SEC Info℠

Home

Search

My Interests

Help

Sign In

Please Sign In

Joway Health Industries Group Inc. – ‘8-K’ for 1/23/23 – ‘EX-96.1’

On:  Friday, 1/27/23, at 12:24pm ET   ·   For:  1/23/23   ·   Accession #:  1213900-23-5558   ·   File #:  333-108715

Previous ‘8-K’:  ‘8-K’ on 10/14/22 for 10/12/22   ·   Next:  ‘8-K/A’ on 2/14/23 for 1/23/23   ·   Latest:  ‘8-K’ on 4/2/24 for 3/28/24   ·   5 References:   By:  Idaho Copper Corp. – ‘10-Q’ on 12/20/23 for 10/31/23 By:  Idaho Copper Corp. – ‘10-Q’ on 9/5/23 for 7/31/23 By:  Idaho Copper Corp. – ‘10-Q’ on 6/14/23 for 4/30/23 By:  Idaho Copper Corp. – ‘10-K’ on 3/10/23 for 12/31/22 By:  Idaho Copper Corp. – Next ‘8-K/A’ on 2/14/23 for 1/23/23 

in

this entire Filing. an “Entity” Search.

Show

Documents searched

and

each “hit”. the 1st “hit”.

↓↑Hints

 Text Wildcards:  ? (any letter/digit),  * (many).  Search Logic:  for Documents:  & (and),  | (or);  for Text:  | (anywhere),  "(&)" (near).  Details... 

  As Of               Filer                 Filing    For·On·As Docs:Size             Issuer                      Filing Agent

 1/27/23  Joway Health Inds Group Inc.      8-K:1,2,3,5 1/23/23   29:16M                                    EdgarAgents LLC/FA

Document/Exhibit                   Description                      Pages   Size 

 1: 8-K         Current Report                                      HTML    495K 
 2: EX-2.1      Share Exchange Agreement, by and Between Joway      HTML    136K 
                Health Group Industries Inc., International Cumo                 
                Mining Corporation, and the Shareholders of                      
                International Cumo Mining Corporation, Dated                     
                January 23, 2023                                                 
 3: EX-4.3      Form 2021 Warrant                                   HTML     72K 
 4: EX-4.4      Form of Replacement Note                            HTML     56K 
 5: EX-4.5      Form of Replacement Warrant                         HTML     41K 
 6: EX-4.6      Form Lock-Up Agreement                              HTML     26K 
 7: EX-4.7      Form of 8.5% Secured Non-Convertible Note           HTML     59K 
 8: EX-4.8      7.5% Secured Note Indenture, Dated August 24,       HTML    844K 
                2021, by and Between International Cumo Mining                   
                Corporation and Computershare Trust Company of                   
                Canada                                                           
 9: EX-10.1     Form Incentive Stock Option Agreement               HTML     41K 
10: EX-10.2     Debt Assignment and Release Agreement, Dated        HTML     21K 
                January 23, 2023, by and Among Joway Health                      
                Industries Group, Inc. and Jhp Holdings, Inc                     
11: EX-10.3     Option Agreement, Dated October 13, 2004, by and    HTML     74K 
                Between Cumo Molybdenum Mining Inc. and Mosquito                 
                Consolidated Gold Mines Limited, as Amended                      
                January 14, 2005                                                 
12: EX-10.4     Mining Claims Agreement, Dated July 25, 2017, by    HTML    261K 
                and Among American Cumo Mining Corporation,                      
                International Cumo Mining Corporation, Cumo                      
                Molybdenum Mining Inc., Western Geoscience Inc.,                 
                and Thomas Evans                                                 
13: EX-10.5     Special Warranty Deed, Between American Cumo        HTML     17K 
                Mining Corporation and International Cumo Mining                 
                Corporation                                                      
14: EX-10.6     Loan Agreement, Dated October 31, 2014, as Amended  HTML    129K 
                March 26, 2015, and January 29, 2016, by and                     
                Between International Cumo Mining Corporation and                
                La Familia Ii LLC                                                
15: EX-10.7     Minesense Amenability Test Proposal, Dated August   HTML     78K 
                29, 2022, by and Between Minesense Technologies                  
                Ltd. and International Cumo Mining Corporation                   
16: EX-14.1     Code of Ethics                                      HTML     32K 
17: EX-23.1     Consent of Geologic Systems Ltd. Regarding the      HTML     13K 
                Cumo Project                                                     
18: EX-96.1     Technical Report Summary and Resource Estimate,     HTML   3.48M 
                the Cumo Project, Boise National Forest, Boise                   
                County, Idaho, United States                                     
19: EX-99.1     Financial Statements of Businesses Acquired and     HTML    875K 
                Pro Forma Financial Information                                  
24: R1          Cover                                               HTML     51K 
27: XML         IDEA XML File -- Filing Summary                      XML     23K 
25: XML         XBRL Instance -- ea171459-8k_jowayhealth_htm         XML     22K 
26: EXCEL       IDEA Workbook of Financial Reports                  XLSX      8K 
21: EX-101.DEF  XBRL Definitions -- gtvi-20230123_def                XML     78K 
22: EX-101.LAB  XBRL Labels -- gtvi-20230123_lab                     XML    106K 
23: EX-101.PRE  XBRL Presentations -- gtvi-20230123_pre              XML     75K 
20: EX-101.SCH  XBRL Schema -- gtvi-20230123                         XSD     19K 
28: JSON        XBRL Instance as JSON Data -- MetaLinks               27±    42K 
29: ZIP         XBRL Zipped Folder -- 0001213900-23-005558-xbrl      Zip   2.08M 

Exhibit 96.1

	S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary
	Prepared for      International CuMo Mining Corp.
	Prepared by        Geologic Systems Ltd.      January 2023

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Table of Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

The CuMo Project (Project) is designed to develop Cumo, Copper-Molybdenum-Silver- Rhenium deposit, and provide long-term employment and business opportunities for a rural area in Idaho, funded by an economically viable project. It would become one of the largest open pit Copper-Molybdenum mines in the United States and producer of Copper, Molybdenum, Silver and Rhenium , critical and strategic minerals.

