-1
22.1	Introduction	22-1
22.2	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	22-1
22.3	Geology and Mineralization	22-1
22.4	Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling	22-1
22.5	Data Verification	22-2
22.6	Metallurgical Testwork	22-2
22.7	Mineral Resource Estimates	22-3
22.8	Mineral Reserve Estimates	22-3
22.9	Mining Methods	22-3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page vi

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

22.10	Recovery Methods	22-4
22.11	Infrastructure	22-4
22.12	Market Studies	22-5
22.13	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	22-5
22.14	Capital Cost Estimates	22-6
22.15	Operating Cost Estimates	22-6
22.16	Economic Analysis	22-6
22.17	Risks and Opportunities	22-6
22.17.1	Risks	22-6
22.17.2	Opportunities	22-7
22.18	Conclusions	22-7
23.0	RECOMMENDATIONS	23-1
24.0	REFERENCES	24-1
24.1	Bibliography	24-1
24.2	Abbreviations and Units of Measure	24-2
24.3	Glossary of Terms	24-4
25.0	RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT	25-1
25.1	Introduction	25-1
25.2	Macroeconomic Trends	25-1
25.3	Markets	25-1
25.4	Legal Matters	25-1
25.5	Environmental Matters	25-1
25.6	Stakeholder Accommodations	25-2
25.7	Governmental Factors	25-2
25.8	Internal Controls	25-2
25.8.1	Exploration and Drilling	25-2
25.8.2	Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates	25-3
25.8.3	Risk Assessments	25-3

TABLES

Table 1‑1:	Summary of Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	1-9
Table 1‑2:	Summary of Gold Inferred Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	1-9
Table 1‑3:	Summary of Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)	1-12
Table 1‑4:	LOM Capital Cost Estimate (US$ M)	1-19
Table 1‑5:	LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$ M)	1-19
Table 1‑6:	Annualized Cashflow Statement	1-20
Table 1‑7:	NPV Sensitivity	1-21
Table 2‑1:	QP Chapter Responsibilities	2-5
Table 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Summary Table	3-2
Table 3‑2:	Water Rights	3-6
Table 5‑1:	Exploration and Development History Summary Table	5-2
Table 6‑1:	Stratigraphic Column	6-3
Table 7‑1:	Project Drill Summary Table, Pre-Coeur Drilling	7-5
Table 7‑2:	Project Drill Summary Table, Coeur Drilling	7-6
Table 7‑3:	Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Kensington	7-7
Table 7‑4:	Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Eureka	7-8

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page vii

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑5:	Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Raven	7-8
Table 7‑6:	Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Jualin	7-9
Table 7‑7:	Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Elmira	7-10
Table 8‑1:	Analytical and Sample Preparation Laboratories	8-3
Table 10‑1:	Historical Metallurgical Testwork	10-2
Table 11‑1:	Input Parameters to Cut-off Grade Determination, Mineral Resources	11-13
Table 11‑2:	Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	11-14
Table 11‑3:	Gold Inferred Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	11-15
Table 12‑1:	Dilution Rate and Dilution Grade	12-3
Table 12‑2:	Input Parameters to Cut-off Grade Determination, Mineral Reserves	12-3
Table 12‑3:	Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)	12-6
Table 13‑1:	LOM Production Schedule	13-9
Table 13‑2:	Equipment List	13-11
Table 14‑1:	Process Equipment List	14-5
Table 17‑1:	Key Permits and Approvals	17-3
Table 18‑1:	LOM Capital Projects	18-2
Table 18‑2:	LOM Capital Cost Estimate (US$ M)	18-3
Table 18‑3:	LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$ M)	18-3
Table 19‑2:	Annualized Cashflow Statement	19-4
Table 19‑3:	NPV Sensitivity	19-4

FIGURES

Figure 2‑1:	Project Location Plan	2-2
Figure 2‑2:	Mining Operations Layout Map	2-3
Figure 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Overview Location Map	3-3
Figure 3‑2:	Mineral Tenure Location Map	3-4
Figure 6‑1:	Regional Geology Map	6-2
Figure 6‑2:	Schematic Showing Development of Discrete and Extensional Vein Arrays	6-5
Figure 6‑3:	Mineralization Cross-Section, Kensington, Eureka, Raven, and Elmira	6-7
Figure 6‑4:	Mineralization Cross-Section, Jualin Deposit	6-10
Figure 7‑1:	Exploration Areas	7-3
Figure 7‑2:	Project Drill Collar Location Plan	7-11
Figure 7‑3:	Drill Section, Section, Kensington	7-12
Figure 7‑4:	Drill Collar Location Section, Raven	7-13
Figure 7‑5:	Drill Collar Location Section, Jualin	7-14
Figure 7‑6:	Drill Collar Location Plan, Elmira	7-15
Figure 11‑1:	Kensington and Raven Model Areas	11-2
Figure 11‑2:	Kensington Model	11-3
Figure 11‑3:	Eureka Model	11-4
Figure 11‑4:	Raven Model	11-5
Figure 11‑5:	#4 Vein Model, Jualin	11-6
Figure 11‑6:	Elmira Model	11-7
Figure 13‑1:	Cross-Section, Kensington	13-4
Figure 13‑2:	Cross-Section, Raven	13-5
Figure 13‑3:	Cross-Section, Jualin	13-6
Figure 13‑4:	Cross-Section, Elmira	13-7
Figure 14‑1:	Process Flowsheet	14-2
Figure 15‑1:	Infrastructure Layout Plan	15-7

APPENDICES

Appendix A:  Detailed Mineral Tenure Tables and Figures

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page viii

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Ms. Rae Keim, P.Geo., and Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, prepared a technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Kensington Gold Operations (the Kensington Operations or the Project), located in Alaska, USA.

Coeur’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Alaska, Inc. (Coeur Alaska), is the operating entity.

1.2 Terms of Reference

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, for the Kensington Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources are reported for Kensington, Eureka, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira Zones.  Mineral reserves are reported for Kensington, Eureka, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira Zones. Mineral reserves are also estimated for material in stockpiles.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.  Unless otherwise indicated, the US Customary unit system is used in this Report.  Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300) of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.  Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.  The Report uses US English.

1.3 Property Setting

The Kensington Operations are located within the Berners Bay Mining District, approximately 48 miles northwest of the capital city of Juneau, Alaska.

Access to the Kensington Operations is by aircraft (helicopter or float plane) or boat from Juneau.  The mine, mill, and camp complex at Jualin is accessed by boat from Auke Bay, Yankee Cove, or Echo Cove to the Slate Creek Cove dock facility (north side of Berners Bay), then five miles by an all-weather gravel road.  Kensington is reached via Lynn Canal to the support facilities near the 850 Portal on the eastern shore of Lynn Canal or by transit through the mine.  Access to existing mine workings (850 Level Portal) is by three miles of all-weather gravel road from Comet Beach or from the Jualin side of the property.  Heavy equipment and supplies can be brought to both sides of the Project directly from Juneau by barge.

The climate in the Project vicinity is maritime with a mean annual precipitation of about 85 inches at the lower mine elevations.  Annual snowfall varies from a few feet at sea level to greater than 10 feet at the 2050 Level Portal.  Mining operations are conducted year-round.  Snow removal equipment is required to keep site roads open during winter months.

Topographic relief ranges from moderate, near sea level, to rugged at the base of Lions Head Mountain.

Vegetation ranges from dense coniferous forest at sea level to dense brush and bare rock.  The tree line is between 3,000–3,500 ft in elevation, depending on slope aspect.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

1.4 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

Coeur Alaska controls two contiguous claims groups: the Kensington group and Jualin group.  The area covered under the Kensington group claims is 3,969 net acres, and under the Jualin group is 8,366 net acres.  Fourteen of the 23 patented lode claims in the Jualin group cover private surface estate only.  The mineral estate to these 14 patented lode claims located within the U.S. Mineral Surveys is owned by the State of Alaska, the mineral rights to which are secured by a State of Alaska upland mining lease.  Coeur Alaska also controls the properties comprising the Jualin group, under a lease agreement with Hyak Mining Company.

The federal unpatented lode claims are maintained by the timely annual payment of claim maintenance fees, which are $165.00 per claim, payable to the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management on or before September 1.  State of Alaska mining claims and upland mining leases are maintained with fees and filings to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water and the Juneau Recorder’s Office. These fees range from $35–$680 per claim, depending on the size and age of the claim. Annual labor in the amount of $100 or $400 per State mining claim, depending on the size of the claim, must be performed or a cash payment in-lieu of the performance of that labor must be paid to the State each year.  The patented lode claims are private land and therefore not subject to federal claim maintenance requirements.  However, as private land, they are subject to property taxes assessed by the Borough and City of Juneau, Alaska, which are due annually on or before September 30 each year.

The Kensington Operations hold all necessary surface and water rights to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan.

Coeur Alaska has an agreement with the Hyak Mining Company (Hyak), as amended August 5, 2005, and further amended July 1, 2009, and October 24, 2013 over the Jualin group claims area (the Hyak Lease).  The current Hyak Lease period, which is the second term of the lease, commenced on August 5, 2020 and ends on August 5, 2035.  If production occurs from the leased premises, a 5% net returns royalty on production as defined by the Hyak Lease, is due, unless the amount of the net returns royalty is less than the adjusted advance minimum royalty.  If the net returns royalty is less, then the advance minimum royalty is paid instead of the net returns royalty.  The Hyak Lease will continue after 2035, provided mining and production are actively occurring within and from the leased premises.

Hyak entered into a working agreement, with an option to purchase, dated July 14, 1982, with Benjamin D. Fremming, Douglas L. Gregg, Thomas E. Schultz, William A. Wondriska, and Mr. and Mrs. Merrill J. Zay over certain patented lode mining claims, Federal unpatented lode and mill site claims and State of Alaska mining claims.  The Hyak Lease incorporates the Hyak working agreement, and the rights awarded under the working agreement apply to the Hyak Lease.  Coeur Alaska has an agreement with Hyak covering a State of Alaska Upland Mining Lease and separate agreements with individuals over a portion of the Falls and Diana patented lode claims within the Jualin group.

Rights for ancillary infrastructure at Slate Creek Cove are secured through a 25-year State of Alaska Tideland Lease, granted in 2011.  Coeur Alaska controls a 7.2-acre parcel of land, consisting of a lodge and marine moorage facilities, under a lease agreement, as amended, with Yankee Cove Development, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The State of Alaska granted a right-of-way permit to the Comet Beach facility on April 15, 1995; this was amended on August 15, 1995.  The permit had a 30-year term on grant, expiring 2025, and is subject to an annual payment that is due on or before April 15.

Coeur Alaska holds a 10-year public, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way, granted in 2016, from the State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and Department of Natural Resources authorizing construction and operation of the Jualin Mine Road from Slate Creek Cove to the Jualin Mine site for purposes of limiting public access and improving access to the Kensington operations.

Coeur Alaska acquired 100% ownership of the Kensington Group on July 7, 1995 from Echo Bay Mines Ltd. and Echo Bay Alaska (collectively Echo Bay).  Under the acquisition agreement, Coeur Alaska is obligated to pay Echo Bay or its successors a scaled net smelter return royalty on 1 M troy ounces of gold production, after Coeur Alaska recoups the $32.5 million purchase price, plus (i) its construction and development expenditures incurred after July 7, 1995 in connection with placing the property into commercial production, and (ii) certain operating exploration and development costs thereafter.  The royalty ranges from 1% at $400/oz gold prices to a maximum of 2½% at gold prices above $475/oz.

A credit agreement between Coeur, certain subsidiaries of Coeur (including Coeur Alaska), and Bank of America, N.A., was entered into on September 29, 2017, as amended (the “Credit Agreement”), under which a security interest in the Kensington property was granted securing a loan of up to $300M.

1.5 Geology and Mineralization

The deposits that comprise the Kensington Operations are considered to be examples of mesothermal vein-style, or orogenic-style gold deposits.

The Berners Bay mining district forms the northern end of the approximately 200-km-long Juneau gold belt and is situated along the western margin of the Coast Mountains. The district is underlain by Triassic mafic metavolcanic rocks of the Wrangellia Terrane. A Cretaceous stock, the Jualin diorite, intrudes the western margin of the Wrangellia Terrane. Both the Triassic metavolcanic rocks and the Jualin diorite are overlain by Cretaceous-aged metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of the Treadwell Formation of the Gravina Belt to the southwest.  The unconformity between the Jualin diorite and the Gravina Belt metasedimentary rocks is marked by a Cretaceous conglomerate.

All significant gold vein deposits are hosted in the Jualin diorite between the northwest-trending, first-order Coastal Shear Zone, a broad chlorite-bearing ductile, and syn-metamorphic shear zone that passes through tonalite of the Coast Plutonic complex approximately 1.2 miles east of the diorite, and the Gastineau Shear Zone, which is the largest of a set of ductile shear zones that pass through the Gravina belt to the southwest. A zone of second- and third-order shears, termed the Kensington Megashear zone, appears to be the most significant influence on mineralized vein systems in the district. Brittle faults and third-order shear zones host discrete extensional quartz–carbonate veins and gold mineralization.

Discrete vein systems are defined by one or more through-going, fault-filling quartz veins.   Discrete veins typically host the highest-grade gold mineralization, dip moderately to steeply east, and typically range between a few inches to several feet in width.  Extensional veins consist of zones of numerous veins that mostly dip steeply to moderately west, but are contained within an overall east-dipping system, and occur adjacent to, or at, terminations of fault-fill veins.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Vein mineralization is characterized by gold and gold–silver telluride minerals with minor associated native gold. Most of the gold is contained in calaverite (AuTe₂), which occurs in association with native gold as inclusions in and interstitial to pyrite grains and in microfractures in pyrite.

1.6 History and Exploration

Prior to Coeur’s acquisition of a 100% interest in the Project, the following companies were active in the area between 1978–1993:  Hyak, Homestake Mining Co.; Placid Oil Company (Placid Oil); Bear Creek Mining Company (Bear Creek); International Curator Resources (Curator); Granges Exploration Inc.; Kensington Joint Venture (Coeur Alaska and Echo Bay); and Placer Dome U.S. Inc. (Placer).  Work conducted included claim staking, geologic mapping and sampling, core drilling, construction of an access road, and completion of a feasibility study.

Coeur acquired its 100% interest in 1995.  Work completed since the acquisition includes surveying and aerial photography, airborne magnetic geophysical survey, helicopter magnetic survey feasibility studies, studies in aid of permitting, mine and facility construction, and mine operations.

The Project area is a target-rich environment given that it is an orogenic gold system and the volcanic feeder at the bottom of the system has not been discovered.  This means that veins likely continue deeper than is currently drilled.  Using this interpretation, it becomes necessary to test offsetting relationships whenever it appears that a vein is closed down dip.  Currently there are plans to continue resource infill and expansion drilling on all the current mining prospects.  Two prospects are waiting on the most recent drilling results and subsequent interpretation but will likely require additional testwork.

1.7 Drilling and Sampling

The drill database for the Project area contains 7,182 core drill holes (2,386,698 ft).  Drilling that supports the mineral resource estimates consists of 4,600 core holes (2,119,138 ft).

Drilling that is excluded from estimation support includes production stope and utility holes, drill holes that have known spatial issues due to missing survey data, and drill holes that did not reach final depth.

Core loggers visually collect lithological intercepts, alteration type and intensity, mineralization type and concentration, vein composition, style, density, and structural type and intensity.  Maximum and minimum intercept angles are collected for all planar features.  During core logging core recovery and rock quality designation (RQD) measurements are collected.  Core is photographed before sampling but after logging.

Surface collar surveys are taken using an RTK global positioning system (GPS) SPS 985 instrument.  Underground surveys are recorded using a Trimble SPS 930.  Before the widespread adoption of GPS for collar surveying, some collar shots were taken by triangulating off the AK NAD 27 SP Z21 grid topographic map.  Downhole surveys were performed with Sperry Sun-type, Fotobor, Reflex Maxibor, Reflex Gyro, Axis Champ, and most recently IDS Gyromaster tools.

Drilling is oriented as practicable to intersect the vein systems, given the underground development available to act as drill stations.  Typically, the drilled intercept width is longer than the true width.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Channel sampling has been conducted since 2014, taking one or two 1 ft horizontal samples from rib-to-rib.  Core sample intervals are based on the distribution of vein density, vein type, mineralization, and any other geological feature needing assay definition. The geologist marks sample intervals, ranging from 1–5 ft in length.  Whole core samples are taken from production drill holes (infill and stope holes).  Half-core samples are taken from all exploration drill holes, where geologically warranted.

Density data determinations were collected using both water submersion (2010 drilling program) and more recent gas pycnometer (2020–present).

Independent primary and umpire laboratories used include Barringer, Bondar-Clegg, Cone Geochemical, ALS Chemex, American Assay Laboratories, Inspectorate America Corporation, Pinnacle Analytical Laboratories, Acme Laboratories, McClelland Laboratories and Bureau Veritas Commodities Canada, Ltd.  Laboratories used early in Project exploration and development programs were not accredited; later laboratories had ISO9001 or ISO17025 accreditations.  The non-independent Kensington mine assay laboratory was also used.

Sample preparation for channel and stope definition drill samples consisted of crushing to 80% passing a 12-mesh screen and pulverizing to 90% passing a 140-mesh screen.  Core samples were initially crushed to 80% passing 10 mesh (2 mm), later to 70% passing 10 mesh (2 mm), and pulverized to 85% passing 200 mesh.

Gold analyses included 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish or 30 g fire assay with atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) finish.  Over-limit assays (>0.292 oz/st Au) were by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.  Over-limit assays >1 oz/st were run by metallic screening until August 2018 when this practice was discontinued.  Multi-element analyses included: four-acid digestion with inductively-coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) finish, 33-element suite; and four-acid digestion with ICP-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) finish, 48-element suite, and multi-acid digest with ICP-MS/emission spectroscopy finish, 45 element suite.

Historically, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures consisted of routine check assays of original pulps, check assays of duplicate pulps from coarse rejects and use of geochemical blanks to determine contamination during sample preparation. Metallic-screen analysis was performed prior to August 2018 to check for coarse gold.  Current procedures include insertion of custom certified reference materials (CRMs), blanks, and duplicates (field, crush, pulp, and analytical).  Field duplicates are taken only for exploration core.  Insertion rates are as follows: insertion rates of 5% for standards, 5% for blanks, and 2.5% for duplicates.  Check assays were selected at 5–10% of sample assays received monthly and were sent to an independent ISO certified secondary analytical laboratory for analysis.  The QA/QC data are acceptable to support mineral resource estimation.

Data collected are stored in an acQuire Geologic Information Management System.  The system stored traditional drill hole data (collar location, orientation, downhole survey, assay, and documentation), but was also used to store mine development sampling, surface exploration sampling, and channel sampling.  Data are subject to regular backup.

1.8 Data Verification

Data verification included internal and external database audits.  Drill collar surveys and downhole surveys are viewed in plan and section and checked against development workings.  Contractor shift reports are compared to actual total drill hole footages.  Core logging data and core photos are checked for completeness.  Assay data and QA/QC data are reviewed.  Data that have not been reviewed and passed QA/QC analysis do not pass the verification process.  Once all data are complete and have been reviewed by the responsible persons, they are reviewed by a senior geologist and signed off on by the Chief Geologist or their designate and locked to further editing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The QP personally undertook QA/QC verification, participated in programs to verify drill data prior to mineral resource estimation, checked selected gold assay data, conducted drill hole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports, and signed off on 2015–present definition drill holes and the 2021 drilling.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

1.9 Metallurgical Testwork

Independent metallurgical testwork facilities used over the Project life, where recorded, included Pittsburgh Minerals and Environmental Technology, Inc., Cannon Microprobe, SGS Vancouver, Colorado Minerals and Research Institute, Maxim Technologies, Inc., Dawson Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc., Knelson Research & Technology Center, Hazen Research, Inc., and G & T Metallurgical Services Ltd.  The Kensington Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

Gold in the Kensington deposit is present as calaverite (AuTe2), and in the form of free gold or microscopic, “invisible” gold.  The relationship of calaverite to pyrite is either as a rind, an inclusion, or a separate, discrete particle.  Particles range from 3–20 µm in size.  Prior to mill construction at Kensington, six different companies conducted extensive metallurgical testing, including comminution gravity separation, flotation (flash flotation, locked-cycle testing, and various reagent additions) and cyanidation of concentrates.  Test results were used as a guideline for plant design.  Metallurgical test results were consistent in the recommended methods of process design, extraction and recovery estimates.

Gold in the Jualin deposit is in the form of native gold and highly liberated gold minerals, and exhibits high gold–sulfide associations.  Tests included flotation using similar operating conditions to those in use in the Kensington plant flotation circuit, and gravity testwork.  Flotation recovery results that averaged 95.8% recovery indicated that the existing circuit could recover the Jualin material with minimal gold losses.  However, it was decided to refurbish the existing Knelson concentrator in the plant in case material from Jualin did not mirror the results obtained from the Jualin Vein #4 mineralization.

Recovery factors estimated are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data.  Recovery factors are appropriate to the mineralization types and the selected process route.  The LOM gold recovery forecast is 95.3%.

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

1.10 Mineral Resource Estimation

1.10.1 Estimation Methodology

All deposits were subject to exploratory data analysis, which could include histograms, cumulative probability plots, box and whisker plots, and contact analysis.

The Kensington resource model currently contains a total of 36 estimation domains that were based on combination of lithology and mineralization.  The Eureka resource model has two estimation domains.  The Raven resource model has five estimation domains.  The Jualin resource model has four estimation domains.  The Elmira resource model has three estimation domains.  Each estimation domain is based on lithology and mineralization.

The estimation domains that inform the Elmira, Raven, and Jualin resource estimates are generated by selecting quartz vein intercepts regardless of the grade.  Each lithological intercept is visually checked by reviewing photos of the drill core.  Boundaries of each domain are snapped as close to the lithological breaks as possible.  Each domain and the diorite host rock have a respective density factor.  If the block is outside of a mineral estimation domain, the block is given the density determined for the diorite host rock.  If inside the domain, it is given the determined density for that estimation domain.

Grade caps were determined by a study of the exploratory data analysis, general statistics, histograms, log normal probability plots, and reconciliation data.  Depending on the domain, caps could range from 0.3–6 oz/st.  For the Kensington and Eureka resource models, drill data were composited at 5 ft down-the-hole intervals by estimation domain using the run-length method.  When compositing for Elmira, Raven, and Jualin, full vein width composites were created using the run-length method to accurately represent the full vein grade.

For the Kensington deposit, variograms were calculated for separate groupings of domains or zones because individual domains had insufficient number of samples to construct a valid variogram model.  The resulting variogram for each zone was applied during estimation for all domains within each zone.  Downhole variograms for the narrow vein deposits at Elmira, Jualin, and Raven were not possible due to the use of single, vein-width composites.

The Kensington model was sub-blocked.  Gold grades were estimated into parent blocks using ordinary kriging (OK).  Blocks within each domain were estimated using only composites from within that domain. Eureka was estimated using inverse distance weighting to the second power (ID2).  Elmira, Jualin, and Raven, being narrow vein deposits using single vein-width composites, required a seam model (2D) to better represent each of the estimation domains.  These deposits were estimated using ID2.

The block models were validated using some or all of the following methods:  visually by stepping through sections and comparing the raw drill data and composite data with the block values; comparison of model statistics to drill data; swath plots; and mill to model reconciliation.

For all deposits other than the #4 Vein at Jualin, the classification of blocks as measured, indicated and inferred was based on drill hole spacing, and set numbers of informing drill holes and samples.  All of the #4 Vein was classified as indicated because of the consistent geology of the discrete vein and the available production and reconciliation data.

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was completed that assessed likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting, and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods; proposed waste disposal; and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.  Mineral resources are confined within conceptual underground mineable shapes.  The estimate assumed that the preferred mining method will be longhole stoping, and that the minimum mining width was 5 ft.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The gold price used in resource estimation is based on long-term analyst and bank forecasts, supplemented with research by Coeur’s internal specialists.  The estimated timeframe used is the three-year LOM that supports the mineral reserve estimates. The forecast is US$1,700/oz for the mineral resource estimate.  The QP considers this price to be reasonable.

The mineral resources are reported using variable gold cut-off grades that range from 0.120–0.175 oz/st Au.

1.10.2 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ.  All models were depleted through 2021, planned mining shapes were used for the month of December as depletion was run on December 7, 2021.

Measured and indicated mineral resources are summarized in Table 1‑1 and inferred mineral resources in Table 1‑2.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Ms. Rae Keim, P.Geo., a Coeur Alaska employee.

1.10.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include: metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for underground mining constraining the estimates; assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑1:          Summary of Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons(st x 1,000)	Gold Grade(oz/st)	Contained Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-offGrades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Measured	2,860	0.23	660	0.120–0.175	95
Indicated	1,263	0.26	323	0.120–0.175	95
Total measured and indicated	4,124	0.24	983	0.120–0.175	95

Table 1‑2:          Summary of Gold Inferred Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery(%)
Inferred	1,915	0.24	455	0.120–0.175	95

Notes to accompany mineral resource tables:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Ms. Rae Keim, P.Geo., a Coeur Alaska employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

4. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional longhole underground mining; gold price of US$1,700/oz; reported above a variable gold cut-off grade that ranges from 0.120–0.175 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 95%; gold payability of 97.5%, variable mining costs that range from US$90.91–150.73/st mined, process costs of US$46.93/t processed, general and administrative costs of US$38.83/t processed, and concentrate refining and shipping costs of US$60.00/oz sold.

5. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

1.11 Mineral Reserve Estimation

1.11.1 Estimation Methodology

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.  The mine plans assume underground mining using longhole open stoping, trackless equipment and combination of cemented rock fill (CRF), waste, and paste backfill.  Target mining rates are capped at approximately 2,000 tons per day, which is the permitted capacity limit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Estimates of development rate are based on measured advance rates in Kensington, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira and any expected variation from manpower or equipment considerations.  Stope production rates are based on measured values of production since the start of operations.

Transverse stoping is the main extraction method used in the Main Kensington center area.  Stope outlines are created on 40 ft centers using the standard level spacing (75 ft in Kensington, 35–50 ft in Raven, 35 ft in Jualin, and 60 ft in Elmira) and the reserve model.  Longitudinal stope designs exist in the fringe regions of Zone 10, much of Zones 12, 30, 35, and 50, much of Elmira, and all of Raven area and represent a majority of the tons in the LOM plan.  These areas of longitudinal stoping are too narrow (>30 ft) to convert to transverse stoping, based on the requisite infrastructure required.  Together with the conventional transverse and longitudinal stopes, there are also some blind back stopes, depending on the reserve model and stoping horizon.

For Kensington and Elmira, a dilution factor of 15% was used by for mine planning purposes.  For Jualin and Raven, a dilution factor of 15% for development and 20% for mining was used in the mine plans to account for expected narrow vein longitudinal stoping.  Unintentional mining of paste backfill or CRF has not been excessive to date, though instances of sloughing of material during and post blast have been observed in secondary stopes, adding 1–3% additional waste dilution in a few select stopes.  A dilution grade of 0.063 oz/st Au was calculated and has subsequently been used for external dilution applications for the Kensington and Elmira stopes.  A dilution grade of 0.0 oz/st was used for stopes at Raven and Jualin due to minimal or no mineralization extending past the vein itself.

Cut-off grades are determined through historical costing for Kensington, Raven, and Jualin.  Mineral reserve cut-off grades range from 0.142–0.201 oz/st Au.  Some blocks are classed as incremental material, which does not include the G&A or mining costs, as those costs are incurred regardless of what the resource classification may be.  As such, this material must be removed from the mine and the consideration is whether it goes to the waste pile or to a low-grade stockpile that only carries the mining and refining costs.  The intent of this material handling designation is for the material to only be processed when mill tonnage needs to be sustained, but where it does not offset other above cut-off grade material.

The gold price used in mineral reserve estimation is based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks of what other peer companies used for pricing over the past year.  The price used is US$1,400/oz for gold for the mineral reserve estimate.  The QP considers this price to be reasonable.

1.11.2 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves have been classified using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the process plant.  Mineral reserves are reported in Table 1‑3 that are current as at December 31, 2021.  Estimates are reported on a 100% ownership basis.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

1.11.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include variations to the following assumptions: the commodity price; metallurgical recoveries; operating cost estimates; geotechnical conditions; hydrogeological conditions; geological and structural interpretations; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for the mineable shapes constraining the estimates; changes to dilution assumptions that can impact grade and operating costs; the inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-11

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑3:          Summary of Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade(oz/st)	Contained ounces(oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades(oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Proven	656	0.19	125	0.142–0.201	95
Probable	690	0.20	136	0.142–0.201	95
Total proven and probable	1,346	0.19	261	0.142–0.201	95

Notes to accompany mineral reserve tables:

1. The Mineral reserve estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of deliver to the process plant.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional underground mining; gold price of US$1,400/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 0.142-0.201 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 95%; gold payability of 97.5%, variable mining costs that range from US$90.91–150.73/st mined, process costs of US$46.93/st processed, general and administrative costs of US$38.83/st processed, and concentrate refining and shipping costs of US$60.00/oz sold.

4. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

1.12 Mining Methods

The Kensington Operations use conventional underground equipment and mining methods.  The mine has been operating since July 2010.  The remaining mine life is three years, to 2024.

Geotechnical conditions underground at Kensington are excellent.  The interaction of the mining sequence on the overall stability of the hanging wall has been investigated by an outside geotechnical expert.  Minor non-reportable occurrences have taken place within open stopes where personnel are not exposed.  Regular additional evaluations by an outside geotechnical expert are ongoing.

Raven workings have been extended, using guidance from an outside geotechnical expert, with excellent results to date.  The existing ground support guidelines were confirmed to be appropriate for use in the Jualin deposit.

There are few hydrogeological aspects to be considered beyond natural inflow of water to the workings within the Kensington and Raven orebodies.  This inflow is monitored, and the water is captured within the workings to be either treated, or discharged, as per Coeur’s permit requirements.  The Jualin deposit is near surface, with several faults and mineralized veins having surface expression.  These structures collect runoff water and, together with the historic Jualin mine workings acting as a reservoir, channel water to the areas under mining development.

The primary access to the Kensington and Raven underground mine areas is via the Kensington Portal at the 964 elevation.  This portal is the primary ingress/egress point for all equipment and personnel to access the Kensington and Raven workings.  There is a secondary portal at 792-elevation on what is known as the Comet Beach side, geographically located on the Lynn Canal side of the mountain.  The Jualin deposit is currently accessed by a decline collared from surface at the 926 elevation.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-12

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Stoping and paste backfill mining methods were selected and implemented based on the orebody location, ground conditions, and geological settings.  Mining design assumptions for each mining region are typically standardized for each area and mining method assumed.  Offsets from the ore, required infrastructure, and support are based on industry standards and best practices, modified by specific location required needs, and operational requirements to safely advance development and production in each area with a minimum of wasted development to maximize efficiency.

The mine production schedule is based on a maximum mill throughput rate of 2,000 st per day. Coeur typically processes between 1,750–1,950 st/day with a waste stream of about 10% rejected as a coarse pebble reject, which is then passed through a sorter to further extract ore grade material for re-feed back into the mill.

Primary ventilation in the Kensington and Raven mine areas is controlled by two fans located in the Comet drift, which pull air from the Kensington/process plant side, near the mill bench, straight through the mountain and exhaust out the Comet side.  Ventilation raises throughout the mine assist in distributing airflow.  Primary ventilation of the Jualin mine area is accomplished with a duct-mounted fan located at the Jualin portal and an in-line booster at the J0625 level, which direct air through to the working areas.  The air exhausts out though the workings back to the portal via the ramp and up through a series of vent/escape raises exhausting through a 10 ft diameter bored raise to surface.

Backfill is a combination of cemented paste fill, CRF, and straight waste fill.

The Kensington underground infrastructure consists of the main underground shop, the paste plant, and electrical infrastructure. The Raven and Elmira deposits share underground infrastructure and portal access with Kensington. Jualin shares surface infrastructure with Kensington. However, Jualin is accessed from its own portal.

Major mining equipment includes the following equipment types:  loaders, haul trucks, jumbo drills, longhole drills, and bolters.  Ancillary support equipment consists of Getman and MacClean flatbeds, explosives loading vehicles, zoom boom forklifts, Kubota RTV’s and tractors, pickups, compressors, and other standard support equipment.

The mining/maintenance personnel requirement for the remaining LOM averages 169 persons.

1.13 Recovery Methods

The process plant design was based on a combination of metallurgical testwork, study designs, and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the mill was operational.  The design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.

The Kensington Operations use a flotation mill to recover gold from sulfide-bearing rock.  Crushing and milling facilities are located directly south of the Jualin Portal.  On the portal bench, ore is segregated by grade and blended before being fed to the two-stage, closed-circuit crushing plant.  Once crushed, ore is fed to a ball mill and then to a flotation circuit consisting of two rougher cells and four scavenger cells.  Final cleaner concentrate reports to a concentrate thickener; flotation concentrates are thickened and filtered to approximately 10% moisture.  The final product is a gold concentrate.  The mill throughput was increased from a previous maximum of 69 st/hr in 2012 to 84 st/hr.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-13

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The mill requires approximately 1.5 to 2.0 MW of power to operate at full capacity.  Currently, there is no expectation for this power demand to increase.  Recycled water for use in the process plant is sent from the paste plant, the concentrate and tailings thickeners, and water reclaimed from the tailings treatment facility (TTF).  Johnson Creek is a back-up fresh water source for the mine site, but extraction is subject to permit conditions.  Consumables used in processing include potassium amyl xanthate; methyl isobutyl carbinol (MIBC); AERO 3894 (promoter); MaxGold 900 (promoter); steel (grinding media); and Z-Flocc 2525.

1.14 Infrastructure

The Slate Creek Cove Marine Terminal Facility and a 5.7-mile all-weather access road from the terminal to the mine provides all personnel and materials access to the mine.  The Slate Creek Cove Marine Terminal Facility includes docking capabilities for main line ocean-going barges, personnel ferries, float planes, ramp barges, and landing craft.

Site infrastructure is located at both the Kensington and Jualin deposit areas:

• Surface facilities at Kensington include 2.3 miles of all-weather access road from Comet Beach to the Comet Portal (850 Level), the mine water treatment facility with two settling ponds, and a development rock storage facility.  Underground infrastructure includes a paste backfill plant, maintenance shop, warehouse, explosive storage, dewatering, and ventilation.

• Surface facilities at Jualin include a 375-person accommodation camp, dining facility, administration building with medical clinic, warehouse, run-of-mine ore stockpile, crusher and flotation mill, and the TTF at Lower Slate Lake.  The Kensington Tunnel, completed in July 2007, connects the Jualin mill facilities to the orebody.  The tunnel is the primary artery for ore haulage, materials transport, and personnel access.  The tunnel includes 9,660 ft of development from the Kensington Portal to the Kensington ramp system.

Kensington has several existing waste rock stockpiles onsite including at Comet, Pit 1, Pit 4, Pit 7, and the Portal Pad.  With the approval of Coeur Alaska’s Plan of Operations Amendment 1 (POA-1), expected in early 2022, Coeur will be allowed to expand the existing Comet, Portal, and Pit 4 stockpiles and create one new stockpile.

The existing TTF is currently operating at Stage 3.  Coeur has initiated engineering work for a possible Stage 4 dam raise if additional reserves are added.  The current Stage 3 TTF has capacity to accommodate the remaining LOM storage requirements. Tailings will continue to be backfilled underground as paste to reduce the need for additional storage capacity at the TTF

Groundwater captured in the underground mine workings is conveyed to the Comet mine water treatment plant and treated and discharged to Sherman Creek.  Surface water runoff and mill process waters that enter the tailings treatment facility are treated and discharged to the east fork of Slate Creek.  The Comet water treatment facility consists of two water plants and a tertiary plant that supports the primary plants during high treatment demand periods.

Electrical power at Kensington is generated by four diesel engines located inside the powerhouse building on the north end of the mill bench.  Power use continues to increase with current peak winter loads at 90–92% of three-generator capacity.  Power capacity is sufficient for the LOM.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-14

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

1.15 Markets and Contracts

1.15.1 Market Studies

The Kensington Operations produce flotation concentrate containing both gold and silver.  The concentrate is highly desirable due to its elevated gold content and lack of deleterious elements.  Concentrate is exported out of Seattle, Washington and delivered to smelters in Europe and Asia where it is consumed, processed, and the valuable metals extracted.

Concentrate is sold directly to international commodity traders, who then sell onto smelters in Europe and Asia.  Subject to the gold and silver content, gold is typically payable around 98%, and silver payable around 80%.  There are typically no penalties for deleterious elements.  Treatment charges, refining charges, and all other terms and conditions are typical and consistent with standard industry practice for such gold concentrates.

1.15.2 Commodity Pricing

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year when considering long-term commodity price forecasts. 

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves:

o US$1,400/oz Au;

• Mineral resources: 

o US$1,700/oz Au;

The economic evaluation uses gold price forecasts of US$1,750/oz for 2022 and 2023, and US$1,700/oz in 2024.

The QP considers the price forecasts to be reasonable.

1.15.3 Contracts

Concentrate is barged in bags in containers from Slate Creek Cove in Berners Bay, Alaska to Seattle, Washington.  The bags are then transloaded from barge containers into international containers for export out of Seattle to Europe and Asia.  The typical cost to transport concentrate from Slate Creek Cove to Europe and Asia is around US$220 per wet metric tonne, subject to the destination and international ocean freight market conditions.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, contract mining, ground support suppliers, and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-15

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

1.16 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

1.16.1 Environmental Studies and Monitoring

Numerous baseline studies were performed in support of Project permitting.  These included air, water, aquatic resources, geology, wildlife, soil, vegetation, wetlands, and cultural resources.  Four environmental impact statement (EIS) documents were prepared, the most recent being a supplemental EIS in 2021.

Environmental monitoring at the site includes water quality, aquatic resource, tailings and waste rock geochemistry, wildlife, and stormwater.

1.16.2 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

A reclamation and closure plan has been prepared and approved by the governing agencies for the Project.  The current plan was updated in 2021 and reflects current mining, mitigation, and site facilities.

Coeur conducts an annual review of its potential reclamation responsibilities company-wide.  The total LOM cost for physical reclamation and long-term monitoring of the Kensington Operations is currently estimated to be US$23.7 M.  Reclamation is anticipated to be completed three years following cessation of mining.  Closure-related activities will continue until about 2055.

1.16.3 Permitting

All required local, state, and federal permits for operation have been issued.  Plan of Operations Amendment 1 (POA-1) was submitted to the Forest Service in 2018 and is currently under review by the local, state, and federal agencies.  POA-1 will provide 5 Mst of additional waste rock storage and 4 Mst of additional tailings storage at site.  A Final Supplemental Impact Statement was completed in July 2021 and the Final Record of Decision (ROD) is expected in early 2022.

1.16.4 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur has had a long and positive relationship with the community of Juneau and southeast Alaska.  Coeur partners with many stakeholders, including national, regional, and state mining associations; trade organizations; fishing organizations; state and local chambers of commerce; economic development organizations; non-government organizations; and state and federal governments.

1.17 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The cost estimates are based on a combination of first principal estimates, historic performance, and quotations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-16

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

All major capital construction projects needed to maintain consistent production and extraction of mineral reserves at the Kensington Operations were completed in 2013.  Additional capital projects have been completed since 2013 to improve mill throughput, enhance power generation, and increase tailings capacity.

Capital development is a concurrent allocation of costs that are derived by taking the number of capital feet driven times the recorded weighted costs to drive those feet in the period they were driven.  Both types of capital expenditures are sustaining and or improvement capital projects.  Each project is selected for the current year of operation, based on the annual allocation of corporate capital funds, the effect the project has on production and or the internal rate of return.

Exploration capital is the cost associated with activities involving resource infill drilling and the conversion of those mineral resources to mineral reserves.

Capital projects envisaged in the LOM include:  Elmira paste booster station engineering; heat recovery detailed design; TTF stage 4 engineering; POA1 construction of WRSFs; and water treatment plant sulfate removal

The total LOM capital cost estimate is US$47.6 M (Table 1‑4).

1.18 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Operating costs are based on actual costs seen during operations and are projected through the LOM plan.  Historical costs are used as the basis for operating cost forecasts for supplies and services unless there are new contract terms for these items.  Labor and energy costs are based on budgeted rates applied to headcounts and energy consumption estimates.

The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$274.4 M (Table 1‑5).

1.19 Economic Analysis

1.19.1 Forward-Looking Information Caution

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and limitations on insurance coverage. 

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes, and other risks of the mining industry; and delays in obtaining governmental approvals. 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-17

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑4:          LOM Capital Cost Estimate (US$ M)

Cost	2022	2023	2024	LOM
Capital mine development	14.8	15.6	0	30.4
Capital equipment (fixed and mobile)	6.5	0.9	0	7.4
Capital projects	3.7	6.2	0	9.8
Total Capital Expenditures	25.0	22.6	0	47.6

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 1‑5:          LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$ M)

Cost	2022	2023	2024	2025–2055	LOM
Mining	59.1	41.0	35.4	0	135.5
Processing	28.7	20.7	13.6	0	62.9
G&A	23.7	17.1	11.4	0	52.3
Reclamation and closure	7.4	6.4	3.6	6.2	23.7
Total Operating Expenditures	118.8	85.2	64.1	6.2	274.4

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

1.19.2 Methodology and Assumptions

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model.  The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.  The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of three years to 2024.

1.19.3 Economic Analysis

The NPV at a discount rate of 5% is $83.7 M.  As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

An annualized cashflow statement is provided in Table 1‑6.  The active mining operation ceases in 2024.  Closure costs are estimated to 2055; however, for presentation purposes, closure costs are shown in Table 1‑6 as occurring within 2025.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-18

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑6:            Annualized Cashflow Statement

Summary	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025–2055	LOM Total
Gold price	US$/oz	1,750	1,750	1,700	0.0	1,738
Net revenue	US$ M	183.2	128.6	94.9	0.0	406.7
Total operating cost	US$ M	118.8	85.2	64.1	6.2	274.4
Operating cashflow	US$ M	64.3	43.4	30.8	(6.2)	135.1
Total capital expense	US$ M	25.0	22.6	0.0	0.0	47.6
Net cashflow	US$ M	39.3	20.8	30.8	(6.2)	87.5
Net present value	US$ M	83.7

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

1.19.4 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, operating cost, capital cost, and grade assumptions was tested.

The Project is most sensitive to metal price and grade, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs (Table 1‑7).

1.20 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 1.10 and Chapter 1.11.3 respectively and discussed in more detail in Chapter 11 and Chapter 12.

1.20.1 Risks

Risks include:

• Commodity price increases for key consumables such diesel, electricity, tires and consumables would negatively impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources;

• Labor cost increases or productivity decreases could also impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources, or impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserves;

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  Any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

• The mineral resource estimates are sensitive to metal prices.  Lower metal prices require revisions to the mineral resource estimates;

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Kensington Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-19

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑7:            NPV Sensitivity

Parameter	-30%	-20%	-10%	-5%	0%	5%	10%	20%	30%
Metal price	0	2.6	43.2	63.4	83.7	104.0	124.3	164.9	205.4
Operating cost	162.2	136.0	109.9	96.8	83.7	70.7	57.6	31.4	5.3
Capital cost	97.7	93.2	88.4	86.1	83.7	81.4	79.1	74.4	69.8
Grade	0	5.4	44.6	64.1	83.7	103.3	122.9	162.1	201.2

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

• Political risk from challenges to:

o Mining licenses;

o Environmental permits;

o Coeur’s right to operate;

• Changes to assumptions as to governmental tax or royalty rates, such as taxation rate increases or new taxation or royalty imposts.

1.20.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all of the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all of the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Higher metal prices than forecast could present upside sales opportunities and potentially an increase in predicted Project economics;

• Ability to define additional mineralization around known veins through exploration;

• Discovery and development of new exploration targets across the district;

• Potential to find or gain access to new mineralization sources that could be processed at the existing Kensington process facilities.

1.21 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

1.22 Recommendations

As the Kensington Operations is an operating mine, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-20

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Registrant

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Ms. Rae Keim, P.Geo., and Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, prepared a technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Kensington Gold Operations (the Kensington Operations or the Project), located in Alaska, as shown in Figure 2‑1.

Coeur‘s wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Alaska, Inc. (Coeur Alaska), is the operating entity.

2.2 Terms of Reference

2.2.1 Report Purpose

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, for the Kensington Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources are reported for Kensington, Eureka, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira.

Mineral reserves are reported for Kensington, Eureka, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira.  Mineral reserves are also estimated for material in stockpiles.

2.2.2 Terms of Reference

The Kensington Operations consist of underground operations at the Kensington Mine, including the Kensington, Raven, and Elmira zones; and the Jualin Mine.

Underground mining commenced in 2010 from the Kensington portal.  Figure 2‑2 shows the location of the current operations.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.

Unless otherwise indicated, the US Customary unit system is used in this Report.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300) of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.

Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.

The Report uses US English.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑1:          Project Location Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2018.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑2:          Mining Operations Layout Map

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2018.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

2.3 Qualified Persons

The following Coeur employees serve as the Qualified Persons (QPs) for the Report:

• Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Senior Director, Technical Services, Coeur;

• Ms. Rae Keim, P. Geo, Geology Superintendent, Coeur Alaska;

• Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, Senior Manager, Mine Planning, Coeur;

The QPs are responsible for, or co-responsible for, the Report Chapters set out in Table 2‑1.

2.4 Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection

Mr. Pascoe’s most recent site visit was July 12, 2021.  He had previously visited the site on a number of occasions from 2015 to 2021.  During the site visits he reviewed resource estimates, mine planning and the overall operations.

Ms. Keim has been employed at the Kensington Operations since June 2014, and this onsite experience serves as her scope of personal inspection.  In her current role she is responsible for overseeing mineral resource estimation and production geology work.

Mr. Haarala’s most recent site visit was July 20, 2021.  He has been employed at Coeur since May 2021.  In his current role he is responsible for overseeing mine planning and designs for Coeur operations.  During his site visit he reviewed mine operations, mine planning and design, and the overall Project area.

2.5 Report Date

Information in the Report is current as at December 31, 2021.

2.6 Information Sources and References

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

2.7 Previous Technical Report Summaries

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

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 2‑1:            QP Chapter Responsibilities

QP Name	Chapter Responsibility
Mr. Chris Pascoe	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.9, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22; 2; 3; 4; 10; 14; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22.1, 22.2, 22.6, 22.10, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.16, 22.17, 22.18; 23; 24; 25.
Ms. Rae Keim	1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.20, 1.22; 2; 5; 6; 7.1, 7.2; 8; 9; 11; 22.1, 22.3, 22.4, 22.5, 22.17; 23; 24; 25
Mr. Peter Haarala	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.11, 1.12, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.20, 1.22; 4; 7.3, 7.4; 12; 13; 15; 16; 17; 18; 22.1, 22.22.8, 22.9, 22.11, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.17; 23; 24; 25

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

3.1 Introduction

The Kensington Operations are located within the Berners Bay Mining District, approximately 48 miles northwest of the capital city of Juneau, Alaska.

The centroid for the Project is 0494796E, 6523068N in NAD 1983 UTM Zone 8V.

The Kensington Portal, which accesses the Kensington deposit, is located at 0496957 E, 6523068N.  The Raven deposit is located at 0490156E, 6530584N and the Jualin deposit at 0497189E, 6522549N.

3.2 Ownership

The Project is operated by Coeur Alaska, a wholly-owned Coeur subsidiary.

3.3 Mineral Title

3.3.1 Tenure Holdings

Coeur Alaska controls two contiguous claims groups: the Kensington group and Jualin group.  Claim types are summarized in Table 3‑1.  An overall claim location map is provided in Figure 3‑1.  Detailed claim tables and claim location maps are provided in Appendix A.

The Kensington and Jualin claims groups are in all or part of the following sections, which are located within the Juneau Recording District and Copper River Meridian, Alaska:

• Township 34 South, Range 62 East, Sections 27 through 35;

• Township 35 South, Range 62 East, Sections 01 through 16, 22 through 27, 35, 36;

• Township 36 South, Range 62 East, Sections 01 and 02.

Fourteen of the 23 patented lode claims in the Jualin group cover private surface estate only.  The mineral estate to these 14 patented lode claims located within the U.S. Mineral Surveys is owned by the State of Alaska, the mineral rights to which are secured by a State of Alaska upland mining lease.  Coeur also controls the properties comprising the Jualin group, under a lease agreement with Hyak Mining Company (see Chapter 3.6).

3.3.2 Tenure Maintenance Requirements

The federal unpatented lode claims are maintained by the timely annual payment of claim maintenance fees, which are $165.00 per claim, payable to the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management on or before September 1.  Should the annual claim maintenance fee not be paid by then, the unpatented lode claims are, by operation of law, rendered forfeit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑1:            Mineral Tenure Summary Table

Claims Group	Claim Type	Number of Claims	Area(net acres)
Kensington	Patented lode and	44	731
	Patented mill site	7	35
	Federal unpatented lode	291	3,111
	State of Alaska mining claim	13	95
	Subtotal	355	3,972
Jualin	Patented lode and	23	388
	Patented mill site	1	5
	Federal unpatented mill site	75	366
	Federal unpatented lode	444	7,448
	State of Alaska upland lease	1	682
	State of Alaska mining claim	1	3
	State-selected mining claim	4	60
	Subtotal	549	8,952
Total		904	12,924

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑1:          Mineral Tenure Overview Location Map

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑2:          Mineral Tenure Location Map

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

State of Alaska mining claims and upland mining leases are maintained with fees and filings to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water and the Juneau Recorder’s Office.  These fees range from $35–$680 per claim, depending on the size and age of the claim.  Annual labor in the amount of $100 or $400 per State mining claim, depending on the size of the claim, must be performed or a cash payment in-lieu of the performance of that labor must be paid to the State each year.

The patented lode claims are private land and therefore not subject to federal claim maintenance requirements.  However, as private land, they are subject to property taxes assessed by the Borough and City of Juneau, Alaska, which are due annually on or before September 30 each year.

All payments have been timely made and the claims are in good standing.

3.4 Surface Rights

The Kensington Operations hold all necessary surface rights to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan.

3.5 Water Rights

The Alaska Department of Natural Resources has granted the water use permits listed in Table 3‑2.  Permits can be renewed on application.  No additional water rights are required to support the LOM plan.

3.6 Agreements and Royalties

Of the royalties discussed in the following sub-sections, only the Hyak Mining Company (Hyak) royalty affects the mineral reserve estimates and is included in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  The royalty is only payable on production from the Jualin deposit.

3.6.1 Hyak Agreement

Coeur Alaska has an agreement with the Hyak Mining Company (Hyak), as amended August 5, 2005, and further amended July 1, 2009, and October 24, 2013 over the Jualin group claims area (the Hyak Lease).  The current Hyak Lease period, which is the second term of the lease, commenced on August 5, 2020 and ends on August 5, 2035.

Under the terms of the Hyak Lease, Coeur Alaska must pay Hyak annually, during the initial term, by or before May 1, an advance minimum royalty of $231,000, which is adjusted every three years in accordance with changes in the Consumer Price Index, published by the U.S. Department of Commerce for all Urban Consumers, City of Anchorage, Alaska.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑2:            Water Rights

Agency	Permit/License Number	Description	Date Issued	Term/Expiration
ADNR	LAS 11711, amended	Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 11711) Camp Creek, amended	5/5/05	05/04/15; Permit application submitted 4/9/15; Administratively extended
ADNR	LAS 13147	Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 13147) Mine groundwater permit	5/5/05	05/04/15; Permit application submitted 4/9/15; Administratively extended
ADNR	LAS 13148	Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 13148) Ophir Creek & Ivanhoe Creek permit	5/5/05	05/04/15; Permit application submitted 4/9/15; Administratively extended
ADNR	LAS 13149	Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 13149) Upper Sherman Creek permit	5/5/05	05/04/15; Permit application submitted 4/9/15; Administratively extended
ADNR	LAS 24432	Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 24432) Johnson Creek, amended	10/17/06	05/04/15; Permit application submitted 4/9/15; Administratively extended
ADNR	LAS 24486	Permit to Appropriate Water (LAS 24486) East Slate Creek/Lower Slate Lake	5/5/05	05/04/15; Permit application submitted 4/9/15; Administratively extended
ADNR	TWUA F2017-021	Temporary Water Use Authorization (TWUA F2017-021)	2/21/17	2/20/22
ADNR	TWUA F2018-116	Temporary Water Use Authorization (TWUA F2018-116)	8/28/18	8/27/23

If production occurs from the leased premises, a 5% net returns royalty on production as defined by the Hyak Lease, is due, unless the amount of the net returns royalty is less than the adjusted advance minimum royalty.  If the net returns royalty is less, then the advance minimum royalty is paid instead of the net returns royalty.  The leased premises under the Hyak lease is currently in production.

The Hyak Lease will continue after 2035, provided mining and production are actively occurring within and from the leased premises.  The advance minimum royalties and prepaid consideration for the second lease term are recoupable by Coeur Alaska by the company crediting and recovering these payments against future net returns and royalties on production due to Hyak. The recoupment cannot in any given year cause the net returns royalties to be reduced to less than the advance minimum royalty amount, as adjusted.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

3.6.2 Hyak Working Agreement

Hyak entered into a working agreement, with an option to purchase, dated July 14, 1982, with Benjamin D. Fremming, Douglas L. Gregg, Thomas E. Schultz, William A. Wondriska, and Mr. and Mrs. Merrill J. Zay.  This agreement was amended on February 12, 1988 and February 10, 2010.

This agreement covers the patented lode mining claims included in Mineral Surveys 676 and 1496, all of Hyak’s Federal unpatented lode and mill site claims, as well as 15 State of Alaska mining claims (ADL Numbers 309740–309742, 323364–323368, 349102, 503245–503248, 509891, and 509892).

The Hyak Lease incorporates the Hyak working agreement, and the rights awarded under the working agreement apply to the Hyak Lease.

3.6.3 Hyak Upland Mining Lease

Coeur Alaska holds an assignment from Hyak to a State of Alaska Upland Mining Lease (ADL# 720953) granted on lands generally located within the following protracted sections of the following unsurveyed township:

• Copper River Meridian, Township 35 South, Range 62 East, Sections 10, 11, 14 and 15.

This Upland Mining Lease converted claims ADL numbers 309740 through 309742, 323364 through 323368, 503245 through 503248, 509891 through 509892, and 719182 through 719190 to lease ADL number 720953, containing approximately 682 acres.  The lease has a 20-year term from December 1, 2016.

Annual rental payments are determined according to AS 38.05.211 and 11 AAC 86.313.  The rent is to be paid each year in advance and is subject to adjustment under AS 38.05.211 (d).  All payments must be made payable to the Alaska Department of Revenue, unless otherwise specified.  Annual labor is required to be performed at an annual rate of $100 for each partial or whole 40 acres of each mining lease.

The 2021 rental was paid timely in the amount of $3,519.12, and the Upland Mining Lease is paid up through September 1, 2022.

3.6.4 Stoll/Mydske Lease

A lease agreement was concluded between Coeur Alaska and Maureen R. Stoll and Shari Mydske on September 29, 2005 (the Stoll/Mydske Lease), under which Coeur Alaska secured an undivided 25/36^th interest in and to the Falls and Diana patented lode claims, (USMS 880), comprising approximately 37.896 net acres.  These patented lode claims are part of the Jualin claims group.

The primary term of the Stoll/Mydske Lease was 10 years from execution, and included the right to renew and extend the Stoll/Mydske Lease for either:

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

• One additional term of five years; or

• Five additional successive terms of one year each.

• In 2020, this lease agreement was extended through September 4, 2035.

The annual payment due to the Lessors under the Stoll/Mydske Lease is $90,000. Stoll and Mydske were also due a net smelter return royalty on production, if any, for and in accordance with, the following:

• For gold, if the fair market value is:

o ≤ $375.00/oz:  3%;

o ≥$375.00 but ≤$450.00/oz:  4%;

o ≥$450.00/oz:  5%;

• For silver, if the fair market value is:

o ≤$6.00/oz:  3%;

o ≥$6.50 but l≤$8.00/oz:  4%;

o ≥$8.00/oz:  5%;

• For all other minerals:

o 5% of the net smelter return;

• For timber:

o fair market value;

• For gravel:

o fair market value.

The property area subject to this lease is not currently in production status but is being maintained through annual anniversary payments and other terms as set out in the agreement.

3.6.5 Slate Creek Cove Tideland Lease

Rights for ancillary infrastructure at Slate Creek Cove are secured through a State of Alaska Tideland Lease (ADL No. 107154; referred to as the Tideland Lease).  The Tideland Lease was granted with a term of 25 years from October 16, 2011 and is subject to annual lease compensation payments that are due each October 16.  Under the terms of the Tideland Lease, the lease compensation is subject to adjustment by the State of Alaska as lessor, upon the commencement of the sixth year of the term and every fifth year thereafter.

The lands controlled by and through the Tideland Lease are defined by the Alaska Tideland Survey 1655, located within Section 01, Township 36 South, Range 62 East, Copper River Meridian.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

3.6.6 Yankee Cove Lease

Coeur Alaska controls a 7.2-acre parcel of land, consisting of a lodge and marine moorage facilities, under a lease agreement, as amended, with Yankee Cove Development, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company.  The lease covers Lot P-1B and Accretion Land, U.S. Survey 571 according to Plat 2006-19 of the Juneau Recording District, situated within the following sections of the Copper River Meridian:

• Township 38 South, Range 64 East: Section 07.

The Yankee Cove lease is subject to a $16,012.39 per month payment.  The original lease agreement was effective as of June 1, 2007 and as amended and extended, this lease has been extended through December 31, 2030.

Coeur Alaska must pay property taxes to the City and Borough of Juneau under the Yankee Cove Lease.  These were up to date at the Report date.

3.6.7 Comet Beach Right-of-Way

The State of Alaska granted a right-of-way permit to the Comet Beach facility on April 15, 1995; this was amended on August 15, 1995.  The permit had a 30-year term on grant, expiring 2025, and is subject to an annual payment that is due on or before April 15, which is subject to adjustment by the State of Alaska as grantor, upon the commencement of the sixth year of the term and every fifth year thereafter.

The right-of-way covers Tracts A and B of Alaska Tidelands Survey 1481, located within Section 06, Township 35 South, Range 62 East, Copper River Meridian.

3.6.8 Jualin Mine Road Right-of-Way

Coeur Alaska holds a public, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way (JNU-16-05) from the State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and Department of Natural Resources for the purpose of authorizing construction and operation of the Jualin Mine Road (RST 4) from Slate Creek Cove to the Jualin Mine site for purposes of limiting public access and improving access to the Kensington operations.  The easement has a 10-year duration from May 6, 2016, unless terminated by the State.

Under JNU-16-005, Coeur Alaska is permitted to use the following described lands, subject to the stipulations described in the permit:

• Copper River Meridian, Township 35 South, Range 62 East: Sections 14, 15, 23, 24, 25, 36; and Township 36 South, Range 62 East: Section 01.

3.6.9 Echo Bay

Coeur Alaska acquired 100% ownership of the Kensington Group on July 7, 1995 from Echo Bay Mines Ltd. and Echo Bay Alaska (collectively, Echo Bay).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Pursuant to the acquisition agreement, Coeur Alaska is obligated to pay Echo Bay or its successors a scaled net smelter return royalty on 1 M troy ounces of gold production, after Coeur Alaska recoups the $32.5 million purchase price, plus (i) its construction and development expenditures incurred after July 7, 1995 in connection with placing the property into commercial production and (ii) certain operating, exploration, and development costs thereafter.

The royalty ranges from 1% at $400/oz gold prices to a maximum of 2½% at gold prices above $475/oz.  The patented lode and patented mill site claims, the unpatented lode claims, and the State of Alaska mining claim, are situated, either wholly or partially, within the following sections of the Copper River Meridian, inside the Juneau Recording District:

• Township 34 South, Range 62 East, Sections 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34;

• Township 35 South, Range 62 East, Sections 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 15, and 16.

3.7 Encumbrances

A credit agreement between Coeur, certain subsidiaries of Coeur (and Coeur Alaska), and Bank of America, N.A., was entered into on September 29, 2017, as amended (the “Credit Agreement”), under which a security interest in the Kensington property was granted.

Fee and Leasehold Deed of Trust with Power of Sale, Assignment of Production, Assignment of Leases and Rents, Security Agreement, Financing Statement, and Fixture Filing (the Instrument), executed by Coeur Alaska, Inc. as trustor and PRLAP, Inc., as trustee, and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent.  Under the terms of the Instrument, a lien was placed upon the legal and beneficial title in and to the lands comprising the Kensington property, securing a loan under the Credit Agreement, in an aggregate principal amount of up to $300 M.  The Instrument matures in March 2025, subject to the terms and/or the conditions of the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents, as defined in the Credit Agreement.

3.7.1 Permitting Requirements

The Kensington Operations are fully permitted (see also discussion in Chapter 17.4).

3.7.2 Permitting Timelines

There are no relevant permitting timelines that apply to the Kensington Operations; the operations as envisaged in the LOM plan are fully permitted.

3.7.3 Violations and Fines

There are no major violations or fines as understood in the United States mining regulatory context that have been reported for the Kensington Operations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

3.8 Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs

To the extent known to the QP, there are no other known significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the properties that comprise the Kensington Operations that are not discussed in this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-11

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

4.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

4.1 Physiography

The Project area lies at the southern terminus of the Kakuhan Range, where it merges with the Coast Range Mountains.  Terrain is generally rugged within the Project Area, extending from sea level to over 4,700 feet in elevation.  Topographic relief ranges from moderate, near sea level, to rugged at the base of Lions Head Mountain.  Four portals give access to the underground workings; the Kensington Portal at 964 ft. elevation, the Comet Portal at 792 ft. elevation, the 2050 Portal at 2,025 ft elevation, and the Jualin Portal at 926 ft. elevation.

Vegetation ranges from dense coniferous forest at sea level to dense brush and bare rock.  The tree line is between 3,000–3,500 ft in elevation, depending on slope aspect.

4.2 Accessibility

The Kensington Gold Mine is approximately 48 miles northwest of the capital city of Juneau, Alaska, and access to the Kensington and Jualin properties is by aircraft (helicopter or float plane) or boat from Juneau.  The mine, mill, and camp complex at Jualin is accessed by boat from Auke Bay, Yankee Cove, or Echo Cove to the Slate Creek Cove dock facility (north side of Berners Bay), then five miles by an all-weather gravel road.

Kensington can be reached via Lynn Canal to the support facilities near the 850 Portal on the eastern shore of Lynn Canal or by transit through the mine.  Access to existing mine workings (850 Level Portal) is by three miles of all-weather gravel road from Comet Beach or from the Jualin side of the property.

Heavy equipment and supplies can be brought to both sides of the Project directly from Juneau by barge.

4.3 Climate

Southeastern Alaska’s climate is the warmest and wettest in Alaska with over 50 inches of annual rainfall in the Juneau area.  The climate in the Project vicinity is maritime with a mean annual precipitation of about 85 inches at the lower mine elevations.  Annual snowfall varies from a few feet at sea level to greater than 10 feet at the 2050 Level Portal.

Mining operations are conducted year-round.  Snow removal equipment is required to keep site roads open during winter month.

4.4 Infrastructure

Juneau provides most of the services required to support the Kensington Operations, with other nearby communities including Haines and Skagway adding to the potential employment base.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 4-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The area has a long mining history and there are active mines in the area from which Coeur can realize vendor synergies and have access to local skilled miners and technical personnel.  The Alaska Marine Highway is the primary form of transportation between Juneau, Haines, and Skagway.  A dedicated crew ferry and buses transport mine employees to and from Kensington on a regular basis from Juneau.

Electrical power is supplied by diesel generators.

Water is sourced for process operations from recycled water from the paste plant, the concentrate and tailings thickeners, and water reclaimed from the tailings treatment facility (TTF), and supplemented when needed from a permitted allowance for freshwater extraction from Johnson Creek.

The Kensington Operations currently have all infrastructure in place to support mining and processing activities (see also discussions in Chapter 13, Chapter 14, and Chapter 15 of this Report).  These Report chapters also discuss water sources, electricity, personnel, and supplies.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 4-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

5.0 HISTORY

Mining activity in the Berners Bay district began in the late 1890s, primarily exploiting gold deposits hosted in the Jualin diorite.  The larger of the underground operations were focused on the Kensington, Comet, and Jualin deposits.  Mining activity had largely ceased by the end of the first world war.

A summary of the recent exploration and development history of the Kensington Operations is provided in Table 5‑1.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 5‑1:            Exploration and Development History Summary Table

Year	Company	Note
1960s	Alan Wright	Acquired claims in Kensington area; no work reported
1978	Hyak	Located claims along the core of the Jualin vein system
1980	Homestake Mining Co.	Optioned Kensington property from Alan Wright; no work reported
1980–1985	Placid Oil Company (Placid Oil)	Completed 10 core holes (3,731) on exploration targets and 45 core holes (18,366 ft) at Kensington. Identified gold mineralization in the upper levels of the Kensington deposit (Kensington Zone 30).
1983–1984	Bear Creek Mining Company (Bear Creek)	Explored Jualin property under option agreement with Hyak.  Completed extensive surface geologic mapping and sampling and drilled five core holes totaling 2,438 ft.  Terminated option at end of 1984.
1987	International Curator Resources (Curator)	Optioned Jualin property from Hyak.  Staked additional claims and drilled an additional 24 core holes (13,434 ft).  Commenced construction of an access road from Slate Creek Cove to the historic Jualin Mine portal
1987–1994	Kensington Joint Venture	Coeur Alaska acquired Kensington property from Placid Oil, formed Kensington Joint Venture (JV) with Echo Bay Mines (Echo Bay).  Echo Bay was JV operator. Completed a feasibility study in 1993.
1988	Curator	Joint ventured Jualin property with Granges Exploration Inc. (Granges).  Completed Slate Creek Cove to Jualin Mine Road.  Completed 27 core-drill holes (12,591 ft).
1989–1991	Placer Dome U.S. Inc. (Placer)	Joined Curator/Granges JV.  Completed 16 core holes (17,232 ft) in 1989 and 39 core holes (29,727 ft) in 1990.  Dropped option in 1991.
1993	Coeur Alaska	Joint ventured Jualin property with Curator.  Infill geochemical sampling, re-logging of selected core-hole intervals, and district-scale aerial photography.
1994		Surveying and aerial photography.  Completed new topographic map of the area between Slate Creek Cove and Independence Lake (north of Kensington).  Limited exploration targeting the northwest extension of the Jualin #4 vein.  Acquired a 100% interest in the Jualin property from Curator
1995		Purchased 100% interest in Kensington property by buying out the 50% Echo Bay interest.
1997		Redefined the Kensington project, completed feasibility study, revised engineering studies and cost estimates and completed permitting
1998		Completed an extensive exploration program in the Kensington area to identify additional mineralization
2004–2005		Airborne magnetic geophysical survey in Kensington district compiled by Wave Geophysics.
2005		Completed 34,035 ft of drilling at Kensington during the second half of 2005
2006		Completed 32,249 ft of drilling at Kensington
2007		13,420 ft of underground lateral development, including completion of the Jualin (now Kensington) Tunnel.  Construction of the Slate Creek Cove marine terminal, site access roads, bridges, a temporary personnel camp, crusher, crushed ore bin, mill facilities, flotation circuit, concentrate handling, and the diesel power generators.
2009		Construction of TTF recommenced after permit refused during initial construction in 2007.
2010		Mining operations commenced.
2012		High-sensitivity helicopter magnetic survey of 713 line-miles conducted by New-Sense Geophysics over the Kensington property. Mining and processing operations commence
2012–2017		Surface reconnaissance programs reviewing prospects in Berners Bay area.
2019		Millionth ounce produced from Kensington/Raven/Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

6.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT

6.1 Deposit Type

The deposits that comprise the Kensington Operations are considered to be examples of orogenic gold deposits.  Such deposits have many synonyms including mesothermal vein-style, mesozonal and hypozonal deposits, lode gold, shear zone-related quartz–carbonate deposits, or gold-only deposits.

Orogenic gold deposits occur in variably deformed metamorphic terranes formed during Middle Archean to younger Precambrian, and continuously throughout the Phanerozoic.  The host geological environments are typically volcano–plutonic or clastic sedimentary terranes, but gold deposits can be hosted by any rock type.  There is a consistent spatial and temporal association with granitoids of a variety of compositions.

Gold deposition occurs adjacent to first-order, deep-crustal fault zones.  Economic mineralization typically formed as vein fill of second- and third-order shears and faults, particularly at jogs or changes in strike along the crustal fault zones.  Mineralization styles vary from stockworks and breccias in shallow, brittle regimes, through laminated crack-seal veins and sigmoidal vein arrays in brittle-ductile crustal regions, to replacement- and disseminated-type orebodies in deeper, ductile environments.

Quartz is the primary constituent of veins, with lesser carbonate and sulfide minerals.  Sulfide minerals can include pyrite, pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite, galena, sphalerite, and arsenopyrite.  Gold is usually associated with sulfide minerals, but native gold can occur.

6.2 Regional Geology

The Berners Bay mining district forms the northern end of the approximately 200-km-long Juneau gold belt and is situated along the western margin of the Coast Mountains.

The district is underlain by Triassic mafic metavolcanic rocks of the Wrangellia Terrane.  The Cretaceous Jualin Diorite stock intrudes the western margin of the Wrangellia Terrane.  Both the Triassic metavolcanic rocks and the Jualin Diorite are overlain by Cretaceous-aged metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of the Treadwell Formation of the Gravina Belt.  The unconformity between the Jualin Diorite and the Gravina Belt metasedimentary rocks is marked by a Cretaceous conglomerate.

6.3 Local Geology

A local geology plan is provided in Figure 6‑1, and a summary stratigraphic column in Table 6‑1.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑1:          Regional Geology Map

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2018.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 6‑1:            Stratigraphic Column

Unit	Age	Comment
Wrangellia Terrain	Triassic	Mafic metavolcanic rocks northeast of the Jualin Diorite
Jualin Diorite	Cretaceous (106 Ma)	Hosts mineralization; intrudes the Wrangellia Terrane
Gravina Belt	Cretaceous	Metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks; unconformably overlies Jualin Diorite

6.3.1 Lithologies

The mafic metavolcanic rocks of the Wrangellia Terrane in the Berners Bay area are composed of a series of massive pyroxene and feldspar porphyritic flows that locally contain pillows and are weakly foliated near the contact with the Jualin Diorite (Miller et al., 1995).  Contact metamorphism of the basalt is readily visible within about 100 m of the Jualin Diorite (Knopf, 1911).

The Jualin Diorite is a 12 km² elongate, northwest-trending body.  Modal analyses (Miller et al., 1995) indicate it to be largely a quartz monzonite to quartz monzodiorite.  Quartz monzodiorite is the primary mineralization host.  It is medium-grained, granular hornblende–quartz monzodiorite with minor biotite ± magnetite and sphene.  Where cross-cut by shear zones, chlorite is common.  The Jualin Diorite is typically massive, jointed and blocky.  Joints commonly strike north to northwest and dip steeply to the east, or strike northwest to north–northeast and dip shallowly to the east (Miller et al., 1995).

The Treadwell Formation in the Berners Bay area consists of a folded sequence of maroon, green, and black metasedimentary rocks with local volcaniclastic layers.  The contact between the Wrangellia Terrane metabasalts and the Treadwell Formation is not exposed in the Berners Bay area.  Redman (1984) described an unconformity and depositional contact between Treadwell Formation rocks and the Jualin Diorite.  Because the Jualin diorite intrudes into the metabasalt, Treadwell Formation rocks are assumed to unconformably overlie the Wrangellia Terrane metabasalt (Miller et al., 1995).

6.3.2 Structure

All significant gold vein deposits are hosted in the Jualin diorite between the northwest-trending, first-order Coastal Shear Zone, a broad chlorite-bearing ductile, and syn-metamorphic shear zone that passes through tonalite of the Coast Plutonic complex approximately 1.2 miles east of the diorite, and the Gastineau Shear Zone, which is the largest of a set of ductile shear zones that pass through the Gravina belt to the southwest (Miller, 1995).

A zone of second- and third-order shears, termed the Kensington Megashear zone, appears to be the most significant influence on mineralized vein systems in the district (refer to Figure 6‑1).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Brittle faults and third-order shear zones host discrete and extensional quartz–carbonate veins and gold mineralization.

Discrete vein systems are defined by one or more through-going fault-fill quartz veins that typically host the highest-grade gold mineralization, dip moderately to steeply east, and typically range between a few inches to several feet in width.  Extensional veins consist of zones of numerous veins that mostly dip steeply to moderately west but are contained within an overall east-dipping system, and occur adjacent to, or at, terminations of fault-fill veins.

Figure 6‑2 illustrates stages in the development of a sigmoidal extension vein array and discrete shear vein system.

6.3.3 Alteration

In the Berners Bay area, mineral assemblages of chlorite–biotite + quartz in metabasalts and diorite indicate that metamorphism in this part of the Gravina belt and Wrangellia Terrane did not exceed greenschist facies (Miller et al., 1995).

Within the Jualin Diorite, the earliest alteration event is a late magmatic alkali metasomatism defined by sericitization and albitization of calcic plagioclase phenocrysts, and subsequent K feldspar flooding, much in the form of pegmatitic dikes.  Chlorite, magnetite, chalcopyrite, and bornite are accessory minerals associated with the early metasomatism.  A later, widespread propylitic event is dominated by calcite, epidote, and less commonly, sphene.

6.3.4 Mineralization

Mineralization of economic importance is restricted to veins within the Jualin Diorite.  Minor gold-anomalous quartz veins have been reported in Wrangellia Terrane metabasalt and in the metasedimentary rocks of the Treadwell Formation.

6.3.4.1 Discrete Veins

Discrete veins are hosted in shear zones that typically trend to the north or northwest, and are steeply easterly or northeasterly dipping.  East dipping fault-fill veins are the dominant structures in the Kensington deposit.

The quartz–pyrite–carbonate–sericite ± chlorite veins were developed along the plane of the shear zones, but also underwent continued deformation after emplacement.

Gold hosting shear zones have a northeast side up (reverse)–right lateral shear sense, typical of other shear zones in the deposit area.  If this shear sense is coeval with vein formation, it may provide predictable potential ore shoot control.  Evidence from previously-mined (e.g., Raven) and drill-tested veins suggests that shallow to moderate south–southwest plunging ore shoots occur at jogs and steps in the shear vein system, which is compatible with a dominantly reverse sense.

Discrete-style veins are observed in the Raven, Kensington Zone 41, Elmira, Eureka, Comet, and Jualin deposit areas.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑2:          Schematic Showing Development of Discrete and Extensional Vein Arrays

Note:  Figure from Rhys, (2010).  Extension vein arrays typically evolve from an en-echelon array of early extension veins (A), through gradual deformation into sigmoidal shapes (B) with shear movement along the core of the array. Eventually, the original extension veins may become partially (C) or fully (D) transposed into the shear zone, and a continuous shear vein may propagate along the shear zone. Later phases of extension veining may be superimposed onto the forming shear vein system (D).

6.3.4.2 Extension Veins

Mineralized zones of this style are defined by increases in concentration and abundance of quartz-carbonate-chlorite veins, and later quartz–iron-carbonate veining.

Extensional-style veins are recognized in the main Kensington deposit, the Eureka area and in the Elmira zone to the east.  Most of the veins in the Kensington system are the extensional veins, which occur approximately orthogonal to the discrete fault-fill veins. These extensional veins are higher density and lower grade, and mostly occur between stacked fault-fill veins.

6.3.4.3 Horizontal Veins

Horizontal to sub-horizontal thin (<1 ft) vein occurrences are found throughout the Kensington system.  These veins or ‘flats’ are locally continuous for the entire width of the economic zone, are often very high-grade and locally host lenses composed of almost 100% pyrite.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

6.3.4.4 Mineralization

Vein mineralization is characterized by gold and gold-silver telluride minerals with minor associated native gold.  Most of the gold is contained in calaverite (AuTe₂), which occurs in association with native gold as inclusions in and interstitial to pyrite grains and in microfractures in pyrite.  Trace amounts of petzite (Ag₃AuTe₂), coloradoite (HgTe) and altaite (PbTe) have also been noted.  Minor amounts of chalcopyrite are also present along with trace amounts of bornite, molybdenite, sphalerite, galena, and pyrrhotite.  The auriferous pyrite typically occurs in small to large blebs or clots within the quartz and quartz–carbonate veins (Miller, 1995).

6.4 Property Geology

Deposit descriptions are provided for the deposits with mineral resource estimates, namely the Kensington, Eureka, Raven, Jualin and Elmira deposits.

6.4.1 Kensington

6.4.1.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Kensington deposit consists of both discrete shear veins and a network of extensional veins.  It is about 3,500 ft long, 2,100 ft wide, ranges in thickness from 1–100ft, and is drill tested to about -600 ft depth.

A cross section showing the deposit location is provided in Figure 6‑3.

6.4.1.2 Lithologies

The deposit is hosted in the Jualin Diorite.

6.4.1.3 Structure

The Kensington vein system is a north-trending, steeply east-dipping network of quartz extension veins and shear veins. The overall veining style is semi-brittle, defined by both vein development (an overall brittle structural style), and the development of sigmoidal folds to vein sets and foliation (ductile style), which accommodate ductile displacement and shortening across the zone.

6.4.1.4 Alteration

Tan-colored sericite-carbonate-pyrite alteration is locally developed immediately adjacent to shear veins and vein arrays, but quickly gives way to surrounding chlorite-dominant, propylitic, alteration, which affects mafic minerals in the diorite (Rhys, 2008).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑3:          Mineralization Cross-Section, Kensington, Eureka, Raven, and Elmira

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

6.4.1.5 Mineralization

Mineralization occurs primarily as disseminated pyrite or pyrite seams and blebs, that range from 1–6 inches in thickness, and are contained within discrete shear veins or stacked networks of sheeted extensional veins. Minor amounts of chalcopyrite occur within the deposit as well.

6.4.2 Eureka

6.4.2.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Eureka deposit consists of both discrete shear veins and a network of extensional veins.  It is about 950 ft long, 900 ft wide, ranges in thickness from 1–30ft, and is drill tested to about -1,350 ft depth.  The Eureka deposit sits immediately in the footwall of the Kensington deposit and has many similar characteristics to the Kensington deposit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The deposit was included in the cross-section provided as Figure 6‑3.

6.4.2.2 Lithologies

The deposit is hosted in the Jualin Diorite.

6.4.2.3 Structure

The Eureka vein system is a north-trending, steeply east-dipping network of quartz extension veins and shear veins.  The overall veining style is semi-brittle, defined by both vein development (an overall brittle structural style), and the development of sigmoidal folds to vein sets and foliation (ductile style), which accommodate ductile displacement and shortening across the zone.  The parallel, hosting, structure of the Eureka deposit commonly contains gouge, <1 inch thick, on both the footwall and hanging wall.

6.4.2.4 Alteration

Tan-colored sericite–carbonate–pyrite alteration is locally developed immediately adjacent to shear veins and vein arrays, but quickly gives way to the surrounding chlorite-dominant, propylitic, alteration, which affects mafic minerals in the Jualin Diorite (Rhys, 2008).  The Eureka system as a whole also shows moderate amounts of oxide staining along the control structure.

6.4.2.5 Mineralization

Mineralization occurs primarily as disseminated pyrite or pyrite seams and blebs, 1–6 inches thick, which are contained within discrete shear veins or stacked networks of sheeted extensional veins. Minor amounts of chalcopyrite occur within the deposit.

6.4.3 Raven

The Raven vein is located about 2,000 ft west of the main Kensington deposit.

6.4.3.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Raven deposit is about 2,200 ft long, 1,500 ft wide, ranges in thickness from 1–20 ft, and is drill tested to about -250 ft depth.  It consists of one main, economic vein with associated splays that vary in grade.

A cross section showing the deposit location was provided in Figure 6‑3.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

6.4.3.2 Lithologies

The deposit is hosted in the Jualin Diorite.

6.4.3.3 Structure

The Raven vein is a north-trending, moderately east-dipping shear vein hosted within a sub-parallel, tightly foliated, ductile, shear zone.  Vein thickness and orientation is controlled by the prevalent C–S fabric (metamorphic fabric formed by the intersection of shear surfaces within rocks affected by dynamic metamorphism) of the shear with blow-outs occurring along jogs in the system.

6.4.3.4 Alteration

Alteration is minimal in the Raven and is dominated by pervasive, weak to moderate, propylitic alteration of the surrounding Jualin Diorite.

6.4.3.5 Mineralization

The shear vein contains pods, lenses, and shear bands of pyrite, petzite, calaverite, hessite, chalcopyrite, galena and native gold.  Mineralization occurs primarily as disseminated pyrite or pyrite seams and blebs, 1–6 inches thick, contained within the hosting discrete shear vein.

6.4.4 Jualin

6.4.4.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Jualin deposit is about 675 ft long, 1,025 ft wide, ranges in thickness from 1–15 ft, and has been drill tested to about -322 ft depth.  It consists of numerous stacked quartz veins but only Vein 2 and Vein 4 are currently considered economic.

A cross-section through the Jualin deposit is included as Figure 6‑4.

6.4.4.2 Lithologies

The deposit consists of stacked, discrete, quartz-veins hosted in the Jualin Diorite.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑4:          Mineralization Cross-Section, Jualin Deposit

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

6.4.4.3 Structure

The Jualin deposit consists of north-trending, steeply east-dipping shear veins hosted within a sub-parallel, tightly foliated, shear zone.  The vein thickness and orientation are controlled by the prevalent C–S fabric of the shear with blow outs occurring along jogs in the system.  Occasional west-dipping, gouge-filled faults offset the vein as much as 40 ft in a reverse left-lateral sense similar to the overall structure fabric of the region.

6.4.4.4 Alteration

Alteration is minimal in the Jualin and is dominated by pervasive, weak to moderate, propylitic alteration of the surrounding diorite with local zones of sericitic alteration and silica flooding.

6.4.4.5 Mineralization

The large veins (2 and 4) within the system tend to be high grade.  The veins dominantly contain pyrite, chalcopyrite, galena, sphalerite, and native gold.  Mineralization occurs as seams, blebs, and disseminated grains throughout the veins that rarely continues into the host diorite, and associated extensional veins are only weakly mineralized.

6.4.5 Elmira

The Elmira deposit is located about 2,500 ft east of the main Kensington deposit and consists of one main quartz vein with associated splays.

6.4.5.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Elmira deposit is about 2,200 ft long, 1,400 ft wide, ranges in thickness from 1–20 ft, and is drill tested to about -50 ft elevation.  A cross-section through the Elmira deposit was included in Figure 6‑3.

6.4.5.2 Lithologies

The deposit consists of stacked, discrete, quartz veins hosted in the Jualin Diorite.

6.4.5.3 Structure

While the veins are hosted within sub-parallel shear or fault fill structures, there does not appear to be interaction with other structures that control extents of veining and mineralization.  That is, the current interpretation does not identify significant faults or fractures oblique or orthogonal to the mineralized body that control vein width, extent, or mineralization.  Rather, vein width and extent appear to be purely a function of the dilatational extents within the C–S fabric of the hosting shear.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-11

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

6.4.5.4 Alteration

Alteration is dominantly weak propylitic alteration of the surrounding diorite with the exception of the immediate hanging wall to the main vein which shows strong alteration of plagioclase to muscovite with an associated decrease in competency.

6.4.5.5 Mineralization

Mineralization within the veins ranges from widely-disseminated pyrite to stringers, blebs, and pyrite breccias.  The mineralization does not seem to favor either the footwall or hanging wall, though it tends to be more abundant near margins or smaller internal structures within the veins.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-12

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

7.0 EXPLORATION

7.1 Exploration

7.1.1 Grids and Surveys

Coeur has used the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system using the North America datum of 1983 (NAD83) and 1927 (NAD27) for all exploratory surface mapping and geochemical since 2012.  The UTM Zone is Zone 8 North.

Coeur uses a local NAD 1927 State Plane Alaska ZONE 1 FIPSZONE:5001 coordinate grid for locating surface and underground drill holes.  All data collected in UTM NAD83 and UTM NAD27 are converted into NAD27 Alaska State Plane using a coordinate transformation before being imported into the Project acQuire database.

7.1.2 Geological Mapping

Surface reconnaissance geological mapping was completed by Coeur personnel at scales ranging from regional scale 1:2,400 to 1:240 scales used in some detailed outcrop maps.

Underground mapping is completed at either 1:240 or 1:120 scales depending on the complexity of geology in the area.

7.1.3 Geochemistry

Soil geochemical sampling was conducted with shovels and hand augers to collect 8–12 oz ounces of C horizon soils.  Sample points were spaced in 25 northerly rows with 100 ft spacings and 15 easterly columns with 50 ft spacings.

Analysis used an unidentified multi-element analytical procedure.  A total of 330 samples were collected in the period May–June, 2021. Sample results indicate that the material sampled does not accurately reflect mapping due to the C soil horizon being dominated by glacial till.  Areas near Johnson Creek support bedrock mapping.  Two areas of interest were identified as potential clusters to use for target generation; however, they are derived from the till samples and due to the proximity to the Fremming shaft are likely contaminated with mined material.

7.1.4 Geophysics

Two airborne geophysical surveys were completed:

• 2004–2005:  Wave Geophysics of Boulder Colorado; airborne magnetic survey;

• 2012:  New-Sense Geophysics; high-sensitivity helicopter magnetic survey; 713 line-miles of total field magnetic data.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The 2012 data are better resolution than the 2004–2005 survey information.  Geophysical data were used for anomaly delineation, structural evaluation, and identification of lithologic trends.

7.1.5 Qualified Person’s Interpretation of the Exploration Information

The Kensington area has been extensively explored for more than 100 years and a considerable database has developed as a result of both exploration and mining activities.  By volume the database is primarily built from core logging data.  Codes are used for alteration and structural intensity and continuous numerical variables returned from assays.  Information is synthesized from this data using statistical modelling with geological inferences.  Statistical models are sometimes tested with simulations and/or additional sampling.

7.1.6 Exploration Potential

Kensington is a target-rich environment given that it is an orogenic gold system that can reasonably be expected to have an overall vertical and lateral extent of several thousand feet.  Using this interpretation, it is necessary to test offsetting relationships whenever it appears that a vein is closed, down dip.

Exploration at Kensington is broken into four tiers:

• Tier one:  consists of targets in currently-mined areas, and includes Kensington, Jualin, Raven, and Eureka targeting extension in both down-dip, laterally primarily to south, and up-dip to the limit of mining defined by the crown pillar;

• Tier two:  consists of prospects with advanced exploration.  Currently this encompasses the Elmira and Johnson vein systems, and the hanging wall Jennifer target associated with Raven;

• Tier three:  ready-to-drill targets.  Targets include Comet/Seward, Valentine/Fremming, Big Lake, and Gold King targets.  These require additional drilling and interpretation work to be advanced;

• Tier four:  the lowest tier are prospects that require additional field work to generate a drill ready target.  Field work will typically consist of ground truthing and soil sampling on prospects in dilation zones identified by interpretation of geophysical surveys.  Depending on results of work conducted in each tier a decision is made to either drop or advance the prospect to a higher or lower tier or remove it completely from the prospect hierarchy.

Figure 7‑1 shows the locations of the main exploration areas.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑1:          Exploration Areas

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

7.2 Drilling

7.2.1 Overview

The drill database for the Project area contains 7,182 core drill holes (2,386,698 ft).  Drilling is summarized in Table 7‑1.

Core drilling supports mineral resource estimation. Drilling that supports each mineral resource estimate is summarized in Table 7‑2 to Table 7‑5.

7.2.2 Drilling Excluded for Estimation Purposes

Drill holes assayed at the onsite laboratory, which include most production stope holes and utility holes are not included in the resource estimation.  Any drill holes that have known spatial issues due to missing survey data are not included in the database.  Drill holes may have some incomplete survey data and still be included if they do not cause any spatial issues with the resource domains and are validated by surrounding drill holes.  Incomplete drill holes that did not reach final depth for any variety of reasons are also not included in the estimate.

7.2.3 Drilling Completed Since Database Close-out Date

Drill holes that were completed in 2021 that were not used to support mineral resource estimates were not included because they did not have assay data returned before the database close out dates.  A total of 19 exploration holes from Raven, nine exploration holes from Elmira and 15 exploration holes from Kensington were not included in the mineral resource estimation support

The QP reviewed the available information on the omitted drilling to determine what impact there could be to the block model and geological and grade interpretations.

Drilling at Kensington and Elmira was conducted to potentially support confidence category upgrades from inferred to indicated.  All drill holes appear to have intersected the mineralized zone, and should provide support for confidence category upgrades within the drilled area.

Drilling at Raven was designed to extend the known mineralization in the upper Raven area and test the Jennifer target.  The drilling in the upper Raven area appears to have mixed success, with some drill holes not intercepting mineralization or veins.  In the Jennifer area, drill results were encouraging and will be used to support an initial mineral resource estimate during 2022.

7.2.4 Drill Methods

Much of the drilling prior to 2013 was performed by Connors Drilling of Montrose, Colorado.  Timberline Drilling Inc. of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho is the current drilling contractor and responsible for the majority of the holes drilled from 2013 to date.  Swick Drilling completed some of the drilling from January 2017 to July 2017.  Where known, drill rigs used by Timberline included  Atlas Copco U8 class drills for underground and Boart Longyear LF70 or Sandvik DE140 class for surface drilling. Equipment used by prior contractors is not recorded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑1:          Project Drill Summary Table, Pre-Coeur Drilling

Year	Company	Exploration		Jualin		Kensington		Raven		Total
		Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet
Early 1980s	Placid Oil	7			1,489	38	16472			45	18,624
Late 1980s to early 1990s	Echo Bay Kensington Venture	19		3	949	406	222,250	19	9,919	444	249,221
1983	Bear Creek			2	13,434					3	1,489
1984	Bear Creek			24	12,591					2	949
1987	Curator			27	17,232					24	13,434
1988	Curator			16	25,147					27	12,591
1989	Placer Dome			33	4580					16	17,232
1990	Placer Dome			6						33	25,147
1991	Placer Dome									6	4,580
Total		26	19,20	111	75,422	444	238,722	19	9,919	600	331,346

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑2:          Project Drill Summary Table, Coeur Drilling

Year	Exploration Drilling				Definition Drilling		Stope Drilling		Total
	Surface		Underground
	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet	Holes	Feet
1993	3	2,414							3	2,414
1998			76	57,094					76	57,094
2005	3	5,171			74	34,118			77	39,289
2006	15	13,455			34	32,099			49	45,554
2007	3	2,181			122	12,458			125	14,639
2009			14	4,086	71	5,215			85	9,301
2010			47	21,534	173	36,236	158	18,546	378	76,316
2011			37	20,105	391	53,829	99	7,636	527	81,569
2012	13	7,641	56	54,192	239	73,513	151	9,839	459	145,185
2013	29	29,361	109	61,857	118	36,611	319	19,838	575	147,666
2014	47	57,731	76	43,006	150	56,227	385	24,413	659	181,376
2015	8	8,361	74	28,920	134	43,997	366	21,397	582	102,675
2016	10	11,285	154	80,551	112	37,500	150	10,873	426	140,208
2017	44	62,867	115	74,327	169	56,165	155	13,923	483	206,603
2018	11	7,183	115	86,493	191	39,924	240	21,372	557	154,969
2019	8	6,366	141	121,431	167	63,745	84	7169	424	204,699
2020	47	44,511	129	112,162	96	35,050	77	4,868	352	196,589
2021	15	18,464	158	140,932	84	27,205	15	1,395	272	187,996
Total	256	276,991	1,301	906,690	2,325	643,892	2,199	161,296	6,109	1,806,146

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑3:          Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Kensington

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Placid Oil	Exploration	1981	Core	5	1,616
Placid Oil	Exploration	1982	Core	9	4.325
Placid Oil	Exploration	1983	Core	14	5,664
Placid Oil	Exploration	1984	Core	1	564
Placid Oil	Exploration	1985	Core	8	4,193
Echo Bay	Exploration	1988	Core	4	1,251
Echo Bay	Exploration	1989	Core	91	46,902
Echo Bay	Exploration	1990	Core	202	111,292
Echo Bay	Exploration	1991	Core	32	25,587
Echo Bay	Exploration	1992	Core	76	58,488
Coeur	Exploration	1998	Core	22	8,200
Coeur	Exploration	2005	Core	45	33,356
Coeur	Exploration	2006	Core	28	25,885
Coeur	Definition	2007	Core	100	10,167
Coeur	Definition	2009	Core	71	5,215
Coeur	Definition	2010	Core	334	55,574
Coeur	Exploration	2011	Core	2	4,873
Coeur	Definition	2011	Core	387	55,531
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	4	11,606
Coeur	Definition	2012	Core	245	77,103
Coeur	Exploration	2013	Core	77	47,056
Coeur	Definition	2013	Core	118	36,611
Coeur	Exploration	2014	Core	61	39,534
Coeur	Definition	2014	Core	108	48,513
Coeur	Exploration	2015	Core	74	28,920
Coeur	Definition	2015	Core	121	40,623
Coeur	Stope	2015	Core	111	7,803
Coeur	Exploration	2016	Core	83	41,843
Coeur	Definition	2016	Core	78	28,005
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	36	20,687
Coeur	Definition	2017	Core	136	43,730
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	55	39,794
Coeur	Definition	2018	Core	178	36,868

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Coeur	Stope	2018	Core	89	9,148
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	9	8,462
Coeur	Definition	2019	Core	151	55,119
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	6	7,582
Coeur	Definition	2020	Core	89	33,850
Coeur	Exploration	2021	Core	6	6,305
Coeur	Definition	2021	Core	13	6,103
Total				3,279	1,129,627

Table 7‑4:          Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Eureka

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Placid Oil	Exploration	1981	Core	3	1,057
Placid Oil	Exploration	1982	Core	2	605
Echo Bay	Exploration	1989	Core	2	1,250
Coeur	Exploration	1998	Core	25	11,257
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	48	25,662
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	31	10,814
Coeur	Definition	2021	Core	36	9,259
Total				147	59,904

Table 7‑5:          Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Raven

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Echo Bay	Exploration	1989	Core	13	7,167
Echo Bay	Exploration	1990	Core	6	2,752
Echo Bay	Exploration	1992	Core	56	32,025
Coeur	Exploration	2010	Core	43	20,120
Coeur	Exploration	2011	Core	20	7,864
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	22	12,289
Coeur	Exploration	2013	Core	26	12,008
Coeur	Exploration	2014	Core	56	11,160

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Coeur	Definition	2015	Core	13	3,374
Coeur	Exploration	2016	Core	18	9,475
Coeur	Definition	2016	Core	33	10,539
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	11	4,685
Coeur	Definition	2017	Core	27	11,496
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	33	17,682
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	33	21,713
Coeur	Definition	2019	Core	16	8,626
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	18	18,008
Total				448	219,008

Table 7‑6:          Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Jualin

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Bear Creek	Exploration	1983	Core	3	1,489
Bear Creek	Exploration	1984	Core	2	949
Curator	Exploration	1987	Core	24	13,434
Curator	Exploration	1988	Core	27	12,591
Placer Dome	Exploration	1989	Core	16	17,232
Placer Dome	Exploration	1990	Core	30	23,649
Placer Dome	Exploration	1991	Core	4	3,699
Kensington Venture	Exploration	1993	Core	3	2,414
Coeur	Exploration	2005	Core	3	5,171
Coeur	Exploration	2006	Core	15	13,455
Coeur	Exploration	2007	Core	3	2,181
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	8	6,145
Coeur	Exploration	2013	Core	21	26,076
Coeur	Exploration	2014	Core	49	60,679
Coeur	Exploration	2015	Core	8	8,361
Coeur	Exploration	2016	Core	45	28,840
Coeur	Exploration	2017	Core	116	112,656
Coeur	Definition	2017	Core	12	3,502

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	3	4,838
Coeur	Definition	2018	Core	8	2,261
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	7	6,309
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	26	23,982
Coeur	Exploration	2021	Core	2	2,097
Coeur	Definition	2021	Core	36	12,116
Total				471	394,122

Table 7‑7:          Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates, Elmira

Company	Purpose	Year	Type	No. Drill Holes	Feet
Placid Oil	Exploration	1984	Core	1	387
Echo Bay	Exploration	1991	Core	3	5,545
Echo Bay	Exploration	1992	Core	4	8,342
Coeur	Exploration	1998	Core	28	37,291
Coeur	Exploration	2012	Core	14	21,975
Coeur	Exploration	2018	Core	15	21,503
Coeur	Exploration	2019	Core	41	56,630
Coeur	Exploration	2020	Core	72	77,623
Coeur	Exploration	2021	Core	77	87,182
Total				255	316,477

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑2:          Project Drill Collar Location Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-11

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑3:          Drill Section, Section, Kensington

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-12

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑4:          Drill Collar Location Section, Raven

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-13

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑5:          Drill Collar Location Section, Jualin

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-14

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑6:          Drill Collar Location Plan, Elmira

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Core sizes included BQ (1.44 inch (36.5 mm) core diameter), NQ (1.875 inch (47.6 mm)), and HQ (2.5 inch (63.5 mm)).

7.2.5 Logging

Core logging is conducted by contract geologist through Geotemps working year-round two weeks on two weeks off rotations.  No core is oriented.

Core loggers visually identify lithological intercepts, alteration type and intensity, mineralization type and concentration, vein composition, style, density, and structural type and intensity.  Maximum and minimum intercept angles are collected for all planar features.  Geotechnical data collection is discussed in Chapter 7.4.

Core is photographed before sampling but after logging.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-15

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Sampling is required for all projected intercepts and is broken out by mineralized zone lithology.  Samples are collected from the wall rock on either side of the intercept to capture the alteration halo.

7.2.6 Recovery

Core recovery is generally high because of the competent nature of the Jualin Diorite.  Approximately 95% of drilled intervals have core recovery >95%.  Poor recovery (<50%) occurs in approximately 1% of intervals and is generally localized to shear zones.

7.2.7 Collar Surveys

Surface collar surveys are taken using an RTK global positioning system (GPS) SPS 985 instrument.  Underground surveys are recorded using a Trimble SPS 930.  Before the widespread adoption of GPS for collar surveying, some collar shots were taken by triangulating off the AK NAD 27 SP Z21 grid topographical map.

7.2.8 Down Hole Surveys

Downhole surveying prior to 1989 was conducted using Sperry Sun-type downhole survey instruments.  Drill holes from 1989 to 2010 were surveyed with Fotobor or Reflex Maxibor downhole survey instruments.  Between 2010 and 2018, downhole surveys were collected using Reflex Gyro or Reflex Maxibor downhole survey instruments.  From 2018 to 2021, downhole surveys were collected using Reflex Gyro, Axis Champ, and most recently IDS Gyromaster downhole survey instruments, and results were quality checked by Coeur geologists.

7.2.9 Comment on Material Results and Interpretation

Drilling from underground drill stations is oriented to intersect the vein systems at as steep an angle as possible (refer to drill sections in this Chapter).  Typically, drilled intercepts are longer than the true width.

Drilling and surveying were conducted in accordance with industry standard practices at the time and provide suitable coverage of the mineralization.  The collar and downhole survey methods used provide reliable sample locations.  Logging procedures provide consistency in descriptions.

In the opinion of the QP, the quantity and quality of existing drilling data are sufficient for resource estimation at Kensington.

Factors that may impact the accuracy and reliability of drill results, such as sample location and sample recovery, have been adequately addressed through the use of appropriate surveying methodologies and careful drilling practices to ensure maximum recoveries.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-16

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

7.3 Hydrogeology

7.3.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

In 2017 a hydrogeological field investigation was completed for the Jualin deposit by Golder Associates Inc. (Golder).  Golder is independent of Coeur.  The work involved in situ well response testing and installation of vibrating wire piezometers on nine core holes as well as long-term discharge tests and groundwater quality sample collection.  This work helped Coeur understand expected water flow rates in the Jualin area as mining progressed.

Two holes were drilled in the Elmira area and packer instruments installed to collect hydrological data.  Flow testing and shut-in testing were completed.  Holes were grouted once testing was completed.  Two additional holes farther to the north will also be drilled and tested using the same procedures.

There are no active efforts to dewater the workings.  A dewatering well was attempted in Jualin with the goal of getting below the lowest planned development; however, a known major fault was encountered at 400 ft and the hole was lost.  A pump was installed but by then the workings were below the pump and the effect was minimal.  The well has since been abandoned.

7.3.2 Comment on Results

The water capture and treatment requirements are well understood, and water is monitored and treated to support permit requirements.  Current water data are sufficient to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan.  Additional information on water as it relates to the mining method is provided in Chapter 13.2.

7.4 Geotechnical

Core recovery and rock quality designation (RQD) measurements are collected when the core is logged.  Core recovery is the percentage of recovered core in a core run (core block to core block) and is measured for every core run.  RQDs are taken by measuring and summing all core pieces greater than 0.33 ft (two times core diameter) in a run to calculate percent RQD.

7.4.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

Mine Fill Services, Inc. issued a report in early 2008 that outlined the suitability of the Kensington tailings for paste fill.  Particle size distribution, paste rheology, and unconfined compressive strength of cured paste were determined.  All tests showed that Kensington tailings were favorable for paste production.

There are currently no active geotechnical monitoring sites in place.  The Raven hanging wall was monitored with extensometers while the shrinkage stopes were being mined.  Monitoring was stopped after the stopes were backfilled with paste.  No ground falls have occurred since production began and as such there is no register for rock events in place at this time.

7.4.2 Comment on Results

A combination of historical and current geotechnical data, together with mining experience, is used in the operations.  The data are suitable for use in mine planning.  Additional information is provided in Chapter 13.1.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-17

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

8.0 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY

8.1 Sampling Methods

8.1.1 Muck

Where necessary, muck samples are taken to guide mining activity and route muck haulage to appropriate stockpiles.  These samples are taken after the muck piles are washed down.  Three imaginary lines are drawn over the muck pile; one sample is gathered from each line. An ore control geologist walks each line while grabbing fist-sized pieces of muck representative of the portions of ore to waste in the pile. The pieces are put in a medium canvas bag until the geologist collects approximately 22 lb of material. The process is repeated on the remaining two lines for a total of three samples.

8.1.2 Channel

Channel sampling has been conducted since 2014.  Depending on location in the mine, one to three horizontal rows of 1-ft tall boxes are painted on the face from rib to rib.  Each box is drawn to respect geologic boundaries and variations in mineralization, and each box marks the boundaries of a separate channel sample.  Samples are taken by the mine geologist across the width of each box.  Each sample is placed in a canvas bag with a unique sample number correlated to the box number.  Box numbers are painted in each box before a face photo is taken.  After the sample is assayed and passed internal quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols, grades are recorded on the face photos.

8.1.3 Core

The basic procedure and protocol for taking surface and underground drill core samples has remained consistent throughout the Coeur and pre-Coeur drill programs. In 2012, core logging changed from manual data recording on paper to recording data directly into a digital database.

Sample intervals are 1–5 ft long and based on the distribution of vein density, vein type, mineralization, and any other geological feature needing assay definition.

Whole core samples are taken from production drill holes (infill and stope holes).  Stope definition holes are sampled top to bottom unless otherwise directed by mine geology.  Kensington and Raven infill definition holes are only sampled where geologically warranted.

Since June 2013, all exploration drill core has been cut with a saw, retaining half for reference.  Half-core samples are taken from all exploration drill holes, where geologically warranted.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

8.2 Sample Security Methods

Coeur technicians handled the transfer of samples to the Kensington laboratory and external laboratories by following chain-of-custody procedures.  Exploration and definition drill samples were shipped off-site in shipping containers in canvas bags shrink-wrapped to pallets.  Once the container was full, it was closed with a chain-of-custody seal and released with shipping paperwork to the Kensington warehouse to load on the barge to Juneau.

Shipments consisted of two to three pallets of canvas bags placed into polyester super-sacks with zip-tie chain-of-custody seals securing the sacks closed.  A shipping notification was submitted to the Kensington warehouse crew to facilitate the transfer of the container to Juneau via the barge.  Once at the yard in Juneau, the pallets were transported by Lynden Trucking to the Acme Juneau laboratory where they were received by Acme personnel.  Acme’s chain-of-custody is initiated once the laboratory receives the samples.

Standard reference materials (standards), coarse rejects, and returned pulps are kept in locations with restricted access.

Half-core samples are stored within their original boxes at a designated area on the mine site. Sampled core is released to the geotechnician assistants for cutting at the core cutting shed.

Authorized Coeur personnel have access to the preparation and analytical laboratory job status websites to track jobs and samples as they move to, within, and from a given laboratory.

8.3 Density Determinations

The independent Inspectorate laboratory located in Reno, NV completed density measurements for the 2010 drilling program, which provided 1,600 analyses from the Kensington deposit. This data was used in the current resource model.

Prior to 2020, density was applied using the data collected in 2010.  From 2020 onward samples of the mineralized domains that were flagged for density analysis were analyzed at the independent laboratory Bureau Veritas Commodities Canada Ltd. (Bureau Veritas) by gas pycnometer analysis.  Prior to starting this program in 2020, a sensitivity study was completed comparing results from the classic submersion method and gas pycnometer which showed that the gas pycnometer analysis returned results within acceptable limits given the competent nature of the rock.  As of December 1, 2021, the density database includes the following sample counts: 1,371 from the Elmira complex, 393 from Eureka, 220 from Jualin, 2,243 from Kensington (includes 2010 samples), and 196 from Raven.

8.4 Analytical and Test Laboratories

Laboratories used that support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimations or operations are summarized in Table 8‑1.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 8‑1:          Analytical and Sample Preparation Laboratories

Laboratory	Period Used	Independent	Accreditation	Comment
Barringer	1980–2004	Yes	Unknown
Bondar-Clegg	1980–2004	Yes	Unknown
Cone Geochemical	1980–2004	Yes	Unknown
ALS Chemex	2005–2009	Yes	ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 17025:1999	Sample preparation in Fairbanks, Alaska and Reno, Nevada. Analysis in Vancouver, Canada
American Assay Laboratories (AAL)	2005–2009	Yes		Sparks, Nevada
Inspectorate America Corporation (Inspectorate)	2010–March 2012	Yes	ISO 9001:2008	Sparks, Nevada
Pinnacle Analytical Laboratories	March–May 2012	Yes	ISO 17025:2005	Lovelock, Nevada
ALS Chemex	May 2012–January 2017	Yes		Reno, Nevada Analysis of exploration and definition drill holes to 2015; thereafter analysis of exploration drill holes
AAL	late 2013 to mid-2015	Yes	ISO/IEC 17025:2005	Check/umpire laboratory
Acme	2013	Yes		Juneau, Alaska Sample preparation for exploration and definition drill holes, prior to shipment to ALS Chemex for analysis
Bureau Veritas Commodities Canada, Ltd. (formerly Acme)	Late 2015	Yes	ISO 9001: ISO/IEC 17025:2005	Vancouver, British Columbia Analysis of definition drill holes
Bureau Veritas	January 2017 onward	Yes	ISO 9001: ISO/IEC 17025:2005	Juneau, Alaska (preparation laboratory) and Vancouver, British Columbia Primary laboratory for all exploration and definition drill hole samples

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Laboratory	Period Used	Independent	Accreditation	Comment
ALS Chemex	January to Q2 2017	Yes		Secondary laboratory
McClelland Laboratories (McClelland)	Q2 2017 onwards	Yes	ISO 17025	Replaced ALS Chemex as secondary laboratory
Kensington site laboratory	2006–date	No	Not accredited	Analyses mine development heading samples and stope definition drill hole samples

8.5 Sample Preparation

Sample preparation methods included:

• Muck and channel samples; stope definition drill samples:  crush to 80% passing 12 mesh; pulverize to 90% passing 140 mesh;

• Core:

o 1987–2005:  no information recorded in the database for sample preparation;

o 2005–2010:  crush to >70% passing 10 mesh (2 mm); pulverize to >85% passing 200 mesh;

o 2010–2013:  crush to 80% passing 10 mesh (2 mm); pulverize to 90% passing 140 mesh, 85% passing 200 mesh, or 90% passing 150 mesh (depending on laboratory);

o 2013 onward:  crush to ≥70% passing 2 mm; pulverize to 85% passing 200 mesh.

Samples submitted to McClelland, the secondary laboratory, were already pulverized.

8.6 Analysis

Gold was assayed using the following methods:

• 30 g fire assay with gravimetric finish;

• 30 g fire assay with atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) finish;

Over-limit assays (>0.292 oz/st Au) were by fire assay with a gravimetric finish (FA530).  Over-limit assays >1 oz/st were metallic screen determinations (method code FS632) until August 2018 when the practice was discontinued after evaluating the difference in accuracy between metallic screen data against traditional fire assay.  Metallic screen assays require a separate sample processed from reject material before assaying.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Multi-element analyses included:

• 2013 to mid-2014:  four-acid digestion with inductively-coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) finish (ALS method ME-ICP61), 33-element suite;

• Mid 2014 to 2017:  four-acid digestion with ICP-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) finish (ALS method ME-MS61), 48-element suite;

• 2017 to present:  four-acid ICP-ES/MS (Bureau Veritas MA200), 45 element suite.

McClelland (secondary laboratory) used the same analytical methods as Bureau Veritas (primary laboratory), with the same over-limit triggers applied.

8.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

Historically, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures consisted of routine check assays of original pulps, check assays of duplicate pulps from coarse rejects and use of geochemical blanks to determine contamination during sample preparation. Metallic-screen analysis was performed prior to August 2018 to check for coarse gold.

Current procedures include insertion of custom certified reference materials (CRMs), blanks, and duplicates (field, crush, pulp, and analytical).  Field duplicates are taken only for exploration core.  Insertion rates are as follows:

Insertion rates of 5% for standards, 5% for blanks and 2.5% for duplicates.

From 2010–2021 standards were sourced from Rocklabs, Inc., Barry Smee, Canadian Resource Laboratories, Ltd., and Ore Research & Exploration (OREAS).  Custom CRMs produced by ORE Research & Exploration were implemented in May 2020.  Standards assaying within ±3 standard deviations of the mean were considered to be acceptable.  Standard results outside of these limits were considered to be failures and were re-assayed according to company protocols and procedures.  The mean and standard deviations as provided in the certificate for each standard were used to determine acceptability criteria until December 2020.  In 2021 the primary and secondary laboratories’ internal results for each standard were used to set the mean and standard deviation for the performance gates.  The certified round robin values were used to determine performance in relation to the analytical laboratory’s level of bias.

Some blank material was collected from barren core from the district and some blanks were sourced from Rocklabs during early QA/QC programs.  In late 2019 blank material was sourced by an aggregate/gravel supplier AGGPro (Juneau, AK) from Washington state.  Blank samples assaying within ±5 standard deviations of the mean were considered to be acceptable.  When a blank sample failed, it was either re-assayed, or it was accepted with a comment in the database documenting the reason for its acceptance.

Assay duplicate results from January 2019 to June 2021 as found in the quality control audit performed by Qualitica Consulting Inc. are as follows:

• Analytical duplicates: 94% report within ±25%;

• Pulp duplicates: 88% report within ±25%;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

• Crush Duplicates: 82% report within ±25%;

• Field Duplicates: 30% report within ±25%.  The low reproducibility is expected given the nature of the deposit.

Check assays were selected at 5–10% of sample assays received monthly and were sent to an independent ISO certified secondary analytical laboratory for analysis.  From January 2019 to June 2021, check assay analysis included a total of 2,231 sample pulps.  In September 2021, a quality control audit performed by third-party consultants Qualitica Consulting Inc. showed a strong comparison with 80% of duplicate pairs falling within ±25%.

8.8 Database

Data collected are stored in an acQuire Geologic Information Management System.  The system stored drill hole data (collar location, orientation, downhole survey, assay, and documentation) mine development sample results, surface exploration results, and channel sample results.

Aside from geological data, the database includes information about contractor daily activities, daily drilling footages, and core logging rates.

Automatic checks built into acQuire flag possible errors and deny permission for the questionable data to be added to the database without authorization from the database manager.  Once data were successfully imported, all necessary QA/QC functions were performed.  After passing QA/QC checks, geologists verified data by cross-referencing drillhole/face photos and updated existing models for geologic continuity.

All business-critical systems are backed up once per day by a backup software specifically designed for virtual environments.  Backups are sent to a primary target that then synchronizes to a secondary target in a different building.  All data files were stored on the company's server in addition to the acQuire database.  Once drill hole data were received and QA/QC checks passed, the drill hole was locked by the designated person.  Once locked, no adjustments could be made to the drill hole data in acQuire unless permitted by the designated person by unlocking the hole.  Hard copies of drill hole logging data, assay certificates, and QA/QC checks are kept on site in filing cabinets or in boxes at the town warehouse.

8.9 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures

In the opinion of the QPs, the sample preparation, analyses, and security for samples used in mineral resource estimation are acceptable, meet industry-standard practice, and are acceptable for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation and mine planning purposes.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

9.0 DATA VERIFICATION

9.1 Internal Data Verification

The Coeur drill hole database includes data from 1981 to the Report date.  The database was audited internally and externally a number of times in support of mineral resource estimates and in support of technical report filings.

In 2013, a detailed and systematic internal audit was initiated, with the goal of checking and verifying all data from original records.  Most of the data were successfully verified.  Some inconsistencies and errors were identified and corrected.  Unverifiable data were removed.

Data evaluation and verification are performed in multiple steps throughout the life of a drill hole until it is “locked down” in the database.  Drill collar surveys and downhole surveys are viewed in plan and section and checked against development workings.  Contractor shift reports are compared to actual total drill hole footages.  Core logging data and core photos are checked for completeness.  Assay data and QA/QC data are reviewed.  Data that have not been reviewed and passed QA/QC analysis do not pass the verification process.  The system is configured so when assay data are imported, the data remain with a pending status until a geologist accepts the data, preventing the usage of data that have not undergone QA/QC review.

Once all data are complete and have been reviewed by the responsible persons, they are reviewed by a senior geologist and signed off on by the Chief Geologist or their designate and locked to further editing.  A Drill Hole Amendment Form is required to document and approve any changes after the lockdown of the drill hole. This process ensures the security of all aspects of the drill hole database.

The confidence in the current drill hole database is therefore considered by the QP to be high, and the QP considers the data in the database to be adequate to support mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates.

9.2 External Data Verification

The Kensington drill hole database, including survey data, logging information, assays, and QA/QC results, has been audited by external consultants such as SRK (1997), Lynn Canal Geological Services (1999; specific to downhole survey data), Dr. Jeffrey Jaacks (2008), KPMG (2013), Dave Heberlin (2016 & 2018), and Qualitica Consulting (2021).

The most recent audit, completed on data collected since 2019, found no concerns with the data or QA/QC policies.  A review of the database that included reviewing lockdown comments on historic holes that are included in the resource estimation and careful review of recent drill programs focusing on survey data, appropriate lithological logging, and accurate sampling methods.  The review supported the use of the data for Mineral Resource Estimation given that:

• No significant sample biases were identified from the QA/QC programs;

• Sample data collected adequately reflect deposit dimensions, true widths of mineralization, and the style of the deposit;

• External reviews of the database were completed in support of acquisitions, feasibility-level studies, and of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, producing independent assessments of the database quality. No significant problems with the database, sampling protocols, flow sheets, check analysis program, or data storage were noted.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

9.3 Data Verification by Qualified Person

Data verification performed by the QP included:

• Reviewed the results of imported data and conducted QA/QC in acQuire on all assay data from 2007–present;

• Reviewed the quarterly QA/QC reports of gold assay data from 2018–present;

• Reviewed all geologic data logged and entered into acQuire from 2007 to present;

• Participated in the 2018 project to review all Jualin drilling to validate inclusion in resource estimation;

• Participated in the 2019 project to review all Elmira drilling to validate inclusion in resource estimation;

• Reviewed the results of a 5–10% check of gold assays performed by an independent laboratory from 2013 to present;

• Conducted drill hole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports;

• Signed off as the geologist for the 2015–present definition drill holes; signed off on all drill holes for 2021 drilling;

• Worked at the Kensington Operations from 2014–present.

9.4 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

The process of data verification for the Project was performed by external consulting firms from 2007 to present, and by Coeur personnel including the QP.  The QP reviewed the appropriate reports.  The QP considers the level of verification to be reasonable and is of the opinion that no material issues would have been left unidentified from the programs undertaken.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

10.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

10.1 Test Laboratories

Independent metallurgical testwork facilities used over the Project life included Pittsburgh Minerals and Environmental Technology, Inc., Cannon Microprobe, SGS Vancouver, Colorado Minerals and Research Institute, Maxim Technologies, Inc., Dawson Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc., Knelson Research & Technology Center, Hazen Research, Inc., and G & T Metallurgical Services Ltd.

The Kensington Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

There is no international standard of accreditation provided for metallurgical testing laboratories or metallurgical testing procedures.

10.2 Metallurgical Testwork

10.2.1 Historical Testwork

Prior to mill construction at Kensington, six different companies conducted extensive metallurgical testing, including comminution gravity separation, flotation (flash flotation, locked-cycle testing, and various reagent additions), and cyanidation of concentrates (Table 10‑1).

Gold in the Kensington deposit was present as calaverite (AuTe2), and in the form of free gold or microscopic, “invisible” gold.  The relationship of calaverite to pyrite was either as a rind, an inclusion, or a separate, discrete particle.  Particles ranged from 3–20 µm in size.

Test results were used as a guideline for plant design.  Metallurgical testing results were consistent in the recommended methods of process design, extraction, and recovery estimates.

10.2.2 Jualin Testwork

Gold in the Jualin deposit was in the form of native gold and highly liberated gold minerals, and exhibited high gold–sulfide associations.

In April 2017, two sets of test holes were drilled to provide composites of Jualin Vein #4 mineralization for flotation testwork using similar operating conditions to those in use in the Kensington plant flotation circuit, and gravity testwork.  Flotation results achieved good recoveries for all tests performed (>96%). Initial mass pulls were high, then tapered down to match the Kensington mill performance.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑1:          Historical Metallurgical Testwork

Title/Year	Facility	Description
Mineralogical Analyses of a Gold Ore Sample from the Kensington Mine, June 1998	Colorado Minerals and Research Institute	Overall mineralogy, liberation/locking characteristics, particle size analyses.
Metallurgical Analyses of a Gold Ore Sample from the Kensington Mine, October 1998	Colorado Minerals and Research Institute	Gold recovery through flotation, gravity and cyanide leaching, cyanide leaching of concentrate, flocculants testing, reagent addition, pilot plant trial, dewatering.
Reagent Analyses Report, 2000	Maxim Technologies, Inc.	Investigation of flotation reagent performance and optimization and reagent degradation study.
Laboratory Metallurgical Testing, 2004	Dawson Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc.	Centrifugal concentrator, reagent addition and dosage optimization, flash flotation, 2nd stage grinding, locked cycle.
Gravity Recoverable Gold, 2005	Knelson Research & Technology Center	Determine the gravity recoverable gold content and distribution through particle size distribution.
Kensington Flotation Tails Project, 2008	Hazen Research, Inc.	Evaluation of alternative tailings disposal methods through pilot plant simulations.
Kensington Flotation Pilot Plant for Kensington Mill, 2009	Hazen Research, Inc.	Evaluation of proposed process designs performance using pilot plant.
Evaluations of Gold Recoveries from Gravity and Flotation Concentrates, 2009	Hazen Research, Inc.	Chemical analyses, mineralogy, intensive cyanidation of gravity concentrate, oxidation roasting, pressure oxidation of flotation concentrates and CIL cyanidation.
Production of Concentrates from a Bulk Sample of Kensington Ore, 2010	G & T Metallurgical Services Ltd.	Pilot plant simulation of proposed process design. Evaluating metallurgical response of ore sample to previously developed process conditions.

In November 2017, a bulk sample of Jualin ore was run through the mill to determine actual mill performance.  Flotation recovery results that averaged 95.8% recovery indicated that the existing circuit could recover the Jualin material with minimal gold losses.

It was decided to refurbish the existing Knelson concentrator in the plant in case material from Jualin did not mirror the results obtained from the Jualin Vein #4 mineralization.

10.3 Recovery Estimates

Recovery estimates based on multiple metallurgical test programs using ore samples representative of the Kensington and Jualin ore bodies have correlated very well with results obtained in the flotation circuit since shortly after mill start up.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Recovery factors estimated are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data.  Recovery factors are appropriate to the mineralization types and the selected process route.

The LOM recovery forecast is 95.3%.

10.4 Metallurgical Variability

Metallurgical test results obtained from several testwork programs conducted during the past 20 years show low variability between several different locations with respect to gold recovery.  This low variability has been verified through the actual mill performance.

Tests were performed on samples that are representative of the deposit and its mineralogy.

10.5 Deleterious Elements

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known deleterious elements that could have a significant adverse effect on the mine economics.

10.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

Industry-standard studies were performed as part of process development and initial plant designs.  Subsequent production experience and focused investigations, as well as marketing requirements, have guided mill process improvements and changes.

Testwork programs, both internal and external, continue to be performed to support current operations and potential improvements.

The QP reviewed the information compiled by Coeur, as summarized in this Chapter, and reviewed reconciliation data available to verify the information used in the LOM plan.

Based on these checks, in the opinion of the QP, the metallurgical testwork results and production data support the estimation of mineral resources and mineral reserves and can be used in the economic analysis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

11.1 Introduction

Mineral resources were estimated for the Kensington, Eureka, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira deposits/veins.  Database closeout dates for the estimates are:

• Kensington: November 1, 2021;

• Eureka: October 12, 2021;

• Raven: October 16, 2021;

• Jualin: October 17, 2021;

• Elmira: December 1, 2021.

Examples of the models for each area are provided in Figure 11‑1 to Figure 11‑6.  While the Eureka deposit is estimated separately from the Kensington deposit due to its small size and close proximity to Kensington, it is reported with the Kensington estimate.

11.2 Exploratory Data Analysis

All deposits were subject to exploratory data analysis methods, which could include histograms, cumulative probability plots, box and whisker plots, and contact analysis.

Statistics were compiled and compared for raw drill hole data, length weighted drill holes, composites, declustered composites, and capped declustered composites to ensure that the grade distribution and true mean of the system were conserved through the estimation process.  The coefficient of variation was analyzed to determine if the domaining produced sufficient stationarity for the estimate.

11.3 Geological Models

Mineralization is primarily hosted in north-trending and east-dipping structures and is hosted by mesothermal quartz veins and vein arrays.  The Kensington mineralization is primarily hosted by vein arrays with some discontinuous discrete quartz veins.  Jualin, Elmira, and Raven are narrow vein deposits hosted by large discrete quartz veins.

The Kensington resource model currently contains a total of 36 estimation domains.  The Eureka resource model has two estimation domains.  The Raven resource model has five estimation domains.  The Jualin resource model has four estimation domains.  The Elmira resource model has three estimation domains.  Each estimation domain is based on lithology and mineralization. 

Three-dimensional (3D) models of each estimation domain were created using Leapfrog Geo geological modeling software which uses implicit modeling to define geological shapes.  This method requires significant diligence in geologic investigation before the procedure can be completed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑1:          Kensington and Raven Model Areas

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑2:          Kensington Model

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Gray lines are drill traces.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑3:          Eureka Model

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Gray lines are drill traces.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑4:          Raven Model

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Gray lines are drill traces.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑5:          #4 Vein Model, Jualin

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Gray lines are drill traces.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑6:          Elmira Model

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Gray lines are drill traces.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Estimation domains that inform Elmira, Raven, and Jualin resource estimates are generated by selecting quartz vein intercepts regardless of the grade.  Each lithological intercept is visually checked by reviewing photos of the drill core.  Boundaries of each domain are snapped as close to the lithological breaks as possible.

11.4 Density Assignment

Density determinations discussed in Chapter 8.3 were used in interpolation.  Each domain and the diorite host rock have a density factor.  Densities are then applied in the model using a script during the post-processing phase.  The script assigns each block the density of the estimation domain the block is in.  If the block is outside of an estimation domain, the block is assigned the density determined for the diorite host rock.

11.5 Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions

Due to variability of grade and outliers in the composite samples, grade capping is implemented. Grade capping reduces grade smearing and prevents the resource model from locally overestimating due to high-grade samples.  Caps were determined by a study of the exploratory data analysis, general statistics, histograms, log normal probability plots and reconciliation data:

• Kensington:  composites samples were capped at values ranging from 1.5–6.0 oz/st Au, depending on the statistics of the zone groups.  Eureka was capped at 0.7–1.2 oz/st Au, depending on statistic of each domain.

• Raven:  composite samples were capped at values ranging from 0.3–3.0 oz/st Au, depending on the statistics of each estimation domain.

• Jualin:  composite samples were capped at values ranging from 1.0–3.5 oz/st Au, depending on the statistics of each estimation domain.

• Elmira:  composite samples were capped ats ranging from 0.5–1.0 oz/st Au, depending on the statistics of each estimation domain.

11.6 Composites

For the Kensington and Eureka resource models, drill data were composited at 5 ft down-the-hole intervals by estimation domain using the run-length method.  The 5 ft interval was selected because it was the largest sample length allowed.  This helps prevent sample splitting during compositing.

When compositing for Elmira, Raven, and Jualin, full vein width composites were created using the run-length method to accurately represent the full vein grade.  All samples that fall within the boundaries of a specified domain will be broken on the domain contact and composited into a single sample as specified by the boundaries of the estimation domain.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

11.7 Variography

Due to the highly variable nature of the deposits, variograms were produced using normal scores transform then back-transformed to produce the final variogram.

For the Kensington and Eureka deposits, variograms were calculated for separate groupings of domains or zones where individual domains had insufficient number of samples to construct a valid variogram model.  The resulting variogram for each zone was applied during estimation for all domains within each zone.

Downhole variograms for the narrow vein deposits at Elmira, Jualin, and Raven were not possible due to the use of single, vein-width composites.  The nugget of these deposits was set using the major, semi-major variograms and knowledge of the deposit.

11.8 Estimation/Interpolation Methods

The Kensington parent block size was 10 x 10 x 10 ft and was sub-blocked down to 1 x 5 x 5 ft at domain boundaries, as needed.  Estimation was done in the parent blocks, therefore the sub-blocks, which lay within the same parent block, had the same grade.  The sub-block size was chosen to provide resolution along domain boundaries, as many of the domains have high angle dips.  Gold grades were estimated into blocks using ordinary kriging (OK) on the 5 ft composite grades.  Blocks within each domain were estimated using only composites from within that domain.  The primary search ellipse was a product of variography and reconciliation.  Each zone group had different dimensions based on results from the respective variogram models.  The major axis was oriented roughly north–south, congruent with the average vein strike orientation.  The semi-major axis dipped at -55º.  Strike and dip were varied for each zone group depending on domain and vein orientations.  The minimum and maximum samples were set to six and 12, respectively.  The maximum number of samples per drill hole is set to 2 thus requiring a minimum of two drill holes to complete the estimation.

Eureka is estimated using inverse distance weighting to the second power (ID2).  This was done due to the lack of sample data to support a robust variogram.  In addition, during sensitivity studies, it was found that OK created an overly smooth estimate that did not respect the composite grades.  A parent block size of 25 x 25 x 25 ft was sub-blocked to 5 x 5 x 0.1 ft at domain boundaries, as needed.  A search ellipse of 300 x 200 x 100 ft was used to include sufficient samples for the estimation and to control local high-grade samples.  The search ellipse used an anisotropic bearing and dip to better represent undulations in the estimation domains.  The plunge of the ellipse was set at 36º to represent the visual trends in composite grades of the estimation domains.  The minimum and maximum number of samples were set to three and nine respectively.  The maximum number of samples per drill hole was set to two, thus requiring a minimum of two drill holes to complete the estimation.

Elmira, Jualin, and Raven, being narrow vein deposits using single vein-width composites, required a seam model (2D) to better represent each of the estimation domains.  The seam model was rotated to the same strike and dip of the deposit and used a single block to fill the width of each domain.  These deposits were estimated using ID2.  The method does not have the tendency to smooth grade across blocks, but rather respects grade variability constrained within parent blocks which prevents the erroneous spreading of metal content.  Blocks within each domain were estimated using only composites from within that domain.  Each of these deposits also used an over-exaggerated minor axis for the search ellipse.  Its purpose was to reduce artifacts in an estimation domain that has undulatory characteristics.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The Elmira estimate used a parent block size of 25 x 25 x 25 ft to help constrain the grade from erroneously spreading grades, while also giving a greater resolution.  Parent blocks were sub-blocked to 5 x 5 x 0.5 ft where needed.  A search ellipse of 600 x 300 x 1000 ft was used.  The search ellipse used an anisotropic bearing and dip to better represent undulations in the estimation domains.  The plunge of the ellipse was set at 10º to represent the visual trends in composite grade of the estimation domains and supported by the variogram.  The minimum and maximum samples were set to three and nine.

Estimation for the Jualin zone used a parent block size of parent block size of 25 x 25 x 25 ft for Vein 4 to help constrain the grade from erroneously spreading grades, while also giving a greater resolution.  The other domains in the deposit used parent blocks of 50 x 50 ft.  Parent blocks were sub-blocked to 5 x 5 x 0.1 ft where needed.  A search ellipse of 300 x 150 x 1000 ft was used.  The search ellipse for Vein 4 had a bearing of 340º, a plunge of -20º and a dip of -50º.  The search ellipse for Vein 2 had a bearing of 320º, a plunge of -15º and a dip of -55º.  The minimum and maximum samples were set to three and nine.

The Raven estimate used a parent block size of parent block size of 25 x 25 x 25 ft to help constrain estimates from erroneously spreading metal content while also giving a greater resolution.  The parent blocks were sub-blocked to 5 x 5 x 0.1 ft where needed.  A search ellipse of 300 x 150 x 1,000 ft was used.  The search ellipse used an anisotropic bearing and dip to better represent undulations in the estimation domains.  The plunge of the ellipse was set at 60º to represent the visual trends in composite grade of the estimation domains.  The minimum and maximum samples were set to three and 12.

11.9 Validation

The block models were validated using some or all of the following methods:

• Visually by stepping through sections and comparing the raw drill data and composite data with the block values;

• Comparison of model statistics to drill data;

• Swath plots;

• Mill to model reconciliation.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

11.10 Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimate

11.10.1 Mineral Resource Confidence Classification

Mineral resources at Kensington and Eureka are classified as follows:

• Measured:  average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is <50 ft, and the block estimation uses two or more drill holes and six or more samples;

• Indicated:  average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is <75 ft, and the block estimation uses two or more drill holes and three or more samples;

• Inferred:  average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is ≤150 ft, the block estimation uses two or more drill holes and two or more samples;

• Unclassified: all other blocks.

Mineral resources at Raven are classified as follows:

• Measured:  average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is ≤50 ft, the block estimation uses two or more drill holes and uses six or more samples;

• Indicated:  average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is ≤75 ft, and the block estimation uses one or more drill holes and two or more samples;

• Inferred: average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is ≤150 ft and uses one or more drill holes;

• Unclassified: all other blocks.

The estimation domain Vein 2 at Jualin is classified as:

• Indicated: average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is ≤100 ft and the block estimation uses two or more samples;

• Inferred: average distance from an estimated block to the composites used is ≤150 ft and the block estimation uses two or more samples;

• Unclassified: all other blocks.

For the estimation domain Vein 4 at Jualin, the entire domain is considered to be indicated.  This is because of the consistent geology of the discrete vein.  In addition, a large amount of production and reconciliation data have been collected giving a high confidence in this domain.

Mineral resources at Elmira are classified as follows:

• Measured: average distance from an estimated block to composited used is ≤ 50 ft and uses six or more samples;

• Indicated: average distance from an estimated block to composites used is ≤ 100 ft and uses four or more samples;

• Inferred: average distance from an estimated block to composites used is ≤ 200 ft and uses two or more samples;

• Unclassified: all other blocks.

For all deposits, any block that falls within the crown pillar or within 200 ft of surface topography, are unclassified as “these blocks will not be mined”.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-11

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

11.10.2 Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification

Following the drill spacing analysis that classified the mineral resource estimates into the measured, indicated and inferred confidence categories, uncertainties regarding sampling and drilling methods, data processing and handling, geological modelling, and estimation were incorporated into the classifications assigned.  The areas with the most uncertainty were assigned to the inferred category, and the areas with fewest uncertainties were classified as measured.

11.11 Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction

11.11.1 Input Assumptions

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was completed that assessed likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal, and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.

Mineral resources were confined within conceptual mineable shapes that used the assumptions in Table 11‑1.  The estimate assumed that the preferred mining method will be longhole stoping, and that the minimum mining width was 5 ft.

11.11.2 Commodity Price

Commodity prices used in resource estimation are based on long-term analyst and bank forecasts, supplemented with research by Coeur’s internal specialists.  An explanation of the derivation of the commodity prices is provided in Chapter 16.  The estimated timeframe used for the price forecasts is the three-year LOM that supports the mineral reserve estimates.

11.11.3 Cut-off

The mineral resources are reported using variable gold cut-off grades that range from 0.116–0.164 oz/t Au.  The cut-off grades for Kensington, Eureka, Raven, and Elmira were calculated as follows:

The individual values and associated units for the above equation were reported in Table 11‑1.

The Jualin cut-off grade was calculated as above but with a 5% deduction taken per the royalty agreement with Hyak Mining.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-12

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑1:          Input Parameters to Cut-off Grade Determination, Mineral Resources

Parameter	Units	Value
Gold price	$/ozAu	1,700
Concentrate refining	$/oz Au	32.00
Gold recovery	%	95.00
Gold payable	%	97.50
Mining cost	$/st mined	90.91–150.73
Mineralization costs:  crushing & process	$/st processed	46.93
Shipping	$/oz sold	28.00
G&A	$/st processed	38.83
Au cut-off grade	oz/st	0.120–0.175

11.11.4 QP Statement

The QP is of the opinion that any issues that arise in relation to relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction can be resolved with further work.  The mineral resource estimates are performed for deposits that are in a well-documented geological setting.  Coeur is very familiar with the economic parameters required for successful operations in the Kensington area; and Coeur has a history of being able to obtain and maintain permits, social license, and meet environmental standards.  There is sufficient time in the three-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecast for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, testwork, and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates.

11.12 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300, and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ.

All models were depleted through 2021.  Planned mining shapes were used for the month of December as the depletion was estimated on December 7, 2021.

Measured and indicated mineral resources are summarized in Table 11‑2 and inferred mineral resources in Table 11‑3.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Ms. Rae Keim, P.Geo., a Coeur Alaska employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-13

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑2:          Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Zone/Deposit	Mineral Resource Classification	Tons (kst)	Au Grade (oz/st)	Au Contained Ounces (koz)	Cut-off Grade (Au oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Kensington	Measured	2,809	0.23	639	0.125	95
	Indicated	1,056	0.23	242	0.125	95
	Subtotal measured & indicated	3,865	0.23	880	0.125	95
Raven	Measured	29	0.52	15	0.125	95
	Indicated	31	0.29	9	0.125	95
	Subtotal measured & indicated	61	0.40	24	0.125	95
Jualin	Measured	0	0.00	0	0.175	95
	Indicated	59	0.59	35	0.175	95
	Subtotal measured & indicated	59	0.59	35	0.175	95
Elmira	Measured	0	0.00	0	0.120	95
	Indicated	84	0.31	26	0.120	95
	Subtotal measured & indicated	84	0.31	26	0.120	95
Eureka	Measured	22	0.29	6	0.125	95
	Indicated	34	0.31	11	0.125	95
	Subtotal measured & indicated	56	0.30	17	0.125	95
Total measured and indicated mineral resources	Total measured	2,860	0.23	660	0.120–0.175	95
	Total indicated	1,263	0.26	323	0.120–0.175	95
	Total measured & indicated	4,124	0.24	983	0.120–0.175	95

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-14

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑3:          Gold Inferred Mineral Resource Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Zone/Deposit	Mineral Resource Classification	Tons (kst)	Au Grade (oz/st)	Au Contained Ounces (koz)	Cut-off Grade (Au oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Kensington	Inferred	1,043	0.22	229	0.125	95
Raven	Inferred	66	0.20	13	0.125	95
Jualin	Inferred	32	0.65	21	0.175	95
Elmira	Inferred	667	0.25	166	0.120	95
Eureka	Inferred	106	0.24	25	0.125	95
Total inferred mineral resource	Total	1,915	0.24	455	0.120–0.175	95

Notes to accompany mineral resource tables:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as at December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Ms. Rae Keim, P. Geo., a Coeur Alaska employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

4. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional longhole underground mining; gold price of US$1,700/oz; reported above a variable gold cut-off grade that ranges from 0.120–0.175 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 95%; gold payability of 97.5%, variable mining costs that range from US$90.91–150.73/st mined, process costs of US$46.93/t processed, general and administrative costs of US$38.83/t processed, and concentrate refining and shipping costs of US$60.00/oz sold

5. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-15

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

11.13 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:

• Metal price and exchange rate assumptions;

• Changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent grade cut-off grade;

• Changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones;

• Changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions;

• Density and domain assignments;

• Changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions;

• Changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to underground mine designs constraining the estimates;

• Assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-16

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

12.1 Introduction

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.

The mine plans assume underground mining using longhole open stoping, trackless equipment and combination of cemented rock fill (CRF), waste, and paste backfill.  Target mining rates are capped at approximately 2,000 tons per day, which is the permitted capacity limit.

12.2 Development of Mining Case

The mineral reserve estimate is based on the following inputs and considerations:

• Mineral resource block model estimating tonnage and gold grade;

• Cut-off grade calculations;

• Stope and development designs;

• Geotechnical and hydrogeological information;

• Depletion from previous mining;

• Consideration of other modifying factors.

Maptek Vulcan mine planning software was used to for the creation of the mining shapes and Deswik mine planning software was used for the interrogation of the mining shapes against the block model.

The surveyed “as-built” mining excavations were depleted from the designed solids and the resource block model.

Mining, geotechnical, and hydrological factors were considered in the estimation of the mineral reserves.

12.3 Designs

Mining excavations (stopes and ore development) were designed to include mineralization above the cut-off grade.  These excavations were then assessed for economic viability.  In addition to the mining cut-off grade, an incremental cut-off grade (excluding the mining cost) was calculated to classify mineralization mined as a result of essential development to access higher-grade mining areas.  Mineralization above this cut-off grade will add value, and is therefore, included as process plant feed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

12.4 Input Assumptions

Estimates of development rate are based on measured advance rates in Kensington, Raven, Jualin, and Elmira and any expected variation from manpower or equipment considerations.  Stope production rates are based on measured values of production since the start of operations.

Transverse stoping is the main extraction method used in the Main Kensington center area.  Stope outlines are created on 40 ft centers using the standard level spacing (75 ft in Kensington, 35–50 ft in Raven, 35 ft in Jualin, and 60 ft in Elmira) and the reserve model.  Longitudinal stope designs were used in the fringe regions of Zone 10, much of Zones 12, 30, 35, and 50, much of Elmira, and all of Raven area and represent a majority of the tons in the LOM plan.  These areas of longitudinal stoping are too narrow (>30 ft) to convert to transverse stoping, based on the requisite infrastructure required.  Together with the conventional transverse and longitudinal stopes, there are also some blind back stopes, depending on the reserve model and stoping horizon.

12.5 Ore Loss and Dilution

Recovery and dilution percentages along with dilution grade were derived from stope reconciliation data from 2012–2020 for Kensington, Raven, and Jualin.  Kensington mining performance has been applied to Elmira for planning and reserve purposes and will be updated as Elmira moves through production.  Reserve estimates and mine plans include dilution and recovery as shown in Table 12‑1.

Unintentional mining of paste backfill, or CRF has not been excessive to date, though instances of sloughing of material during, and post, blast have been observed in secondary stopes, adding 1–3% additional waste dilution in a few select stopes.

Beginning in 2020 dilution grades were calculated using reconciliation data instead of relying on the original dilution grade of 0.063 oz/st that was calculated by a third-party consultant at the beginning of the Project.  Also beginning in 2020, a dilution grade was applied to stopes in the Raven and Jualin using reconciliation data instead of assuming 0.0 oz/st due to minimal or no mineralization extending past the vein.

12.6 Cut-off Grades

Cut-off grades are determined through historical costing for Kensington, Raven and Jualin.  Cut-offs range from 0.142–0.201 oz/st.  The cut-off includes consideration of concentrate and shipping costs, mining costs, crushing and process costs, general and administrative (G&A) costs, gold recovery and gold payability (Table 12‑2).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑1:          Dilution Rate and Dilution Grade

Zone	Development/ Stope	Recovery (%)	Dilution (%)	Grade (oz/st)
Kensington	Development		15	0
	Stope	85	20	0.087
Raven	Development		15	0
	Stope	85	20	.06
Elmira	Development		15	0
	Stope	85	20	.087
Jualin	Development		15	0
	Stope	85	20	.06

Table 12‑2:          Input Parameters to Cut-off Grade Determination, Mineral Reserves

Parameter	Units	Value
Gold price	$/oz	1,400
Concentrate refining	$/oz Au	32.00
Gold recovery	%	95
Gold payable	%	97.5
Mining cost	$/ore ton mined	90.91–150.73
Processing	$/ore ton mined	46.93
G&A	$/ ore ton mined	38.83
Shipping	$/oz sold	28.00
Au cut-off grade	oz/t	0.142–0.201
Marginal AuEq cut-off grade	oz/t	0.037-0.040
Gold price	$/oz	1,400

Some blocks are classed as incremental material, which does not include the G&A or mining costs, as those costs are incurred regardless of what the resource classification may be.  This material must be removed from the mine and its destination,  the waste pile or low-grade stockpile, is determined by the requirement that it carries only the mining and refining costs.  This material is only processed when mill tonnage needs to be sustained, but where it does not offset other above cut-off grade material.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

12.7 Commodity Price

The gold price used in mineral reserve estimation is based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The estimated timeframe used is the three-year LOM that supports the mineral reserves estimates.  The gold price forecast for the mineral resource estimate is US$1,400/oz. The QP reviewed the forecast as outlined in Chapter 16.

12.8 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves were classified using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the process plant.  Mineral reserves are reported in Table 12‑3.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

12.9 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

• Operating costs:  higher or lower operating costs than those assumed could also affect the mineral reserve estimates.  While the trend over 2014–2020 showed operating cost reductions at the Kensington Operations, this trend could reverse and costs could increase over the life of the Project, due to factors outside of the company’s control;

• Dilution:  additional dilution has the effect of increasing the overall volume of material mined, hauled and processed.  This results in an increase in operating costs and could result in mineral reserve losses if broken stocks are diluted to the point where it is uneconomic to muck, haul, and process the material and the broken stocks are abandoned.  The operations have developed a number of methods to control dilution, including the installation of stope support, a flexible mine plan with the ability to limit stope wall spans, and good development practices that avoid undercutting the stope hanging wall.  To assist in these efforts, site geotechnical reviews are carried out regularly by external consultants;

• Geotechnical: geotechnical issues could lead to additional dilution, difficulty accessing portions of the ore body, or sterilization of broken or in situ ore.  In addition to the controls discussed in the dilution section there are significant management controls in place to effectively mitigate geotechnical risks;

• Hydrogeological:  unexpected hydrogeological conditions could cause issues with access and extraction of areas of the mineral reserve due to higher than anticipated rates of water ingress;

• Geological and structural interpretations:  changes in the underlying geology model including changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones, changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions, and density and domain assignments could result in changes to the geology model upon which mineral reserve estimate is based;

• Permitting and social license:  inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain social license to operate could result in the inability to extract some or all of the mineral reserve.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑3:          Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve Statement at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)

Zone/Deposit	Mineral Reserve Classification	Tons (kst)	Au Grade (oz/st)	Au Contained Ounces (koz)	Cut-off Grade (Au oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Kensington	Proven	595	0.18	109	0.143	95
	Probable	337	0.17	56	0.143	95
	Subtotal proven & probable	932	0.18	165	0.143	95
Raven	Proven	9	0.46	4	0.143	95
	Probable	1	0.33	0	0.143	95
	Subtotal proven & probable	10	0.44	5	0.143	95
Jualin	Proven	0	0.00	0	0.201	95
	Probable	48	0.33	16	0.201	95
	Subtotal proven & probable	48	0.33	16	0.201	95
Elmira	Proven	0	0.00	0	0.142	95
	Probable	273	0.21	58	0.142	95
	Subtotal proven & probable	273	0.21	58	0.142	95
Eureka	Proven	52	0.22	12	0.143	95
	Probable	31	0.21	6	0.143	95
	Subtotal proven & probable	83	0.22	18	0.143	95
Total proven and probable mineral reserve	Total proven	656	0.19	125	0.142–0.201	95
	Total probable	690	0.20	136	0.142–0.201	95
	Total proven & probable	1,346	0.19	261	0.142–0.201	95

Notes to accompany mineral reserve tables:

1. The Mineral Reserve estimates are current as at December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of deliver to the process plant.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Peter Haarala, RM SME, a Coeur employee.

3. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional underground mining; gold price of US$1,400/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 0.142-0.201 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 95%; gold payability of 97.5%, variable mining costs that range from US$90.91–150.73/st mined, process costs of US$46.93/st processed, general and administrative costs of US$38.83/st processed, and concentrate refining and shipping costs of US$60.00/oz sold.

4. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

13.0 MINING METHODS

13.1 Introduction

The Kensington Operations use conventional underground equipment and mining methods.  The mine has been operating since July 2012.

13.2 Geotechnical Considerations

Geotechnical conditions underground at Kensington are excellent.  No Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) reportable ground falls have occurred at Kensington during the current phase of operation that began in 2009.  This is attributable to a stable, competent rock mass, appropriate ground support standards, and proper installation of ground support.

The interaction of the mining sequence on the overall stability of the hanging wall has been investigated by an outside geotechnical expert.  Minor non-reportable occurrences have taken place within open stopes where personnel are not exposed.  Regular additional evaluations by an outside geotechnical expert will be ongoing to assess any additional changes that may be necessary.

Raven workings have been extended, using guidance from an outside geotechnical expert, with excellent results to date.  No MSHA-reportable ground falls have been identified in Raven, and more visits by an outside geotechnical expert will allow changes as necessary while Coeur proceeds with operations in this region of the mine.

The existing ground support guidelines were confirmed to be appropriate for use in the Jualin deposit.  Pillars were recommended in the stoping regions to reduce potential hanging wall dilution and have been shown to be effective.  The ground support guidelines document will continue to be updated as new information and understanding of the geotechnical properties is gained.

13.3 Hydrogeological Considerations

There are few hydrogeological aspects to be considered beyond natural inflow of water to the workings within the Kensington and Raven orebodies.  This inflow is monitored, and the water is captured within the workings to be either treated, or discharged, as per Coeur’s permit requirements.  Water quality, including suspended solids and mining-introduced contaminants is measured, and the water is treated accordingly, to meet discharge limits.

Some water ingress is associated with regional fracture systems.  There is a measurable variance in flow within the mine which corresponds with seasonal precipitation events.  Water influx decreases with depth as fractures become tighter and fewer, and less weathering of the fractures has occurred over time.  As the up-ramp is extended, inflows of 200–300 gpm are expected while mining above the K2050 Level.

The Jualin deposit is near surface, with several faults and mineralized veins having surface expression.  These structures collect runoff water and, together with the historic Jualin mine workings acting as a reservoir, channel water to the areas under mining development.  An upgraded dewatering system was installed in 2020 and is expected to meet or exceed water handling requirements through the Jualin LOM.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Water in flow from future Elmira production is expected to be minimal in the bottom two thirds of the deposit.  No major water courses were encountered during extensive diamond drilling activities.  Diamond drill holes collared in the historic 2050 level show water inflows from the upper reaches of the Elmira deposit.

As mining advances and more open ground is created, mine in flows have increased.  During the freshet there may be more water in flow than currently permitted for discharge.  In this case water is impounded in mined out voids in the Raven and lower Kensington and discharged as in flows decrease and capacity is available in the water treatment plant.

A permit from the State of Alaska is expected in May 2022 to increase the discharge limit from 3,000 gpm to 4,500 gpm. Upgrades to the Comet Water Treatment Plant were performed in 2020 and 2021 in anticipation of the limit increase.

13.4 Mine Access

The primary access for all equipment and personnel to the Kensington, Raven, and Elmira underground mine areas is via the Kensington Portal at 964 ft. elevation, located on an upper bench adjacent to the main mill site at the base of Lion’s Head Mt.

There is a secondary portal at 792 ft. elevation on the east side of Lynn Canal (Comet Beach) side of the mountain, south of Haines.

The Jualin deposit is accessed by a -15% grade, nominal 15 x 17 ft decline collared from surface at 926 ft. elevation on an intermediate bench behind the main mill site.

13.5 Mining Method Selection

Stoping and paste backfill mining methods were selected and implemented based on the orebody location, ground conditions, and geological settings.  Mining design assumptions for each mining region are typically standardized for each area and mining method assumed.  Offsets from the ore, required infrastructure, and support are based on industry standards and best practices, modified by specific location required needs and operational requirements to safely advance development and production in each area while minimizing waste development to maximize efficiency.

13.5.1 Kensington

The Kensington deposit is mined using longitudinal longhole stoping or transverse longhole stoping.  Key metrics include:

• Longitudinal stopes:  25 ft maximum width, strike length of <100 ft, with 80 ft as the optimum length open;

• Transverse stopes:  40 ft width, nominal height of 75 ft, and variable lengths, from 25–150 ft along strike.

Both stope types are backfilled with paste.

When developing a level for longitudinal stoping, the drift is placed within the orebody, and follows the primary structures as much as possible to minimize waste development and allow a retreat mining approach from the farthest extent of the orebody back to the central access corridor.  Ore is extracted by driving along the orebody on two levels, drilling and blasting with 60–90 ft rings of blast holes drilled down dip, creating an open stope parallel to the strike and dip of the ore.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

In areas exploited using transverse stoping, access ramps (16 x 16 ft) and level development (15 x 15 ft) are driven in the footwall (above 910 level) or hanging wall (below 850 Level) of the orebody.  Development is placed such that the ramps are 200–250 ft from the orebody.  Footwall drifts, when developing for transverse stopes, are placed 100 ft from the orebody, whenever possible, with some consideration given to optimal equipment access.  When both mining methods are present on a level, then transverse stoping designs take precedence, and longitudinal work is placed, as possible, where it follows the traditional longitudinal approach.

Equipment used includes twin boom jumbos, load–haul–dump (LHD) vehicles, and low-profile mine haul trucks.

Infrastructure such as vent raises, sumps, utilities, and paste line corridors are placed, whenever possible, between the ramp and footwall and the services are then distributed throughout the level as operations progresses.

A cross-section showing the stope layout is provided in Figure 13‑1.

13.5.2 Raven

Upper Raven is accessed by two Alimak raises.  The primary raise (10 x 10 feet) is in the south–central portion of the orebody, and is equipped with a manway and equipment slide, and flanked by 4 x 4 ft muck passes to the north and south.  The 7 x 7 ft secondary raise, located on the north end of the orebody, is used as an escapeway.  Upper Raven is completely mined out and shrinkage stopes are backfilled with paste.  Access is still retained via the raises.

Lower Raven is accessed by a 12 x 12 ft nominal ramp driven from the Comet main, and currently has ventilation and escapeways from the access level at the 820 elevation down to the lower levels.  The orebody in Lower Raven is intersected approximately every 30–50 ft vertically by 12 x 12 ft mechanically-driven development drifts that are excavated off varying points on the main ramp, and by internal ramps connecting the orebody levels.  Mining equipment includes single boom jumbos, jacklegs, and LHDs.  Longitudinal stopes are blasted between levels, mucked along strike, and paste backfilled.

A cross-section showing the stope layout is provided in Figure 13‑2.

13.5.3 Jualin

Jualin is a high-grade, narrow, discrete vein orebody.  The main mining method is longitudinal stoping similar to lower Raven.

Due to a higher density of geologic structures in Jualin the stope length and therefore the hanging wall exposure is limited to 60 ft.  All stopes in Jualin are designed with a minimum 4 ft width.  One third of the designed stopes have an ore width of <4 ft. and rely on the high-grade of the narrow vein to carry the additional dilution.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 13‑1:          Cross-Section, Kensington

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021. .

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 13‑2:          Cross-Section, Raven

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Jualin is mined with conventional single and double boom jumbos, jackleg and mechanized bolting, and LHD/trucks.  Drifts dimensions are 15 x 17 ft in the ramps and level access stubs, 12 x 12 ft in the level access/infrastructure, and 10 x 10 ft in the longitudinal stope development drifts.

Levels are spaced every 35 ft vertically due to variable dip and are connected by a spiral ramp.  The ramp is placed between Vein 4 and Vein 2 to allow access to both veins from a single ramp.

Cemented rock fill (CRF) and waste are used to backfill stopes in Jualin.  At the bottom of every stoping horizon a sill prep of cable bolts and CRF is placed to allow backstopes from below without undue dilution from backfill.

A cross-section showing the stope layout is provided in Figure 13‑3.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 13‑3:          Cross-Section, Jualin

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Looking from east to west.

13.5.4 Elmira

Elmira is a narrow, disseminated, vein orebody.  The main mining method will be longitudinal stoping, similar that used at upper Kensington.  A figure eight up-ramp has been started on the hanging wall side of the ore body from 900 ft. elevation with level accesses every 60 vertical ft. leading to longitudinal ore drifts.  Ore and waste passes will be available on all levels with the muck sent to the 900 level for load out to the surface by haul truck.  All levels are configured to utilize automated mining processes such as mucking and drilling.

All stopes are designed with a minimum width of 5 ft.  Elmira will be mined with conventional double boom jumbos, mechanized bolting, and LHD/trucks.  All stopes will be filled with paste backfill supplied from the existing Kensington paste plant.

A cross-section showing the stope layout is provided in Figure 13‑4.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 13‑4:          Cross-Section, Elmira

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

13.6 Blasting and Explosives

Blasting underground is controlled from surface, using Dyno-Nobel blasting products. Most blasting is done with either packaged or bulk ANFO emulsion.  Trim and perimeter explosives are nitro based.  Kensington, Raven, and Elmira utilize a carrier mounted bulk emulsion delivery system for both development and stoping.  Jualin uses hand loaded stick emulsion for development and stopes due to narrow drifts limiting powder truck access.  All stoping utilizes electronic detonators, development rounds use non-electric detonators for timing and are initiated with electronic detonators.

13.7 Underground Sampling and Production Monitoring

Every ore development round is visited after blasting and the material routed as ore or waste by the Mine Geologist.  During this inspection the face advance distance is recorded, and a description of the ore body made.  Transverse headings are not sampled after blast as they receive vertical stope drill holes for modeling purposes.  Longitudinal headings are sampled after every face advance as described in Chapter 8.1.2.  Muck samples are taken on an as needed basis to help understand grade as described in Chapter 8.1.1.  All production headings are mapped every 100-200 ft of advance.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

13.8 Production Schedule

The mine production schedule is based on a maximum mill throughput rate of 2,000 st per day. Coeur Alaska typically processes between 1,750–1,950 st/day with a waste stream of about 10% rejected as a coarse pebble reject, which is then passed through an optical sorter to extract additional ore-grade material for re-feed back into the mill.  Deswik planning software is used for the detailed scheduling.  Rolling three-month plans are completed every month and updated forecasts for end of year are completed every quarter.  The LOM planned development and production schedule is provided in Table 13‑1.

13.9 Backfill

Backfill is a combination of cemented paste fill, CRF, and straight waste fill.  For cemented paste fill, as much as 100% of the tailings from the mill are sent back underground via pipe to the paste plant located at the 910 elevation, where the tailings are mixed with a 1–6% slag/cement binder mix and pumped to open stopes.  Binder percentages vary depending on if mine personnel will need to work adjacent to filled stopes. Kensington, Raven, and Elmira use paste backfill and Jualin uses a combination of CRF and waste.

13.10 Ventilation

Primary ventilation in the Kensington and Raven mine areas is controlled by two 500 HP fans located in the Comet drift, which pull air from the Kensington Portal straight through the mountain and exhaust out the Comet side.  Two 200 HP booster fans pull a portion of this fresh air up and down the ramps that then supply air to the remainder of the existing workings.  Various 150, 125, 75, and 30 HP fans then direct air flow into each individual level, and active mining headings on those levels through hard ventilation ducting and flexible vent bag ducting.  The main and booster fans are powered by variable frequency drives (VFD) which allow the air volumes to be finely adjusted.

In 2021 one of the two main fans was switched out with a newly-built exact replacement unit as a result of approaching the recommended service life.  The second main fan will be switched out in Q1 2022 with a newly rebuilt exact replacement that is currently on site awaiting installation.

Elmira shares the backbone of the Kensington ventilation system.  Two 20 HP high volume low pressure fans draw a split of air from the Kensington down-ramp and ventilate 2,000 ft of lateral development exhausting back into the Kensington airflow at the main underground shop.  As mining progresses and ventilation needs increase, the smaller fans will be replaced by a 200 HP booster fan.

Primary ventilation of the Jualin mine area is accomplished with a single 200 HP bulkhead mounted fan located in the J0625 level which pulls air in from the Jualin Portal, down to the bottom of the decline and up a series of vent/escape raises, exhausting to surface through a 10 ft. diameter bored raise.  Various 150, 125, 75, and 30 HP fans then direct air flow into each individual level, and active mining headings on those levels through hard ventilation ducting and flexible vent bag ducting.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑1:          LOM Production Schedule

Area	Unit	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	LOM Total
Kensington Mine Development
Total capital development	equiv. feet	4,963	4,208	—	—	—	9,171
Total expensed development	equiv. feet	6,580	3,256	293	—	—	10,129
Total development (cap + exp)	equiv. feet	11,543	7,464	293	—	—	19,300
Drift advance per day	ft/day	31.63	20.45	0.8	—	—	5.87
Raven Mine Development
Total capital development	equiv. feet	—	—	—	—	—	—
Total expensed development	equiv. feet	97	—	—	—	—	97
Total development (cap + exp)	equiv. feet	97	—	—	—	—	97
Drift advance per day	ft/day	0.27	—	—	—	—	0.03
Jualin Mine Development
Total capital development	equiv. feet	373	—	—	—	—	373
Total expensed development	equiv. feet	983	—	—	—	—	983
Total development (cap + exp)	equiv. feet	1,355	—	—	—	—	1,355
Drift advance per day	ft/day	3.71	—	—	—	—	0.41
Elmira Mine Development
Total capital development	equiv. feet	4,540	6,189	5,651	—	—	16,379
Total expensed development	equiv. feet	1,331	1,542	3,249	—	—	6,122
Total development (cap + exp)	equiv. feet	5,870	7,731	8,900	—	—	22,501
Drift advance per day	ft/day	16.08	21.18	24.32	—	—	6.84
Total Mine Development
Total capital development	equiv. feet	9,876	10,397	5,651	—	—	25,923
Total expensed development	equiv. feet	8,991	4,798	3,542	—	—	17,331
Total development (cap + exp)	equiv. feet	18,866	15,195	9,193	—	—	43,254
Drift advance per day	ft/day	51.69	41.63	25.12	—	—	13.15
Kensington Mine Production
Total ore production	tons	508,821	386,110	119,952			1,014,883
Total ore grade	oz/ton	0.18	0.18	0.18	—	—	0.18
Total contained ounces	oz	90,268	71,011	21,065			182,344
Ore tons mined per day	tons/day	1,394	1,058	328	—	—	309
Raven Mine Production
Total ore production	tons	10,494	—				10,494
Total ore grade	oz/ton	0.44	—	—	—	—	0.44
Total contained ounces	oz	4,668	—				4,668
Ore tons mined per day	tons/day	29	—	—	—	—	3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Area	Unit	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	LOM Total
Jualin Mine Production
Total ore production	tons	47,499	—				47,499
Total ore grade	oz/ton	0.33	—	—	—	—	0.33
Total contained ounces	oz	15,808	—				15,808
Ore tons mined per day	tons/day	130	—	—	—	—	14
Elmira Mine Production
Total ore production	tons	43,943	59,440	174,801			278,184
Total ore grade	oz/ton	0.14	0.18	0.24	—	—	0.21
Total contained ounces	oz	6,259	10,904	41,191			58,354
Ore tons mined per day	tons/day	120	163	478	—	—	85
Total Mine Production
Total ore production	tons	610,757	445,549	294,753	—	—	1,351,059
Total ore grade	oz/ton	0.19	0.18	0.21	—	—	0.19
Total contained ounces	oz	117,003	81,915	62,256	—	—	261,174
Ore tons mined per day	tons/day	1,673	1,221	805	—	—	411

13.11 Underground Infrastructure Facilities

The Kensington and Raven underground infrastructure consists of the main underground shop, the paste plant, clean and discharge water handling systems, and the electrical distribution system.  Ventilation raises throughout the mine assist in distributing airflow.  Ore and waste passes in the upper region of the mine deliver Kensington ore and waste to the 910 elevation for haulage out either the Comet or Kensington side of the mine, depending on material type and desired dumping location.  Below the 910 elevation, all ore and the waste not being used as backfill is moved to surface by haul truck.

Jualin underground infrastructure consists of clean and discharge water handling systems and the electrical distribution system.  The Jualin maintenance shop is located on the surface adjacent to the portal.

There is currently no dedicated Elmira infrastructure.

13.12 Equipment

Major mining equipment is shown in Table 13‑2.  Ancillary support equipment consists of Getman and MacClean flatbeds, explosives loading vehicles, zoom boom forklifts, Kubota RTV’s and tractors, pickups, compressors, and other standard support equipment.

13.13 Personnel

Total Coeur Alaska mining/mining maintenance personnel requirements for the LOM average 169 persons.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑2:          Equipment List

Type	Make/Model	Peak Requirements
Loader	CAT R1300G	1
	Sandvik LH204	2
	Sandvik LH410	4
	Sandvik LH514	2
	Sandvik LH307	2
Haul truck	CAT AD45B	1
	Wagner MT2000	2
	CAT AD30	2
	Sandvik TH320	1
	Sandvik TH430	6
Jumbo drill	Atlas Copco M2C SP	2
	Sandvik DD422i	2
	Sandvik DD210	2
Longhole drill	Cubex Aries	1
	Atlas Copco Simba M7C	1
	Atlas Copco Simba ME7C	1
	Boart Stopemate	2
	Sandvik DU311	1
Bolter	Atlas Copco Boltec MC	3
	Sandvik DS311D-EC	3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-11

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

14.0 RECOVERY METHODS

14.1 Process Method Selection

The process plant design was based on a combination of metallurgical testwork, study designs and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the mill was operational.  The design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.

14.2 Flowsheet

A summary process flowsheet is included as Figure 14‑1.

14.3 Plant Design

The Kensington Operations use a flotation mill to recover gold from sulfide-bearing rock.  Crushing and milling facilities are located directly south of the Jualin Portal.  On the portal bench, ore is segregated by grade and blended before being fed to the two stage, closed-circuit crushing plant.  Once crushed, ore is fed to a ball mill and then to a flotation circuit.  The initial design for the recovery process was a standard rougher/scavenger, cleaner re-cleaner configuration.  However, the flotation circuit was modified in 2012 to maximize recovery.

Prior to 2012, a flash flotation cell and regrind mill were in use.  Due to the high density coming from the primary ball mill, the flash flotation cell did not perform well and experienced excessive wear.  It was taken offline and rougher cell 1 was utilized as a flash flotation cell.  Reagents that were originally fed into the conditioning tank were added further down the flotation train to accommodate this change.  The regrind mill was taken down due to a hole in the outer shell.  While it was down, an increase in overall recovery occurred.  Based on this observation, the decision was made to keep the ball mill down indefinitely. The final product is a gold concentrate.

Mill throughput was increased from a previous maximum of 69 st/hr in 2012 to 84 st/hr.  This was achieved by splitting flows between paste plant and tailings pond, also by continuous removal of less enriched, harder, granitic rock pebbles that used to be recycled back to the ball mill feed.  This system allows the mill to run at peak capacity of 160% above design, averaging 149% (original design capacity of 1,250 st/d, or 52 st/hr).  Granitic rock pebbles are rejected using an X-ray transmission (XRT) ore-sorting technology, with the positively-sorted material fed back into the mill and processed as ore.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 14‑1:          Process Flowsheet

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

14.3.1 Ore Sorting

In late September 2015, Coeur Alaska commissioned a TOMRA COM Tertiary XRT 1200 ore sorter.  This device uses XRT technology that identifies pockets of high-density minerals (pyrite in this case) on, or in the bulk of, the lower-density quartz and diorite being fed to it across the sorter conveyor belt.  The software identifies, targets, and tracks the rocks containing the selected mineral, then uses one or more jets of air to alter an individual rock’s trajectory at the discharge of the sorter’s conveyor belt.  Waste goes onto a conveyor belt to be stockpiled separately and the ore onto another conveyor belt to be recycled back to the process.  Ore pebbles are fed back through the milling process at an average grade of 0.247 oz/st Au (24% higher than LOM feed grade).  During normal operation, the average processing rate is 52 st/hr.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Through 2021, 240,485 tons of pebbles were sorted, yielding 18,492 tons of ore containing 4,216 ounces of gold.

Test work is in progress to determine the feasibility of sorting development grade ore (~0.5 oz/st Au) and waste rock.  Waste rejected from the sorter is shipped offsite for use as fill material for Tideline.

14.3.2 Crushing

After blending based on grade, ore is fed to the crushing plant using a vibratory feeder.  First stage crushing is achieved by using a jaw crusher to reduce the ore size to minus 4 inches.  The primary crusher product is fed to a vibrating double deck screen.  The lower screen deck separates material at a mixture of 1 inch and 1.5-inch openings.  This allows higher throughput by reducing circulating load in the crushing circuit.  The oversize screen product is conveyed to a cone crusher, set at 0.75 inch.  The secondary crusher product returns to the screen deck.  The undersize screen product is fed to the mill.  Mill feed is stored in a 1,100 st-capacity fine ore bin.

14.3.3 Grinding

Ore from the fine ore bin is fed to the primary ball mill by a conveyor belt.  Grinding is accomplished using a 19.8 x 11.1 ft ball mill equipped with a 1,250 HP motor.  Ball mill discharge is fed to one of two 20-inch cyclones.  Cyclone overflow, at P80 of 210 µm, is fed to the flotation circuit, while the underflow is returned to the ball mill.

14.3.4 Flotation

Primary flotation is conducted in a circuit comprised of two rougher cells and four scavenger cells. Rougher–flotation product is either sent directly to the concentrate thickener or to the cleaner circuit.  Scavenger product is sent directly to the cleaner circuit, which consists of four primary cleaner cells and two secondary re-cleaner cells.

Reagent addition points were designed to give the telluride mineral (calaverite) priority in rougher flotation, then allow for flotation of the bulk sulfides, i.e., a selective flotation strategy.  The discrete calaverite particles can be floated first, followed by those existing as rinds and inclusions with pyrite.  Flotation recovery is about 96% with an overall recovery of 95%.

14.3.5 Dewatering

Final cleaner concentrate reports to a concentrate thickener, the underflow of which supplies a filter feed tank. The thickener overflow returns to the process water system.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Flotation concentrates are thickened and filtered to approximately 10% moisture.  The filter feed tank contents are pumped to a Larox filter press for further dewatering.  Dried filter cake from the Larox is weighed into 2 st flexible intermediate bulk containers (FIBCs); 12 FIBCs are loaded into each 20 ft sea container.  Storage space at the mill is limited, so tractor trailer trucks are used to haul sea containers of concentrate product to a staging area at the Kensington port.  The containers are staged until the desired lot size is achieved, at which time, a barge takes the lot to Seattle, and a container ship delivers the product to the overseas smelter.

14.3.6 Tailings

Tailings from the scavenger cells are mixed with flocculent and sent to a 29.5 ft diameter high-rate thickener.  The underflow is then pumped 3.5 miles either the TTF, or pumped underground to the paste plant to create backfill.  The overflow returns to the process water system.

The paste plant uses a disc filter to decrease the moisture to 20% before the filter cake is mixed with binder and the resulting slurry is pumped to the appropriate stope.  Water removed by the disc filter is sent back to the mill as recycled water.

Supernatant water at the TTF is sent to a tailings treatment facility for processing where suspended solids and deleterious elements are removed.  The plant discharges clean water into Slate Creek via pipeline.

14.4 Equipment

Table 14‑1 is a list of equipment in the process plant.

14.5 Power and Consumables

14.5.1 Power

The mill requires approximately 1.5–2.0 MW of power to operate at full capacity.  Currently, there is no expectation for this power demand to increase.  The power source is discussed in Chapter 15.10.

14.5.2 Water

The Kensington Operations are allowed by permit to withdraw water from Johnson Creek only when creek levels are higher than a permitted level.  This provides a back-up source of fresh water to the entire site, including the mill and potable water system, with up to 520 gpm of fresh water being available for mill use.  However, the mill requires approximately 1,600 gpm of total water to operate.  The difference between the recycled water and total water required for the mill is made up using fresh water.  Recycled water is sent from the paste plant, the concentrate and tailings thickeners, and water reclaimed from the TTF.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑1:          Process Equipment List

Type	Make	Model	Number
Jaw crusher	Metso Outotec	C100	1
Cone crusher	Metso Outotec	HP200	1
Ore silo	N/A	1,200 ton cap.	1
Ball mill	FLSmidth	3.4m x 6m	1
Hydrocyclone	Weir	500CVX1	2
Knelson concentrator	FLSmidth	CD-20	1
Deister table	Deister	Deister #14 Table	1
Rougher/scavenger flotation cell	Metso Outotec	TC30	6
Cleaner flotation cell	Metso Outotec	TC5	6
Column cell	Eriez	4' x 22'	1
Concentrate thickener	Metso Outotec	SF6HRT	1
Tailings thickener	Metso Outotec	SF9HRT	1
Larox filter press	Metso Outotec	PF16/25	1

14.5.3 Consumables

The key reagents and consumables used are:

• Potassium amyl xanthate;

• Methyl isobutyl carbinol (MIBC);

• AERO 3894 (promoter);

• MaxGold 900 (promoter);

• Steel (grinding media);

• Z-Flocc 2525.

14.6 Personnel

The personnel requirements in the process plant for the LOM total mill operations is 84 and mill maintenance is 35.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

15.0 INFRASTRUCTURE

15.1 Introduction

The Slate Creek Cove Marine Terminal Facility and a 5.7-mile all-weather access road from the terminal to the mine provides all personnel and materials access to the mine.  The Slate Creek Cove Marine Terminal Facility includes docking capabilities for main line ocean-going barges, personnel ferries, float planes, ramp barges, and landing craft.

Site infrastructure is located at both the Kensington and Jualin deposit areas:

• Surface facilities at Kensington include 2.3 miles of all-weather access road from Comet Beach to the Comet Portal (850 Level), the mine water treatment facility with two settling ponds, and a development rock storage facility.  Underground infrastructure includes a paste backfill plant, maintenance shop, warehouse, explosive storage, dewatering, and ventilation;

• Surface facilities at Jualin include a 375-person camp, dining facility, administration building with medical clinic, warehouse, run-of-mine ore stockpile, crusher and flotation mill, and the TTF at Lower Slate Lake.  The Kensington Tunnel, completed in July 2007, connects the Jualin mill facilities to the orebody.  The tunnel is the primary artery for ore haulage, materials transport, and personnel access.  The tunnel includes 9,660 ft of development from the Kensington Portal to the Kensington ramp system.

An infrastructure location plan is provided in Figure 15‑1.

15.2 Dumps and Leach Pads

15.2.1 Existing Waste Rock Stockpiles

Kensington has several existing waste rock stockpiles onsite including at Comet, Pit 1, Pit 4, Pit 7, and the Portal Pad.

The Comet waste stockpile is located just outside the Comet portal.  The toe of the stockpile sits just above the Comet water treatment plant.  This stockpile is currently full and not able to receive additional waste rock.

Pit 1 is a temporary waste rock stockpile that is used to stage material that will be barged offsite.  Pit 1 can hold approximately 15,000 st and is currently full.

The Pit 4 waste stockpile is located in Pit 4 approximately 1 mile south of camp on the main site access road.  Pit 4 is currently permitted to hold 323,040 st, although there is no additional space available until other structures are moved.  Pit 4 contains the pug mill, original mobile maintenance shop, graphitic phyllite rock stockpiles, and surface operations containers and equipment.  The original carpenter shop was relocated from Pit 4 to lower camp for use as an emergency response building.  All but the pug mill is planned to be removed by end of summer, 2022.  This will provide additional waste rock storage space on the north end of Pit 4.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Figure 15‑1:          Infrastructure Layout Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Pit 7 is located on Pipeline Road approximately 2.4 miles from camp and can hold approximately 125,000 st.  Pit 7 is not permitted as a permanent waste rock stockpile.  Between 2015 and 2018 Pit 7 was used to stockpile waste rock for the Stage 3 tailings dam raise and also crushing equipment.  Pit 7 was completely empty at the end of 2018.  In early 2021 due to Pit 4 being full, approximately 11,000 st of waste rock was hauled to Pit 7.  Additional rock is scheduled to be hauled to Pit 7 during the summer and fall of 2021.

The Kensington Portal stockpile can hold approximately 90,000 st of waste rock and continually receives waste from Kensington and Jualin.  This waste rock is moved twice each year to Pit 4 to allow the mine continuous stockpile space.

15.2.2 Additional Waste Rock Stockpiles

With the approval of an amended plan of operations (POA-1) by the US Forest Service, which is expected in early 2022, Coeur Alaska will be allowed to expand existing stockpiles and create one new stockpile.  Stockpile capacities will be:

• Kensington Portal Stockpile Expansion:  73,000 st;

• Pit 4 Waste Stockpile Expansion:  1,600,000 st;

• Comet Waste Stockpile Expansion:  1,000,000 st;

• Pipeline Road New Waste Stockpile:  2,300,000 st.

15.2.3 Waste Rock Barged Offsite

For the past several years Coeur Alaska has had a contractor crush waste rock and barge it offsite. Approximately 45,000 st was sent offsite in 2020 and 6,340 st in 2021

15.3 Tailings Treatment Facility

The existing TTF is currently operating at Stage 3 which was constructed 2018–2019 with a crest elevation of 740 ft amsl.  Stage 4 is currently undergoing engineering design that would raise the dam crest to 760 ft amsl and also include a back dam that would separate Upper and Lower Slate Lake.  The back dam would have a crest height of 749 ft amsl.  Both dams are being engineered with the potential for a Stage 5 dam that would increase the main dam crest to 776 ft amsl and the back dam to 765 ft amsl.

Stage 3 accommodates the remaining LOM storage requirements.  The following operational measures and/or features will continue to be used:

• Conventional slurry tailings are generated at the mill, and pumped to the TTF through the existing pipeline;

• Tailings are deposited into the TTF via a subaqueous pipeline whose location is adjusted based on the shape of the tailings deposition that forms and the depth of the water cover that is being maintained within the facility;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

• Reclaim water is pumped from the TTF to the mill for use as process water using the reclaim pump station;

• Some water from the TTF is pumped to the TTF water treatment plant, treated by flocculation and filtration, and discharged at Outfall 002 as currently permitted (Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (APDES) Discharge Permit AK005057-1) on East Slate Creek;

• The existing discharge bypass pipelines between Upper Slate Lake and East Slate Creek below the TTF will be maintained;

• A minimum water cover of 9 ft will be present during operation of the TTF;

• A minimum water cover of 28 ft will be present following closure of the TTF to support benthic and fish populations;

• Following closure, fish passage from Upper Slate Lake to the TTF (Lower Slate Lake) and to East Slate Creek below the TTF will be provided.

Tailings will continue to be backfilled underground as paste.  To support the LOM plan, this amount will be increased to reduce, to the extent reasonably practicable, the need for expansion of the surface disturbance of the TTF.  Growth media salvaged from the proposed TTF expansion will be stockpiled below the TTF dam and within the proposed water treatment plant relocation area.

15.4 Water Management

Groundwater captured in the underground mine workings is conveyed to the Comet mine water treatment plant and treated and discharged to Sherman Creek.  The discharge is permitted as outfall 001 in the APDES permit.

Surface water runoff and mill process waters that enter the tailings treatment facility are treated and discharged to the east fork of Slate Creek.  The discharge is permitted as outfall 002 in the APDES permit.

Runoff from the roads and site facilities is managed using best management practices, as described in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.  All storm water discharges are covered under EPA Multi-Sector General Permit AKR-06-0000.

15.4.1 Domestic Water/Wastewater Plants Overview

Potable water is supplied from Johnson Creek and Bay 19 in the mine to a potable water treatment skid located on the mill bench.  Kensington camp is served by a 22 gpm potable water plant.  This plant uses prefiltration, chlorination, media filtration and UV disinfection to meet state compliance.  Treated water is distributed by pipelines to the mill and camp.

The Kensington camp is served by two MBR (membrane bioreactor) sewage plants. Capacity is permitted to 10,000 gallons per day. These plants use pre-screening, aeration, anoxic denitrification and activated sludge to reduce solids and remove ammonia and nitrates.  Generated sludge waste is shipped offsite for final treatment.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

15.4.2 Comet Water Treatment Facility and Process Background

The Comet water treatment facility consists of two water plants and a tertiary plant that supports the primary plants during high treatment demand periods.  All three plants use classical clarification and media filtration.

The treatment facility is permitted for 3,000 gpm discharge of treated effluent to the 002 outfall.

• Comet plant 1:  1,600 gpm nominal;

• Comet plant 2:  1,500 gpm nominal;

• Comet plant 2.5:   500 gpm nominal.

The raw water supply comes from the Comet Portal through an 18” diameter discharge pipe that is reduced down to 14” diameter pipe which discharges into two supply ponds. This water is classified as industrial wastewater.

The water treatment plants operate together as one larger conventional water treatment plant.  Processes included are coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, and filtration.

15.5 Camps and Accommodation

Camp accommodations have a 375-person capacity, a kitchen dining recreation (KDR) facility, gym, and administration building.

15.6 Power and Electrical

Electrical power at Kensington is generated by four diesel engines located inside the powerhouse building on the north end of the mill bench.  The powerhouse was completed in early 2019.  Three generators running simultaneously can produce a maximum of 10.7 MW.  Power is sent to transformers located on the mill bench and form there distributed across the site.

Power use continues to increase with current peak winter loads at 90–92% of three-generator capacity.  There is sufficient power for the planned LOM.

15.7 Fuel

Annual fuel consumption at the mine includes 100,000 gal of propane for mine heat, 3.6 Mgal of diesel for power generation, and 0.9 Mgal of diesel for rolling stock.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

16.0 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

16.1 Markets

The Kensington Operations produce flotation concentrate containing both gold and silver.  The concentrate is highly marketable due to its elevated gold content and lack of deleterious elements.

Concentrate is exported out of Seattle, Washington and is delivered to smelters in Europe and Asia where it is consumed, processed, and the valuable metals extracted.

Product from the Kensington Operations is sold by in-house marketing experts.

Coeur has established contracts and buyers for concentrate products and has an internal marketing group that monitors markets for its concentrate.  There is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, the flotation concentrate will be saleable.

There are no agency relationships relevant to the marketing strategies used.

16.2 Commodity Price Forecasts

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves:

o US$1,400/oz Au;

• Mineral resources:

o US$1,700/oz Au.

The economic evaluation uses gold price forecasts that of US$1,750/oz for 2022 and 2023, and US$1700/oz in 2024.

All commodity prices are advised by Coeur across its operations and revised as necessary throughout the budget and forecast process.  The sites do not advise on commodity prices or deviate from the prices provided.

16.3 Contracts

Concentrate is sold directly to international commodity traders, who then sell onto smelters in Europe and Asia.  Subject to the gold and silver content, gold is typically payable around 98%, and silver payable around 80%.  There are typically no penalties for deleterious elements.  Treatment charges, refining charges, and all other terms and conditions are typical of, and consistent with, standard industry practice for such gold concentrates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Concentrate is barged in bags in containers from Slate Creek Cove in Berners Bay, Alaska to Seattle in Washington State.  The bags are then transloaded from barge containers into international containers for export from Seattle to Europe and Asia.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, contract mining, ground support suppliers and drilling contractors.

The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

Coeur’s overall hedging strategy remains focused on supporting cash flow generation during expansion projects, specifically in Nevada.  Coeur proactively monitors market conditions to layer in zero cost collars on as much as 50% of expected gold production in 2022.  Coeur’s silver price exposure remains unhedged.  Currently, 132,000 gold ounces have been hedged by Coeur for 2022 with an average ceiling of $2,038/oz and average floor of $1,630/oz.

16.4 QP Statement

For the purposes of the gold price forecasts used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, the QPs reviewed the corporate pricing provided by Coeur, and accepted these prices as reasonable.  The reviews included checking the pricing used in technical reports recently filed with Canadian regulatory authorities, pricing reported by major mining company peers in recent public filings, the current spot gold pricing, and three-year trailing average pricing.

The US$1,400/oz Au price is considered to be a reasonable forecast for the three-year mine life envisaged in the mine plan.  The US$1,700/oz Au mineral resource price is, as noted, selected to ensure that the mineral reserves are a subset of the mineral resources and assume that there is sufficient time in the three-year mine life forecast for the mineral reserves for the mineral resources to potentially be converted to mineral reserves.

Overall, the QPs conclude that there is sufficient time in the three-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecasts for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, testwork and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates or upgrade the confidence categories that are currently assigned.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

17.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS

17.1 Baseline and Supporting Studies

Numerous baseline studies were performed in support of Project permitting.  These included air, water, aquatic resources, geology, wildlife, soil, vegetation, wetlands, and cultural resources.

Four environmental impact statement (EIS) documents were prepared:

• 1992 Final EIS;

• 1997 Supplemental EIS;

• 2004 Supplemental EIS;

• 2021 Supplemental EIS.

17.2 Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs

Environmental monitoring at the site includes water quality, aquatic resource, tailings and waste rock geochemistry, wildlife, and stormwater.

Water quality and aquatic resource monitoring is conducted in accordance with the Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (APDES Permit).  Discharges from the water treatment plants along with receiving waters are included in this monitoring program.  Aquatic resource monitoring is conducted at the three receiving waters adjacent to the mine operations.

Tailings and waste rock geochemistry is conducted on a quarterly basis and include meteoric water mobility procedure (MWMP) and acid base accounting.

Wildlife monitoring occurs at the TTF during the summer months on a weekly basis.  This monitoring is conducted according to the Terrestrial Wildlife Monitoring Plan.

Stormwater monitoring at the site is conducted according to the approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

17.3 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

Coeur Alaska conducts an annual review of its potential reclamation responsibilities company- wide.  The total LOM cost for physical reclamation and long-term monitoring of the Kensington Operations is currently estimated to be US$23.7 M.  For this Report, Coeur used the 2021 internal update costs for the total Project, which presents the best information currently available on-site conditions and probable reclamation costs.  The estimates are based on unit costs developed using third-party costs, where applicable, and reflect current pricing conditions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

At the time of release of the TTF from reclamation liability, long-term monitoring and maintenance would be implemented based on the schedule developed in the final reclamation plan.

Coeur intends to fund the long-term monitoring component through establishment of a trust agreement with the state and/or federal agencies. In anticipation of this requirement, the company has pre-funded the long-term monitoring and maintenance account with an insurance carrier.

A reclamation and closure plan has been prepared and approved by the governing agencies for the Project.  The current plan was updated in 2021 and reflects current mining, mitigation, and site facilities.  The facility-wide reclamation plan is a combination of site-specific reclamation plans for each part of the mine facility that are required under the Plan of Operations for closure.

The plan reflects the alternative chosen in the Final Supplemental EIS Record of Decision and includes comprehensive cost estimates to be used for bonding purposes.  The plan incorporates key reclamation, closure, and monitoring requirements described in the Final Supplemental EIS Record of Decision, and individual, applicable permits for the Project.

The closure cost estimate used in the economic model in Chapter 19 is $23.7 M.  Reclamation is anticipated to be completed three years following cessation of mining.  Closure-related activities will continue until about 2055.

17.4 Permitting

All required local, state, and federal permits for operation have been issued.  The key approvals and permits are summarized in Table 17‑1.

POA-1 was submitted to the Forest Service in 2018 and is currently under review by the local, state, and federal agencies.  POA-1 will provide 5 Mst of additional waste rock storage and 4 Mst of additional tailings storage at site.  A Final Supplemental Impact Statement was completed in July 2021 and the Final Record of Decision (ROD) is expected in early 2022.

17.5 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur Alaska has had a long and positive relationship with the community of Juneau and southeast Alaska.  The operations are well established as an employer providing high-paying jobs.  In addition to direct payroll, Coeur Alaska purchases local goods and services, and is a local taxpayer.  Coeur Alaska employees also volunteer hundreds of hours each year in schools and for local organizations.

Coeur Alaska partners with many stakeholders, including national, regional, and state mining associations; trade organizations; fishing organizations; state and local chambers of commerce; economic development organizations; non-government organizations; and, state and federal governments.

Coeur Alaska has a partnership with the Berners Bay Consortium, which includes three Alaska Native corporations.  Since 1996, this partnership has provided these corporations with business opportunities and shareholder employment.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑1:          Key Permits and Approvals

	Agency	Permit/License Number	Description	Date Issued	Term/Expiration
Federal	ACOE	POA-1990-592-M8	Lower Slate Lake	11/24/2020	Construction Completion: 11/30/2025
	USFS	Env. Assessment	USFS – FONSI – 5 yr. Exploration Project	04/06/18	4/06/2023
State	ADEC	AK0050571	Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System	Effective: 8/1/17	5/31/22
	ADEC	2013DB0002	Waste Management Permit	9/20/13; Administratively extension issued on 11/30/18.	5 years from issuance date
	ADEC	2007DB0021-Modified	Jualin WWTF Wastewater Disposal Permit	12/02/10	06/02/13; Renewal application submitted on 4/20/13, Administratively Extended
	ADEC	113010820	Food Permit	01/01/21	12/31/21
	ADNR	APMA #4243	Surface exploration drilling approval (2007-2021)	2007	12/2021
	ADOT	JNU-16-005	Public Non-exclusive Easement JNU-16-005; Jualin Mine Road	5/06/16	5/05/2026
	ADNR	AK00308	Certificate of Approval to Operate a Dam - TTF	2/9/21	2/9/2023
	ADNR	AK00308	Certificate of Approval to Modify a Dam – Spillway ARD mitigation	7/1/21	6/2/23
	ADNR	AK00407	Certificate of Approval to Operate a Dam – Avalanche Ponds Dam System	5/25/21	9/21/2024
	ADNR	AK00406	Certificate of Approval to Operate a Dam – Camp Ponds Dam System	3/30/21	9/21/2024
	ADNR	AK00405	Certificate of Approval to Operate a Dam – Mud Dump Ponds Dam System	3/30/21	9/21/2024

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Agency	Permit/License Number	Description	Date Issued	Term/Expiration
ADNR	ADL 107154, Final Finding and Decision	Tideland Lease, Slate Creek Cove	10/16/11	10/15/36
ADNR	TWUA F2017-021	Temporary Water Use Authorization (TWUA F2017-021)	02/21/17	02/20/22
ADNR	TWUA F2018-116	Temporary Water Use Authorization (TWUA F2018-116)	08/28/18	08/27/23

Note:  ACOE = Army Corps of Engineers; USFS = United States Forestry Service; ADEC = Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation; ADNR = Alaska Department of Natural Resources.

Coeur Alaska focuses on hiring its workforce from local communities and providing those employees with training that will afford them sustained success into the future.  Coeur has formed industry and educational partnerships for job training, recruitment, and hiring with the Alaska Department of Labor and the University of Alaska Southeast.

Coeur Alaska developed a community relations plan to identify and ensure an understanding of the needs of the surrounding communities and to determine appropriate programs for filling those needs. The company monitors socio-economic trends, community perceptions and mining impacts.

17.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues

Based on the information provided to the QP by Coeur and Coeur Alaska, there are no material issues known to the QP that will require additional mitigation activities or allocation of remediation costs in respect of environmental, permitting, closure, or social license considerations beyond what is included in the existing plans.  Currently, the Kensington Operations are a mature mining operation that have demonstrated the ability to maintain environmental compliance and attain permits in a timely manner.  Coeur Alaska has a strong social license to operate within its local communities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

18.0 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

18.1 Introduction

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

18.2 Capital Cost Estimates

All major capital construction projects needed to maintain consistent production and extraction of mineral reserves at the Kensington Operations were completed in 2013.  Since 2013, additional capital projects were completed to improve mill throughput, enhance power generation, and increase tailings storage capacity.

Capital development is a concurrent allocation of costs derived by taking the number of capital feet driven times the recorded weighted costs to drive those feet in the period they were driven.  Both types of capital expenditures are sustaining and or improvement capital projects.  Each project is selected for the current year of operation, based on the annual allocation of corporate capital funds, the effect the project has on production and or the internal rate of return.

Exploration capital is the cost associated with activities involving infill drilling and the conversion of mineral resources to mineral reserves.

Capital projects contemplated in the LOM plan are summarized in Table 18‑1.

18.2.1 Basis of Estimate

The Kensington Operations are scheduled to run 24 hours per day, 365 days a year, at or near designed capacity.  Financial estimations are based on a zero-base budget approach to building cost estimates for LOM modeling.  All applied consumption rates and cost factors are relative to the sites historical financial data and adjusted for anticipated future inflationary increases.

Mine and mill manpower requirements are determined by the respective production rates necessary to meet economic based production requirements.  Coeur Alaska uses four rotating shifts to cover two, 12-hour shifts per day.  The primary shift rotation is two weeks on and two weeks off.  Other shift schedules are used on a limited basis to meet varying business needs.

G&A manpower requirements are based on supporting production activities, management of employees and departments, and meeting external reporting/data requirements.  The primary shift rotation is four days on and three days off per working week.

Most of the material costs are based on the applied engineering designs to excavate and maintain safe underground tunneling for the access to and extraction of ore and maintain the equipment necessary to perform these duties. Among the top material costs is diesel, which is estimated on the utilization rates of seven generators needed to provide the electricity needs primarily to the mine and mill and for running the operation/support equipment needed to perform mining activities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑1:          LOM Capital Projects

LOM Capital Expenditures	Total Cost (US$ M)
Capital development	30.4
Capital equipment (fixed and mobile)	7.4
Capital projects	9.8

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

18.2.2 Capital Cost Summary

The LOM capital cost estimate is summarized in Table 18‑2, and totals US$47.6 M over the LOM.

18.3 Operating Cost Estimates

18.3.1 Basis of Estimate

Operating costs are based on actual costs seen during operations and are projected through the LOM plan.  Historical costs are used as the basis for operating cost forecasts for supplies and services unless there are new contract terms for these items.  Labor and energy costs are based on budgeted rates applied to headcounts and energy consumption estimates.

18.3.2 Operating Cost Summary

The LOM operating cost estimate is summarized in Table 18‑3, and totals US$274.4 M over the LOM.

18.4 QP Statement

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  The estimate accuracies and ranges comply with the stated accuracy and contingency ranges required to meet a pre-feasibility level of study under SK1300.  The QPs considered the risks associated with the engineering estimation methods used when stating the accuracy and contingency ranges and preparing the cost estimate forecasts.

The capital and operating cost estimates are presented for an operating mine, with an 11-year production history.  Analogues to prior similar environments are not relevant to the Kensington Operations given the production history and that the mine was in production as at December 31, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 18‑2:          LOM Capital Cost Estimate (US$ M)

Cost	2022	2023	2024	LOM
Capital mine development	14.8	15.6	0	30.4
Capital equipment (fixed and mobile)	6.5	0.9	0	7.4
Capital projects	3.7	6.2	0	9.8
Total Capital Expenditures	25.0	22.6	0	47.6

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 18‑3:          LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$ M)

Cost	2022	2023	2024	2025–2055	LOM
Mining	59.1	41.0	35.4	0	135.5
Processing	28.7	20.7	13.6	0	62.9
G&A	23.7	17.1	11.4	0	52.3
Reclamation and closure	7.4	6.4	3.6	6.2	23.7
Total Operating Expenditures	118.8	85.2	64.1	6.2	274.4

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

19.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

19.1 Forward-looking Information Caution

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage.

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals.

19.2 Methodology Used

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model.  The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.  The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

19.3 Financial Model Parameters

19.3.1 Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life

The mineral resources are discussed in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserves in Chapter 12.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of three years to 2024.

19.3.2 Metallurgical Recoveries

Forecast metallurgical recoveries are provided in Chapter 10.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

19.3.3 Smelting and Refining Terms

Smelting and refining terms for the gold concentrates are outlined in Chapter 16.

19.3.4 Metal Prices

Metal price assumptions are provided in Chapter 16.

19.3.5 Capital and Operating Costs

Capital and operating cost forecasts price assumptions are outlined in Chapter 18.

19.3.6 Taxes and Royalties

Royalties are discussed in Chapter 3.6. For the purposes of the economic analysis, the Alaska State Royalty at 7% and a corporate tax rate of 15% were applied to the 2021 LOM budget calculated net income.

Currently, Coeur pays no federal income tax due to historic Net Operating Losses.

Coeur Alaska is obligated to pay Echo Bay or its successors a scaled net smelter return royalty on 1 M troy ounces of gold production, after Coeur Alaska recoups the $32.5 million purchase price, plus (i) its construction and development expenditures incurred after July 7, 1995 in connection with placing the property into commercial production and (ii) certain operating, exploration and development costs thereafter.  Due to the amount of capital to be recovered, no royalty payments are anticipated to be triggered within the LOM plan.

Coeur Alaska has an agreement with the Hyak Mining Company (Hyak), as amended August 5, 2005, and further amended July 1, 2009, and October 24, 2013 over the Jualin group claims area (the Hyak Lease).  The current Hyak Lease period, which is the second term of the lease, commenced on August 5, 2020 and ends on August 5, 2035.

Under the terms of the Hyak Lease, Coeur Alaska must pay Hyak annually, during the initial term, by or before May 1, an advance minimum royalty of $231,000, which is adjusted every three years in accordance with changes in the Consumer Price Index, published by the U.S. Department of Commerce for all Urban Consumers, City of Anchorage, Alaska.

If production occurs from the leased premises, a 5% net returns royalty on production as defined by the Hyak Lease, is due, unless the amount of the net returns royalty is less than the adjusted advance minimum royalty.  If the net returns royalty is less, then the advance minimum royalty is paid instead of the net returns royalty.

The Hyak Lease will continue after 2035, provided mining and production are actively occurring within and from the leased premises.  The advance minimum royalties and prepaid consideration for the second lease term are recoupable by Coeur Alaska by the company crediting and recovering these payments against future net returns and royalties on production due to Hyak. The recoupment cannot in any given year cause the net returns royalties to be reduced to less than the advance minimum royalty amount, as adjusted.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

19.3.7 Closure Costs and Salvage Value

The closure cost estimate used in the economic model in Chapter 19 is $23.7 M.  Reclamation is anticipated to be completed three years following cessation of mining.  Closure-related activities are expected to continue until about 2055.

19.3.8 Financing

The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.

19.3.9 Inflation

The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

19.4 Economic Analysis

The NPV at a discount rate of 5% is $83.7 M.

As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

An annualized cashflow statement is provided in Table 19‑2.

The analysis assumes active mining operations cease in 2024.  Closure costs are estimated to 2055; however, for presentation purposes, closure costs are shown in Table 19‑2 as occurring within 2025.

19.5 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, operating cost, capital cost and grade assumptions was tested.

The Project is most sensitive to metal price and grade, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs (Table 19‑3).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Table 19‑2:          Annualized Cashflow Statement

Summary	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025–2055	LOM Total
Gold price	US$/oz	1,750	1,750	1,700	0.0	1,738
Net revenue	US$ M	183.2	128.6	94.9	0.0	406.7
Total operating cost	US$ M	118.8	85.2	64.1	6.2	274.4
Operating cashflow	US$ M	64.3	43.4	30.8	(6.2)	135.1
Total capital expense	US$ M	25.0	22.6	0.0	0.0	47.6
Net cashflow	US$ M	39.3	20.8	30.8	(6.2)	87.5
Net present value	US$ M	83.7

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 19‑3:          NPV Sensitivity

Parameter	-30%	-20%	-10%	-5%	0%	5%	10%	20%	30%
Metal price	0	2.6	43.2	63.4	83.7	104.0	124.3	164.9	205.4
Operating cost	162.2	136.0	109.9	96.8	83.7	70.7	57.6	31.4	5.3
Capital cost	97.7	93.2	88.4	86.1	83.7	81.4	79.1	74.4	69.8
Grade	0	5.4	44.6	64.1	83.7	103.3	122.9	162.1	201.2

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

20.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 20-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

21.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 21-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

22.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

22.1 Introduction

The QPs note the following interpretations and conclusions within their areas of expertise, based on the review of data available for this Report.

22.2 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

Coeur Alaska is the operating entity.

Coeur Alaska controls two contiguous claims groups: the Kensington group and Jualin group.  The area covered under the Kensington group claims is 3,969 net acres, and under the Jualin group is 8,366 net acres.  Fourteen of the 23 patented lode claims in the Jualin group cover private surface estate only.  The mineral estate to these 14 patented lode claims located within the U.S. Mineral Surveys is owned by the State of Alaska, the mineral rights to which are secured by a State of Alaska upland mining lease.  Coeur Alaska also controls the properties comprising the Jualin group, under a lease agreement with Hyak.

The Kensington Operations hold all necessary surface and water rights to support the LOM plan.

Rights for ancillary infrastructure at Slate Creek Cove are secured through a 25-year State of Alaska Tideland Lease, granted in 2011.

The State of Alaska granted a right-of-way permit to the Comet Beach facility.

Coeur Alaska holds a 10-year public, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way for the Jualin mine road.

A scaled net smelter return royalty on 1 M troy ounces of gold production is payable to Echo Bay after certain conditions are met.

The property is secured in favor of Coeur’s lender under its revolving credit facility.

22.3 Geology and Mineralization

The deposits that comprise the Kensington Operations are considered to be examples of orogenic gold deposits.

The geological understanding of the settings, lithologies, and structural and alteration controls on mineralization is sufficient to support estimation of mineral resources.

22.4 Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling

The exploration programs completed by Coeur Alaska to date and predecessor companies are appropriate for the mineralization styles.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

The quantity and quality of the lithological, collar, and down hole survey data collected in the exploration program completed are sufficient to support mineral resource estimation.  No drilling, sampling, or core recovery issues that could materially affect the accuracy or reliability of the core samples have been identified.

The collected sample data adequately reflect deposit dimensions, true widths of mineralization, and the deposit style.

Sampling is representative of the gold values, reflecting areas of higher and lower grades.

The independent analytical laboratories used by Coeur Alaska and predecessor companies, where known, are accredited for selected analytical techniques.

Sample preparation procedures and protocols are/were standard in the industry and have been adequate throughout the history of the Project.  Sample analysis uses procedures that are standard in the industry.

The QA/QC programs adequately address issues of precision, accuracy, and contamination, and indicate that the analytical results are adequately accurate, precise, and contamination free to support mineral resource estimation.

The sample preparation, analysis, and security procedures are adequate for use in the estimation of mineral resources.

22.5 Data Verification

The QP undertook QA/QC verification, participated in programs to verify drill data prior to mineral resource estimation, checked selected gold assay data, conducted drill hole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports, and signed off on 2015–present definition drill holes and the 2021 drilling.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

22.6 Metallurgical Testwork

Metallurgical testwork was conducted by reputable laboratories and is supported by nearly a decade of production data.  Test results were used as a guideline for plant design.  Metallurgical testing results were consistent in the recommended methods of process design, extraction and recovery estimates.

Recovery factors estimated are based on appropriate metallurgical test work and confirmed with production data.  Recovery factors are appropriate to the mineralization types and the selected process route.  The LOM recovery forecast is 95.3%.

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

22.7 Mineral Resource Estimates

The mineral resource estimate conforms to industry best practices and is reported using the definitions set out in SK-1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves. The reference point for the estimate is in situ.  The estimate is primarily supported by core drilling.  The estimate was constrained using reasonable prospects of economic extraction that assumed longhole stoping underground mining methods.

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include: metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining, and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for underground mining constraining the estimates; assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

22.8 Mineral Reserve Estimates

The mineral reserve estimate conforms to industry best practices and is reported using the definitions set out in SK-1300.  The reference point for the estimate is the point of delivery to the process facilities.

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources.  Inferred mineral resources were set to waste.  The mine plans assume underground mining using longhole open stoping, trackless equipment and combination of CRF, waste, and paste backfill.  Target mining rates are capped at approximately 2,000 tons per day, which is the permitted capacity limit.

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include variations to the following assumptions:  the commodity price; metallurgical recoveries; operating cost estimates; geotechnical conditions; hydrogeological conditions; geological and structural interpretations; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for the mineable shapes constraining the estimates; changes to dilution assumptions that can impact grade and operating costs; the inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain the social license to operate.

22.9 Mining Methods

The Kensington Operations use conventional underground equipment and mining methods.  The mine has been operating since July 2012.

Geotechnical conditions are reasonably understood, and geotechnical assumptions are supported by third-party expert reviews.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

There are few hydrogeological aspects to be considered beyond natural inflow of water to the workings within the Kensington and Raven orebodies.

Stoping and paste backfill mining methods were selected and implemented based on the orebody location, ground conditions and geological settings.  Mining design assumptions for each mining region are typically standardized for each area and mining method assumed.

The Kensington Operations typically process between 1,750–1,950 st/day with a waste stream of about 10% rejected as a coarse pebble reject, which is then passed through a sorter to further extract ore grade material for re-feed back into the mill.

Ventilation is provided by fans and ventilation raises.

Backfill is a combination of cemented paste fill, CRF, and straight waste fill.

The production plan assumes a three-year mine life to 2024.

22.10 Recovery Methods

The process plant design was based on a combination of metallurgical testwork, study designs and industry standard practices, together with debottlenecking and optimization activities once the mill was operational.  The design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.

22.11 Infrastructure

All infrastructure required to support operations has been constructed and is operational.  On-site infrastructure includes the Slate Creek Cove Marine Terminal Facility, access roads, accommodations camp, mine water treatment facility with two settling ponds, a development rock storage facility, paste backfill plant, maintenance shop, warehouse, explosive storage, dewatering and ventilation infrastructure, administration buildings, medical clinic, warehouse, run-of-mine ore stockpile, crusher and flotation mill, and the TTF.

The Kensington Operations have several existing waste rock stockpiles onsite.  With the approval of POA-1, Coeur Alaska will be allowed to expand existing stockpiles and create one new stockpile.

The existing TTF is currently operating at Stage 3, which was constructed 2018–2019.  Stage 3 will accommodate the remaining LOM storage requirements.  Stage 4 is currently undergoing engineering design that would raise the dam crest to 760 ft amsl and also include a back dam that would separate Upper and Lower Slate Lake.  Both dams are being engineered with the potential for a Stage 5 dam.

Groundwater, surface water runoff and mill process waters that enter the tailings treatment facility are sent to a water treatment plant. The Comet water treatment facility consists of two water plants and a tertiary plant that supports the primary plants during high treatment demand periods.

Electrical power is supplied by diesel generators.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Water is sourced for process operations from recycled water from the paste plant, the concentrate and tailings thickeners, and water reclaimed from the TSF, and supplemented when needed from a permitted allowance for freshwater extraction from Johnson Creek.

22.12 Market Studies

The Kensington Operations produce flotation concentrate containing both gold and silver.  The concentrate is highly desirable due to its elevated gold content and lack of deleterious elements.  Concentrate is sold directly to international commodity traders, who then sell onto smelters in Europe and Asia.  Subject to the gold and silver content, gold is typically payable around 98%, and silver payable around 80%.

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.  Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

Concentrate is sold directly to international commodity traders, who then sell onto smelters in Europe and Asia.  Subject to the gold and silver content, gold is typically payable around 98%, and silver payable around 80%.  There are typically no penalties for deleterious elements.  Treatment charges, refining charges, and all other terms and conditions are typical of, and consistent with, standard industry practice for such gold concentrates.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, contract mining, ground support suppliers and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

22.13 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

Baseline studies and monitoring were required in support of Project permitting.

The closure cost estimate used in the economic model in Chapter 19 is $23.7 M.  Reclamation is anticipated to be completed three years following cessation of mining.  Closure-related activities will continue until about 2055.

All required local, state, and federal permits for operation have been issued. POA-1 was submitted to the Forest Service in 2018 and is currently under review by the local, state, and federal agencies.

Coeur Alaska developed a community relations plan to identify and ensure an understanding of the needs of the surrounding communities and to determine appropriate programs for filling those needs. The company appropriately monitors socio-economic trends, community perceptions and mining impacts.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

22.14 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The total LOM capital cost estimate is US$47.6 M.

22.15 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$274.4 M.

22.16 Economic Analysis

The mineral reserves support a mine life of three-years to 2024.  Closure costs are estimated to 2055.

The NPV at a discount rate of 5% is $83.7 M.  As the cashflows are based on existing operations where all costs are considered sunk, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, exchange rate, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a ±30% range.

The Project is most sensitive to metal price and grade, less sensitive to operating costs, and least sensitive to capital costs

22.17 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 11 and Chapter 12.

22.17.1 Risks

Risks include:

• Commodity price increases for key consumables such diesel, electricity, tires and consumables would negatively impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources;

• Labor cost increases or productivity decreases could also impact the stated mineral reserves and mineral resources, or impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserves;

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  Any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

• The mineral resource estimates are sensitive to metal prices.  Lower metal prices require revisions to the mineral resource estimates;

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Kensington Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates;

• Political risk from challenges to:

o Mining licenses;

o Environmental permits;

o Coeur Alaska’s right to operate;

• Changes to assumptions as to governmental tax or royalty rates, such as taxation rate increases or new taxation or royalty imposts.

22.17.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all of the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all of the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Higher metal prices than forecast could present upside sales opportunities and potentially an increase in predicted Project economics;

• Ability to define additional mineralization around known veins through exploration;

• Discovery and development of new exploration targets across the district;

• Potential to find or gain access to new mineralization sources that could be processed at the existing Kensington process facilities.

22.18 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

23.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

As the Kensington Operations is an operating mine, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 23-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

24.0 REFERENCES

24.1 Bibliography

Barry, J., and Sims, J., 2010:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date January 1, 2010.

Barry, J., 2012:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Year End 2012, Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date January 1, 2013.

Beebe, K., Oduro, I., and Mondragon, R., 2014:  Technical Report for the Kensington Gold Mine, Juneau, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. NI 43-101 Technical Report: report prepared for Coeur Mining Corporation, effective date December 31, 2014

Beebe, K., Oduro, I., and Mondragon, R., 2017:  Technical Report for the Kensington Gold Mine, Juneau, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. NI 43-101 Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur Mining Corporation, effective date December 31, 2017.

Behre Dolbear & Company, Inc., 2012:  Review of Kensington Mineral Resource Modeling Procedures:  report prepared for Coeur Alaska, Inc., , October 19, 2012, 6 p.

Birak, D., 2004:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Technical Report: report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date July 15, 2004.

Birak, D., 2006:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date February 22, 2007.

Birak, D., 2007:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date January 1, 2008.

Birak, D., Sims, J., and Blaylock, G., 2008:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date January 1, 2009.

Caddey, S.W., Harvey, D., Buxton, C., and Cato, K., 1994:  Structural Analysis of the Kensington Gold Deposit: Deformation History, Deposit Formation, Ore Controls, and Exploration Guides, Juneau, Southeast Alaska: report prepared for Coeur Alaska, Inc., 18 p.

Goodwin, R. and Ross A., 2004:  Reserve Evaluation and Mine Planning for the 2004 Kensington Gold Project Feasibility Study:  report prepared for Coeur Alaska, Inc., by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants, 102 p.

Kingsley, T., 2007:  Kinematic Analysis and Age Constraints of Gold Mineralization at the Kensington Gold Deposit, Southeast Alaska:  M.Sc. Thesis, University of Idaho, 54 p.

Leveille, R.A., 1991:  Geology and Gold Deposits of the Jualin Mine Area, Berners Bay district, Southeastern Alaska:  M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Alaska, 215 p.

Miller, L., Goldfarb, R., Snee, L.W., Gent, C. and Kirkham, R.A., 1995:  Structural Geology, Age and Mechanisms of Gold Vein Formation at the Kensington and Jualin Deposits, Berners Bay District, Southeast Alaska:  Economic  Geology, v. 90, pp. 342–368.

Naugle, C. T., 2010:  H204 Production Reconciliation: report prepared by Coeur Alaska, Inc., October 19, 2010, internal R 69 p.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

O’Leary, B., and Sims, J., 2009:  Kensington Gold Mine, Southeast Alaska, U.S.A. Technical Report:  report prepared for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, effective date January 1, 2010.

Petsel, S, 1992:  Report on the Horrible Vein Deposit, Kensington Venture Juneau, Alaska, Year-End 1992:  report for Echo Bay Alaska, Inc. 195 p.

Rhys, D.A., 2008:  Structural Observations from a June 2008 Reconnaissance Visit to the Kensington Deposit, Southeast Alaska:  report prepared by Panterra Geoservices, Inc. for Coeur Alaska, Inc., July 9, 2008, 36 p.

Rhys, D.A., 2010:  Structural Geology Study of Vein Patterns in the Kensington Gold Deposit, with Mining and Exploration Implications:  report prepared by Panterra Geoservices, Inc. for Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, 51 p.

Schaff, J., 1993:  Report on the Comet Vein Exploration Program, 1992: Echo Bay Alaska:  report prepared by Echo Bay Alaska, 16 p.

Sibson, R.H., Robert, F., Poulsen, H., 1988:  High-angle Reverse Faults, Fluid-Pressure Cycling, and Mesothermal Gold-Quartz Deposits:  Geology, v.16, pp. 551–555.

Sibson, R.H., Scott, J., 1998:  Stress/Fault Controls on the Containment and Release of Overpressured Fluids: Examples from Gold-Quartz Vein Systems in Juneau, Alaska; Victoria, Australia and Otago, New Zealand:  Ore Geology Reviews, v. 13, pp. 293–306.

Trigg, C.M., Woollett, G.N., 1990:  Jualin Project, Berners Bay Mining District, Alaska: report prepared by Trigg, Woollett, Olson Consulting Ltd. for International Curator Resources Ltd., 30 p.

Trueman, A. and Sims, J., 2006:  Resource Review and Parallel Estimation:  report prepared for Coeur Alaska, Inc., by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants, 36 p.