This Technical Report Summary (TRS or Report) provides an overview of the Project and includes recommendations for future work. It discloses, at an Initial Assessment level, information about the geology, mineralization, exploration potential, Mineral Resources, mining methods, processing methods, infrastructure, social and economic benefits, environmental protection, cleanup, and repair of historical impacts, permitting, reclamation and closure concepts, capital and operating costs and an economic analysis for the Project.

For readers to fully understand the information in this Report, they should read this Report in its entirety, including all qualifications, assumptions and exclusions that relate to the information set out in this Report that qualifies the technical information contained in the Report. The Report is intended to be read as a whole, and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The technical information in the Report is subject to the assumptions and qualifications contained in the Report. The economic and technical analyses included in this Report provide only a summary of the potential Project economics based on the assumptions set out herein. There is no guarantee that the Project economics described herein can be achieved.

This technical report summary (TRS or Report) was commissioned by the registrant, International CuMo Mining Corp. (CuMoCo), for its Copper-Molybdenum-Silver Project (CuMo or Project) In Boise County, Idaho for the purpose of reporting an initial assessment. CuMoCo is an Idaho company exploring options for the development and restoration of the project area.

This Report is the inaugural TRS developed for the CuMo Project in accordance with United States SEC S-K 1300 regulations. The TRS summarizes a 2020 Preliminary Economic Analysis (PEA) Technical Report (SRK, 2020) that was completed under Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument (NI) 43-101 guidelines and published June , 2020 with the following notable differences:

Site visits for the purposes of personal inspections of the CuMo property have been undertaken by Shaun Dykes, Geologic QP, 2005 to 2022; Mr. Gary Giroux, resource QP (June 2015); Mr. Bob McCarthy, SRK mining QP (October 2018); Mr. Andy Thomas, SRK pit geotechnical QP (October 2018), and Mr. Calvin Boese, SRK waste management QP (October 2018).

Note: Throughout this report, all currency is United States dollars and all units are imperial, unless otherwise specifically noted.

The CuMo deposit is a molybdenum-copper deposit situated 37 miles, equivalent to 60 kilometers (km), northeast of Boise, Idaho, USA. The project is situated in the southern section of the Boise Mountains which are characterized by north-northwest trending mountain ranges separated by alluvial filled valleys. Topographic elevations on the CuMo claims range from 5,400 feet (1,700 meters) to 7,100 ft (2,400 m) above sea level.

Situated in a historic lode gold camp with a recorded production of 2.8 million ounces, molybdenite (MoS₂) mineralization was not discovered in this area until 1963 by Amax Exploration (Amax). After conducting surface sampling in 1964, Amax relinquished rights to the property. It was subsequently explored by Curwood Mining Company, Midwest Oil Corporation (later Amoco Minerals Company), Amax (a second time), and then Climax Molybdenum Company (a subsidiary of Amax Inc.). The Historic Drilling was done between 1969 and 1982 for a total of 10,981 m (36,026 ft) in 23 diamond drill holes and three reverse circulation holes. Note: Reverse circulation holes are not used in the resource calculation.

The property was re-staked in 1998 by CuMo Molybdenum Mining Inc. and optioned to Mosquito Consolidated Gold Mines Ltd., (now CuMoCo) in 2004.

Presently, the CuMo project is held by a wholly owned USA subsidiary of CuMoCo, Interntaional CuMo Mining Corporation (CuMoCo).

After CuMoCo had optioned the property in 2004, Kobex Resources Ltd. (Kobex) optioned it from CuMoCo in 2005 and commenced drilling in 2006. Kobex drilled one complete hole and 50% of a second hole 1,087 m (3,565 ft). In late 2006, CuMoCo resumed control and completed the 2006 to 2011 exploration drilling programs, including the incomplete hole by Kobex. CuMoCo completed 20,187 m (66,230 ft) of drilling in 32 diamond drill holes in that program. During 2012, CuMoCo drilled nine additional holes totaling 4,713 m (15,464 ft), aimed at improving the resource categorization and gaining a better understanding of the extent of the deposit.

The CuMo deposit is located at the southwestern end of the Idaho-Montana Porphyry Belt. Igneous complexes in this belt are interpreted to be related to an Eocene, intra-arc rift, and are characterized by alkalic rocks in the northeast, mixed alkalic and calc-alkalic rocks in the middle, and calc-alkaline rocks in the southwest. The CuMo deposit is typical of large, dispersed, low grade molybdenum ± copper porphyry deposits that are associated with hybrid magmas typified by fluorine-poor, differentiated monzogranite igneous complexes. Due to their large size, the total contained economic molybdenum in these types of deposits can be equivalent to or exceed that of high-grade molybdenum deposits.