24.2 Abbreviations and Units of Measure

Abbreviation/Symbol	Term
#	number
%	percent
/	per
<	less than
>	greater than
µm	micrometer (micron)
BQ	1.44 inch core size
ft	feet
g	gram
HP	horsepower

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Term
HQ	2.5 inch core size
km	kilometer
km2	square kilometers
lb	pound
m	meter
Ma	million years ago
mesh	size based on the number of openings in one inch of screen
Moz	million ounces
°MW	megawatts
NQ	1.87 inch core size
º	degrees
oz	ounce/ounces (troy ounce)
oz/t	ounces per ton
st	US ton (short ton), 2000 pounds
st/d	short tons per day
st/h	short tons per hour
AAS	atomic absorption spectroscopy
ARD	acid-rock drainage
AuEq	gold equivalent
CPG	Certified Professional Geologist
CPG AIPG	Certified Professional Geologist of the American Institute of Professional Geologists
CRM	certified reference material
EIS	Environmental Impact Statement
GAAP	generally-accepted accounting principles
GPS	global positioning system
ICP	inductively-couple plasma
ICP ES	inductively-coupled plasma emission spectroscopy
ICP-MS	inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry
ICP-OES	inductively-coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Abbreviation/Symbol	Term
ID	inverse distance interpolation; number after indicates the power, eg ID6 indicates inverse distance to the 6th power.
ID2	inverse distance interpolation; number after indicates the power, eg ID2 indicates inverse distance to the 2nd power.
LOM	life-of-mine
NI 43-101	Canadian National Instrument 43-101 “Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Companies”
OK	ordinary kriging
P.Geo.	Professional Geologist
QA/QC	quality assurance and quality control
QP	Qualified Person
RM SME	Registered Member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration
RQD	rock quality designation
SAG	semi-autogenous grind
SG	specific gravity
SME	Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration
St	Short ton

24.3 Glossary of Terms

Term	Definition
ANFO	A free-running explosive used in mine blasting made of 94% prilled aluminum nitrate and 6% No. 3 fuel oil.
aquifer	A geologic formation capable of transmitting significant quantities of groundwater under normal hydraulic gradients.
ball mill	A piece of milling equipment used to grind ore into small particles.  It is a cylindrical shaped steel container filled with steel balls into which crushed ore is fed.  The ball mill is rotated causing the balls themselves to cascade, which in turn grinds the ore.
comminution/crushing/grinding	Crushing and/or grinding of ore by impact and abrasion. Usually, the word "crushing" is used for dry methods and "grinding" for wet methods. Also, "crushing" usually denotes reducing the size of coarse rock while "grinding" usually refers to the reduction of the fine sizes.
concentrate	The concentrate is the valuable product from mineral processing, as opposed to the tailing, which contains the waste minerals. The concentrate represents a smaller volume than the original ore

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
cut-off grade	The grade (i.e., the concentration of metal or mineral in rock) that determines the destination of the material during mining. For purposes of establishing “prospects of economic extraction,” the cut-off grade is the grade that distinguishes material deemed to have no economic value (it will not be mined in underground mining or if mined in surface mining, its destination will be the waste dump) from material deemed to have economic value (its ultimate destination during mining will be a processing facility). Other terms used in similar fashion as cut-off grade include net smelter return, pay limit, and break-even stripping ratio.
cyanidation	A method of extracting gold or silver by dissolving it in a weak solution of sodium cyanide.
data verification	The process of confirming that data has been generated with proper procedures, has been accurately transcribed from the original source and is suitable to be used for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation
decline	A sloping underground opening for machine access from level to level or from the surface.  Also called a ramp.
density	The mass per unit volume of a substance, commonly expressed in grams/ cubic centimeter.
depletion	The decrease in quantity of ore in a deposit or property resulting from extraction or production.
development	Often refers to the construction of a new mine or; Is the underground work carried out for the purpose of reaching and opening up a mineral deposit. It includes shaft sinking, cross-cutting, drifting and raising.
dilution	Waste of low-grade rock which is unavoidably removed along with the ore in the mining process.
drift	A horizontal mining passage underground.  A drift usually follows the ore vein, as distinguished from a crosscut, which intersects it.
easement	Areas of land owned by the property owner, but in which other parties, such as utility companies, may have limited rights granted for a specific purpose.
encumbrance	An interest or partial right in real property which diminished the value of ownership, but does not prevent the transfer of ownership.  Mortgages, taxes and judgements are encumbrances known as liens.  Restrictions, easements, and reservations are also encumbrances, although not liens.
exploration information	Geological, geophysical, geochemical, sampling, drilling, trenching, analytical testing, assaying, mineralogical, metallurgical, and other similar information concerning a particular property that is derived from activities undertaken to locate, investigate, define, or delineate a mineral prospect or mineral deposit
feasibility study	A feasibility study is a comprehensive technical and economic study of the selected development option for a mineral project, which includes detailed assessments of all applicable modifying factors, as defined by this section, together with any other relevant operational factors, and detailed financial analysis that are necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable. The results of the study may serve as the basis for a final decision by a proponent or financial institution to proceed with, or finance, the development of the project. A feasibility study is more comprehensive, and with a higher degree of accuracy, than a pre-feasibility study. It must contain mining, infrastructure, and process designs completed with sufficient rigor to serve as the basis for an investment decision or to support project financing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-5

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
flotation	Separation of minerals based on the interfacial chemistry of the mineral particles in solution. Reagents are added to the ore slurry to render the surface of selected minerals hydrophobic. Air bubbles are introduced to which the hydrophobic minerals attach. The selected minerals are levitated to the top of the flotation machine by their attachment to the bubbles and into a froth product, called the "flotation concentrate." If this froth carries more than one mineral as a designated main constituent, it is called a "bulk float". If it is selective to one constituent of the ore, where more than one will be floated, it is a "differential" float.
flowsheet	The sequence of operations, step by step, by which ore is treated in a milling, concentration, or smelting process.
footwall	The wall or rock on the underside of a vein or ore structure.
Gravity concentrate
gravity separation	Exploitation of differences in the densities of particles to achieve separation. Machines utilizing gravity separation include jigs and shaking tables.
gravity recoverable gold	A term that describes the portion of gold in an ore that is practically recoverable by gravity separation, determined through a standard laboratory test procedure.
greenschist facies	one of the major divisions of the mineral facies classification of metamorphic rocks, the rocks of which formed under the lowest temperature and pressure conditions usually produced by regional metamorphism. Temperatures between 300 and 450 °C (570 and 840 °F) and pressures of 1 to 4 kilobars are typical. The more common minerals found in such rocks include quartz, orthoclase, muscovite, chlorite, serpentine, talc, and epidote
hanging wall	The wall or rock on the upper or top side of a vein or ore deposit.
indicated mineral resource	An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling.  The term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty. The level of geological certainty associated with an indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.
inferred mineral resource	An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling.  The term limited geological evidence means evidence that is only sufficient to establish that geological and grade or quality continuity is more likely than not. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. A qualified person must have a reasonable expectation that the majority of inferred mineral resources could be upgraded to indicated or measured mineral resources with continued exploration; and should be able to defend the basis of this expectation before his or her peers.
initial assessment	An initial assessment is a preliminary technical and economic study of the economic potential of all or parts of mineralization to support the disclosure of mineral resources. The initial assessment must be prepared by a qualified person and must include appropriate assessments of reasonably assumed technical and economic factors, together with any other relevant operational factors, that are necessary to demonstrate at the time of reporting that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction.  An initial assessment is required for disclosure of mineral resources but cannot be used as the basis for disclosure of mineral reserves

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-6

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
internal rate of return (IRR)	The rate of return at which the Net Present Value of a project is zero; the rate at which the present value of cash inflows is equal to the present value of the cash outflows.
Knelson concentrator	a high-speed centrifuge that combines centrifugally enhanced gravitational force with a patented fluidization process to recover precious metals
life of mine (LOM)	Number of years that the operation is planning to mine and treat ore, and is taken from the current mine plan based on the current evaluation of ore reserves.
locked cycle	A repetitive batch flotation test
locked cycle flotation test	A standard laboratory flotation test where certain intermediate streams are recycled into previous separation stages and the test is repeated across a number of cycles.  This test provides a more realistic prediction of the overall recovery and concentrate grade that would be achieved in an actual flotation circuit, compared with a simpler batch flotation test.
longitudinal longhole stoping	A form of sublevel stoping where the long axis of the stope is along (or parallel) to the strike of the orebody.
measured mineral resource	A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling.  The the term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.
mill	Includes any ore mill, sampling works, concentration, and any crushing, grinding, or screening plant used at, and in connection with, an excavation or mine.
mineral project	Any exploration, development or production activity, including a royalty or similar interest in these activities, in respect of diamonds, natural solid inorganic material, or natural solid fossilized organic material including base and precious metals, coal, and industrial minerals
mineral reserve	A mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted. The determination that part of a measured or indicated mineral resource is economically mineable must be based on a preliminary feasibility (pre-feasibility) or feasibility study, as defined by this section, conducted by a qualified person applying the modifying factors to indicated or measured mineral resources. Such study must demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The study must establish a life of mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, which will be the basis of determining the mineral reserve. The term economically viable means that the qualified person has determined, using a discounted cash flow analysis, or has otherwise analytically determined, that extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The term investment and market assumptions includes all assumptions made about the prices, exchange rates, interest and discount rates, sales volumes, and costs that are necessary to determine the economic viability of the mineral reserves. The qualified person must use a price for each commodity that provides a reasonable basis for establishing that the project is economically viable.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-7

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
mineral resource	A mineral resource is a concentration or occurrence of material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality, and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction. The term material of economic interest includes mineralization, including dumps and tailings, mineral brines, and other resources extracted on or within the earth’s crust. It does not include oil and gas resources as defined in Regulation S-X (§210.4-10(a)(16)(D) of this chapter), gases (e.g., helium and carbon dioxide), geothermal fields, and water. When determining the existence of a mineral resource, a qualified person, as defined by this section, must be able to estimate or interpret the location, quantity, grade or quality continuity, and other geological characteristics of the mineral resource from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling; and conclude that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction of the mineral resource based on an initial assessment, as defined in this section, that he or she conducts by qualitatively applying relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction.
mining claim	A description by boundaries of real property in which metal ore and/or minerals may be located.
modifying factors	The factors that a qualified person must apply to indicated and measured mineral resources and then evaluate in order to establish the economic viability of mineral reserves. A qualified person must apply and evaluate modifying factors to convert measured and indicated mineral resources to proven and probable mineral reserves. These factors include, but are not restricted to: mining; processing; metallurgical; infrastructure; economic; marketing; legal; environmental compliance; plans, negotiations, or agreements with local individuals or groups; and governmental factors. The number, type and specific characteristics of the modifying factors applied will necessarily be a function of and depend upon the mineral, mine, property, or project.
net present value (NPV)	The present value of the difference between the future cash flows associated with a project and the investment required for acquiring the project.  Aggregate of future net cash flows discounted back to a common base date, usually the present.  NPV is an indicator of how much value an investment or project adds to a company.
net smelter return royalty (NSR)	A defined percentage of the gross revenue from a resource extraction operation, less a proportionate share of transportation, insurance, and processing costs.
open stope	In competent rock, it is possible to remove all of a moderate sized ore body, resulting in an opening of considerable size.  Such large, irregularly-shaped openings are called stopes.  The mining of large inclined ore bodies often requires leaving horizontal pillars across the stope at intervals in order to prevent collapse of the walls.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-8

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
ounce (oz) (troy)	Used in imperial statistics.  A kilogram is equal to 32.1507 ounces.  A troy ounce is equal to 31.1035 grams.
plant	A group of buildings, and especially to their contained equipment, in which a process or function is carried out; on a mine it will include warehouses, hoisting equipment, compressors, repair shops, offices, mill or concentrator.
portal	The surface entrance to a tunnel or adit
preliminary feasibility study, pre-feasibility study	A preliminary feasibility study (prefeasibility study) is a comprehensive study of a range of options for the technical and economic viability of a mineral project that has advanced to a stage where a qualified person has determined (in the case of underground mining) a preferred mining method, or (in the case of surface mining) a pit configuration, and in all cases has determined an effective method of mineral processing and an effective plan to sell the product. A pre-feasibility study includes a financial analysis based on reasonable assumptions, based on appropriate testing, about the modifying factors and the evaluation of any other relevant factors that are sufficient for a qualified person to determine if all or part of the indicated and measured mineral resources may be converted to mineral reserves at the time of reporting. The financial analysis must have the level of detail necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable
probable mineral reserve	A probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.   For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The lower level of confidence is due to higher geologic uncertainty when the qualified person converts an indicated mineral resource to a probable reserve or higher risk in the results of the application of modifying factors at the time when the qualified person converts a measured mineral resource to a probable mineral reserve.  A qualified person must classify a measured mineral resource as a probable mineral reserve when his or her confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors to the measured mineral resource is lower than what is sufficient for a proven mineral reserve.
propylitic	Characteristic greenish colour.  Minerals include chlorite, actinolite and epidote.  Typically contains the assemblage quartz-chlorite-carbonate
proven mineral reserve	A proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality.  A proven mineral reserve can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-9

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Term	Definition
qualified person	A qualified person is an individual who is a mineral industry professional with at least five years of relevant experience in the type of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and in the specific type of activity that person is undertaking on behalf of the registrant; and an eligible member or licensee in good standing of a recognized professional organization at the time the technical report is prepared. For an organization to be a recognized professional organization, it must: (A)          Be either: (1)          An organization recognized within the mining industry as a reputable professional association, or (2)          A board authorized by U.S. federal, state or foreign statute to regulate professionals in the mining, geoscience or related field; (B)          Admit eligible members primarily on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience; (C)          Establish and require compliance with professional standards of competence and ethics; (D)          Require or encourage continuing professional development; (E)          Have and apply disciplinary powers, including the power to suspend or expel a member regardless of where the member practices or resides; and; (F)          Provide a public list of members in good standing.
raise	A vertical or inclined underground working that has been excavated from the bottom upward
reclamation	The restoration of a site after mining or exploration activity is completed.
refining	A high temperature process in which impure metal is reacted with flux to reduce the impurities.  The metal is collected in a molten layer and the impurities in a slag layer.  Refining results in the production of a marketable material.
right-of-way	A parcel of land granted by deed or easement for construction and maintenance according to a designated use.  This may include highways, streets, canals, ditches, or other uses
rock quality designation (RQD)	A measure of the competency of a rock, determined by the number of fractures in a given length of drill core.  For example, a friable ore will have many fractures and a low RQD.
royalty	An amount of money paid at regular intervals by the lessee or operator of an exploration or mining property to the owner of the ground. Generally based on a specific amount per tonne or a percentage of the total production or profits. Also, the fee paid for the right to use a patented process.
semi-autogenous grinding (SAG)	A method of grinding rock into fine powder whereby the grinding media consists of larger chunks of rocks and steel balls.
specific gravity	The weight of a substance compared with the weight of an equal volume of pure water at 4°C.
stope	An excavation in a mine, other than development workings, made for the purpose of extracting ore.
strike length	The horizontal distance along the long axis of a structural surface, rock unit, mineral deposit or geochemical anomaly.
tailings	Material rejected from a mill after the recoverable valuable minerals have been extracted.
transverse stoping	A type of sublevel stoping where the long axis of the stope is perpendicular to the strike of the orebody
tunnel	A horizontal underground passage that is open at both ends; the term is loosely applied in many cases to an adit, which is open at only one end

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-10

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

25.0 RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT

25.1 Introduction

The QPs fully relied on the registrant for the guidance in the areas noted in the following sub-sections.  As the operations have been in production for over 11 years, the registrant has considerable experience in this area.

The QPs took undertook checks that the information provided by the registrant was suitable to be used in the Report.

25.2 Macroeconomic Trends

Information relating to inflation, interest rates, discount rates, taxes.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.3 Markets

Information relating to market studies/markets for product, market entry strategies, marketing and sales contracts, product valuation, product specifications, refining and treatment charges, transportation costs, agency relationships, material contracts (e.g. mining, concentrating, smelting, refining, transportation, handling, hedging arrangements, and forward sales contracts), and contract status (in place, renewals).

This information is used when discussing the market, commodity price and contract information in Chapter 16, and in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.4 Legal Matters

Information relating to the corporate ownership interest, the mineral tenure (concessions, payments to retain, obligation to meet expenditure/reporting of work conducted), surface rights, water rights (water take allowances), royalties, encumbrances, easements and rights-of-way, violations and fines, permitting requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits

This information is used in support of the property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-1

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

25.5 Environmental Matters

Information relating to baseline and supporting studies for environmental permitting, environmental permitting and monitoring requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits, emissions controls, closure planning, closure and reclamation bonding and bonding requirements, sustainability accommodations, and monitoring for and compliance with requirements relating to protected areas and protected species.

This information is used when discussing property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.6 Stakeholder Accommodations

Information relating to social and stakeholder baseline and supporting studies, the partnership with the Berners Bay Consortium, hiring and training policies for workforce from local communities, partnerships with stakeholders (including national, regional, and state mining associations; trade organizations; fishing organizations; state and local chambers of commerce; economic development organizations; non-government organizations; and, state and federal governments), and the community relations plan.

This information is used in the social and community discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.7 Governmental Factors

Information relating to taxation and royalty considerations at the Project level, monitoring requirements and monitoring frequency, and bonding requirements.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.8 Internal Controls

25.8.1 Exploration and Drilling

Internal controls are discussed where required in the relevant chapters of the technical report summary.  The following sub-sections summarize the types of procedures, protocols, guidance and controls that Coeur has in place for its exploration and mineral resource and reserve estimation efforts, and the type of risk assessments that are undertaken.

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for exploration data:

• Written procedures and guidelines to support preferred sampling methods and approaches; periodic compliance reviews of adherence to such written procedures and guidelines;

• Maintenance of a complete chain-of-custody, ensuring the traceability and integrity of the samples at all handling stages from collection, transportation, sample preparation and analysis to long-term sample storage;

• Geological logs are checked and verified, and there is a physical sign-off to attest to the validation protocol required;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-2

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

• Quality control checks on collar and downhole survey data for errors or significant deviations;

• Appropriate types of quality control samples are inserted into the sample stream at appropriate frequencies to assess analytical data quality;

• Third-party fully certified labs are used for assays used in public disclosure or resource models

• Regular inspection of analytical and sample preparation facilities by appropriately experienced Coeur personnel;

• QA/QC data are regularly verified to ensure that outliers sample mix-ups, contamination, or laboratory biases during the sample preparation and analysis steps are correctly identified, mitigated or remediated.  Changes to database entries are required be documented;

• Database upload and verification procedures to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the data being entered into the Project database(s).  These are typically performed using software data-checking routines.  Changes to database entries are required to be documented.  Data are subject to regular backups.

25.8.2 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation:

• Prior to use in mineral resource or mineral reserve estimation, the selected data to support estimation are downloaded from the database into a project file and reviewed for improbable entries and high values;

• Written procedures and guidelines are used to support estimation methods and approaches;

• Completion of annual technical statements on each mineral resource and mineral reserve estimate by qualified persons.  These technical statements include evaluation of modifying and technical factors, incorporate available reconciliation data, and are based on a cashflow analysis;

• Internal reviews of block models, mineral resources and mineral reserves using a “layered responsibility” approach with Qualified Person involvement at the site and corporate levels;

25.8.3 Risk Assessments

Coeur has established mine risk registers that are regularly reviewed and maintained.  The registers record the risk type, the nature of the impact if the risk occurred, the frequency or probability of the risk occurrence, planned mitigation measures, and record of progress of the mitigation undertaken.  Risks are removed from the registers if mitigation measures are successful or added to the registers as a new risk is recognized.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-3

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Other risk controls include aspects such as:

• Active monitoring programs such as mill performance, geotechnical networks, water sampling, waste management;

• Regular review of markets, commodity and price forecasts by internal specialists; reviews of competitor activities;

• Regular reviews of stakeholder concerns, accommodations to stakeholder concerns and ongoing community consultation;

• Monitoring of key permits and obligations such as tenures, surface rights, mine environmental and operating permits, agreements and regulatory changes to ensure all reporting and payment obligations have been met to keep those items in good standing.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-4

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

APPENDIX A: MINERAL TENURE

UNPATENTED

Code	Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Group
AA 042185	KNS # 19 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042186	KNS # 20 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042187	KNS # 21 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042188	KNS # 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042189	KNS # 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042190	KNS # 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042191	KNS # 25 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042192	KNS # 26 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042193	KNS # 27 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042194	KNS # 28 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042195	KNS # 29 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042196	KNS # 30 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042197	KNS # 31 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042198	KNS # 32 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042199	KNS # 33 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042200	KNS # 34 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042201	KNS # 35 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042202	KNS # 36 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042203	KNS # 37 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042204	KNS # 38 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042205	KNS # 39 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042206	KNS # 40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042207	KNS # 41 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042208	KNS # 42 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042209	KNS # 43 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042210	KNS # 44	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042211	KNS # 45 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042212	KNS # 46 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042213	KNS # 47 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042214	KNS # 48 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042215	KNS # 49 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042216	KNS # 50 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042217	KNS # 51 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042218	KNS # 52 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042219	KNS # 53 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042220	KNS # 54 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042221	KNS # 55	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042222	KNS # 56	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042223	KNS # 57	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042224	KNS # 58	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042225	KNS # 59	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042226	KNS # 60	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code	Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Group
AA 042227	KNS # 61	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042228	KNS # 62	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042230	KNS # 64	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042231	KNS # 65 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042232	KNS # 66	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042233	KNS # 67	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042234	KNS # 68	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044071	KNS 63 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044072	KNS 64 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044948	KNS No. 71	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044949	KNS No. 72	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044950	KNS No. 73	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044951	KNS FRACTION No. 74	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044956	KNS No. 79	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044957	KNS No. 80	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044958	BIG SEVEN FRACTION 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044959	BIG SEVEN FRACTION 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044960	BIG SEVEN FRACTION 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044961	BIG SEVEN NUMBER 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 044962	BIG SEVEN No. 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 046193	BIG SEVEN No. 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 046194	BIG SEVEN No 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 046195	BIG SEVEN No. 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 046196	BIG SEVEN No 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 046197	BIG SEVEN No. 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 050980	BIG SEVEN No 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 050981	BIG SEVEN No 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 050987	BIG SEVEN No 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 050988	BIG SEVEN No 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 050994	BIG SEVEN No 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 051000	BIG SEVEN No 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 051009	KNS No 81 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061054	POX 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061055	POX 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061056	POX 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061057	POX 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061058	POX - 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061059	POX 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061060	POX - 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061061	POX - 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061062	POX - 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061063	POX - 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061064	POX - 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061065	POX - 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061066	POX - 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061067	POX - 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code	Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Group
AA 061068	POX 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061069	POX 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061070	POX 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061071	POX 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061072	POX 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061073	POX 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061074	POX 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061075	POX - 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061076	POX - 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061077	POX 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061078	POX 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061079	POX 26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061080	POX 27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061081	POX 28	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061082	POX 29	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061083	POX 30	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061084	POX 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061085	POX 32	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061086	POX 33	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061087	POX 34	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061088	POX 35	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061089	POX 36	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061090	POX 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061091	POX 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061092	POX 39	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061093	POX 40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061094	POX 41	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061095	POX - 42	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061096	POX 43	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061097	POX 44	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061098	POX 45	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061099	POX 46	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061393	COMET #1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061394	COMET #2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061395	COMET #3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061396	COMET #4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061397	COMET #5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061398	COMET #6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061404	COMET #12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061405	COMET #13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061411	COMET #19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061412	COMET #20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061418	COMET #26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061419	COMET #27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061425	COMET #33	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061426	COMET #34	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code	Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Group
AA 061427	COMET #35	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061428	COMET #36	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061429	COMET #37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061430	COMET #38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061431	COMET #39	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061432	COMET #40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061433	COMET #41	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061434	COMET #42	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061435	COMET #43	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061436	COMET #44	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061437	COMET #45	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061438	COMET #46	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061439	COMET #47	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061440	COMET #48	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061441	COMET #49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061442	COMET #50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061443	COMET #51	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061444	COMET #52	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061445	COMET #53	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061446	COMET #54	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061447	COMET #55	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061448	COMET #56	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061449	COMET #57	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061450	COMET #58	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061451	COMET #59	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061452	COMET #60	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061453	COMET #61	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061454	COMET #62	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061455	COMET #63	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061456	COMET #64	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061457	COMET #65	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061458	COMET #66	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061459	COMET #67	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061460	COMET #68	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061461	COMET #69	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061462	COMET #70	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061463	COMET #71	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061464	COMET #72	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061465	COMET #73	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061466	COMET #74	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061467	COMET #75	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061468	COMET #76	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061469	COMET #77	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061470	COMET #78	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061471	COMET #79	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061472	COMET #80	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 061473	COMET #81	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061474	COMET #82	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061475	COMET #83	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061476	COMET #84	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061477	COMET #85	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061478	COMET #86	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061479	COMET #87	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061480	COMET #88	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061481	COMET #89	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061482	COMET #90	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061483	COMET #91	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061484	COMET #92	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061485	COMET #93	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061486	COMET #94	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061487	COMET #95	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061488	COMET #96	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061489	COMET #97	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061490	COMET #98	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061491	COMET #99	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061492	COMET #100	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061493	COMET #101	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061494	COMET #102	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061495	COMET #103	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061496	COMET #104	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061497	COMET #105	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061498	COMET #106	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061499	COMET #107	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061500	COMET #108	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061501	COMET #109	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061502	COMET #110	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061503	COMET #111	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061504	COMET #112	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061505	COMET #113	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061506	COMET #114	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061507	COMET #115	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061508	COMET #116	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061509	COMET #117	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061510	COMET #118	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061511	COMET #119	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061671	POX 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061672	POX 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061673	POX 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061674	POX 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061675	POX 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061676	POX 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061677	POX 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 061678	POX 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061679	POX 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061680	POX 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061681	POX 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061682	POX 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 061683	POX 42	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 062965	KNS 100 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064393	COMET 211	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064394	COMET 212	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064395	COMET 213	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064396	COMET 214	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064397	COMET 215	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064398	COMET 216	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064399	COMET 217	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064400	COMET 218	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064401	COMET 219	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064402	COMET 220	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064403	COMET 221	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064404	COMET 222	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 064405	COMET 223	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 065035	BIG Seven Number 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 069981	Cover Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093665	Beachhead 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093666	Beachhead 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093667	Beachhead 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093668	Beachhead 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093669	Beachhead 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093670	Beachhead 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093671	Beachhead 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093681	Sentinel 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093682	Sentinel 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093683	Sentinel 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093684	Sentinel 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093685	Sentinel 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093686	Sentinel 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093687	Sentinel 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093688	Sentinel 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093689	Sentinel 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093690	Sentinel 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093691	Sentinel 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093692	Sentinel 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093693	Sentinel 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093694	Sentinel 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093695	Sentinel 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093696	Sentinel 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093697	Sentinel 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 093698	Sentinel 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093703	Sentinel 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093704	Sentinel 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093710	Sentinel 30	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093722	Vigilant 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093723	Vigilant 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093724	Vigilant 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093725	Vigilant 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093726	Vigilant 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093899	Avalanche 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093900	Avalanche 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 093901	Avalanche 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 042180	KNS # 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 042181	KNS # 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 042182	KNS # 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 042183	KNS # 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 042184	KNS # 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060988	GREEK BOY #1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060989	GREEK BOY #2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060990	Greek Boy #3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060991	Greek Boy #4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060992	GREEK BOY #5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060993	GREEK BOY #6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060994	GREEK BOY #7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 060995	GREEK BOY #8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061583	MM # 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061584	MM # 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061585	MM # 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061586	MM # 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061587	MM # 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061588	MM # 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061589	MM # 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061590	MM # 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061591	MM # 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061592	MM # 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061593	MM # 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061594	MM # 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061595	MM # 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061596	MM # 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061597	MM # 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061598	MM # 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061599	MM # 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061600	MM # 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061601	MM # 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061602	MM # 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061603	MM # 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 061604	MM # 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061605	MM # 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061606	MM # 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061607	MM # 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061608	MM # 26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061609	MM # 27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061610	MM # 28	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061611	MM # 29	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061612	MM # 30	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061613	MM # 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061614	MM # 32	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061615	MM # 33	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061616	MM # 34	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061617	MM # 35	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061618	MM # 36	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061619	MM # 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061620	MM # 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061621	MM # 39	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061622	MM # 40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061623	MM # 41	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061624	MM # 42	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061625	MM # 43	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061626	MM # 44	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061627	MM # 45	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061628	MM # 46	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061629	MM # 47	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061630	MM # 48	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061631	MM # 49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061632	MM # 50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061633	MM # 51	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061634	MM # 52	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061635	MM # 53	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061636	MM # 54	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061637	MM # 55	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061638	MM # 56	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061639	MM # 57	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061640	MM # 58	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061644	MM # 62	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061645	MM # 63	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061646	MM # 64	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061652	MM # 70	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061653	MM # 71	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061654	MM # 72	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061655	MM # 73	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061656	MM # 74	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061657	MM # 75	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 061658	MM # 76	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061659	MM # 77	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061660	MM # 78	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061661	MM # 79	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061801	SLATE CREEK 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061802	SLATE CREEK 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061809	SLATE CREEK 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061810	SLATE CREEK 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061811	SLATE CREEK 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061812	SLATE CREEK 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061813	SLATE CREEK 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061814	SLATE CREEK 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061815	SLATE CREEK 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061816	SLATE CREEK 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061817	SLATE CREEK 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061818	SLATE CREEK 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061819	SLATE CREEK 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061826	SLATE CREEK 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061827	SLATE CREEK 32	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061828	SLATE CREEK 33	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061829	SLATE CREEK 34	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061830	SLATE CREEK 35	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061831	SLATE CREEK 36	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061832	SLATE CREEK 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061833	SLATE CREEK 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061837	SLATE CREEK 42	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061838	SLATE CREEK 43	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061839	SLATE CREEK 44	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061840	SLATE CREEK 45	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061841	SLATE CREEK 46	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061842	SLATE CREEK 47	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061843	SLATE CREEK 48	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061844	SLATE CREEK 49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061845	SLATE CREEK 50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061846	SLATE CREEK 51	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061849	SLATE CREEK 63	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061850	SLATE CREEK 64	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061851	SLATE CREEK 65	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061854	SLATE CREEK 68	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061855	SLATE CREEK 69	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061856	SLATE CREEK 70	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061859	SLATE CREEK 82	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061860	SLATE CREEK 83	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061861	SLATE CREEK 84	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061862	SLATE CREEK 85	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061863	SLATE CREEK 86	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 061864	SLATE CREEK 87	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061865	SLATE CREEK 88	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061866	SLATE CREEK 89	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061867	SLATE CREEK 90	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061869	SLATE CREEK 94	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061870	SLATE CREEK 95	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061871	SLATE CREEK 96	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061872	SLATE CREEK 97	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061899	E.J # 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061900	E.J # 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061901	E.J. # 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061902	E.J # 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061903	E.J # 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061904	EJ # 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061905	EJ # 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061906	EJ # 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061907	EJ # 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061908	EJ # 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061910	EJ # 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061911	EJ # 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061912	EJ # 20S	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061913	EJ # 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061920	MM FRACTION # 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061921	MM FRACTION # 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061922	MM FRACTION # 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 061924	INDOMITABLE FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 062971	BLOC # 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 062983	BLOC # 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 062984	BLOC # 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 062995	BLOC # 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 062996	BLOC # 26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063007	BLOC # 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063008	BLOC # 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063019	BLOC # 49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063020	BLOC # 50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063031	BLOC # 61	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063032	BLOC # 62	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063648	KY # 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063649	KY # 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063650	KY # 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063651	KY # 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063655	KY # 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063656	KY # 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063657	KY # 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063658	KY # 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063664	KY # 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 063665	KY # 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063666	KY # 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063667	KY # 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063668	KY # 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063669	KY # 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063674	KY # 27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063675	KY # 28	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063676	KY # 29	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063677	KY # 30	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063684	KY # 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063685	KY # 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063686	KY # 39	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063687	KY # 40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063694	KY # 47	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063695	KY # 48	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063696	KY # 49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 063697	KY # 50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071931	MANE # 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071932	MANE # 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071933	MANE # 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071934	MANE # 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071935	MANE # 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071943	MANE # 28	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071944	MANE # 29	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071945	MANE # 30	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071946	MANE # 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071947	MANE # 32	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071960	MANE # 48	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071961	MANE # 49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071962	MANE # 50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071963	MANE # 51	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071964	MANE # 52	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071978	MANE # 68	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071979	MANE # 69	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071980	MANE # 70	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071981	MANE # 71	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 071982	MANE # 72	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072002	MANE # 98	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072003	MANE # 99	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072004	MANE # 100	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072005	MANE # 101	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072006	MANE # 102	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072007	Mane # 103	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072008	MANE # 104	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072009	MANE # 105	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072010	MANE # 106	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 072011	MANE # 107	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072012	MANE # 108	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072026	MANE # 128	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072027	MANE # 129	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072028	MANE # 130	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072029	Mane # 131	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072030	Mane # 132	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072031	Mane # 133	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072032	MANE # 134	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072033	MANE # 135	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072034	MANE # 136	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072035	MANE # 137	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072036	Mane # 138	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072037	MANE # 139	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072038	MANE # 140	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072039	MANE # 141	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072040	MANE # 142	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072041	MANE # 143	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072042	MANE # 144	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072050	MANE # 158	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072051	MANE # 159	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072052	MANE # 160	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072053	MANE # 161	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072054	Mane # 162	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072055	MANE # 163	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072056	MANE # 164	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072057	MANE # 165	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072058	MANE # 166	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072059	MANE # 167	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072060	MANE # 168	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072061	MANE # 169	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072062	MANE # 170	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072063	MANE # 171	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072064	MANE # 172	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072065	MANE # 173	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 072066	MANE # 174	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077798	ZACh 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077799	ZACh 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077800	ZACh 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077801	ZACh 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077802	ZACh 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077803	ZACh 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077804	ZACh 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077805	ZACh 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077806	ZACh 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077807	ZACh 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 077808	ZACh 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077809	ZACh 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077810	ZACh 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 077811	ZACh 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 078936	CONVEN No. 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 078937	CONVEN No. 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 078938	CONVEN No. 3 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 078939	CONVEN No. 4 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 078941	SLATE No. 1 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 078942	SLATE No. 2 FRACTION	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093672	King Midas 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093673	King Midas 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093674	King Midas 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093675	King Midas 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093676	King Midas 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093677	King Midas 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093678	King Midas 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093679	King Midas 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093680	King Midas 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093699	Sentinel 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093700	Sentinel 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093701	Sentinel 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093702	Sentinel 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093705	Sentinel 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093706	Sentinel 26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093707	Sentinel 27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093708	Sentinel 28	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093709	Sentinel 29	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093711	Sentinel 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093712	Sentinel 32	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093713	Sentinel 33	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093714	Sentinel 34	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093715	Sentinel 35	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093716	Sentinel 36	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093717	Sentinel 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093718	Sentinel 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093719	Sentinel 39	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093720	Sentinel 40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093721	Vigilant 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093727	Vigilant 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093728	Vigilant 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093729	Vigilant 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093730	Vigilant 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093731	Vigilant 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093732	Vigilant 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093733	Vigilant 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 093734	Vigilant 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093735	Vigilant 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093736	Vigilant 26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093737	Vigilant 27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 095793	Mill Site 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095794	Mill Site 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095795	Mill Site 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095796	Mill Site 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095797	Mill Site 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095798	Mill Site 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095799	Mill Site 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095800	Mill Site 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095801	Mill Site 9	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095802	Mill Site 10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095803	Mill Site 11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095804	Mill Site 12	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095805	Mill Site 13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095806	Mill Site 14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095807	Mill Site 15	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095808	Mill Site 16	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095809	Mill Site 17	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095810	Mill Site 18	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095811	Mill Site 19	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095812	Mill Site 20	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095813	Mill Site 21	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095814	Mill Site 22	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095815	Mill Site 23	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095816	Mill Site 24	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095817	Mill Site 25	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095818	Mill Site 26	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095819	Mill Site 27	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095820	Mill Site 28	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095821	Mill Site 29	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095822	Mill Site 30	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095823	Mill Site 31	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095824	Mill Site 32	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095825	Mill Site 33	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095826	Mill Site 34	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095827	Mill Site 35	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095828	Mill Site 36	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095829	Mill Site 37	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095830	Mill Site 38	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095831	Mill Site 39	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095832	Mill Site 40	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095833	Mill Site 41	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095834	Mill Site 42	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 095835	Mill Site 43	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095836	Mill Site 44	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095837	Mill Site 45	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095838	Mill Site 46	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095839	Mill Site 47	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095840	Mill Site 48	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095841	Mill Site 49	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095842	Mill Site 50	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095843	Mill Site 51	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095844	Mill Site 52	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095845	Mill Site 53	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095846	Mill Site 54	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095847	Mill Site 55	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095848	Mill Site 56	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095849	Mill Site 57	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095850	Mill Site 58	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095851	Mill Site 59	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095852	Mill Site 60	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095853	Mill Site 61	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095854	Mill Site 62	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095855	Mill Site 63	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095856	Mill Site 64	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095857	Mill Site 65	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095858	Mill Site 66	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095859	Mill Site 67	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095860	Mill Site 68	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095861	Mill Site 69	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095862	Mill Site 70	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095863	Mill Site 71	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095864	Mill Site 72	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095865	Mill Site 73	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095866	Mill Site 74	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Millsite Claim	Jualin
AA 095786	LODE 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 095787	LODE 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 095788	LODE 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 095789	LODE 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 095790	LODE 6	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 095791	LODE 7	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 095792	LODE 8	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Federal Lode Claim	Kensington
AA 043684	MARIA A LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043685	MARIA B LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043686	MARIA C LODE (AMMENDED)	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043687	THOMAS FRACTION No 6 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043688	MARIA J LODE (AMMENDED)	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043689	MARIA K LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043690	MARIA L LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 043691	MARIA Y LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043692	MARIA Z LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043693	CONTACT No 1	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043694	CONTACT No. 2 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043695	CONTACT No 3 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043696	CONTACT No 4	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043697	CONTACT No. 5 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043698	THOMAS No 8 - AMMENDED	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043887	THOMAS No 1 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043888	THOMAS No 2 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043889	THOMAS No 3 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043890	Thomas No 4	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043891	THOMAS # 5	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043892	THOMAS No 6 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043893	THOMAS No 7 LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043894	THOMAS FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043896	MARIA D LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043897	MARIA E LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043898	MARIA F LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043899	MARIA G LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043900	MARIA H LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043901	MARIA I LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043902	MARIA F EXTENSION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043903	MARTHA	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043904	PONCIN	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045000	SUE DEAN	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045002	COONJOHN	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045003	SALLY	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045004	CHRISTINA	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045005	STACEY FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045006	MARGEN FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045007	KIRSTEN	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045009	ROBERT 3	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045010	ROBERT FRACTION No. 2	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045011	ROBERT 4	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045014	LEO STEWART FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045015	CINQ	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045016	DEUZE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045017	NEUF	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045018	DUEX	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045019	UNE FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045020	UNE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045021	CONTACT No 8	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045022	CONTACT No 7	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045023	CONTACT No 6	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045024	CONTACT No 11	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 045025	CONTACT 111	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045026	CONTACT 1111	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045027	CONTACT 1113	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045028	CONTACT 1112	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045029	CONTACT 113	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045030	CONTACT 112	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045031	CONTACT No 18	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045032	CONTACT 17	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045033	CONTACT No 16	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045034	CONTACT No 15	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045035	CONTACT No 14	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045036	CONTACT No 13	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045037	CONTACT No 12	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045668	MARTHA EXTENSION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045669	BROWNIE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045670	SEWANEE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045671	DRAKE ESQUIRE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045672	MARIA G EXTENSION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045673	MR. CHENEY	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045674	Pretty Patti Fraction	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045675	MR. FROST FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045676	CONTACT 118 FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045677	CONTACT 1114	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045678	CONTACT 114	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045679	CONTACT 115	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045680	CONTACT 1115	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045681	CONTACT 1116	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045682	CONTACT 116	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045683	CONTACT 117	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045684	CONTACT 1117	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045685	CONTACT 1118 FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045686	JANA	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045687	DENISE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045688	MONICA	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045689	CAROLYN	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045690	SHANNON	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045692	LISA	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045693	ROBINSON	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045694	DRAKE	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045695	FROST	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045696	Wiley Fraction	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045697	ANNIE FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045698	SARA	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045699	KATHRYN	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045700	ANNIE FRACTION 2	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045701	SANDY ANNE FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

AA 045702	SARA FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 045703	KATHRYN FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 050215	ROBERT 1	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 050216	ROBERT 2	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 050217	ROBERT FRACTION	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054403	DZ-1	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054404	DZ-2	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054405	DZ-3	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054406	DZ-4	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054407	DZ 5	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054408	DZ 6	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054409	DZ 7	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054410	DZ 8	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054411	DZ-9	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054412	DZ 10	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054413	DZ-11	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054414	DZ-12	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054415	DZ-13	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054416	DZ-14	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054417	DZ-15	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054418	DZ 16	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054419	DZ-17	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054420	DZ 18	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054421	DZ-19	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054422	DZ-20	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054423	DZ-21	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054424	DZ-22	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054425	DZ-23	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 054426	DZ-24	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093738	RBT 2	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 093739	RBT 4	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Lode Claim	Jualin
AA 043895	Thomas Millsite	Hyak Mining Company	Federal Mill site Claim	Jualin
ADL 309740	HYAK No 1 (AMMENDED	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 309741	HYAK No 2 (AMMENDED	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 309742	HYAK No 3 (AMENDED)	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 323364	HYAK No 4 (AMENDED)	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 323365	HYAK No 5 (AMENDED)	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 323366	HYAK No 6	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 323367	HYAK No 7	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 323368	HYAK No 8	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 349102	LUCKY CHANCE LODE	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 503245	HYAK No 9	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 503246	HYAK No 10	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 503247	HYAK No 10A	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 503248	HYAK No 11	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 509891	HYAK No 1A	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Code Name Owner/Parties Type Group

ADL 509892	HYAK No 1B	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 651759	UNDINE MILLSITE	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719182	Lucky Chance Lode 2	Hyak Mining Company	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 563238	Casey #11	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	State-Select Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 563239	Casey #10	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	State-Select Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 563241	Casey #13	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	State-Select Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 563242	Casey #14	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	State-Select Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719183	Lockie 1	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-160 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719184	Lockie 2	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-160 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719185	Lockie 3	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-160 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719186	Lockie 4	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-40 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719187	Lockie 5	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-40 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719188	Lockie 6	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-40 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719189	Lockie 7	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-40 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 719190	Lockie 8	Hyak Mining Company	State MTRSC-40 Mining Claim (AK)	Jualin
ADL 337383	KNS 65 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 337384	KNS 66 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 337385	KNS 67 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 337386	KNS 68 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 337387	KNS 69 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 337388	KNS 70 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 514549	Ellen	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 651758	KNS 71 Fraction	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 719191	Ivanhoe 1	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 719192	Ivanhoe 2	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 719193	Ivanhoe 3	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 719194	Ivanhoe 4	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington
ADL 719195	Ivanhoe 5	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Traditional State Mining Claim (AK)	Kensington

PATENTED

Code	Name	Owner/Parties	Type	Group
MS 37A: Ophir Lode	Ophir Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 37B: Ophir Mill Site	Ophir Mill Site	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 38A: Bear Lode	Bear Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 38B: Bear No. 2 Mill Site	Bear No. 2 Mill Site	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 39: Savage Lode	Savage Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 40A: Seward Lode	Seward Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 40B: Seward Millsite	Seward Millsite	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 41: Seward No. 2 Lode	Seward No. 2 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 42: Elmira Lode	Elmira Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 43: Northern Belle Lode	Northern Belle Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 44: Yellow Jacket Lode	Yellow Jacket Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

MS 45: Kensington Lode	Kensington Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 46: Eureka Lode	Eureka Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 47A: Esmeralda Lode	Esmeralda Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 47B: Esmeralda Millsite	Esmeralda Millsite	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 48: Excelsior Lode	Excelsior Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 49: North West Lode	North West Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 50A: Cumberland Lode	Cumberland Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 50B: Cumberland Millsite	Cumberland Millsite	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 51: Comet Lode	Comet Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 52A: Thomas Lode	Thomas Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 52B: Thomas Millsite	Thomas Millsite	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 53: Poor Richard Lode	Poor Richard Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 54A: Comet Extension Lode	Comet Extension Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 54B: Comet Extension Millsite	Comet Extension Millsite	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Mill site Claim	Kensington
MS 55: Snowflake Lode	Snowflake Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 56: Last Chance Lode	Last Chance Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 57: Banner Lode	Banner Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 58: Eclipse Lode	Eclipse Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 59: Hartford Lode	Hartford Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 60: Horrible Lode	Horrible Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 61: Mexican Lode	Mexican Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 380: Northern Light Ex. No. 1 Emma Lode	Northern Light Ex. No. 1 Emma Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 380: Northern Light Ex. No. 2 Lode	Northern Light Ex. No. 2 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 380: Northern Light Lode	Northern Light Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Bat Lode	Bat Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Bee Lode	Bee Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Lions Paw Lode	Lions Paw Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Lions Paw No. 1 Lode	Lions Paw No. 1 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Lions Paw No. 2 Lode	Lions Paw No. 2 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Lions Paw No. 3 Lode	Lions Paw No. 3 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Lions Paw No. 4 Lode	Lions Paw No. 4 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Lions Tail Lode	Lions Tail Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Olga No. 1 Lode	Olga No. 1 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Olga No. 2 Lode	Olga No. 2 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Olga No. 3 Lode	Olga No. 3 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Olga No. 4 Lode	Olga No. 4 Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2015: Stanley Lode	Stanley Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2018: Arnold Lode	Arnold Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2018: Lucky Boy Fraction Lode	Lucky Boy Fraction Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 2018: Plucky Girl Fraction Lode	Plucky Girl Fraction Lode	Coeur Alaska, Inc.	Patented Lode Claim	Kensington
MS 261: Banshee Lode	Banshee Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 264: Undine Lode	Undine Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 265: Cover Lode	Cover Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 266: Minerva Lode	Minerva Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

MS 578: Hard Scrabble Lode	Hard Scrabble Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Independence Lode	Independence Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Jean Burke Lode	Jean Burke Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Last Chance Lode	Last Chance Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Lucky Chance Lode	Lucky Chance Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Ophir Lode	Ophir Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Rose Lode	Rose Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Rover Lode	Rover Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Trixie Lode	Trixie Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 578: Wonder Lode	Wonder Lode	Hyak Mining Company	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 676: Grace R Lode	Grace R Lode	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 676: Humming Bird Lode	Humming Bird Lode	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 676: Indomitable Lode	Indomitable Lode	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 676: Mystery Lode	Mystery Lode	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 676: Perhaps Lode	Perhaps Lode	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 676: Victor Lode	Victor Lode	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 880: Diana Lode	Diana Lode	Hyak, Stoll, Stevens	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 880: Falls Lode	Falls Lode	Hyak, Stoll, Stevens	Patented Lode Claim	Jualin
MS 1496: Mystery Lode Millsite	Mystery Lode Millsite	Fremming Group Royalty Trust	Patented Mill site Claim	Jualin

TENURE LOCATION PLANS

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

Kensington Gold Operations Alaska Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix A

EX-96.4

Exhibit 96.4

Wharf Operations

South Dakota

Technical Report Summary

Prepared for: Coeur Mining, Inc.	Prepared by: Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME Ms. Lindsay Chasten, RM SME Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME Mr. John Key, RM SME
Report current as at: December 31, 2021

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Date and Signature Page

The following Qualified Persons, who are employees of Coeur Mining, Inc. or its subsidiaries, prepared this technical report summary, entitled “Wharf Operations, South Dakota, Technical Report Summary” and confirm that the information in the technical report summary is current as at December 31, 2021 and filed on February 16, 2022.

/s/ Christopher Pascoe

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME

 /s/ Tony Auld

Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME

/s/ Lindsay Chasten

Ms. Lindsay Chasten, RM SME

/s/ Kenan Sarratt

Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME

/s/ John Key

Mr. John Key, RM SME

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page a

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

CONTENTS
1.0	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	1-1
1.1	Introduction	1-1
1.2	Terms of Reference	1-1
1.3	Property Setting	1-1
1.4	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	1-2
1.5	Geology and Mineralization	1-2
1.6	History and Exploration	1-3
1.7	Drilling and Sampling	1-3
1.8	Data Verification	1-5
1.9	Metallurgical Testwork	1-5
1.10	Mineral Resource Estimation	1-6
1.10.1	Estimation Methodology	1-6
1.10.2	Mineral Resource Statement	1-7
1.10.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	1-7
1.11	Mineral Reserve Estimation	1-8
1.11.1	Estimation Methodology	1-8
1.11.2	Mineral Reserve Statement	1-9
1.11.3	Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	1-9
1.12	Mining Methods	1-10
1.13	Recovery Methods	1-11
1.14	Infrastructure	1-12
1.15	Markets and Contracts	1-12
1.15.1	Market Studies	1-12
1.15.2	Commodity Pricing	1-12
1.15.3	Contracts	1-13
1.16	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	1-13
1.16.1	Environmental Studies and Monitoring	1-13
1.16.2	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	1-13
1.16.3	Permitting	1-14
1.16.4	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	1-14
1.17	Capital Cost Estimates	1-14
1.18	Operating Cost Estimates	1-14
1.19	Economic Analysis	1-15
1.19.1	Forward-Looking Information	1-15
1.19.2	Methodology and Assumptions	1-16
1.19.3	Economic Analysis	1-16
1.19.4	Sensitivity Analysis	1-16
1.20	Risks and Opportunities	1-18
1.20.1	Risks	1-18
1.20.2	Opportunities	1-19
1.21	Conclusions	1-19
1.22	Recommendations	1-19
2.0	INTRODUCTION	2-1
2.1	Registrant	2-1
2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.2.1	Report Purpose	2-1
2.2.2	Terms of Reference	2-1
2.3	Qualified Persons	2-3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page i

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

2.4	Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection	2-4
2.5	Report Date	2-4
2.6	Information Sources and References	2-5
2.7	Previous Technical Report Summaries	2-5
3.0	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION	3-1
3.1	Property Location	3-1
3.2	Ownership	3-1
3.3	Mineral Title	3-1
3.3.1	Tenure Holdings	3-1
3.3.2	Tenure Maintenance Requirements	3-1
3.4	Property Agreements	3-4
3.4.1	Black Hills Chair Lift Company 2010 Agreement	3-4
3.4.2	Black Hills Chair Lift Company 2011 Agreement	3-6
3.4.3	Black Hills Chair Lift Company Stock Purchase Agreement and Option	3-6
3.4.4	Timber Cutting Agreements	3-7
3.5	Surface Rights	3-7
3.6	Water Rights	3-7
3.7	Royalties	3-7
3.7.1	Dykes, Jumper and Handley Mineral Lease and Royalty	3-7
3.7.2	Carlson Royalty	3-9
3.7.3	Homestake Mining Company of California Royalty	3-9
3.7.4	Krejci and Kane Royalty	3-9
3.7.5	Kunz Royalty	3-10
3.7.6	Mountain View Heights, Inc. Royalty	3-10
3.7.7	Royal Gold, Inc. Royalty	3-10
3.7.8	Thompson Revocable Trust Royalty	3-10
3.7.9	Valentine Royalty	3-13
3.7.10	White House Congress, Inc. Royalty	3-13
3.8	Encumbrances	3-13
3.8.1	Credit Agreement	3-13
3.8.2	Permitting Requirements	3-13
3.8.3	Permitting Timelines	3-13
3.8.4	Violations and Fines	3-15
3.9	Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs	3-15
4.0	ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY	4-1
4.1	Physiography	4-1
4.2	Accessibility	4-1
4.3	Climate	4-1
4.4	Infrastructure	4-1
5.0	HISTORY	5-1
5.1	Wharf	5-1
5.2	Golden Reward	5-3
6.0	GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT	6-1
6.1	Deposit Type	6-1
6.2	Regional Geology	6-1
6.3	Local Geology	6-3
6.3.1	Lithologies	6-3
6.3.2	Structure	6-3
6.3.3	Alteration	6-3
6.3.4	Mineralization	6-8

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page ii

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

6.4	Property Geology	6-10
6.4.1	Deposit Dimensions	6-10
6.4.2	Lithologies	6-10
6.4.3	Structure	6-12
6.4.4	Alteration	6-12
6.4.5	Mineralization	6-13
7.0	EXPLORATION	7-1
7.1	Exploration	7-1
7.1.1	Grids and Surveys	7-1
7.1.2	Geological Mapping	7-1
7.1.3	Geochemistry	7-1
7.1.4	Geophysics	7-1
7.1.5	Qualified Person’s Interpretation of the Exploration Information	7-1
7.1.6	Exploration Potential	7-2
7.2	Drilling	7-2
7.2.1	Overview	7-2
7.2.2	Drill Methods	7-2
7.2.3	Logging	7-2
7.2.4	Recovery	7-4
7.2.5	Collar Surveys	7-4
7.2.6	Down Hole Surveys	7-5
7.2.7	Drilling Since Wharf Database Close-out Date	7-5
7.2.8	Comment on Material Results and Interpretation	7-5
7.3	Hydrogeology	7-5
7.3.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-5
7.3.2	Comment on Results	7-6
7.3.3	Surface Water	7-6
7.3.4	Groundwater	7-6
7.4	Geotechnical	7-7
7.4.1	Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations	7-7
7.4.2	Comment on Results	7-7
8.0	SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY	8-1
8.1	Sampling Methods	8-1
8.1.1	Reverse Circulation	8-1
8.1.2	Core	8-1
8.1.3	Grade Control	8-1
8.2	Sample Security Methods	8-2
8.3	Density Determinations	8-2
8.4	Analytical and Test Laboratories	8-3
8.5	Sample Preparation	8-3
8.6	Analysis	8-4
8.6.1	Mine Assay Laboratory	8-4
8.6.2	ALS Reno	8-4
8.6.3	Bureau Veritas	8-4
8.6.4	Inspectorate	8-5
8.6.5	McClelland	8-5
8.6.6	Energy Laboratories	8-5
8.6.7	Intermountain Laboratories	8-5
8.7	Quality Assurance and Quality Control	8-5
8.7.1	Pre-Coeur	8-5
8.7.2	Coeur	8-6

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page iii

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

8.8	Database	8-7
8.9	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures	8-7
9.0	DATA VERIFICATION	9-1
9.1	Internal Data Verification	9-1
9.2	External Data Verification	9-1
9.3	Data Verification by Qualified Person	9-1
9.4	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	9-2
10.0	MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING	10-1
10.1	Test Laboratories	10-1
10.2	Metallurgical Testwork	10-1
10.3	Recovery Estimates	10-2
10.4	Metallurgical Variability	10-2
10.5	Deleterious Elements	10-2
10.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy	10-2
11.0	MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES	11-1
11.1	Introduction	11-1
11.2	Exploratory Data Analysis	11-1
11.3	Geological Models	11-1
11.4	Density Assignment	11-1
11.5	Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions	11-1
11.6	Composites	11-2
11.7	Variography	11-3
11.8	Estimation/interpolation Methods	11-3
11.9	Validation	11-3
11.10	Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimate	11-3
11.10.1	Mineral Resource Confidence Classification	11-4
11.10.2	Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification	11-4
11.11	Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction	11-4
11.11.1	Input Assumptions	11-4
11.11.2	Commodity Price	11-5
11.11.3	Cut-off	11-5
11.11.4	QP Statement	11-6
11.12	Mineral Resource Statement	11-6
11.13	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate	11-6
12.0	MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES	12-1
12.1	Introduction	12-1
12.2	Development of Mining Case	12-1
12.3	Designs	12-1
12.4	Input Assumptions	12-2
12.5	Surface Topography	12-1
12.6	Density and Moisture	12-1
12.7	Ore Loss and Dilution	12-2
12.8	Commodity Price	12-2
12.9	Mineral Reserve Statement	12-2
12.10	Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate	12-3
13.0	MINING METHODS	13-1
13.1	Introduction	13-1
13.2	Geotechnical Considerations	13-1
13.3	Hydrogeological Considerations	13-1
13.4	Operations	13-1
13.5	Blasting and Explosives	13-2

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page iv

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

13.6	Grade Control and Production Monitoring	13-2
13.7	Production Schedule	13-2
13.8	Equipment	13-2
13.9	Personnel	13-2
14.0	RECOVERY METHODS	14-1
14.1	Process Method Selection	14-1
14.2	Flowsheet	14-1
14.3	Plant Design	14-1
14.3.1	Overview	14-1
14.3.2	Crushing	14-1
14.3.3	Heap Leach	14-5
14.3.4	Adsorption, Desorption and Recovery Process Facility	14-6
14.4	Process Facility Performance	14-7
14.5	Equipment Sizing	14-7
14.6	Power and Consumables	14-7
14.6.1.1	Power	14-7
14.6.1.2	Water	14-7
14.6.1.3	Consumables	14-10
14.6.2	Personnel	14-10
15.0	INFRASTRUCTURE	15-1
15.1	Introduction	15-1
15.2	Roads and Logistics	15-1
15.3	Stockpiles	15-5
15.4	Leach Pads	15-5
15.5	Waste Rock Storage Facilities	15-6
15.6	Spent Ore Facilities	15-6
15.7	Water Management	15-7
15.8	Water Supply	15-7
15.9	Camps and Accommodation	15-7
15.10	Power and Electrical	15-7
15.11	Fuel	15-8
16.0	MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS	16-1
16.1	Markets	16-1
16.2	Commodity Price Forecasts	16-1
16.3	Contracts	16-2
16.4	QP Statement	16-3
17.0	ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS	17-1
17.1	Baseline and Supporting Studies	17-1
17.2	Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs	17-1
17.3	Closure and Reclamation Considerations	17-1
17.4	Permitting	17-2
17.5	Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements	17-2
17.6	Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues	17-2
18.0	CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS	18-1
18.1	Introduction	18-1
18.2	Capital Cost Estimates	18-1
18.3	Operating Cost Estimates	18-2
18.3.1	Basis of Estimate	18-2
18.3.2	Mine Operating Costs	18-2
18.3.3	Process Operating Costs	18-3

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page v

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

18.3.4	Infrastructure Operating Costs	18-3
18.3.5	General and Administrative Operating Costs	18-5
18.3.6	Owner (Corporate) Operating Costs	18-6
18.3.7	Operating Cost Summary	18-6
18.4	QP Statement	18-6
19.0	ECONOMIC ANALYSIS	19-1
19.1	Forward-looking Information	19-1
19.2	Methodology Used	19-1
19.3	Financial Model Parameters	19-2
19.3.1	Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life	19-2
19.3.2	Metallurgical Recoveries	19-2
19.3.3	Smelting and Refining Terms	19-2
19.3.4	Metal Prices	19-2
19.3.5	Capital and Operating Costs	19-2
19.3.6	Working Capital	19-2
19.3.7	Taxes and Royalties	19-3
19.3.8	Closure Costs and Salvage Value	19-3
19.3.9	Financing	19-3
19.3.10	Inflation	19-3
19.4	Economic Analysis	19-3
19.5	Sensitivity Analysis	19-6
20.0	ADJACENT PROPERTIES	20-1
21.0	OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION	21-1
22.0	INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS	22-1
22.1	Introduction	22-1
22.2	Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements	22-1
22.3	Geology and Mineralization	22-1
22.4	Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling	22-2
22.5	Data Verification	22-2
22.6	Metallurgical Testwork	22-2
22.7	Mineral Resource Estimates	22-3
22.8	Mineral Reserve Estimates	22-3
22.9	Mining Methods	22-4
22.10	Recovery Methods	22-4
22.11	Infrastructure	22-5
22.12	Market Studies	22-5
22.13	Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations	22-6
22.14	Capital Cost Estimates	22-6
22.15	Operating Cost Estimates	22-7
22.16	Economic Analysis	22-7
22.17	Risks and Opportunities	22-7
22.17.1	Risks	22-7
22.17.2	Opportunities	22-8
22.18	Conclusions	22-8
23.0	RECOMMENDATIONS	23-1
24.0	REFERENCES	24-1
24.1	Bibliography	24-1
24.2	Abbreviations and Units of Measure	24-4
24.3	Glossary of Terms	24-5
25.0	RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT	25-1
25.1	Introduction	25-1

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page vi

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

25.2	Macroeconomic Trends	25-1
25.3	Markets	25-1
25.4	Legal Matters	25-1
25.5	Environmental Matters	25-1
25.6	Stakeholder Accommodations	25-2
25.7	Governmental Factors	25-2
25.8	Internal Controls	25-2
222.17.1	Exploration and Drilling	25-2
22.17.2	Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates	25-2
22.17.2	Risk Assessments	25-3

TABLES

Table 1‑1:	Summary of Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	1-8
Table 1‑2:	Summary of Gold Inferred Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	1-8
Table 1‑3:	Summary of Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)	1-10
Table 1‑4:	LOM Sustaining Capital Cost Estimate	1-15
Table 1‑5:	LOM Total Operating Cost Estimate	1-15
Table 1‑6:	Cashflow Summary Table	1-17
Table 1‑7:	Sensitivity Table (US$ x 1,000)	1-18
Table 2‑1:	QP Chapter Responsibilities	2-4
Table 3‑1:	Title Summary Table, Wharf Group	3-2
Table 3‑2:	Title Summary Table, Golden Reward Group	3-2
Table 3‑3:	Homestake Royalty	3-10
Table 3‑4:	Royal Gold Royalty	3-12
Table 5‑1:	Exploration and Development History Summary Table	5-4
Table 6‑1:	Stratigraphic Table, Sedimentary Lithologies	6-5
Table 6‑2:	Intrusive Lithologies	6-6
Table 7‑1:	Property Drill Summary Table	7-3
Table 7‑2:	Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates	7-3
Table 10‑1:	Forecast Metallurgical Recovery Estimates	10-3
Table 10‑2:	Expected versus Actual Recovery	10-3
Table 11‑1:	Constraining Pit Shell Assumptions	11-5
Table 11‑2:	Summary of Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	11-7
Table 11‑3:	Summary of Gold Inferred Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)	11-7
Table 12‑1:	Pit Shell Input Parameters	12-2
Table 12‑2:	Leach Pad Optimization Input Parameters	12-2
Table 12‑3:	Mineral Reserves Pit Shell Input Parameters	12-2
Table 12‑4:	Summary of Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)	12-3
Table 13‑1:	Forecast LOM Production Schedule	13-3
Table 13‑2:	Peak Required Equipment List	13-3
Table 14‑1:	Process Equipment List Summary (Crusher, Cones, Screens)	14-9
Table 14‑2:	Process Equipment List Summary (Plant)	14-10
Table 16‑1:	Commodity Price Forecast Used in Cashflow Analysis	16-2

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page vii

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑1:	Key Permits and Approvals	17-3
Table 18‑1:	LOM Sustaining Capital Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)	18-2
Table 18‑2:	Mining Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)	18-4
Table 18‑3:	Process Plant Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)	18-4
Table 18‑4:	Other Process Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)	18-4
Table 18‑5:	General and Administrative Operating Costs (US$ x 1,000)	18-7
Table 18‑6:	LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)	18-7
Table 18‑7:	LOM Total Operating Cost Estimate	18-7
Table 19‑1:	Cashflow Summary Table	19-4
Table 19‑2:	Cashflow Forecast on Annualized Basis (US$ x 1,000)	19-5
Table 19‑3:	Sensitivity Table (US$ x 1,000)	19-8

FIGURES
Figure 2‑1:	Project Location Plan	2-3
Figure 3‑1:	Mineral Tenure Location Plan	3-3
Figure 3‑2:	Property Agreements Location Plan	3-5
Figure 3‑3:	Claims Subject To Royalties	3-8
Figure 3‑4:	Claims Subject to Royal Gold Royalty	3-13
Figure 3‑5:	Claims Subject to Valentine Royalty	3-15
Figure 5‑1:	Location Plan, Historical Open Pits	5-2
Figure 6‑1:	Regional Geology Map	6-2
Figure 6‑2:	Project Geology Plan	6-4
Figure 6‑3:	Stratigraphic Column	6-7
Figure 6‑4:	Wharf Geology Cross-Section	6-11
Figure 6‑5:	Wharf Geological and Mineralization Cross-Section	6-14
Figure 7‑1:	Property Drill Collar Location Plan	7-4
Figure 11‑1:	Map Showing Wharf Pit Model Extent	11-5
Figure 12‑1:	Life-of-Mine Outline Plan	12-1
Figure 12‑2:	Mine Progression Layout Plan	12-2
Figure 14‑1:	Crusher Flow Diagram	14-2
Figure 14‑2:	Leach Pad Flowsheet	14-3
Figure 14‑3:	Neutralization and Denitrification Flow Diagram	14-4
Figure 15‑1:	Infrastructure Layout Plan	15-2
Figure 15‑2:	Facilities Layout Plan	15-3
Figure 15‑3:	Waste Rock and Spent Ore Facility Layout Plan	15-4

APPENDICES

Appendix A:  Detailed Mineral Tenure Tables and Figures

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page viii

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, Ms. Lindsay Chasten, RM SME, Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, and Mr. John Key, RM SME, prepared this technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Wharf Gold Operations (the Wharf Operations or the Project), located in South Dakota.

Coeur acquired the Wharf Operations in February 2015 from Goldcorp Inc. (Goldcorp).  The Wharf Operations are conducted by Coeur’s wholly owned subsidiaries, Wharf Resources (USA) Ltd. (Wharf Resources) and Golden Reward Mining Limited Partnership (Golden Reward LP).  For the purposes of this Report, Coeur is used interchangeably to refer to the parent and subsidiary companies.

1.2 Terms of Reference

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, for the Wharf Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported for the Portland Ridge open pit, which is exploiting the Wharf deposit.  Mining commenced in 1982, and mining operations were conducted at the American Eagle, Green Mountain, Golden Reward, and Portland Ridgeline pits.  Currently, only the Portland Ridge open pit is active and is operated as a conventional truck and loader operation.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) dollars (US$).  Unless otherwise indicated, the US customary unit system is used in this Report.  The Report uses US English.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300) of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.  Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.

1.3 Property Setting

The Wharf Operations are in the northern Black Hills of western South Dakota, approximately nine miles south of Interstate 90 near Spearfish, South Dakota and approximately 3.5 miles south and west of the city of Lead, South Dakota.

Access to the Project from Lead is by Nevada Gulch Road, a paved road, which is followed for 4.6 miles to the Wharf Mine Road, an all-weather gravel road, which is followed for 2.1 miles to the mine office.

The climate in the Wharf Operations area is classified as cold and semi-arid.  Mining operations are conducted year-round.

Elevations in the Project area range from approximately 5,800–6,700 ft above sea level.  South of, and adjacent to, the mine is Terry Peak at 7,064 ft.  A ski area on Terry Peak is operated during winters.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The area is primarily forested with ponderosa pine, and to a lesser extent, Black Hills spruce.

1.4 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

The Wharf Operations consist of two contiguous property groups:

• Wharf group:  northern and western sectors of the Project area; 362 patented lode claims, 35 government lots, 133 subdivided lots, and 59 federal unpatented lode claims; and

• Golden Reward group:  southern and eastern sectors of the Project area; 196 patented lode claims, 14 government lots, 19 subdivided lots, and 34 federal unpatented lode claims.

The patented lands are private land and not subject to federal claim maintenance requirements.  However, as private land, they are subject to ad valorem property taxes assessed by Lawrence County, South Dakota.  The federal unpatented lode claims are maintained by the timely annual payment of claim maintenance fees, which are presently $165 per claim, payable to the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management on or before September 1 each year.  As at the Report date, all required payments had been made.

Surface rights are a combination of patented lode claims, federal unpatented lode claims, government lots and fee property.  No additional rights are needed to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan presented in this Report.

Coeur has agreements with the Black Hills Chair Lift Company.  These agreements, as amended, generally provide that the Black Hills Chair Lift Company will support and assist Coeur in obtaining permits and authorizations for the expanded mine operations and will provide consent and access on lands it owns for Coeur’s mining activities in exchange for financial support, conveyance of specified parcels, water use, and other considerations.  A timber cutting agreement is in place with Neiman Timber Co., L.C.

Potable water is supplied to the Wharf Operations by wells.  Coeur owns multiple groundwater and surface water rights sufficient to support ongoing operations.  No additional water rights are anticipated to be required for LOM operations.

The mineral tenures are subject to several royalties, which range from sliding scale royalty payments on production to fixed production royalties to net smelter return royalties.  The largest royalty is payable to Royal Gold, Inc. (Royal Gold).

The Wharf Property is secured pursuant Coeur’s revolving credit facility.

1.5 Geology and Mineralization

The genesis of the Wharf deposit is considered controversial, and has been described as a hydrothermal replacement deposit, a Carlin-type deposit, and more recently as a low- to intermediate-sulfidation epithermal deposit.  The gold mineralization is disseminated and structurally controlled.

The Black Hills of South Dakota are located at the junction of several major terranes that have been the locus of repeated rifting and collisional events.  A complex deformational history is preserved in the Laramide age Black Hills uplift which exposes Archean through Oligocene rocks.  Regional uplift, doming, and subsequent erosion have exposed older, underlying Precambrian rocks in “windows” through the younger, overlying Phanerozoic rocks.  Contemporaneous Tertiary alkalic magmatic intrusive centers occur along a west–northwest-trending belt across the northern Black Hills.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The Lead–Deadwood dome, a northwest-oriented structure about 5.5 miles long and 3.5 miles wide, exposes a Precambrian core of metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks, flanked by numerous Tertiary porphyritic intrusions and intrusive breccias.  The core is ringed outwards by sedimentary rocks including the Cambrian–Ordovician Deadwood Formation and Mississippian Pahasapa Limestone, which have both been mineralized at different locations.  Intrusive rocks, primarily sills, inflate the sedimentary section, and dikes and stocks intrude the Precambrian rocks.

The Wharf deposit dimensions range from 8,000–9,000 ft long in the east–northeast direction, 2,100–5,000 ft wide, 150 ft thick in historically mined areas to 500 ft in active pits.  Mineralization has been drill tested to varying depths to the Precambrian surface, which ranges from 5,400–6,200 ft in elevation across the deposit.

A trachyte sill is a main host for mineralization, with low-grade disseminated mineralization throughout the body.  Igneous bodies within the Wharf deposit are predominantly sills.  Dikes are less volumetrically important but occur in most mined areas.  The best mineralized intrusion, the lower trachyte sill, is present within several of the open pits that are mining or have mined the Wharf deposit.  This trachyte sill was intruded both beneath and above the lower contact Deadwood Formation.

Silicification in the area of the mine plan is common, can as zones or along horizons in the same lithology, and can occur in any lithology with any degree of gold mineralization.  Carbonate replacement and veinlets can be present due to remobilization from the mineralized zone.  Argillization is also present in porphyritic intrusive rocks.

Gold mineralization occurs as gold substitution in sulfides and as native gold with silver in the main stage of mineralization.

1.6 History and Exploration

Gold was first discovered in the Black Hills of South Dakota in 1874.  Initial underground mining activity around the current Wharf Operations was conducted from 1901–1959.

The Wharf Operations area has been the subject of modern exploration and development activities since the mid-1970s, and a considerable database developed because of both exploration and mining activities.  Prior to Coeur’s acquisition of the Project, work was conducted by several companies, including Homestake Mining Company, Taiga Gold Inc., Goldex Holdings, Inc., Wharf Resources, Dickenson Mines Limited (Dickenson), and Goldcorp Inc. (Goldcorp).  Work completed included claims consolidation; geological mapping; total magnetics, apparent resistivity, and radiometric geophysical survey; reverse circulation (RC) and limited core drilling; mining studies; metallurgical testwork; environmental, social, and permitting activities; and active mining operations.  Mining at the current location commenced in 1983.

Since Project acquisition in 2015, Coeur has completed drilling, mining studies; metallurgical testwork; environmental, social, and permitting activities; and active mining operations.

1.7 Drilling and Sampling

A total of 11,140 drill holes (2,700,999 ft) have been completed in the Project area, the majority of which were RC drill holes.  RC and core drilling supports mineral resource estimation.  Drilling that supports the resource estimate consists of 7,666 drill holes (1,854,130 ft).  Drill holes in the drill database that are flagged as being completed by a production rig, are considered to have generated unreliable samples, and are flagged such that they are not be exported from the acQuire database for resource modelling purposes.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

RC chips were logged for lithology, alteration, and mineralization.  Core holes were logged for lithology, rock type, mineralization, alteration, recovery, and rock quality designation (RQD).

Historically, the collar coordinates were written on paper logs and entered manually as actuals into a GEMS database.  Currently a Trimble differential global positioning system (GPS) instrument is used to determine drill hole collar locations.  Downhole surveys were not performed on RC drill holes prior to 2014.  After 2015 downhole surveys were completed on all RC drilling regardless of depth.  Drill holes are designed to intersect mineralization as perpendicular as possible. Mineralized zones in the Wharf Operations are generally horizontal to sub-horizontal and can be adequately drilled with vertical drill holes.  A sufficient number of angled drill holes were completed at Wharf to test for vertical controls on the mineralization.

RC sampling was performed by drill contractors at the drill rig.  Sampling practice from 2007–2021 was to sample 10 ft. intervals.  Pre-2007 RC drilling at the Wharf Operations was sampled on 10-ft intervals and drilling at the Golden Reward area that is now part of the Wharf Operations was at 5-ft intervals.  The entire drill hole was sampled.  Sample runs of core holes averaged 4.5 ft at the Wharf Operation.  Grade control samples are collected during blast hole drilling.

Historically, density was determined from laboratory testing.  Documentation was not preserved.  Verification of trachyte porphyry values was conducted by FMG Engineering, Inc., with four samples in 2010, 15 in 2013, and 40 in 2021, and of phonolite porphyry with 10 samples in 2013 and 30 in 2021.  Density used in estimation is derived from density testing and ranges from 0.0714–0.0790 st/ft³ depending on lithology.

Independent primary and check laboratories used include Inspectorate America Corporation (Inspectorate, now Bureau Veritas) in Sparks, Nevada, ALS U.S.A. Inc. Minerals Division in Reno, Nevada (ALS Reno), and McClelland Laboratories, Inc, located in Sparks, Nevada (McClelland).  These laboratories were ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accredited.

The mine assay laboratory, located on site in Lead, was the primary analytical facility from mine inception to 2015.  The laboratory was not independent and was not accredited.

RC samples were dried, crushed to 80% passing ½ inch, and pulverized to 85% passing 200 mesh.  At ALS Reno and Inspectorate/Bureau Veritas, samples were dried, crushed to >70% passing 2 mm, and pulverized to >85% passing 75 µm.

Gold analyses at the mine laboratory were completed with a cold cyanide shake with an atomic absorption (AA) finish.  Over-limit analyses were completed on gold and silver by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.  At ALS Reno, primary analyses for gold were completed by fire assay with AA finish, and for silver by four-acid digestion with AA finish.  For check analyses, gold analyses were completed by fire assay with an AA finish.  Over-limit analyses were completed by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.  At Inspectorate, for checks of 2014 pulps, gold analyses were completed by cold cyanide shake with an AA finish.  Gold fire analyses with an AA finish were completed and triggered by cold cyanide analyses ≥0.008 oz/st Au to match the original procedure used at the Wharf Operations.  Gold analyses were completed at Bureau Veritas, with a fire assay with an AA finish, and results higher than the lower detection limit (>0.0001 oz/st) Au triggered a cold cyanide shake with AA finish.  Silver was analyzed as part of a 30-element suite by aqua regia with an inductively coupled plasma (ICP) finish and results higher than the lower detection limit triggered a silver cold cyanide shake with AA finish.  Over-limit analyses were completed by fire assay with gravimetric finish when the initial fire assay results were >0.29 oz/st Au.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Prior to Coeur’s Project acquisition, sample quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) consisted of check analyses completed at a commercial laboratory as verification of the mine assay laboratory.  There is no record of certified reference materials, standards, or blanks being inserted into the analytical batches.  Quantile–quantile plots of the entire assay population for check assays completed at ALS Reno from 2009–2014 indicated no bias and good correlation between the two datasets.  The resulting overall correlation and lack of bias in the population supported the data quality produced by the mine assay laboratory.

During Coeur’s ownership, certified reference standards and certified blank samples were inserted at regular intervals to maintain a 5% insertion rate of primary samples.  Sample-stage duplicates were collected at the drill rig to maintain a 2.5% insertion rate.  Crush stage and pulp-stage duplicate samples were generated by the sample preparation laboratory at a 2.5% insertion rate.  Additionally, 5–10% of primary sample pulps were sent to a secondary commercial laboratory for check analysis.  Results were reviewed quarterly, and elements of the QA/QC program were adjusted as necessary.  The reviews of the 2015–mid-year 2021 QA/QC data indicated no significant biases or contamination in the reviewed data.

Since 2015, assay data have been imported directly into the acQuire database and must pass internal database checks for referential integrity.  Assays were reviewed for QA/QC of certified reference materials and duplicates.  Assays were accepted or rejected in the database by the database manager based on QA/QC results.  All assay data is retained, and assays passing QA/QC are available for export in acQuire to other software systems.

From 2015–2021, collar surveys, downhole surveys, geology logs, and QA/QC-passing assay data were exported from acQuire as csv files and imported into a GEMS database for each yearly and midyear model update.  In 2021, the acQuire database was migrated to a Maptek Vulcan ISIS database.