CuMoCo’s work has resulted in the interpretation and modelling of three distinct mineralized zones within the deposit. These zones were previously interpreted by Amax as distinct shells that were produced by separate intrusions. Re-interpretation of down-hole histograms for copper (Cu), silver (Ag) and molybdenite (MoS₂^[1]) suggests the mineralized zones are part of a single, large, concentrically zoned system with an upper copper-silver zone (named Cu-Ag Zone), underlain by a transitional copper-molybdenum zone (named Cu-Mo Zone), in turn underlain by a lower molybdenum-rich zone (named Mo Zone). Three-dimensional modeling of the above zonation indicates the current area being drilled is located on the north side of a large system extending 4.5 km (15,000 ft) in diameter, of which 1.5 km (3,000 ft) has been drilled.

The Mineral Resource estimates for the Project were estimated in conformity with Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (CRIRSCO) “International Reporting Template for the public reporting of Exploration Targets, Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” as adopted by the International Council on Mining & Metals November 2019. The mineral resources are reported in in accordance with §§229.1300 through 229.1305 (subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K).

The resource estimate was based on a total of 65 diamond drill holes totaling 36,166 m (118,654 ft). Note that the three reverse circulation holes were not used in the resource estimate. Nine of the 65 diamond drill holes were completed in 2012. As no additional drilling has been completed since the 2015 resource was estimated, it is considered current.

A geological model separating the CuMo Deposit into four mineralize zones with an oxidized layer on top was developed by CuMoCo geologists. In addition, major fault blocks were identified both by assay data and by marker beds. Assays were tagged as one of four mineralized zones: a near surface Cu-Ag Zone, a deeper Cu-Mo Zone and a still deeper Mo Zone and an underlying potassic-silica zone (MSI). Statistical analysis of each variable in each zone led to the capping of assays based on the grade distribution within each zone. Uniform down-hole 50 feet (ft) composites were produced for each zone. For variography, the major post mineral fault blocks were rotated back to their original position using marker beds. Semi-variograms were produced for each variable within each zone based on the samples’ original pre-fault locations. A block model with block dimensions of 50 ft was superimposed on the mineralized zones. Grade was interpolated into blocks by ordinary kriging. A tonnage factor was determined for each zone based on multiple specific gravity determinations. Individual blocks were classified as measured, indicated or inferred resource based on their location relative to drill-hole composites.

To take into account the four primary potentially economic minerals estimated, a form of metal equivalent or recoverable value (RCV) was calculated for each block based on reasonable commodity prices and estimated recoveries in each of five zones; the oxide zone (a combination of altered Cu-Ag and Cu-Mo Zones), Cu-Ag Zone, Cu-Mo Zone, Mo Zone and MSI Zone. The 2015 resource estimate is summarized below for RCV cut-offs.

The metal prices used for resource estimation are provided in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1: Metal prices for resource estimation

The metal recoveries used were a function of mineralized zones as follows in Table 1-2.

Table 1-2: CuMo metal recoveries by zone

In 2012, Snowden Mining Consultants (Snowden) used Geovia’s Whittle^TM pit optimizer to determine a constraining open pit shell for the CuMo deposit. Optimization parameters were from Thompson Creek mine (a comparable open pit molybdenum project located in Idaho). The optimization parameters included mill feed, mining and processing costs of $7.52 per processed ton, overall pit slope angles of 45°, metallurgical recoveries as shown above and appropriate dilution and offsite costs and royalties. The commodity prices used in 2012 by Snowden for restraining the resource were Mo at $25/lb, Cu at $3/lb, Ag at $20/oz and W at $10/lb. This pit constraint is still valid.

Since the infill drill holes completed in 2012 were all within the conceptual pit, this resource update uses the Snowden 2012 optimum pit shell to constrain the estimate.

In the mineral resource estimate tables below (Table 1-3, Table 1-4, Table 1-5, and Table 1-6), the base case $5.00/t RCV cut-off is highlighted and is selected based on operating costs and the results of grade improvement using a mineral sorting process. The $5.00 cut-off is suggested to separate waste from material that is fed into the sorters. From the sorters, only mill feed above an economic cut-off would be sent for immediate processing.

It should be noted that since the convention for the CuMo project has been to work with %MoS₂, as calculated from measured %Mo, the %MoS₂ values in the resource estimate tables are 1.6681 times greater than %Mo.

An estimate for rhenium (Re) and sulfur (S) associated with the MoS₂ was completed using linear regression of MoS₂ vs. Re and MoS₂ vs S to show the average grades of Re and S that would be contained with MoS₂ within each block. The Re and S were not used to determine the RCV value of resources shown in Table 1-3, Table 1-4, Table 1-5, and Table 1-6 below.

Note: Regression analysis is not industry standard practice in calculating overall resources. However, the fact that rhenium is entirely and almost all the sulfur are contained within the material containing MoS₂, (note; a minor amount of sulfur is contained in pyrite) which has been estimated by kriging, means that regression is a valid method of obtaining a reasonable estimate of the rhenium and sulfur contents at the level of precision of this study. Due to the large number of samples involved in the regression analysis, the confidence of this particular regression estimate is comparable to that obtained by the method of ordinary kriging.

Table 1-3: Measured resource within pit shell

Source: Giroux et al, 2015, modified 2019

Table 1-4: Indicated resources

Source: Giroux et al, 2015, modified 2019

Table 1-5: Measured and indicated resources

Source: Giroux et al, 2015, modified 2019

Table 1-6: Inferred resources (molybdenum, copper, silver, rhenium and sulfur)

CuMo is to be developed as an open pit mining operation, mining waste and providing feed to a primary crusher which then supplies crushed material to a mineral sorting plant. The sorting plant consists of both bulk and particle sorting and produces feed for a mill and flotation plant. The project plan includes an off-site roaster to convert molybdenum concentrate (as MoS₂) to saleable MoO₃. Major by-products are copper and silver, and minor by-products are rhenium and sulfuric acid. Potential for the production of tungsten as a minor by-product may also exist.

The proposed operation is for a 150,000 short tons per day (stpd) feed rate to the mill. This requires a sort feed rate averaging about 200,000 stpd, with a maximum of about 265,000 stpd. Mining rates to achieve this feed average about 400,00 stpd, reaching a maximum mining rate of 500,000 stpd.

The overall process is for material to be mined at the mining rate, and a grade control cut-off is applied to that material to determine what material is sent to the sort plant (sorter feed); the remaining material is sent to waste dumps. The sort plant consists of an initial three-stage bulk sort process, where for each stage, a pair of cut-offs is applied to produce mill feed, waste, and middlings streams. The middlings stream for each sort stage becomes the feed for the next sort stage. After the third sort, the middlings are sent to a stockpile which is the feed source for a particle sorting process. The product from the particle sort process is combined with the mill feed product of the bulk sort process in a coarse material stockpile for feed to the mill.

The mill is a conventional semi-autogenous grinding circuit and flotation circuit creating an interim copper-molybdenum concentrate which is then further processed in a molybdenum flotation circuit to separate copper and molybdenum concentrates. Molybdenum concentrate is transported to the project roaster for production of MoO₃. Copper concentrate is shipped to market.

The tailings storage facility (TSF) will be located at the headwaters of the Clear Creek watershed, in a natural basin formed by the surrounding ridgeline. The TSF will have capacity to store the 1,582M tons (~900M m³) of tailings produced over the 28 year mine life, with an ultimate crest elevation of 6,950 ft. Tailings containment will be provided by the natural topography on the valley sides and an engineered dam that will be buttressed by the Clear Creek waste rock facility (WRF) constructed immediately downstream of the TSF. A starter dam will be constructed to elevation 6300 ft to facilitate early mine production, followed by an additional five raises spread out over the life of the mine.

At this time, no issues were identified that would materially impact the ability to eventually extract mineral resources at the project.

The proposed mine will be located on public land administered by the United States Forest Service (USFS) and private land owned and controlled by ICMC. The permitting path will involve multiple state and federal agencies. Permits likely to be required for the project are presented in Table 20-1. An environmental impact statement will be required at the level of NEPA analysis for mine development, operations, and closure. Reclamation bonds will be required by both federal and state agencies. The reclamation liability for the proposed mine will have to be determined based on third-party costs, and the bond amount will have to be posted using an approved financial instrument

ICMC has initiated consultation with various stakeholders namely: government officials at all levels and local communities in regard to the potential social and community impacts or improvements that may occur as the project progresses. All groups are provided regular updates as the project is proceeding. Local communities and officials have come out in strong support of the project and are actively working with the project on both the Grimes Creek project and future planning (Hilscher et al, 2018).

The mine will be located in an area used for weekend summer dispersed recreation and fall big-game hunting and is well-known in the Boise area. Organized environmental groups such as the Idaho Conservation League and Sierra Club are keeping their constituents informed so as to coordinate opposition to the project. As such, well-funded, organized opposition to mining activities should be anticipated.

At the current time the United States Forest Service (USFS) is working on a Supplemental Red Line Environmental Assessment that will allow the Company to proceed to the next round of drilling and road access construction on the property. The authorization is expected in 2020, and no surface disturbing activities can proceed on the property until the authorization is received. This is the only ongoing permitting activity.

Operating costs were derived from the mining operation based on comparison to similar size operations and the authors’ experience. Modifications were made to account for varying haul profiles that are expected during the mine life. General and administrative costs were similarly based on similar size operations and the authors’ experience.

Processing costs were based on prior work by Ausenco (Ausenco, 2009) and compare well with more recent studies and so continue to apply.

Capital costs for mining were based on evaluation of mining equipment fleet requirements and application of unit equipment prices used in recent studies. Pre-production mining (pre-stripping) was also capitalized for the purpose of economic analysis. Capital costs for the sorting plant were estimated based on its material handling focus (conveyors).

The capital costs for infrastructure and mineral processing from the earlier Ausenco work (Ausenco, 2009) were reviewed and were deemed reasonable in comparison to more recent studies of large porphyry projects though some cost escalation was applied.

Certainty of Initial Assessment

The Initial Assessment is preliminary in nature, that it includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves, and there is no certainty that initial assessment will be realized.

The project as presented and under the current assumptions has the potential to be economic. The after-tax NPV is positive and is robust across a range of sensitivities with respect to capital costs, operating costs and revenue (price). A summary of the project economics is shown in Table 1-7a and b. Two tables are presented one with the inferred resource included one without. Due to the ore sorting and central location of the pit a large portion of the inferred component of the resource is located on the outer edges in the waste blocks. What inferred that is located within the mineable resource has been converted to waste.