1.8 Data Verification

Data verification included an RC-paired sampling study, review of data in the database for internal consistency corresponding to database rules such as no overlapping intervals and unique IDs and combining split intervals by reimporting the validated historic data into acQuire.  Drill hole lockdown signoff reports were completed by the geologist and database manager.  All were stored as digital copies on a network drive with restricted access and as paper copies.

The QP personally verified, amongst other checks, QA/QC of assay data from 2015–2021, logged all geologic data from 2015, 2017, and 2018, and conducted a 10–20% check of geologic logs from 2016 and 2021.  The QP worked at the Wharf Operations from 2009–2021.  The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

1.9 Metallurgical Testwork

The process plant was built in 1983.  Historical testwork on which the plant designs were based isn’t available to Coeur.  Changes made to the process plant were based on actual plant performance trends and testwork performed on-site and at independent facilities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Independent metallurgical testwork facilities used over the Project life included Amtel and McClelland Laboratories.  Testwork conducted included column leach test, bottle roll tests, and gold deportment studies.

The Wharf Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

There is no international standard of accreditation provided for metallurgical testing laboratories or metallurgical testing techniques.

Metallurgical performance using laboratory testing suggests that recovery of gold varies by lithology and sizing of placed material.  Life-of-mine (LOM) forecast recoveries include:

• Intermediate:  80.0%;

• Lower Contact:  71.0%;

• Porphyry:  80.5%.

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

1.10 Mineral Resource Estimation

1.10.1 Estimation Methodology

The database closeout date for the estimate was July 23, 2021.  All deposits were subject to exploratory data analysis methods, which could include histograms, cumulative probability plots, box and whisker plots, and contact analysis.

Domains were created based on lithology and changing trends in strike and dip of the major mineralized structures and underground workings that cross cut lithological units.  A total of three main structural domains were modeled resulting in 16 separate estimation domains.  Density values were assigned to each block based on the major rock type within the block.  Underground workings were assigned an adjusted density values determined by the percentage of the block intersected by workings.  Capping was applied to raw assays prior to compositing, with values to be capped assessed from probability plots.  Grade caps ranged from 0.08–0.6 oz/st Au, with 147 samples capped.  Compositing was done on 10 ft intervals to ensure sufficient samples were available in the vertical direction for estimation and to avoid over-smoothing prior to variography.  Back-transformed, normal scores (gaussian) variography was completed on all 16 domains.  For eight of the domains, an indicator estimation technique was used.  For these domains, variograms were created for the high-grade portion of the data and for the low-grade portion.

Ordinary kriging (OK) interpolation was chosen to estimate all lithology units.  Iterations were performed with a single pass OK estimate, adjusting the search parameters, minimum and maximum samples, and maximum number of drill holes.  The resulting basic statistics were then compared to those of the composites, nearest neighbor (NN) estimate, and an inverse distance squared (ID2) estimate.

The block models were validated using some or all of the following methods:  visually by stepping through sections and comparing the raw drill data and composite data with the block values; comparison of model statistics to drill data; swath plots; mill to model reconciliation; and general visual inspection of shape and spread of the estimate with regards to production experience.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The confidence classifications on average used:

• Measured:  30–55 ft from nearest drill hole; maximum of six composites, maximum of three composites from a single drill hole;

• Indicated:  80–140 ft from nearest drill hole; maximum of four composites, maximum of two composites from a single drill hole;

• Inferred:  155–410 ft from nearest drill hole; maximum of two composites, maximum of two composites from a single drill hole.

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was undertaken that evaluated likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting, and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal, and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.  Mineral resources are confined within conceptual pit shells.

The gold price used in resource estimation is based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The gold price forecast for the mineral resource estimate is US$1,700/oz.  The QP considers this price to be reasonable.

A breakeven cut-off grade of 0.12 oz/st Au was used for conceptual pit designs. Within that design, an incremental cut-off grade of 0.10 oz/st Au was used as the determination of whether material is sent to the leach pad or to the WRSF.  The mineral resources are reported using a cut-off of 0.010 oz/st Au.

1.10.2 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Estimates are current as at December 31, 2021.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ.

Measured and indicated mineral resources are summarized in Table 1‑1 and inferred mineral resources in Table 1‑2 and are reported on a 100% ownership basis.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

1.10.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the conceptual pit shell constraining the estimates; and assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑1:          Summary of Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Gold 'Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Measured	13,947	0.02	273	0.010	80
Indicated	6,379	0.022	140	0.010	80
Total Measured and Indicated	20,326	0.020	413	0.010	80

Table 1‑2:          Summary of Gold Inferred Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Gold Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Inferred	3,724	0.024	89,704	0.010	80

Notes to accompany mineral resource tables:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as at December 31, 2021, and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

4. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional open pit mining; gold price of US$1,700/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 0.010 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 78.7%; royalty burden of US$68/oz Au; pit slope angles that vary from 34–50º; mining costs of $2.15/st mined, rehandle costs of US$1.65/st rehandled, process costs of US$10.34/st processed (includes general and administrative costs).

5. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

1.11 Mineral Reserve Estimation

1.11.1 Estimation Methodology

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources using a detailed pit design and block model from a physical survey of the topography as of December 31, 2021.  The mine plan assumes open pit mining, and a conventional truck and loader fleet.  Mining rates are primarily dictated by the crusher throughput.  Average annual throughput of 4.6 Mst from the crusher is expected.  Throughput rates were established and proven over the more than 30 years of operational history at the site.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-8

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The mining area consists of the Portland Ridgeline pit.  Different nomenclatures used for mining areas refer to the same deposit but represent distinct mining phases.

The site was evaluated using economic pit shells generated using Whittle software.  Appropriate cost and mining schedules were applied using cost estimates forecast for the LOM.  A gold price of $1,400 was used for the economic shells.

Pit optimizations were completed using the Lerchs–Grossmann algorithm using Whittle software.  Individual pits were phased by the Wharf Operations engineering staff using a design cut-off grade of 0.012 oz/st and consideration was given to mining the highest-grade areas first, while maintaining adequate space for waste advancement in the mined-out portions of the pit.  Pits were designed from bottom up in 20 ft increments, designing in the toe, crest, catch benches at specified intervals for the appropriate rock types.

The gold price used in reserve estimation is based on analysis of three-year rolling averages long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks of what other peer companies used for pricing over the past year.  The price used is US$1,400/oz for gold for the mineral reserve estimate.  The QP considers this price to be reasonable.

An operational cut-off grade of 0.10 oz/st Au was used to determine the material that is economically viable to mine.  Economic and sustaining capital considerations were factors in using an operational cut-off grade above the break-even cut-off.

The topography used for reserve estimation was an updated 2021 August month-end surface.  Mineral reserve estimates assume 100% mining recovery and no dilution was applied.

1.11.2 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves were classified using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facility.  Mineral reserves are current as at December 31, 2021.

Mineral reserves are reported in Table 1‑3.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.  Estimates are reported on a 100% ownership bases.

1.11.3 Factors That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include variations to the following assumptions:  the commodity price; metallurgical recoveries; operating cost estimates, including assumptions as to equipment leasing agreements; geotechnical conditions; hydrogeological conditions; geological and structural interpretations; and the inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain the social license to operate.  A portion of the estimated mineral reserves are not currently permitted.  The application process for acquiring new permits and permit amendments has been initiated with both the State and Lawrence County.  If the permits are not granted, a portion of the estimated mineral reserves will not be available to mine.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-9

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑3:          Summary of Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Gold Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Proven	27,976	0.022	620	0.010	80
Probable	8,306	0.028	231	0.010	80
Total proven and probable	36,282	0.023	851	0.010	80

Notes to accompany mineral reserve table:

1. The Mineral Reserve estimates are current as at December 31, 2021, and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is delivery to the heap leach facility.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

3. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional open pit mining; gold price of US$1,400/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 0.010 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 78.7% across all rock types; royalty burden of US$56/oz Au; pit slope angles that vary from 34–50º; mining costs of $2.15/st mined, rehandle costs of US$1.65/st rehandled, process costs of US$10.34/st processed (includes general and administrative costs).

4. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

1.12 Mining Methods

The last geotechnical study was completed in 2021 by personnel from third-party consultants, Respec.  The current pit slope design configurations were concluded to be appropriate, but there was an opportunity to design the ultimate pit with steeper slopes.

Water infiltration near the 5,960 ft elevation has made drill and blast activities below this horizon challenging.  Previous mining advanced benches to the 5,920 ft bench.  Current mineral reserve estimates include material down to the 5,900 ft elevation.

In-situ ore and waste must be blasted prior to removal.  Several historic pits that were partially backfilled are being mined again and the backfilled material is considered re-handle and does not require blasting.  Waste material removed for access to the ore is taken to one of the waste rock storage facilities (WRSF) sites.  The WRSF sites are all designed to fill existing pits and are reclaimed as soon as possible after placement.  Mined ore is either placed in a stockpile or placed directly into the primary crusher ore hopper. Crushed ore is then conveyed to a final product stockpile.  Crushed ore is picked up by loaders and placed in trucks to be dumped in 20 ft lifts on one of the five heap leach pads.

Once ore is leached and neutralized, it is considered spent ore and upon approval from the South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources (DANR), can be unloaded from the pad, and the pad can be reused for fresh ore loading.  The spent ore is used to backfill pits within defined perimeter of pollution zones.  These are zones in which the DANR allows a variance to groundwater standards.  Within each perimeter of pollution zone, nitrates in the spent ore in specific quantities can be placed.  The current active perimeters of pollution zones have physical capacities to contain the estimated mineral reserves.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-10

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The production plan assumes an eight-year mine life to 2029.

Equipment is leased, and conventional to open pit operations.  The fleet includes drills, dozers, wheel and motor loaders, haul trucks, back- and track-hoes, water, oil, sand trucks and snowplows.

The mine operations personnel requirement for the remaining LOM averages 255.

1.13 Recovery Methods

The process plant design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.  Debottlenecking and optimization activities since Coeur acquired the operations have increased capacities and efficiencies.

Ore is trucked to the crusher located at the east end of the plant/pad area to be crushed to a nominal size of 83% minus ½ inch. The crushing plant can process between 4.2–4.6 Mst/a of ore, depending on ore hardness. Lime is added to the crushed ore.  Once crushed, the ore is trucked to leach pads to be stacked in 20 ft high lifts to a maximum height of 150 ft above liner.

Stacked ore is then leached with dilute sodium cyanide solution.  Gold and silver in the pregnant (metal-bearing) leach solution are recovered by adsorption on activated carbon and the barren (non-metal bearing) leach solution is recycled to the heap leach pad.  Spent ore is rinsed, neutralized, and denitrified and then removed from the leach pad to be placed on a designated spent ore storage area.

Gold and silver are recovered from loaded carbon using a modified pressure Zadra method.  The rich electrolyte from elution is processed by electrowinning, depositing the metals into an electrolytic sludge composed of 90–98% gold and silver.

Precious metals in the electrolytic sludge are purified by smelting at a commercial refinery.

Silver to gold ratios in the process feed have historically varied from near 1:1 to >40:1. These variations in the ore delivered to the pad have resulted in wide swings in the product composition produced by the plant.  Plant gold efficiency during the low silver periods reaches the industry norm of +95% for this type of plant.  During periods when the silver concentration begins to climb, silver preferentially loading on the carbon reduces both the plant gold and silver efficiencies.  Changes in the plant stripping circuit have improved the ability for the plant to compensate for the additional silver content.

The plant has sufficient electrowinning capacity and can adjust strip cycles to increase the carbon volume processed.  During periods of extremely high silver grades, the retort is used at maximum capacity.  Consumption of reagents also increases with additional silver content.  Greater amounts of cyanide are consumed by increased silver in leach solutions.  Changes in the plant stripping schedule also affect sodium hydroxide and carbon consumption rates.

Processing power requirements are approximately 13,700 MWh per year, and this power requirement is consistent through the LOM plan.  Water, where needed, is from well sources.  Consumables used in processing include activated carbon, cyanide, nitric acid, caustic, anti-scalant, hydrogen peroxide, and lime.

The personnel requirements in the heap leach and process area for the LOM total 67.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-11

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

1.14 Infrastructure

All infrastructure required to support operations is constructed and operational.  On-site infrastructure includes production and monitoring water wells, offices, maintenance, warehouse and various ancillary facilities, open-pit mining areas, WRSFs, crushing and conveying facilities, five lined heap leach pads, two water treatment plants and a process facility.  There is an onsite assay laboratory as well as a metallurgical laboratory.  There is no onsite accommodation.  Employees reside in adjacent communities.

There are currently five on/off heap leach pads used for the leaching cycle.  Each pad is loaded in 20 ft lifts to a maximum of 150 ft above the liner.  Each lift is wetted with a dilute sodium cyanide solution.  In the final stages of precious metal recovery from the heap leach, sodium cyanide addition ceases for the rinsing stage.  The rinsing stage of leaching recovers the final gold and silver ounces prior to spent ore treatment.  Once all expected gold is recovered, the pad enters the neutralization/denitrification stage.  Denitrification continues until the spent ore meets the criteria for off-loading.  When the spent ore is approved for removal from the pad, the spent ore is trucked to a spent ore storage area.

Spent ore backfill on unlined facilities is permitted by way of a groundwater discharge permit.  Currently Coeur has both un-lined and lined spent ore facilities.  DANR has approved a Perimeter of Operational Pollution zone for each permit and allows for a variance to select groundwater standards within the Perimeter of Operational Pollution zones.

Waste rock is disposed of in designated waste rock storage facility (WRSF) areas, and is currently typically used to backfill existing pits.  All WRSFs are located within the permitted disturbance boundary.  There is sufficient space in the WRSFs for the LOM plan waste storage requirements.

The water management system consists of five major sections:  five leach pad cells, five process ponds (pregnant, barren, overflow, contingency, and neutralization), three water treatment plants, treated water discharge/spray system, and a lead detection/recapture system.

Electrical power is supplied by Black Hills Power via a 12.47kV transmission line that runs up Nevada Gulch.  This transmission line is shared by Terry Peak Ski Area, Spearfish Canyon, and residential customers.  There are two onsite generators to support operations in case of a power failure.

1.15 Markets and Contracts

1.15.1 Market Studies

Coeur has established contracts and buyers for the gold concentrate product from the Wharf Operations and has an internal marketing group that monitors markets for all of Coeur’s key products.  Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that Coeur’s key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

1.15.2 Commodity Pricing

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts. 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-12

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves:

o US$1,400/oz Au;

• Mineral resources: 

o US$1,700/oz Au.

The economic analysis uses a reverting price curve, which results in a forecast range of US$1,750 for 2022 to US$1,600 for the last year of operations in 2029, and for the closure costs consolidated into 2030.

The QP considers the price forecasts to be reasonable.

1.15.3 Contracts

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, raise boring, ground support suppliers, and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

1.16 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

1.16.1 Environmental Studies and Monitoring

Baseline studies and monitoring were required for permitting.  Hydrogeological fate and transport modeling and baseline monitoring were also required for each groundwater discharge plan.  Statement of basis analyses were also required during each renewal of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) surface water discharge permits.

The Wharf Operations are materially in compliance with all current permit conditions and requirements and there are no outstanding material environmental issues.

1.16.2 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

Financial surety sufficient to reclaim the Wharf Operations mine and processing facilities is up to date and held by the state of South Dakota.  The closure bond plan associated with reclamation and post closure surety was updated in 2020. The estimated asset retirement obligation for the project is approximately $47.6 M.

Financial surety for the Golden Reward area, sufficient to conduct monitoring and maintenance during a 30-year post closure period, is up to date and held by the state of South Dakota.  The estimated asset retirement obligation for the project is approximately $0.61 M.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-13

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

1.16.3 Permitting

The Wharf Operations commenced in 1983 and have obtained all necessary environmental permits and licenses from the appropriate county, state and federal agencies for the open pit mines, heap leach pads, and all necessary support facilities.  Operational standards and management best practices were established to maintain compliance with applicable state and federal regulatory standards and permits.

1.16.4 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur currently enjoys a positive relationship with local communities.  The entire workforce is local to the area and mining is a historically important activity in Lawrence County.  The Wharf Operations continue to support local businesses and Coeur considers it reasonable to expect local community support during permit actions or other activities involving the public.

1.17 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital project cost estimates in the budget year are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Costs remaining for the LOM are sustaining capital costs, and include technology-related purchases, support equipment, light vehicles, other general or administrative expenditure, and mine plan required short-range infill drilling.

Sustaining capital costs total approximately US$16.4 M, capitalized drilling costs are US$5.3 M, for an overall capital cost estimate for the LOM of approximately US$21.7 M (Table 1‑4).

1.18 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

Operating costs include allocations for:

• Mine:  material movement, property access, hauling, loading, dozing, drilling, blasting, roads and yards, and general operating costs (maintenance group and operations salary supervision staff);

• Process:  pad load, pad unload, crushing, leaching, process operating, denitrification, water treatment, neutralization and metallurgical administration;

• General and administrative:  laboratory, exploration, warehouse, safety, engineering, environmental, human resources, information technology, land, senior management overhead costs, salaries, travel, training, insurance, production tax and general costs.

The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$664 M (Table 1‑5).  The LOM mining cost is forecast at US$2.23/st mined, the process cost estimate is US$7.39/st crushed and the general and administrative (G&A) cost estimate is US$2.89/st crushed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-14

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑4:          LOM Sustaining Capital Cost Estimate

Description	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	Total
Sustaining capital	1,392	3,000	3,000	3,000	3,000	3,000	—	—	16,392
Capitalized drilling	1,610	2,103	1,550	—	—	—	—	—	5,263
Total Capital	3,002	5,103	4,550	3,000	3,000	3,000	—	—	21,655

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 1‑5:          LOM Total Operating Cost Estimate

	LOM Totals (US$ x 1,000)	US$/st	Units
Mining	293,752	2.23	US $/st mined
Pad loading	34,426	0.96	US $/st crushed
Pad unloading	48,477	1.35	US $/st crushed
Crushing	83,849	2.33	US $/st crushed
Plant	99,538	2.76	US $/st crushed
Services	104,164	2.89	US $/st crushed
LOM Total	664,207
Mining cost		2.23	US $/st mined
Process cost		10.29	US $/st crushed

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

1.19 Economic Analysis

1.19.1 Forward-Looking Information

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage.

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-15

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

1.19.2 Methodology and Assumptions

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model.  The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.  The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of eight years, with mining complete in 2029 and processing and gold production continuing to 2030.  Smelting and refining costs are defined by contract with Coeur’s primary refiner and customer.  Royalties included in the cashflow analysis are based on gold ounces mined or produced depending upon the agreement.  Net profits severance tax rates are 10%, royalty tax rates are 8%, and production taxes are US$8/oz Au sold.  Closure costs are estimated at US$47.6 M (Wharf Operations) and US$0.61 M (Golden Reward).  While the active mining operation ceases in 2029, closure costs are estimated to 2083.  For the purposes of the financial model, all costs incurred beyond 2030 are included in the cash flow as occurring in 2030.

1.19.3 Economic Analysis

The Project’s NPV at 5% is US$274.2 M.  As the cashflow is based on existing operations, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.  A summary of the financial results is provided in Table 1‑6.

1.19.4 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, grade, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a range of 30% above and below the base case values.  The NPV sensitivity to these parameters is illustrated in Table 1‑7, with the base case bolded.  Recovery is not shown as the sensitivity to recovery mirrors the sensitivity to metal price.

The Project is most sensitive to gold price, less sensitive to operating cost increases, and least sensitive to capital expenditure changes.  The primary sensitivity is to macroeconomic and other factors impacting gold pricing.  Coeur typically ensures that production from the Wharf Operations is sold in the year that the doré is produced.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-16

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑6:          Cashflow Summary Table

Item	Units	Value
Revenue	kUS$	1,145,120
Production costs	kUS$	738,310
Write downs	kUS$	3,471
Total costs and expenses	kUS$	741,782
EBITDA	kUS$	403,339
Amortization	kUS$	(60,130)
Accretion of liability	kUS$	(10,962)
Interest income	kUS$	(0)
Interest expense	kUS$	(1,031)
Income before taxes	kUS$	331,216
Income tax expense (benefit)	kUS$	36,827
Net income	kUS$	294,389
Add back amortization	kUS$	60,130
Add back accretion	kUS$	10,962
Operating cash flow before working capital changes	kUS$	365,481
Receivables trade	kUS$	(2)
Inventory variation	kUS$	19,961
Inventory - other	kUS$	(2,232)
Other current assets	kUS$	2,763
Tax payable	kUS$	163
Other liability items	kUS$	(13,548)
Operating cash flow	kUS$	372,587
Payments on capital leases	kUS$	(1,089)
AFE capital	kUS$	(18,947)
Total cash flow	kUS$	352,552
NPV @ 5%	kUS$	274,222

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-17

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 1‑7:          Sensitivity Table (US$ x 1,000)

Parameters	-30%	-20%	-10%	-5%	0%	5%	10%	20%	30%
Metal price	(2,155)	89,971	182,097	228,159	274,222	320,285	366,348	458,473	550,599
Operatingcosts	454,282	394,262	334,242	304,232	274,222	244,212	214,202	154,182	94,163
Capitalcosts	278,963	277,383	275,802	275,012	274,222	273,432	272,642	271,061	269,482
Grade	(2,155)	89,971	182,097	228,159	274,222	320,285	366,348	458,473	550,599

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

1.20 Risks and Opportunities

1.20.1 Risks

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates are identified in Chapter 1.10 and Chapter 1.11.3 respectively and discussed in more detail in Chapter 11 and Chapter 12.

Other risks noted include:

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  Any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

o Unforeseen geotechnical issues could lead to additional dilution, difficulty accessing portions of the ore body, or sterilization of broken or in situ ore.  There are sufficient management controls in place to effectively mitigate geotechnical risks.  Designed pit slopes have been evaluated for stability in several geotechnical studies and are regularly evaluated by the engineering group at the mine.  The QP considers that sufficient controls are in place at the Wharf Operations to effectively manage geotechnical risk, and the risk of significant impact on the mineral reserve estimate is low;

o Water infiltration near the 5,960 ft elevation has made drill and blast activities below this horizon challenging, and may affect the portion of the mine plan that is expected to reach the 5,900 ft elevation;

• Coeur leases the majority of the earth-moving equipment used at the mine.  Relationships with local dealers average 15 years.  Current truck and loader fleet lease rates are under contract through 2024 with an option for a two-year extension.  A major change in pricing would affect operating cost and have an impact on the mineral reserve estimates and the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-18

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

• The mineral reserve estimates are most sensitive to metal prices.  Coeur’s current strategy is to sell most of the metal production at spot prices, exposing the company to both positive and negative changes in the market, both of which are outside of the company’s control;

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Wharf Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates.

1.20.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Evaluation by third-party consultants suggested that the pit walls in the last stage of the pit could be steepened, potentially resulting in minor operating cost estimate savings.

1.21 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

1.22 Recommendations

As the Wharf Operations is an operating mine, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 1-19

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Registrant

Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, Ms. Lindsay Chasten, RM SME, Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, and Mr. John Key, RM SME, prepared this technical report summary (the Report) for Coeur Mining, Inc. (Coeur), on the Wharf Gold Operations (the Wharf Operations or the Project), located in South Dakota, as shown in Figure 2‑1.

Coeur acquired the Wharf Operations in February 2015 from Goldcorp Inc. (Goldcorp).  The Wharf Operations are conducted by Coeur’s wholly owned subsidiaries, Wharf Resources (USA) Ltd. (Wharf Resources) and Golden Reward Mining Limited Partnership (Golden Reward LP).

2.2 Terms of Reference

2.2.1 Report Purpose

The Report was prepared to be attached as an exhibit to support mineral property disclosure, including mineral resource estimates, for the Wharf Operations in Coeur’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported for the Portland Ridge open pit, which is exploiting the Wharf deposit.

2.2.2 Terms of Reference

The Wharf Operations consist of two contiguous property groups:

• Wharf group:  northern and western sectors of the Project area;

• Golden Reward group:  southern and eastern sectors of the Project area.

Mining commenced in 1982, and mining operations were conducted at the American Eagle, Green Mountain, Golden Reward, and Portland Ridgeline pits.  Currently, only the Portland Ridge open pit is active and is operated as a conventional truck and loader operation.

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial values are reported in United States (US) currency (US$) including all operating costs, capital costs, cash flows, taxes, revenues, expenses, and overhead distributions.

Unless otherwise indicated, the US customary unit system is used in this report for mineral resources and mineral reserves and associated financials.

Mineral resources and mineral reserves are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300) of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.  Illustrations, where specified in SK1300, are provided in the relevant Chapters of report where that content is requested.

The Report uses US English.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 2‑1:        Project Location Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2018.

2.3 Qualified Persons

The following Coeur or Wharf Resources employees serve as the Qualified Persons (QPs) for the Report:

• Mr. Christopher Pascoe, RM SME, Senior Director, Technical Services; Coeur

• Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, Operations Manager; Wharf Resources

• Ms. Lindsay Chasten, RM SME, Senior Geologist; Wharf Resources

• Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, Chief Geologist; Wharf Resources

• Mr. John Key, RM SME, Process Operations Manager; Wharf Resources

The QPs are responsible for, or co-responsible for, the Report Chapters set out in Table 2‑1.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 2‑1:          QP Chapter Responsibilities

QP Name	Chapter Responsibility
Mr. Chris Pascoe	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22; 2; 3; 4; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22.1, 22.2, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.16, 22.17, 22.18; 23; 24; 25.
Mr. Tony Auld	1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.11, 1.12, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.20, 1.22; 4; 7.3, 7.4; 12; 13; 15; 16; 17; 18; 22.1, 22.22.8, 22.9, 22.11, 22.12, 22.13, 22.14, 22.15, 22.17; 23; 24; 25
Ms. Lindsay Chasten	1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.20, 1.22; 2; 5; 6; 7.1, 7.2; 8; 9; 22.1, 22.3, 22.4, 22.5, 22.17; 23; 24; 25
Mr. Kenan Sarratt	1.1, 1.2, 1.10, 1.20, 1.22; 2; 11; 22.1, 22.7, 22.17; 23; 24; 25
Mr. John Key	1.1, 1.2, 1.9, 1.13, 1.17, 1.18, 1.20, 1.22; 2; 10; 14; 18.1, 18.2, 18.3.3, 18.3.7; 22.1, 22.6, 22.10, 22.14, 22.15, 22.17; 23, 24, 25

2.4 Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection

Mr. Pascoe’s most recent site visit was December 6, 2021.  He had previously visited the site on several occasions from 2015 to 2021.  During the site visits he reviewed mine planning and the overall operations.

Mr. Auld has been employed at the Wharf Operations since 2001, and this onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  During his time at Wharf, Tony has been involved in operations in the capacities of short/long-range planner, Chief Engineer, and Mine Manager.  In his current role he is responsible for the operations department and technical services.

Ms. Chasten has been employed at the Wharf Operations since 2010, and this onsite experience serves as her scope of personal inspection.  Lindsay is responsible for and familiar with, the reverse circulation (RC) drilling and sampling that supports the resource estimate, database management and quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC), site geology, and construction of the deposit geologic model.

Mr. Sarratt has been employed at the Wharf Operations since 2006, and this onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  Kenan is familiar with and has inspected site geology, exploration activities, drilling activities, and supervised the geological model and resource estimate.

Mr. Key has been employed at the Wharf Operations since 2015, and this onsite experience serves as his scope of personal inspection.  During his time at Wharf, John has been involved in operations in his role as Process Operations Manager.  In this role he is responsible for assay laboratory, metallurgical laboratory, crushing, leaching and adsorption, desorption and recovery (ADR) plant operations, as well as metals accounting and reporting.

2.5 Report Date

Information in the Report is current as at December 31, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

2.6 Information Sources and References

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

2.7 Previous Technical Report Summaries

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

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 2-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

3.1 Property Location

The Wharf Operations are in the northern Black Hills of western South Dakota, approximately 9 miles south of Interstate 90 near Spearfish, South Dakota and approximately 3.5 miles south and west of the city of Lead, South Dakota.

The centroid for the Project is 44°20’03”N Latitude, 103°50’06”W Longitude.

The Wharf property group centroid is 44°20’39”N Latitude, 103°51’02”W Longitude.

The Golden Reward property group centroid is 44°19’51”N Latitude, 103°48’46”W Longitude.

3.2 Ownership

Coeur wholly owns the Wharf Operations.

3.3 Mineral Title

3.3.1 Tenure Holdings

The Wharf Operations are situated within the following sections of land, located within the Black Hills Meridian, Lawrence County, South Dakota:

• Township 04 North, Range 02 East: Sections 01, 02, 03, 04, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 24;

• Township 04 North, Range 03 East: Sections 06, 07, 08, 17, 18, 19, and 20;

• Township 05 North, Range 02 East: Sections 16, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36;

• Township 05 North, Range 03 East: 17, 18, 19, 20, 29, 30, 32.

The Wharf property group consists of 362 patented lode claims, 35 government lots, 133 subdivided lots, and 59 federal unpatented lode claims (Table 3‑1).  The Golden Reward property group encompasses 196 patented lode claims, 14 government lots, 19 subdivided lots, and 34 federal unpatented lode claims (Table 3‑2).  An overall tenure location plan is included as Figure 3‑1.

Claim details are provided in Appendix A.

3.3.2 Tenure Maintenance Requirements

The patented lands are private land and not subject to federal claim maintenance requirements.  However, as private land, they are subject to ad valorem property taxes assessed by Lawrence County, South Dakota, which may be paid semi-annually by April 30 and October 3 each year.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑1:          Title Summary Table, Wharf Group

Title	Title Type	Area and Comment
Patented lands	Surface estate	Approximately 3,599 net acres
	Mineral estate *	Approximately 652 net mineral acres
	Non-Precambrian mineral estate #	Approximately 3,243 net mineral acres
	Precambrian mineral estate	Approximately 1,603 net mineral acres
Federal unpatented lands	Federal unpatented lode claims	Approximately 287 net acres of federal public land appropriated

Notes:  * Includes only lands where both the Precambrian and younger formations are owned or controlled. # Less and except all the Precambrian formation.  The Precambrian mineral estate is defined in Chapter 3.7.2.

Table 3‑2:          Title Summary Table, Golden Reward Group

Title	Title Type	Area and Comment
Patented lands	Surface estate	Approximately 1,355 net acres
	Mineral estate *	Approximately 2,987 net mineral acres
	Non-Precambrian mineral estate #	Approximately 357 net mineral acres
	Precambrian mineral estate	Approximately 153 net mineral acres
Federal unpatented lands	Federal unpatented lode claims	Appropriating approximately 25 net acres of federal public land

Notes:  * Includes only lands where both the Precambrian and younger formations are owned or controlled. # Less and except all the Precambrian formation.  The Precambrian mineral estate is defined in Chapter 3.7.2.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑1:        Mineral Tenure Location Plan

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Ad valorem taxes are paid in arrears in South Dakota.  As at the Report date, all required payments had been made.

The federal unpatented lode claims are maintained by the timely annual payment of claim maintenance fees, which are presently $165 per claim, payable to the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management on or before September 1 each year.  Should the annual claim maintenance fee not be paid by or before then, the unpatented lode claim(s) are, by operation of law, rendered forfeited.  As at the Report date, all required payments had been made.

3.4 Property Agreements

3.4.1 Black Hills Chair Lift Company 2010 Agreement

The locations of the properties subject to agreements with Black Hills Chair Lift Company are shown in Figure 3‑2.

Effective December 1, 2010, Wharf Resources entered into an agreement with Black Hills Chair Lift Company, as amended, concerning mutual obligations to benefit expansion of the Wharf and Golden Reward mine operations into a new permit area and operation of the Terry Peak Ski Area (2010 Agreement).

Under the terms of the 2010 Agreement, Wharf Resources agreed to cooperate “to minimize interference with the Terry Peak Ski Area ski season by only conducting mining activities between April 15 and Thanksgiving of each calendar year, unless other dates are agreed upon by the parties.”

The 2010 Agreement generally provides that the Black Hills Chair Lift Company will support and assist Wharf Resources in obtaining permits and authorizations for the expanded mine operations and will provide consent and access on lands it owns for Wharf Operations mining activities in exchange for financial support, conveyance of specified parcels, water use, and other consideration, which are set forth under five distinct phases.  Two are complete, and the three that are not complete are described below.

The 2010 Agreement Phase 1 envisaged that mining at Golden Reward would be completed and the site reclaimed between 2017 and 2019.  Reclamation has since been completed at Golden Reward.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑2:        Property Agreements Location Plan

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The remaining 2010 Agreement phases include:

• 2010 Agreement Phase 4:  After the completion of mining and reclamation in the Golden Reward Mine expansion area, Wharf Resources is required to pay the Black Hills Chair Lift Company a total of $2,250,000, which will cover a chair lift run extension, conveyance of a parking lot, gravelling a new carpark, and conveyance of 100 acres for new ski trails, extended ski runs, and a new lift area.  This obligation is not expected to be incurred until reclamation at the Golden Reward mining area is completed, which is currently projected at 2024.

• 2010 Agreement Phase 5:  Wharf Resources is to pay the Black Hills Chair Lift Company $1,000,000 after completion of mining in the "new permit area," which may only be applied towards construction costs of a new ski lodge, provided that Wharf Resources is not required to make this payment "if mining ceases in the new permit area due to lack of profitability, resulting in the execution of less than 90% of the original mine plan in the new permit area. This lack of profitability could be caused by low gold prices, high operating costs, incorrect geological models, or any combination of all three factors."  The Phase 5 obligation is not expected to be fulfilled until 2024, and upon the condition that 90% of the mineral reserves have been mined.

3.4.2 Black Hills Chair Lift Company 2011 Agreement

Under the 2010 Agreement, Wharf Resources and the Black Hills Chair Lift Company entered into a Lease Agreement dated effective November 1, 2011, concerning Lots 6, 7, and 8 in Block 2, Lost Camp Tract B (the Lease), replacing a prior ground lease between Golden Reward, as landlord, and Terry Peak Snowmaking Co. LLC, as tenant.

There is no rent due to Wharf Resources under the terms of the Lease.  The Lease commenced on November 1, 2011 with a termination date set for April 15, 2012; however, the Lease further provides that it “shall automatically renew for the same term on November 1 of each year, unless either gives to the other party thirty 30 days’ written notice of non-renewal.”

The Black Hills Chair Lift Company is required to indemnify and hold Wharf Resources harmless from all penalties, claims, demands, liabilities, expenses, and losses of whatever nature, arising from the Black Hills Chair Lift Company’s use of the properties, including reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by Wharf Resources for any litigation, or threatened litigation, which arises out of the Black Hills Chair Lift Company’s use of the properties.

3.4.3 Black Hills Chair Lift Company Stock Purchase Agreement and Option

On September 9, 1987, Golden Reward purchased 800 shares of common stock in the Black Hills Chair Lift Company.

Section 4.7 grants Black Hills Chairlift Company the option to purchase lands within a 500-yard radius of the lower terminus of the Red Chair Lift when mining and reclamation of the lands have been completed.  This includes 12 patented lode claims and one government lot.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

3.4.4 Timber Cutting Agreements

In November 2013, both Wharf Resources and Golden Reward entered into Timber Cutting Agreements with Neiman Timber Co., L.C. encumbering many patented claims and subdivided lots located outside of the mine corridor.

The Timber Cutting Agreements provide a revenue source, reduce the real property taxes, and ensure sustainable timber management.  The term of both Timber Cutting Agreements was 10 years to 2023.  The agreements are renewable by mutual agreement of the parties.

3.5 Surface Rights

Surface rights are a combination of patented lode claims, federal unpatented lode claims, government lots and fee property.

No additional rights are needed to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan presented in this Report.

3.6 Water Rights

Potable water is supplied to the Wharf Operations by wells.  Coeur owns multiple groundwater and surface water rights sufficient to support ongoing operations.

No additional water rights are anticipated to be required for LOM operations.

3.7 Royalties

A location map showing the locations of claims subject to royalties is provided in Figure 3‑3.

3.7.1 Dykes, Jumper and Handley Mineral Lease and Royalty

A Mineral Lease, as amended, covering the mineral estate of 34 patented lode claims, comprising approximately 291.1 acres, is leased from John R. Dykes, Arlen Jumper, and the estate of Thomas Handley (SunTrust Bank, Trustee).  The location of the properties under this agreement are shown in Figure 3‑2.

The corresponding surface estate of these patented lode claims is owned by Wharf Resources.

The term of the Mineral Lease was 10 years from July 18, 1979, but the term was automatically continued for so long thereafter as the Wharf Resources was actively engaged in exploring, developing or mining the leased premises or was in the actual process of developing a producing mine.

During the term of the Mineral Lease, the lessors were also entitled to a royalty on production, if any, of 3% of the net smelter returns (NSR) of all silver and gold ores, together with other ores and minerals.  In addition, there is an advance minimum royalty due the lessors of $5,000 per year unless and until Wharf Resources identifies and publishes a reserve encompassing the leased premises, at which point the advance minimum royalty increases to $25,000 per year.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑3:        Claims Subject To Royalties

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-8

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

3.7.2 Carlson Royalty

Under a June 8, 1999 Minerals Royalty Deed, Wharf Resources conveyed to Alvin R. Carlson a non-participating production royalty of 2% on gold produced from ores mined and delivered to the heap leach pads, from an undivided ⅛ interest in the minerals, including the Precambrian Mineral Estate (see below for definition), within and beneath the following parcels:  Lots 1, 2 and 4, Block 5 of Plat #2 Bald Mountain Mining Company, Town of Trojan, forming portions of USMS #1226 and USMS #2027, and comprising 2.4 acres.

The Precambrian Mineral Estate includes the area beneath the “Precambrian Surface” which is defined as the Precambrian Surface at any point in the Properties means: (i) where the Cambrian formations overlie the Precambrian formations, that the point of separation marked by the erosional disconformity between early Proterozoic metasediments and the younger overlying sedimentary rocks of Cambrian or younger age and (ii) where Cambrian or younger formations do not overlie Precambrian formations, the surface of the ground."

3.7.3 Homestake Mining Company of California Royalty

Under an April 18, 1986 Quitclaim Deed from Wharf Resources to Homestake Mining Company of California (Homestake), Wharf Resources granted Homestake a sliding scale production royalty (Table 3‑3) on the gross value of all gold in saleable form on the mineral estate, including the Precambrian Mineral Estate, of those certain lands owned by Dykes, Jumper and Handley, and leased to Wharf Resources, together with 11 unpatented lode claims.

The severance tax paid to the State of South Dakota on the gross value of production is the only allowable deduction to this royalty.

Under a March 15, 1988 Deed, as amended, from Homestake to Golden Reward, Homestake reserved a 5% NSR royalty on production from materials younger than the Precambrian age within the Bonanza (USMS #516), Plutus (USMS #517A), Buxton (USMS #518), Cheetor (USMS #519), Clarinda (USMS #520), and Clarinda Extension (USMS #1097) patented lode claims, which comprise 50.3 acres, and are located within the Golden Reward Group.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-9

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑3:          Homestake Royalty

Percentage of Gross Value (%)	Monthly Average London PM Gold Fix ($ per ounce)
0	<350
0.5	350–399
1.0	400–499
2.0	>500

3.7.4 Krejci and Kane Royalty

Under a February 18, 1986 Offer and Agreement to Purchase, Wharf Resources, as buyer, agreed to pay Frank Krejci, Rosina G. Krejci, and Rita J. Kane, as sellers, a contractual, non-participating production royalty of 4%, on any and all minerals, including those from the Precambrian Mineral Estate, from the following undivided interests, in the following four patented lode claims:  100% for the Paddy Ford (USMS #1581), 50% for the Hidden Ore (USMS #1229), and 16.67% for the Saxon and Delancy (USMS #1229).  These patented lode claims comprise 33.29 acres.  Under the terms of the Offer and Agreement to Purchase, this non-participating production royalty is capped at, and therefore limited to, $100,000.

3.7.5 Kunz Royalty

Under a December 31, 1990 Contract for Deed, James A. Kunz and Marjorie L. Kunz reserved a 5% production royalty on all gold recovered from two patented lode claims, the Wm. B. Allison and Summit Flat (USMS #1516), which encompass 28.07 acres.  This production royalty also encumbers the Precambrian Mineral Estate.

3.7.6 Mountain View Heights, Inc. Royalty

Under a January 19, 2011 Warranty Deed, Mountain View Heights, Inc. retained a production royalty of 1.5% on gold produced from the 5.46-acre Dark Horse (USMS #866) patented lode claim.  This production royalty also encumbers the Precambrian Mineral Estate.

3.7.7 Royal Gold, Inc. Royalty

Under five December 21, 1988 Quitclaim Deeds, one February 1, 1989 Quitclaim Deed, and two agreements dated November 1, 1994 and September 1, 1996, Royal Gold, Inc., the successor in interest to Homestake, holds a sliding scale production royalty on the gross value of all gold in saleable form (Table 3‑4).  This royalty encumbers most of the lands comprising the Wharf Group, together with a small portion of the lands encompassing the Golden Reward Group, and wholly excludes the Precambrian Mineral Estate (Figure 3‑4).

The severance tax paid to the State of South Dakota on the gross value of production is the only allowable deduction to this royalty.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-10

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 3‑4:          Royal Gold Royalty

Percentage of Gross Value (%)	Monthly Average London PM Gold Fix ($ per ounce)
0	<350
0.5	350–399
1.0	400–499
2.0	>500

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-11

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑4:        Claims Subject to Royal Gold Royalty

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-12

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

3.7.8 Thompson Revocable Trust Royalty

Under a February 9, 1982 Deed, the predecessors in interests to the Thomas F. Thompson and Charlotte J. Thompson Revocable Trust, dated September 18, 2001 reserved a perpetual, non-participating 3% NSR royalty from all ores and minerals produce, sold, and saved from the 6.1 acre Clinton (USMS #956) patented lode claim.

3.7.9 Valentine Royalty

Under two September 27, 1974 Minerals Royalty Deeds, as amended, Wharf Resources’ predecessor in interest, Bald Mountain Mining Company, conveyed to Donald D. Valentine, et al. a 3% nonparticipating royalty on gold that is produced from ores mined and delivered to heap leach pads or recovered from tailings.  This royalty encumbers the mineral estate, including the Precambrian Mineral Estate, of much of the lands comprising the Wharf Group (Figure 3‑5).

Wharf Resources holds a right of first refusal to purchase this royalty, a portion of which was repurchased in 2020.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-13

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 3‑5:        Claims Subject to Valentine Royalty

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-14

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

3.7.10 White House Congress, Inc. Royalty

Under two June 1, 1976 conveyances from White House Congress, Inc. (White House) to Wharf Resources’ predecessor in interest, Homestake Mining Company, White House reserved a 5% gross production royalty of the recovered value of any metals or minerals produced from the ores extracted from 27 patented lode mining claims, which comprise 318.3 acres.  Proceeds from this gross production royalty, pursuant to the conveyances’ reservations, are capped at $200.00 per acre.

3.8 Encumbrances

3.8.1 Credit Agreement

Under a September 29, 2017 Credit Agreement by and between Coeur Mining, Inc., certain subsidiaries of Coeur Mining, Inc. (including Wharf Resources), and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent (as amended, the Credit Agreement), a Mortgage, Assignment of Production, Assignment of Leases and Rents, Security Agreement, Financing Statement, and Fixture Filing (the Instrument), was executed by Wharf Resources, Wharf Rewards Mines Inc., Wharf Gold Mines Inc., Golden Reward, and Wharf Resources Management Inc., as mortgagors and Bank of America, N.A., as beneficiary and mortgagee.  Under the terms of the Instrument, a lien was placed upon the legal and beneficial title in and to the lands comprising the Wharf Property, securing a loan under the Credit Agreement, in an aggregate principal amount of up to $300,000,000.  The Credit Agreement matures in March 2025.

3.8.2 Permitting Requirements

The Wharf Operations are fully permitted (see also discussion in Chapter 17.4).

3.8.3 Permitting Timelines

There are no relevant permitting timelines that apply to the Wharf Operations; the operations as envisaged in the LOM plan are fully permitted.

3.8.4 Violations and Fines

There are no major violations or fines as understood in the United States mining regulatory context that have been reported for the Wharf Operations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-15

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

3.9 Significant Factors and Risks That May Affect Access, Title or Work Programs

To the extent known to the QP, there are no other known significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the properties that comprise the Wharf Operations that are not discussed in this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 3-16

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

4.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

4.1 Physiography

The Wharf Operations are in the Black Hills, a small mountain range that is predominantly located in western South Dakota and extends westward into Wyoming.  The Black Hills uplift is the easternmost part of the Rocky Mountains, and as an isolated range, is surrounded by the northern Great Plains.  Elevations above sea level range from approximately 3,500–7,242 ft, with the highest elevation at Black Elk Peak.  South of, and adjacent to, the mine is Terry Peak at 7,064 ft.  The Terry Peak Ski Area is on Terry Peak and used during winters.

Within the existing mine permit boundary, the highest elevation is 6,630 ft at Foley Ridge; the lowest is 5,630 ft in the northernmost drainage.  The Wharf Operations lie in an area of moderately steep terrain.

The area is primarily forested with ponderosa pine, and to a lesser extent, Black Hills spruce.

The general area is cut by two principal drainages, Cleopatra Creek, which drains to the north, and Annie Creek, which drains to the southwest.  However, there are no live streams in any of the permit areas.

4.2 Accessibility

The town of Lead, South Dakota, is approximately 61 miles from Rapid City, South Dakota, the second-largest city in the state.  Access between Rapid city and Lead is by way of a major Interstate highway (I-90) and local rural highways.  Rapid City is serviced by an all-weather airport.

Access to the operations from Lead is by Nevada Gulch Road, a paved road, which is followed for 4.6 miles to the Wharf Mine Road, an all-weather gravel road, which is followed for 2.1 miles to the mine office.

4.3 Climate

The climate in the Wharf Operations area is classified as cold and semi-arid.

Average annual precipitation at the Wharf Operations is 30.5 inches, and the average annual snowfall is 199 inches.  Between 1990–2014, annual precipitation at the mine ranged from 14.64–41.29 inches.

Average temperatures range from a high of 71°F to a low of 16°F.

Mining operations are conducted year-round.

4.4 Infrastructure

The town of Lead provides most of the services required to support the Wharf Operations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 4-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The Wharf Operations have a well-developed mine infrastructure and a local workforce with extensive experience in mining operations.

Electrical power is supplied by Black Hills Power via a 12.47kV transmission line that runs on rights-of-way granted to Black Hills Power.  Three diesel generators provide backup power sufficient to supply all plant, process, and administrative operations in the event of a grid power failure.  Montana Dakota Utilities provides natural gas to the site via buried pipelines.

Water is sourced from four small production wells located onsite; however, much of the makeup water required for processing and plant operations is garnered from meteoric water captured within the lined pad/pond system.

The Wharf Operations currently have all infrastructure in place to support mining and processing activities (see also discussions in Chapter 13, Chapter 14, and Chapter 15 of this Report).  These Report Chapters also discuss water sources, electricity, personnel, and supplies.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 4-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

5.0 HISTORY

5.1 Wharf

Gold was discovered in the Black Hills during the 1874 reconnaissance by the Custer expedition.  The first lode claims, on what became the Homestake property, were located in 1875, and fossil placer deposits in basal conglomerate of the Deadwood Formation were found at about the same time (Luoma and Lowe, 2010).  The original discovery at Bald Mountain was by A.J. Smith in 1877.  In 1877, following discoveries of alluvial gold in the Black Hills, the first claims were staked over the Wharf Mine.  Underground production was recorded along high-angle structures between 1901 and 1959.

Between 1911 and 1928, claims were consolidated under the Bald Mountain Mining Company and the Golden Reward Consolidated Mining and Milling Company.

From April 1974 onward, exploration companies began to consolidate the Annie Creek district.  On October 31, 1974, the Bald Mountain 50/50 Partnership was formed between Homestake Mining Company (Homestake as manager) and Taiga Gold Inc. (Taiga Gold).

Wharf Ltd. drilled 91 holes in 1979 and 1980; permitted the Annie Creek mine for production in 1982; and began construction with first production in 1983, when another 32 holes were drilled.  Full-scale production was achieved by May 1984 at Annie Creek.  The Wharf Resources Partnership was formed in 1984 through the merger of Wharf Ltd and Wharf USA Inc.

Mining at the current location commenced in 1983 and surface mine operations included (Figure 5‑1):

• Twelve open pits:  Annie Creek, Juno, Foley, Portland, West Portland, Deep Portland, Trojan, Green Mountain, Bald Mountain, Flossie and American Eagle;

• An ore processing area:  a crusher, five heap leach pads, a leachate processing plant, three water treatment facilities, seven lined process ponds and associated piping, and lined ditches;

• Three spent ore depositories:  Ross Valley, American Eagle, and Juno/Foley, which includes the lined 33-Vertical, North Foley, and Polo depositories;

• Three waste rock storage facilities (WRSFs):  Reliance, Trojan, and Cleopatra Creek;

• Access and haul roads;

• Historical (relic) mine tailings.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 5‑1:        Location Plan, Historical Open Pits

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

5.2 Golden Reward

The Golden Reward Mining and Milling Company was formed in 1897 by the consolidation of the Golden Reward Gold Mining Company and the Deadwood and Delaware Smelting Company. Operation of the mine and mill ceased in 1918 with little exploration activity (Naething 1938).

The Anaconda Company purchased the holdings of the Golden Reward Mining and Milling Company in 1940 and held them until 1985.  After many mergers, MinVen purchased a 100% interest and promptly sold a 60% interest to Wharf Resources.  The Golden Reward Mining Limited Partnership was formed in 1992, consisting of subsidiaries of both MinVen and Wharf Resources. Wharf Resources assumed management responsibility of the limited partnership in 1992.

The Golden Reward mining area was closed in 2009 and placed into Post Closure Status with the state of South Dakota Closure monitoring and maintenance are conducted in accordance with the Golden Reward Post Closure Plan and Financial Assurance document.  A portion of the West side of Golden Reward was re-opened in 2012 with State Permit #476.  Coeur subsequently mined the Golden Reward area from July 2014 through October 2017.  Zones exploited included the Harmony and Liberty orebodies.

A summary of the recent exploration and development activities for Wharf and Golden Reward is provided in Table 5‑1.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 5‑1:          Exploration and Development History Summary Table

Year	Operator	Comment
1974	Taiga Gold	Property acquisition
	Taiga Gold and Homestake	Joint venture formed
	Taiga Gold	Granted options to purchase Homestake's 50% interest in its remaining Bald Mountain properties.  Taiga Gold purchased Homestake’s interest in the joint venture to add the Foley Ridge and adjacent deposits
1977	Goldex Holdings, Inc.	Company formed, subsequently renamed to Wharf Resources
1982	Wharf Resources	Acquired Taiga Gold Awarded mining permit for Annie Creek open pit
1985		Foley Ridge and Annie Arm mining permits were approved, which extended the original Annie Creek pit
1987	Dickenson Mines Limited (Dickenson)	Acquired the majority shareholding in Wharf Resources
1994	Goldcorp Inc. (Goldcorp)	Became the continuing corporation following the amalgamation of Goldcorp, Dickenson Goldquest Exploration Inc. and CSA Management Limited. Geophysical survey was flown covering both the Wharf and Golden Reward properties.
1996		Announced a takeover bid for the 49.7% stake in Wharf Resources that it did not already own; Wharf Resources becomes a Goldcorp subsidiary
1998		Clinton mining permit was approved
2012		Mining permit approved to expand mining into Green Mountain
2015	Coeur Mining, Inc.	Acquires Wharf Resources from Goldcorp.
2015–2021		Annual expansion and infill drilling.  Updated Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 5-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

6.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION, AND DEPOSIT

6.1 Deposit Type

The deposits in the Wharf Operations area are considered to be examples of structurally controlled and disseminated gold mineralization.  The Wharf deposit has been described as a hydrothermal replacement deposit, (Lessard and Loomis, 1990) a Carlin-type deposit (Paterson, 1990), and more recently as a low- to intermediate-sulfidation epithermal deposit. (Pedraza Rojas, 2017).

Host rocks to epithermal deposits are dominantly silty carbonates, but mineralization can also be present in siliceous and silicified rocks as well as intrusive rocks.  Low- to intermediate-sulfidation epithermal deposits commonly exhibit significant structural (faults) and stratigraphic (composition/permeability) controls.  Mineralization often consists of extremely fine-grained disseminated gold, hosted primarily by arsenian pyrite.

Wharf differs from this standard model in that host rocks are dominantly sandstone with varying carbonate content and trachytic porphyry, and mineralization consists of native gold and electrum and remobilized gold in addition to early-stage gold-bearing sulfides.

6.2 Regional Geology

The Black Hills are located at the junction of several major terranes that have been the locus of repeated rifting and collisional events (Redden et al., 1990; Dahl et al., 2005; Dahl et al., 2006).  The Black Hills are in the Wyoming boundary zone, on the eastern edge of the Wyoming craton (McCormick, 2008).  A complex deformational history is preserved in the Laramide age Black Hills uplift which exposes Archean through Oligocene rocks (Figure 6‑1).

Laramide-age uplift of the Black Hills was accommodated along north and northwest-trending monoclines over deeper thrust faults (Lisenbee and DeWitt, 1993), forming an asymmetrical dome that is exposed over an area 120 miles in length and 60 miles in width.  Regional uplift, doming, and subsequent erosion exposed older, underlying Precambrian rocks in “windows” through the younger, overlying Phanerozoic rocks.

Contemporaneous Tertiary alkalic magmatic intrusive centers occur along a west–northwest-trending belt across the northern Black Hills (Harris and Paterson, 1996), possibly controlled by a deep crustal structure.  The extension of this trend to the west–northwest also parallels several major faults and lineaments (Duke, 2005).

Igneous intrusions are exposed from Devil’s Tower and the Missouri Buttes in Wyoming, through the Wharf mine area to Bear Butte near Sturgis, South Dakota, almost 70 miles along strike.  Intrusive rocks in the belt are primarily alkalic in composition.  Magmatic centers include a cluster around the Lead–Deadwood dome and the Cutting Stock (Lisenbee, 1981); this cluster has also been described as one major center and the entire intrusive dome as an associated zone of Tertiary-age mineralization (Shapiro and Gries, 1970).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑1:        Regional Geology Map

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Compositions of igneous bodies in the dome area include rhyolite, alkali rhyolite, trachyte, quartz trachyte, and phonolite, as well as intrusive breccias.

6.3 Local Geology

6.3.1 Lithologies

The Lead–Deadwood dome, a northwest-oriented structure about 5.5 miles long and 3.5 miles wide, exposes a Precambrian core of metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks, flanked by numerous Tertiary porphyritic intrusions and intrusive breccias.  The core is ringed outwards by sedimentary rocks including the Cambrian–Ordovician Deadwood Formation and Mississippian Pahasapa Limestone, which have both been mineralized at different locations.  Intrusive rocks, primarily sills, inflate the sedimentary section, and dikes and stocks intrude the Precambrian rocks.

A Project geology map is provided in Figure 6‑2.  Table 6‑1 is a summary of the sedimentary geology in the Project area and Figure 6‑3 is a stratigraphic column showing the sedimentary succession.  Table 6‑2 summarizes the intrusive lithologies.

6.3.2 Structure

The Precambrian basement fabric is oriented dominantly north–south in the local area, with the orientation shifting to the north–northwest to the east of the mine area.  Multiple Paleoproterozoic deformation and metamorphic events from the complex tectonic history of the Black Hills are recorded in the tightly to isoclinally folded and sheared Precambrian rocks.

The dominant forms of igneous intrusion are sills and laccoliths that commonly intrude at the level of the Deadwood Formation (Lisenbee, 1981).  The Cutting Stock, consisting of intrusions with various compositions, is exposed near the center of the Lead-Deadwood dome.  The Cutting Stock displays an uneven contact, due to numerous dikes intruding along north to northwest-striking foliation planes in the Precambrian rock (Lisenbee et al., 1981).  Intrusions can locally change geometry, an example being a dike swarm within the nearby Homestake open pit, where dikes intruded between Precambrian foliation planes form sills within the lower Deadwood Formation.

6.3.3 Alteration

The local area exhibits widespread regional potassic alteration.  Altered and mineralized rocks at Foley were relatively enriched in silica and potassium and contained lower sodium than their unaltered quartz alkali trachyte counterparts, and some phenocrysts were altered to sericite and clay (Harris and Paterson, 1996).

Argillization and subsequent brecciation along strongly mineralized fractures were observed (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).  Within intrusive rocks, alkali rhyolite alteration with clay or zeolite replacement of alkali feldspars were observed (Harris and Paterson, 1996), following oxidation of disseminated pyrite within porphyry (Emanuel and Walsh, 1987).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑2:        Project Geology Plan

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 6‑1:          Stratigraphic Table, Sedimentary Lithologies

Age	Unit	Comment
Mississippian	Pahasapa Limestone	Limestone and dolostone
Devonian	Englewood Formation	Argillaceous limestone
Ordovician	Whitewood Formation	Dolomite and sandy dolomite
	Winnipeg Formation	Icebox Shale, a gray to green or red shale
Cambrian–Ordovician	Deadwood Formation	Near-shore sequence of sandstones, siltstones, intraformational conglomerate, and shales with varying carbonate content. Shale units within the Deadwood Formation are mostly unmineralized, with sandier units acting as the main mineralization host.	Upper unit: sandstone, glauconitic sandstone, interbedded sandstone/siltstone/shale/limestone
			Calcareous gray shale, interbedded sandstone/siltstone/shale/limestone
			Sandstone, interbedded sandstone/siltstone/shale/limestone
Precambrian	Flag Rock and Ellison Formations	Quartzite, biotite/muscovite phyllite and schist, graphitic phyllite, iron formation, meta-tuffs, and other metavolcanic rocks

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 6‑2:          Intrusive Lithologies

Intrusive Type	Description	Observation
Phonolite	Green-gray porphyritic rock with few phenocrysts of sanidine and pyroxene	Post-mineralization. Forms a sill on top of Green Mountain, and forms multiple narrow, clay-altered dikes in the Wharf pits
Alkali rhyolite	Typically altered and partially mineralized granular potassium feldspar and quartz with trace aegirine needles	Occurs as a sill in the former Foley pit, as dikes and thin sills in the overlying Winnipeg Formation, more volumetrically significant south of the mine
Quartz alkali trachyte	Phenocrysts are sanidine and albite, with rare pyroxene, and some replacement of phenocrysts by Fe oxides or carbonate; quartz is present as a minor phenocryst phase	Most common rock type at Annie Creek
Trachyte	Potassium feldspar is typically the only phenocryst visible in hand samples of the currently mined sills. Trachyte at Annie Creek contains anorthoclase, aegirine/augite, hauyne, plagioclase, apatite, titanite, and calcite. Biotite phenocrysts are observed in rock chips in small (10–20 ft) intervals of trachyte in drill holes at Wharf.	Most mineralized and volumetrically significant igneous rock type in the present Wharf Operation
Breccia	Heterolithic clast-supported to crackle breccia, intrusive igneous breccia to hydrothermal breccia, matrix composed of variable proportions of silica, rock flour, iron oxides, and fluorite.	Mineralized to unmineralized

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑3:        Stratigraphic Column

Note: Figure prepared by Coeur (2015) and modified after Loomis and Alexander (1990).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

At the Annie Creek portion of the mine, weak propylitic alteration was suggested by the presence of secondary chlorite (Giebink and Paterson, 1986b).  Chlorite and epidote were observed as veins in trachyte, and sericite and chlorite formed replacements in rhyolite (Emanuel et al. 1990).  Limited early propylitic alteration was interpreted from epidote and chlorite replacement of feldspar within porphyry, and replacement of carbonate within calcareous sedimentary rocks (Emanuel et al., 1987).  Propylitic alteration predated silicification and was cross-cut by pyrite and fluorite veinlets.

A study of the eastern side of the deposit in the Bald Mountain and Golden Reward areas (Pedraza Rojas, 2017) identified stages of mineralization and alteration:

• Fenitization of intrusion;

• Hydrothermal replacement of orthoclase with albite, adularia, and quartz, and calcite precipitation along fractures and minor sulfide mineralization with some possible tellurides and electrum, coincident with shallower phyllic alteration;

• Argillic alteration, acid leaching, and breccia formation;

• Carbonate alteration, fluorite, pyrite, and base metal sulfide mineralization, and ore deposits of Au, tellurides, and electrum;

• Supergene alteration with some gold remobilization.

6.3.4 Mineralization

Mineralization was strongly structurally controlled, and high-angle structures fed mineralized zones. Mineralization at the Foley Ridge portion of the mine occurred in zones up to 100 ft from structures, or in manto-like deposits where structures were pervasive (Paterson and Giebink, 1989; Loomis and Alexander, 1990).  Manto-like replacement mineralization was noted in some of the sandstone units of the Deadwood Formation intersected by multiple silicified structures (Emanuel and Walsh, 1987).  Mineralization within the trachyte sill at Foley Ridge occurred in areas of fracturing, and was especially strong where fracturing was intense, particularly around structural highs and dikes (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).

The main host rock for high-grade mineralization is the sandstone and dolomitic zones of the lower member of the Deadwood Formation.  High-grade mineralization and extensive manto-like mineralization formed in this horizon where the Deadwood Formation was highly permeable, had a high carbonate component or cement, or was nearest to the fractures carrying mineralizing fluids from the less-permeable Precambrian units (Paterson and Giebink, 1989).

In the upper Deadwood Formation, rocks with original high carbonate and low quartz content are better mineralized (Giebink and Paterson, 1986a).  Although impermeable horizons such as thick sills and Deadwood Formation shales typically formed barriers to fluid and thus are generally not mineralized, in some areas they were exposed to early silicification and subsequent fracturing. With sufficient ground preparation, sills and shales were mineralized (Emanuel and Walsh, 1987).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-8

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Igneous bodies make up the bulk of the mineralized material at Wharf.  Historically mined sills of quartz alkali trachyte were well mineralized at Foley (e.g., Harris, 1991; Harris and Paterson, 1996).  Zones of pervasive mineralization occur in trachytic porphyry present in active pits.

Smaller intrusive bodies of different compositions are locally mineralized.  Mineralization occurs near dikes, sills, and in fracture and breccia zones (Emanuel and Walsh, 1987).  Narrow biotite-bearing porphyritic dikes and sills are also mineralized.  However, the late phonolite Is not known to be mineralized.

Gangue minerals associated with mineralization included quartz, fluorite, sericite, calcite/dolomite, barite, and clays (Emanuel and Walsh, 1987; Emanuel et al., 1990). Hydrothermal quartz found with mineralization at Foley Ridge formed small veinlets to large, up to 1 ft wide, drusy quartz-lined open fractures (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).

Fluorite was frequently noted in mineralized zones, occurring as massive pods, crystalline veins or in cavities, as well as replacing phenocrysts in porphyry and as matrix in breccias.  Fluorite is found in both mineralized and unmineralized rock and multiple phases of fluorite mineralization used the same conduits as the mineralization event(s).  Fluorite is considered a late-stage mineral (Paterson et al., 1989).

High-grade mineralization at Annie Creek is associated with clustered, euhedral marcasite with quartz (Giebink and Paterson, 1986a), which, along with quartz, was likely a replacement of dolomite (Paterson and Giebink, 1989).  Quartz and marcasite were later rimmed by arsenopyrite and replaced by arsenian pyrite (Giebink and Paterson, 1986a, Paterson and Giebink, 1989).  Later generations of slightly larger, disseminated, euhedral pyrite, followed by coarser void fillings of pyrite have been identified (Giebink and Paterson, 1986a).

Gold mineralization occurred as gold substitution within sulfides (e.g., Giebink and Paterson, 1986a), similar to occurrences of gold-bearing sulfides in Carlin-type systems, and as native gold with silver in the main stage of mineralization (Pedraza Rojas, 2017).  Historic mining at Two Johns and Golden Reward focused at times on the “blue ores,” which are silicified, unoxidized lower Deadwood Formation sandstone.  These “blue ores” were milled and roasted to recover gold (Miller, 1962). The benefits of roasting indicate at least a portion of the gold is within sulfides.  Thin sections of high-grade samples from the Annie Creek mine analyzed by Schurer and Fuchs (1991) show native gold associated with hematite, goethite, and jarosite, which forms from oxidation of iron sulfides, and arseniosiderite which forms from oxidation of arsenopyrite.  Quartz is also associated with gold.  A thin section from the lowest-grade sample in that study showed no native gold, but abundant sulfides, which was assumed to indicate lattice or sub-micrometer gold.

Silver to gold ratios vary throughout the district; at Golden Reward they range from 1:1 to 14:1 (Emanuel et al., 1990) averaging 4:1 during historic mining according to Emanuel and Walsh (1987).  At Annie Creek the average ratio was 2.5:1 (Lessard and Loomis, 1990), and the ratio was approximately 2:1 at Foley Ridge (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-9

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

6.4 Property Geology

6.4.1 Deposit Dimensions

The Wharf deposit dimensions range from 8,000–9,000 ft long in the east–northeast direction, 2,100–5,000 ft wide, 150 ft thick in historically mined areas to 500 ft in active pits.  Mineralization has been drill tested to varying depths to the Precambrian surface, which ranges from 5,400–6,200 ft in elevation across the deposit.

6.4.2 Lithologies

Trachytic sills are the bulk of the mineralized lithology within the mine plan.  Composition varies and includes trachytic, quartz trachytic, and quartz alkali feldspar trachytic (Pedraza, 2017). Phonolite is present as a large capping sill and as dikes and smaller sills and is post-mineral.

The entire Deadwood sequence is present in the current mine area, as well as some overlying Icebox Shale.  Manto-like mineralization occurs in the sandstone and dolomitic zones of the lower member of the Deadwood Formation, and narrower, higher-grade zones occur in the upper sandstone and glauconitic sandstone units.

Precambrian metamorphic rocks including phyllites and quartzites underlie the property and but not intercepted by any of the pits.

A trachyte sill is a main host for mineralization, with low-grade disseminated mineralization throughout the body.  Igneous bodies at Wharf are predominantly sills.  Dikes are less volumetrically important but occur in most mined areas.

The best mineralized intrusion, the lower trachyte sill, occurs in several pits at Wharf.  This trachyte sill was intruded both above and below the base of the Deadwood Formation.

A geological cross-section is included as Figure 6‑4.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-10

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑4:        Wharf Geology Cross-Section

Note:  Figure prepared by Pedraza (2018) and modified by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-11

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

6.4.3 Structure

Sills geometries in the pits vary.  Sill thickness is highly varied; almost the entire depth of the Foley and American Eagle pits were porphyry sills, but other pits intersected the sills where they were 20–30 ft thick.  Sills can be discordant across thick sequences of stratigraphy, moving up-section gradually, possibly along pre-existing structures.

A weakly mineralized dike up to 100 ft wide was present in the easternmost Bald Mountain area.  Narrow, late phonolite dikes cross-cut trachyte sills in several places in the pits.

A fault zone exposes Precambrian rocks at Bald Mountain, east of the haul road tunnels connecting Wharf to Golden Reward.  Zones of intense silicification, clay alteration, and brecciation parallel the fault.  This fault continues south to Golden Reward, and parallels north-trending Precambrian structures and is probably a reactivated older structure.  Other faults with minor offset are present throughout the site and have been viewed in-pit.

The main trends of mineralization at Wharf parallel the strike of major joint sets measured in upper and lower Deadwood Formation outcrops (Shapiro and Gries, 1970).

6.4.4 Alteration

Silicic alteration within the Golden Reward portion of the property was common in mineralized areas and was expressed as quartz veins, stockworks, and as disseminated quartz with sulfides (Emanuel et al., 1990).  Silicification in the Annie Creek portion of the property was typically focused around fractures (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).  Silicification included destruction of glauconite in sandstone and porphyritic texture in the intrusions, replacement of dolomite crystals, and preservation of primary sedimentary structures (Paterson and Giebink, 1989; Loomis and Alexander, 1990).  In the Foley sill at Wharf, zones of silicification were observed to be enclosed by decalcified zones, with metal grade decreasing from the zone interior outward (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).  Silicification also occurred along structures, such as the Bald Mountain fault zone, at contacts with the igneous intrusions, and along bedding planes and lithologic contacts.

Outside of these silicified zones, carbonate replacement and veinlets formed by remobilization of carbonate from the mineralized zone (Loomis and Alexander, 1990).  Locally, rather than decalcification, original calcareous horizons were replaced with dolomite (Shapiro and Gries, 1970).  In the mine area, phenocrysts in trachytic porphyry sills are partially replaced by carbonate, and carbonate veinlets occur within the sills.

Argillization occurs in porphyritic intrusive rocks.  Prominent clay-altered structures were visible in the pits, but these structures were barren and typically contained an extremely altered phonolite dike core.  A late-stage barren phonolite cap at Green Mountain and along Foley Ridge had similar strong argillic alteration along fractures.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-12

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

6.4.5 Mineralization

Most of the mineralized intrusive rocks at Wharf are trachytic in composition.  Trachyte porphyry forms sills that exhibit fracture-controlled mineralization.  Locally, gold is disseminated strongly fractured zones contain higher grades and more continuous mineralization.

Quartz trachytic and quartz alkali feldspar trachytic rocks are varyingly mineralized, with a barren sill in the western portion of the mine area, and a more mineralized sill has been mined in the eastern portion of the pit.  A thin biotite-rich sill similar in texture and composition to the barren cap phonolite is also mineralized.

The upper and lower Deadwood Formation are host to higher-grade mineralization.  The upper unit has narrower, higher-grade, more structurally controlled mineralization, with the lower Deadwood exhibiting more pervasive mineralization.  More impermeable units such as the interbedded shale units of the Deadwood Formation are less mineralized, but in places host structurally controlled mineralization.

Drilling intercepts showing mineralization with general geology for a cross-section central to the future pit area is shown in Figure 6‑5.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-13

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 6‑5:          Wharf Geological and Mineralization Cross-Section

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 6-14

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

7.0 EXPLORATION

7.1 Exploration

7.1.1 Grids and Surveys

All broad-scale topography was generated from aerial photogrammetry, with the most recent survey completed in 2016.  Local surveys are generated with RTK global positioning system (GPS) high-precision rover survey systems and aerial drones.

The Wharf Operations’ local grid system is based on the WGS 1984 coordinate system with a transverse Mercator projection.  Northings and eastings were truncated to reduce the size of coordinates.

7.1.2 Geological Mapping

Geological maps from Redden and DeWitt (2008) are used at the regional (1:100,000) and local (1:24,000) scale.  Small-scale mapping was performed on a limited basis.

No pit highwall or blasthole mapping is done.  On a blast pattern basis, general rock type is recorded by engineering personnel as broadly porphyry, lower Deadwood Formation, or general Deadwood lithology.

7.1.3 Geochemistry

A limited number of drill samples were analyzed to provide geochemical data for permit requirements.  Humidity cells, meteoric water mobility tests, and acid base accounting (ABA) samples were collected and analyzed for permit requirements. ABA sampling is done on an ongoing basis for waste rock characterization.

7.1.4 Geophysics

A geophysical survey was flown covering both the Wharf and Golden Reward properties in October 1994.  Geophysical measurements consisted of total magnetic fields, apparent resistivity (at 865, 4175, and 33000 Hz), and radiometric measurements (potassium, thorium, and uranium). Resultant maps exist but digital data were not retained.

7.1.5 Qualified Person’s Interpretation of the Exploration Information

The Wharf Operations area has been the subject of exploration and development activities since the mid 1970s, and a considerable information database developed because of both exploration and mining activities.  Procedures are consistent with industry-standard practices at the time the work was performed.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

7.1.6 Exploration Potential

Within the current Wharf permit boundary, all past production areas are of interest for future exploration potential. Condemnation drilling previously conducted is not sufficient for depth or extents.  Drilling is currently being conducted near the Juno pit testing at depth and perpendicular to strike.

The Portland Ridge south of the current permit boundary is under evaluation for expansion towards our surface ownership extent.

Near-mine locations near mine have been evaluated with regards to metals pricing, production limitations, and socioeconomic factors.  Near-mine areas include Two Johns to the north, eastern Bald Mountain (Alpha underground workings), deeper open pits at Golden Reward, and the Hannibal and Astoria workings in southern Golden Reward.