Table 1-7a: Summary of Project Economics with Inferred Resources

Table 1-8b: Summary of Project Economics without Inferred Resources

The mineral resource is supported by exploration results, test-work and modelling. As with any mineral resource estimate there is uncertainty inherent in the estimation process. There is a risk that the grades and metallurgical recoveries may be lower than currently modelled. There is also a risk that the interpretation of the results is inaccurate and that less mineralized material is present than is currently modelled.

Additional exploration and test-work will potentially reduce this risk as the project is advanced.

The mining concepts for CuMo are largely proven. The adoption of autonomous equipment does possess some risk in that federal and local regulators may require extensive efforts by proponents to ensure the safety of their operations.

The CuMo open pit is envisioned to be a large, deep pit (up to 3500 ft deep). With this comes the potential geotechnical risk for wall failures. While the author has assumed a relatively flat overall wall angle for the study (37°), there may be risks associated with yet unknown rock mass or structural geology conditions that may require consideration of even flatter slopes in places.

The technology envisioned in this study for bulk sorting, prompt gamma neutron activation analysis (PGNAA), has had limited application to molybdenum-copper deposits. While demonstrated for some low-grade copper deposits, testing is required to verify that molybdenum is measurable at the specific grades envisioned for CuMo.

As with bulk sorting technology, additional testing is required to better estimate the final results expected from particle sorting.

There is a risk that achieved recoveries could be lower than estimated, that throughputs will not be achieved and that costs may be higher than modelled. The process recovery, throughput and cost estimates will be refined as part of the pre-feasibility study.

The planned mine will be a green-fields site and requires construction of mine and process-related infrastructure including the TSF. Access roads in and around the project site will be required. There is a risk that the designs, costs and implementation timelines for the provision of this infrastructure may not be as anticipated, increasing costs and schedule.

At this time, no issues were identified that would materially impact the ability to eventually extract mineral resources at the project. Previous environmental analyses have identified the presence of a rare plant Sacajawea’s bitterroot (Lewisia sacajawa), and potential habitat for Endangered Species Act wildlife, and USFS sensitive species. These potential issues will need to be analyzed and disclosed in NEPA documents and potentially mitigated.

The mine will be located in an area used for weekend summer dispersed recreation and fall big-game hunting and is well-known in the Boise area. Organized environmental groups such as the Idaho Conservation League and Sierra Club are keeping their constituents informed citing issues of potential pollution of the Boise river which supplies drinking water to the city of Boise. As such, well-funded, organized opposition to mining activities should be anticipated.

Under the 1872 Mining Law as amended, ICMC has the legal right to develop the mineral resources on their mining claims. The USFS has a requirement to manage ICMC’s activities in accordance with its mining regulations at 36 CFR 228A and must ensure compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. As defined in law and regulations, the USFS is limited in that it may not deny ICMC’s mining plan of operations provided that the activities proposed are reasonably incident to mining, not needlessly destructive, and comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The USFS does not have the authority to impose unreasonable requirements that would have the effect of denying the statutory right to explore and develop the mineral resource, provided the mining plan of operations otherwise meets the intent of applicable laws and regulations (USFS 2018).

There is a risk that the mining plan of operations would identify and characterize issues that may lengthen the timeline and increase the costs of the permitting the project. Note that the STUDY described in this report does not quantify the timeline and costs for the pre-construction and permitting activities.

Table 20-1 in Section 20.2 summarizes the federal, state, and local authorizations and permits that will be required for mining. No applications for mining authorizations and permits have been filed with federal, state, and local agencies. Reclamation bonds will have to be posted with the state of Idaho and the USFS.

Project Strategy Risk

Overall, the author considers that the likelihood of a major revision to project strategy emerging from the pre-feasibility study to be moderate. Mineral sorting as contemplated in this study is not a mature technology, and there is a risk that the assumptions used may not prove accurate. Elimination of the mineral sorting pre-process from the strategy has the potential to materially reduce the economic proposition of the project.

Commodity Price Risk

There is a risk that commodity prices may not be consistent with assumptions made in this study. In particular, molybdenum, which contributes to the majority of the project value is historically subject to significant price volatility.

Capital Cost Risk

There is a risk that the capital required to build and operate the project may be higher than that forecast in this study. The author recommends that the precision of the estimates be refined at the pre-feasibility study and feasibility study before commitment to project construction is made.

Operating Cost Risk

There is a risk that the operating costs incurred to operate the project may be higher than that forecast in this study. The author notes that variability in the operating cost drivers (productivity, input costs and labor costs) over time is expected. The analysis assumes constant conditions but is best thought of as reflecting an expectation of average costs. The author recommends that the precision of the estimates be refined in the pre-feasibility and feasibility studies before commitment to project construction is made.

Schedule Risk

There is a risk that the schedule to build the project may vary from that assumed in the study. This is an asymmetrical risk, with significantly more downside scope than upside. This risk is exacerbated by the seasonality of the location, with somewhat difficult construction conditions occurring in some winter months. Small delays have the potential to be more significant than, might otherwise be the case, if they push critical path activities into winter months, thereby incurring a much longer delay.

Process Recovery Risk

There is a risk that achieved recoveries could be lower than estimated, reducing the revenue and economic returns of the project. The process recovery estimates will be refined as part of the feasibility study.

Permitting and Pre-construction Schedule Risk

This was not explicitly considered for the purposes of this study in the economic analysis as the analysis is conducted only from the commencement of construction. Nevertheless, the risk of longer-than-anticipated permitting timeline will reduce the project value is considered from “today” forward.

The exploration drilling and thus mineral resource model for CuMo is constrained on the western extents of the deposit. There is potentially an opportunity with increased exploration to expand the resource to the west, thus offering either more process feed within the current envisioned open pit or increasing the size of the open pit to the west.

With increased knowledge of the rock mass and structural geology, through additional geotechnical field programs and investigation, there is potential to steepen the wall angles for CuMo, potentially reducing and/or deferring some mining costs.

Further consideration of high angle conveying solutions in combination with semi-mobile crushing and conveying (IPCC) concepts could highlight opportunities for cost savings at CuMo. Applying IPCC to sort feed, which needs to be crushed either way and is up to 50% of the mined material, poses the greatest opportunity.

The bulk sorting analysis was conducted on drill core that was sampled on a standard 10 ft interval. Thus, heterogeneity could only be assessed down to this scale. With multiple stage sorting and splitting, smaller size packets of material could be measured. As heterogeneity increases with reduced scale, there is potential that better segregation of waste, mill feed and middlings is possible. The opportunity would be for increased waste rejection and ultimately reduced middlings fractions to improve the economics of the project.

Ultimately, the potential for exploitation of the heterogeneity of the deposit may not be firmly quantified by way of studies conducted on exploration-level data. Much higher-resolution sampling and sorting may be possible at an operational scale. This has the potential to enhance project economics, but the quantum of that improvement is difficult to quantify.

The field of mineral-sorting is the subject of significant research and development. There exists an opportunity for this project to exploit improvements in this technology.

Additional metallurgical work to determine optimum grind size (the current assessment is based on the finest grind tested to date), analyze recoveries of the various metals in the proposed unit operations, and analyze the effects of the higher grade coming from the mineral sorters on metal recoveries. This has the potential to improve project economics.

Optimization of reagents to reduce costs and improve metallurgical recoveries has the potential to improve recoveries.

There may be opportunity to economically recover tungsten from the mineralized material.

Further studies may allow for optimization of infrastructure design, costing and schedule. Whilst optimization is worth pursuing, the author views modification to the infrastructure concepts to be unlikely to materially affect the economic proposition at a strategic level for the project.

Real Option Value

In the case of a large, long-life open-pit mine such as is contemplated for the CuMo project, there exists significant optionality that can be leveraged to improve project cashflows and values. The simple sensitivity analysis conducted in Section 22.12 assumes a constant operating strategy, even as assumptions are varied. In practice, management has the option to alter strategy in response to those variations. Downsides can be mitigated, and upsides can be leveraged for greater returns.

It is also expected that the mine would run using a dynamic cut-off policy where sorting strategies and cut-offs, mill-feed cut-offs, stockpiling strategies and mining rates will all be varied in real time to maximize returns as prices and costs vary. The benefits of this strategy are not reflected in the central estimate approach to valuation summarized in this report.

Project Strategy Opportunity

While the probability of a major revision to project strategy can be considered moderate, careful consideration and revision of the strategic decisions should be a feature of studies going forward. In particular, effort should be made to enhance the optionality of the project, particularly where this is a low-cost investment.

Commodity Price Opportunity

There is a risk that commodity prices may not be consistent with assumptions made in this study. Higher prices, both realized and forecast, would lead to re-optimization of the mine and processing plans with a potential to create additional value beyond that shown by the sensitivity analysis summarized in Section 22.11.

Capital Cost Opportunity

Opportunities to reduce or defer capital expenditure may be realized in future studies. Care should be taken when considering the relationship between lower capital opportunities and technical risk to the project.

Operating Cost Opportunity

Operating costs may be lower than forecast for the purposes of this study. Lower costs should feed into both strategic and short-term mine planning, to allow optimization of stockpiling, sorting and mill feed strategies.

Schedule Opportunity

This risk is highly asymmetric. The author considers that the opportunity to execute a significantly shorter construction program is low. The author cautions that optimized schedules with multiple critical or near-critical path activities will contain additional embedded risks.

Process Recovery Opportunity

Further metallurgical test-work will allow for optimization of the process flow sheet and plant design in the pre-feasibility and feasibility studies. Better than planned recoveries are possible.

Pit Slope Angle Opportunity

This is not considered to be a significant opportunity from an economic perspective. Strip ratios are relatively low, and incremental change in waste-movement volumes do not impact the overall project economics significantly.

Exploration work consisting mainly of drilling is required to reach feasibility. It is estimated that a total of 33 additional holes for 71,000 ft plus an additional five geotechnical holes for 12,000 ft on the deposit plus additional 74,800 ft allocated to condemnation drilling of waste dump, mill site and tailings pond areas, making a total of 157,8000 ft of drilling budgeted. This drilling is broken into the following categories:

The shortest time to complete this work will be two seasons using four drill rigs each season.

The author provides these recommendations for the next steps of geotechnical assessment:

The author recommends further study of the application of high angle conveying of sort feed at CuMo.

The author further recommends the continued consideration of autonomous haulage for CuMo, with commensurate refinement of performance parameters and costs.

The author recommends that CuMoCo engage with bulk sorting technology providers to advance testing of penetrative technologies (e.g. PGNAA) for the measurement of molybdenum in lower grade applications.

Additional scanning of the existing core to examine heterogeneity at a finer level than the 10 ft intervals used in the current study is recommended. Further testing of existing particle sorting technologies/machines to look for improvements in throughput is recommended.