7.2 Drilling

7.2.1 Overview

A total of 11,140 drill holes (2,700,999 ft) have been completed in the Project area, the majority of which were RC drill holes. A summary of this drilling is included as Table 7‑1.  RC and core drilling supports mineral resource estimation.  Drilling that supports the mineral resource estimate is summarized in Table 7‑2.

A drill collar location map for the Project area is included in Figure 7‑1.  All of the drill holes shown on Figure 7‑1 were used in the variography and exploratory data analysis for the resource model, even though they are outside the current model boundaries.

Drill holes in the drill database that are flagged as being completed by a production rig, are considered to have generated unreliable samples, and are flagged such that they are not be exported from the acQuire database for resource modelling purposes.

7.2.2 Drill Methods

The majority of the drilling is reverse circulation.  From 2007–2013, drilling was contracted to North River Drilling; in 2014, Major Drilling; and from 2015–2017, Boart Longyear; 2018, HD Drilling; and Boart Longyear in 2021.

RC holes were typically 5.5” in diameter.

Core drilling was completed by Boyles Brothers Drilling or Longyear Drilling.  The only core size used was HQ (63.5 mm diameter).  No core drilling and sampling has been completed since 2007.

7.2.3 Logging

RC chips were logged for lithology, alteration, and mineralization.  Core holes were logged for lithology, rock type, mineralization, alteration, recovery, and rock quality designation (RQD).

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 7‑1:          Property Drill Summary Table

Year	Number of RC Holes	RC Footage(ft)	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage(ft)
1979–2006	9,459	1,988,188	11	19,040
2007	169	43,110	—	—
2008	125	57,310	—	—
2009	63	19,455	—	—
2010	379	157,155	—	—
2011	284	97,181	—	—
2012	119	49,010	—	—
2013	94	21,340	—	—
2014	61	32,260	—	—
2015	56	35,180	—	—
2016	51	30,530	—	—
2017	87	56,190	—	—
2018	51	—	—	—
2019	—	—	—	—
2020	—	—	—	—
2021	131	95,050	—	—
Total	11,129	2,681,959	11	19,040

Table 7‑2:          Drill Summary Table Supporting Mineral Resource Estimates

Number of RC Holes	RC Footage(ft)	Number of Core Holes	Core Footage(ft)
7,655	1,835,090	11	19,040

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 7‑1:        Property Drill Collar Location Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.  Drill holes can plot outside current boundaries as permit areas have changed over time.

7.2.4 Recovery

Recovery is not recorded for RC or core drilling.

7.2.5 Collar Surveys

Designed drill holes are marked with a Trimble GPS instrument, using coordinates in the local Wharf Operations grid.  The drill setup is confirmed by the exploration team (dip, azimuth, collar location).  After completion of the hole, the collar is re-surveyed using a Trimble differential GPS.  Surveyed drill holes are reviewed in GEMS against the designed coordinates and the current topography.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Historically, the collar coordinates were written on paper logs and input manually as actuals into a GEMS database.

7.2.6 Down Hole Surveys

Downhole surveys were not performed on RC drill holes prior to 2014.  After 2015 downhole surveys were completed on all RC drilling regardless of depth.  A small subset of surveys was conducted on drilling performed in 2015.

Fourteen core holes, completed prior to 2007, with average depths of ~1,600 ft have downhole surveys using an unknown method.  The results are stored in an acQuire database.

7.2.7 Drilling Since Wharf Database Close-out Date

A total of 47 drill holes (27,320 ft) were drilled at Wharf since July 27, 2021.  All footage was RC, and the drill holes have valid assay data.  Although a few of the newer drill holes may change the grades locally, the drill holes that are within the existing model should, in the QP’s view, have no material effect on the overall tonnages and average grade of the current mineral resource estimate.

7.2.8 Comment on Material Results and Interpretation

Drill holes are designed to intersect mineralization as perpendicular as possible.  Mineralized zones in the Wharf Operations are generally horizontal to sub-horizontal and can be adequately drilled with vertical drill holes.  A sufficient number of angled drill holes have been completed at Wharf to test for vertical controls on the mineralization.

Drilling and surveying were conducted in accordance with industry standard practices at the time and provide suitable coverage of the mineralization.  The collar and downhole survey methods used provide reliable sample locations.  Logging procedures provide consistency in descriptions.

These data are suitable for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation.  There are no drilling factors known to the QP that could materially impact the accuracy and reliability of the results.

7.3 Hydrogeology

7.3.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

Third-party party consultants Respec were responsible for creating the groundwater model of the Wharf site.  Monitor well data were used to create an average potentiometric surface as a base for any flow and transport modelling.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

7.3.2 Comment on Results

No definitive aquifers have been encountered in exploration drilling at Wharf.  All workings encountered in production are dry outside of meteoric events.

Pit water management is seasonal and situational, depending on the orientation of the current pit floor compared to backfilled pits and WRSFs.

Meteoric water infiltrates the WRSFs and hits the relatively impermeable Precambrian basement.  The Precambrian dips gently to the southwest, which is the same direction of pit progression. Given this scenario, snow melt along with spring rains has the pit bottoms filling.  The water is pumped out when needed to facilitate production on the final benches.

7.3.3 Surface Water

The east–west-trending Foley Ridge is a major surface water divide at the mine site.  Surface water flow north of the ridge drains to Cleopatra Creek and False Bottom Creek, and east to Deadwood Creek.  Surface water flow south of the ridge drains to Ross Creek, Annie Creek and Nevada Gulch.  Cleopatra Creek and Annie Creek subsequently flow generally west into Spearfish Creek.

Cleopatra Creek is fed by a spring at the headwaters of the stream.  The spring discharges from the toe of the backfill in the Cleopatra Creek WRSF, approximately 100 feet upstream of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Compliance Point 004.  Barren rock was deposited in the Cleopatra Creek WRSF from 1987 to 1990 by Wharf Resources.  The headwater spring discharges groundwater from a perched zone above the Tertiary intrusive units that underlie the Juno Pit and upper Cleopatra Creek valley.  Cleopatra Creek flows northward into Spearfish Creek, 4.5 miles northwest of the mine.

False Bottom Creek originates north of Bald Mountain and runs northward through Lawrence and Butte Counties.  False Bottom Creek flows into the Redwater River south of Belle Fourche.  Deadwood Creek originates east of the Trojan Pit and flows eastward into Whitewood Creek west of Lead.  Surface water flow in the creeks is mainly from direct runoff of precipitation and snowmelt, with the remainder base flow from springs and seeps.  High flows in the spring typically occur during periods when the surface water drainages receive a combination of snowmelt and precipitation during major storm events.

7.3.4 Groundwater

The primary bedrock aquifer underlying the western portion process area of the mine site is the Madison Formation. Madison Formation is not present under locations where active mining occurs.  The Madison Formation consists of limestone, sandy limestone, and dolomite.  Secondary aquifers include the limestones and dolomites of the Englewood and Whitewood Formations.  These aquifers are underlain by the relatively low permeability sandstones, siltstones and shales of the Winnipeg and Deadwood Formations. Groundwater flow in the Madison Formation is unconfined and occurs mainly in fractures and small dissolution cavities in the upper part of the formation.  Horizontal groundwater flow within the Madison Formation is generally to the west, and vertical flow is predominantly downward.  However, the fractures and solution cavities are not uniformly distributed in the aquifer, and they form preferential flow paths that locally control the direction of groundwater flow.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Groundwater recharge occurs primarily through the infiltration of precipitation and surface runoff.  Average recharge rate in this area of the Black Hills is estimated to be about 6.8 inches per year.

Hydraulic conductivities of the aquifers vary significantly and are dependent on the degree of fracturing and dissolution.  The primary aquifer, the Madison Formation, has low to moderate hydraulic conductivities, ranging from 1.3 x 10-4 to 7.7 x 10-2 cm/sec.  Well yields range from 10–75 gpm.  Measured hydraulic conductivities of the underlying Winnipeg and Deadwood Formations are somewhat lower, ranging from 3.7 x 10-6 to 1.6 x 10-4 cm/sec.  Measured hydraulic conductivities of the Tertiary intrusive units are very low, ranging from 1.6 x 10-7 to 5.8 x 10-5 cm/sec.

7.4 Geotechnical

7.4.1 Sampling Methods and Laboratory Determinations

Due to the difficulty of gathering structural and rock strength information from RC chips, no specific geotechnical information is recorded.  Interpretation on where fracture zones are and the presence of underground workings have been recorded through logging.

An initial evaluation was conducted on the current pit slope angles and benches in 2021.  Respec gathered past evaluations and current physical measurements of fracturing and rock properties to conduct an analysis.  The results of the analysis state Coeur’s current practices are within an appropriate factor of safety, and additional sampling and studies should be performed before adjusting the slope angles.

7.4.2 Comment on Results

A combination of historical and current geotechnical data, together with mining experience, is used in the operations.

The Wharf Operations conduct twice-yearly highwall and pit rim inspections with associated maps as well as twice daily work area (pit) inspections performed by the operations team.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 7-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

8.0 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY

8.1 Sampling Methods

8.1.1 Reverse Circulation

RC sampling was performed by drill contractors at the drill rig.  Sampling practice from 2007–2021 was to sample 10 ft. intervals.  Pre-2007 RC drilling at the Wharf Operations was sampled on 10-ft intervals and drilling at the Golden Reward area that is now part of the Wharf Operations was at 5-ft intervals.  Approximately 2 in³ of chips per sample interval was retained for geological logging.

Cuttings from the center-return RC drill were directed to a cyclone and collected as underflow from the cyclone in five-gallon buckets.  These samples were split into two samples, the size of which depended on drilling return, which in turn was affected by factors such as rock type and presence of underground voids.  The average weight of dried cuttings collected from 2015–2021 was 14.8 lbs, with 90% of samples weighing between 5.4–28.1 lbs, and with <1% of samples being under 2 lbs.

Sampling was conducted on primarily dry drilling through 2014, with wet drilling encountered depending on conditions, and wet-drilled samples from 2015–2021.  Pre-2015, when drilling in dry conditions, the entire sample was retained for analysis; however, in wet drilling conditions, the suspended fines were washed off the sample to reduce water volume.

Groundwater was rarely encountered in RC drilling; depth and flow rates were not recorded.  Typically, water was used in drilling to improve drilling performance and sample recovery.

Prior to 2015, samples were collected into large, numbered, impervious plastic sample bags, with a numbered ID tag attached.  From 2015–2021, samples were collected in cloth sample bags for drainage while retaining fines.  One sample was delivered to the assay laboratory, and another was saved for geochemical testing.  Only one sample was collected in areas of sufficient density of testing.  Excess pulps were stored on-site for at least two years in case additional analyses were required.

8.1.2 Core

The entire length of the drill hole was sampled.  Sample runs of holes recorded as core averaged 4.5 ft at the Wharf Operation.

One half of the core was delivered to the Wharf laboratory for sample preparation and analysis for gold and silver. All remaining core samples were eventually discarded.

8.1.3 Grade Control

Grade control samples are collected while drilling blast patterns.  Coeur uses DM-45 hammer drills to drill patterns on approximately 15 x 15 ft spacing.  The production drills currently have a GPS instrument for guidance on hole location and sampling identification.  Cuttings are collected in a rectangular pan placed near the collar of the drill hole.  Rock fragments are flushed from the hammer via injected air/water out to the surface where the fragments either deflect off the apron or land directly in the pan.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The drill operator collects the pan at 10 ft intervals down the hole and empties the pan into a plastic bag with the associated hole-ID tag.  The individual hole-IDs are assigned before drilling and match a barcode that is used in the laboratory information management system (LIMS) at the Wharf Operations on-site assay laboratory (mine assay laboratory).  The sample bags are stapled shut and delivered to the mine assay laboratory at the end of shift.

8.2 Sample Security Methods

RC cuttings were collected in sample bags by the drill crew at the active drill site.  Prior to 2014 samples were transported from the site to the mine assay laboratory by exploration or laboratory personnel.  In 2014 contract drilling company personnel transported the samples to the mine assay laboratory.

All samples remained at the mine assay laboratory through the entire sample preparation and assay process.  All pre-2014 sample material was discarded.

From 2015–2018 all samples were transported to the Wharf Operations exploration building by drill contract personnel.  From 2019–2021 samples were transported by exploration personnel. Samples were staged and prepared for shipment to a commercial analytical laboratory.  Shipping was conducted via overland transport, with samples secured in palletized super sacks from 2018–2020.  Starting in 2021 samples were shipped in bulk container plastic totes.  Chain-of-custody documentation was maintained throughout the shipping and receiving process. Following analytical testwork, samples were stored at the commercial laboratory during the quality control (QC) review process and then returned to Wharf for storage.  Pulps are stored for two years before discarding.

From 2015–2020, certified reference material (standards) and blanks purchased from CDN Laboratories were inserted into the sample stream during staging.  Certified reference materials acquired from OREAS starting in 2020 were provided in sealed plastic packages.

8.3 Density Determinations

Historically, density was determined through laboratory testing.  Documentation was not preserved.  Density values corresponded to the general rock types used in grade control, and  are:

• 0.0714 st/ft³ for Deadwood Formation;

• 0.0769 st/ft³ for trachyte porphyry;

• 0.079 st/ft³ for phonolite porphyry;

• 0.0588 st/ft³ for backfill.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

In addition to production records and scale tests, verification of trachyte porphyry density values was conducted with four samples in 2010, 15 in 2013, and 40 in 2021, and of phonolite porphyry with 10 samples in 2013 and 30 in 2021.  The analysis by was performed by an external laboratory, FMG Engineering, Inc., using ASTM C 127, the standard test method for specific gravity of coarse aggregate, in 2010.  In 2013 and 2021,  FMG Engineering, Inc. used ASTM D 6473-10 in 2013 and 2021, the standard test method for specific gravity of rock for erosion control.  Past production and supplemental density testing show density values in use are reasonable, and ongoing testwork will be used to refine values for sub-types to these categories.

8.4 Analytical and Test Laboratories

The mine assay laboratory, located on site, was the primary analytical facility from mine inception to 2015.  The laboratory was not independent and was not accredited.

Check analyses for gold fire assays were completed from 2009–2010 and from 2012–2014 at ALS U.S.A. Inc. Minerals Division in Reno, Nevada (ALS Reno).  ALS Reno is independent and at the time used, held ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations for selected analytical techniques.

Check assays were also completed at Inspectorate America Corporation (Inspectorate, now Bureau Veritas) in Sparks, Nevada, on a large portion of pulp samples from the 2014 drill campaign.  Bureau Veritas was a check analysis laboratory in 2015 and 2016.  Bureau Veritas was the primary laboratory from 2017–2021.  Inspectorate was an independent laboratory, and at the time used, held ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations for selected analytical techniques. Bureau Veritas is independent and holds SO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditations for selected analytical techniques.

McClelland Laboratories Inc., located in Sparks, Nevada (McClelland) was used as a check laboratory from 2017 onward.  The laboratory is accredited under ISO/IEC 17025:2005 for selected analytical techniques and is independent of Coeur.

8.5 Sample Preparation

Prior to 2015, all exploration and near mine development sample preparation was completed by the mine assay laboratory.  RC samples were dried, crushed to 80% passing ½ inch, and pulverized to 85% passing 200 mesh.

At ALS Reno, samples were dried, crushed to >70% passing 2 mm, and pulverized to >85% passing 75 µm.

Bureau Veritas dries the samples, crushes to >70% passing 2 mm, and pulverizes to >85% passing 75 µm.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

8.6 Analysis

8.6.1 Mine Assay Laboratory

All primary exploration and development gold analyses for samples collected by Coeur, following the commencement of mine operations in 1983 through 2014 were analyzed at the mine assay laboratory.

Gold analyses were completed with a cold cyanide shake with an atomic absorption (AA) finish.  Over-limit analyses were completed on gold and silver by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.  The over-limit analyses were completed based on a trigger value from the cold shake cyanide analyses.  The trigger varied by year, based on variables such as the mine cut-off grade.  In 2014, the over-limit was set at 0.012 oz/st Au.  From 2007–2014, the over limit trigger was 0.008 oz/st Au.

8.6.2 ALS Reno

Primary analyses for gold were completed by fire assay with AA finish, and for silver by four-acid digestion with AA finish.  Cyanide leach with AA finish for Au and Ag was completed for all samples with gold fire assays above lower detection (0.0001 oz/st) in 2015, and for all samples with gold fire assays above 0.006 oz/st in 2016.  Over-limit gold fire analyses were completed with gravimetric finish above a trigger of 0.292 oz/st Au.

For check analyses, gold analyses were completed by fire assay with an AA finish.  Over-limit analyses were completed by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.  The trigger for the over-limit was 0.292 oz/st Au.

Trace multi-element aqua regia digestion with ICP finish was completed for 51 elements in 2010, 2011, and 2015 on samples selected for testwork to support permitting requirements.

Humidity cell analyses of approximately two-month duration were completed for 32 elements, conductivity, pH, and sulfate on samples selected for permitting requirements in 2010, 2011, and 2012.

8.6.3 Bureau Veritas

From 2017 to present all primary exploration and development analyses of samples for inclusion in resource estimation were analyzed at Bureau Veritas.  Prior to this it was used as a check assay laboratory for 2016 drilling.

Gold analyses were completed with a fire assay with an AA finish, and results registering above lower detection (>0.0001 oz/st) Au triggered a cold cyanide shake with an AA finish.  Silver was analyzed as part of a 30-element suite by aqua regia with an inductively coupled plasma (ICP) finish and results greater than the lower detection limit triggered a silver cold cyanide shake with an AA finish.  Over-limit analyses were completed by fire assay with gravimetric finish when the initial fire assay results were >0.29 oz/st Au.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Bureau Veritas conducted 2016 check assays, which were fire assay gold analyses with an AA finish.

Bureau Veritas in Vancouver conducted modified acid-base accounting (ABA) with paste pH, total sulfur, and sulfate sulfur of every fourth primary sample in 2021 after preparation and splitting in Sparks, NV.

8.6.4 Inspectorate

For check assays of 2014 pulps, gold analyses were completed by cold cyanide shake with an AA finish.  Gold fire analyses with an AA finish were completed and triggered by cold cyanide analyses ≥0.008 oz/st Au to match the original procedure used at the Wharf Operations.

An additional higher-accuracy fire assay with gravimetric finish was triggered on one sample, at >0.292 oz/st gold.  For 2015 check assays, gold analyses consisted of fire assay with an AA finish.

8.6.5 McClelland

McClelland Laboratories, Inc., performed check assays on pulps from 2018–2020.  Gold analyses were completed by fire assay with an AA finish.  No check samples are currently available, as the 2021 umpires are pending sample return from the primary laboratory.

8.6.6 Energy Laboratories

Energy Laboratories performed ABA analysis with sulfur speciation on primary samples and pulps from 2010–2013 and 2018.  Analyses were conducted at regular intervals that varied from every tenth to every sample in a drill hole.  Nitrate analysis on samples selected for permitting requirements was also completed in 2010 and 2012.

8.6.7 Intermountain Laboratories

Intermountain Laboratories completed meteoric water mobility procedures (MWMP) that included pH, total dissolved solids, anions, cations, and dissolved metals in 2011 on samples selected for permitting requirements.

8.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

8.7.1 Pre-Coeur

Prior to Coeur’s Project acquisition, sample quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) consisted of check assays completed at a commercial laboratory as a check on the mine assay laboratory.  There is no record of certified reference materials, standards, or blanks being inserted into the analytical batches.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

For the cold cyanide shake method, for each batch of 48 samples, one internally made gold standard of known value was inserted.  The control failed if it was outside of a ± 0.003 oz/st Au tolerance limit.  The instrument was recalibrated, and then all previous samples following the previous successful QC check were re-run.  This process was continued until the control sample passed the check.  For each batch of 48 samples, every 10^th sample analyzed by the cold cyanide method was weighed and digested in duplicate.  If the duplicate and parent values were not within the ± 0.003 oz/st Au tolerance limit of the instrumentation, the batch was considered a failure. If a failure occurred, the entire batch was re-processed and re-run.  This process was continued until the duplicate in the batch passed the check.

For fire assay, for each batch of 24 samples, a QC sample of internally made composited reference material was inserted and used as a standard.

Fire assays values were also checked against AA values, with acceptable differences based on grade.  Differences greater than this resulted in rerun of first AA, then fire assay if AA values were within ± 0.003 oz/st Au.

Quantile–quantile plots of the entire assay population for check assays completed at ALS Reno from 2009–2014 indicated no bias and good correlation between the two datasets.  The resulting overall correlation and lack of bias in the population supported the data quality produced by the mine assay laboratory.

8.7.2 Coeur

Certified reference standards and certified blank samples were inserted at regular intervals to maintain a 5% insertion rate of primary samples.  Sample-stage duplicates were collected at the drill rig to maintain a 2.5% insertion rate.  Crush stage and pulp-stage duplicates were generated by the commercial laboratory at a 2.5% insertion rate.  Additionally, 5–10% of primary sample pulps were sent to a secondary commercial laboratory for check analysis.

A standard failed when the value exceeded or fell short of ± 3 standard deviations of the certified value.  A blank failed when the value exceeded five times the lower detection limit of the assay method.  Failure of a standard or blank sample required re-submission of the pulps within the same laboratory job on either side of the failure from the previous to the next passing standard or blank, respectively.  Failure of a crush duplicate occurred when values exceeded 15% mean paired relative difference, and a pulp duplicate when exceeding 10%.  Passing re-runs were given precedence over the original results when used in resource estimation, unless repeated analyses of the batch resulted in failures.  Secondary re-runs were then processed at the check laboratory, subject to the same QA/QC protocol.  Low-level failures, such as those acceptable within rounding, when there was insufficient pulp for additional re-runs, may have been accepted at staff discretion.

Results were reviewed quarterly, and elements of the QA/QC program were adjusted as necessary.

The reviews of the 2015–midyear 2021 QA/QC data indicated no significant biases or contamination in the reviewed data.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

8.8 Database

Collar surveys of drillholes are taken with a Trimble or Topcon GPS instrument, and data are exported from the device to a csv file.  Prior to 2015, locations were imported into the GEMS drill hole database in use at the time, as surveys were completed.  Since 2015, files have been imported into a controlled acQuire database.

Since 2016, downhole surveys were completed on all holes by a third-party contractor, IDS.  Files received from IDS were uploaded into the acQuire database.  Prior to 2015, no downhole surveys were completed except for core holes.  In 2015, no downhole surveys passing QA/QC were completed.

Prior to 2015, geologic logging was completed on paper logs and manually entered the GEMS drill hole database.  Since 2015, geologic logging data are directly entered into the acQuire database.

Prior to 2015, the mine assay laboratory data were entered into Microsoft Excel files, which were imported into the GEMS drill hole database.  All historic data were migrated to acQuire in 2015, after validation and modeling in Hexagon Mining MineSight by an external consultant, Moose Mountain Technical Services, in 2015.

Since 2015, assay data have been imported directly into the acQuire database and must pass internal database checks for referential integrity.  Assays were reviewed for QA/QC of certified reference materials and duplicates.  Assays were accepted or rejected in the database by the database manager based on QA/QC results.  All assay data are retained, and assays passing QA/QC are available for export in acQuire to other software systems.

From 2015–2021, collar surveys, downhole surveys, geology logs, and QA/QC-passing assay data have been exported from acQuire as csv files for upload into a GEMS drill hole database for each yearly and mid-year model update.  In 2021, the acQuire database was transferred to a Maptek Vulcan ISIS database.

Drill hole locations and downhole surveys are visually compared against hole designs in GEMS for verification.

8.9 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Sample Preparation, Security, and Analytical Procedures

In the opinion of the QP, the sample preparation procedures, analytical methods, QA/QC protocols, and sample security for the samples used in mineral resource estimation are acceptable, meet industry-standard practice, and are acceptable for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation and mine planning purposes.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 8-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

9.0 DATA VERIFICATION

9.1 Internal Data Verification

In 2015, a paired sampling study was completed on three drill holes to evaluate the potential for systematic bias in RC sampling regarding the pre-Coeur method where fines and water were removed, and the Coeur method of larger bagged samples.  A total of 155 samples were analyzed and compared. The grade of the collective population was biased to the Coeur-preferred sampling method, but overall was equivocal with respect to potential sources of variance.  Additional work was not warranted because the results showed there were unlikely to be material impacts.

In 2015, prior to import of the legacy GEMS database to an acQuire database, data were reviewed for internal consistency corresponding to database rules such as no overlapping intervals and unique IDs.  Corrections were made based on data in paper logs and digital files.

In 2018, a project to recombine previously split assay intervals caused by lithology breaks on assays during transfer from the 2015 MineSight model to the acQuire implementation was completed.  Extra breaks had been created in assay intervals in the migration to new software based on geochemical sampling intervals that did not correspond to gold assay intervals.  Combining split intervals by reimporting the validated historic data into acQuire was conducted by CT Geoservices.

The Wharf Operations laboratory, which produced exploration results prior to 2015, participated in a Society of Mineral Analysts round-robin program of fire assay gold in 2017–2018.  Results indicated good repeatability between duplicates of each sample, and good correlation with peer laboratories, with 16 of 18 samples reporting within the 95% confidence limits, including one outlier.

Drill hole lockdown of holes drilled from 2015–2018 was completed, where the acQuire database was locked for the given holes by the database manager, and data could not be changed except by the database manager unlocking them.  Prior to locking, assay certificates, downhole survey certificates, geology logs, and chip photos were reviewed and filed, and QA/QC reports were generated, reviewed, and filed.  Drill hole lockdown signoff reports were completed by the geologist and database manager.  All were stored as digital copies on a network drive with restricted access and as paper copies.

9.2 External Data Verification

The Wharf blasthole dataset was reviewed by AMC Consultants (UK) Limited during 2017, as part of a larger study of the regression-based data transformation used to correct atomic absorption cyanide shake results to fire assay values. The dataset was used in the analysis of the 2017 resource estimate for verification purposes.

9.3 Data Verification by Qualified Person

Data verification performed included:

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

• Imported and conducted QA/QC on all assay data from 2015–2021;

• Quarterly QA/QC reports of gold assay data from 2015–2021;

• Logged all geologic data from 2015, 2017, and 2018;

• Conducted a 10–20% check of geologic logs from 2016 and 2021;

• Participated in the 2018 project to recombine split historic assay intervals;

• Conducted drill hole lockdown, including checks of assay certificates, collar and downhole surveys, geology, and QA/QC reports;

• Signed off as the geologist for the 2015–2018 drill holes;

• Working at the Wharf Operations from 2009–2021.

9.4 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

The process of data verification for the Project was performed by third parties and Coeur personnel, including the QP.  The QP reviewed the appropriate reports.  The QP considers that a reasonable level of verification has been completed, and that no material issues would have been left unidentified from the programs completed.

The QP is of the opinion that the data verification programs for Project data adequately support the geological interpretations, the analytical and database quality, and therefore support the use of the data in mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation, and in mine planning.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 9-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

10.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

10.1 Test Laboratories

The process plant was built in 1983.  Historical testwork on which the plant designs were based is not available to Coeur.  Changes made to the process plant have been based on actual plant performance trends and testwork performed on-site and at independent facilities.

Independent metallurgical testwork facilities used over the Project life included Amtel and McClelland Laboratories.  Testwork conducted included column leach test, bottle roll tests, and gold deportment studies.

The Wharf Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

There is no international standard of accreditation provided for metallurgical testing laboratories or metallurgical testing techniques.

10.2 Metallurgical Testwork

The Wharf Operations maintain a continuous testing program on the ore being sent to the heap leach.  Composite samples are collected from the crusher product using a cross-belt sampling system.  Samples are taken at 50 st intervals from the combined product conveyor belt.  These samples are analyzed for moisture, size distribution, and gold and silver using AA and fire assay.

Metallurgical testing is undertaken at the mine site internal laboratory and periodically through contracting external laboratories.  Testing at external laboratories includes, but is not limited to, column leach tests, bottle rolls, carbon activity testing, and deportation studies.

Regular testing at the mine site internal laboratory includes head analysis for gold and silver using AA and fire assays and column leach testing on an as-needed basis.  The head assays, final tails assays and the information from the daily solution samples are used to determine the overall percent recovery rate and recovery by size fraction for the material.  Sodium cyanide and lime consumption rates are estimated for process.  The data from the column testing are used either to predict leach pad performance or reconcile actual leach pad performance.

Exploration duplicates are created by taking a split of drill cuttings from the exploration drill sites.  The samples are retained for two years and available in case analysis is required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

10.3 Recovery Estimates

Metallurgical performance using laboratory testing suggests that recovery of gold varies by lithology and sizing of placed material.  Lithological recoveries used to estimate overall heap expected recovery for planning purposes are shown in Table 10‑1.

Actual performance compared to ore-weighted expected recoveries for pads processed during the period 2019–2020 are provided in Table 10‑2.

Table 10‑2 includes pads from a period in time which ROM was used to overcome temporary operational challenges.  ROM is not part of the current life-of-mine (LOM) plan or the cashflow analysis.

10.4 Metallurgical Variability

Metallurgical test results obtained from several testwork programs conducted during the past five years show low variability between several different locations with respect to gold recovery.  This low variability has been verified through the actual leach performance.

Tests were performed on samples that are representative for the deposit and its mineralogy.

10.5 Deleterious Elements

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

Analysis of net acid generating (NAG) potential has identified isolated pockets within the ore body of potential acid generating material.  This material is handled by existing, State approved protocols to blend NAG material with non-NAG ore to reduce the impact on pad pH. Lime is added to the crushed ore that is placed on the leach pad to control pH.  The amount of lime added is based on daily composite bottle rolls and the lime required to control the bottle roll to the target pH.  The pH of the process solutions and pad effluents is monitored each day.

None of the deposits contain sufficient quantities of sulfide minerals, organic carbons or silica encapsulation to be categorized as refractory ore.

10.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Data Adequacy

Production experience and focused investigations, as well as marketing requirements, have guided leach pad process improvements and changes since Coeur’s acquisition of the Wharf Operations.

Testwork programs, both internal and external, continue to be performed to support current operations and potential improvements.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 10‑1:        Forecast Metallurgical Recovery Estimates

Ore Type	% GoldRecovery
Intermediate	80.0
Lower Contact	71.0
Porphyry	80.5

Table 10‑2:        Expected versus Actual Recovery

Pad Loading(pad cycle)	Est. GeologicalGold Recovery(%)	ActualGoldRecovery(%)	Delta(%)
4.14	70.7	69.6	(1.2)
5.04	73.4	70.8	(2.6)
3.15	74.5	75.1	0.6
2.15	77.9	75.3	(2.7)
Pad Average	74.2	72.7	(1.5)

Note:  ROM ore was used in various amounts for the four pads.  Additionally, for the pads listed, sizing from the crusher exceeded historical norms, negatively impacting recovery.

Current metallurgical testwork confirms the material to be mined as having similar response to the heap leaching process as previously mined ores.  Metal recovery assumptions are derived from past performance of the leaching operation.

The QP reviewed the information compiled by Coeur, as summarized in this Report Chapter, and performed a review of the reconciliation data available to verify the information used in the LOM plan.

Based on these checks, in the opinion of the QP, the metallurgical testwork results and production data support the estimation of mineral resources and mineral reserves and can be used in the economic analysis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 10-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

11.0 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES

11.1 Introduction

Mineral resources are estimated for the Wharf deposit (Figure 11‑1).

The database closeout date for the estimate was July 27, 2021.  Drilling used in estimation was summarized in Table 7‑2.

11.2 Exploratory Data Analysis

All deposits were subject to exploratory data analysis methods, which could include histograms, cumulative probability plots, box and whisker plots, and contact analysis.

Statistics were compiled and compared for raw drill hole data, length weighted drill holes, composites, declustered composites, and capped declustered composites to ensure that the grade distribution and true mean of the system were conserved through the estimation process.

11.3 Geological Models

Domains were created based on lithology and changing trends in strike and dip of the major mineralized structures and underground workings that cross cut lithological units.  Adjustments to the existing geologic model were made where new drill data were added.  Lithologic domains were assessed for changes in the strike and dip of near vertical structures.  A total of three main structural domains were modeled resulting in 16 separate estimation domains.

11.4 Density Assignment

Density values were assigned to each block based on the major rock type within the block.  Underground workings were assigned an adjusted density values determined by the percentage of the block intersected by workings.

11.5 Grade Capping/Outlier Restrictions

Capping was applied to raw assays prior to compositing, with values to be capped assessed from probability plots.  Grade caps ranged from 0.08–0.6 oz/st Au, with 147 samples capped.

To reduce smearing of structurally controlled high-grade mineralization, an indicator was applied during estimation.  Indicator variograms were run on the low-grade portion of the distribution and on the high-grade.  Final search ellipsoids for low-grade were approximately equal to the range at 95% of the sill and for the high-grade the range at 100% of the sill. High-grade samples were used to estimate a high-grade gold variable in every block where the sample selection criteria was met using the high-grade search ellipsoid.  A similar estimation was done for the low-grade into a low-grade gold variable using the estimation parameters.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 11‑1:      Map Showing Wharf Pit Model Extent

To determine the proportion of high-grade and low-grade to combine into the final gold grade, an indicator estimate was made so that each block has a percent variable of the amount (number of close by samples) of high-grade.  The final estimate is created by combining the proportion of high-grade multiplied by the high-grade estimate (if one exists) with the remaining proportion and grade of the low-grade.

11.6 Composites

The majority of assay data used in the model were sampled on 10 ft sample lengths (94%).

Compositing was done on 10 ft intervals to ensure enough samples were available in the vertical direction for estimation and to avoid over-smoothing prior to variography.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

11.7 Variography

Back-transformed, normal scores (gaussian) variography was completed using Snowden Supervisor software for each of the 16 domains.  Usually, the down-hole variogram was used to determine the nugget, but in several cases the downhole variogram was of poor quality and the minor direction variogram was used.

For eight of the domains, an indicator estimation technique was used.  For these domains, variograms were created for the high-grade portion of the data and for the low-grade portion.  Those domains will have two variograms for each of the three domains:  a high-grade, low-grade, and indicator variogram.  To generate the indicator percent of high and low grade, the low-grade variogram was used.

11.8 Estimation/interpolation Methods

Ordinary kriging (OK) interpolation was chosen to estimate all lithology units.  Iterations were performed with a single pass OK estimate, adjusting the search parameters, minimum and maximum samples and maximum number of drill holes.  The resulting basic statistics were then compared to those of the composites, nearest neighbor (NN) estimate, and an inverse distance squared (ID2) estimate.

The high-grade indicator runs use a range of 2–7 composites, the low-grade indicator 2–14 composites, with the rest OK estimates using 4–12 composites.  All domains are limited to two composites from any one drill hole.

11.9 Validation

The block models were validated using some or all of the following methods:

• Visually by stepping through sections and comparing the raw drill data and composite data with the block values;

• Comparison of model statistics to drill data;

• Swath plots;

• Mill to model reconciliation;

• General visual inspection of shape and spread of the estimate with regards to production experience.

11.10 Confidence Classification of Mineral Resource Estimate

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

11.10.1 Mineral Resource Confidence Classification

Variograms for each domain using exploration data were generated and plotted.  The search ranges for each domain at 70% of the sill, 80%, 90%, and 95% were compiled.  As a starting point, Measured used a range at 70% of the sill, Indicated used a range at 80% of the sill, and Inferred used a range at 95% of the sill.  With several iterations and analysis, these ranges were adjusted as needed.  Each block was then queried for distance to the closest composite, number of composites used in the estimate, and number of drill holes used in the estimate, and a confidence classification was assigned.  Variograms for blastholes were also generated and plotted as a way of confirming the exploration data. In general, the maximum range of the blastholes were reasonably close to the ranges from exploration variograms, but the range from blastholes at 70% and 80% of the sill were shorter. When selecting the classification range, this information was considered.

The confidence classifications on average used:

• Measured:  30–55 ft from nearest drill hole; maximum of six composites, maximum of three composites from a single drill hole;

• Indicated:  80–140 ft from nearest drill hole; maximum of four composites, maximum of two composites from a single drill hole;

• Inferred:  155–410 ft from nearest drill hole; maximum of two composites, maximum of two composites from a single drill hole.

11.10.2 Uncertainties Considered During Confidence Classification

Following the drill spacing analysis that classified the mineral resource estimates into the measured, indicated, and inferred confidence categories, uncertainties regarding sampling and drilling methods, data processing and handling, geological modelling, and estimation were incorporated into the classifications assigned.  The areas with the most uncertainty were assigned to the inferred category, and the areas with fewest uncertainties were classified as measured.

11.11 Reasonable Prospects of Economic Extraction

11.11.1 Input Assumptions

For each resource estimate, an initial assessment was undertaken that assessed likely infrastructure, mining, and process plant requirements; mining methods; process recoveries and throughputs; environmental, permitting, and social considerations relating to the proposed mining and processing methods, and proposed waste disposal; and technical and economic considerations in support of an assessment of reasonable prospects of economic extraction.

Mineral resources are confined within conceptual pit shells that use the assumptions in Table 11‑1.

Pit optimizations were completed using the Lerchs-Grossmann algorithm in Whittle software.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑1:        Constraining Pit Shell Assumptions

Mining Cost		Process Cost
Drilling	US$0.20/st mined
Blasting	US$0.26/st mined	Crushing	US$2.31/st processed
Dozing	US$0.26/st mined	Pad load	US$0.80/st processed
*Hauling(waste)	US$0.75/st mined	Unload	US$1.22/st processed
Loading	US$0.16/st mined	Process	US$2.46/st processed
Roads & yards	US$0.16/st mined	G&A	$US3.55/st processed
General mining	US$0.35/st mined
Total Mining	US$2.15/st mined	Wharf Total Process	US$10.34/st processed
Rehandle cost	US$1.62/t rehandled	Metallurgical recovery	78.7%
Cut-off grade (oz/ton Au)	0.010
Selling price (Au/oz)	US$1,700
Burden
Royalty (Au/oz)	US$68.00
Pit slopes by rock type
Deadwood Formation	45°
Porphyry	50°
Fill	34°

11.11.2 Commodity Price

The gold price used in resource estimation is based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The estimated timeframe used is the eight-year LOM that supports the mineral reserves estimates.  The gold price forecast for the mineral resource estimate is US$1,700/oz.  The QP reviewed the forecasts as outlined in Chapter 16.

11.11.3 Cut-off

The mineral resources are reported using a cut-off of 0.010 oz/st Au.  The cut-off is based on the operational history of the deposit.  The cut-off selected is higher than the break-even grade to keep the cut-off within the range of known outcomes.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

11.11.4 QP Statement

The QP is of the opinion that any issues that arise in relation to relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction can be resolved with further work.  The mineral resource estimates are performed for deposits that are in a well-documented geological setting.  Coeur is very familiar with the economic parameters required for successful operations in the Wharf area; and Coeur has a history of being able to obtain and maintain permits, social license and meet environmental standards.  There is sufficient time in the seven-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecast for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, testwork and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates.

11.12 Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral resources are reported using the mineral resource definitions set out in SK1300 and are reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The mineral resources are current as at December 31, 2021.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ.

Measured and indicated mineral resources are summarized in Table 11‑2 and inferred mineral resources in Table 11‑3.  Estimates are reported on a 100% ownership basis.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

11.13 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:

• Metal price and exchange rate assumptions;

• Changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent grade cut-off grade;

• Changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones;

• Changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions;

• Density and domain assignments;

• Changes to geotechnical, mining, and metallurgical recovery assumptions;

• Changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for the conceptual pit shell constraining the estimates;

• Assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 11‑2:        Summary of Gold Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Gold Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Measured	13,947	0.02	273	0.010	80
Indicated	6,379	0.022	140	0.010	80
Total Measured and Indicated	20,326	0.020	413	0.010	80

Table 11‑3:        Summary of Gold Inferred Mineral Resources at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,700/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Gold Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Inferred	3,724	0.024	89,704	0.010	80

Notes to accompany mineral resource tables:

1. The mineral resource estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral resource estimate is in situ.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Kenan Sarratt, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

3. Mineral resources are reported exclusive of the mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

4. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional open pit mining; gold price of US$1,700/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 0.010 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 78.7%; royalty burden of US$68/oz Au; pit slope angles that vary from 34–50º; mining costs of $2.15/st mined, rehandle costs of US$1.65/st rehandled, and process costs of US$10.34/st processed (includes general and administrative costs).

5. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 11-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

12.0 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

12.1 Introduction

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources using a detailed pit design and block model from a physical survey of the topography as of December 31, 2021.  The mine plans assume open pit mining, and a conventional truck and loader fleet.

Mining rates are predominantly dictated by the crusher throughput.  Average annual throughput of 4.6 Mst from the crusher is expected.  Throughput rates were established and proven over the more than 30 years of operational history at the site.

The Wharf mining area contains the remaining Portland Ridgeline pit.  Different nomenclature used for mining areas are all part of the same deposit but represent distinct mining phases.

12.2 Development of Mining Case

The site was evaluated using economic pit shells generated using Whittle software.  Appropriate cost and mining schedules were applied using cost estimates forecast for the life of mine (LOM).  A gold price of $1,400 was used for the economic shells.

12.3 Designs

Pit optimizations were done using the Lerchs–Grossmann algorithm using Whittle software.  Whittle software uses the operating and processing costs in conjunction with a range of selling costs for the metal to produce a set of nested pits.  Nested pits begin at the lowest metal price and get successively larger as the metal price is increased.  If the pits are mined in order, they will generate the maximum value.

The nested pits generated from the Whittle software are brought into GEMS mine planning software and used as a template to design pits and laybacks.  The individual pits are phased by the Wharf Operations engineering staff and consideration is given to mining the highest-grade areas first, while maintaining adequate space for waste advancement in the mined-out portions of the pit.  Pits are designed from bottom up in 20 ft increments, designing in the toe, crest, catch benches at specified intervals for the appropriate rock types.

Design input parameters used in the pit optimizations are summarized in Table 12‑1, and the design assumptions for the leach pads are provided in Table 12‑2.

Phased laybacks are designed from the nested Whittle pit shells for the Wharf mining area.  Using appropriate determinations for the annual mining limits based on the estimated crusher production, specific shells are selected as potential laybacks.  The Whittle operational scenario and schedule graph allows for ore and total material limits to be input, and if the mining limits imposed can be honored, the output will be a series of annual pit shells.  After numerous Whittle iterations the resulting outputs become the basis of the phase selection used to optimize mining.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑1:        Pit Shell Input Parameters

Parameter	Deadwood	Porphyry	Fill
Bench height (ft.)	20	20	20
Bench toe offset (ft.)	10	7.5	20
Batter angle (degrees)	63	69	45
Catch bench (ft.)	20	20	10
Slope (degrees)	45	50	34
Minimum mining width (ft.)	80
Road design width (ft.)	80
Haul road grade (typical; %)	10
Haul road grade (maximum; %)	12

Table 12‑2:        Leach Pad Optimization Input Parameters

Parameter	Value	Unit
Lift height (ft.)	20
Overall slope	2:1	H:V
Catch bench (ft.)	10	per lift
Maximum design height (ft.)	150	above liner
Cushion layer (working area) (ft.)	10	above liner

The outline of the final pit is shown in Figure 12‑1, and the remaining pit mine plan by year is provided in Figure 12‑2.

The resulting mine plan was analyzed in a financial model and is economically viable.

12.4 Input Assumptions

Input parameters used in the pit designs were summarized in Table 12‑1.

Geotechnical assumptions are discussed in Chapter 13.2.  Hydrological assumptions are included in Chapter 13.3.

A design cut-off grade of 0.12 oz/st Au was used to determine the material that is economically viable to mine.  The ultimate pit design was generated using this design cut-off grade of 0.012 oz/st Au.  Economic considerations are factors in selecting a design cut-off grade slightly above the calculated break-even cut-off.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑1:      Life-of-Mine Outline Plan

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 12‑2:      Mine Progression Layout Plan

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The calculated design cut-off is based on the following equation:

• (Cost/ton Total Mining + Cost/ton Total Process) ÷ (Gold Price ($/oz) x Gold Recovery (%))

Since all material contained in the ultimate pit design will be mined and moved to the crusher or waste rock storage facility (WRSF), the mining cost is removed from the above equation to calculate the operational cut-off grade of 0.010 oz/st Au.  The material above 0.010 oz/st Au is sent to the leach pad for processing.  The material below 0.010 oz/st Au is sent to the WRSF.  The mining cost is the same for ore and waste.  Gold recovered from processing the material between 0.010 and 0.012 oz/st Au offsets the mining and processing costs so that it is more economic to process it than sending it to the WRSF.  This also helps improve the net present value (NPV) of the operation.  The reserves are reported above the operational cut-off of 0.010 oz/st Au.

Economic parameters used for the cut-off grade were those provided in Table 12‑3.  The costs are based on the LOM mine plans and the costs associated with executing the plan.  The costs selected for use are shown as reasonable by examining the full LOM costs.  A discussion of the operating costs is provided in Chapter 18.3.

12.5 Surface Topography

The topography used for reserve estimation was a December 2021 actual month-end surface.  A survey of all active mining areas and WRSFs is completed at the end of each month, which was used to update the topography in active mining areas.  Topography outside the active surveyed areas was obtained from orthophotos and photogrammetry.

12.6 Density and Moisture

The densities used for the mineral reserve estimate are:

• In-situ (open pit):

o Phonolite:  0.0790 ton/ft³;

o Porphyry:  0.0769 ton/ft³;

o Deadwood Formation:  0.0714 ton/ft³;

• Stockpile:  0.0591 ton/ft³.

In situ moisture averages 5% and stockpile material averages 5%.

Mineral reserve tonnages are reported as dry bank tons.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑3:        Mineral Reserves Pit Shell Input Parameters

Mining Cost		Process Cost
Drilling	US$0.20/st mined
Blasting	US$0.26/st mined	Crushing	US$2.31/st processed
Dozing	US$0.26/st mined	Pad load	US$0.80/st processed
*Hauling(waste)	US$0.75/st mined	Unload	US$1.22/st processed
Loading	US$0.16/st mined	Process	US$2.46/st processed
Roads & yards	US$0.16/st mined	G&A	$US3.55/st processed
General mining	US$0.35/st mined
Total Mining	US$2.15/st mined	Wharf Total Process	US$10.34/st processed
Rehandle cost	US$1.62/t rehandled
Cut-off grade (oz/ton Au)	0.010
Selling price (Au/oz)	US$1,400
Burden
Royalty (Au/oz)	US$56.00
Pit slopes by rock type
Deadwood Formation	45°
Porphyry	50°
Fill	34°

12.7 Ore Loss and Dilution

Estimates assume 100% mining recovery and no dilution was applied.

12.8 Commodity Price

The gold price used in mineral reserve estimation is based on analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year.  The estimated timeframe used is the eight-year LOM that supports the mineral reserves estimates.  The gold price forecast for the mineral reserve estimate is US$1,400/oz. The QP reviewed the forecast as outlined in Chapter 16.

12.9 Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral reserves have been classified using the mineral reserve definitions set out in SK1300.  The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facility.  Mineral reserves are reported in Table 12‑4 and are current as at December 31, 2021.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 12‑4:        Summary of Gold Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves at December 31, 2021 (based on US$1,400/oz gold price)

Confidence Category	Tons (st x 1,000)	Gold Grade (oz/st)	Contained Gold Ounces (oz x 1,000)	Gold Cut-off Grades (oz/st)	Metallurgical Recovery (%)
Proven	27,976	0.022	620	0.010	80
Probable	8,306	0.028	231	0.010	80
Total proven and probable	36,282	0.023	851	0.010	80

Notes to accompany mineral reserve table:

1. The Mineral Reserve estimates are current as of December 31, 2021 and are reported using the definitions in Item 1300 of Regulation S–K (17 CFR Part 229) (SK1300).

2. The reference point for the mineral reserve estimate is delivery to the heap leach facility.  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Tony Auld, RM SME, a Wharf Resources employee.

3. The estimate uses the following key input parameters:  assumption of conventional open pit mining; gold price of US$1,400/oz; reported above a gold cut-off grade of 0.010 oz/st Au; metallurgical recovery assumption of 78.7% across all rock types; royalty burden of US$56/oz Au; pit slope angles that vary from 34–50º; mining costs of $2.15/st mined, rehandle costs of US$1.65/st rehandled, process costs of US$10.34/st processed (includes general and administrative costs).

4. Rounding of short tons, grades, and troy ounces, as required by reporting guidelines, may result in apparent differences between tons, grades, and contained metal contents.

12.10 Uncertainties (Factors) That May Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimate

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include:

• Commodity prices:  the mineral reserve estimates are most sensitive to metal prices.  Coeur’s current strategy is to sell most of the metal production at spot prices, exposing the company to both positive and negative changes in the market, both of which are outside of the company’s control;

• Metallurgical recovery:  changes in metallurgical recovery could also have an impact on the mineral reserve estimates;

• Operating costs:  higher or lower operating costs than those assumed could also affect the mineral reserve estimates.  Operating costs could increase over the life of the Project, due to factors outside of the company’s control;

• Geotechnical:  unforeseen geotechnical issues could lead to additional dilution, difficulty accessing portions of the orebody, or sterilization of broken or in situ ore.  There are sufficient management controls in place to effectively mitigate geotechnical risks.  Designed pit slopes have been evaluated for stability in several geotechnical studies and are regularly evaluated by the engineering group at the mine.  The QP considers that sufficient controls are in place at the Wharf mine to effectively manage geotechnical risk, and the risk of significant impact on the mineral reserve estimate is low;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

• Hydrogeological:  unexpected hydrogeological conditions could cause issues with access and extraction of areas of the mineral reserve due to higher than anticipated rates of water ingress.  The QP considers the risk of encountering hydrogeological conditions which would significantly affect the mineral reserve estimate is low;

• Equipment leases:  equipment leases have been maintained over the last 25 years.  Current truck and loader fleet lease rates are under contract through 2024 with an option for a two-year extension beyond.  A major change in pricing would affect operating cost and have an impact on the mineral reserve estimate;

• Geological and structural interpretations:  changes in the underlying geology model including changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones, changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions, and density and domain assignments could result in changes to the geology model upon which mineral reserve estimate is based;

• Treatment of nitrates:  the ability to treat the spent ore for nitrates to below 10 ppm has been demonstrated through years of operational history.  If an unexpected interruption to the treatment process occurred, it could affect the ability to offload and reuse the leach pad, which could impact the mineral reserve estimate due to increased costs;

• Permitting:  a portion of the estimated mineral reserves are not currently permitted.  The application process for acquiring new permits and permit amendments has been initiated with both the State and Lawrence County.  If the permits are not granted, a portion of the estimated mineral reserves will not be available to mine;

• Permitting and social license:  inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain social license to operate could result in the inability to extract some or all of the mineral reserve.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 12-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

13.0 MINING METHODS

13.1 Introduction

The Wharf Operations use conventional truck and loader mining methods to feed a heap leach pad.  The mine has been in continuous operation since 1983.

13.2 Geotechnical Considerations

The last geotechnical study was completed in 2021 by personnel from third-party consultants, Respec.  This study was to assess the potential for highwall instabilities at the mine site.  Respec concluded that the current design configurations are appropriate, but there is an opportunity to design the ultimate pit with steeper slopes.

13.3 Hydrogeological Considerations

Water infiltration near the 5,960 ft elevation has made drill and blast activities below this horizon challenging.  Previous mining has advanced benches to the 5,920 ft bench.  The current mineral reserve estimate includes material down to the 5,900 ft elevation.

13.4 Operations

The Wharf Operations are currently a conventional truck and loader heap leach gold mine.  The operation consists of five heap leach pads, which are all load/offload pads.  The majority of the planned mining disturbance falls within the current permitted area and an expansion to the mine permit is expected in 2022 that will cover the remaining mineral reserve estimate.

Coeur leases nearly all the earth-moving equipment used at the mine.  Relationships with local dealers span over 15 years, and the earthmoving equipment is under contract through 2024.

In-situ ore and waste must be blasted prior to removal.  Several historic pits that were partially backfilled are being mined again and the backfilled material is considered re-handle and does not require blasting.  Waste material removed for access to the ore is taken to one of the WRSF sites.  The WRSF sites are all designed to fill existing pits and are reclaimed as soon as possible after placement.

Mined ore is either placed in a stockpile or placed directly into the primary crusher ore hopper. Crushed ore is then conveyed to a final product stockpile.  Crushed ore is picked up by loaders and placed in trucks to be dumped in 20 ft lifts on one of the five heap leach pads.

Ore is leached for a specified time and then neutralized and de-nitrified. Once the ore has been leached and neutralized, it is considered spent ore and upon approval from the South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources (DANR), can be unloaded and the pad reused for fresh ore loading.  The spent ore is used to backfill pits within defined perimeter of pollution zones.  Within each perimeter of pollution zone, nitrates in the spent ore in specific quantities can be placed.  The current active perimeter of pollution zones have physical capacity to contain the estimated mineral reserves.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

13.5 Blasting and Explosives

Coeur uses Epiroc DM-45 hammer drills to drill patterns.  Patterns consist of approximately 250 holes.  The drill pattern spacings vary based on the rock type:

• Porphyry:  15 x 15 ft;

• Deadwood Formation:  16 x 16 ft;

• Phonolite:  17 x 17 ft.

Coeur contracts out the loading and blasting of the drill holes.  The contractor uses ammonium nitrate/fuel oil (ANFO) in dry holes and uses emulsion in wet holes.  Drill patterns are shot five days a week.

13.6 Grade Control and Production Monitoring

Grade control samples are collected while drilling out the blast pattern.  The drills have a GPS instrument for guidance on hole location and sampling identification.  Cuttings are collected in a pan placed near the collar of the drill hole.  The drill operator collects the pan at 10 ft intervals down the hole and empties the pan into a plastic bag with the associated hole-ID tag.  Sample bags are delivered to the assay laboratory at the end of each shift.

Assay data are delivered to the Wharf engineering department as csv files and subsequently imported into Geovia GEMS mining software.  The ore control engineer uses the data to design ore and waste polygons that are then staked out in the pit for mining.  Ore polygons are a minimum of 20 ft wide due to the size of the mining equipment employed.

13.7 Production Schedule

The forecast annual production schedule is provided in Table 13‑1.  An outline of the final pit was provided in Figure 12‑1, and the planned mine progression in Figure 12‑2.

13.8 Equipment

A list of key primary and support equipment required for mining is provided in Table 13‑2.

13.9 Personnel

The mine operations personnel requirement for the remaining LOM averages 255.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 13‑1:        Forecast LOM Production Schedule

	Units	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	Total
Mine
Tons ore	kst	5,030	4,594	4,124	4,561	4,600	4,600	4,600	3,670
Gold grade	oz/st	0.021	0.025	0.025	0.023	0.024	0.024	0.024	0.023
Mined gold	koz	106	116	102	106	110	110	110	83
Tons waste	kst	12,989	10,671	11,852	11,065	10,170	10,414	8,840	1,674
Tons rehandle	kst	4,342	5,509	2,029	1,167	1,795	1,8,38	1,560	26
Total material mined	kst	22,361	20,774	18,005	16,793	16,565	16,852	15,000	5,370
Strip ratio	waste:ore	3.45:1	3.52:1	3.37:1	2.68:1	2.60:1	2.66:1	2.26:1	0.46:1
Placed Ore
Tons ore	kst	4,600	4,600	4,600	4,600	4,600	4,600	4,600	3,579
Gold grade	oz/st	0.022	0.025	0.023	0.024	0.024	0.024	0.024	0.023
Placed gold	koz	101	116	106	110	111	110	111	82

Table 13‑2:        Peak Required Equipment List

Equipment	Units
Production bench drill	3
Dozer	8
Wheel loader	5
Haul truck	17
Backhoe	3
Track hoe	2
Motor grader	2
Water truck	2
Oil/fuel truck	1
Sand truck	1
Snowplow	2

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 13-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

14.0 RECOVERY METHODS

14.1 Process Method Selection

The process plant design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.  Debottlenecking and optimization activities that have occurred since Coeur acquired the operations have assisted in increasing capacities and efficiencies.

14.2 Flowsheet

A flow diagram for the crusher is provided in Figure 14‑1.  The leach pad flowsheet is included as Figure 14‑2.  A simplified diagram showing the neutralization and denitrification process is shown in Figure 14‑3.

14.3 Plant Design

14.3.1 Overview

Ore is trucked to the crusher located at the east end of the plant/pad area to be crushed to a nominal size of 83% minus 1/2-inch. The crushing plant can process between 4.2 and 4.6 Mst/a of ore, depending on ore hardness. Lime is added to the crushed ore.  Once crushed, the ore is trucked to leach pads to be stacked in 20 ft high lifts up to a maximum height of 150 ft above liner.

Stacked ore is then leached with dilute sodium cyanide solution.  Gold and silver in the pregnant (metal-bearing) leach solution are recovered by adsorption on activated carbon and the barren (non-metal bearing) leach solution is recycled to the heap leach pad.  Spent ore is rinsed, neutralized, and denitrified and then removed from the leach pad to be placed on a designated spent ore storage area.

Gold and silver are recovered from loaded carbon using a modified pressure Zadra method.  The rich electrolyte from elution is processed by electrowinning, depositing the metals into an electrolytic sludge comprised of 90–98% gold and silver.

Precious metals in the electrolytic sludge are further purified by smelting at a commercial refinery.

14.3.2 Crushing

A single crushing circuit is used to process ore before being transferred to the leach pads.  This crushing circuit has undergone numerous modifications over its history to accommodate operational conditions and optimize performance.

Ore is hauled from the pit with CAT 777 and 785 haul trucks that dump directly into a hopper or onto a stockpile adjacent to the hopper.  Stockpiled ore is fed into the hopper by a loader at times when a direct ore haul is not available.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 14‑1:      Crusher Flow Diagram

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 14‑2:      Leach Pad Flowsheet

 

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 14‑3:      Neutralization and Denitrification Flow Diagram

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Ore is transferred by an apron chain feeder to a vibrating grizzly where oversize rock is diverted into a Metso C140 jaw crusher.  The jaw crusher reduces the rock down to a 6 inch nominal size before dropping onto a conveyor belt along with the fines from the grizzly.

Before being fed into the secondary crusher, the ore passes over a screen deck to remove final product sized material.  These fines are conveyed to the final product pile and oversize rock drops into a Metso-Nordberg HP 500 cone crusher where it is reduced to 2½ inch nominal size.  Crushed ore may be conveyed to an adjacent screen plant to remove product size material before being conveyed to the tertiary crushing stage.  Product size rock from the screen plant is conveyed to the final product pile.  The system can be set for the ore to bypass the screen plant and be fed directly to the tertiary crushers in the event of a failure or planned maintenance at the screen plant.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

The tertiary stage of the crushing system consists of four Metso-Nordberg Omnicone 1560 cone crushers.  Ore enters the tertiary stage through a diverter that distributes the rock to the four cone crushers.  Each cone has its own screen deck to remove product size material before dropping into the crusher.  This product size material is conveyed to the final product pile.  Rock that is larger than product size falls in the tertiary cones and is crushed down to ¾-inch nominal size.  The total crushing system throughput of 750–1,000 st/hr can be achieved with only three of the tertiary cones operating.  A fourth cone can be left in standby in the event of a failure or planned maintenance on one of the other cones.

After leaving the tertiary crushers the ore is conveyed back to the screen plant and any material not meeting the final product size is recirculated back into the tertiary cones until it meets specifications.  The final product size target is 95% passing ¾-inch and 83% passing ½-inch.  Powdered lime is added to the final crushed product.  The lime application rate is adjusted as needed to control solution pH during leaching.

The maximum system throughput is generally considered to be 1,000 st/hr; however, rock type, moisture content, and weather conditions have a significant impact on actual throughput.  Average throughput is approximately 730 st/hr.  The crushing system is operated on 12-hour shifts for 680 shifts per year.  Non-operating shifts are used for planned maintenance.

14.3.3 Heap Leach

The heap leach process began in 1983 using reusable heap leach pads (load/offload).  There are currently five on/off heap leach pads used for the leaching cycle; the newest pad (Pad #5) was constructed in 2008.

In 2013, Wharf received certification by the International Cyanide Management Institute in recognition of being compliant with the International Cyanide Management Institute cyanide code for adhering to the best industry practices for storage, handling, and use of cyanide.  International Cyanide Management Institute cyanide code re-certification was attained in 2019.  Re-certification is in process.

Each pad is loaded in 20-ft lifts to a maximum of 150 ft above the liner.  Each lift is wetted with a dilute sodium cyanide solution that is distributed through a series of drip emitters, wobblers, or Rain Bird-style impact sprays.  Drippers are the primary solution distribution method and involve drip lines being placed underneath the pads active ore placement surface to mitigate potential freezing, reduce evaporation, and minimize the opportunity for ponding.  In the final stages of precious metal recovery from the heap leach, sodium cyanide addition ceases for the rinsing stage.  The rinsing stage of leaching recovers the final gold and silver ounces prior to spent ore treatment.

Once the contained gold’s full economic recovery from the ore has been achieved, the pad enters the neutralization/denitrification stage.  The pad neutralization circuit uses hydrogen peroxide to destroy the sodium cyanide contained in the pad effluent.  Once the WAD cyanide levels have been reduced to target levels, the solution is routed to the denitrification system.  The denitrification system consists of two biological denitrification plants and a heated pond which acts as a biological reaction cell.  The biological denitrification process uses bacteria to remove the oxygen from the nitrates and nitrites, chemically reducing them to inert nitrogen gas.  Upon completion of nitrate destruction in the solution stream, solution is routed back to the pad through the same piping network, drippers, and wobblers that applied the original leach solution.  The five-pad system allows for a minimum of one pad to be available for each phase of the processing cycle at any given time.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Denitrification continues until the spent ore meets the criteria for off-loading.  Both DANR representatives and Coeur sample the solutions for testing to verify the pad effluent meets off-load criteria through third-party analysis.  When the spent ore is approved for removal from the pad, the spent ore is trucked to a spent ore disposal area.

14.3.4 Adsorption, Desorption and Recovery Process Facility

In the gold leaching process, barren (non-metal bearing) process solution is pumped to the active leach pads and applied at a target rate of 0.0045 gpm/ft2.  The barren leach solution trickles through the heap leach, chemically extracting precious metals through cyanidation.  The pad pregnant liquor solution sodium cyanide target concentrations are 25 to 35 ppm weakly acid-dissociable cyanide (maximum weakly acid-dissociable cyanide value of 50 ppm for cyanide code compliance).

The pregnant leach solution is collected on high density polyethylene liner and routed through a collection of drainpipes under the pad.  The pregnant leach solution is directed to the collection dam of the respective pad and through a series of pipes into the pregnant sump.  From the sump, the pregnant solution is pumped to the first tank of a series of carbon-in-column tanks.  There are four carbon-in-column circuits to process precious metal solutions. Activated coconut shell carbon is used to collect metals from solution.  Once the precious metals have been adsorbed on carbon to sufficient concentration, the loaded carbon is transferred to the elution circuit.  The barren solution has additional sodium cyanide added to it and is pumped back to the pads.  A safety screen is used to prevent carbon fines loss. If the pregnant leach solution from the pad is too low in grade due to late stage leaching or rinsing, the pregnant leach solution is routed to the enrichment sump and returned to another pad.

In the elution circuit, carbon is prepared by acid washing with 3–4% nitric acid, rinsed with soft water, and then pH adjusted using liquid caustic.  Gold and silver are stripped from the loaded carbon using a modified Zadra process.  Coeur incorporates a heated sodium hydroxide solution under sufficient pressures to keep solution from flashing.  This process forces the precious metals back into solution at concentrations up to 40 times what is seen in the pregnant leach solution plant feed.  The rich electrolyte solution is then passed through a series of electrowinning cells where the precious metals are precipitated producing 90–98% precious metal electrolytic sludge.  The electrolytic sludge is harvested, dewatered, retorted, sampled, packaged, and shipped to a commercial refinery for further processing.  Alternatively, the refinery has the capability to smelt the sludge using a furnace to make doré.  Liquid mercury is collected from the retort process and stored.  Stripped carbon is reactivated and returned to the carbon-in-column circuit.

Carbon fines are collected and shipped off site for precious metals removal.  Spent environmental carbon for either cyanide or mercury collection is sent off site for disposal.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

14.4 Process Facility Performance

Silver to gold ratios in the process feed have historically varied from near 1:1 to >40:1. These variations in the ore delivered to the pad have resulted in wide swings in the bullion composition produced by the plant.  A Merrill-Crowe circuit would provide better plant performance in high silver situations, but during the early years the gold to silver ratio did not warrant use of the technique. By the time the silver ratios began increasing, the plant was firmly established as an activated carbon adsorption–desorption–recovery plant.

Plant gold efficiency during the low silver periods reaches the industry norm of +95% for this type of plant.  During periods when the silver concentration begins to climb, silver preferentially loading on the carbon reduces both the plant gold and silver efficiencies.  Changes in the plant stripping circuit have improved the ability for the plant to compensate for the additional silver content.

The plant has sufficient electrowinning capacity and can adjust strip cycles to increase the carbon volume processed.  During periods of extremely high silver grades, the retort is used at maximum capacity.  Consumption of reagents also increases with additional silver content.  Greater amounts of cyanide are consumed by increased silver in leach solutions.  Changes in the plant stripping schedule also affect sodium hydroxide and carbon consumption rates.

14.5 Equipment Sizing

The major equipment used in the process is summarized in Table 14‑1 and Table 14‑2.

14.6 Power and Consumables

14.6.1.1 Power

Processing power requirements are approximately 13,700 MWh per year.  This power requirement is consistent through the LOM plan.  Incoming power to the site was designed with redundancies.  Black Hills Energy provides power to the site from two different directions allowing a swap in direction in the event of an outage.  In addition, generators are installed on site with sufficient capacity to critical facilities, with exception of the crusher, during an outage.

14.6.1.2 Water

The pregnant, barren, overflow, and contingency process ponds are used to collect either the excess or drain down solution in the event of a water balance upset or power supply interruptions.  Surplus water in the processing circuit can be routed through the contingency pond and sent to the Reliance and Ross Valley holding ponds.

During times of water surplus, water is processed out of the system from the Ross Valley holding pond through water treatment plants.  Each water treatment facility is operated similar to a municipal water treatment plant.  Bacteria are used to reduce nitrates and nitrites to permitted levels.  The effluents of both treatment plants are routed to the Ross Valley holding pond where heated raw water is mixed in with nutrients.  In cases where metals species or pH are not within the acceptable parameters, consumables are utilized to precipitate the metals species or adjust the pH prior to discharge in the permitted mining area.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

During times of drought, make up water can be added to the system from PW3.  This process well has sufficient capacity to supply necessary water to maintain operations during dry conditions.

Treated water is discharged to surface or groundwater, depending on permit and operational requirements.  The water treatment facilities consist of Pond 4, the South Dakota carbon-in-columns, Pond 5, Reliance holding pond, Ross Valley heat plant, Ross Valley holding pond, the Egg Pond, the Clean Water treatment plant, and the Ross Valley treatment plant.  These facilities are used to treat nitrates and nitrites in pad effluents for offload, in excess process fluids due to meteoric events, and in historic mining fluids from prior operations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-8

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑1:        Process Equipment List Summary (Crusher, Cones, Screens)

Crusher and Cones
Equipment	Model	Liner Manufacturer	Liner Model #
Jaw crusher	Metso c-140 jaw crusher	ESCO	PN JLKC140M26-14R, PN JLKC140S21-14R
Secondary crusher	Metso-Nordberg HP-500	ESCO	PN GMTH500LO914R,PN GMTH500M26-14R
Tertiary cones	Metso-Nordberg Omnicone 1560	ESCO	PN GNB1560L08-14R,PN GNB1560M14-14R
Screens
Equipment	Model	Screen Manufacturer	Screen Model #
Grizzly	Tabor 5*10	-	-
Secondary screen	Tabor 8*20 (or 8*24)	ESCO	PN 920FE35CA, Polydeck, Deister top deck
			PN 920SE35CA, Polydeck, panel with skid bars, 12 x 24 in
			PN 1374FC3JEA, Polydeck, secondary lower deck / upper half screen panel, 19 x 60-BK40F-MX-SWF-8P, B3H2#1186-PD60, NR80, 1 x 2
			PN 1373FC3CWA, Polydeck, panel, 12.5 x 65 mm slotted opening, black, 40 mm thick, flat, maxi high open area style, slotted with flow, 8 pin fastening, Rubberdex 40 flexi rubber, DMAX, 12 X 24 in
1, 2, and 4 decks	Tabor 7*16	ESCO	PN 767FC3JEA, Polydeck, panel, 25 x 75 mm (1 x 3 in equivalent) slotted opening, black, 40 mm thick, flat, maxi high open area style, slot with flow, 8 pin fastening, Rubberdex 60 flexi rubber, 12 x 24 in,
			PN 1373FC3CWA, Polydeck, panel, 12.5 x 65 mm slotted opening, black, 40 mm thick, flat, maxi high open area style, slotted with flow, 8 pin fastening, Rubberdex 40 flexi rubber, DMAX, 12 x 24 in
3 deck	Tabor 6*16 (swapped to Tabor 7*16 on OCT2021)	ESCO	PN SFMOT-1.000-243-S00002, major wire, tert 3 deck, 1 in
			PN SFMOT-0.500-148-S00005, major wire, tert 3 deck, 1/2 in
5 and 6 decks	KCI-JCI	ESCO	PN SFMOT-1.250-243-S00007, major wire, top deck, 1-1/4 in
			PN SFMOT-0.500-148-S00006, major wire, bottom deck, 1/2 in

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-9

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 14‑2:        Process Equipment List Summary (Plant)

Equipment	Manufacturer	Model
Preg solution pumps (3)	Summit pump	2196XLO
Barren/enrichment pumps	Summit Cornell	2196XLO 81024MX-12DB
Reactivation kiln	FLSmidth	2MT2422
EW cells (3)	Summit Valley Equipment	75EC18
Retort	Summit Valley Equipment	n/a
Refining furnace	MIFCO	T-200-MT
Strip vessels	Gladwin Tank MFG	n/a
Boilers (3)	Superior Boiler  Superior Boiler	Triad GMS-2000-HP-HEP Mohawk 4-5-304
New columns (6)	n/a	n/a
Old columns (5)	n/a	n/a
South Dakota columns (4)	n/a	n/a
Nevada columns (4)	n/a	n/a
Mercury scrubber (2)	FLSmidth	n/a
Generators (3)	Euclid Caterpillar Caterpillar	573RSL2049A SR4 SR4B

14.6.1.3 Consumables

Consumables used in processing include activated carbon, cyanide, nitric acid, caustic, anti-scalant, hydrogen peroxide, and lime.

14.6.2 Personnel

The personnel requirements in the heap leach and process area for the LOM average 52 hourly and 15 salary positions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 14-10

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

15.0 INFRASTRUCTURE

15.1 Introduction

All infrastructure required to support operations has been constructed and is operational.  The operation consists of mining one open pit that comprises several historic open pits and underground mines.  During the life of the operation, once a portion of the ultimate pit is finished it is backfilled and reclaimed as soon as possible.

Active mining and processing areas at Wharf are fenced to maintain perimeter safety and security. Gates with locks are used on all tertiary roads that have access on and off the site.  The mine is fully supported with electricity, natural gas, telephone, and radio communications.  On-site infrastructure includes production and monitoring water wells, offices, maintenance, warehouse and various ancillary facilities, open-pit mining areas, WRSF areas, crushing and conveying facilities, five lined heap leach pads, two water treatment plants and a process facility.  There is an onsite assay laboratory as well as a metallurgical laboratory.

A site utility layout plan is presented in Figure 15‑1.  A site facilities layout plan is presented in Figure 15‑2. The WRSFs and spent ore facilities are shown on Figure 15‑3.

The Golden Reward area is undergoing closure and rehabilitation.  On-site infrastructure at Golden Reward includes a production well used to supply the Terry Peak Ski Area with snow-making water, several monitoring wells, a lined pond used for snow making by the Terry Peak Ski Area, a maintenance shop building used by the Terry Peak Ski Area, and an administration building used by Coeur for cold storage.

15.2 Roads and Logistics

The Wharf Operations are located four miles west of Lead in Lawrence County.  The site is accessed by traveling south of Lead on Highway 85/14A for one mile, then traveling west on Highway 473 to the Stewart Slope Road and turning left onto the Wharf access road. The paved portion of the Stewart Slope Road terminates at the Wharf access road.  The Wharf access road and the Stewart Slope Road are maintained by Coeur to provide continuous access from Highway 473 to the Wharf security gate in all weather conditions.

Various unpaved roads exist on and around the Wharf Operations area and are maintained by Coeur to facilitate light vehicle and heavy mobile equipment traffic movements.

The Golden Reward area is situated two miles southwest of the town of Lead and is accessed by traveling south of Lead on Highway 85/14A one mile and then traveling west on Highway 473 for a quarter of a mile to Fantail Gulch Road. Fantail Gulch Road leads to the main gate at Golden Reward.  Very little maintenance is done to the few existing roads on site because of the inactive status of the area.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 15‑1:      Infrastructure Layout Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 15‑2:      Facilities Layout Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Figure 15‑3:      Waste Rock and Spent Ore Facility Layout Plan

Note:  Figure prepared by Coeur, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-4

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

15.3 Stockpiles

Topsoil stockpiles are utilized at strategic locations throughout the mine site.  These locations are generally close to stripping areas as well as future reclamation sites to minimize haulage.  An interim reclamation seed mix approved by the State is applied to topsoil stockpiles to minimize erosion potential and limit weed growth.

15.4 Leach Pads

There are currently five on/off heap leach pads used for the leaching cycle; the newest pad (Pad #5) was constructed in 2008.  In 2013, Wharf received certification by the International Cyanide Management Institute (ICMI) in recognition of being compliant with the ICMI cyanide code for adhering to the best industry practices for storage, handling, and use of cyanide.  ICMI cyanide code re-certification was attained in early 2016.

Each pad is loaded in 20 ft lifts to a maximum of 150 ft above the liner.  Each lift is wetted with a dilute sodium cyanide solution that is distributed through a series of drip emitters, wobblers, or Rain Bird-style impact sprays.  Drippers are the primary solution distribution method and involve drip lines being placed underneath the pads active ore placement surface to mitigate potential freezing, reduce evaporation and minimize the opportunity for ponding.  In the final stages of precious metal recovery from the heap leach, sodium cyanide addition ceases for the rinsing stage.  The rinsing stage of leaching recovers the final gold and silver ounces prior to spent ore treatment.

Once the contained gold’s full economic recovery from the ore has been achieved, the pad enters the neutralization/denitrification stage.  The pad neutralization circuit uses hydrogen peroxide to destroy the sodium cyanide in pad effluent to the target levels required for denitrification plant influent.  The pad effluent is then processed using CIC for metals removal to meet surface water discharge quality.  From the CIC, the solution is then routed to the denitrification circuit for nitrate destruction.  Neutralization continues until cyanide, pH and metals contents are within required target ranges.

The denitrification system consists of two biological denitrification plants and a heated pond which acts as a biological reaction cell.  The biological denitrification process utilizes bacteria to remove the oxygen from the nitrates and nitrites, chemically reducing them to inert nitrogen gas.  Upon completion of nitrate destruction in the solution stream, solution is routed back to the pad through the same piping network, drippers and wobblers that applied the original leach solution.  The five-pad system allows for a minimum of one pad to be available for each phase of the processing cycle at any given time.

Denitrification continues until the spent ore meets the criteria for off-loading.  When the spent ore is approved for removal from the pad, the spent ore is trucked to a spent ore storage area.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-5

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

15.5 Waste Rock Storage Facilities

Waste rock is disposed of in designated waste rock storage facility (WRSF) areas, typically used to backfill existing pits (refer to Figure 15‑3).

A small amount of material has elevated sulfides and has sporadically been encountered during mining.  This material is handled according to the acid rock drainage mitigation plan approved by DANR.  All WRSFs are located within the permitted disturbance boundary.  Waste facilities are re-contoured to an approximate 3:1 slope, covered with topsoil, and revegetated as soon as possible upon completion.

For the remaining mine life, Wharf will mine approximately 92 Mst of waste.  There is sufficient space in the WRSFs for the estimate waste quantity.

15.6 Spent Ore Facilities

Once the ore has been leached, neutralized, and denitrified, it is considered “spent ore”.  Spent ore backfill on unlined facilities are permitted by way of a groundwater discharge permit.  Currently Coeur has both un-lined and lined spent ore facilities.  Facility locations were shown on Figure 15‑3.

DANR has approved a Perimeter of Operational Pollution zone for each groundwater discharge permit and allows for a variance to select groundwater standards within the Perimeter of Operational Pollution zones.

The limiting factor that controls the amount of spent ore that can be placed unlined in each facility under the groundwater discharge plan is nitrate loading.  By maintaining the loading limit for nitrate, regional groundwater quality will be protected.  DANR has assigned a loading limit for each groundwater discharge permit based on hydrogeological fate and transport models submitted during the permit application process.

Coeur is required to monitor the pore water of every neutralized heap prior to off-loading to calculate the nitrate loading within each permit.  Coeur is also required to monitor compliance wells located at the edges of the Perimeter of Operational Pollution zones and implement a mitigation plan if the nitrate concentration exceeds half of the groundwater standard.  When the nitrate loading within each facility approaches the assigned limit, Coeur has the option of placing spent ore on lined facilities or implementing in-situ denitrification.  DANR may grant a credit to the loading limit if Coeur can demonstrate successful in-situ denitrification.

Coeur is required to perform an update to the site fate and transport model at least once every three years to verify model accuracy and update input parameters and sampling data.  The most recent model update was performed in December 2019, which demonstrated adequate capacity for LOM projected spent ore and waste rock within currently designed facilities.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-6

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

15.7 Water Management

The annual water accumulation within lined pads, ponds, and ditches due to precipitation averages approximately 100-Mgal.

The focus of the water balance program is monitoring and proactive control of the process to maintain solutions at appropriate levels for any given situation.  The method is a combination of constant monitoring and a set of “go” or “no go” parameters that, when the conditions are met, trigger a set of actions.  The program is a holistic, comprehensive approach in that it examines daily precipitation, accounts for varying amounts of water inventory and the current routing of flows to various locations.

The water management system consists of five major sections:  five leach pad cells, five process ponds (pregnant, barren, overflow, contingency, and neutralization), three water treatment plants, treated water discharge/spray system, and a lead detection/recapture system.

DANR requires that Coeur manage for a total pond freeboard to hold a 19.6-inch storm event (probable maximum precipitation) between all the ponds on site.

The water balance is maintained by monitoring daily precipitation and using a spreadsheet model and decision tree to determine how water is transferred between the five sections of the water system.  In the event of excess water being stored within the ponds, treated water is discharged to specifically permitted surface and groundwater discharge areas.

15.8 Water Supply

Potable water is supplied to the Wharf Operations by well PW-2 that taps the Madison limestone aquifer.  Well PW-2 can supply approximately 80–100 gpm of quality drinking water.

After chlorination treatment, the water enters two 5,000-gal concrete storage reservoirs prior to distribution to the various mine facilities, which include the warehouse, administration, shop building, crusher, Ross Valley treatment plant, and the process plant.

Potable water is also supplied to a fill station used to fill portable tanks used for in-pit drilling.

Freshwater wells PW-1, PW-3, and HDH-8A provide supplemental water for water treatment and process use as needed.

15.9 Camps and Accommodation

There is no onsite accommodation.  Employees reside in adjacent communities.

15.10 Power and Electrical

Electrical power is principally supplied by Black Hills Power via a 12.47kV transmission line that runs up Nevada Gulch.  This transmission line is shared by Terry Peak Ski Area, Spearfish Canyon, and residential customers.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-7

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Main power service enters the mine site near the warehouse and administration buildings and is primary metered at the service point.  Several small services are fed ahead of the main service and are individually metered (i.e., Candy Cane Gates, Polo Pump Shed, Two Johns well, and the original viewing platform area lighting).

Once past the service metering point, the lines divide with one circuit feeding the Crusher and one feeding the rest of the mine site.  The crusher circuit uses pad mount step-down transformers 12.47 kV x 4160 volt and 12.47 kV x 480 to feed various motor control centers and various distribution panels.  The other circuit feeding the balance of the mine site, uses various pad mount and various pole mount 12.47 kV x 480-volt transformers to serve the loads as required.  The loads vary between motor control centers and distribution panels.

Maintenance of the transformers and 12.47 kV lines is contracted to Black Hills Power, as needed.  The secondary circuit is maintained by the on-site electrical department.

One auxiliary generator is located at the process plant and services the plant exclusively.  A second generator is located at the neutralization building and back feeds the transformer to the rest of the mine site 12.47 kV line, excluding the crusher.

15.11 Fuel

The Wharf Operations maintain three 14,500-gallon tanks for storage of #2 dyed diesel:  two are located at the Trojan Fueling Station, and one is in the Maintenance Shop Yard.  Two companies are available that can deliver, as needed.  The average number of fuel deliveries is seven per week at 8,000 gallons each.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 15-8

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

16.0 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

16.1 Markets

Coeur has established contracts and buyers for the gold concentrate product (doré) from the Wharf Operations and has an internal marketing group that monitors markets for its key products.  Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

There are no agency relationships relevant to the marketing strategies used.

Product valuation is included in the economic analysis in Chapter 19 and is based on a combination of the metallurgical recovery, commodity pricing, and consideration of processing charges.

Coeur sells its payable silver and gold production on behalf of its subsidiaries on a spot or forward basis, primarily to multi-national banks and bullion trading houses.  Markets for both silver and gold bullion are highly liquid, and the loss of a single trading counterparty is not expected to impact Coeur’s ability to sell its bullion.

16.2 Commodity Price Forecasts

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.

Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.

The long-term gold price forecasts are:

• Mineral reserves:

o US$1,400/oz Au;

• Mineral resources:

o US$1,700/oz Au;

The economic analysis in Chapter 19 uses a reverting price curve (Table 16‑1).  All commodity prices are advised by the corporate investment committee and revised as necessary throughout the budget and forecast process.  This guidance is used to keep all sites using the same basis for revenue.  The sites do not advise prices or deviate from the prices provided.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

16.3 Contracts

The Wharf Operations produce precious metal concentrates in the form of doré containing gold and silver, which is transported from the mine site to the refinery by a secure transportation provider.  Transportation costs, which consist of a fixed charge plus a liability charge based on the declared value of the shipment, equate to approximately $1.15/oz of material shipped.

Wharf Resources has a contract with a U.S.-based refiner that refines the doré into gold and silver bullion to meet certain benchmark standards set by the London Bullion Market Association, which regulates the acceptable requirements for bullion traded in the London precious metals markets.

Wharf Resources also uses a secondary refiner for the “sludge” product, which is the remainder containing gold that cannot be recovered by processes used by the primary refiner.  By agreement penalties in the metal processing are incurred for quantities of elements above specific levels.  These elements include mercury, arsenic, lead, selenium nickel, zinc, iron and copper.  Quantities of these elements above non-penalty limits are not commonly found in the ore shipped to the refiner.  In regard to the secondary refinery who handles the sludge product there are no penalties per se.  If the material is above agreed limits of mercury, it is returned to Wharf Resources for treatment to reduce the mercury levels.  The shipment and return cost are at Wharf Resources’s expense.

Contract terms include: a treatment charge based on the weight of the doré received at the refinery; a metal return percentage applied to recoverable gold; a metal return percentage applied to recoverable silver; and, penalties charged for deleterious elements contained in the doré. The total of these charges can range from $1.00–$1.50/oz of doré based on the silver and gold grades of the doré, as well as the contained amounts of deleterious elements.

In addition to the contracted terms, there are other uncontracted losses experienced through the refining of the Wharf Operations doré, including the loss of precious metals during the doré melting process as well as differences in assays between Wharf Resources and the refiner.  For the purposes of the cashflow analysis in Chapter 19, the QP assumed that uncontracted losses averaged $2.00–$4.00/oz doré received by the refiner.

Table 16‑1:        Commodity Price Forecast Used in Cashflow Analysis

	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Gold $/oz	1,750	1,750	1,700	1,600	1,600	1,600	1,600	1,600	1,600
Silver $/oz	24	23	22	21	21	21	21	21	21

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers and drilling contractors.  The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

16.4 QP Statement

For the purposes of the gold price forecasts used in the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates, the QPs reviewed the corporate pricing provided by Coeur, and accepted these prices as reasonable. The reviews included checking the pricing used in technical reports recently filed with Canadian regulatory authorities, pricing reported by major mining company peers in recent public filings, the current spot gold pricing, and three-year trailing average pricing.

The US$1,400/oz Au price is a reasonable forecast for the eight-year mine life envisaged in the mine plan.  The US$1,700/oz Au mineral resource price is, as noted, selected to ensure that the mineral reserves are a subset of the mineral resources and assume that there is sufficient time in the eight-year mine life forecast for the mineral reserves for the mineral resources to potentially be converted to mineral reserves.

Overall, the QPs conclude that there is sufficient time in the eight-year timeframe considered for the commodity price forecasts for Coeur to address any issues that may arise, or perform appropriate additional drilling, test work and engineering studies to mitigate identified issues with the estimates or upgrade the confidence categories that are currently assigned.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 16-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

17.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS

17.1 Baseline and Supporting Studies

Baseline studies and monitoring were required for permitting.  Hydrogeological fate and transport modeling and baseline monitoring were also required for each groundwater discharge plan.  Statement of basis analyses were also required during each renewal of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) surface water discharge permits.

17.2 Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs

The Wharf Operations comply with all current permit conditions and requirements and there are no outstanding environmental issues.

Environmental monitoring for air quality (monthly and quarterly), surface water quality (biweekly, quarterly, and annually), groundwater quality (quarterly and annually), leak detection of lined facilities (daily), and rock geochemistry (quarterly) are completed regularly and reported per permit conditions.

17.3 Closure and Reclamation Considerations

The Golden Reward mining area was closed in 2009 and placed into Post Closure Status with the state of South Dakota (a portion of the West side of Golden Reward was re-opened in 2012 with State Permit #476).  Closure monitoring and maintenance are conducted in accordance with the Golden Reward Post Closure Plan and Financial Assurance document.  Costs associated with closure of the Golden Reward mining area are typically updated every year and included in the Golden Reward ARO estimate and technical review document.

Costs associated with closure and post closure of the Wharf Operations are typically updated every year and included in the annual Wharf Operations asset retirement obligation estimate and technical review document.

Financial surety sufficient to reclaim the Wharf Operations mine and processing facilities is up to date and held by the state of South Dakota.  The closure bond plan associated with reclamation and post closure surety was updated in 2020. The estimated asset retirement obligation for the Project is approximately $47.6 M.

Financial surety for the Golden Reward area, sufficient to conduct monitoring and maintenance during a 30-year post closure period is up to date and held by the state of South Dakota.  The estimated asset retirement obligation for the project is approximately $0.61 M.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-1

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

17.4 Permitting

The Wharf Operations commenced in 1983 and have obtained all necessary environmental permits and licenses from the appropriate county, state and federal agencies for the open pit mines, heap leach pads, and all necessary support facilities.  The key approvals and permits are summarized in Table 17‑1.

Operational standards and Best Management Practices were established to maintain compliance with applicable state and federal regulatory standards and permits.

17.5 Social Considerations, Plans, Negotiations and Agreements

Coeur currently enjoys a positive relationship with local communities.  The entire workforce is local to the area and mining is a historically and economically important activity in Lawrence County.

The Wharf Operations continue to support local businesses and expects local community support during permit actions or other activities involving the public.

17.6 Qualified Person’s Opinion on Adequacy of Current Plans to Address Issues

Based on the information provided to the QP by Coeur, there are no material issues known to the QP that will require mitigation activities or allocation of remediation costs in respect of environmental, permitting, closure or social license considerations.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-2

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Table 17‑1:        Key Permits and Approvals

Agency	Permit or Approval
DANR Air Quality Program	Title V Air Quality Permit # 28.1155-09 (under renewal process)
South Dakota DANR Surface Water Program	Surface Water Discharge Permit # SD-0025852 Surface Water Discharge Permit # SDG-070867
South Dakota DANR Groundwater Program	Ross Valley Groundwater Discharge Plan (Permit and Variance) # GWD 1-88 Reliance Groundwater Discharge Plan (Permit and Variance) # GWD 1-94 Juno/Foley Groundwater Discharge Plan (Permit and Variance) # GWS 1-98 American Eagle Groundwater Discharge Plan (Permit and Variance) # GWD 1-11
South Dakota DANR Drinking Water Program	Public Water System EPA ID # 0933
South Dakota DANR Minerals and Mining Program	Large Scale Surface Mine Permit # 356 Large Scale Surface Mine Permit # 434 Large Scale Surface Mine Permit # 435 Large Scale Surface Mine Permit # 464 Large Scale Surface Mine Permit # 476 Aggregate Mine License # 90-400
South Dakota DANR Waste Management Program	Construction Demolition Debris Permit # 97-22- 054
South Dakota DANR Water Rights Program	Water Right Permit # 1173-1 Water Right Permit # 1346-1 Water Right Permit # 1365-1 Water Right Permit # 1406-1 Water Right Permit # 1437-1 Water Right Permit # 1493-1 Water Right Permit # 1667-1 Water Right Permit # 1761-1
Lawrence County, South Dakota	Conditional Use Permit # 224 Conditional Use Permit # 398 Sewage Disposal System Permit # 168 Sewage Disposal System Permit # 457 Sewage Disposal System Permit # 497
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers	Army Nationwide 404 Permit # 14
U.S. Federal Communication Commission	FCC Radio Station Authorization # WPRM414 FCC Radio Station Authorization # WQAH357
South Dakota Secretary of State	Corporate Business License # FB015535 Corporate Business License # FB015535
U.S. Department of Transportation	Hazardous Materials Transportation General Permit Reg. #062112 600 032UW; Company ID #051785

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 17-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

18.0 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

18.1 Introduction

Capital and operating cost estimates in the current budget cycle are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  In later years, capital estimates are based on estimated annual operating requirements and are considered as sustaining capital.

18.2 Capital Cost Estimates

All major capital construction projects needed to maintain consistent production and extraction of mineral reserves at the Wharf Operations have been completed over the last 30 years.

The future capital estimates are derived from expected equipment needs and project plans and are determined with the assistance of vendor quotes, previous buying experience and/or experience with construction of similar projects.  The capital cost estimate includes consideration of historical capital cost estimates.

Labor assumptions for capital projects are based on third-party contractor costs, internal employee wage rates plus benefits, or a combination of the two.

Material costs are based on current prices for consumables with no market or inflation rate assumed.

A 10–15% contingency has been added to select capital projects.  This contingency is used where project elements have not been fully defined.

Other sustaining capital costs consist of technology related purchases, light vehicles, and other general or administrative expenditure.  Exploration drilling capital is estimated for infill drilling costs required to improve estimates for short-range planning purposes.  Drilling is based on a quoted cost per foot drilled; the expenditure also includes Wharf Operations salary personnel dedicated to the exploration program, in addition to assaying, supplies and consumables necessary to complete the work.

Mine capital costs comprise typical sustaining capital items for a mature open pit mine the cost of which reduces as the mine approaches the end of its life.  Most the Wharf Operations’ capital needs are sustaining in nature, required for the ongoing mining operations, and low in dollar amounts.  Capital needs are subject to change with the needs of the mine plan.  Since most of the capital projects do not have a direct impact to production in the given year, there is flexibility to postpone or remove projects to adhere to the approved budget.

The LOM sustaining capital cost estimate is provided in Table 18‑1.  Sustaining capital costs total approximately US$16.4 M, capitalized drilling costs are US$5.3 M, for an overall capital cost estimate for the LOM of approximately US$21.7 M.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-1

Table 18‑1:          LOM Sustaining Capital Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)

Description	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	Total
Sustaining capital	1,392	3,000	3,000	3,000	3,000	3,000	—	—	16,392
Capitalized drilling	1,610	2,103	1,550	—	—	—	—	—	5,263
Total Capital	3,002	5,103	4,550	3,000	3,000	3,000	—	—	21,655

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

18.3 Operating Cost Estimates

18.3.1 Basis of Estimate

The operating costs are well understood and based on a 30-year operational history.  The basis used for costs can be derived from a variety of factors including but not limited to contract price, historical market/actual price, market price plus appropriate rate increase, current wages, cost per unit mined, crushed, produced, hour, and utilized.

18.3.2 Mine Operating Costs

Mine operating costs include the costs required to move all the material needed to maintain a constant supply or ore to the crusher, maintain access to the property and provide access to all areas of the mine.

Mine operating costs incorporate all the costs for operating and maintaining the production earthmoving equipment.  The mine operating costs are broken into seven cost centers based on the equipment used.  The cost centers are hauling, loading, dozing, drilling, blasting, roads and dumps, and general operating.  Mine operating costs are reported as a cost per ton mined.

Each cost center incorporates all the costs needed to operate and maintain the corresponding equipment and include all labor, rental, tires, tracks, fuel and wear parts needed to operate:

• Hauling includes all the costs associated with the 777 and 785 truck fleets;

• Loading includes all the costs associated with the 993 and 994 loaders;

• Dozing includes all the costs associated with the D-9 and D-10 dozers;

• Drilling includes the costs for the DM45 downhole blast hole drills.

• Blasting includes all the costs for the explosives and contract blasting group;

• Roads and yards include all costs associated with maintaining the roads and the mine travel infrastructure and includes costs for sand trucks, water trucks and motor graders ;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-2

• General operating includes the cost for the maintenance group and the operations salary supervision staff.  This cost center also includes the costs for the building maintenance and much of the small equipment and light vehicles needed to maintain daily operations.

The mining cost/ton figure used in the mineral reserve estimate and cut-off calculations is applied to all ore and waste tons.  A summary of the forecast mining costs for the remaining LOM is provided in Table 18‑2.

18.3.3 Process Operating Costs

The process operating costs include all the costs incurred once an ore ton is delivered to the crusher.  Each ore ton must be crushed, placed on a leach pad, leached, neutralized, de-nitrified and offloaded and placed back in the pit.  Process operating costs are where these costs are accounted for.  Process operating costs are broken down into nine cost centers:  pad load, pad unload, crushing, leaching, process operating, denitrification, water treatment, neutralization, and metallurgical administration.  Processing unit costs are reported as a cost per ton crushed.

The pad load and pad unload cost centers contain costs allocated from loading, hauling, and dozing cost centers.  Both the pad load and pad unload cost centers are based upon the number of hours each equipment type spends doing the task.  On a monthly basis, each group from loading, hauling, and dozing has a cost per hour calculated based on the total spend and number of hours used.  This cost is applied to the pad load and pad unload cost centers according to the number of hours spent multiplied by the cost per hour.  These are considered process costs because they only apply to the ore tons moved.

Crusher costs incorporates all the costs to reduce the ore size from 2 ft down to 80% passing ½ inch.  The costs include all labor, maintenance, lime, belts, wear metal and replacement parts needed to maintain operation above 80% availability.

The process cost/ton figure used in the mineral reserve estimate and cut-off calculations is applied to crusher tons only.  Forecast process operating costs are provided in Table 18‑3 and Table 18‑4.

18.3.4 Infrastructure Operating Costs

All infrastructure is in place.  The cost of upkeep is included within each department’s individual operating costs on an annual basis.  Maintenance and upkeep for the administration building, warehouse and shop are included in the general mining cost center.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-3

Table 18‑2:          Mining Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	Total
Drilling	4,132	4,132	4,455	3,121	3,663	3,686	3,231	1,889	28,309
Blasting	4,165	4,165	4,490	3,146	3,692	3,715	3,256	1,904	28,533
Dozing	3,143	3,002	3,058	2,082	2,544	2,573	2,286	1,145	19,833
Hauling	18,369	18,258	16,697	11,590	13,811	14,337	12,599	7,077	112,738
Loading	6,455	6,221	5,960	3,751	4,819	4,795	4,215	1,656	37,872
Roads & yards	2,923	2,755	2,793	2,175	2,510	2,371	2,310	1,347	19,184
General mining	7,218	7,221	6,514	6,517	6,165	6,110	5,017	2,524	47,286
Total	46,405	45,753	43,965	32,383	37,203	37,588	32,914	17,542	293,753

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 18‑3:          Process Plant Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
Leaching	6,113	6,113	6,113	6,113	6,113	6,113	6,113	4,340	1,302	48,433
Process operating	3,256	3,278	3,299	3,321	3,343	2,911	2,777	2,328	698	25,211
Denitrification	580	598	616	634	653	475	293	61	18	3,928
Water treatment	546	569	591	613	637	364	158	(51)	(15)	3,412
Neutralization	187	192	196	201	205	111	85	40	12	1,229
Met administration	2,187	2,187	2,187	2,187	2,187	2,187	2,187	1,553	466	17,328
Totals	12,869	12,936	13,001	13,069	13,138	12,161	11,612	8,271	2,481	99,538

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 18‑4:          Other Process Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	Total
Crusher	10,854	10,797	10,818	10,840	10,863	10,422	10,289	8,966	83,849
Pad load	4,212	4,387	4,387	4,387	4,387	4,387	4,387	3,894	34,428
Pad unload	4,090	5,713	7,743	6,928	8,005	5,480	7,199	3,318	48,476
Total	19,156	20,897	22,948	22,155	23,255	20,289	21,875	16,178	166,753

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-4

18.3.5 General and Administrative Operating Costs

The general and administrative costs include overhead departments to support the mining and processing operations.  This includes costs received from support by the corporate office as well as the refining and processing costs required to create a saleable product.  Costs are based upon historical spending and updated for market trends such as cost of living increases for the salaried and hourly work force.  The reporting measurement is on a ton per crushed basis to determine the reasonableness for prior and future years.

The general and administrative cost includes senior management overhead costs, salaries, travel, training, insurance, production tax and general costs covering all areas as approved by the General Manager.

Laboratory costs support mining and processing operations by providing assay results for the various drilling programs to provide guidance on ore extraction and ore blending for the leach pads.  This is critical in order to optimize gold ore leaching and recovery.

Exploration covers costs related to property review where the results are preliminary and not likely to lead to extension of current mining operations.  This is expensed cost, whereas costs to expand current operations would be capitalized in order to match the expenditure with future extraction of ore.

Warehouse costs are minimal as the majority of the costs are budgeted in general administration.

Safety costs cover the mine site and benefit all operations.  This entails review of processed, defining safety procedures, creating administrative and engineering controls and review that all work is being completed in a safe manner.

Engineering works with mining and process to plan operational goals which meet both short, and long term, needs for staying on the life of mine plan.  This includes geophysical review of ore types, blending and strategies for efficient use of equipment and manpower.

The Environmental team is responsible for the operations staying within the guidelines set by regulatory agencies for staying within proper limits of environmental standards.  This includes updating and necessary permits and being a liaison with external entities.

The Human Resources operations handles the functions necessary for hiring and retention of personnel.  Dealing with daily employee issues and aligning benefits for specific and overall needs. The team works closely with all operational departments to ensure that the correct number of employees are available to meet the needs to achieve the workload.

Information Technologies is responsible for computer infrastructure needs.  Much of the cost is passed down from the corporate office to cover the Wharf Operations’ share of the company computer systems.  In addition, the mine has site-specific computer and software needs to assist the Engineering team and other functions complete their tasks.

Land costs cover expenses for re-seeding, fencing, soil testing which are not part of the reclamation and closure cost functions.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-5

The administrative cost/ton figure used in the mineral reserve estimate and cut-off calculations is applied to crusher tons only.  The LOM forecast general and administrative costs are summarized in Table 18‑5.

18.3.6 Owner (Corporate) Operating Costs

The Wharf Operations pay corporate costs monthly.  These are typically in the form of management fees and insurance premiums which are split between the mines.  These costs are reported under the general administration cost center and is accounted for in general and administrative operating costs.  Annually, these costs plus costs for information technology are included in the budget and forecasts.

18.3.7 Operating Cost Summary

The operating cost estimate for the remaining LOM is provided on an annualized basis in Table 18‑6 and on a dollar per ton basis in Table 18‑7.  The LOM operating cost is US$664 M, which equates to US$2.23/t mined and US$10.29/t processed.

18.4 QP Statement

Capital and operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  The estimate accuracies and ranges comply with the stated accuracy and contingency ranges required to meet a pre-feasibility level of study under SK1300.  The QPs considered the risks associated with the engineering estimation methods used when stating the accuracy and contingency ranges and preparing the cost estimate forecasts.

The capital and operating cost estimates are presented for an operating mine, with a 30+-year production history.  Analogues to prior similar environments are not relevant to the Wharf Operations given the production history and that the mine was in production as at December 31, 2021.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-6

Table 18‑5:          General and Administrative Operating Costs (US$ x 1,000)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
General Admin	6,164	6,394	6,445	6,534	6,671	5,374	5,364	3,459	709	47,114
Laboratory	1,322	1,322	1,322	1,322	1,322	1,058	1,058	635	127	9,488
Safety	881	881	881	881	881	705	705	423	85	6,323
Engineering/ Ops Support	1,324	1,321	1,321	1,321	1,321	1,056	1,056	634	127	9,481
Environmental Services	1,485	1,485	1,485	1,485	1,485	1,188	1,188	713	143	10,657
Human Resources	2,173	2,173	2,173	2,173	2,173	1,738	1,738	1,043	209	15,593
Information Technology	687	687	687	687	687	549	549	330	66	4,929
Land	81	81	81	81	81	65	65	39	8	582
Totals	14,117	14,343	14,395	14,484	14,621	11,734	11,724	7,275	1,472	104,165

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Table 18‑6:          LOM Operating Cost Estimate (US$ x 1,000)

Area	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	Total
Mining	46,405	45,753	43,965	32,383	37,203	37,588	32,914	17,542	—	293,753
Pad loading	4,212	4,387	4,387	4,387	4,387	4,387	4,387	3,894	—	34,428
Pad unloading	4,090	5,713	7,743	6,928	8,005	5,480	7,199	3,318	—	48,476
Crushing	10,854	10,797	10,818	10,840	10,863	10,422	10,289	8,966	—	83,849
Plant	12,869	12,936	13,001	13,069	13,138	12,161	11,612	8,271	2,481	97,057
Services	14,117	14,343	14,395	14,484	14,621	11,734	11,724	7,275	1,472	102,693
Total	92,547	93,930	94,309	82,090	88,216	81,770	78,124	49,266	3,953	660,252

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-7

Table 18‑7:          LOM Total Operating Cost Estimate

	LOM Totals (US$ x 1,000)	$/st	Units
Mining	293,752	2.23	US $/st mined
Pad loading	34,426	0.96	US $/st crushed
Pad unloading	48,477	1.35	US $/st crushed
Crushing	83,849	2.33	US $/st crushed
Plant	99,538	2.76	US $/st crushed
Services	104,164	2.89	US $/st crushed
LOM Total	664,207
Mining cost		2.23	US $/st mined
Process cost		10.29	US $/st crushed

Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 18-8

19.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

19.1 Forward-looking Information

Results of the economic analysis represent forward- looking information that is subject to several known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

Other forward-looking statements in this Report include, but are not limited to: statements with respect to future metal prices and concentrate sales contracts; the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources; the realization of mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated future production; costs of production; capital expenditures; costs and timing of the development of new ore zones; permitting time lines; requirements for additional capital; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; unanticipated reclamation expenses; title disputes or claims; and, limitations on insurance coverage.

Factors that may cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include: actual results of current reclamation activities; results of economic evaluations; changes in Project parameters as mine and process plans continue to be refined, possible variations in mineral reserves, grade or recovery rates; geotechnical considerations during mining; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; shipping delays and regulations; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; and, delays in obtaining governmental approvals.

19.2 Methodology Used

Coeur records its financial costs on an accrual basis and adheres to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

The financial costs used for this analysis are based on the 2022 LOM budget model, which was built on a zero-based budgeting process that was validated through a historical cost comparison from the previous financial year.  Production figures in this Chapter are based on predicted equipment hours and manpower requirements needed to execute the mine plan using actual unit costs, labor rates and may vary from year to year depending on capital and production needs.

Consumables are based upon market projections and contract pricing.  Experts and bids are used for capital purchases to ensure that all costs are included in the project to avoid and unbudgeted expenditures.

All financial results are communicated to the site management team.  This process results in refinements and agreements as to the validity of the cost, capital and cash flow results.  This is an on-going process through-out the budget and provides consistency of the results and acceptance of both short- and long-term goals.

Capitalized exploration is determined annually through the corporate office, is discretionary, and therefore not included in the economic analysis.  Management fees assessed through the corporate office are not included in the economic analysis.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-1

19.3 Financial Model Parameters

19.3.1 Mineral Resource, Mineral Reserve, and Mine Life

The mineral resources are discussed in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserves are discussed in Chapter 12.

The mineral reserves support a mine life of eight years with mining complete in late 2029 and processing and gold production continuing to December 2030.

19.3.2 Metallurgical Recoveries

Forecast metallurgical recoveries are provided in Chapter 10.

19.3.3 Smelting and Refining Terms

Smelting and refining terms for the doré are outlined in Chapter 16.  Smelting and refining costs are defined by contract with Wharf Operation’s primary refiner and customer.  Wharf Operations also use a secondary refiner for the “sludge” product, which is the remainder containing gold that cannot be recovered by processes used by the primary refiner.

19.3.4 Metal Prices

Metal price assumptions are provided in Chapter 16.

19.3.5 Capital and Operating Costs

Capital and operating cost forecasts price assumptions are outlined in Chapter 18.

Capitalized exploration is determined annually through corporate office and is discretionary and therefore not included in the economic analysis. Management fees assessed through the corporate office are excluded in the economic analysis.

19.3.6 Working Capital

Working capital based for the analysis in the 2022 LOM, is based upon historical trends for movement in payables and receivables.  This is adjusted year over year for changes in spending levels. Historically the spending levels remain constant on a cost per ton basis.  Tax payments are adjusted annually for production and sales of gold and silver.  Inventory movement is also adjusted annually for production levels. In future years the working capital is adjusted from recent historical values based upon the timing of the remaining mine life.  The timing and annual spending at the Wharf Operations is very consistent on a per ton basis, and this analysis is used to support the cash flow movements that create the working capital.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-2

19.3.7 Taxes and Royalties

Royalties are discussed in Chapter 3.7.  Royalties included in the cashflow analysis are based upon gold ounces mined or produced depending upon the agreement.

Net profits severance tax rates are 10%, royalty tax rates are 8% and production taxes are US$8/oz Au sold.

The tax rates used are set by governmental agencies and the Wharf Operations remain in compliance.  Severance taxes are the largest tax component.

Currently, Coeur pays no federal income tax due to historic net operating losses.

19.3.8 Closure Costs and Salvage Value

Closure costs are summarized in Chapter 17.3.

Closure costs are based upon economic review by the Environmental team.  The models used are reviewed internally and validated by external auditors.  The closure costs are included in the annual budget LOM.  This is reviewed by corporate investment teams.

19.3.9 Financing

The economic analysis is based on 100% equity financing and is reported on a 100% project ownership basis.

19.3.10 Inflation

The economic analysis assumes constant prices with no inflationary adjustments.

19.4 Economic Analysis

The NPV at 5% is $274.2 M.  As the cashflow is based on existing operations, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

A summary of the financial results is provided in Table 19‑1.  An annualized cashflow statement is provided in Table 19‑2.

The active mining operation ceases in 2029; however, closure costs are estimated to be paid out through 2083.  For the purposes of the financial model, all costs incurred beyond 2030 are included in the cash flow in the year 2030.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-3

Table 19‑1:          Cashflow Summary Table

Item	Units	Value
Revenue	kUS$	1,145,120
Production costs	kUS$	738,310
Write downs	kUS$	3,471
Total costs and expenses	kUS$	741,782
EBITDA	kUS$	403,339
Amortization	kUS$	(60,130)
Accretion of liability	kUS$	(10,962)
Interest income	kUS$	(0)
Interest expense	kUS$	(1,031)
Income before taxes	kUS$	331,216
Income tax expense (benefit)	kUS$	36,827
Net income	kUS$	294,389
Add back amortization	kUS$	60,130
Add back accretion	kUS$	10,962
Operating cash flow before working capital changes	kUS$	365,481
Receivables trade	kUS$	(2)
Inventory variation	kUS$	19,961
Inventory - other	kUS$	(2,232)
Other current assets	kUS$	2,763
Tax payable	kUS$	163
Other liability items	kUS$	(13,548)
Operating cash flow	kUS$	372,587
Payments on capital leases	kUS$	(1,089)
AFE capital	kUS$	(18,947)
Total cash flow	kUS$	352,552
NPV @ 5%	kUS$	274,222

Note:  AFE = authorization for expenditure ; EBITDA = earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-4

Table 19‑2:          Cashflow Forecast on Annualized Basis (US$ x 1,000)

Item	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Revenue	131,706	152,332	141,978	135,309	144,618	135,508	138,837	134,540	30,293
Production costs	95,824	100,063	95,501	96,729	99,114	87,891	83,300	67,060	12,830
Write downs	484	484	484	484	484	387	387	232	46
Total costs and expenses	96,308	100,546	95,984	97,213	99,597	88,278	83,687	67,292	12,877
Earnings before depreciation interest and taxes (EBITDA)	35,398	51,786	45,994	38,096	45,020	47,230	55,150	67,248	17,416
Amortization	(8,317)	(6,758)	(6,723)	(7,103)	(7,026)	(6,882)	(7,743)	(7,639)	(1,939)
Accretion of liability	(1,034)	(828)	(925)	(961)	(1,084)	(1,225)	(1,198)	(2,004)	(1,703)
Interest expense	(140)	(131)	(130)	(132)	(140)	(132)	(135)	(74)	(17)
Income before taxes	25,907	44,069	38,216	29,901	36,770	38,991	46,075	57,531	13,757
Income tax expense (benefit)	2,404	4,147	3,433	4,053	4,302	3,949	4,270	7,673	2,597
Net income	23,503	39,922	34,783	25,848	32,468	35,043	41,804	49,858	11,160
Add back amortization	8,317	6,758	6,723	7,103	7,026	6,882	7,743	7,639	1,939
Add back accretion	1,034	828	925	961	1,084	1,225	1,198	2,004	1,703
Operating cash flow before working capital changes	32,855	47,508	42,431	33,912	40,579	43,150	50,745	59,501	14,803
Receivables trade	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	—	—
Inventory variation	(3,404)	(1,461)	(6,047)	8,640	4,043	(549)	(1,456)	11,971	8,225
Inventory - other	(376)	(376)	(376)	(376)	(376)	(188)	(94)	(60)	(10)
Other current assets	471	471	471	471	471	236	118	50	5
Tax payable	(833)	996	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Other liability items	(1,517)	(1,616)	(1,382)	(1,370)	(1,544)	(1,462)	(2,531)	(2,414)	288
Operating cash flow	27,195	45,522	35,096	41,276	43,173	41,186	46,781	69,048	23,311
Payments on capital leases	(497)	(545)	(47)	—	—	—	—	—	—
AFE capital	(1,447)	(4,500)	(3,000)	(3,000)	(3,000)	(3,000)	(500)	(500)	—
Total cash flow	25,251	40,477	32,049	38,276	40,173	38,186	46,281	68,548	23,311

Note:  AFE = authorization for expenditure.  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-5

19.5 Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity of the Project to changes in metal prices, grade, sustaining capital costs and operating cost assumptions was tested using a range of 30% above and below the base case values.  The NPV sensitivity to these parameters is illustrated in Table 19‑3, with the base case bolded.  Recovery is not shown as the sensitivity to recovery mirrors the sensitivity to metal price.

The Project is most sensitive to gold price, less sensitive to operating cost increases, and least sensitive to capital expenditure changes.

The Wharf Operations are not subject to exchange rates as the operation and customers are both residents of the United States.

The primary sensitivity is to the impact of macroeconomic conditions and other factors upon gold pricing.  Coeur typically ensures that production from the Wharf Operations is sold in the year that the doré is produced.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-6

Table 19‑3:          Sensitivity Table (US$ x 1,000)

Parameters	-30%	-20%	-10%	-5%	0%	5%	10%	20%	30%
Metal price	(2,155)	89,971	182,097	228,159	274,222	320,285	366,348	458,473	550,599
Operating costs	454,282	394,262	334,242	304,232	274,222	244,212	214,202	154,182	94,163
Capital costs	278,963	277,383	275,802	275,012	274,222	273,432	272,642	271,061	269,482
Grade	(2,155)	89,971	182,097	228,159	274,222	320,285	366,348	458,473	550,599

               Note:  Numbers have been rounded.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 19-7

20.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 20-1

21.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

This Chapter is not relevant to this Report.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 21-1

22.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

22.1 Introduction

The QPs note the following interpretations and conclusions within their areas of expertise, based on the review of data available for this Report.

22.2 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements

The Wharf Operations are wholly owned by Coeur and operated through Coeur’s subsidiaries Wharf Resources and Golden Reward LP.

The Project consists of two contiguous property groups:

• Wharf group:  northern and western sectors of the Project area; 362 patented lode claims, 35 government lots, 133 subdivided lots, and 59 federal unpatented lode claims;

• Golden Reward group:  southern and eastern sectors of the Project area; 196 patented lode claims, 14 government lots, 19 subdivided lots, and 34 federal unpatented lode claims.

The mineral tenures are subject to several royalties, which range from sliding scale royalty payments on production to fixed production royalties to net smelter return royalties.  The largest royalty is payable to Royal Gold.

Agreements are in place with local ski areas to allow mining access.

Surface rights are a combination of patented lode claims, federal unpatented lode claims, government lots and fee property.  No additional rights are needed to support the LOM plan presented in this Report.

Potable water is supplied to the Wharf Operations by wells.  Coeur owns multiple groundwater and surface water rights sufficient to support ongoing operations.  No additional water rights are anticipated to be required for LOM operations.

22.3 Geology and Mineralization

The genesis of the Wharf deposit is considered controversial; most recently the deposit has been interpreted as epithermal in style.  The gold mineralization is disseminated and structurally controlled.

The geological understanding of the settings, lithologies, and structural and alteration controls on mineralization is sufficient to support estimation of mineral resources.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-1

22.4 Exploration, Drilling, and Sampling

The exploration programs completed by Coeur to date and predecessor companies are appropriate for the mineralization styles.

The quantity and quality of the lithological, collar and down-hole survey data collected in the exploration program completed are sufficient to support mineral resource estimation.  No drilling, sampling, or core recovery issues that could materially affect the accuracy or reliability of the core samples have been identified.

The collected sample data adequately reflect deposit dimensions, true widths of mineralization, and the deposit style.

Sampling is representative of the gold and silver values, reflecting areas of higher and lower grades.

The independent analytical laboratories used by Coeur and predecessor companies, where known, are accredited for selected analytical techniques.

Sample preparation has used procedures and protocols that are/were standard in the industry and has been adequate throughout the history of the Project.  Sample analysis uses procedures that are standard in the industry.

The QA/QC programs adequately address issues of precision, accuracy, and contamination, and indicate that the analytical results are adequately accurate, precise, and contamination free to support mineral resource estimation.

The sample preparation, analysis, and security procedures are adequate for use in the estimation of mineral resources.

22.5 Data Verification

The QP personally verified, amongst other checks, QA/QC of assay data from 2015–2021, logged all geologic data from 2015, 2017, and 2018, and conducted a 10–20% check of geologic logs from 2016 and 2021.  The QP worked at the Wharf Operations from 2009–2021.

The data verification programs concluded that the data collected from the Project adequately support the geological interpretations and constitute a database of sufficient quality to support the use of the data in mineral resource estimation.

22.6 Metallurgical Testwork

The Wharf Operations have an on-site analytical laboratory that assays concentrates, in-process samples, and geological samples.  The on-site metallurgical laboratory is used for testing flotation reagents, grind analysis, and characterizing the behavior of new ores.  The laboratory is not independent.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-2

Metallurgical performance using laboratory testing suggests that recovery of gold varies by lithology and sizing of placed material.  Forecast recoveries range from 76–80.5%, depending on lithology.

Based on extensive operating experience and testwork, there are no known processing factors of deleterious elements that could have a significant effect on the economic extraction of the mineral reserve estimates.

22.7 Mineral Resource Estimates

The mineral resource estimate is reported using the definitions set out in SK-1300 and is reported exclusive of those mineral resources converted to mineral reserves.  The reference point for the estimate is in situ.  The estimate is primarily supported by RC drilling.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.  The estimate was constrained using reasonable prospects of economic extraction that assumed open pit mining methods.

Factors that may affect the mineral resource estimates include:  metal price and exchange rate assumptions; changes to the assumptions used to generate the gold equivalent grade cut-off grade; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological and mineralization shape and geological and grade continuity assumptions; density and domain assignments; changes to geotechnical, mining and metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the input and design parameter assumptions that pertain to the assumptions for the conceptual pit shell constraining the estimates; and assumptions as to the continued ability to access the site, retain mineral and surface rights titles, maintain environment and other regulatory permits, and maintain the social license to operate.

22.8 Mineral Reserve Estimates

The mineral reserve estimate is reported using the definitions set out in SK-1300.  The reference point for the estimate is the point of delivery to the heap leach facilities.  The estimate is current as at December 31, 2021.

Mineral reserves were converted from measured and indicated mineral resources using a detailed pit design and block model from a physical survey of the topography as of December 31, 2021.  The mine plans assume open pit mining, and a conventional truck and loader fleet.  Mining rates are predominantly dictated by the crusher throughput.  Average annual throughput of 4.6 Mst from the crusher is expected.  Throughput rates were established and proven over the more than 30 years of operational history at the site.

An operational cut-off grade of US$0.10 oz/st Au was used to determine the material that is economically viable to mine.  Economic and sustaining capital considerations were factors in using an operational cut-off grade above the break-even cut-off.

Factors that may affect the mineral reserve estimates include variations to the following assumptions:  the commodity price; metallurgical recoveries; operating cost estimates, including assumptions as to equipment leasing agreements; geotechnical conditions; hydrogeological conditions; geological and structural interpretations; and the inability to maintain, renew, or obtain environmental and other regulatory permits, to retain mineral and surface right titles, to maintain site access, and to maintain social license to operate.  A portion of the reserves are not currently permitted.  The application process for acquiring new permits and permit amendments has been initiated with both the State and Lawrence County.  If the permits are not granted, a portion of the estimated mineral reserves will not be available to mine.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-3

22.9 Mining Methods

The current geotechnical design configurations were concluded to be appropriate following examination by a third-party consultant.  The consultant noted that there was an opportunity to design the ultimate pit with steeper slopes.

Water infiltration near the 5,960 ft elevation has made drill and blast activities below this horizon challenging.  Current mineral reserve estimate includes material down to the 5,900 ft elevation.

Several historic pits that were partially backfilled are being mined again and the backfilled material is considered re-handle and does not require blasting.  Waste material removed for access to the ore is taken to one of the WRSF sites.  The WRSFs are all designed to fill existing pits and are reclaimed as soon as possible after placement.

Mined ore is either placed in a stockpile or placed directly into the primary crusher ore hopper.

Spent ore is used to backfill pits within defined perimeter of pollution zones.  The current active perimeter of pollution zones has physical capacity to contain the estimated mineral reserves.

The production plan assumes an eight-year mine life to 2029.

Equipment is leased, and conventional to open pit operations.

22.10 Recovery Methods

The process plant was built in 1983.  Historical testwork on which the plant designs were based is not available to Coeur.  Changes made to the process plant have been based on actual plant performance trends and testwork performed on-site and at independent facilities.

The process plant design is conventional to the gold industry and has no novel parameters.  Debottlenecking and optimization activities that have occurred since Coeur acquired the operations have assisted in increasing capacities and efficiencies.

Silver to gold ratios in the process feed have historically varied from near 1:1 to >40:1. These variations in the ore delivered to the pad have resulted in wide swings in the bullion composition produced by the plant.  Plant gold efficiency during the low silver periods reaches the industry norm of +95% for this type of plant.  During periods when the silver concentration begins to climb, silver preferentially loading on the carbon reduces both the plant gold and silver efficiencies.  Changes in the plant stripping circuit have improved the ability for the plant to compensate for the additional silver content.

The plant has sufficient electrowinning capacity and can adjust strip cycles to increase the carbon volume processed.  During periods of extremely high silver grades, the retort is used at maximum capacity.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-4

22.11 Infrastructure

All infrastructure required to support operations has been constructed and is operational.  On-site infrastructure includes a production and monitoring water wells, offices, maintenance, warehouse and various ancillary facilities, open-pit mining areas, rock disposal areas, crushing and conveying facilities, five lined heap leach pads, two water treatment plants and a process facility.  There is an onsite assay laboratory as well as a metallurgical laboratory.  There is no onsite accommodation.  Employees reside in adjacent communities.

There are currently five on/off heap leach pads used for the leaching cycle.

Spent ore backfill on unlined facilities is permitted by way of a groundwater discharge permit.  Currently Coeur has both un-lined and lined spent ore facilities.  DANR has approved a Perimeter of Operational Pollution zone for each permit and allows for a variance to select groundwater standards within the Perimeter of Operational Pollution zones.

The water management system consists of five major sections:  five leach pad cells, five process ponds (pregnant, barren, overflow, contingency, and neutralization), three water treatment plants, treated water discharge/spray system, and a lead detection/recapture system.

In the event of excess water being stored within the ponds, treated water is discharged to specifically permitted surface and groundwater discharge areas.

Electrical power is principally supplied by Black Hills Power.

22.12 Market Studies

Coeur has established contracts and buyers for the gold concentrate product from the Wharf Operations and has an internal marketing group that monitors markets for its key products.  Together with public documents and analyst forecasts, these data support that there is a reasonable basis to assume that for the LOM plan, that the key products will be saleable at the assumed commodity pricing.

Coeur uses a combination of analysis of three-year rolling averages, long-term consensus pricing, and benchmarks to pricing used by industry peers over the past year, when considering long-term commodity price forecasts.  Higher metal prices are used for the mineral resource estimates to ensure the mineral reserves are a sub-set of, and not constrained by, the mineral resources, in accordance with industry-accepted practice.  The economic analysis uses a reverting price curve.

Wharf Resources has a contract with a U.S.-based refiner that refines the doré into gold and silver bullion.

Wharf Resources also uses a secondary refiner for the “sludge” product, which is the remainder containing gold that cannot be recovered by processes used by the primary refiner.

There are numerous contracts in place at the Project to support mine development or processing. Currently there are contracts in place to provide supply for all major commodities used in mining and processing, such as equipment vendors, power, explosives, cyanide, tire suppliers, raise boring, ground support suppliers and drilling contractors.

The terms and rates for these contracts are within industry norms.  The contracts are periodically put up for bid or re-negotiated as required.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-5

22.13 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations

Baseline studies and monitoring were required for permitting.  Hydrogeological fate and transport modeling and baseline monitoring were also required for each groundwater discharge plan.  Statement of basis analyses were also required during each renewal of NPDES surface water discharge permits.  The Wharf Operations comply with all current permit conditions and requirements and there are no outstanding environmental issues.

Financial surety sufficient to reclaim the Wharf Operations mine and processing facilities is up to date and held by the state of South Dakota.  The closure bond plan associated with reclamation and post closure surety was updated in 2020. The estimated asset retirement obligation for the Project is approximately US$47.6 M.

Financial surety for the Golden Reward area, sufficient to conduct monitoring and maintenance during a 30-year post closure period is up to date and held by the state of South Dakota.  The estimated asset retirement obligation for the project is approximately US$0.61 M.

The Wharf Operations commenced in 1983 and have obtained all necessary environmental permits and licenses from the appropriate county, state and federal agencies for the open pit mines, heap leach pads, and all necessary support facilities.  Operational standards and Best Management Practices were established to maintain compliance with applicable state and federal regulatory standards and permits.

Coeur currently enjoys a positive relationship with local communities.

22.14 Capital Cost Estimates

Capital cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.  In later years, capital estimates are based on estimated annual operating requirements and are considered as sustaining capital.

All major capital construction projects needed to maintain consistent production and extraction of mineral reserves at the Wharf Operations have been completed over the last 30 years.

Costs remaining for the LOM are considered sustaining capital costs. The total LOM capital cost estimate is $24.2 M, which consists of $18.9 M for sustaining capital purchases and $5.3 M for infill drilling programs.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-6

22.15 Operating Cost Estimates

Operating cost estimates are at a minimum at a pre-feasibility level of confidence, having an accuracy level of ±25% and a contingency range not exceeding 15%.

The total LOM operating cost estimate is US$664 M.

22.16 Economic Analysis

The mineral reserves support a mine life of eight years with mining complete in 2029 and processing and gold production continuing in 2030.  Smelting and refining costs are defined by contract with Asahi, which is Coeur’s primary refiner and customer.  Royalties included in the cashflow analysis are based upon gold ounces mined or produced depending upon the agreement.  Net profits severance tax rates are 10%, royalty tax rates are 8% and production taxes are US$8/oz Au sold.  The active mining operation ceases in 2029; however, closure costs are estimated to 2083.  For the purposes of the financial model, all costs incurred beyond 2030 are included in the cash flow in 2030.

The NPV at 5% is US$274 M.  As the cashflow is based on existing operations, considerations of payback and internal rate of return are not relevant.

The Project is most sensitive to gold price, less sensitive to operating cost increases, and least sensitive to capital expenditures.  The primary sensitivity is to the world economy and the effect this has upon gold pricing.  Coeur typically ensures that production from the Wharf Operations is sold in the year that the doré is produced.

22.17 Risks and Opportunities

Factors that may affect the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates were identified in Chapter 11.13 and Chapter 12.9 respectively.

22.17.1 Risks

Other risks noted include:

• Geotechnical and hydrological assumptions used in mine planning are based on historical performance, and to date historical performance has been a reasonable predictor of current conditions.  Any changes to the geotechnical and hydrological assumptions could affect mine planning, affect capital cost estimates if any major rehabilitation is required due to a geotechnical or hydrological event, affect operating costs due to mitigation measures that may need to be imposed, and impact the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

o Unforeseen geotechnical issues could lead to additional dilution, difficulty accessing portions of the ore body, or sterilization of broken or in situ ore.  There are sufficient management controls in place to effectively mitigate geotechnical risks.  Designed pit slopes have been evaluated for stability in several geotechnical studies and are regularly evaluated by the engineering group at the mine.  The QP considers that sufficient controls are in place at the Wharf mine to effectively manage geotechnical risk, and the risk of significant impact on the mineral reserve estimate is low;

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-7

o Water infiltration near the 5,960-foot elevation has made drill and blast activities below this horizon challenging, and may affect the portion of the mine plan that is expected to reach the 5,900 ft elevation;

• Coeur leases nearly all the earth moving equipment used at the mine.  Relationships with local dealers span over 15 years.  Current truck and loader fleet lease rates are under contract through 2024 with an option for a two-year extension beyond.  A major change in pricing would affect operating cost and have an impact on the mineral reserve estimates and the economic analysis that supports the mineral reserve estimates;

• The mineral reserve estimates are most sensitive to metal prices.  Coeur’s current strategy is to sell most of the metal production at spot prices, exposing the company to both positive and negative changes in the market, both of which are outside of the company’s control;

• Assumptions that the long-term reclamation and mitigation of the Wharf Operations can be appropriately managed within the estimated closure timeframes and closure cost estimates.

22.17.2 Opportunities

Opportunities include:

• Conversion of some or all of the measured and indicated mineral resources currently reported exclusive of mineral reserves to mineral reserves, with appropriate supporting studies;

• Upgrade of some or all of the inferred mineral resources to higher-confidence categories, such that such better-confidence material could be used in mineral reserve estimation;

• Evaluation by third-party consultants suggested that the pit walls in the last stage of the pit could be steepened, potentially resulting in minor operating cost estimate savings.

22.18 Conclusions

Under the assumptions in this Report, the operations evaluated show a positive cash flow over the remaining LOM.  The mine plan is achievable under the set of assumptions and parameters used.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 22-8

23.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

As the Wharf Operations is an operating mine, the QPs have no material recommendations to make.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 23-1

24.0 REFERENCES

24.1 Bibliography

Caddey, S.W., Bachman, R.L., Campbell, T.J., Reid, R.R., and Otto, R.P., 1991:  The Homestake Gold Mine, An Early Proterozoic Iron-Formation-Hosted Gold Deposit, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1857, 67 p.

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, 2019:  CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines:  75 p.

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, 2014:  CIM Definition Standards – For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves:  9 p.

Dahl, P.S., Terry, M.P., Jercinovic, M.J., Williams, M.L., Hamilton, M.A., Foland, K.A., Clement, S.A., and Friberg, L.M., 2005:  Electron Probe (Ultrachron) Microchronometry of Metamorphic Monazite: Unraveling the Timing of Polyphase Thermotectonism in the Easternmost Wyoming Craton (Black Hills, South Dakota):  American Mineralogist, v. 90, pp. 1712–1728.

Dahl, P.S., Hamilton, M.A., Wooden, J.L., Foland, K.A., Frei, R., McCombs, J.A., and Holm, D.K., 2006:  2480 Ma Mafic Magmatism in the Northern Black Hills, South Dakota: a New Link Connecting the Wyoming and Superior Cratons:  Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 43, pp. 1579–1600.

DeWitt, E., Redden, J. A., Wilson, A. B., and Buscher, D., 1986:  Mineral Resource Potential and Geology of the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming:  U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1580, 135 p.

Duke, Genet I., 2005:  Geochemistry and geochronology of Paleocene-Eocene Alkalic Intrusive Rocks, Northern Black Hills, South Dakota and Wyoming:  Ph.D. dissertation, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 291 p.

Emanuel, K. M., Wagner, J.J., and Uzunlar, N., 1990:  The Relationship of Gold and Silver Mineralization to Alkalic Porphyry and Breccias, Golden Reward Mine, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  in Thompson, T., ed., SEG Guidebook Series v. 7, Metallogeny of Gold in the Black Hills, South Dakota.

Emanuel, K.M., and Walsh, J.F., 1987:  Alkalic Intrusive Rocks and Gold Mineralization at the Golden Reward, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  in Han, K., and Kliche, C., eds., Proceedings from the Third AIME Western Regional Conference on Precious Metals, Coal, Environment. Rapid City, South Dakota, Sep. 23–26, 1987, pp. 73–81.

Giebink, B.G., and Paterson, C.J., 1986a:  Stratigraphic Controls on Sediment-Hosted Epithermal Au-Ag Mineralization, Annie Creek Mine, Northern Black Hills, South Dakota (Transcript):  Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 18, p. 613.

Giebink, B.G., and Paterson, C.J., 1986b:  Geology and Geochemistry of the Tertiary Gold Mineralization, Annie Creek, Northern Black Hills, South Dakota:  South Dakota Mining and Mineral Resources Research Institute, Final Report, pp. 67–73.

Harris, K., 1991:  Petrology, Geochemistry, and Petrogenesis of the Tertiary Igneous Intrusions in the Annie Creek and Foley Ridge Mines, Black Hills, South Dakota, and Their Relationship to the Gold-Silver Mineralization:  M.Sc. thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 112 p.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-1

Harris, K., and Paterson, C.J., 1996:  Petrology of the Tertiary Igneous Rocks, Annie Creek/Foley Ridge Mine, Black Hills, South Dakota:  in Paterson, C.J., and Kirchner, J.G., Guidebook to the Geology of the Black Hills, South Dakota. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Bulletin No. 19, pp. 150–160.

Hummel, C.L., 1952:  The Structure and Mineralization of a Portion of the Bald Mountain Mining District, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  M.Sc. thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 93 p.

Kirchner, J.G., 1979:  Petrographic Significance of a Carbonate-Rich Lamprophyre from Squaw Creek, northern Black Hills, South Dakota: American Mineralogist, v. 64, p. 986-992.

Larsen, R.K., 1977, Geology, alteration, and mineralization of the northern Cutting Stock, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  M.Sc. thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 147 p.

Lessard, J.F., and Loomis, T.A., 1990:  Geology of the Annie Creek Sediment- and Porphyry-Hosted Gold Deposit:  in Paterson, C.J., and Lisenbee, A.L., eds., Metallogeny of gold in the Black Hills, South Dakota: Guidebook prepared for the Society of Economic Geologists Field Conference, SEG Guidebook Series, v. 7, pp. 151–156.

Lisenbee, A.L., 1981:  Studies of the Tertiary Intrusions of the Northern Black Hills uplift, South Dakota and Wyoming: A Historical Review:  in Rich, F.J., ed., Geology of the Black Hills, South Dakota and Wyoming: American Geological Institute Field Trip Guidebook for the annual meeting of the Rocky Mountain Section of the Geological Society of America, Rapid City, South Dakota, pp. 106–125.

Lisenbee, A.L., and DeWitt, E., 1993:  Laramide Evolution of the Black Hills Uplift:  in Snoke, A.W., Steidtmann, J.R., and Roberts, S.M., eds., Geology of Wyoming: Geological Survey of Wyoming Memoir 5, p. 374–412.

Lisenbee, A., Karner, F., Fashbaugh, E., Halvorson, D., O’Toole, F., White, S., Wilkinson, M., and Kirchner, J., 1981:  Field trip #2: Geology of the Tertiary Intrusive Province of the Northern Black Hills, South Dakota And Wyoming:  in Rich, F.J., ed., Geology of the Black Hills, South Dakota and Wyoming, American Geological Institute Field Trip Guidebook for the annual meeting of the Rocky Mountain Section of the Geological Society of America, Rapid City, SD, pp. 33–105.

Loomis, T.A., and Alexander, D.L., 1990:  The Geology of the Foley Ridge Gold Mine:  in Fourth Western Regional Conference on Precious Metals and the Environment, Lead, South Dakota, Sep. 19–22, 1990, Proceedings: AIME, Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Black Hills Section, pp. 77–87.

Luoma, G. and J. A. Lowe, 2010:  A Level III Cultural Resource Inventory for Wharf Resources (USA) Inc., Wharf Golden Reward Project, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  prepared by TRC Environmental Corporation, Laramie, WY, for Wharf Resources (USA) Inc., Lead, SD.

Miller, P.A., 1962:  A Study of the Bald Mountain Mining Area, Lawrence County, South Dakota:  mining engineering thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 124 p.

McCormick, K., 2008:  New Compilation of the Precambrian Basement of South Dakota:  American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2008, abstract #H53A-1001.

McDowell, F.W., 1971:  K-Ar ages of Igneous Rocks From the Western United States:  Isochron/West, v. 2, pp. 1–16.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-2

Naething, F.S., 1938:  Golden Reward:  unpublished due diligence report for Mammoth- St. Anthony Management Corp., Tucson, Arizona, 51 p.

Noble, J.A., 1952:  Evaluation of Criteria for the Forcible Intrusion of Magma:  Journal of Geology, vol. 59, pp. 927–940.

Norton, J.J., 1983:  Bald Mountain Gold Mining Region, Northern Black Hills, South Dakota:  U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 83-791, 18 p.

Norton, J.J., 1989:  Gold-Bearing Polymetallic Veins and Replacement Deposits – Part I– Bald Mountain Gold Mining Region, Northern Black Hills, South Dakota:  U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1857-C, pp. C1–C13.

Paterson, C.J., 1990, Magmatic-hydrothermal model for epithermal-mesothermal Au- Ag deposits in the northern Black Hills, Proceedings, Fourth Western Regional Conference on Precious Metals and the Environment, Black Hills section, SME, Sep. 19-23, Lead, South Dakota, p. 89-102.

Paterson, C.J., and Giebink, B.G., 1989:  Controls on Epithermal Sediment-Hosted (Carlin-type) Au-Ag Mineralization, Annie Creek Mine, Northern Black Hills, South Dakota:  internal company report, Wharf Resources, 23 p.

Paterson, C.J., Uzunlar, N., and Longstaffe, F.J., 1987:  Epithermal Au-Ag Deposits in the Northern Black Hills: A Variety of Ore-Forming Fluids:  in Han, K., and Kliche, C., eds., Proceedings from the Third AIME Western Regional Conference on Precious Metals, Coal, Environment, Rapid City, South Dakota, pp. 83–89.

Paterson, C.J., Lisenbee, A.L., and Redden, J.A., 1988:  Gold Deposits in the Black Hills, South Dakota:  in Diedrich, R.P., Dyka, M.A.K., and Miller, W.R., eds., Wyoming Geological Association 39^th Field Conference Guidebook, Eastern Powder River Basin-Black Hills, pp. 295–304.

Paterson, C.J., Uzunlar, N., Groff, J., and Longstaffe, F.J., 1989:  A View Through an Epithermal-Mesothermal Precious Metal System in the Northern Black Hills:  in Keays, R.R., Ramsay, W.R.H., and Groves, D.I., eds., The Geology of Gold Deposits: The Perspective in 1988, Economic Geology Monograph 6, pp. 564–570.

Pedraza Rojas, J.M., 2017:  Geologic Controls on Alteration and Mineralization at the Wharf Mine, South Dakota:  M.Sc. Thesis, Colorado School of Mines South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 110 p.

Redden, J.A., 1987:  Early Proterozoic and Precambrian-Cambrian Unconformities of the Nemo Area, Black Hills, South Dakota:  in Bues, S.S., ed., Centennial field volume: Geological Society of American, Rocky Mountain Section, v. 2, p. 219–225.

Redden, J.A., and DeWitt, E., 2008:  Maps Showing Geology, Structure, and Geophysics of the Central Black Hills, South Dakota:  U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2777, 44 p. pamphlet, 2 sheets.

Redden, J.A., Peterman, Z.E., Zartman, R.E., and DeWitt, E., 1990:  U-Th-Pb Geochronology and Preliminary Interpretation of Precambrian Tectonic Events in the Black Hills, South Dakota:  in Lewry, J. F., and Stauffer, M. R., eds., The Trans-Hudson Orogen: Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 37, pp. 229–251.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-3

Schurer and Fuchs Petrography, 1991:  Ore Mineralogy of Three High-Grade Gold Samples from the Annie Creek Mine, South Dakota:  internal report to Wharf Resources.

Shapiro, L.H., and Gries, J.P., 1970:  Ore Deposits in Rocks of Paleozoic and Tertiary Age of the Northern Black Hills, South Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 70-300, 235 p.

U.S. Geological Survey:  Lead Topographic Quadrangle, South Dakota, 1961, photo revised 1971, scale 1:24,000.

Uzunlar, N., 1993:  Genesis of Tertiary Epithermal-Mesothermal gold-Silver Deposits in the Lead-Deadwood Dome, northern Black Hills, South Dakota:  Ph.D. thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 261 p.