Metallurgical aspects to be studied were highlighted in the preliminary metallurgical analysis, some of which require larger samples to finalize the detailed flow sheet and determine how many cleaning stages will be required.

A critical part of the analysis is a grinding-versus-recoverability study, since in the previous study, only two grinding sizes were studied: coarse and fine. The fine grind promised to be more economically favorable despite the increase in costs. Further study with multiple grinding size options is required to determine an optimum grinding system. An intermediate grind for example in the range between 71 to 106 microns P₈₀, would allow single stage SAG milling to be evaluated for reduced comminution energy cost, lower operating and maintenance labor in comminution and dewatering, and easier discard of a coarser tailing product when compared to the present grind P₈₀ of 63 microns. The single stage SAG milling concept also allows for low cost future expansion of the initial lines provided by simply adding a ball mill to each SAG mill line to create about double the tonnage capability, without adding feed bins or conveyors. SAG mills with diameter/length aspect ratios over two are needed to make this work.

Work will consist of collecting and analyzing sufficient large bulk samples to determine the optimum flow sheet for the deposit. This work is expected to be further supported by a variability study to analyze variations within the deposit. Typically, a total of 100 to 150 twenty-kilogram samples will be used for the variability study.

Engineering studies, including TSF design and potential water management and treatment design, including:

At this time, no issues were identified that would materially impact the ability to eventually extract mineral resources at the project. A mining plan of operations and reclamation cost estimate must be prepared to identify locations of the mine, waste rock dumps, roads (haul and access), power and water line corridors from the source to the point of use, mill, tailings storage facility, and other support facilities. Operating plans must be developed in conjunction with the mining plan of operations. ICMC should develop robust reclamation and closure plans for the facilities. ICMC should also begin acquiring any necessary water rights. Stakeholder outreach should continue.

Once the facility locations have been determined, ICMC should coordinate with state and federal agencies to identify the baseline studies that will need to be completed to support the development of an environmental impact statement and initiate those studies.

Previous environmental analyses have identified the presence of a rare plant Sacajawea’s bitterroot (Lewisia sacajawa), and potential habitat for Endangered Species Act wildlife, and USFS sensitive species. These potential issues will need to be analyzed and disclosed in NEPA documents and potentially mitigated.

Organized environmental groups such as the Idaho Conservation League and Sierra Club are keeping their constituents informed so as to coordinate opposition to the project. As such, well-funded, organized opposition to mining activities should be anticipated.

Table 1-8 sets out a summary of work expected to be completed prior to a commitment to construction. The estimated time frame for this work program is three years.

Table 1-9: Budget for additional work

The CuMo project is an early-stage molybdenum-copper exploration project, located approximately 37 miles northeast of Boise, Idaho, USA. CuMoCo holds its interest in the CuMo project through its direct ownership of patented and unpatented mining claims.

This technical report summary (TRS or Report) was commissioned by the registrant, International CuMo Mining Corp. (CuMoCo), for its Copper-Molybdenum-Silver Project (CuMo or Project) In Boise County, Idaho for the purpose of reporting an initial assessment. ICMC is an Idaho company exploring options for the development and restoration of the project area.

This Report is the inaugural TRS developed for the CuMo Project in accordance with United States SEC S-K 1300 regulations. The TRS summarizes a 2020 Preliminary Economic Analysis (PEA) Technical Report (SRK, 2020) that was completed under Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument (NI) 43-101 guidelines and published June , 2020 with the following notable differences:

The Mineral Resource estimates for the Project were examined by the author and determined to be in conformity with Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (CRIRSCO) “International Reporting Template for the public reporting of Exploration Targets, Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” as adopted by the International Council on Mining & Metals November 2019. The mineral resources are reported in in accordance with §§229.1300 through 229.1305 (subpart 229.1300 of Regulation S-K).

The Author, Shaun Dykes is responsible for the preparation of this Technical summary, which is based on the work produced by the following Qualified Persons that produced the original PEA report which is being summarized in this reprot Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: QP responsibilities

This report is based on information collected by the author during his work on the project from 2005 to present, numerous site visits and on additional information provided by CuMoCo throughout the course of the study.

The authors have no reason to doubt the reliability of the information provided by CuMoCo. The authors have not performed verification studies with respect to information provided by CuMoCo other than as described explicitly in this report.

Note: Throughout this report, United States Dollars unless otherwise specifically noted.

Shaun Dykes has been a regular on the project since inception in 2005 and has visited the site on a regular basis. QP’s form the original PEA report who have visited the site include: Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Thomas visited the property from 30 to 31 October 2018, while Mr. Boese visited on only 30 October. All were accompanied by Joey Puccinelli of ICMC. The purpose of the site visit was to observe the mining area as well as project infrastructure, including access, rail, and water supply. Drill core was also inspected to provide context and observations for mining and geotechnical purposes.

Mr. Giroux last visited the site in June 2015, when all appropriate requirements of a current inspection were met for data verification and resource estimation. No drilling related work has been performed on site since that time.

Mr. Starkey, Mr. Winkelmann, and Ms. Sawyer have not visited the site.

The QPs were given full access to relevant data.

This Report is the initial TRS completed for ICMC to maintain compliance with SEC regulations. The resources reported herein are current as of the end of November 2022. The information in the TRS is based upon the “Preliminary Economic Assessment & NI 43 101 Technical Report for the CuMo Project, USA” effective June 4, 2020, and Independent report prepared in compliance with the Canadian National Instrument (NI) 43-101 – Standards for Disclosure of Mineral Projects within Canada. Multi Metals Development Ltd, formerly American Cumo Mining Copr., is listed on the Toronto Venture Stock Exchange (TSXV:MLY)..