24.2          Abbreviations and Units of Measure

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
'	minutes (geographic)
"	seconds (geographic)
#	number
%	percent
<	less than
>	greater than
µm	micrometer (micron)
ft	feet
ft3	cubic foot/cubic feet
HP	horsepower
HQ	2.5-inch core size
kV	kilovolt
lb	pound
Lbs	pounds
mesh	size based on the number of openings in one inch of screen
Mst/a	million tons per year
MWh	megawatt
º	degrees
oz	ounce/ounces (troy ounce)
pH	measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a solution
ppm	parts per million
oz/st	ounces per ton
st	ton, meaning US ton (short ton), 2,000 pounds
st/h	tons per hour

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-4

Abbreviation/Symbol	Definition
AA	atomic absorption spectroscopy
Cu Eq	copper equivalent
GPS	global positioning system
ICP	inductively-couple plasma
ID2	inverse distance interpolation; number after indicates the power, e.g.. ID2 indicates inverse distance to the second power.
LOM	life-of-mine
NN	nearest-neighbor (
NSR	net smelter return
OK	ordinary kriging
QA/QC	quality assurance and quality control
QP	Qualified Person
RC	reverse circulation
ROM	run-of-mine
RQD	rock quality designation
st/ft3	tons per cubic foot

24.3 Glossary of Terms

Term	Definition
acid rock drainage/ acid mine drainage	Characterized by low pH, high sulfate, and high iron and other metal species.
ANFO	A free-running explosive used in mine blasting made of 94% prilled aluminum nitrate and 6% No. 3 fuel oil.
aquifer	A geologic formation capable of transmitting significant quantities of groundwater under normal hydraulic gradients.
argillic alteration	Introduces any one of a wide variety of clay minerals, including kaolinite, smectite and illite.  Argillic alteration is generally a low temperature event, and some may occur in atmospheric conditions
azimuth	The direction of one object from another, usually expressed as an angle in degrees relative to true north.  Azimuths are usually measured in the clockwise direction, thus an azimuth of 90 degrees indicates that the second object is due east of the first.
bullion	Unrefined gold and/or silver mixtures that have been melted and cast into a bar or ingot.
carbon-in-column (CIC)	A method of recovering gold and silver from pregnant solution from the heap leaching process by adsorption of the precious metals onto fine carbon suspended by up-flow of solution through a tank.
comminution/crushing/grinding	Crushing and/or grinding of ore by impact and abrasion. Usually, the word "crushing" is used for dry methods and "grinding" for wet methods. Also, "crushing" usually denotes reducing the size of coarse rock while "grinding" usually refers to the reduction of the fine sizes.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-5

Term	Definition
cut-off grade	A grade level below which the material is not “ore” and considered to be uneconomical to mine and process. The minimum grade of ore used to establish reserves.
cyanidation	A method of extracting gold or silver by dissolving it in a weak solution of sodium cyanide.
data verification	The process of confirming that data has been generated with proper procedures, has been accurately transcribed from the original source and is suitable to be used for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation
density	The mass per unit volume of a substance, commonly expressed in grams/ cubic centimeter.
dilution	Waste of low-grade rock which is unavoidably removed along with the ore in the mining process.
doré	A bar composed of a mixture of precious metals, typically gold and silver
easement	Areas of land owned by the property owner, but in which other parties, such as utility companies, may have limited rights granted for a specific purpose.
elution	Recovery of the gold from the activated carbon into solution before zinc precipitation or electro-winning.
encumbrance	An interest or partial right in real property which diminished the value of ownership but does not prevent the transfer of ownership.  Mortgages, taxes and judgements are encumbrances known as liens.  Restrictions, easements, and reservations are also encumbrances, although not liens.
feasibility study	A feasibility study is a comprehensive technical and economic study of the selected development option for a mineral project, which includes detailed assessments of all applicable modifying factors, as defined by this section, together with any other relevant operational factors, and detailed financial analysis that are necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable. The results of the study may serve as the basis for a final decision by a proponent or financial institution to proceed with, or finance, the development of the project. A feasibility study is more comprehensive, and with a higher degree of accuracy, than a pre-feasibility study. It must contain mining, infrastructure, and process designs completed with sufficient rigor to serve as the basis for an investment decision or to support project financing.
flowsheet	The sequence of operations, step by step, by which ore is treated in a milling, concentration, or smelting process.
gangue	The fraction of ore rejected as tailing in a separating process.  It is usually the valueless portion, but may have some secondary commercial use
heap leaching	A process whereby valuable metals, usually gold and silver, are leached from a heap or pad of crushed ore by leaching solutions percolating down through the heap and collected from a sloping, impermeable liner below the pad.
indicated mineral resource	An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling.  The term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty. The level of geological certainty associated with an indicated mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-6

Term	Definition
inferred mineral resource	An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated based on limited geological evidence and sampling.  The term limited geological evidence means evidence that is only sufficient to establish that geological and grade or quality continuity is more likely than not. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. A qualified person must have a reasonable expectation that the majority of inferred mineral resources could be upgraded to indicated or measured mineral resources with continued exploration; and should be able to defend the basis of this expectation before his or her peers.
internal rate of return (IRR)	The rate of return at which the Net Present Value of a project is zero; the rate at which the present value of cash inflows is equal to the present value of the cash outflows.
initial assessment	An initial assessment is a preliminary technical and economic study of the economic potential of all or parts of mineralization to support the disclosure of mineral resources. The initial assessment must be prepared by a qualified person and must include appropriate assessments of reasonably assumed technical and economic factors, together with any other relevant operational factors, that are necessary to demonstrate at the time of reporting that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction.  An initial assessment is required for disclosure of mineral resources but cannot be used as the basis for disclosure of mineral reserves
Lerchs–Grossmann	An algorithm used to select the optimum design for an open pit mine.
life of mine (LOM)	Number of years that the operation is planning to mine and treat ore and is taken from the current mine plan based on the current evaluation of ore reserves.
measured mineral resource	A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated based on conclusive geological evidence and sampling.  The term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity. The level of geological certainty associated with a measured mineral resource is sufficient to allow a qualified person to apply modifying factors, as defined in this section, in sufficient detail to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.
merger	A voluntary combination of two or more companies whereby both stocks are merged into one.
Merrill-Crowe (M-C) circuit	A process which recovers precious metals from solution by first clarifying the solution, then removing the air contained in the clarified solution, and then precipitating the gold and silver from the solution by injecting zinc dust into the solution. The valuable sludge is collected in a filter press for drying and further treatment
mineral reserve	A mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted. The determination that part of a measured or indicated mineral resource is economically mineable must be based on a preliminary feasibility (pre-feasibility) or feasibility study, as defined by this section, conducted by a qualified person applying the modifying factors to indicated or measured mineral resources. Such study must demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The study must establish a life of mine plan that is technically achievable and economically viable, which will be the basis of determining the mineral reserve. The term economically viable means that the qualified person has determined, using a discounted cash flow analysis, or has otherwise analytically determined, that extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The term investment and market assumptions includes all assumptions made about the prices, exchange rates, interest and discount rates, sales volumes, and costs that are necessary to determine the economic viability of the mineral reserves. The qualified person must use a price for each commodity that provides a reasonable basis for establishing that the project is economically viable.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-7

Term	Definition
mineral resource	A mineral resource is a concentration or occurrence of material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality, and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction. The term material of economic interest includes mineralization, including dumps and tailings, mineral brines, and other resources extracted on or within the earth’s crust. It does not include oil and gas resources as defined in Regulation S-X (§210.4-10(a)(16)(D) of this chapter), gases (e.g., helium and carbon dioxide), geothermal fields, and water. When determining the existence of a mineral resource, a qualified person, as defined by this section, must be able to estimate or interpret the location, quantity, grade or quality continuity, and other geological characteristics of the mineral resource from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling; and conclude that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction of the mineral resource based on an initial assessment, as defined in this section, that he or she conducts by qualitatively applying relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospect of economic extraction.
mining claim	A description by boundaries of real property in which metal ore and/or minerals may be located.
modifying factors	The factors that a qualified person must apply to indicated and measured mineral resources and then evaluate to establish the economic viability of mineral reserves. A qualified person must apply and evaluate modifying factors to convert measured and indicated mineral resources to proven and probable mineral reserves. These factors include but are not restricted to: mining; processing; metallurgical; infrastructure; economic; marketing; legal; environmental compliance; plans, negotiations, or agreements with local individuals or groups; and governmental factors. The number, type and specific characteristics of the modifying factors applied will necessarily be a function of and depend upon the mineral, mine, property, or project.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-8

Term	Definition
net smelter return royalty (NSR)	A defined percentage of the gross revenue from a resource extraction operation, less a proportionate share of transportation, insurance, and processing costs.
open pit	A mine that is entirely on the surface. Also referred to as open-cut or open-cast mine.
ounce (oz) (troy)	Used in imperial statistics.  A kilogram is equal to 32.1507 ounces.  A troy ounce is equal to 31.1035 grams.
plant	A group of buildings, and especially to their contained equipment, in which a process or function is carried out; on a mine it will include warehouses, hoisting equipment, compressors, repair shops, offices, mill or concentrator.
potassic alteration	A relatively high temperature type of alteration which results from potassium enrichment.  Characterized by biotite, K-feldspar, adularia.
preliminary feasibility study, pre-feasibility study	A preliminary feasibility study (prefeasibility study) is a comprehensive study of a range of options for the technical and economic viability of a mineral project that has advanced to a stage where a qualified person has determined (in the case of underground mining) a preferred mining method, or (in the case of surface mining) a pit configuration, and in all cases has determined an effective method of mineral processing and an effective plan to sell the product. A pre-feasibility study includes a financial analysis based on reasonable assumptions, based on appropriate testing, about the modifying factors and the evaluation of any other relevant factors that are sufficient for a qualified person to determine if all or part of the indicated and measured mineral resources may be converted to mineral reserves at the time of reporting. The financial analysis must have the level of detail necessary to demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that extraction is economically viable
probable mineral reserve	A probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.  For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. The lower level of confidence is due to higher geologic uncertainty when the qualified person converts an indicated mineral resource to a probable reserve or higher risk in the results of the application of modifying factors at the time when the qualified person converts a measured mineral resource to a probable mineral reserve.  A qualified person must classify a measured mineral resource as a probable mineral reserve when his or her confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors to the measured mineral resource is lower than what is sufficient for a proven mineral reserve.
propylitic	Characteristic greenish color.  Minerals include chlorite, actinolite and epidote.  Typically contains the assemblage quartz-chlorite-carbonate
proven mineral reserve	A proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality.  A proven mineral reserve can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-9

Term	Definition
qualified person	A qualified person is an individual who is a mineral industry professional with at least five years of relevant experience in the type of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and in the specific type of activity that person is undertaking on behalf of the registrant; and an eligible member or licensee in good standing of a recognized professional organization at the time the technical report is prepared. For an organization to be a recognized professional organization, it must: (A)          Be either: (1)           An organization recognized within the mining industry as a reputable professional association, or (2)           A board authorized by U.S. federal, state, or foreign statute to regulate professionals in the mining, geoscience or related field; (B)           Admit eligible members primarily based on their academic qualifications and experience; (C)           Establish and require compliance with professional standards of competence and ethics; (D)           Require or encourage continuing professional development; (E)           Have and apply disciplinary powers, including the power to suspend or expel a member regardless of where the member practices or resides; and; (F)           Provide a public list of members in good standing.
reclamation	The restoration of a site after mining or exploration activity is completed.
refining	A high temperature process in which impure metal is reacted with flux to reduce the impurities.  The metal is collected in a molten layer and the impurities in a slag layer.  Refining results in the production of a marketable material.
refractory	Gold mineralization normally requiring more sophisticated processing technology for extraction, such as roasting or autoclaving under pressure.
rock quality designation (RQD)	A measure of the competency of a rock, determined by the number of fractures in a given length of drill core.  For example, a friable ore will have many fractures and a low RQD.
royalty	An amount of money paid at regular intervals by the lessee or operator of an exploration or mining property to the owner of the ground. Generally based on a specific amount per ton or a percentage of the total production or profits. Also, the fee paid for the right to use a patented process.
run-of-mine (ROM)	Rehandle where the raw mine ore material is fed into the processing plant’s system, usually the crusher. This is where material that is not direct feed from the mine is stockpiled for later feeding. Run-of-mine relates to the rehandle being for any mine material, regardless of source, before entry into the processing plant’s system.
strip ratio	The ratio of waste tons to ore tons mined calculated as total tons mined less ore tons mined divided by ore tons mined.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 24-10

25.0 RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRANT

25.1 Introduction

The QPs fully relied on the registrant for the guidance in the areas noted in the following sub-sections.  As the operations have been in production for 30+ years, the last seven of which were under Coeur’s management, the registrant has considerable experience in this area.

The QPs took undertook checks that the information provided by the registrant was suitable to be used in the Report.

25.2 Macroeconomic Trends

Information relating to inflation, interest rates, discount rates, taxes.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.3 Markets

Information relating to market studies/markets for product, market entry strategies, marketing and sales contracts, product valuation, product specifications, refining and treatment charges, transportation costs, agency relationships, material contracts (e.g. mining, concentrating, smelting, refining, transportation, handling, hedging arrangements, and forward sales contracts), and contract status (in place, renewals).

This information is used when discussing the market, commodity price and contract information in Chapter 16, and in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.4 Legal Matters

Information relating to the corporate ownership interest, the mineral tenure (concessions, payments to retain, obligation to meet expenditure/reporting of work conducted), surface rights, water rights (water take allowances), royalties, encumbrances, easements and rights-of-way, violations and fines, permitting requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits

This information is used in support of the property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.5 Environmental Matters

Information relating to baseline and supporting studies for environmental permitting, environmental permitting and monitoring requirements, ability to maintain and renew permits, emissions controls, closure planning, closure and reclamation bonding and bonding requirements, sustainability accommodations, and monitoring for and compliance with requirements relating to protected areas and protected species.

This information is used when discussing property ownership information in Chapter 3, the permitting and closure discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-1

25.6 Stakeholder Accommodations

Information relating to social and stakeholder baseline and supporting studies, relationships with the local ski areas, hiring and training policies for workforce from local communities, partnerships with stakeholders (including national, regional, and state mining associations; trade organizations; fishing organizations; state and local chambers of commerce; economic development organizations; non-government organizations; and, state and federal governments), and the community relations plan.

This information is used in the social and community discussions in Chapter 17, and the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.7 Governmental Factors

Information relating to taxation and royalty considerations at the Project level, monitoring requirements and monitoring frequency, and bonding requirements.

This information is used in the economic analysis in Chapter 19.  It supports the mineral resource estimate in Chapter 11, and the mineral reserve estimate in Chapter 12.

25.8 Internal Controls

Internal controls are discussed where required in the relevant chapters of the technical report summary.  The following sub-sections summarize the types of procedures, protocols, guidance and controls that Coeur has in place for its exploration and mineral resource and reserve estimation efforts, and the type of risk assessments that are undertaken.

25.8.1 Exploration and Drilling

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for exploration data:

• Written procedures and guidelines to support preferred sampling methods and approaches; periodic compliance reviews of adherence to such written procedures and guidelines;

• Maintenance of a complete chain-of-custody, ensuring the traceability and integrity of the samples at all handling stages from collection, transportation, sample preparation and analysis to long-term sample storage;

• Geological logs are checked and verified, and there is a physical sign-off to attest to the validation protocol required;

• Quality control checks on collar and downhole survey data for errors or significant deviations;

• Appropriate types of quality control samples are inserted into the sample stream at appropriate frequencies to assess analytical data quality;

• Regular inspection of analytical and sample preparation facilities by appropriately experienced Coeur personnel;

• QA/QC data are regularly verified to ensure that outliers sample mix-ups, contamination, or laboratory biases during the sample preparation and analysis steps are correctly identified, mitigated, or remediated. Changes to database entries are required to be documented;

• Database upload and verification procedures to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the data entered into the Project database(s). These are typically performed using software data-checking routines. Changes to database entries are required to be documented. Data are subject to regular backups.

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-2

25.8.2 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates

Coeur has the following internal controls protocols in place for mineral resource and mineral reserve estimation:

• Prior to use in mineral resource or mineral reserve estimation, the selected data to support estimation are downloaded from the database into a project file and reviewed for improbable entries and high values;

• Written procedures and guidelines are used to support estimation methods and approaches;

• Completion of annual technical statements on each mineral resource and mineral reserve estimate by qualified persons. These technical statements include evaluation of modifying and technical factors, incorporate available reconciliation data, and are based on a cashflow analysis;

• Internal reviews of block models, mineral resources and mineral reserves using a “layered responsibility” approach with Qualified Person involvement at the site and corporate levels;

25.8.3 Risk Assessments

Coeur has established mine risk registers that are regularly reviewed and maintained.  The registers record the risk type, the nature of the impact if the risk occurred, the frequency or probability of the risk occurrence, planned mitigation measures, and record of progress of the mitigation undertaken.  Risks are removed from the registers if mitigation measures are successful or added to the registers as a new risk is recognized.

Other risk controls include aspects such as:

• Active monitoring programs such as mill performance, geotechnical networks, water sampling, waste management;

• Regular review of markets, commodity, and price forecasts by internal specialists; reviews of competitor activities;

• Regular reviews of stakeholder concerns, accommodations to stakeholder concerns and ongoing community consultation;

• Monitoring of key permits and obligations such as tenures, surface rights, mine environmental and operating permits, agreements, and regulatory changes to ensure all reporting and payment obligations have been met to keep those items in good standing

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Page 25-3

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

APPENDIX A

Claims

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

12000-00402-030-00

Lot 1

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.29

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-030-05_1

Lot 2

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.36

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-030-05_2

Lot 3

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-030-05_3

Lot 4

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.03

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-030-05_4

Lot 5

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-040-06

Lot 6

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.03

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-360-00_1

Lot 10

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-360-00_2

Lot 22

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-360-00_3

Lot 23

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00402-040-00

Tract 4 of MS 1704

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

1.6125%

Valentine, et al

1.0000%

Metalla Royalty

26280-00561-000-00

War Eagle

561

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00562-000-00

Yukon

562

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00564-000-00

Gold Eagle

564

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00675-000-00

General Grant

675

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00945-000-90

House only on Monday Lode MS 945

945

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01095-000-10_1

Tigress

1095

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.04

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01095-000-10_2

Euphrat

1095

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.88

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01095-000-10_3

Allowez

1095

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.24

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01095-000-20_1

Gentle Annie

1095

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.63

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01095-000-20_2

Squaw Creek

1095

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.93

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01139-000-40

Ground Hog, Foley, Buffaloe (part)

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01139-000-50

Lot A of Foley

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.50

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01139-000-70

Forest Queen

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.48

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01141-000-20_1

Saganaw (part outside CUP)

1141

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.70

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01141-000-20_2

Camden

1141

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26420-01141-000-20_3

Georgie

1141

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26420-01141-000-20_4

Ford

1141

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26460-01205-000-10

Lot 1-A of MS 1341 & 1205

1205

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

7.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01205-000-20

Lot 2-A of MS 1341 & 1205

1205

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01213-000-10_1

Thora

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26500-01213-000-10_2

Comstock

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.89

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-10_3

Red Headed Woman

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-10_4

Red Headed Boy

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-10_5

Red Headed Girl

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.34

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_1

Lawrence

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.75

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_2

Red Headed Man

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_3

Lost Man

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.72

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_4

Gold King

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_5

Silver King

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.51

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_6

Mill Site

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.51

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_7

Pluto Fraction

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.04

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_8

Odin

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.86

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_9

Lucky Man

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_10

Found Fraction

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_11

Liewellen Fraction

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.91

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26500-01213-000-20_12

Connecting Link Fraction

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01213-000-20_13

Golden Wedge

1213

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-10_1

Hidden Ore

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.15

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

4.00%

Krejci Kane et al

2.000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-10_2

Saxon

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.67

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

4.0000% 2.0000%

Krejci Kane Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-10_3

Delancy

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.97

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

4.0000% 2.0000%

Krejci Kane Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-10_4

Coxey Fraction

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.90

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-10_5

Hamden

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-10_6

Walton

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.97

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-30

Harvey Fraction

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01283-000-30_1

Buffalo

1283

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.70

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26540-01283-000-30_2

Link Fraction

1283

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.62

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26540-01286-000-10

Revenue Fraction No. 2

1286

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.76

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26540-01286-000-20

Revenue Fraction No. 1

1286

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.96

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01288-000-20

Cardinal

1288

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26580-01310-000-00_1

Desire No. 1 (part)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.93

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_2

Desire No. 2 (part)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_3

Hattie, Lost Camp and Minnesota Maid exc lots

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.89

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-15

Gertrude Fraction

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.61

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01340-000-00

Ontario

1340

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01341-000-10_1

Apex

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-10_2

Argentine

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-10_3

Golden (part)

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-10_4

Star (part)

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-30

50'X500' Parcel, MS 1341 & 1205

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01378-000-00_1

Tibo

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_2

Alleta

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.89

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_3

Berta

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.73

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_4

Golconda

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_5

Yantic

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26580-01378-000-00_6

Eclipse

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.68

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_7

Bancroft

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_8

Little Chief

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.20

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_9

McKenzie

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_10

Summit

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_11

Summit Fraction

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_12

Little Eagle

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_13

Perry

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.38

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_14

Long Valley No. 1

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_15

Long Valley No. 3

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_16

Galena Fraction

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.21

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_17

Galena

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.37

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_18

Porcupine

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.58

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01378-000-00_19

Blue Jay

1378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01384-000-20_1

Bath

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.27

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26580-01384-000-20_2

St. Croix

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.59

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_3

Havana

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.42

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_4

Cawnpore

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_5

Osaka

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.97

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_6

Ghent

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_7

Owls Roost

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_8

Boulders

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_9

Al Borak

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.83

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_10

Sometimes

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.34

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_11

Sardona

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_12

Blue Crow

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_13

Moscow

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_14

On Guard

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.15

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26580-01384-000-20_15

Old Iron Sides

1384

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01413-000-40_1

Spotted Pike

1413

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26620-01413-000-40_2

Fair Day

1413

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.76

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01413-000-40_3

Ohio

1413

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01413-000-40_4

Coolgarde

1413

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01419-000-10

Burlap

1419

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01419-000-20

Paystreak No. 3 exc Lot 2

1419

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01419-000-30

Lot 2 of Paystreak No. 3

1419

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.80

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01419-000-40

Paystreak No. 2

1419

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01419-000-50

Paystreak

1419

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01427-000-00_1

Gault No. 1

1427

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26620-01427-000-00_2

Gault No. 4

1427

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26620-01427-000-00_3

Gault No. 5

1427

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.19

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26620-01427-000-00_4

Gault No. 6

1427

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26620-01431-000-00_1

Aztec No. 1

1431

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01431-000-00_2

Aztec No. 2

1431

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01431-000-00_3

Aztec No. 3

1431

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26620-01438-000-00

McCullum Millsite

1438

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01451-000-10

Blanch E

1451

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.67

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01451-000-20_1

May E

1451

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.50

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01451-000-20_2

Nellie M

1451

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.83

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01451-000-20_3

Ruth

1451

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01451-000-20_4

Nettie C

1451

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01453-000-00

Dolphin

1453

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.20

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01475-000-00_1

Little Allen

1475

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.35

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01475-000-00_2

Baby

1475

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.50

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01475-000-00_3

Little Robbie

1475

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01475-000-00_4

Little Darling

1475

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.42

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01515-000-00

Wandering Jew

1515

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01536-000-20_1

Francis (pt)

1536

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.64

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01536-000-20_2

Rambler (pt)

1536

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01536-000-20_3

Madeline (pt)

1536

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26680-01567-000-10

Daisy Fraction

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.59

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01581-000-10_1

Modoc (part outside CUP boundary)

1581

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.21

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.00%

Royal Gold

26680-01581-000-10_2

Paddy Ford Fraction

1581

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.51

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

4.00%

Krejci, Kane, et al

2.00%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-10

Lot 2 of Lomie

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.50

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-20

Lot 3 of Lomie

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-40_1

Lot 1 of Lomie

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.40

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-40_2

Lot 4 of Lomie

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.03

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-40_3

Lot 5 of Lomie

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-50

Thusnelda

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.78

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-70_1

Phonolite

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-70_2

Trenton

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01659-000-10

Bad Tale Fraction

1657

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01670-000-10

Camp Bird

1670

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.41

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01670-000-20_1

Log Cabin

1670

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01670-000-20_2

Denver

1670

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.72

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26680-01670-000-20_3

Grainger

1670

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.90

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01670-000-20_4

Allentown

1670

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01684-000-00

Plum Fraction

1684

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26720-01760-000-00

Dump

1760

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01782-000-00_1

Marco Polo

1782

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.22

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01782-000-00_2

Bald Hill

1782

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01782-000-00_3

Saturday

1782

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01782-000-00_4

April

1782

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.14

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01786-000-10

Acme

1786

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01790-000-00_1

Remo

1790

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.35

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01790-000-00_2

Hoctor

1790

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.24

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01790-000-00_3

Russell

1790

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01790-000-00_4

Laborn No. 1

1790

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.75

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01790-000-00_5

Calumet

1790

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01795-000-10_1

Victor

1795

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26760-01795-000-10_2

Point

1795

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01803-000-00_1

Bayou

1803

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.03

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01803-000-00_2

Eagle Fraction

1803

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01803-000-00_3

Eagle

1803

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.68

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01803-000-00_4

Texana

1803

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01803-000-00_5

Meteor

1803

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.36

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01803-000-00_6

Rocket

1803

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.68

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01844-000-00

Rochester

1844

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01848-000-00

Myrtle

1848

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.29

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26760-01875-000-10_1

Norwich

1875

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.54

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01875-000-10_2

Gossan Fraction

1875

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.88

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01875-000-10_3

Gossan (part)

1875

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.75

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01939-000-00_1

Caeser

1939

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.81

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01939-000-00_2

Plunger

1939

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01939-000-00_3

Non Plus Ultra

1939

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26840-01942-000-30_1

Busby exc Tract C

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_2

Washington exc Tract C

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.68

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_3

Heritage exc Tracts G & F

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_4

Belle Plane

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.64

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01946-000-00_1

Freshett

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_2

No Bagatelle

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.04

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_3

Slip Fraction No. 1

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_4

Meerschtendals

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.21

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_5

Goldsmith Maid

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.38

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_6

Montesuma

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_7

Frankfurt

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.71

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01946-000-00_8

Bavaria

1946

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.70

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26840-01955-000-36

Arizona including Lots A-1 & A-2

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.95

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-54_1

Wall

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.84

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-54_2

Harrison

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26840-01955-000-54_3

Morton

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.76

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01960-000-00

Robert Emmett

1960

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

5.0000% 2.0000%

WH Con. Royal Gold

26840-01962-000-00

Silver King

1962

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01970-000-60

November

1970

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.93

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01970-000-70_1

July

1970

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01970-000-70_2

August

1970

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.50

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01970-000-70_3

Mollie Dare

1970

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.21

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01979-000-10_1

Imperial

1979

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01979-000-10_2

Queen

1979

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01979-000-10_3

Princess

1979

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.22

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01979-000-10_4

Crown

1979

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02006-000-00

Margurite No. 2

2006

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.27

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-10

Lot A of Clarence exc Lot 1 Rev

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-15_1

Mother (part)

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-15_2

Little Barefoot (part)

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.58

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26880-02021-000-35_1

Belle Fraction

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.73

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-35_2

Rope Fraction

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02044-000-20

Tessa (part)

2044

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02050-000-00_1

Comet (part)

2050

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02050-000-00_2

Comet No. 1 (part)

2050

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.24

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02060-000-00

Pewabic

2060

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.56

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02066-000-10

Milton Fraction (part)

2066

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.70

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02074-000-10

Lillie M.

2074

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02074-000-30

Lillie M. No. 1

2074

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26920-00001-004-31

Lot 31 Block 4

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.37

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26920-00001-005-01

Lots 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, Pt 9, 16 of Block 5

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

5.04

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26920-00001-008-29

Lots 29, 20, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 of Block 9

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.61

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26920-00001-009-01

Lots 1 thru 13, Lots 16 thru 29 of Block 9

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

12.14

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26920-00001-010-01

Lots 1 thru 25 of Block 10

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

10.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26920-00001-011-01

Lots 1 thru 12 of Block 11

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

5.23

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26920-00001-012-04

Lots 4, 8, 9 of Block 12

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26930-00201-010-00

Lots 1 thru 6 of Block 1

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.72

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26930-00202-060-00

Lots 6, 7, 8 of Block 2

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

6.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26940-00003-001-02

Lots 1, 2 of Block 1

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26940-00003-001-03

Lot 3 of Block 1

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.39

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26940-00003-002-68

Lots 68, 69 of Block 2

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26940-00005-000-50

Tract F

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26940-00005-000-60

Tract G

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

6.71

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

31425-00700-002-00

LOT 2 BLK 7 HEARST SUB.

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-010-00_1

Lot 7

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

3.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-010-00_2

Lot 25

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-00

Lot 1

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-10_1

Lot 2

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.47

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-10_2

Lot 3

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

2.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-10_3

Lot 4

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

12000-00402-020-10_4

Lot 5

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

1.38

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-10_5

Lot 7

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-10_6

Lot 8

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

1.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-020-10_7

Lot 10

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_1

Lot 8

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_2

Lot 9

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_3

Lot 10

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_4

Lot 11

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

1.37

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_5

Lot 12

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.03

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_6

Lot 13

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_7

Lot 14

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_8

Lot 15

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-340-00_9

Lot 16

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-350-00_1

Lot 1

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-350-00_2

Lot 5

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

16000-00502-350-00_3

Lot 6

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-350-00_4

Lot 8

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

1.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-350-00_5

Lot 9

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-350-00_6

Lot 10

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

16000-00502-350-07

Lot 7

502

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

1.86

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00195-000-00

Decorah

195

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.21

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00330-000-00

Portland

330

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00331-000-00

Gustavus

331

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.20

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00332-000-00

Paragon

332

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00351-000-00_1

Silver Plume exc pt in Tract 11

351

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00356-000-00

Folger

356

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.74

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00357-000-00

Empire State

357

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00358-000-00

Perserverance

358

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.50

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00359-000-00

Indispensible

359

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.86

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00360-000-00

Olive

360

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.96

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26280-00361-000-20

Trojan

361

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00378-000-10

Mark Twain exc Lot U

378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00397-000-00

Alameda

397

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.23

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00398-000-00

Alameda Extension

398

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.36

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00402-000-00_1

Sante Fe exc pt in Tracts 5 and 11

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.67

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00472-000-20

Mound

472

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00558-000-00

India

558

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00559-000-00

Japan

559

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00560-000-00

Pappoose

560

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00563-000-00

Goodenough

563

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00565-000-00

Marco Polo

565

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

2.00%

Royal Gold

26280-00566-000-00

Algoma

566

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

2.00%

Royal Gold

26340-00793-000-00_1

Little Snowdrop

793

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00793-000-00_2

Dividend

793

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00793-000-00_3

Hector

793

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.74

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00866-000-00

Dark Horse

866

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

1.50%

Mountain View Heights

26340-00898-000-00

Hardscrabble and Vulgar exc pt in Tract B

898

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.61

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-25_1

Red Flag

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.19

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-25_2

Horseshoe

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-25_3

Horseshoe Fraction

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.20

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00914-000-10

North

914

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.91

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00915-000-00

Bristol Fraction

915

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00915-000-10_1

Ashland

915

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00915-000-10_2

Norman

915

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00915-000-10_3

Boston

915

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00915-000-10_4

Providence

915

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00916-000-10_1

Jessie Lee

916

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00916-000-10_2

Leopard

916

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00944-000-00

Baltimore

944

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.15

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00945-000-10_1

Reindeer

945

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00945-000-10_2

Ofer Fraction

945

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.27

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00945-000-10_3

Monday

945

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.41

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00978-000-00

Beaver Fraction

978

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00979-000-00

Burlington

979

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00996-000-00_1

Apex

996

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00996-000-00_2

Northerly Segregated Burlington

996

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.90

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-01013-000-00_1

Missouri

1013

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-01013-000-00_2

Gold Hill Fraction

1013

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.48

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-01013-000-00_3

Middle Fraction

1013

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-01016-000-00_1

Annie

1016

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26340-01016-000-00_2

Annie Fraction

1016

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.47

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26340-01016-000-00_3

Josie

1016

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26340-01016-000-00_4

Josie Fraction

1016

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.89

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26340-01016-000-00_5

Katy

1016

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26380-01041-000-00

Last Fraction

1041

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01079-000-10_1

Keed

1079

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.48

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26380-01079-000-10_2

Mary

1079

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01104-000-10

Yukon

1104

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.57

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01104-000-20

Ajax

1104

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.96

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01104-000-30_1

Ajax No. 2

1104

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01104-000-30_2

Orinoco Fraction

1104

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.57

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01104-000-30_3

Atlas

1104

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.24

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01107-000-00_1

Elk Mountain Group No. 1

1107

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01107-000-00_2

Elk Mountain Group No. 2

1107

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01107-000-00_3

Elk Mountain Group No. 3

1107

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01107-000-10

Elk Mountain Group No. 3 (part)

1107

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01117-000-00_1

Keystone

1117

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26380-01117-000-00_2

Bunker Hill

1117

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.56

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26380-01117-000-00_3

Bunker Hill Fraction

1117

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26420-01141-000-10

Saganaw (part in CUP)

1141

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.68

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

5.00%

White House Congress

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01172-000-00

Katie Putnam exc Tracts 8 & 10

1172

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01173-000-00_1

North Side exc Tracts 8 & 10

1173

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01175-000-10

Ingham

1175

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26460-01175-000-10_1

Winnesheik

1175

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.94

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26460-01175-000-20_2

File Closer Fraction

1175

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.54

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26460-01189-000-10_1

Rudolph

1189

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.78

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26460-01189-000-10_2

Costello

1189

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.88

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26460-01189-000-10_3

Dolphin

1189

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.51

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26500-01214-000-00

Peggie

1214

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.64

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-10

Red Wing exc Lots 1-2-4 and M&B

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.93

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.00%

Carlson

26540-01226-000-20

Huxley, exc Lots 1-2-4, Block 5 (M&B)

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

5.03

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-25

Wenona

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-32_1

Lasalle exc Lots 1-2-4 and M&B

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-32_2

Lasalle Fraction

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-40

M&B of Huxley, Lasalle, Redwing

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.75

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26540-01226-000-45_1

Austin

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.97

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-45_2

Tacqua

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.72

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-45_5

Austin Fraction

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.94

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-50_1

Rutland

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

7.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-50_2

Halford

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

7.80

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01226-000-60

Lots 1-2-4 of Block 5 MS 1226 and 2027

1226

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.37

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01229-000-25_1

High Tarriff exc Lot A

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.37

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-25_2

Maud

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01229-000-25_3

Eagle Chief

1229

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01233-000-10_1

General Jackson

1233

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01233-000-10_2

Diamond Fraction

1233

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01233-000-20

Callebogie Fraction

1233

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.20

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01233-000-30

Callebogie

1233

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.34

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01272-000-00_1

Sunset

1272

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26540-01272-000-00_2

Rainy Day

1272

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.51

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26540-01283-000-10

May

1283

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26540-01283-000-20

Deadwood

1283

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26540-01292-000-10

Senator

1292

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.89

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01292-000-20

Gold Bug Fraction

1292

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01349-000-00

James G. Blain

1349

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.15

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26620-01404-000-10_1

Gunnison

1404

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01404-000-10_2

Vulcan exc Lot 1

1404

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01404-000-20

Lot 1 of Vulcan

1404

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

8.83

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01428-000-10_1

Wedge

1428

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01428-000-10_2

Jim

1428

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01428-000-10_3

Joseph

1428

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01428-000-10_4

Yellow Boy Fraction

1428

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.74

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01428-000-10_5

Little Rock

1428

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01429-000-20_1

Mono

1429

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.22

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01429-000-20_2

Tiger

1429

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.84

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26620-01429-000-20_3

Rehl

1429

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.90

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01429-000-20_4

Lucy

1429

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01468-000-00

Loyd

1468

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01472-000-00

Ruby Evans

1472

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26620-01493-000-00_1

Star (exc Tract 11)

1493

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.57

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01516-000-00_1

Summit Flat

1516

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.08

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

Kunz, et al

26620-01516-000-00_2

Wm. B. Allison

1516

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

Kunz, et al

26620-01551-000-10

Comerse

1551

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01551-000-20

Porcupine

1551

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.96

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-10

Daisie Fraction

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.71

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_1

Daisy No. 1

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.81

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_2

Daisy No. 2

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_3

Giddings

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_4

Funston

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_5

Fargo

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26680-01567-000-15_6

Fargo Fraction

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_7

McLaughlin

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.48

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_8

Little Eva

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-15_9

Frost

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.62

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01567-000-20

Hogarth

1567

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.72

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01580-000-00

Juno

1580

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.34

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01581-000-20

Modoc (part inside CUP boundary)

1581

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.00%

Royal Gold

26680-01616-000-60_1

Grenada

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.58

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01616-000-60_2

Genesee

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.47

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01616-000-60_3

Peerless

1616

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.64

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01643-000-00_1

Snorter

1643

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.91

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26680-01643-000-00_2

Snorter Fraction

1643

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.23

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26680-01649-000-10

Orinoco

1649

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01653-000-00

Golden Flag Fraction

1653

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.37

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01659-000-20_1

Telegram

1659

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26680-01659-000-20_2

Maid of Erin

1659

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.40

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26680-01659-000-20_3

Gannon

1659

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26680-01659-000-20_4

B & M Fraction

1659

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

5.00%

White House Congress

26680-01667-000-00_1

Stanley

1667

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01667-000-00_2

June

1667

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01667-000-00_3

Keystone Fraction

1667

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01668-000-10_1

Copperhead (pt inside CUP boundary)

1668

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01668-000-10_2

Copperhead Fraction

1668

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.91

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01668-000-15

Copperhead (pt outside CUP boundary)

1668

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

12.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26680-01668-000-20

Flossie

1668

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01740-000-10

Deadwood

1740

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01740-000-20

General Terry

1740

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26720-01756-000-00

Alaska Fraction

1756

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01768-000-00

Foran

1768

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.67

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01937-000-00

Maria

1937

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26840-01955-000-37_1

Akka

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.97

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-37_2

Cornucopia

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-37_3

Prolific

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

16.54

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-38_1

Water

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.74

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-40

Elizabeth including Lot E1-A

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

12.96

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-57

Granet Fraction

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

19.00

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01955-000-59

Confidence

1955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01960-000-10

Sarchfield

1960

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

14.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

5.0000% 2.0000%

WH Con. Royal Gold

26840-01970-000-50

January including Lot J-1

1970

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.10

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01984-000-00_1

Star

1984

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.14

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.00%

Royal Gold

26840-01984-000-00_2

Hart

1984

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.63

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.00%

Royal Gold

26880-02001-000-10

Ryan

2001

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02001-000-20_1

Ryan Fraction exc Tract 9 Rev

2001

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.86

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02027-000-10

Index exc Lot A

2027

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.35

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02027-000-15

Huxley Fraction

2027

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26880-02027-000-20

Lot A of Index

2027

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02029-000-10

Alaska

2029

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02029-000-20

Link

2029

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02036-000-00_1

Mill

2036

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26880-02036-000-00_2

Columbia Fraction

2036

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.94

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26880-02037-000-00

Reliance Fraction

2037

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.43

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

3.00%

Dykes, et al

26880-02075-000-00

Snowstorm exc Tract 11

2075

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00351-000-00_2

Silver Plume (pt under Tract 11)

351

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.40

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00352-000-00

Southerland (under Tract 11)

352*

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00378-000-00

Mark Twain (under Lot U)

378

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00402-000-00_2

Santa Fe (under Tracts 5 & 11)

402

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.18

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00409-000-10

Welcome

409-A

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.51

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00409-000-20

Welcome Mill Site exc. Tract B

409-B

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00410-000-00

Genoa

410-A

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00412-000-00

Marathon

412

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26280-00413-000-00

Terry's Peak

413

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00414-000-00

Magenta

414

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00535-000-00

North Star #1

535

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00791-000-00

Ben Hur

791

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00881-000-00

Maringo

881

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.71

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-01105-000-00_1

Little Phil

1105

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-01105-000-00_2

Surprise

1105

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-02069-000-00

Martin Fraction

2069

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.30

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-02075-000-00

Snowstorm (under Tract 11)

2075

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.90

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00900-000-00_1

Blizzard

900

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00900-000-00_2

Silver Peak

900

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.76

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00900-000-00_3

Hurricane

900

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.92

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-00_1

Alaska

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-00_2

Hudson

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-00_3

Logan

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00902-000-00_4

Mohawk

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-00_5

Opher

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-00_6

Terrific

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-00_7

Terror

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.84

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00976-000-00_1

Alexander

976

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00976-000-00_2

Badger

976

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00976-000-00_3

Carbonate

976

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00976-000-00_4

Custer

976

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00976-000-00_5

Fairview

976

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00976-000-00_6

Hubble

976

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-01089-000-00

Car Street

1089

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.16

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01040-000-00

May Queen (pt)

1040

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01119-000-00_1

Eva No. 2

1119

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01119-000-00_2

Monitor (pt)

1119

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01119-000-00_3

Monitor Fraction

1119

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.94

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01119-000-00_4

Oak

1119

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01119-000-00_5

Oak Fraction (pt)

1119

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01120-000-00

Singapore

1120

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01121-000-00_1

Fulva

1121

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.76

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01121-000-00_2

Katisha

1121

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.71

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01121-000-00_3

Lew Wallace

1121

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.61

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01121-000-00_4

Passiac

1121

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01122-000-00_1

Little Hope Fraction

1122

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.55

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01122-000-00_2

Star

1122

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.35

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01122-000-00_3

Urgent

1122

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.27

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01122-000-00_4

White Pine

1122

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.71

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-10_5

Golden (pt)

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-10_6

Star (pt)

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01341-000-10_7

Lincoln (pt)

1341

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.14

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01139-000-00_1

Lily of the West

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.88

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26420-01139-000-00_2

Whale

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01139-000-00_3

Whale Fraction (pt)

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.43

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01139-000-40_2

Ground Hog, Foley, Buffaloe (part)

1139

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

26.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01205-000-00_1

Bunker Hill (pt)

1205

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26420-01205-000-00_2

Last Chance (pt)

1205

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.91

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26460-01172-000-00_2

Kate Putnam (under Tracts 8 & 10)

1172

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.41

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01173-000-00_2

Northside (under Tracts (8 & 10)

1173

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01271-000-00_1

Franklin

1271

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.65

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01271-000-00_2

Hamilton

1271

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.96

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01271-000-00_3

Tallahasse

1271

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01271-000-00_4

Tariff

1271

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01279-000-00_1

Hoboe Queen

1279

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01279-000-00_2

Tin Pie

1279

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.78

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26540-01279-000-00_3

Yogo

1279

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_4

Desire No. 1 (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.56

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26580-01310-000-00_5

Desire No. 2 (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_6

Emma Fraction (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_7

Hattie and Lost Camp exc lots

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_8

Leta (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.24

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_9

Attraction

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.12

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_10

Minnesota Maid (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.99

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_11

Tiger Fraction (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.05

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01310-000-00_12

Terry Fraction (pt)

1310

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.70

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-00

Emperor Fraction

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.74

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-10_1

Belle of Deadwood

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.59

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-10_2

Elroy Fraction

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.31

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-10_3

Pasha Fraction

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.69

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-10_4

Magnolia Fraction

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.74

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-10_5

Transit of Venus

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26580-01335-000-10_6

Magnolia Fraction No. 2

1335

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26583-00410-000-00

Rinaldo Mill Site

410-B

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.09

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01493-000-00

Star (under Tracts 7 & 11)

1493

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

26620-01536-000-00_1

Francis (pt)

1536

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.67

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01536-000-00_2

Rambler (pt)

1536

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.67

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01536-000-00_3

Madeline (pt)

1536

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01648-000-00

Baltimore

1648

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.79

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01704-000-00

Black Moon

1704

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.54

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01705-000-00_1

Cygnet

1705

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

11.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26680-01705-000-00_2

Sunnyside

1705

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.54

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01425-000-00_1

Freeport

1425

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.93

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01425-000-00_2

J.C.

1425

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.35

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01425-000-00_3

Newport

1425

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.83

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01425-000-00_4

R.G.

1425

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.87

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01439-000-00_1

Blacktail Chief

1439

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.25

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01439-000-00_2

Valet Chief

1439

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.43

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26684-01439-000-00_3

Manning (W/2)

1439

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

4.92

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01439-000-00_4

Maggie Fraction

1439

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.01

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26684-01439-000-00_5

Mongrel and Dhoul

1439

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.80

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26760-01802-000-10

Revenue

1802

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.64

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_5

Busby (under Tract C)

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_6

Washington (under Tract C)

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.95

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_7

Paris

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.76

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_8

Maggie

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

17.63

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_9

Edinbergh

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

18.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_10

Angeline Fraction

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_11

Rome

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

20.58

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01942-000-30_12

Heratage (pt)

1942

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

1.85

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01993-000-00_1

Apex

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

13.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01993-000-00_2

Apex No. 3

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.18

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01993-000-00_3

Apex No. 4

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26840-01993-000-00_4

Missing Link

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.17

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01993-000-00_5

Snowstorm No. 1

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

15.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01993-000-00_6

Snowstorm Fraction

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.46

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26840-01993-000-00_7

Hidden Fraction

1993

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02001-000-20_2

Ryan Fraction (under Tracts 8 & 9 Rev)

2001

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

2.19

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-10_2

Clarence (pt)

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.49

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-15_3

Mother (pt)

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.68

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02021-000-15_4

Little Barefoot (pt)

2021

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.52

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02044-000-20_2

Tessa (pt)

2044

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

3.60

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02050-000-00_3

Comet (pt)

2050

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

8.18

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02050-000-00_4

Comet No. 1 (pt)

2050

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

0.70

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26880-02066-000-10_2

Milton (pt)

2066

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

5.11

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC98673

INCLINE LODE

MMC 98673

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC98674

M & V

MMC 98674

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC114132

MARCIE

MMC 114132

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

15.36

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC114133

FISCHER

MMC 114133

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

4.59

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC114134

ANNE

MMC 114134

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

13.32

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC114135

CYNTHIA

MMC 114135

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

15.98

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC114136

BEANIE

MMC 114136

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

15.45

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC117070

KL #5

MMC 117070

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

4.59

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164704

DIRTY DICK

MMC 164704

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

16.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164705

PEDER DRAGON

MMC 164705

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

16.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164706

CASEY FRACTION #1

MMC 164706

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

19.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164707

CASEY FRACTION #2

MMC 164707

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

19.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164708

CASEY FRACTION #3

MMC 164708

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

19.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164709

CASEY FRACTION #4

MMC 164709

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

19.28

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164710

D. J. K. 1

MMC 164710

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164711

D.J.K. 2

MMC 164711

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164712

D.J.K. 3

MMC 164712

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164713

D.J.K. 4

MMC 164713

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164714

D. J. K. 5

MMC 164714

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164715

D. J. K. 6

MMC 164715

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC164716

D. J. K. 7

MMC 164716

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

1.6125% NSR

Valentine, et al

1.00% NSR

Metalla Royalty

MMC164717

D. J. K. 8

MMC 164717

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

1.6125% NSR

Valentine, et al

1.00% NSR

Metalla Royalty

MMC164718

D. J. K. 9

MMC 164718

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164719

D. J. K. 10

MMC 164719

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164720

D. J. K. 11

MMC 164720

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164721

D. J. K. 12

MMC 164721

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164722

D. J. K. FRACTION

MMC 164722

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

10.33

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC164723

D. J. K. FRACTION 1

MMC 164723

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

3.44

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164724

D. J. K. FRACTION 2

MMC 164724

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

16.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164725

D. J. K. FRACTION 3

MMC 164725

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

11.02

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC164726

D. J. K. FRACTION 4

MMC 164726

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

16.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173949

BIG MOUTH

MMC 173949

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173950

BIG FOOT

MMC 173950

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173951

BIG LEG

MMC 173951

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173952

BIG HEAD

MMC 173952

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.58

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173953

BIG WIG

MMC 173953

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

13.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173954

BIG STICK

MMC 173954

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

13.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173955

BIG MAMA

MMC 173955

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173956

BIG LAC

MMC 173956

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173957

BIG HILL

MMC 173957

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC173958

BIG DEAL

MMC 173958

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC173959

BIG SADDLE

MMC 173959

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

13.77

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183350

SPOTTED OWL

MMC 183350

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

2.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183447

SQUAW CREEK FRACTION

MMC 183447

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

4.82

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183448

M. BEAR

MMC 183448

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

16.64

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183449

LACROSSE

MMC 183449

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

19.97

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183450

HAWK FRACTION

MMC 183450

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

2.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183451

GOLD FRACTION

MMC 183451

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

2.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183452

FALCON

MMC 183452

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

4.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183453

BALD EAGLE

MMC 183453

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

4.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183454

ASHLEY

MMC 183454

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

4.13

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183455

CAMDEN WEDGE

MMC 183455

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

8.26

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183456

VINCENT

MMC 183456

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

7.35

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183689

GRAY WOLF

MMC 183689

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

6.20

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183693

CHELSEA

MMC 183693

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

2.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC183694

STEALTH

MMC 183694

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

16.53

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC187939

DUTCHMAN

MMC 187939

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

0.23

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC187940

GUIEDO

MMC 187940

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

0.23

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC187941

RUFUS

MMC 187941

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

2.07

Wharf

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_1

Lot 7

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.20

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_2

Lot 13

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

5.14

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

13000-00403-060-00_3

Lot 14

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_4

Lot 15

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_5

Lot 16

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.08

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_6

Lot 17

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.02

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_7

Lot 18

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.05

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_8

Lot 27

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-00_9

Lot 30

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

13000-00403-060-10

Lot 6 exc Oxford Subdivision

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.00%

Carlson

13000-00403-070-00

Lot 2

403

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

2.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00316-000-00

Steward

316

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00401-000-00

North Star

401

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00480-000-00

Black Sulphate

480

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.14

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00516-000-00

Bonanza

516

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.32

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00517-000-10

Plutus

517

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.00

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00518-000-00

Buxton

518

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26280-00519-000-00

Cheetor

519

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.64

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00520-000-00

Clarinda

520

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.96

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00536-000-00

Richelieu exc Hwy

536

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.24

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00537-000-00

Patrick Henry

537

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00538-000-00

Ruby Bell

538

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.92

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00539-000-00

Golden Reward

539

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.89

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00540-000-00

Silver Case

540

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.76

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00541-000-00

Golden Wedge Fraction

541

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.18

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00542-000-00

Isadorah Fraction

542

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.59

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00543-000-00

Silver Shower exc Oxford Sub

543

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00544-000-00

Smiley & Lundt

544

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.83

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00572-000-20

May Flower

572

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.25

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00573-000-00

Aurora

573

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00574-000-00

Lucke

574

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00575-000-00

Rebecca

575

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26280-00576-000-00

Motto

576

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00577-000-00

Motto Fraction

577

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.46

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00578-000-00

Point Fraction

578

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.15

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00579-000-00

Crown Point

579

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.60

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00600-000-00

Minnie (part)

600

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.37

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00760-000-00

New Atlantic

760

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00763-000-00

Green Point

763

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00764-000-00

Ophir exc Oxford Sub

764

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00765-000-00

Mikado

765

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00766-000-00

Silver Springs

766

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.23

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00768-000-00

Elizabeth

768

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.85

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00769-000-00

Fannie

769

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00781-000-00

Sunrise

781

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00782-000-00

Sunset

782

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00784-000-00

Sunshine

784

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00785-000-00

Sunday

785

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00789-000-00

Tilton

789

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00845-000-00

Comit

845

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.17

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00872-000-00

National

872

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.70

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00873-000-00

International

873

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00880-000-00_1

Little Bonanza

880

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.46

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00880-000-00_2

Perry

880

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.84

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00880-000-00_3

Penny

880

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.84

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00896-000-00

Alice May

890

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.89

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00899-000-00_1

General Custer

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.88

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00899-000-00_2

Silver Reef

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00899-000-00_3

Florence Fraction

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.08

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00899-000-00_4

Belle Fourch

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00899-000-00_5

Alta

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00899-000-00_6

Glencoe

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00899-000-00_7

Sundance

899

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00902-000-30_3

Oppitz

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.28

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_4

Yetter

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_5

Hilton

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.03

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_6

Sarsfield

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_7

Pat Claybourne

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_8

Scott

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_9

Great Scott

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_10

Mason

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.05

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_11

Security

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_12

Syndicate

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.28

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-82_1

Bacon Rind

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.44

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-82_2

Armada

902

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.12

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00911-000-10

Schuylkill

911

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00911-000-20

Eddie

911

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00911-000-30

Monroe

911

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.94

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00911-000-40

Lansford

911

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.57

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00911-000-50

Lansford No. 2

911

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.72

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00922-000-00_1

Hannibal

922

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.25

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00922-000-00_2

Ruby Basin Fraction

922

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.03

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00922-000-00_3

Roanoke

922

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00923-000-00_1

Rob Roy Fraction

923

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00923-000-00_2

Huron

923

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.08

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00923-000-00_3

Powhattan

923

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.73

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00923-000-00_4

Grove

923

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.73

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00924-000-00_1

Boston

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.34

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00924-000-00_2

Clark Fraction

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.78

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00924-000-00_3

Jimmie Fraction

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.53

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00924-000-00_4

Carthage

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.88

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00924-000-00_5

What's Left Frac., west of Hwy

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00924-000-00_6

Plowman Frac., west of Hwy

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.25

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00951-000-10

Tract A of Henry George

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.12

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-20

Harrison

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.10

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-30

Tract B of Henry George

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

7.88

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-40_1

Axiom

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-40_2

Buna Vista

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.94

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-40_3

Clontarf

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-50

Tract A of Powderly

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00951-000-60

Tract B of Powderly

951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

9.05

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00956-000-20

Clinton exc Oxford Sub

956

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.10

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.00%

Carlson

3.00%

Thompson, et al

26340-00958-000-20_1

Tract A of Hardscrabble #3

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

4.49

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-20_2

Tract B of Hardscrabble #3

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

0.62

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-20_3

Tract A of Hardscrabble #4

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

4.36

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-20_4

Tract B of Hardscrabble #4

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.56

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00966-000-00_1

Aldebaran

966

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.56

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00966-000-00_2

Nabob

966

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00966-000-00_3

Northern Crown

966

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00966-000-00_4

Andromeda

966

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00984-000-00_1

Buckingham

984

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.93

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00984-000-00_2

Rubican

984

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.93

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00984-000-00_3

Champion exc Lot 3

984

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.87

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00984-000-00_4

Peruvian exc Lot 3

984

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00984-000-00_5

Home

984

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-01014-000-00_1

John Collins

1014

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-01014-000-00_2

Harry

1014

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-01014-000-00_3

Fred Fraction

1014

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.34

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-01014-000-00_4

Little Blanch

1014

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.10

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01037-000-00

Last Chance exc Hwy

1037

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01039-000-10

Lot S of Silver Wave

1039

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.47

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01052-000-00

Spargo

1052

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.14

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01061-000-00_1

Emma

1061

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.79

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01061-000-00_2

Emma Fraction No. 2

1061

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01062-000-00

Silver Hill

1062

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01062-000-10

Billy

1062

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.73

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01062-000-20

Isadorah

1062

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.92

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01062-000-30

Rock Bluff

1062

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.07

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01062-000-40

Silver Hill Fraction

1062

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01062-000-50

Jessie Fraction

1062

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.23

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01063-000-00

Alpha exc Oxford Sub

1063

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.86

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-20

Minnie

1064

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.83

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-30

Minnie Fraction

1064

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01065-000-00_1

Mineral Point exc. Oxford Sub

1065

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.91

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01065-000-00_2

Oxford exc. Oxford Sub

1065

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01065-000-00_3

Mohawk exc. Oxford Sub

1065

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.42

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01065-000-00_4

Dump Fraction

1065

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01071-000-00_1

Bald Eagle

1071

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.80

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01071-000-00_2

Log Cabin

1071

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01072-000-00_1

Mountain Peak

1072

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.73

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01072-000-00_2

Compliment

1072

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.56

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01072-000-00_3

Ernest

1072

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01072-000-00_4

Mountain Peak Fraction

1072

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.54

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01073-000-00_1

Lone Pine exc. Oxford Sub

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.92

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01073-000-00_2

Lone Jack exc. Oxford Sub

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.90

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01073-000-00_3

Meadow Lark

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.07

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01073-000-00_4

ED R.A.

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01073-000-00_5

Shaft Fraction

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01074-000-00

Golden Bar

1074

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.03

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01075-000-10

Monte Cristo

1075

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01075-000-20

Maybury

1075

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01076-000-00_1

Comet No. 1

1076

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01076-000-00_2

Comet No. 2

1076

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.76

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01077-000-00

Victory

1077

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01097-000-00

Clarinda Extension

1097

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.56

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01101-000-00_1

St. Ives

1101

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.48

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01101-000-00_2

Some Left Frac., west of Hwy

1101

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.48

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_1

Blaine, west of Hwy

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.36

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_2

Cleveland, west of Hwy

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.38

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_3

Dickinson, west of Hwy

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01112-000-00

Sunny

1112

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01124-000-00

Bertha Fraction

1124

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26385-01073-010-00

Oxford Sub, Lot 1

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26385-01073-020-00

Oxford Sub, Lot 2

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.15

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26385-01073-030-00

Oxford Sub, Lot 3

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.25

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26385-01073-040-00

Oxford Sub, Lot 4

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26385-01073-050-00

Oxford Sub, Lot 5

1073

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.10

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26420-01136-000-00_1

Silver Belt No. 1, west of Hwy

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.72

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_2

Silver Belt No. 2

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.28

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_3

Big Crow

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.25

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_4

Aztec

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_5

Bayard

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_6

Little Crow

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_7

Little Crow Fraction

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.79

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-00_8

Saw Tooth Fraction

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.44

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-04

Lot 4 of Cuba & Great Western

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.83

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-10_1

Cyclone Fraction No. 2

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-10_2

Cyclone Frac., west of Hwy

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.94

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-10_3

Sioux, west of Hwy

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.44

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-30

Evangeline No. 7 & 8 (1/2 int)

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-35

Evangeline No. 7 & 8 (1/2 int)

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01167-000-00_1

Canyon exc. Hwy

1167

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.59

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01167-000-00_2

Ruby Belle Frac. exc Hwy

1167

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.20

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01176-000-00_1

Harvard

1176

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.78

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01176-000-00_2

Cleveland

1176

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.64

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01197-000-00

Tony

1197

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.57

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01197-000-10

Maggie Fraction

1197

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-10_1

Carter, west of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.20

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-10_2

Trial No.1, west of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.46

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-10_3

Trial No. 2, west of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-10_4

Trial No. 3, west of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-10_5

Trial Fraction, west of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_1

Bismark

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.42

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_2

Bismark No. 1

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_3

Bismark No. 2

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.50

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_4

Bismark No. 3

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_5

Crown Point

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.70

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01204-000-00_6

Crown Point No. 1

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.62

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_7

Crown Point No. 2

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.62

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_8

Crown Point No. 3

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_9

Crown Point No. 4

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_10

Crown Point No. 5

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_11

Hanify

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_12

Hanify No. 1

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_13

Hanify No. 2

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_14

Hanify No. 3

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_15

Hanify No. 4

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_16

Hanify No. 5

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_17

Hanify No. 6

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01204-000-00_18

Hanify No. 7

1204

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.24

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01221-000-00_1

Lovisa

1221

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.28

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01221-000-00_2

Eva

1221

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.00

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26540-01221-000-00_3

Addie

1221

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.56

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01221-000-00_4

Gamba Fraction

1221

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.91

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26540-01221-000-00_5

Foster Fraction

1221

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26680-01606-000-20

Lot 2B of Lot 2 of Augusta

1606

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

6.00

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-010-05_1

Lot 22

402

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.03

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-010-05_2

Lot 23

402

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.09

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-010-05_3

Lot 27

402

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.02

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

12000-00402-120-00

Lot 1

402

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Government Lot or Block (Fee)

0.73

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00761-000-00

Bosebel

761

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00800-000-00

Harmony

800

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00801-000-00

Brewery exc Railroad ROW

801

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00802-000-00

Brewery Fraction

802

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.56

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00898-000-10

Tract B of M.S. 898, etal

898

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

15.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00907-000-00_1

Nevada Gulch Fraction

907

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.17

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00907-000-00_2

Silver Light

907

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.79

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26340-00907-000-00_3

Liberty Hill

907

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.96

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00907-000-00_4

Oblique Fraction

907

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00907-000-00_5

Oblique Fraction No. 2

907

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.70

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00925-000-10

Mogul exc Tract B

925

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.58

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00925-000-20

Tract B of Omega

925

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

3.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00925-000-30

Peabody exc Tract B

925

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-10_1

Belcher exc Tract B

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.57

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-10_2

North Cross

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.47

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-10_3

Hardscrabble No. 2

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00958-000-10_4

Contact

958

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.36

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00989-000-00_1

Yuba exc Terry Cemetary

989

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00989-000-00_2

Eldora exc Terry Cemetary

989

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.05

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00989-000-10

Terry Cemetary

989

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.34

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01052-000-10

Garland

1052

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01052-000-20

Graham

1052

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01064-000-00_1

Big Test Fraction

1084

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-00_2

St. Louis

1084

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-00_3

Silver Fraction

1084

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-00_4

Tornado

1084

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.96

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-10_1

Daisy Fraction

1567

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26380-01064-000-10_2

Little Bird

1064

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.15

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-20

Minnie

1064

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.83

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01064-000-30

Minnie Fraction

1064

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01075-000-00

Livingston

1075

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.08

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01078-000-00

Ibex Fraction

1078

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.25

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00762-000-00

Mariposa

762

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26280-00411-000-30

Tract A of Oriole

411

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

2.68

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00924-000-00

What's Left Frac. lying E & S of Hwy

924

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.05

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00984-000-03

Lot 3 of Champion & Peruvian Lodes

984

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.83

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01101-000-00

Some Left Frac. lying E & S of Hwy

1101

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01102-000-00_4

St. Just

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.79

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_5

Specie Payment Fraction

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.90

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_6

Bryan

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.78

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_7

Blaine lying E & S of Hwy

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.36

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_8

Cleveland lying E & S of Hwy

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.38

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01102-000-00_9

Dickinson lying E & S of Hwy

1102

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_1

Overdraft

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.42

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_2

Cleopatra

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.80

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_3

Argenta

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.38

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_4

Daybreak

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.91

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_5

Midnight

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_6

Brandywine

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.95

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_7

Brandywine Fraction

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.12

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_8

Georgiana

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01131-000-00_9

Florence Fraction

1131

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26380-01132-000-00_1

Wye House

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_2

Mix

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_3

Stir

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_4

Glendale Fraction

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_5

Buckeye No. 2

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.58

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_6

Stone Wall

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.78

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_7

Blue Ridge

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.24

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26380-01132-000-00_8

Lloyd Lounds

1132

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-10_1

Cuba

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.89

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-10_2

Cuba Fraction

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-10_3

Great Western

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.74

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01136-000-10_4

Silver Belt No. 1 lying E & S of Hwy

1136

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_1

Beaver

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.72

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_2

Sound Money

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.75

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_3

Boone

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26420-01151-000-10_4

Cuba No. 1 Fraction

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.46

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_5

Colts

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.99

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_6

Cook

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.73

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_7

Missing Link

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_8

Syracuse

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.65

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_9

Cuba Fraction

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.95

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_10

McKinley Fraction

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.57

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_11

Diorite

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_12

Xerxes

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01151-000-10_13

Linnaeus

1151

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.72

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_1

Boston

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.85

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_2

Welcome

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.91

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_3

Derby

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.91

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_4

Tiger

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_5

Seagull

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26420-01152-000-00_6

Sitting Bull

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.17

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_7

Lot D of Doze, Palmetto , et al

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

32.88

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01152-000-00_8

Lot F of Doze Frac. & Dexter

1152

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

1.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-00_1

Old Bill

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-00_2

McLeod

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-00_3

Golden Key

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.92

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-00_4

Bayard Fraction

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.57

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-00_5

Cyclone Frac. lying E & S of Hwy

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01153-000-00_6

Sioux lying E & S of Hwy

1153

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_1

On Time

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_2

On Time No. 1

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_3

On Time No. 2

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_4

On Time No. 3

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_5

On Time No. 4

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_6

Evangeline No. 1

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26420-01158-000-00_7

Evangeline No. 2

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_8

Evangeline No. 3

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.20

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_9

Evangeline No. 4

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_10

Evangeline No. 5

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.21

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_11

Evangeline No. 6

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_12

Evangeline No. 7

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_13

Evangeline No. 8

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_14

Big Four

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.80

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_15

Big Four No. 1

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.54

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_16

Big Four No. 2

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.62

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_17

Big Four No. 3

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.60

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_18

Big Four No. 4

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_19

Square

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.72

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_20

High Point

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.18

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_21

Big Foot

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26420-01158-000-00_22

Black Thunder

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_23

Crow Dog

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_24

Bull Eagle

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.87

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26420-01158-000-00_25

Little Bird Fraction

1158

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_1

CAW

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.02

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_2

I.M.H.

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.36

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_3

Florence

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.23

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_4

Stead

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_5

Stead No. 1

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_6

Stead No. 2

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_7

Stead No. 3

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_8

Stead No. 4

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.42

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_9

McLeod

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.02

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_10

McLeod No. 1

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_11

McLeod No. 2

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.74

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26450-00200-000-00_12

Gertrude

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_13

Coppy Fraction

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_14

Low

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_15

High

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_16

Poorman

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.71

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_17

Elsie

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.97

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_18

Monmouth

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_19

Monmouth No. 1

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_20

Monmouth No. 2

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_21

Monmouth No. 3

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_22

Monmouth No. 4

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_23

Monmouth No. 5

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.93

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_24

Monmouth No. 6

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.18

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_25

December

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.10

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_26

Bridgeport

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26450-00200-000-00_27

Blue Danube

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_28

Dr. Late

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_29

Lamplighter

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_30

West Virginia

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_31

Client Fraction

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-00200-000-00_32

Client

1142

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.58

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01058-000-00_1

Carmyllie

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01058-000-00_2

Sol Star

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01058-000-00_3

Golden Eagle

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.33

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26450-01058-000-00_4

Guild

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.38

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01058-000-00_5

Mose Lyon Fraction

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.20

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01058-000-00_6

Doctor Flick Fraction

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

0.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01058-000-00_7

Robert Emet

1058

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01188-000-00_1

Wild Deer No. 1

1188

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.18

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01188-000-00_2

Wild Deer No. 2

1188

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26450-01188-000-00_3

Wild Fawn

1188

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_1

Leona Lock

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.23

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_2

Lone Star

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.94

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_3

Bengal Tiger

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.34

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_4

Deposit

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_5

B & M Fraction

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_6

Gopher No. 1

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_7

Gopher No. 2

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.53

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26450-01215-000-00_8

Gopher No. 3

1215

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26455-01169-000-00_1

Polar Bear

1169

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26455-01169-000-00_2

Wedge

1169

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26455-01169-000-00_3

Edison

1169

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26455-01169-000-00_4

Edison No. 2

1169

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.20

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26455-01169-000-00_5

Edison No. 3

1169

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_1

King

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.32

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01200-000-00_2

Carter No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.88

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_3

Carter No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_4

Carter No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.94

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_5

Fay No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.65

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_6

Fay No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.70

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_7

Ray

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.94

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_8

Ray No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_9

Ray No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.31

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_10

Ray No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_11

Bancroft No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.71

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_12

Bancroft No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.41

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_13

Bancroft No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.96

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_14

Violet No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.17

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_15

Violet No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_16

Violet No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.83

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01200-000-00_17

Ox

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.62

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_18

Flat

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.30

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_19

Rainbow

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_20

Albert Steele

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.47

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_21

Browning

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.28

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_22

Paragon

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.53

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_23

Charlie

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.99

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_24

Ruby Basin

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_25

Cunniff

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_26

Star

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.07

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_27

Principal Fraction

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.00

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_28

Principal Fraction No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_29

Principal No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_30

Principal No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_31

Principal No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.28

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01200-000-00_32

Principal No. 4

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_33

Sheridan

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.96

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_34

Annie

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.96

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_35

Springview

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.15

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_36

Maggie

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_37

Amy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_38

Waukegon

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.12

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_39

Genevieve

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_40

Little Johnny

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.70

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_41

Llama

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.74

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_42

Tum-Tum

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.84

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_43

Lucky Girl

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.80

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_44

Jay No. 1

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_45

Jay No. 2

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_46

Jay No. 3

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.64

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26460-01200-000-00_47

Albert Steel Fraction

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.70

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_48

Log Cabin

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.87

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_49

Hazard

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.16

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_50

Carter lying E of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_51

Trial No. 1 lying E of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.86

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26460-01200-000-00_52

Trial No. 2 lying E of Hwy

1200

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

1.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_1

St. George No. 1

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_2

St. George No. 2

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.04

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_3

Monte Carlo

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_4

Venus

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_5

Jupiter

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_6

Deer Mountain

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_7

Evarts

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.19

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_8

Fairview

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.15

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_9

World's Fair

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26500-01209-000-00_10

Bangor Fraction No. 2

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_11

Bangor No. 1

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.61

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_12

Selbie

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.74

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_13

Transit

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_14

First Chance

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.93

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_15

Chicago

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_16

Big Dipper Fraction

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.87

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_17

Big Dipper No. 1

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.74

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_18

Big Dipper No. 2

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.06

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_19

Big Dipper No. 3

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_20

Big Dipper No. 4

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

10.29

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26500-01209-000-00_21

Big Dipper No. 5

1209

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.22

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_1

Havana No. 1

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.90

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_2

Havana No. 2

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.64

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_3

Havana No. 3

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.36

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26583-01210-000-00_4

Havana No. 4

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.39

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_5

Havana No. 5

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_6

Havana No. 6

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

9.38

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_7

Havana No. 7

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_8

Havana No. 8

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_9

Havana No. 9

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_10

Havana No. 10

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

5.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_11

Connecting

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.50

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_12

Wabash No. 1

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.43

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_13

Wabash No. 2

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

4.44

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_14

Wabash No. 3

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.98

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_15

Wabash No. 4

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

3.95

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26583-01210-000-00_16

Wabash No. 5

1210

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

2.99

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26584-01217-000-00_1

Doze

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

6.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26584-01217-000-00_2

Doze Fraction

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

7.57

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

26584-01217-000-00_3

Evening Star

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.40

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26584-01217-000-00_4

Bryan

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.38

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26584-01217-000-00_5

Belt

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26584-01217-000-00_6

Isreal

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26584-01217-000-00_7

Dolphin

1217

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Patented Lode Claim

8.45

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

26340-00902-000-30_13

Quit Claim

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

10.27

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00925-000-40

Tract A of Omega

925

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Tract or Parcel (Fee)

6.81

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26280-00411-000-10

Oriole exc Tract A

411-A

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.64

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_1

Cyanide

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

6.01

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26340-00902-000-30_2

LaPierre

902

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

9.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

26620-01470-000-00

Cherry Gulch

1470

Wharf Resources (USA) Inc.

Patented Lode Claim

7.65

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

2.6125%

Valentine, et al, Metalla

2.0000%

Royal Gold

MMC89109

GOLDEN REWARD #2

MMC 89109

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

5.51

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC89110

GOLDEN REWARD #4

MMC 89110

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC92905

GOLDEN REWARD #5

MMC 92905

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

13.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC94456

GOLDEN REWARD #15

MMC 94456

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

4.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC94457

GOLDEN REWARD #16

MMC 94457

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

4.82

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC94459

GOLDEN REWARD #18

MMC 94459

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

4.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC94460

GOLDEN REWARD #19

MMC 94460

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

4.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC94462

GOLDEN REWARD #25

MMC 94462

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

6.89

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC125813

MOCO JV-11

MMC 125813

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

6.89

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC125814

MOCO JV-12

MMC 125814

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

6.89

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC125815

MOCO JV-13

MMC 125815

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

2.75

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC132782

BABY

MMC 132782

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

2.75

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC132783

MELANIE

MMC 132783

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

7.35

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC134347

PATTI #2

MMC 134347

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

1.84

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC134349

PATTI #4

MMC 134349

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

2.75

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC134350

PATTI #5

MMC 134350

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

2.75

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC134351

PATTI #6

MMC 134351

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

2.75

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC134352

PATTI #7

MMC 134352

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

4.13

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC134353

PATTI #8

MMC 134353

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

1.84

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC172950

FRED #1

MMC 172950

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

8.26

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC172951

FRED #2

MMC 172951

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

3.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC172952

FRED #3

MMC 172952

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

3.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC172953

FRED #4

MMC 172953

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

3.67

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC184192

BONESPUR FRACTION

MMC 184192

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

0.23

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC193034

GREMLIN NO 1

MMC 193034

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

16.52

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC193035

GREMLIN NO 2

MMC 193035

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

13.77

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC193323

GREMLIN NO 3

MMC 193323

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

0.55

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC193324

GREMLIN NO 4

MMC 193324

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

0.11

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC222709

CAITLIN NO. 1

MMC 222709

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

1.03

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC222710

CAITLIN NO. 2

MMC 222710

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

4.12

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC222711

CAITLIN NO. 3

MMC 222711

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

1.03

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC223020

CAITLIN NO. 4

MMC 223020

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

6.43

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC223021

CAITLIN NO. 5

MMC 223021

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

0.69

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC234507

Hattie Clay Lode

MMC 234507

Golden Reward Mining Company LP

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Golden Reward

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236754

JH 1

MMC 236754

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236755

JH 2

MMC 236755

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236756

JH 3

MMC 236756

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236757

JH 4

MMC 236757

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236758

JH 5

MMC 236758

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236759

JH 6

MMC 236759

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236760

JH 7

MMC 236760

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236761

JH 8

MMC 236761

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236762

JH 9

MMC 236762

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236763

JH 10

MMC 236763

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236764

JH 11

MMC 236764

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236765

JH 12

MMC 236765

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236766

JH 13

MMC 236766

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236767

JH 14

MMC 236767

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC236768

JH 15

MMC 236768

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236769

JH 16

MMC 236769

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236770

JH 17

MMC 236770

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236771

JH 18

MMC 236771

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236772

JH 19

MMC 236772

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236773

JH 20

MMC 236773

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236774

JH 21

MMC 236774

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236775

JH 22

MMC 236775

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236776

JH 23

MMC 236776

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236777

JH 24

MMC 236777

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236778

JH 25

MMC 236778

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236779

JH 26

MMC 236779

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236780

JH 30

MMC 236780

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236781

JH 31

MMC 236781

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236782

JH 32

MMC 236782

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236783

JH 33

MMC 236783

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236784

JH 34

MMC 236784

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236785

JH 35

MMC 236785

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236786

JH 36

MMC 236786

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236787

JH 37

MMC 236787

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236788

JH 38

MMC 236788

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC236789

JH 39

MMC 236789

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236790

JH 40

MMC 236790

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236791

JH 41

MMC 236791

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236792

JH 42

MMC 236792

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236793

JH 43

MMC 236793

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236794

JH 44

MMC 236794

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236795

JH 47

MMC 236795

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236796

JH 48

MMC 236796

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236797

JH 49

MMC 236797

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236798

JH 50

MMC 236798

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236799

JH 51

MMC 236799

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236800

JH 53

MMC 236800

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236801

JH 54

MMC 236801

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236802

JH 55

MMC 236802

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236803

JH 62

MMC 236803

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236804

JH 65

MMC 236804

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236805

JH 68

MMC 236805

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236806

JH 69

MMC 236806

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236807

JH 70

MMC 236807

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236808

JH 71

MMC 236808

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236809

JH 72

MMC 236809

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

c

Name

M.S. Number

Patent #

BLM S/N

State S/N

Owner/Parties

Type

Acreage

Project

State

County

Royalty (1)

Royalty Holder (1)

Royalty (2)

Royalty Holder (2)

MMC236810

JH 73

MMC 236810

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236811

JH 74

MMC 236811

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236812

JH 75

MMC 236812

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236813

JH 76

MMC 236813

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236814

JH 77

MMC 236814

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236815

JH 78

MMC 236815

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236816

JH 79

MMC 236816

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

MMC236817

JH 80

MMC 236817

Coeur Explorations, Inc.

Federal Lode Claim

20.66

Johana (Wharf)

South Dakota

Lawrence

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Maps

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

Wharf Operations South Dakota Technical Report Summary

 

Effective Date:  December 31, 2021 Appendix.A

XML

Document and Entity Information	Feb. 16, 2022
Cover [Abstract]
Document Type	8-K
Amendment Flag	false
Document Period End Date	Feb. 16, 2022
Entity Registrant Name	Coeur Mining, Inc.
Entity Incorporation, State or Country Code	DE
Entity File Number	1-8641
Entity Tax Identification Number	82-0109423
Entity Address, Address Line One	104 S. Michigan
Entity Address, Address Line Two	Suite 900
Entity Address, City or Town	Chicago
Entity Address, State or Province	IL
Entity Address, Postal Zip Code	60603
City Area Code	312
Local Phone Number	489-5800
Written Communications	false
Soliciting Material	false
Pre-commencement Tender Offer	false
Pre-commencement Issuer Tender Offer	false
Entity Emerging Growth Company	false
Entity Central Index Key	0000215466
Title of 12(b) Security	Common Stock (par value $.01 per share)
Trading Symbol	CDE
Security Exchange Name	NYSE