The CuMo property is located approximately 37 air miles northeast of the city of Boise, Idaho, USA (Figure 4-1). It is situated in the northern portion of the Grimes Pass area on the USGS 1:62,500 Placerville Quadrangle (15' Series) within T7N and T8N, R5E and R6E, in Boise County, Idaho (Figure 4-2). The Latitude at the approximate center of CuMo property is 44 degrees, 2’N and the Longitude is 115 degrees 47’ 30” W or UTM coordinates of 597,500E, 4,876,000N (NAD 27 CONUS).

The property consists of 126 unpatented and un-surveyed contiguous mining lode claims covering an area of approximately 3,260 acres and 41 fully patented claims covering an area of 739 acres. Most of the claims consist of full-sized, 600 ft by 1500 ft claims (20.66 acres each). However, the total includes 27 fractional claims where the new claims were staked over existing claims. The claims are shown in Figure 4-2 and the claim information is listed in Appendix 1. Unpatented claims have the mineral rights with the surface owned by the federal government. Patented claims are private property and cover both the surface and mineral rights.

In Idaho, staked claims expire annually on September 1. An annual fee of $155/claim must be paid to the BLM prior to Aug 31, 2019 or all claims will expire on Sept 1, 2019. At $155/claim, CuMoCo must make annual payments to the BLM of $28,675 to keep all claims in good standing.

For patented claims, since they are owned outright, taxes are assessed by the county on a yearly basis. Currently the yearly tax bill for the patented claims is approximately $450. It varies as it is dependent upon assessed value and the county tax rate which changes from year to year.

On October 13, 2004, CuMoCo completed an “Option to Purchase Agreement” with CuMo Molybdenum Mining Inc. to purchase eight unpatented mineral claims located in Boise County, Idaho, USA known as “CuMo Molybdenum Property”. As part of the original CuMo and CuMoCo agreement, all claims acquired within five miles of the CuMo 1-8 claims became part of the option deal. Therefore, all the new claims referred to in this report as part of the CuMo Molybdenum Property are automatically subject to the terms outlined in that agreement.

Terms of the agreement are:

These payments are to be credited against a 1.5% net smelter return (NSR) which reduces to 0.5% NSR after cumulative payments of $3,000,000.

On October 6, 2006, Kobex surrendered all rights and interests in the CuMo property to CuMoCo.

CuMoCo has completed all payments since 2006 and the property is in good standing.

February 14, 2017 CuMoCo announced it has purchased 20 claims in the area around the CuMo project from a group of local prospectors. The 20 unpatented mining claims cover an area of approximately 400 acres. The purchase price of 100% ownership the claims was one $250,000 silver unit plus one million shares of CuMoCo.

Note: A silver unit is a seven-year exchange approved debenture that can be converted into the right to buy silver for $5 per ounce from any future production at CuMo. The debenture pays 8.75% interest per annum.

In April 25, 2017, CuMoCo announced that its wholly-owned subsidiary, ICMC, has completed an option to purchase agreement for 36 patented mining claims, covering an area of approximately 640 acres adjacent to the CuMo project. Patented claims contain the surface rights as well as the mineral rights. The consideration payable for the claims is as follows:

Payment of the Option Payments (except for the issuance of the American CuMo shares) may be accelerated at CuMo’s option.

In July 17, 2017, CuMoCo announced that it had signed a mining claims purchase agreement effective as of July 6, 2017 (the “Purchase Agreement”) between CuMoCo and its wholly-owned subsidiary, ICMC, and CuMo Molybdenum Mining Inc., Western Geoscience Inc. and Thomas Evans (collectively, the “Parties”). CuMoCo is to acquire from the Parties a 100% interest, including any Net Smelter Royalties owned by the parties, in the CuMo project which is currently under option, pursuant to an option agreement between CuMoCo and CuMo Molybdenum Mining Inc. dated October 13, 2004 and amended on January 14, 2005 (the “Option Agreement”).

As of the effective date of this report all agreements remain in place as described above.

Source: Giroux et al, 2015

Figure 3-1: CuMo property location map

Source: Giroux et al, 2015 modified 2019

Figure 3-2: Claim location map for the CuMo property

The change since the 2015 report in the outline of the deposit is a result of reconnaissance work performed in 2017 by CuMo field geologists on the recently acquired claims.

The CuMo project will be subject to federal, state of Idaho, and local regulations. Key regulations to which the project will be subject governing exploration and mining design, operations, and reclamation include:

There are currently no known environmental liabilities on the property. The company has a $300,000 reclamation bond on deposit once the permits are re-issued.

It is possible, that with the development of a detailed mining plan of operations and the more detailed investigation of aspects of the property that are associated with that plan, that as-yet unknown environmental liabilities and/or issues may be identified.

At this time, no specific issues have yet been identified that would materially impact the ability to eventually extract mineral resources at the project. That is, any other significant factors and risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the property are not yet known.

However, ICMC should be prepared to address potential issues associated with but not limited to the following aspects:

Exploration on federal lands requires an authorization to conduct exploration except for sampling of rocks and soils by hand and other activities that create no land disturbance. There are three levels of permits reflecting increasing disturbance: