Exhibit 99.46

 

NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE

 

MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE

 

NUSSIR AND ULVERYGGEN PROJECTS, NORWAY

 

Prepared for

 

Blue Moon Metals Inc.

 

by

 

Qualified Person:

Adam Wheeler, B.Sc, M.Sc, C. Eng., Eur Ing., FIMMM

 

Effective Date of Resources:   20th January 2025

Effective Date of Report:           24th January 2025 (as amended and restated on 12 September 2025)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adam Wheeler,

Mining Consultant, C. Eng, Eur Ing,, FIMMM

Cambrose Farm,

Redruth,

Cornwall, TR16 4HT,

England.

 

September 2025

 

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects2

 

QUALIFIED PERSONS CERTIFICATE

Certificate Of Author

Adam Wheeler, Mining Consultant,

Cambrose Farm, Redruth, Cornwall, TR16 4HT, England.

Tel/Fax: (44) 1209-899042; E-mail: adamwheeler@btinternet.com

 

As the author of this “Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects, Norway”, I, A. Wheeler do hereby certify that:

 

1.I am an independent mining consultant, based at Cambrose Farm, Redruth, Cornwall, TR16 4HT, England.

 

2.I hold the following academic qualifications:-

 

  B.Sc. (Mining) Camborne School of Mines 1981
  M.Sc. (Mining Engineering) Queen’s University (Canada) 1982

 

3.I am a registered Chartered Engineer (C. Eng and Eur. Ing) with the Engineering Council (UK). Reg. no. 371572.

 

4.I am a professional fellow (FIMMM) in good standing of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining.

 

5.I have worked as a mining consultant in the minerals industry for over 40 years. I have worked on over 50 different projects involving geological modelling, exploration drillhole layout or resource estimation. These projects have covered 35 different countries, and 25 of them have involved me as an QP for either 43-101 or JORC reports. Twenty of these projects have been related to copper. I have been working on the Nussir project since 2007 and the Ulveryggen project since 2010, involved with exploration drillhole layout, geological modelling and resource estimation.

 

6.I have read NI 43-101 and the technical report, which is the subject of this certificate, has been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101. By reason of my education, experience and professional registration, I fulfil the requirements of a “qualified person” as defined by NI 43-101. My work experience includes 5 years at an underground gold mine, 7 years as a mining engineer in the development and application of mining and geological software, and 30 years as an independent mining consultant, involved with geological modelling, exploration drill hole layout, resource and reserve estimation, evaluation and planning projects for both open pit and underground mining projects.

 

7.I am responsible for the preparation of the technical report titled “Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects, Norway”, and dated January 25th, 2025. I visited the project property on 2/7/2007 – 4/7/2007, 14/6/2010 – 16/6/2010, 22/9/2014 – 24/9/2014 and 14/1/2025 – 16/1/2025. The visits before 2024 were part of my prior involvement with Nussir as an independent contractor, related to previous resource estimation exercises for the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects.

 

8.As of the date hereof, to the best of the my knowledge, information and belief, the technical report, which is the subject of this certificate, contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make such a technical report not misleading.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects3

 

9.I am independent of the Issuer and related companies applying all of the tests of Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

 

10.I have read the National Instrument and Form 43-101F1 (the “Form”) and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with the Instrument and the Form.

 

DATE AND SIGNATURES PAGE

 

Herewith, my report entitled “Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects, Norway”, dated January 24, 2025 (as amended and restated on September 12, 2025).

 

  (signed and sealed) "Adam Wheeler"    
  A. Wheeler,  C.Eng., Eur. Ing. FIMMM   Dated the 12th of September 2025

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects4

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

  Page
QUALIFIED PERSONS CERTIFICATE 2
1 SUMMARY 12

1.1 Overview 12
1.2 Ownership 12
1.3 Geology 12
1.4 Database and Resource Estimation 13
1.5 Exploration Status 14
1.6 Mineral Resource Estimation 15
1.7 Results and Interpretations 16
1.7.1 Exploration Targets – Nussir deposit 16
1.7.2 Exploration Targets – Ulveryggen deposit 17
1.7.3 Double Mineralised Intersections – Nussir deposit 17
1.7.4 Inferred Resource Conversion – Nussir deposit 17
1.7.5 Inferred Resource Conversion – Ulveryggen deposit 17
1.8 Conclusions 18
1.9 Recommendations 18
1.9.1 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security 18
1.9.2 Data Verification 19
1.9.3 Further Studies 19
1.9.4 Exploration Program and Budget 20

2 INTRODUCTION 21

2.1 Author 21
2.2 Terms of Reference 21
2.3 Units and Currency 22

3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS 22

3.1 Ownership 22
3.2 Taxes 22

4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION 23

4.1 Location 23
4.2 Licenses 24
4.3 Fees and Royalties 27
4.4 Environmental Liabilities 27

5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE and PHYSIOGRAPHY 28

5.1 Accessibility 28
5.2 Site Description 28
5.3 Climate 28
5.4 Local Resources 29
5.5 Infrastructure 29
5.6 Power Supply 30
5.7 Water Supply 30

6 HISTORY 31

6.1 Nussir 31
6.1.1 Initial Exploration 31
6.1.2 Geophysical surveys 31
6.2 Ulveryggen 36
6.2.1 Initial Exploration and Historical Open Pit Mining 36
6.2.2 Geophysical survey 36
6.2.3 Structural Mapping and Field XRF Analyses 39
6.2.4 Stream Sediment Sampling 42
6.3 Historical Mineral Resources 42

7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALISATION 44

7.1 Nussir 44
7.1.1 Regional Geology- Nussir 44
7.1.2 Local Geology and Mineralisation - Nussir 46
7.2 Ulveryggen 47
7.2.1 Regional Geology - Ulveryggen 47
7.2.2 Local Geology and Mineralisation - Ulveryggen 47

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects5

 

8 DEPOSIT TYPE 52

8.1 Background 52
8.2 Nussir 52
8.3 Ulveryggen 52

9 EXPLORATION 53
10 DRILLING 53

10.1 Nussir 53
10.2 Ulveryggen 61

11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS AND SECURITY 68

11.1 Nussir 68
11.1.1 1984 to 1996 68
11.1.2 Terra Control/Nussir ASA 2006 to 2019 68
11.1.3 Quality Assurance/ Quality Control 70
11.1.4 Density Measurements 89
11.1.5 Summary 89
11.2 Ulveryggen 89
11.2.1 Sample Preparation and Analysis 89
11.2.2 Quality Assurance/ Quality Control 91
11.3 Core and Sample Storage 98
11.4 Overview 98

12 DATA VERIFICATION 99

12.1 Site Visits 99
12.2 Drillhole Data 102
12.2.1 Collar Data 102
12.2.2 Drillhole Core 105
12.3 Database 105
12.4 Overview 108

13 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING 109

13.1 Overview 109
13.2 Variability and Hardness Testing 112
13.3 Locked Cycle Testing 113
13.4 Material Sorting Studies 114

14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE 115

14.1 Nussir 115
14.1.1   Data Collation 115
14.1.2   Interpretation 117
14.1.3   Exploratory Data Analysis 121
14.1.4   Compositing 124
14.1.5   Geostatistics 125
14.1.6   Volumetric Modelling 128
14.1.7   Density 132
14.1.8   Grade Estimation 134
14.1.9   Resource Classification 137
14.1.10 Model Validation 142
14.1.11 Resource Evaluation 144
14.2 Ulveryggen 149
14.2.1   Data Collation 149
14.2.2   Interpretation 150
14.2.3   Exploratory Data Processing 153
14.2.4   Compositing 156
14.2.5   Geostatistics 158
14.2.6   Volumetric Modelling 159
14.2.7   Grade Estimation 159
14.2.8   Density 162
14.2.9   Resource Classification 163
14.2.10 Model Validation 165
14.2.11 Resource Evaluation 167

15 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES 169
16 MINING METHODS 169
17 RECOVERY METHODS 169

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects6

 

18 PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE 169
19 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS 169
20 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING AND SOCIAL IMPACT 169
21 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS 169
22 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 169
23 ADJACENT PROPERTIES 170
24 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION 172
25 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS 172

25.1  Risks and Uncertainties 172

25.1.1 Drillholes 172
25.1.2 Density Measurements 172
25.1.3 Rejects/Pulps Inventory 172
25.1.4 Historic QA/QC Procedures 173
25.1.5 Fault Zones - Nussir 173
25.1.6 Structural Modelling - Nussir 173

25.2 Results and Interpretations 174

25.2.1 Exploration Targets - Nussir 174
25.2.2 Exploration Targets - Ulveryggen 174
25.2.3 Double Mineralised Intersections – Nussir deposit 175
25.2.4 Inferred Resource Conversion – Nussir deposit 175

25.3 Conclusions 176

26 RECOMMENDATIONS 178

26.1 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security 178
26.2 Data Verification 179
26.3 Further Studies 179
26.4 Exploration Program and Budget 180

27 REFERENCES 181

 

APPENDICES  
     
A Geostatistical Plots - Nussir  

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects7

 

LIST OF TABLES
   
  Page
   
Table 1-1. Nussir Resource Estimation Summary 15
Table 1-2. Ulveryggen Resource Estimation Summary 16
Table 1-3. Proposed Exploration Budget 20
Table 4-1. Summary of License Areas - Nussir 25
Table 4-2. Summary of License Areas – Ulveryggen 25
Table 10-1. Summary of Collar Positioning Systems – Nussir 54
Table 10-2. Nussir Diamond Drilling Summary 55
Table 10-3. Nussir Drillhole Collars, 1985-2011 56
Table 10-4. Nussir Drillhole Collars, 2013-2019 57
Table 10-5. Nussir – Main Drillhole intersections, 1985-2011 58
Table 10-6. Nussir – Main Drillhole intersections, 2013-2019 59
Table 10-7. Ulveryggen Drilling Summary 61
Table 10-8. Ulveryggen Drillhole Collars – Underground Drill Holes 62
Table 10-9. Ulveryggen Drillhole Collars – Surface Drill Holes 63
Table 10-10. Summary of Main Intersections- Ulveryggen (1 of 2) 64
Table 10-11. Summary of Main Intersections- Ulveryggen (2 of 2) 65
Table 11-1. Summary of Reassay Cu Analysis - 2008 70
Table 11-2. Summary of 2011 Nussir Cu Check Assay Analysis 72
Table 11-3. Summary of 2011 ALS Internal Duplicates 73
Table 11-4. Summary of Internal Coarse Duplicates - 2013 73
Table 11-5. External Duplicates’ Summary – 2013 75
Table 11-6. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2014 and 2015 76
Table 11-7. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2017 79
Table 11-8. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017 79
Table 11-9. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017 80
Table 11-10. Standards’ Results Summary and Global Accuracy - 2017 82
Table 11-11. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2019 84
Table 11-12. Summary of Sample Standards 89
Table 11-13. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2014 and 2015 91
Table 11-14. Summary of Standards Used for Ulveryggen 91
Table 11-15. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2017 94
Table 11-16. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017 95
Table 11-17. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017 95
Table 11-18. Standards’ Results Summary and Global Accuracy - 2017 97
Table 11-19. Summary of Core Inventories 98
Table 11-20. Summary of Analytical Laboratories 98
Table 12-1. Summary of Horizontal Displacements - Azimuth Differences – Nussir 102
Table 12-2. Summary of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR - Nussir 103
Table 12-3. Summary of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR – Ulveryggen 104
Table 13-1. Summary of Nussir Composite Metallurgical Samples 109
Table 13-2. Assay Breakdown of Nussir Composite Metallurgical Samples 110
Table 13-3. Variability Samples Head Assays 112
Table 13-4. Nussir Deposit Grindability Statistics 112
Table 13-5. Locked Cycle and Open Circuit Test Results Summary 114
Table 14-1. Holes and Cu Sample Data Summary - Nussir 116

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects8

 

Table 14-2. Sample Statistics – Nussir 121
Table 14-3. Summary of Top-Cuts Applied – Nussir 121
Table 14-4. Composite Statistics – Nussir 124
Table 14-5. Model Variogram Parameters – Nussir 127
Table 14-6. Model Prototype Definitions - Nussir 131
Table 14-7. Statistical Summary of Density Measurements - Nussir 132
Table 14-8. Statistical Summary of Composite Densities - Nussir 132
Table 14-9. Grade Estimation Parameters – Nussir 134
Table 14-10. Conditional Simulation Results for Nussir 140
Table 14-11. Resource Classification Criteria - Nussir 140
Table 14-12. Global Comparison of Grades – Nussir 142
Table 14-13. MSO Parameters – Nussir 144
Table 14-14. Average Resource True Thickness 144
Table 14-15. Cut-Off Grade Calculation 145
Table 14-16. Copper-Equivalent Calculations 145
Table 14-17. Grade-Tonnage Table – Measured and Indicated Resources Only 146
Table 14-18. Constrained Resource Evaluation Statement – Nussir deposit 147
Table 14-19. Sample Data Summary - Ulveryggen 149
Table 14-20. Summary of Selected Samples - Ulveryggen 153
Table 14-21. Cu Sample Statistics - Ulveryggen 154
Table 14-22. Decile Analysis of Selected Samples >0.3% Cu, - Ulveryggen 155
Table 14-23. Summary of 2.5m Composites - Ulveryggen 156
Table 14-24. Composite Statistics – Ulveryggen 156
Table 14-25. Model Variogram Parameters - Ulveryggen 158
Table 14-26. Model Prototype - Ulveryggen 159
Table 14-27. Grade Estimation Parameters - Ulveryggen 161
Table 14-28. Summary of Density Measurements - Ulveryggen 162
Table 14-29. Resource Classification System - Ulveryggen 163
Table 14-30. Global Comparison of Cu Grades - Ulveryggen 165
Table 14-31. MSO Parameters - Ulveryggen 167
Table 14-32. Resource Evaluation Summary – Ulveryggen 168
Table 14-33. Grade-Tonnage Table - Indicated Resources Only- Ulveryggen 168
Table 25-25-1. Nussir Resource Estimation Summary 177
Table 25-25-2. Ulveryggen Resource Estimation Summary 178
Table 26-1. Proposed Budget 180

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects9

 

LIST OF FIGURES
  Page
   
Figure 4-1. Area Map of West Finnmark 23
Figure 4-2. Plan of License Areas 26
Figure 6-1. Geophysical Signature of the Nussir West Area 33
Figure 6-2. Structural Interpretation of Nussir West Area 34
Figure 6-3. Profile Plot of Inverse of Apparent Resistivity, Hz 34133 35
Figure 6-4. Flight Lines of Geophysical Survey Lines, South of Repparfjord 37
Figure 6-5. Plan of Magnetic Total Field Results 38
Figure 6-6. Plan of Structural Observation Localities 39
Figure 6-7. View to NE of Hovedfelt Northeastern Face 40
Figure 6-8. Cu Analyses Along lower NE wall at Hovedfelt 41
Figure 6-9. Identified Exploration Targets 42
Figure 7-1. Nussir Geological Map 45
Figure 7-2. John Open Pit, Looking SW 48
Figure 7-3. Erik Open Pit Looking N 49
Figure 7-4. Hovedfelt Open pit, NE part, looking NE 49
Figure 7-5. NW-dipping Mineralisation in Erik Open Pit 50
Figure 7-6. Plan of Deposit Area and Main Tectonic Features 51
Figure 7-7. Section of Simplified Tectonic Framework 51
Figure 10-1. Plan of Drill Holes – Nussir 60
Figure 10-2. Example Drill Hole Cross-Sections – Nussir 60
Figure 10-3. Plan of Drillholes and Mineralised Zones - Ulveryggen 66
Figure 10-4. 3D View of Drillholes Looking NE - Ulveryggen 66
Figure 10-5. Plan of Drill Holes 67
Figure 10-6. Example Drill Hole Sections 67
Figure 11-1. Nussir - Reassayed Grade Comparison 70
Figure 11-2. Check Assay Scatterplot – 2009 Campaign 71
Figure 11-3. ALS Internal Duplicate Assays – 2011 Drilling Campaign 72
Figure 11-4. Internal Coarse Cu Duplicates - 2013 73
Figure 11-5. Blanks’ Results – 2013 74
Figure 11-6. External Duplicates – 2013 74
Figure 11-7. Standards’ Results - 2013 75
Figure 11-8. 2015 Field Duplicates – Precision Analysis 77
Figure 11-9. Pulp Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015 77
Figure 11-10. External Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015 78
Figure 11-11. Blanks’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015 78
Figure 11-12. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017 79
Figure 11-13. Precision Analysis – Coarse Duplicates - 2017 80
Figure 11-14. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017 80
Figure 11-15. Standard Analyses’ Graphs – Cu% - 2017 81
Figure 11-16. Coarse Blanks’ Assays - 2017 83
Figure 11-17. Field Duplicates’ Results -2019 85
Figure 11-18. Coarse Duplicates’ Results -2019 85
Figure 11-19. Pulp Duplicates’ Results -2019 86
Figure 11-20. Coarse Blanks’ Results – 2019 86
Figure 11-21. Standard 910-11 Results 2017-2019 87
Figure 11-22. Standard 310-1 Results 2017-2019 87

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects10

 

Figure 11-23. External Check Sample Results – 2019 88
Figure 11-24. 2015 Field Duplicates – Precision Analysis 92
Figure 11-25. Pulp Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015 92
Figure 11-26. External Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015 93
Figure 11-27. Blanks’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015 93
Figure 11-28. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017 94
Figure 11-29. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017 95
Figure 11-30. Standard Analyses’ Graphs – Cu% - 2017 96
Figure 11-31. Coarse Blanks’ Assays - 2017 97
Figure 12-1. Looking West Along Topography at Nussir 100
Figure 12-2. Looking North at Drilling Rig Set-Up – Nussir 100
Figure 12-3. South-East Wall of Holvedfelt Pit, Ulveryggen 100
Figure 12-4. Looking Eastwards into Old Pit Workings, Ulveryggen 101
Figure 12-5. Skaidi Core Shack 101
Figure 12-6. Histograms of Collars’ LiDAR Errors - Nussir 103
Figure 12-7. Histograms of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR - Nussir 103
Figure 12-8. Histograms of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR - Ulveryggen 104
Figure 12-9. Plan of LiDAR Differences with Collar Elevation - Nussir 104
Figure 12-10. 3D View of Holes, Showing Holes of Core Review 105
Figure 12-11. Hole NUS-DD-90-009 106
Figure 12-12. Hole NUS-DD-90-017 106
Figure 12-13. Hole NUS-DD-90-021 106
Figure 12-14. Hole NUS-DD-14-001 107
Figure 12-15. Hole NUS-DD-15-030 107
Figure 12-16. Hole ULV-DD-17-06 108
Figure 13-1. Nussir Long Section - Locations of Composite Metallurgical Samples 111
Figure 13-2. Nussir Long Section – Drillholes Used for Variability Metallurgical Samples 111
Figure 13-3. Locked Cycle Test Flowsheet 113
Figure 14-1. Nussir Horizontal Section at 0mRL, with Lithological Interpretation 117
Figure 14-2. Nussir Example Sections - Lithological Interpretation 118
Figure 14-3. Plan View of Drillholes and Interpretation Limits - Nussir 119
Figure 14-4. 3D View of Nussir Mineralized Zones – East Side 120
Figure 14-5. 3D View of Nussir Mineralized Zones – West Side 120
Figure 14-6. Log-Probability Plots of Mineralized Zone Samples - Nussir 122
Figure 14-7. Coefficient of Variation Analyses’ Graphs - Nussir 123
Figure 14-8. Sample Length Histogram - Nussir 124
Figure 14-9. Histogram of Composite True Thicknesses - Nussir 124
Figure 14-10. Statistical Cu Plots, Composites - Nussir 125
Figure 14-11. Histograms/ Log-Probability Plots- - Composites Au, Ag. Pd, Pt 126
Figure 14-12. Experimental and Model Variograms - Nussir 127
Figure 14-13. Plan of Evaluation Regions - Nussir 128
Figure 14-14. Plan View of Mineralized Wireframe Model - Nussir 129
Figure 14-15. W-E Long Section of Wireframe Model - Nussir 129
Figure 14-16. 3D View of Wireframe Model – View from SW - Nussir 130
Figure 14-17. 3D View of Model Prototype Structures– View from SW - Nussir 130
Figure 14-18. Grade vs Density Graph – Mineralized Zone Measurements - Nussir 132
Figure 14-19. Density Histograms by Rock Type - Nussir 133
Figure 14-20. Density Histograms by Lithology - Nussir 133
Figure 14-21. 3D View of Density Measurement Locations - Nussir 133
Figure 14-22. 3D View of Estimated Cu Grades - Nussir 134

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects11

 

Figure 14-23. Long Section of Modelled Cu Grades - Nussir 135
Figure 14-24. Long Section of Resource Classification - Nussir 136
Figure 14-25. Normal Score Variogram for Cu - Nussir 139
Figure 14-26. Example Histogram of Simulated Average Cu Grades 139
Figure 14-27. Resource Classification – Plan- Nussir 141
Figure 14-28. Resource Classification – 3D View from NE, With Drillholes – Nussir 141
Figure 14-29. Swath Plots - Nussir 143
Figure 14-30. Constrained Resource Evaluation Long Section – Nussir (looking north) 148
Figure 14-31. Long Section - Resource Model Partitions – Nussir (looking north) 148
Figure 14-32. Example Interpretation of Ulveryggen Mineralized Zones – Section 20 150
Figure 14-33. Plan View of Interpreted Mineralized Zones – Ulveryggen 151
Figure 14-34. Long Section of Mineralized Zones - Ulveryggen 151
Figure 14-35. 3D View of Mineralized Zones, Looking North-East - Ulveryggen 152
Figure 14-36. Log Probability Plot of All Selected Samples - Ulveryggen 154
Figure 14-37. Log Probability Plot of +0.3%Cu Composites - Ulveryggen 157
Figure 14-38. Cu Variogram Models - Ulveryggen 158
Figure 14-39. Example Vertical Section of Block Model Structure- Ulveryggen 160
Figure 14-40. Example Horizontal Section of Block Model Structure – Ulveryggen 160
Figure 14-41. Histogram of Densities – Mineralised Samples 2017 - Ulveryggen 162
Figure 14-42. Example Block Model Section, Showing Resource Classes – Ulveryggen 164
Figure 14-43. Cu Swath Plot - Ulveryggen 166
Figure 14-44. 3D Plot of MSO Stopes Shapes – Ulveryggen 167
Figure 23-1. Claims in the Repparfjord Area 171

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects12

 

 

1SUMMARY

 

1.1Overview

 

Mr. Adam Wheeler, (C. Eng, Eur Ing.) was retained by Blue Moon Metals Inc. (“Blue Moon”), a TSX Venture Exchange listed (TSX-V.: MOON) company focused on the exploration and development of deposits in Norway and the USA, to prepare an independent Technical Report on the mineral resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects located in Finnmark, northern Norway. Both are potential underground mining projects. The deposits are approximately 3 km apart. This Technical Report conforms to National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101). The Author has visited the Project several times, most recently from January 14 to 16, 2025.

 

The Nussir deposit has been evaluated over several different drilling campaigns from 2007 up to 2019. The resource estimate described here reflects all the drilling up to 2019, as well as development of the project since then. The Nussir sample database reflects the most recent drilling results available, as well as checks on old and reanalysed data. Geological Interpretation work was done using the Leapfrog modelling system, version 4.3.1 in 2018 and version 5.0.3 in 2019.

 

The Ulveryggen deposit, previously referred to as Repparfjord, was mined by a series of small open pits during the 1970s. The deposit was evaluated again in 2010, based on available drillhole, channel and trench data. Further drilling was then done between 2014 and 2017, leading to the resource estimation described in this report.

 

For both deposits, resource estimation work was done using the Datamine mining software system (Studio RM).

 

1.2Ownership

 

Nussir ASA owns 25 extraction licences and 4 exploration licences covering the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposit areas within the Kvalsund district. There are no protected areas (national park, nature reserve, landscape conservation) in the area.

 

Blue Moon entered into a definitive agreement with Nussir ASA, a private Norwegian Company, on December 19, 2024, to which Blue Moon has agreed to acquire 99.5% of the issued and outstanding shares of Nussir. The consideration is being satisfied through the issuance of common shares of Blue Moon. Closing of such transaction is subject to TSX-V approval, and therefore acceptance of this NI 43-101 technical report.

 

1.3Geology

 

Nussir is considered to be a stratabound sediment hosted copper deposit. The Nussir Cu-mineralized zone is an almost continuous layer over a strike length of 9 km, which is dolomite-dominated in the west and mostly calcite-dominated sandstone-limestone, along with medium dark schist with chalcocite/bornite dissemination in the east. This mineralized zone is within the Gorohatjohca sedimentary formation, which consists of claystone and is 200- 400m thick in the west, thinning out to a few meters wide in the east. The Gorohatjohca overlies the Stangvatn conglomerate formation and underlies the Nussir volcanic formation.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects13

 

The Ulveryggen prospect area is comprised of folded Precambrian sedimentary rocks, that are exposed in the Caledonian mountain belt of western Finnmark. Sediments in the general prospect area are typically described as sandstones and quartzites, trending to what have been previously described as conglomeratic beds in the immediate area of the old Ulveryggen Mine. The Ulveryggen sedimentary units are fault-bounded to the south by older greenstones and to the north by younger sedimentary units.

 

The main Ulveryggen deposit area is dominated by two sub-parallel ENE-trending faults, dipping steeply towards each other. Known mineralization occurs in several pods along a 2-kilometer trend between the two main faults and along a fan of smaller faults located in between. It is considered that the mineralisation is most likely of shear zone origin, rather than sedimentary, primarily in the form of chalcopyrite, bornite, and lesser chalcocite and secondary malachite. The thickness of mineralization appears to diminish with depth as the two main faults coalesce. However, there is potential for more, heretofore undiscovered, copper mineralization along strike of the main system, both to the east and west.

 

1.4Database and Resource Estimation

 

For both deposits, the sample databases were updated by Norwegian geologists, which has culminated in Excel databases, data from which were exported to Datamine as separate .csv files for collar coordinates, drillhole survey data, assay results and lithology logs. After import of these data sets into Datamine, the different assay, collars and survey data files were combined into a single file of three-dimensional samples.

 

For the Nussir deposit, complete sets of data from 211 diamond drillholes have now been collated. Of these, 172 diamond drillholes have intersected mineralisation. In addition, data from 10 lines of surface channel samples have been used. These data were then used to develop a final three-dimensional model of sectional interpretations, based on a cut-off of broadly 0.4%Cu. The interpreted zones have in general been extrapolated a maximum distance of approximately 100m, both laterally and down-dip, from the outer-most drillhole intersections. The drilling grid spacing used was generally 200-250m, so the extrapolation distance is generally half of the typical grid spacing.

 

These Nussir solid wireframe models were separated into three main groups, according to orientation, and were then used as the basis to create resource block models of the deposit, with blocks rotated so as to be aligned with the zones’ general orientations. Cu, Ag, Au, Pd and Pt grades were estimated into the resource block models using ordinary kriging. Geostatistical parameters were also used in the assignment of resource categories. These final block models were used as the basis for resource evaluation.

 

For Ulveryggen, complete sets of data from 134 diamond drillholes have now been collated. Of these, 113 diamond drillholes have intersected mineralisation. In addition, data from 51 surface trenches have been used, along with 8 underground channel samples. These data were then used to develop a final three-dimensional model of sectional interpretations, based on a cut-off of broadly 0.3%Cu.

 

The interpreted Ulveryggen zones have in general been extrapolated a maximum distance of approximately 50m down-dip, from the outer-most drillhole intersections, and 30m laterally beyond the ultimate drilled sections. The drilling grid spacing generally used is 30-45m. Cu grades were estimated into the resource block model using ordinary kriging, and the final block models was used as the basis for resource evaluation.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects14

 

1.5Exploration Status

 

The Nussir and Ulveryggen projects are at the Mineral Resource development stage. Drilling was carried out between 1985 and 2019, during which operators completed 345 core drill holes for a total of 69,440 m. Other exploration work has included surficial geochemistry sampling, ground and airborne geophysical studies, geological mapping, surface chip and grab sampling (including trenching), and regional lithogeochemical rock sampling for rocktype fingerprinting. In addition to the two deposits that have been identified, there are a number of mineralized occurrences both around the deposits and regionally that are either untested or supported by limited drilling. This means that additional infill and exploration drilling is warranted to more fully test favourable stratigraphy both around the deposits and regionally.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects15

 

1.6Mineral Resource Estimation

 

This Mineral Resource Estimation (“MRE”) work was carried out and prepared in compliance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101, and the mineral resources in this estimate were calculated using the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council May, 2014.

 

Conforming with guidelines for “reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction”, constrained evaluations were completed using a Mineable Shape Optimiser (MSO) to generate wireframes.

 

The updated mineral resource estimate of the Nussir deposit is summarised in Table 1-1, related to a cut-off grade of 0.3%Cu and a minimum width of 2.0 m.

 

Table 1-1. Nussir Resource Estimation Summary

Effective Date: 20th January, 2025

 

Category Tonnes Cu Ag Au Cu Eq Cu Metal Ag Metal Au Metal
  Mt % g/t g/t % Kt Koz Koz
Measured 2.69 1.08 12.8 0.18 1.31 29 1,103 16
Indicated 26.03 1.01 12.3 0.11 1.19 263 10,288 92
Meas+Ind 28.72 1.02 12.3 0.12 1.20 292 11,391 108
                 
Inferred 31.99 1.01 14.6 0.14 1.23 324 14,972 143

 

Notes:

 

1.CIM definitions were followed for MRE.
2.A minimum mining width of 2.0 m was applied in making the MRE constraint wireframes. These wireframes were generated using a preliminary MSO.
3.Density values for Nussir were estimated from density sample values or assigned default average values where insufficient samples occur nearby.
4.MRE constraint wireframes were generated for a cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu, related to potential underground mining.
5.Metal prices assumed for this MRE were US$4.20 lb Cu, US$27.00/Oz Ag and US$2,200oz Au, which represent reasonable long-term consensus metal pricing.
6.Metallurgy recovery assumptions were 96% Cu, 80% Ag and 93% Au, which stem from SGS metallurgical testwork completed in 2022.
7.The cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu was derived from the price and recovery values above, as well as a smelter payability of 97.3% and an assumed total operating cost $26.20/t of ore.
8.Rounding may result in apparent summation differences between tonnes, grades and metal content; not considered material.
9.Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects16

 

The updated resource estimate of the Ulveryggen deposit is summarised in Table 1-2 .

 

Table 1-2. Ulveryggen Resource Estimation Summary

Effective Date: 20th January, 2025

 

Resource Tonnes Cu Cu Metal
Category Mt % Kt
Indicated 4.05 0.65 26.3
       
Inferred 3.70 0.68 25.0

 

Notes:

 

1.CIM definitions were followed for MRE.
2.A minimum mining width of 2.0 m was applied in making the MRE constraint wireframes. These wireframes were generated using a preliminary MSO.
3.A global density value was assigned for Ulveryggen, based on analysis of density measurements.
4.MRE constraint wireframes generated for a cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu, related to potential underground mining.
5.The assumed metal price assumed for this MRE was 4.20 $/lb Cu, which represents a reasonable long-term value.
6.The assumed metallurgical recovery was 96% Cu, which stems from SGS metallurgical testwork completed in 2022.
7.The cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu was derived from the price and recovery values above, as well as a smelter payability of 97.3% and an assumed total operating cost $26.20/t of ore.
8.Rounding may result in apparent summation of differences between tonnes, grades and metal content; not considered material.
9.Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

 

1.7Results and Interpretations

 

There are several opportunities to improve the current results, that should be investigated further as part of the ongoing development of the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects.

 

1.7.1Exploration Targets – Nussir deposit

 

The Nussir deposit is open to the west and to depth. In particular, the current limit of Inferred category resources excludes the influence of thee deep drillhole intersections, because they are excessively distant to the grid of holes above. The exploration target potential was derived by modelling the identified mineralization. The volume of the modelled areas determines the potential tonnage statement in the exploration target. The grade range given in the exploration target is determined with consideration to the drill results within the modelled exploration target area and consideration of the geological setting in an established mineral resource estimate area. The potential tonnages and grades are therefore conceptual in nature and are based on previous drill results that defined the approximate length, thickness, depth and grade of the portion of the mineral resource estimate. There has been insufficient exploration and data collection to define a current mineral resource for the exploration target and the Issuer cautions that there is a risk that further exploration will not result in the delineation of a mineral resource. The exploration target around these deeper intersections therefore represents a tonnage between 8.5 Mt and 16.5 Mt, and a Cu grade between 0.7 and 1.3% Cu, between 9 and 17g/t Ag, and 0.1 to 0.15 g/t Au.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects17

 

There are also a number of mineralized targets occur both downdip and along strike of the mineralized exploration target that has been defined. This mineral potential has not been properly tested by drilling. Additionally, a number of mineral targets currently outside of the resource area of the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits are supported by geological mapping and limited drilling. This means that additional infill and exploration drilling is warranted to more fully test favourable stratigraphy both regionally and directly at Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits.

 

1.7.2Exploration Targets – Ulveryggen deposit

 

The Ulveryggen deposit is open to depth, and based on geochemical sampling and geophysics, there are drilling targets both along strike and down-dip.

 

1.7.3Double Mineralised Intersections -– Nussir deposit

 

There are some instances at Nussir, mainly in the more folded west end, of single drillholes picking up two mineralised intersections. This could be due to reverse faulting, and when drilled sufficiently in the future, could lead to an improved interpretation with more mineralised material that is currently modelled. These potentially repeated strata are only known to occur over 2.5 of the 10 km strike length of known mineralization. Limited drilling has been done to date to fully test the mineral potential of this possible extension. Given the presence of a mineral resource adjacent to this parallel zone of favourable strata, it means additional drilling is warranted, but there is no guarantee that additional drilling will result in the delineation of a mineral resource in these areas.

 

1.7.4Inferred Resource Conversion -– Nussir deposit

 

The Nussir deposit is open to depth over much of its strike length, as well as westwards. If the project progresses and the proposed underground development commences, this could allow much closer and offset access for drilling of deeper zones. This would provide an opportunity to significantly extend Indicated resources to depth and westwards. Additional drilling should be designed in order to enable a significant proportion of the deposit to be reclassified into a higher category of confidence, such as Indicated category, as well as provide a more accurate interrelation and structural geology and mineralised zones. Though it is cautioned that additional drilling is not a guarantee for upgrading the resource category.

 

1.7.5Inferred Resource Conversion – Ulveryggen deposit

 

There are numerous areas currently modelled at the Ulveryggen deposit, where the current drilling density does not support an Indicated resource categorisation. Additional drilling should be designed in order toto enable a significant proportion of the deposit to be reclassified into a higher category of confidence, such as Indicated category, as well as provide a more accurate interrelation and structural geology and mineralised zones. Though it is cautioned that additional drilling is not a guarantee for upgrading the resource category.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects18

 

1.8Conclusions

 

The updated mineral resource estimate as of January 20th, 2025, has these conclusions from the Author and are as follows:

 

·      The geological setting and character of the sedimentary-hosted copper mineralization identified to date on the Project, and specifically at the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits, are of sufficient enough merit to justify additional exploration expenditures.

 

·      The majority of drill holes completed to date were targeting the mineral resource totalling 345 core drill holes for 69,440 metres.

 

·      Drilling has identified extensive, conformable, sedimentary strata that are well mineralized that remain open for growth. Geological mapping on surface and drilling both along strike and downdip of the mineral resource have identified the same favourable host rocks for copper mineralization indicating mineral potential warranting additional drilling to more fully test these favourable strata both regionally and at the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits.

 

·      The Author has reviewed the procedures for drilling, sampling, sample preparation and analysis, and is of the opinion that they are appropriate for the deposit style and mineralization.

 

·      The Author has reviewed the quality control results (QA/QC) and did not find any material issues, so the Author is of the opinion that the databases for the mineral resource are of sufficient quality to estimate mineral resources.

 

·      Mineral resources were estimated using a 0.30% copper cutoff value for potential underground extraction that will need to be studied further in the future.

 

·      Measured mineral resources for the Nussir deposit are 2.69 Mt grading 1.08% copper, 12.8 g/t silver, and 0.11 g/t gold. The Indicated mineral resources are 26.03 Mt grading 1.01% copper, 12.3 g/t silver and 0.11 g/t gold. The Inferred mineral resources are 31.99 Mt grading 1.01% copper, 14.6 g/t silver and 0.14 g/t gold.

 

·      For the Ulveryggen deposit, the Indicated mineral resources are 4.05 Mt grading 0.65% copper and the Inferred mineral resources are 3.70 Mt grading 0.68% copper.

 

·      There is a parallel zone of mineralization that is believed to be a potential fault repetition, tested only by limited drilling over a 2.5 km stretch of the 10 km strike extent of the favourable strata. A number of additional mineral occurrences occur outside of the deposits, such as the Western zone, that require addition exploration beyond infill and exploration drilling directly around the mineral resource wireframes.

 

·      There is general support for the project at the exploration stage of mineral resource development from the affected communities in the area, as those communities will benefit from local employment.

 

1.9Recommendations

 

1.9.1Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

 

·      Develop a rigorous quality control and quality assurance (“QAQC”) policy for standards, blanks and duplicate sample when drilling, that is monitored on a batch by batch basis when data is received from the accredited laboratory.

 

·      Consider the use of prep- and or reject duplicate samples to enhance the QAQC.

 

·      Select certified reference material (CRM) that are more aligned to the grades of the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits for copper, gold and silver; being mindful that if geochemically testing for platinum and or palladium, it might require a different CRM.

 

·      Using an umpire or secondary independent laboratory, and remitting approximately 10 to 15% of the total samples, and select analysis methodologies that are similar to the primary laboratory. This will provide future assurances that the range of grades seen in the analytical certificates are valid and respected.

 

·      Consider centralizing all pulp and reject storage.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects19

 

1.9.2Data Verification

 

·      Finish the drill collar validations done in 2019, referencing the Devisight system from Devico for the X and Y coordinates, and then validating elevation (or Z) data between the surveys for each of the drill collar locations against the LiDAR survey. Having a valid elevation data strengthens the respect of the mineral resource modelling.

 

·      Consider a more rigorous check analysis program, if the analytical pulps are available from prior drilling program results. At a minimum, select approximately 100 to 200 pulps from each round of drilling that would be re-run at both the primary and secondary laboratory.

 

·      Consider moving point and vector data from drilling into a proper database management system such as MX Deposit. This includes but is not limited to drill collar information, lithological data, structural data, sample data, and analytical results. The advantage of such a cloud-based database management system is that it negates expensive software purchasing and it can be linked to major 3D modelling programs such as Seequent’s Leapfrog Geo and other programs.

 

1.9.3Further Studies

 

·      An optimization and or trade-off study is recommended to assess a conventional tailings facility approach for any future engineering studies

 

·      Consider building a Leapfrog Geo model of all lithological units and structures that is maintained and updated regularly when new surficial mapping and or drilling is completed. This will help better guide future studies and mineral resource estimation processes.

 

·      Consider adding RMR to the geomechanical (rock mechanics) data collection in addition to the RQD work already part of the core logging process. This methodology is typically done for deposits that potentially could be extracted through an underground.

 

·      Consider adding point load testing (“PLT”) to the geomechanical data collection process in the coreshack. The addition of this process will provide rock quality and strength information that is expected to be valuable when assessing ground stability in future engineering studies. It will also provide a large dataset that can be used in conjunction with any analytical program carried out at a rock mechanics laboratory

 

·      Consider a regular analytical process at a rock mechanics laboratory to backstop geomechanical data collection. Testing could include UCS, BTS, and Triaxial measurements. If a PLT is collecting

 

·      Consider taking a coreshack measurement of specific gravity for each sample marked for collection or add an analytical pulp or reject measurement at the primary laboratory. The addition of a larger number of specific gravity measurements is expected to greatly enhance the estimation of the tonnes on a block by block basis in the mineral resource model, as currently the estimations are using average values for lithologies.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects20

 

1.9.4Exploration Program and Budget

 

For further development of the project, the Author recommends a work program at the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects, that includes the preparation of the development of an exploration decline (including logistics and support), exploration drilling and optimization studies including engineering. A summary breakdown of this work program is presented below along with associated estimated costs expected to cost C$13.0 million (Table 1-3).

 

Table 1-3. Proposed Exploration Budget

 

Item (C$000)
Underground access (decline) preparation, exploration logistics and support 4,000
Exploration – drilling 25,000 to 30,000 m 6,000
Optimization studies including engineering studies 3,000
Total 13,000

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects21

 

2INTRODUCTION

 

2.1Author

 

This report was prepared by qualified person (QP) Adam Wheeler (C. Eng, Eur Ing, Fellow, Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining) – herein referred to as the Author. Mr. Wheeler is an independent mining consultant, who was contracted by Blue Moon in order to estimate an updated mineral resource, which has an effective date of 20th January, 2025. The Author’s involvement with Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects started in 2007, noting a summary of the Author’s site visits and personal inspections are shown below:

 

 

Dates Duration Work Completed
2/7/2007 – 4/7/2007 3 days. Inspected whole Nussir deposit and project area, and review of available data.
14/6/2010 – 16/6/2010 3 days Surface and underground inspections at Ulveryggen.
22/9/2014 – 24/9/2014 3 days Nussir site visit during drilling campaign, inspection of core, sampling and QA/QC procedures
03/12/2024 1 day Nussir and Ulveryggen core review ay NGU core storage facilities, Løkken.
14/1/2025 – 16/1/2025 3 days Ulveryggen site visit, as well as Nussir/Ulveryggen core review in Skaidi.

 

2.2Terms of Reference

 

This independent Technical Report was commissioned by the Issuer, Blue Moon Metals Inc., in connection with its acquisition of Nussir ASA, and completed by the Author, an independent mining consultant.

 

Blue Moon has agreed to acquire a 99.5% interest in Nussir ASA and the Nussir project, pursuant to a share purchase agreement dated December 19, 2024, as further described in news releases dated December 19, 2024 and November 17, 2024. Nussir ASA is a private Norwegian company, and its main asset is the Nussir project in northern Norway.

 

The Author was retained previously by Nussir ASA to provide an independent Technical Report on the Mineral Resources at Nussir, as at December 31st, 2019, and for the Mineral Resources at Ulveryggen, as at January 31st, 2018. The mineral resource estimated presented herein has used resource block models generated from these periods, but the evaluation itself has been updated.

 

Blue Moon retained the Author for the current transaction to provide an independent Technical Report on the combined Mineral Resources for Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects that meets the provisions of CIM - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects. The purpose of this current report is to provide an independent Technical Report in conformance with the standards required by NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1. The estimate of mineral resources contained in this report conforms to the CIM Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve definitions (May 2014) referred to in NI 43-101.

 

Based on the Property visits and review of the available literature and data, the Author takes responsibility for the information herein.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects22

 

This Report is a compilation of proprietary and publicly available information. In support of the technical sections of this Report, the Author has independently reviewed reports, data, and information derived from work completed by Nussir ASA and relevant geological publications, as listed in Section 27. These were used to verify background geological information regarding the regional and local geological setting and mineral deposit potential of the Property. The Author has deemed these reports, data, and information to be valid contributions, to the best of his knowledge. In addition to site visits, Adam Wheeler reviewed available literature and documented results concerning the project and held discussions with technical personnel of Blue Moon.

 

Based on the Property visits and review of the available literature and data, the Author takes responsibility for the information herein.

 

2.3Units and Currency

 

All measurement units used in this report are metric, and currency is expressed in US Dollars, unless stated otherwise.

 

3RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS

 

For this report, the Author has relied on information related to:

 

3.1Ownership

 

The Author has worked on the Nussir project since 2007 and so is familiar with the relevant license areas but has not independently reviewed the ownership of the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects, or any underlying property agreements, mineral tenure, surface rights, or royalties. For the Nussir project, the extent and nature of the Title to the mineral lands has been investigated and confirmed by a 3rd party legal expert, Simonsen Vogt Wiig AS, written by Mona Soyland, in a report dated December 19, 2024. This 3rd party title opinion has confirmed the Author’s view with respect to the validity of the mineral title for tenure, but the Author is not qualified to express a legal opinion in respect to property titles, current ownership, and other related legal matters, associated with the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects. It is further described in Section 4.2 of this report.

 

3.2Taxes

 

The Author has relied on Blue Moon for guidance on applicable taxes, royalties, and other government levies or interests, applicable to revenue or income from the Project. This information was provided by an internal document on January 22nd, 2025, from Blue Moon’s legal advisors, Simonsen Vogtwiig, written by Mona Soyland. The Author is not qualified to express an opinion regarding taxation in respect to the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects. This information has been further described in Section 4.3 of this report. However, as this report is focussed on resource estimates only, with no economic analysis, this tax information does not affect the resource estimation results but have been presented to give a full disclosure of these economic parameters.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects23

 

4PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

 

4.1Location

 

The Nussir deposit is located about 1,5 km north of the Øyen Industrial area and 1.5 km south of the Markoppnes Industrial area, in Repparfjord, Kvalsund, Hammerfest Municipality, in the western part of Finnmark county, northern Norway. The Ulveryggen deposit is located approximately 3 km south of Nussir. It is envisaged that an industrial area with mineral processing plant and related facilities could be located either at the established industrial area at Øyen, subject to a deal with the current operator, or at the Markoppnes industrial area. The zoned area for mining and industrial activity in the Repparfjord area is about 5000 acres.

 

For exploration activities, access is year-round for the underground, however, for surface exploration, only the legislated window of May 1 to June 15 each year is unavailable. This means that all work that is planned and budgeted can be undertaken on tenure for the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects.

 

Figure 4-1. Area Map of West Finnmark

[Map compiled by Promin AS]

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects24

 

4.2Licenses

 

The main license areas held by Nussir ASA, are shown in Figure 4-2 and Figure 3-2, and are summarised in Table 4-1 for Nussir and in Table 4-2 for Ulveryggen. These areas all have valid extraction status and are held by Nussir ASA. These extraction licences areas do not expire as the operating licence on top of these is valid and are held by Nussir ASA. Nussir applied for an operating license for the area covered by the 25 extraction licences, and the operating licence was awarded in 2019. In 2024 it applied for extension of the operating licence for further 3 years according to the Minerals Act of Norway. Extension was granted by the Mining Directorate of Norway in 2024 and then objected by a third parties. The Mining Directorate upheld its decision and then sent the objections to be finally decided by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries and a decision is expected within Q1 2025. As long as the objection regarding the extension is under processing, the permit remains valid. Other than the fees described in section 4.3, there are no other obligations that must be met to retain the permit.

 

Nussir ASA, a Norwegian public limited liability company, holds various mineral extraction and exploration permits necessary for its mining operations. According to the title and legal opinion provided by Simonsen Vogt Wiig AS, Nussir ASA is duly incorporated and in good standing under Norwegian law, with no ongoing bankruptcy proceedings as of December 19th, 2024, and has valid title to all licences listed in Tables 4-1 and 4-2. The company does not own or lease any real property, meaning it must enter into an agreement with the public landowner Finnmark Estate for mining activities. Nussir ASA is given access by the state to the land covered by the extraction permits which allows Nussir to access the surface rights both for the Nussir and Ulveryggen properties, and to carry out the required exploration and development activities. In addition, Nussir ASA needs to submit application to the Municipality for use of vehicles for such activities, typically once a year. Nussir ASA will need to reach an agreement to acquire and/or lease additional industrial area to construct a full mine and milling operation. Two options exist at the Markoppnes or the Oyen industrial areas next to the project. Both are being evaluated by Nussir ASA, with a further decision to come in due course, but at this time Nussir ASA is in good legal standing with all of its licenses and access arrangements with the different governing entities for the current stage of project.

 

The third-party,legal, title opinion confirms that Nussir ASA holds a 100% interest in all its registered mining permits, which remain in good standing. These include an operating license, extraction permits named for copper, gold, palladium, platinum, and silver (but will in fact also include all other state-owned minerals (i.e metals with a specific gravity of 5 grams/cm3 or higher) within the license areas) and 4 exploration permits. The company’s operating license, initially issued in 2019, was extended until 2027 by the Norwegian Directorate of Mining, although this decision has been appealed and is currently under review by the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Fisheries. If the extension is overturned, a new application process could take up to two years. The opinion also notes that the permits are not subject to any registered security interests and that no legal or regulatory issues outside Norway have been identified that would affect Nussir ASA’s ability to hold these rights.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects25

 

Table 4-1. Summary of License Areas - Nussir

 

License Code NAME AREA
    m2
G.UTV 0001/2006-FB Nussir 1 291,172
G.UTV 0002/2006-FB Nussir 2 292,251
G.UTV 0003/2006-FB Nussir 3 299,109
G.UTV 0004/2006-FB Nussir 4 298,875
G.UTV 0005/2006-FB Nussir 5 296,036
G.UTV 0006/2006-FB Nussir 6 174,865
G.UTV 0007/2006-FB Nussir 7 287,282
G.UTV 0008/2006-FB Nussir 8 205,676
G.UTV 0009/2006-FB Nussir 9 242,878
G.UTV 0010/2006-FB Nussir 10 255,072
G.UTV 0011/2006-FB Nussir 11 199,900
G.UTV 0012/2006-FB Nussir 12 215,893
G.UTV 0001-1/2015 Nussir Deep 1 644,623
G.UTV 0002-1/2015 Nussir Deep 2 288,715
G.UTV 0003-1/2015 Nussir Deep 3 433,512
G.UTV 0004-1/2015 Nussir Deep 4 269,706
G.UTV 0005-1/2015 Nussir Deep 5 283,553
G.UTV 0006-1/2015 Nussir Deep 6 399,766
G.UTV 0007-1/2015 Nussir Deep 7 806,227
G.UTV 0008-1/2015 Nussir Deep 8 233,762
G.UTV 0009-1/2015 Nussir Deep 9 207,267
G.UTV 0010-1/2015 Nussir Deep 10 184,362
G.UTV 0011-1/2015 Nussir Deep 11 369,850

 

Table 4-2. Summary of License Areas – Ulveryggen

 

License Code NAME AREA
    m2
G.UTV 001-1/2013 Ulveryggen 1 991,269
G.UTV 002-1/2013 Ulveryggen 2 988,113

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects26

 

Figure 4-2. Plan of License Areas

[Source: Norwegian Directorate of Mining]

 

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects27

 

4.3Fees and Royalties

 

Under the Norwegian Minerals Act, metals with a specific gravity of 5 g/cm³ or higher, including copper, silver, and gold, are classified as state-owned minerals. These metals, which are of primary economic interest at both Nussir and Ulveryggen, require compensation to the state through payment of yearly fees in order to uphold the extraction and exploration permits. These fees are calculated based on the size of the areas in question and must be paid within 15th January each year. Nussir ASA has made payment of NOK 107,000 in total for all extraction and exploration permits for 2025.

 

Further, all extraction of state-owned minerals requires payment of a 0.5% net smelter royalty of the sales value of the extracted minerals to the landowner, who is Finnmarkseiendommen (FeFo). In addition, an increased landowner royalty of 0.25% net smelter royalty is mandated for projects in Finnmark as is the case for Nussir ASA, which is also paid to Finnmarkseiendommen (FeFo).

 

Blue Moon must therefore pay a 0.75% net smelter royalty on all extracted minerals. This royalty will be due for payment by March 31 of the following year. There are no back-in rights, payments or other encumbrances to which both Nussir and Ulveryggen permits are subject to.

 

4.4Environmental Liabilities

 

The Nussir and Ulveryggen projects have negligible environmental liability, since any impact from historical mining operations, notably at Ulveryggen deposit, rest with the State, meaning Norwegian Government.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects28

 

5ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE and PHYSIOGRAPHY

 

5.1Accessibility

 

The Øyen area and nearby Markoppnes, which are on the coast just to the north-west of each deposit, are situated along National Highway 94 (R94). The R94 highway continues to the north-west, up to the city of Hammerfest with its major oil installations. The E6 major road is just a few kilometres away at the site of Skaidi; this road connects the previous mining area to the biggest city in Finnmark, Alta, to the south. Alta is approximately 70km south-west of the deposit areas and has an international airport.

 

The Repparfjord is ice-free during winter, making sea transport of supplies and export of concentrate directly to and from the site possible year-round.

 

5.2Site Description

 

The topography overlying and around the area of the Nussir deposit is an unspoiled Arctic environment, extending westwards from the port area at Øyen. The area immediately overlying Nussir is relatively flat for most of the first 8 km from the coast, passing various small shallow post-glacial lakes, at an elevation generally of approximately 200 m. Almost immediately north of the Nussir outcrop, hill rise up steeply, up to a height of approximately 500 m. Approximately 800m south-east of the Nussir deposit the land again rises up to 400-500 m. The most westward part of the Nussir deposit passes under the rising hills. The vegetation of the projects is predominantly described as alpine and rare, but variable. It ranges from areas of birch trees close to the fjord to more like alpine tundra, at altitude, with very sparse and limited vegetation. Near bog ecosystems, dwarf birch trees are present.

 

The Ulveryggen deposit is approximately 3km south-east from the Nussir deposit and 2km south-west from the coastline. There are four old open pits at the Ulveryggen deposit, which were mined from 1972 to 1979. There is some surface infrastructure which connects to a 2.5 km 36 m2 (6x6 meter) historical underground haulage tunnel, which is in good condition, as well as existing 4.5 km of surface haul roads from the Øyen industrial area all the way up to the open pits at 450 meter above sea level. Next to the tunnel portal there is an existing workshop building for trucks and other vehicles. The current strike of the Ulveryggen deposit is much smaller than Nussir, extending approximately 2 km from west to east.

 

5.3Climate

 

The climate and landscape of the Kvalsund Municipality is typical of Arctic and Sub-Arctic Zones. There is midnight sun in the summers and 24 hours without sun in the winter.

 

Precipitation is typically over 1 mm for 10-15 days/month throughout the year, and over 10 mm for 1-2 days/month throughout the year. Wind speeds are typically over 10 m/s (Force 5) from December through to April, and otherwise much lower for the other months.

 

Winter temperatures are generally below freezing for November through till April, typically around -5o C. The lowest temperatures can be down to around -10o C. Summer temperatures are typically around 7-10o C and get up to 16o C.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects29

 

5.4Local Resources

 

Kvalsund was a 1,846 km2 municipality on the western coast of Finnmark, which largely consists of pristine and rugged landscapes. It is approximately 20 km from the western boundary of the projects; noting the roads are of good quality and provide for sufficient transport. Most of that area was on the mainland, but 125 km2 of it was on the island Kvaløya and 85 km2 on the island Seiland. The municipality had about 1,000 inhabitants, many of which live in the Kvalsund village, the then administrative centre. Some live in the Sami village of Kokelv, in the inner part of the Revsbotn Fjord. The population of Kvalsund has been in decline since 1950, during the period 1950-2004 by 43%, the reason being a sharp decline in employment in the fisheries. Kvalsund Municipality was merged with the larger Hammerfest Municipality on January 1st, 2020.

 

Businesses in Kvalsund are characterized by small enterprises of various trades. Primary industries have recently become less important for employment. Tourism, transport, aquaculture, construction and service industries have become the more prominent industries. On the other hand, 37% of the working population have jobs outside the Kvalsund area, mainly in Hammerfest.

 

5.5Infrastructure

 

The industrial area and former processing plant are currently controlled by Repparfjord Eiendom. Access to the eastern portion of the Nussir deposit is facilitated by its proximity to the fjord which provides deep water harbour, with all year access. There is an opportunity to place any new construction within the regulated industrial area at Øyen, including but not limited to a processing plant, roads, and the portal to the mine.

 

A processing plant was built to serve the previous historical mining activities of the Ulveryggen deposit with an open pit in the 1970s, transporting ore via an underground tunnel and ore pass to an ore processing plant at the Øyen industrial area. The industrial area today is partially in use to serve a local quarry, which also utilises the harbour’s loading facilities.

 

The quay was built in 1971 and can serve vessels up to 30,000 tonnes. A Ship Loader with a loading capacity of 1,000 to 1,500 tph is installed and in use. The quay is operated and maintained by Repparfjord Eiendom.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects30

 

5.6Power Supply

 

The municipality has two hydroelectric powerplants in Porsaelva on the east side of the Vargsundet (a total of 65 GWh of average annual production), and there is currently stranded green electric hydropower oversupply in Northern Norway, leading to relatively low electricity prices and therefore power available for any future development of industrial activities.

 

5.7Water Supply

 

There are considerable freshwater resources in the area. Repparfjord Eiendom owns the existing water feed system including a dam and an 8” pipeline and has secured the rights from the owner, FEFO, to use the water. A study was initiated to assess secure the water supply in the future. One of the suggestions has been to strengthen the existing dam at level 170 m. Taking water from the Geresjohka River has also been considered. Improving the road to the dam would also be necessary for future developments.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects31

 

6HISTORY

 

6.1Nussir

 

6.1.1Initial Exploration

 

Copper ore deposits in the Repparfjord area were discovered at the turn of the last century. In 1903, the Swedish company Nordiska Grufaktiebolag began to explore the ore field. Sydvaranger AS, a large Norwegian mining company with an iron ore mine in Finnmark, was prospecting west of Ulveryggen and found some Cu-enriched sites, which were later identified to be the Nussir orebody. AS Prospektering was established from Sydvaranger as an independent company, and worked on building their geological database, including the Nussir Project.

 

In 2000, Terra Holding bought AS Prospektering and took over the Nussir deposit rights. Further analyses on the deposit showed promising results, and plans were made to further study and develop the project. In December 2004, Terra Holding created Nussir AS to focus on developing the Nussir deposit.

 

6.1.2Geophysical surveys

 

Ground IP and Resistivity

 

Three ground geophysical surveys campaigns have been done by the Norwegian Geological Survey (NGU) using surveying equipment comprising a Terrameter ABEM-LS unit and multi-electrode cables. Cables configured with 2m electrode interval were used for the five 160m long survey lines in 2007, 10m electrode interval were used for the four long survey lines in 2011 and an electrode interval of 5m were used for the nine 4-700m long survey lines in the 2013 campaign. Depth range depended on profile length, being roughly 160m for the long 2011 profiles and 60 m for the 2013 profiles. Most profiles were oriented normal to structures, as shown in Figure 6-1.

 

Induced polarisation and resistivity were measured in the ground above drillhole intersections for correlation purposes and in target exploration areas. Results indicated strong correlations between copper mineralisation, strong IP anomalies and low resistivity anomalies, as exemplified in Figure 6-2 (Dalsegg. E. et.al. 2013). Other mineralisation suffers from a low signal-to-noise ratio. Large parts of the regions are characterized by "negative" in phase data, typical for regions with high susceptibility and/or high resistivity. All collected data have a significant higher quality and resolution than earlier airborne data collected by the NGU in the same area in the 1970s.

 

A GPS system from Seatex (SEAPOS 100E) was used for helicopter positioning. This system has an accuracy of ±5 m. Moreover, a Bendix/King radar-altimeter was mounted on the helicopter. Its accuracy is 5 % of the measured altitude. The time sampling of the GPS was 1 second.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects32

 

It was important to interpret all the geophysical data in order to understand the overall occurrence of the mineralised zones. Progressing from the (eastern) Nussir I mineralised body, detailed field observations allowed the establishment of its potential Nussir II continuation towards west. Figure 6-1 shows its magnetic and radiometric signatures, with a red line highlighting a possible thrust discontinuity (Pharaoh et al.,1983). The vertical derivative of the total magnetic field (Figure 6-1a) shows that the Nussir greenstones to the east of the red line are characterised by two very prominent, parallel high anomalies. A third, weaker and less continuous anomaly parallels these two anomalies further to the north. These features are the most prominent elements of the magnetic signature in the greenstones of the Nussir Mountain. They are folded about a NE-SW trending axis and can be readily traced eastward, where they strike ENE-WSW. The same fold geometry is shown by the anomalies generated by the Saltvatn Group lithologies, south of the yellow line. The Nussir mineralisation is folded by this structure, which generated local thickening and duplication of the deposit. It is obvious from Figure 6-1 that these high anomalies do not continue simply to the west of the red line, where a single, yet extremely irregular and laterally stepped magnetic anomaly has instead been observed. The radiometric dataset is less conclusive with regard to the detailed internal architecture of the greenstone bodies exposed to the east and west of the discontinuity, but on the other hand, highlights significant compositional similarities between the two greenstone bodies, expressed by a similar total count signature (Figure 6-1b) and, above all, the ternary radiometric information of Figure 6-1c. It needs to be mentioned that only the radioactive concentrations of the uppermost 1-2 m are detected by gamma ray spectrometry and, therefore, the radiometric signature reflects only the surface geology.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects33

 

Figure 6-1. Geophysical Signature of the Nussir West Area

[Source: NGU]

Geological information is drawn on top of:

a)       The vertical gradient of the magnetic total field.

b) The radiometric total count.

c) The ternary radiometry.

 

The red line traces possible thrust discontinuity (Pharaoh et al., 1983). The yellow line shows the boundary between the Nussir (to the north) and Saltvatn Groups (to the south).

 

 

  

The current interpretation of the local structural framework is shown in Figure 6-2. White lines are used to trace the main anomalies within the greenstones. These interpretations are supported by the results from structural investigations (Viola, G. et al 2008): the Skinnfjellet greenstone body is interpreted as being folded by a Fn+1 antiform, with an undulating axial trace trending generally SW-NE. The fold nose has been traced, however, not by following the curved map pattern of the dolomites, but instead by joining the high magnetic anomalies of the underlying greenstones, which are the likely source of the magnetic signature from underneath a presumably very thin dolomite occurrence. The south-eastern limb of the antiform is easily identified and corresponds to the top-to-the-NW sheared contact between dolomites and greenstones and the Dypelv conglomerates.

 

The conglomerates contain also early Fn folds, which are the oldest structural feature recognised by Nussir within the Repparfjord Window (see Sandstad et al., 2007). Later Fn+2 shortening generated the prominent folds that refold Fn+1 and Fn folds. Fn+2 are the folds that caused the current folded pattern of the Nussir and Saltvatn Group lithologies in the Nussir West area.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects34

 

Figure 6-2. Structural Interpretation of Nussir West Area.

[Source: NGU]

[Interpretation superimposed on the vertical gradient of the total magnetic field]

 

 

 

Key to the understanding of a possible existence of a south-westward continuation of Nussir I, into the postulated Nussir II towards the west, was the geological and structural evolution in the Nussir West area. The currently preferred interpretation, i.e. the Nussir Group greenstones occupying the hanging wall of a thrust with top-to-the-SE transport direction, calls for a possible continuation of Nussir I below this thrust plane on the south-eastern side of Skinnfjellet. The dip of the thrust plane is, however, an important factor. Although there is a lack of direct field constraints on the geometry of the structure, it can be argued that the dip of this thrust is probably steep, as indicated by the abrupt termination of the magnetic anomalies of the highly magnetic Djupelv Formation conglomerate. If the conglomerate continued at shallow depth beneath the greenstones of Steinfjellet, then the magnetic signature of this formation should be encountered as deeply seated magnetic anomalies, which is not the case, thus, suggesting a sharp truncation by the thrust plane.

 

Detailed studies of the highest frequency of apparent resistivity, as shown in Figure 6-3, give a clear indication of an anomaly which fits with the mapped Nussir mineralisation in the eastern part. In this part the geophysical profiles are perpendicular to the mineralisation. In the western part the outline of the mineralisation is swinging north, and the geophysical profiles are parallel. In this area the geophysical anomalies are not easy to interpret.

 

The geophysical study show that lakes and strong faults also give the same anomaly as the mineralised zone, and it is not easy to distinguish the three. There are a lot of lakes and faults in the area.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects35

 

Figure 6-3. Profile Plot of Inverse of Apparent Resistivity, Hz 34133.

[Source: NGU]

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects36

 

6.2Ulveryggen

 

6.2.1Initial Exploration and Historical Open Pit Mining

 

The Repparfjord deposit was identified around 1900. The first trenches and shafts were opened in 1903 by the Swedish company “Nordiska Grufaktiebolaget”. In 1905, the company was granted a mining permit.

 

In 1955, 2,358 m of drilling was carried out by the Canadian company “Invex Corporation Ltd”. In 1963, a Norwegian company acquired the rights to the deposit. In the 1960s, the Norwegian company “AS National Industri” drilled around 10,000 m. Based on the geological work from this period, the deposit was estimated as 10 million ton averaging 0.72% Cu.

 

“Folldal Verk AS” acquired the rights to the deposit in 1970, and at the same time construction of mining and flotation facilities began. 2 years later in May 1972 the test production started, and full open pit production later the same year.

 

Mine development included 700 m of crosscuts, shafts and about 1,700 m of trenches, however, the grade of ore was found to be too low to allow for a profitable operation at that time. The Ulveryggen ore was mined and processed by Folldal Verk AS from 1972 until 1979.

 

The Repparfjord deposit produced 2 Mt of waste rock and 3 Mt of ore averaging 0.66% Cu from four small open pits. The deposit was opened by 4 open pits each 100-400 m long, 30-120 m wide and with 2-5 benches of 10 m height. For wintertime transport, a 2,500 m long haulage tunnel was driven 200 m under the open pit level. Ore was dumped through an ore pass down to the tunnel from where trucks hauled the ore to an ore pass leading to and feeding the primary crusher. An underground conveyor took the primary crushed ore to further crushing, milling and separation in the nearby processing plant.

 

The deposit outcrops at around 425 meter above sea level, and due the climatic conditions the crushing and processing facilities were placed at sea level around 4 km from the deposit. The ore was crushed and milled in 4 operations down to 80% under 0.074 mm in size. From the crude ore, 50,903 tons of concentrate with an average content of 35.5% Cu were processed. The copper mill recovery was 91.3% on average.

 

Since the closure of the mine, one of the pits has been used for disposal of cleaned drilling cuttings from the offshore oil activities. The filling is cement stabilized.

 

In 2011, Nussir ASA purchased the rights to the old Ulveryggen mine with all its existing facilities and access to complement the Nussir Project.

 

6.2.2Geophysical survey

 

In October 2007 a helicopter-borne geophysical survey was completed around Ulveryggen. Measurements taken included magnetic, frequency-domain EM, spectral gamma ray radiometry data. These measurements were a small part (~40 km2) of a larger survey carried out south of Vargsundet.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects37

 

 

During acquisition the crystal for the radiometric measurements was mounted directly at the bottom of the helicopter, whereas the magnetometer and the EM-transmitter and receiver coils were mounted in a bird hanging 30 m below the helicopter. The part of the survey around the Ulveryggen comprised 101 lines with a line spacing of 100 m. The average helicopter altitude was 65 m. These flight lines are shown in Figure 6-4.

 

All collected data had a significant higher quality and resolution than earlier airborne data collected by the NGU in the same area in the seventieths. Maps were generated of magnetic field data, resistivity data and processed radiometric data for potassium, uranium and thorium ground concentrations.

 

Figure 6-4. Flight Lines of Geophysical Survey Lines, South of Repparfjord 

[Source: NGU]

 

 

 

This survey showed that the delineation of EM and magnetic anomalies are related to overall district-scale structures. An example plan of the magnetic total field results are shown in Figure 6-5.

  

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects38

 

Figure 6-5. Plan of Magnetic Total Field Results 

[Source: NGU]

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects39

 

6.2.3Structural Mapping and Field XRF Analyses

 

Reconnaissance structural geological mapping and field XRF-analyses were carried out in the Ulveryggen area in August 2007. The preliminary conclusions from this work suggest a structural control of at least part of the mineralisation.

 

The plan in Figure 6-6 shows the localities of structural observations and the location of example XRF-profiles.

 

Figure 6-6. Plan of Structural Observation Localities

 

  

 

Observations at Hovedfelt suggest a relatively constant dip direction of the bedding to the NE. There appears to be a large antiform to the south of the studies area, with Ulveryggen being located on it north-western limb. At Hovedfelt and Vestfelt there is a significant brittle/ductile shear zone, seemingly associated with the high copper values within the meta-sediments. The shear zone in the Hovedfelt pit is shown in Figure 6-7. This shows a 35 m wide shear zone. The stereonet plot shows the dextral reverse kinematics of a number of sub-vertical striated fractures in the shear zone.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects40

 

Figure 6-7. View to NE of Hovedfelt Northeastern Face

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects41

 

XRF analyses were carried out by using a Thermo Scientific NITON XLp Analyzer. A total of 179 analyses were made, including 133 analyses along seven profiles in three of the open pits at Ulveryggen, 32 analysis from the Roar prospect, which is located 2 km SW of the mining area, and some test anaylises of various mineralised boulders. Examples of these analyses are depicted in Figure 6-8. The analyses were mostly carried out along across-strike profiles in NE facing walls within the open pits, three profiles in the 'Hovedfelt' and 'Vestfelt', and a final profile in the NE-wall of the northeasternmost Erik pit. The analyses commonly show strong variation along each profile, but there are also example of rather homogeneous values.

 

Figure 6-8. Cu Analyses Along lower NE wall at Hovedfelt

 

 

 

The intimate spatial association of the locally very high Cu values and sheared volumes of the Ulveryggen Formation suggests a structural control on at least part of the mineralisation. The brittle/ductile shear zones are generally characterized by complex internal architectures, with irregular distribution of highly sheared and practically undeformed domains, separated by irregular fracture networks.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects42

 

6.2.4Stream Sediment Sampling

 

Target areas in the Repparfjord District were identified, based on interpretation of geophysics, geochemistry, known geology and the stream sediment grades, as shown in Figure 6-9. Other targets exist in presumed sub-parallel structural zones.

 

Figure 6-9. Identified Exploration Targets

 

 

 

6.3Historical Mineral Resources

 

There have been several historical mineral resources for the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects, which are summarized in this section. Blue Moon is not treating the historical estimates as current mineral resources or mineral reserves.

 

The Author of this report has not done sufficient work to classify any of the historical estimates discussed in this section as current mineral reserves or mineral resources. The Author has referred to these estimates as "historical estimates" and the reader is cautioned not to treat them, or any part of them, as current mineral resources. The historical estimates summarized below are included simply to provide the reader with a complete history of the Property. The Author of this report has reviewed the information in this section, as well as that within the cited references, and have determined that it is suitable for disclosure.

 

All stakeholders are cautioned that none are considered current and therefore should not rely on them due to being superseded by this report.

 

In 2012, the Author was commissioned by Nussir ASA for a mineral resource estimate that incorporated drilling from 1985 to 2011 (17,761 m in 90 core drill holes). The mineral resource estimate report was completed, titled “Nussir Report Estimation Updated May 2012” (Wheeler, 2012) and it is historical in nature and should not be relied upon. Subsequently in 2013, the Author was re-engaged for a mineral resource estimate update to include an additional 3,222 metres of drilling from 21 core drill holes. A report titled, “Nussir Report Estimation Updated March 2014” was completed (Wheeler, 2013), The report is considered historical in nature and should not be relied upon.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects43

 

In April 2016, Nussir ASA commissioned a PFS for the Nussir project. For the PFS, an updated mineral resource estimate report was completed, titled “Nussir Report Estimation Updated October 2016” that incorporated additional drilling results from 67 core drill holes totalling 19,880 metres. Both the PFS and the mineral resource are historical in nature and should not be relied upon.

 

The Author was commissioned by Nussir ASA in 2018 to update the mineral resource estimate to incorporate an additional 7,947 metres of drilling in 20 core drill holes. A report titled “Nussir Report Estimation Updated January 2018” was completed (Wheeler, 2018). This mineral resource is historical in nature, and it should not be relied upon.

 

In 2019, Nussir ASA commissioned a DFS for the Nussir project. The DFS, titled, “Nussir Feasibility Study 2023”, was supported by a mineral resource estimate that incorporated a further 3,912 metres of additional drilling in 13 core drill holes. Both the DFS and the mineral resource are historical in nature and should not be relied upon.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects44

 

7GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALISATION

 

7.1Nussir

 

7.1.1Regional Geology- Nussir

 

The Nussir project area is situated within the Repparfjord-Komagfjord (Pharaoh et al. 1983) Precambrian tectonic window which was uplifted and exposed due to erosion of the overlying Caledonian nappes. The first detailed bedrock mapping of the region was carried out by Reitan (1963). Revised mapping of the northern part was done in the 1970’s by Pharaoh et al (1983). Later, more detailed mapping of the area was conducted by Nilsen & Nilsson (1996). Geochemical studies of the metavolcanic rocks were performed by Jensen (1996).

 

The bedrock of the window consists predominantly of metavolcanic and metasedimentary rock, as shown in Figure 7-1. The rocks are intruded by mafic, ultramafic and felsic intrusive rocks. Although geochronological constraints are generally scarce, the meta-supracrustal rocks are assumed to be primarily of Early Proterozoic age, even though the lowermost stratigraphic sequences might represent Archaean rocks, as suggested by the comparison to correlative sequences in inner Finnmark. The oldest metavolcanic unit within the Kautokeino Greenstone Belt has revealed an Archaean Age (~2780 Ma, A. Solli pers. comm. 2008). The Paleoproterozoic rocks are overlain by thin sequences of Neoproterozoic sediments. The basement rocks are overthrust by allochthonous rocks of the Caledonian Nappe Complex and have undergone multiphase deformation during the Svecokarelian and Caledonian orogenies.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects45

 

Figure 7-1. Nussir Geological Map 

[NGU description of stratigraphic units]

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects46

 

7.1.2Local Geology and Mineralisation - Nussir

 

The Nussir deposit mineralisation is hosted by yellowish to greenish grey, banded, fine-grained sandstones and siltstones with common carbonate-rich layers. Studies of thin sections show that the rocks have strong variations in deformation, from well-preserved primary layering to strong ductile deformation (Sandstad, 2010). These show that the major ore minerals in the eastern part of Nussir are bornite and chalcocite. They mainly comprise cement of clastic grains of the sandstone and suggest a diagenetic origin for their deposition rather than strictly epigenetic formation, related to deformation of the host rock. Accessory sulphide minerals include chalcopyrite, covelite, wittichenite, carrollite, and cinnabar.

 

Gold (Au) and Silver (Ag) are closely associated with the Cu-mineralisation. Electrum (AuAg) has been identified at the contact and as inclusions and cracks in bornite. Ag also occurs in minerals associated with Tellurium (Te), Lead (Pb), Selenium (Se) and Bismuth (Bi). Platinum (Pt) most frequently occurs as microscopic grains of sperrylite that form clusters of inclusions in bornite and disseminated, interstitial grains in the silicate matrix of the sandstone.

 

Other sulphides are rare, although pyrite and molybdenite occur locally. Malachite is observed on surface outcrops. The mineralisation occurs as fine-grained impregnation fracture fillings. The thickness of the mineralised zone varies from zero to more than 4 meters.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects47

 

7.2Ulveryggen

 

7.2.1Regional Geology - Ulveryggen

 

The prospect area is comprised of folded Precambrian metasedimentary rocks of the Ulveryggen Formation, part of the Saltvatn Group, that are exposed in the Komagfjord tectonic window, within the Caledonian mountain belt of western Finnmark. Sediments in the general prospect area are typically sandstones and quartzites, trending to what have been previously described as conglomerates in the immediate area of the old Ulveryggen Mine (Nilsen, K. 2019). Evidence of ENE-trending faulting, roughly parallel to the regional trend of bedding, is strong, as is the presence of NNE-trending faulting, particularly obvious in the mine area. Occasional small mafic dikes are also present in the mine area. The Ulveryggen sedimentary units are fault-bounded to the south by older greenstones and to the north by probably younger sedimentary units.

 

7.2.2Local Geology and Mineralisation - Ulveryggen

 

A plan of the area is shown in Figure 7-6. The mineralization occurs along a 2-kilometer trend between the two main faults and along a fan of smaller faults located in between. NNE-trending strike slip faults offset mineralization along the order of 10’s to several 100’s of meters. Copper mineralization, typically in the form of chalcopyrite, bornite, lesser chalcocite, and secondary malachite, is present as disseminations in conglomerates (partly interpreted as mylonites), on shears, along bedding, in cracks and fractures, and in small, sometimes cross-cutting, quartz veins and veinlets. The thickness of the mineralization appears to diminish with depth as the two main faults coalesce. However, there is strong mineral potential for more to be discovered, heretofore undiscovered, copper mineralization along strike of the main system, both to the east and west.

 

Clay alteration is apparent in narrow ENE-trending shear zones that have been previously described as thin argillite partings. Although extremely difficult to ascertain in hand samples, mass silicification of the quartzites is probable along the main ENE-trending fault zones.

 

In section the mineralisation is SE-dipping (from about 60o to vertical), often significantly widening to the top and narrowing to the bottom. Generally, the horizontal length of the mineralised zone is about 2.6 km, with widths up to 200 m, and a vertical extent of approximately 150 m.

 

Host rocks of the deposit are notably bedded and foliated with the foliation in many cases. The foliation is not necessarily parallel to the bedding, mostly dipping NW or SE with the angles of 22˚ to 40˚, marking gentle, almost symmetrical folds. It appears that NW-dipping predominates.

 

Mineralized metasedimentary rocks appear to be significantly silicified. Sometimes mineralization occurs as a set of mesothermal quartz veins with rich chalcopyrite-bornite mineralization. The main part of the economic mineralization in the mined-out John open pit is bounded between to two antithetic NE-striking, NW- and SE-dipping shear zones, as shown in Figure 7-2.

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects48

 

Figure 7-2. John Open Pit, Looking SW 

[Picture by Promin AS]

 

 

 

Striations observed in the Erik pit (Figure 7-3) appear flatter than striations in the Hovedfelt pit (Figure 7-4), which implies that the vertical component of the shear zone movement is progressively increasing in the SW direction, while the horizontal component is getting weaker. Kinematics of the shear zone appear to be dextral–normal (SE block uplifted), which is shown by observed shear zone fabrics (Figure 7-5), as well as by porphyroblast (pebbles) rotation.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects49

 

Figure 7-3. Erik Open Pit Looking N. 

[Picture by Promin AS]

 

 

 

Figure 7-4. Hovedfelt Open pit, NE part, looking NE 

[Picture by Promin AS]

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects50

 

Figure 7-5. NW-dipping Mineralisation in Erik Open Pit 

[Picture by Promin AS]

 

 

 

Numerous ductile shear zones with NW orientation cut and displace mineralization, while being mineralized themselves. The shear zone offsets on a larger scale affect the major ore bodies, as shown by the position of the existing pits. Some of the faults also demonstrate the presence of vertical movement component. The faults appear to be reverse in the mineralized faults and normal in the non-mineralized.

 

The appearance of the dextral shear zones suggests a model of a contractional imbricate fan. of a dextral (and of course reverse) shear zone. The northern (SE-dipping) shear zone appears to be the main structure, while the southern (NW-dipping) structures are in the form of a set of splays (shears), as shown in Figure 7-7. Vertically the shears are reverse, as would result from NW orientated compression, which is supported by the presence of NW-oriented tension gashes observed in the field.

 

Opening of both NW- and SE-dipping foliation planes due to more recent NE-orientated stresses is also suggested, as suggested by northern tension gashes. It appears that the higher-grade mineralization is related to the intersection of the NW-striking cross-faults with the main structure. Superposition of all or some of these factors caused the formation of the Ulveryggen mineralization, characterized by disseminated and fracture filling texture.

 

Impressions from the 2017 logging of drill cores indicate that parts of the conglomeratic zones may have been formed by alteration (silicification- carbonatization) of exhalitic volcanics, possibly in combination with larger scale alteration, mobilization and eventually Cu-mineralization by precipitation in the pressure shadows within shear zones. Chlorite in the “conglomerate” matrix and relatively higher Ni- and Cr- background levels in correlation with Cu, may indicate a possible mafic volcanic source for the Ulveryggen mineralisation. Further studies of the Cu-genesis, high Cu-background data from old stream samples, as well as shear-zones, could help define possible promising exploration targets in vicinity of Ulveryggen area.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects51

 

Figure 7-6. Plan of Deposit Area and Main Tectonic Features 

[After E. Plyuschev, 2008]

 

  

Green triangles – synthetic to main fault zone 

Red triangles – antithetic to main fault zone

 

Figure 7-7. Section of Simplified Tectonic Framework

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects52

 

8DEPOSIT TYPE

 

8.1Background

 

The two Cu-deposits, Nussir and Ulveryggen, have a similar composition of Cu-bearing sulphides. They are probably the result of a similar geological system. They represent examples of sedimentary-associated type of deposits, with many common features found in the Copperbelt in central Africa and Kupferschiefer in Poland and Germany, which include a continental rift environment, hot sub-aquatic conditions, shale/dolomite/conglomerate sequences, stratabound disseminated veinlets of Cu minerals, partly extensive alteration, syngenetic-diagenetic settings and epigenetic events

 

8.2Nussir

 

The Nussir deposit is considered to be a stratabound sediment hosted copper deposit, and the mineralisation is interpreted as post-diagenetic. The Nussir deposit is a generally homogenous, Cu-ore zone with Ag, Au, some Pt and Pd. It was primarily deposited as a continuous dolomite-schist layer on the sea floor, with relatively little deviation in grade, thickness and other factors. Later events with folding, shearing and alterations have partly affected primary features.

 

Description of the Copperbelt deposits has many similarities with the mineralisation in the Repparfjord area, in particular with the Nussir deposit. They both have a base of conglomerates overlaid by dolomites and siltstones. Both are interpreted to be associated with deposition in rift basins.

 

Similar stratigraphy can also be seen in the Kupferschiefer in Poland. At the base there are clastic materials lying in a series of basins, mainly red sandstones and conglomerates, and the uppermost sections are composed of arenites and carbonates.

 

8.3Ulveryggen

 

The Ulveryggen deposit is also considered to be a stratabound sediment hosted copper deposit, with a similar composition of copper-bearing sulphides to Nussir, but the general mineralogy and genetic setting is different. The Ulveryggen deposit constitutes a more complex orebody, described as sedimentary deposition of copper minerals within layers in sandstone-conglomeratic sequences. The Ulveryggen mineralisation has a different setting, interpreted as syngenetic shear-zones. The Au- Ag and Pt- Pd content is considerably lower at Ulveryggen than at Nussir.

 

The main Ulveryggen deposit area is dominated by two sub-parallel ENE-trending faults, dipping steeply towards each other. Known mineralization occurs in several pods along a 2-kilometer trend between the two main faults and along a fan of smaller faults located in between. The thickness of mineralization appears to diminish with depth as the two main faults coalesce. However, there is potential for more, heretofore undiscovered, copper mineralization along strike of the main system, both to the east and west.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects53

 

9EXPLORATION

 

Blue Moon has not carried out any exploration work on the property. For a description of historical exploration work, including that completed by Nussir ASA and its predecessor companies (AS Prospektering and Terra Holdings), refer to Section 6 - History.

 

10DRILLING

 

Blue Moon has not carried out any drilling activities on either Nussir or Ulveryggen deposits, and all drilling on these properties and for the mineral resource estimation exercises were completed by prior operators. The current mineral resource estimate is presented in Section 14 of this report with an effective date of January 20th, 2025.

 

10.1Nussir

 

A total of 211 exploration diamond drillholes, covering over 52,700 m, have been drilled on the Nussir project up to 2019. One drillhole (no.212) was delayed out of the 2019 resource estimation and was drilled in 2020 and confirmed the modelled grade and width. A few additional drillholes were performed in 2024, however, these were solely for metallurgical and processing test work, in order to achieve enough core material to perform material sorting tests and were not intended or used for mineral resource estimation, because they were all twin drill holes of older, successfully completed drillholes. In addition, ten channel samples have been collected from mineralized surface outcropping. A total of approximately 2,600 samples has been assayed.

 

In 1984, ten channel samples were collected from mineralized surface outcrops. The drilling started in 1985 with six relatively short diamond drill holes, all less than 80 m in length and a dip varying between 50 to 70 degrees. In 1986, further two diamond drillholes were drilled to check the continuity of the mineralization at depth. One of the drillholes confirmed the vertical extension of the mineralization to more than 250 m below surface. The laboratory Mercury Analytical Ltd. was used to analyse the core from the first eight drillholes.

 

In 1988, six diamond drill holes were drilled. The core was analysed by Caleb Brett Laboratories. A total of 35 diamond drill holes were drilled in the period between 1990 and 1996. Between 1985 and 1996, a total of 600 samples were analysed from 43 drill holes. All samples were analysed for Cu, and partly for Ag and Au. The samples were analysed by different laboratories with unknown analytical methods. For verification purposes, 69 samples from 1990 were assayed in 2008, as described in Section 11. The older samples were not independently used to define blocks defined as Indicated Resources in the current study.

 

In 2002, 63 samples from nine diamond drillholes were analysed by OMAC Laboratories, Ireland for 47 elements using Aqua Regia digestion and ICP. Ag was the only of the precious metals analysed. However, only a few meters of each of the drill holes were analysed. Typically, the analysed core section analysed was one meter per sample.

 

The drilling continued in 2006 with the drilling of seven diamond holes. A total of 32 samples from four holes were analysed by OMAC Laboratories, Ireland using 46 elements by Aqua Regia digestion and ICP-OES. In addition, Au was analysed by Fire Assay/AA on 30 g samples.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects54

 

407 samples from 9 holes were analysed in 2008 for 46 elements by Aqua Regia digestion and ICP-OES by OMAC Laboratories, Ireland. The digestion is partial for some elements especially Al, Ba, Cr, K, Na, Sn, Sr, Ta, Ti, V and W. In addition, Au, Pt and Pd were analysed by Fire Assay/AA on 30 g samples. The whole cores from drill holes Bh 39 (117.6 m), 40 (43.2 m) and 60 (120 m) were analysed, whereas parts of Bh 19, 20, 54, 55, 57 and 90 were analysed. The analysed core lengths were 1-2 m.

 

In 2011, a total of six diamond drillholes (1996 m) were drilled on the Nussir deposit. Five of the drill holes (1,432 m) were drilled as infill holes in the eastern part of the deposit to decrease the drill spacing from 250 m to 125 m. In addition, one deep diamond drill hole (564 m) was drilled in the central part of the Nussir deposit to confirm the extension of the mineralization in this previous undrilled zone. The drill hole successfully confirmed an 8.6 m intersection zone (7m true width) averaging 0.69% Cu (including 3.6 m averaging 1,09% Cu) from 541 m downhole. From the 2011 drill campaign, a total of 164 samples (including standards and blanks) were submitted to ALS Chemex laboratory in Piteå. All samples were analysed by 33 element four acid ICP-AES and Au, Pt and Pd 30 g Fire Assay ICP. In the mineralized zone the core was normally analysed on one-meter intervals. However, additional samples of varying length were sampled in zones of interest.

 

All pre-2011 drill hole collar locations were originally surveyed using a DPOS GPS (TOPCON) with an accuracy of 1-2 dm. The 2011 drill holes were surveyed using a handheld GPS with and later surveyed by DPOS GPS (TOPCON) in 2012. Downhole surveys have been done for all intact drillholes in 2012 using a pee-wee magnetic survey tool. The registered azimuth values in the upper part of some holes were influenced by magnetic rocks and had to be corrected. Gyro based downhole surveying was chosen during 2013 campaign to avoid this problem.

 

In 2017, 89 drillhole collars were re-measured using a more accurate (within 1-2cm) CPOS GPS instrument, in a re-survey program completed by the company GeoNord. The collar database used in the resource estimation covered in this report is summarised in, with respect to the positioning system used.

 

Table 10-1. Summary of Collar Positioning Systems – Nussir

 

Method Number Proportion
Unknown (Channels) 10 5%
Hand GPS 15 7%
DPOS 107 48%
CPOS 89 40%
TOTAL 221 100%

 

Most of the drill holes have been drilled with success. However, in the central parts of the 9 km long mineralized horizon, four drill holes were abandoned before they reached the mineralization. This was due to strongly fractured rocks in an interpreted fault zone.

 

All cores were transported down to a warehouse with logging facilities and logged for geological, sampling and geotechnical purposes by in-house personnel.

 

Geotechnical data have been collected from some pre-2011 drill holes, including RQD, core recovery, fracture density and orientation, hardness and joint data. All core drilled from 2008 have been photographed. Data collected on the six diamond drillholes drilled from 2011, includes geology, down hole survey, sample, RQD, core recovery and assay data.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects55

 

A summary of the current database, with relation to the different diamond drilling campaigns, to date is shown in Error! Reference source not found. Table 10-2

 

Table 10-2. Nussir Diamond Drilling Summary

 

Year  Number of
Holes
Length (m)  Average Hole
Length (m)
Hole
Size
Core Diameter
(mm)
Drilling Company  Drill Rig 
1985 6 264 44 AQ 27 - -
1986 2 496 248 AQ 27 - -
1988 6 1,325 221 AQ 27 - -
1990 24 1,893 78 AQ 27 - -
1995 4 724 181 AQ 27 - -
1996 4 1,182 296 AQ 27 - -
2006 7 2,687 384 - 18 Diamantboring Nord AS Diamec 262
2007 1 78 78 AQ 27 - -
2008 30 7,116 233 BQTK 36.5 Arctic Drilling AS Diamec 252
2011 6 1,996 333 BQTK 40.7 Arctic Drilling AS Diamec 252
2013 21 3,222 153 BQTK 40.7 ADC Ltd. Oy K1 with Sandvik drill
2014 34 9,308 274 NQ/BQ 47.6/36.5 Arctic Drilling AS Atlas U6 and 264
2015 33 10,572 320 NQ 47.6 Arctic Drilling AS Atlas U6/264
2017 20 7,947 397 NQ 47.6 Arctic Drilling AS/Rockma Atlas U6/264, Sandvik DE 140 MT
2019 13 3,912 301 NQ 47.6 Arctic Drilling AS/Rockma Atlas U6/264, Sandvik DE 140 MT
Total 211 52,722 250        

 

The 10 lines of channel samples that were taken in 1985 covered an average sampled length of 35 m/line. In 2006, 20 air percussive holes were also drilled, with an average length of 20 m, but samples from these percussive holes were not used in the current resource estimate. Selected core material including intersections from 2013 campaigns are stored in Skaidi, nearby the deposit. Core from 35 older holes is stored at the Norwegian Geological Survey in Løkken.

 

The drillhole collar locations for all Nussir holes, directions, dips and lengths are shown in Table 10-3 and Table 10-4. Summaries of the main Nussir drillhole intersections are shown in Table 10-5 and Table 10-6.

 

A plan and cross-sections of the drillhole data are shown in Figure 10-1 and Figure 10-2.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects56

 

Table 10-3. Nussir Drillhole Collars, 1985-2011

 

    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth
(o)
Dip
(o)
Length
(m)
1985 NUS-CH-85-001 390,533 7,818,095 371 33 0 3
NUS-CH-85-002 390,539 7,818,091 375 33 0 4
NUS-CH-85-003 391,432 7,818,155 410 340 0 4
NUS-CH-85-004 393,097 7,818,573 360 330 0 3
NUS-CH-85-005 395,195 7,819,588 314 330 0 3
NUS-CH-85-006 395,431 7,819,627 279 340 0 2
NUS-CH-85-007 390,239 7,818,657 400 80 0 5
NUS-CH-85-008 390,116 7,819,012 410 50 0 4
NUS-CH-85-009 390,062 7,819,058 402 50 0 5
NUS-CH-85-010 396,948 7,820,005 173 340 0 3
NUS-DD-85-001 395,480 7,819,652 278 170 60 25
NUS-DD-85-002 395,477 7,819,656 278 170 70 42
NUS-DD-85-003 395,286 7,819,638 297 155 60 28
NUS-DD-85-004 393,839 7,819,021 323 160 50 80
NUS-DD-85-005 392,843 7,818,531 399 158 59 64
NUS-DD-85-007 390,544 7,818,140 375 197 48 25
1986 NUS-DD-86-001 396,070 7,820,037 208 165 60 293
NUS-DD-86-002 390,259 7,819,114 405 250 75 203
1988 NUS-DD-88-001 396,069 7,820,037 208 165 80 373
NUS-DD-88-002 395,454 7,819,765 278 170 80 191
NUS-DD-88-003 394,939 7,819,647 366 145 85 277
NUS-DD-88-004 395,270 7,819,656 298 160 80 109
NUS-DD-88-005 396,729 7,820,053 218 155 60 180
NUS-DD-88-006 396,418 7,819,991 227 170 65 195
1990 NUS-DD-90-001 390,231 7,819,047 414 238 30 93
NUS-DD-90-002 390,232 7,819,047 414 239 60 99
NUS-DD-90-003 390,312 7,818,805 403 261 46 55
NUS-DD-90-004 390,311 7,818,805 403 253 79 72
NUS-DD-90-006 390,286 7,818,504 413 288 48 50
NUS-DD-90-007 390,286 7,818,503 413 290 75 68
NUS-DD-90-008 390,343 7,818,487 423 270 80 120
NUS-DD-90-009 390,650 7,818,096 394 186 45 34
NUS-DD-90-010 390,667 7,818,146 398 187 81 106
NUS-DD-90-011 391,153 7,818,148 432 171 45 63
NUS-DD-90-012 391,153 7,818,148 432 172 80 95
NUS-DD-90-013 391,724 7,818,289 421 165 45 70
NUS-DD-90-014 391,724 7,818,289 421 165 80 114
NUS-DD-90-015 392,276 7,818,371 441 170 45 84
NUS-DD-90-016 392,276 7,818,370 441 170 75 90
NUS-DD-90-017 392,843 7,818,531 399 157 80 89
NUS-DD-90-018 393,414 7,818,776 346 153 80 55
NUS-DD-90-019 393,414 7,818,775 346 163 43 44
NUS-DD-90-020 393,398 7,818,804 351 154 80 110
NUS-DD-90-021 393,838 7,819,022 323 160 80 118
NUS-DD-90-022 393,859 7,818,980 316 153 45 43
NUS-DD-90-023 394,329 7,819,219 335 155 45 56
NUS-DD-90-024 394,329 7,819,220 335 155 80 57
NUS-DD-90-026 394,960 7,819,564 336 145 45 110
1995 NUS-DD-95-001 390,480 7,818,709 416 281 69 197
NUS-DD-95-002 390,415 7,818,382 425 222 42 124
NUS-DD-95-003 390,415 7,818,383 425 245 87 150
NUS-DD-95-004 392,791 7,818,660 454 160 70 253

 

 

    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth
(o)
Dip
(o)
Length
(m)
1996 NUS-DD-96-001 390,622 7,818,678 435 270 80 368
NUS-DD-96-002 391,009 7,818,364 425 165 78 319
NUS-DD-96-003 391,650 7,818,480 455 165 75 356
NUS-DD-96-005 396,110 7,819,872 190 155 70 140
2006 NUS-DD-06-001 396,410 7,820,160 207 176 80 427
NUS-DD-06-002 390,826 7,818,485 433 135 85 520
NUS-DD-06-003 392,730 7,818,841 435 160 85 403
NUS-DD-06-004 390,824 7,818,484 434 195 80 469
NUS-DD-06-005 390,824 7,818,486 434 270 85 306
NUS-DD-06-006 390,360 7,819,359 444 210 80 443
NUS-DD-06-007 389,972 7,819,200 398 178 59 120
2007 NUS-DD-07-001 391,457 7,818,203 416 180 60 78
2008 NUS-DD-08-001 396,203 7,819,984 200 150 58 230
NUS-DD-08-002 396,204 7,819,984 201 150 71 248
NUS-DD-08-003 396,019 7,819,922 213 140 60 210
NUS-DD-08-004 396,019 7,819,922 213 150 80 260
NUS-DD-08-005 395,912 7,819,891 226 138 60 184
NUS-DD-08-006 395,912 7,819,892 226 140 75 237
NUS-DD-08-007 395,687 7,819,938 266 160 50 257
NUS-DD-08-008 395,687 7,819,939 266 160 60 320
NUS-DD-08-009 395,564 7,819,781 273 160 90 268
NUS-DD-08-010 395,569 7,819,756 269 160 60 164
NUS-DD-08-011 395,384 7,819,700 292 160 90 201
NUS-DD-08-012 395,384 7,819,699 292 160 70 110
NUS-DD-08-013 395,191 7,819,851 344 160 75 395
NUS-DD-08-014 395,067 7,819,846 335 160 60 373
NUS-DD-08-015 394,648 7,819,706 384 160 60 445
NUS-DD-08-016 394,455 7,819,617 408 160 60 420
NUS-DD-08-019 395,349 7,819,913 323 160 65 378
NUS-DD-08-020 395,349 7,819,912 323 160 80 497
NUS-DD-08-021 396,918 7,820,104 186 160 60 160
NUS-DD-08-022 396,918 7,820,104 185 160 80 200
NUS-DD-08-023 397,173 7,820,148 162 160 75 144
NUS-DD-08-024 397,173 7,820,147 162 160 90 184
NUS-DD-08-025 396,404 7,819,842 194 160 90 59
NUS-DD-08-026 396,231 7,819,871 187 150 80 115
NUS-DD-08-027 397,438 7,820,242 59 160 55 120
NUS-DD-08-028 397,438 7,820,242 59 160 70 140
NUS-DD-08-029 397,756 7,820,292 44 160 90 161
NUS-DD-08-030 395,796 7,819,753 221 160 90 116
NUS-DD-08-031 398,089 7,820,385 17 80 86 360
NUS-DD-08-032 390,858 7,818,205 416 190 60 164
2011 NUS-DD-11-001 395,133 7,819,635 321 140 86 200
NUS-DD-11-002 395,224 7,819,701 320 160 77 194
NUS-DD-11-003 395,224 7,819,702 320 160 90 238
NUS-DD-11-004 395,412 7,819,854 310 160 90 462
NUS-DD-11-005 395,304 7,819,899 330 160 55 339
NUS-DD-11-006 392,731 7,818,849 456 160 82 563

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects57

 

Table 10-4. Nussir Drillhole Collars, 2013-2019

 

    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth
(o)
Dip
(o)
Length
(m)

2013 

NUS-DD-13-001 389,769 7,819,221 382 170 50 112
NUS-DD-13-002 389,523 7,819,182 345 180 55 154
NUS-DD-13-003 389,280 7,819,335 312 208 52 162
NUS-DD-13-004 389,763 7,819,478 402 178 81 437
NUS-DD-13-005 389,706 7,819,124 367 178 51 175
NUS-DD-13-006 389,711 7,819,154 368 0 90 14
NUS-DD-13-007 389,172 7,819,372 293 208 50 64
NUS-DD-13-008 389,048 7,819,584 290 160 55 247
NUS-DD-13-009 390,824 7,818,070 388 180 44 61
NUS-DD-13-010 390,635 7,818,086 391 170 46 51
NUS-DD-13-011 389,605 7,819,222 360 174 45 71
NUS-DD-13-012 389,513 7,819,207 343 182 44 51
NUS-DD-13-013 389,200 7,819,315 302 275 44 36
NUS-DD-13-014 389,251 7,819,352 308 342 44 111
NUS-DD-13-015 389,175 7,819,181 298 346 44 54
NUS-DD-13-016 389,228 7,819,121 310 42 46 29
NUS-DD-13-017A 389,019 7,819,449 262 197 45 23
NUS-DD-13-017B 389,030 7,819,450 263 197 45 45
NUS-DD-13-018 389,343 7,819,524 331 203 81 600
NUS-DD-13-019 390,232 7,819,047 414 239 60 120
NUS-DD-13-020 393,594 7,819,259 382 139 83 604

 

2014

NUS-DD-14-001 391,209 7,818,993 453 226 85 1,101
NUS-DD-14-002 393,477 7,819,510 432 167 83 979
NUS-DD-14-003B 391,601 7,818,802 470 154 83 905
NUS-DD-14-003C 391,601 7,818,802 470 154 83 899
NUS-DD-14-004 392,616 7,819,071 477 154 83 908
NUS-DD-14-005 390,623 7,819,427 470 224 83 751
NUS-DD-14-006 394,565 7,819,323 315 157 45 64
NUS-DD-14-007 394,070 7,819,093 320 153 50 36
NUS-DD-14-008 393,828 7,819,039 328 161 83 161
NUS-DD-14-009 393,646 7,818,889 324 153 45 32
NUS-DD-14-010 393,146 7,818,627 365 158 45 31
NUS-DD-14-011 392,984 7,818,553 379 163 60 32
NUS-DD-14-012 392,946 7,818,539 386 163 55 30
NUS-DD-14-013 392,917 7,818,514 385 160 60 34
NUS-DD-14-014 392,882 7,818,492 385 160 60 8
NUS-DD-14-014B 392,883 7,818,494 387 160   15
NUS-DD-14-015 392,853 7,818,495 394 160 60 26
NUS-DD-14-016 392,843 7,818,538 402 343 85 164
NUS-DD-14-017 392,843 7,818,534 403 160 87 111
NUS-DD-14-018 392,825 7,818,487 398 163 55 31
NUS-DD-14-019 392,797 7,818,479 401 168 50 35
NUS-DD-14-020 392,768 7,818,468 407 163 55 37
NUS-DD-14-021 392,735 7,818,457 409 163 50 50
NUS-DD-14-022 392,548 7,818,373 409 343 45 40
NUS-DD-14-022B 392,548 7,818,373 409 153 50 31
NUS-DD-14-023 391,941 7,818,296 420 158 55 55
NUS-DD-14-024 391,426 7,818,341 452 168 83 327
NUS-DD-14-025 393,396 7,818,806 349 330 77 236
NUS-DD-14-026 392,844 7,818,533 401 339 74 282
NUS-DD-14-027 392,842 7,818,539 403 339 77 212
NUS-DD-14-028 392,844 7,818,534 403 343 87 150
NUS-DD-14-029B 392,275 7,818,373 442 340 76 300
NUS-DD-14-030 391,662 7,818,575 469 162 83 571
NUS-DD-14-031 392,183 7,818,664 499 157 83 584

 

  

    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth
(o)
Dip
(o)
Length
(m)
2015 NUS-DD-15-001 395,635 7,819,958 267 160 75 422
NUS-DD-15-002 395,846 7,820,008 231 160 71 357
NUS-DD-15-003 396,324 7,820,019 219 160 83 312
NUS-DD-15-004 396,083 7,819,819 191 160 79 63
NUS-DD-15-006 393,834 7,819,048 324 340 78 376
NUS-DD-15-007 393,710 7,818,986 325 340 77 342
NUS-DD-15-008 393,627 7,818,912 327 340 85 170
NUS-DD-15-009 393,514 7,818,858 335 340 78 225
NUS-DD-15-010 393,241 7,818,725 362 340 72 203
NUS-DD-15-011 393,083 7,818,604 368 340 73 90
NUS-DD-15-012 393,063 7,818,616 373 340 68 336
NUS-DD-15-013 392,622 7,818,417 408 340 76 96
NUS-DD-15-014 392,106 7,818,334 435 160 82 121
NUS-DD-15-015 392,055 7,818,473 477 160 83 350
NUS-DD-15-016 392,404 7,818,552 486 160 83 330
NUS-DD-15-017 392,584 7,818,628 477 160 84 362
 NUS-DD-15-018 391,590 7,818,230 419 175 80 83
NUS-DD-15-019 391,862 7,818,486 456 160 84 402
NUS-DD-15-020 392,001 7,818,608 482 160 84 552
NUS-DD-15-021 392,472 7,818,786 471 160 83 563
NUS-DD-15-022 392,938 7,818,961 456 160 83 575
NUS-DD-15-023 393,186 7,819,008 448 160 84 510
NUS-DD-15-024 393,432 7,819,101 393 160 83 418
NUS-DD-15-025 391,422 7,818,464 458 175 83 472
NUS-DD-15-026 391,180 7,818,496 434 175 83 522
NUS-DD-15-027 391,210 7,818,343 439 175 79 326
NUS-DD-15-028 391,282 7,818,190 428 175 80 116
NUS-DD-15-029 394,055 7,819,131 322 160 85 164
NUS-DD-15-030 393,848 7,819,314 393 160 81 482
NUS-DD-15-031 393,063 7,818,616 379 340 73 246
NUS-DD-15-032 393,958 7,819,089 320 340 78 242
NUS-DD-15-033 394,139 7,819,237 351 160 84 326
NUS-DD-15-034 393,650 7,819,205 379 160 82 404
2017 NUS-DD-179 395,890 7,819,786 211 160 80 100
NUS-DD-180 392,868 7,818,888 452 160 70 470
NUS-DD-181 396,206 7,820,022 205 340 84 461
NUS-DD-182 393,047 7,818,899 452 160 79 480
NUS-DD-183 396,048 7,820,000 209 310 80 504
NUS-DD-184 393,135 7,819,028 457 160 82 610
NUS-DD-185 395,839 7,819,933 239 340 82 499
NUS-DD-186 396,597 7,820,127 219 20 78 473
NUS-DD-187 396,570 7,820,091 225 160 85 299
 NUS-DD-188 396,604 7,819,902 175 340 77 56
NUS-DD-189 392,377 7,818,702 481 160 78 512
NUS-DD-190 392,630 7,818,789 468 160 71 465
NUS-DD-191 393,353 7,819,181 401 180 73 577
NUS-DD-192 393,479 7,819,172 385 170 81 531
NUS-DD-193 394,195 7,819,185 328 345 82 185
NUS-DD-194 393,786 7,819,317 394 164 79 569
NUS-DD-195 393,991 7,819,401 405 169 85 625
NUS-DD-196 393,971 7,819,045 314 342 83 86
NUS-DD-197 392,450 7,818,284 407 339 45 132
NUS-DD-198 393,287 7,818,720 356 165 83 71
2019 NUS-DD-199 396,748 7,820,206 204 216 85 488
NUS-DD-200 397,019 7,820,171 173 179 66 200
NUS-DD-201 396,988 7,820,171 176 276 80 300
NUS-DD-202 397,218 7,820,181 151 105 60 200
NUS-DD-203 397,218 7,820,181 151 317 72 350
NUS-DD-204 396,761 7,820,172 198 182 74 328
 NUS-DD-205 396,572 7,820,092 225 176 77 330
NUS-DD-206 396,766 7,819,930 185 338 41 30
NUS-DD-207 396,777 7,819,922 177 346 51 93
NUS-DD-208 397,007 7,820,220 175 321 83 428
NUS-DD-209 397,440 7,820,348 48 243 78 270
NUS-DD-210 397,596 7,820,276 43 160 68 120
NUS-DD-211 397,504 7,820,391 42 96 71 330

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects58

 

 

Table 10-5. Nussir – Main Drillhole intersections, 1985-2011

 

YEAR BHID FROM TO Cu Length True
Thickness
    m m % m m
1985 NUS-DD-85-001    15.0 17.7 1.07 2.7 2.4
NUS-DD-85-002 26.0 28.3 1.41 2.3 1.9
NUS-DD-85-003 19.2 22.6 2.46 3.4 3.1
NUS-DD-85-004    67.0 72.0 1.10 5.0 4.6
NUS-DD-85-005    53.0 57.7 1.59 4.7 4.3
NUS-DD-85-007 17.6 21.6 1.48 4.0 3.5
1986 NUS-DD-86-001   275.2 279.7 1.70 4.5 4.1
NUS-DD-86-002   140.3 148.0 1.25 7.7 4.4
1988 NUS-DD-88-001   350.8 352.6 1.59 1.8 1.6
NUS-DD-88-002   176.2 182.8 1.10 6.6 5.2
NUS-DD-88-003   269.7 271.0 0.70 1.4 1.2
NUS-DD-88-004 57.0 57.5 0.78 0.5 0.4
NUS-DD-88-005   147.0 148.7 0.09 1.7 1.5
NUS-DD-88-006   188.9 191.9 1.20 3.0 2.6
1990 NUS-DD-90-001    40.0 43.0 1.00 3.0 2.1
NUS-DD-90-002    44.0 49.0 0.66 5.0 3.7
NUS-DD-90-003    41.0 45.0 1.15 4.0 3.9
NUS-DD-90-004    59.0 65.0 1.33 6.0 4.9
NUS-DD-90-006    40.0 45.0 1.10 5.0 4.8
NUS-DD-90-007    48.0 53.3 1.31 5.3 4.5
NUS-DD-90-008    96.0 101.0 1.32 5.0 4.1
NUS-DD-90-009    24.0 28.0 1.47 4.0 2.8
NUS-DD-90-010    96.0 103.0 0.95 7.0 5.4
NUS-DD-90-011    56.0 60.0 1.24 4.0 3.9
NUS-DD-90-012    80.0 86.0 0.93 6.0 4.7
NUS-DD-90-013 55.0 58.0 0.10 3.0 3.0
NUS-DD-90-014    99.0 101.0 0.64 2.0 1.5
NUS-DD-90-015    74.0 75.0 1.02 1.0 1.0
NUS-DD-90-017    73.9 77.7 1.82 3.8 2.7
NUS-DD-90-018    52.1 54.9 0.55 2.8 2.0
NUS-DD-90-019    37.0 40.0 1.33 3.0 2.9
NUS-DD-90-020    94.0 97.0 1.40 3.0 2.2
NUS-DD-90-021    97.0 100.0 1.23 3.0 2.0
NUS-DD-90-022    19.0 22.0 1.17 3.0 2.8
NUS-DD-90-023    23.0 25.0 0.79 2.0 1.9
NUS-DD-90-024    37.0 41.0 0.80 4.0 2.8
NUS-DD-90-026    90.0 91.0 0.57 1.0 1.0
1995 NUS-DD-95-001   184.0 192.0 0.84 8.0 6.8
NUS-DD-95-002   116.0 122.0 0.98 6.0 5.2
NUS-DD-95-003   133.9 140.0 1.19 6.2 4.6
NUS-DD-95-004 243.0 246.0 1.17 3.0 2.5

 

 

YEAR BHID FROM TO Cu Length True
Thickness
    m m % m m

1996

NUS-DD-96-001 355.0 362.0 1.51 7.0 5.5
NUS-DD-96-002 309.0 313.0 1.29 4.0 2.9
NUS-DD-96-003 343.0 347.5 1.58 4.5 3.4
NUS-DD-96-005 127.0 130.0 0.98 3.0 2.1

2006

NUS-DD-06-001 415.0 417.0 0.54 2.0 1.4
NUS-DD-06-002 505.0 512.5 1.26 7.5 5.2
NUS-DD-06-004 438.1 442.2 1.50 4.1 3.9
NUS-DD-06-007 24.3 29.0 1.27 4.7 4.1
2007 NUS-DD-07-001 52.0 56.0 1.29 4.0 3.6

2008 

NUS-DD-08-001 195.0 198.0 0.98 3.0 2.8
NUS-DD-08-002 232.7 235.0 2.06 2.3 1.9
NUS-DD-08-003 174.2 177.1 0.48 2.9 2.6
NUS-DD-08-004 258.0 260.0 0.54 2.0 1.5
NUS-DD-08-005 174.6 177.5 1.35 2.9 2.6
NUS-DD-08-006 207.6 210.9 1.29 3.3 2.5
NUS-DD-08-008 309.0 313.8 1.39 4.8 4.3
NUS-DD-08-009 259.4 265.0 1.25 5.6 3.2
NUS-DD-08-010 132.6 139.0 1.48 6.4 6.0
NUS-DD-08-011 134.5 144.4 1.60 9.9 5.7
NUS-DD-08-012 85.2 89.0 1.05 3.8 3.0
NUS-DD-08-013 374.0 378.9 0.27 4.9 4.0
NUS-DD-08-014 320.2 324.0 0.63 3.8 3.6
NUS-DD-08-015 422.9 425.6 0.43 2.7 2.5
NUS-DD-08-016 405.2 407.3 0.51 2.1 2.0
NUS-DD-08-019 357.3 361.8 0.61 4.5 4.0
NUS-DD-08-020 485.4 488.7 0.57 3.3 2.4
NUS-DD-08-021 125.1 128.8 1.37 3.7 2.9
NUS-DD-08-022 154.7 158.8 0.14 4.1 2.5
NUS-DD-08-023 124.0 129.9 1.12 5.9 4.3
NUS-DD-08-024 168.3 173.1 0.66 4.8 2.8
NUS-DD-08-025 30.4 32.7 2.34 2.3 1.3
NUS-DD-08-026 93.5 95.7 2.00 2.2 1.7
NUS-DD-08-027 99.1 103.1 0.79 4.0 3.3
NUS-DD-08-028 101.7 104.9 1.82 3.2 2.9
NUS-DD-08-030 111.9 114.5 0.54 2.6 1.5
NUS-DD-08-032 147.5 152.5 1.06 5.0 4.2

2011

NUS-DD-11-001 120.0 123.0 0.81 3.0 1.9
NUS-DD-11-002 146.7 150.0 0.31 3.3 2.5
NUS-DD-11-003 223.0 228.3 0.19 5.3 3.0
NUS-DD-11-004 454.1 459.8 0.38 5.8 3.9
NUS-DD-11-005 314.0 318.0 0.75 4.0 3.7
NUS-DD-11-006 541.4 550.0 0.69 8.6 7.0

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects59

 

Table 10-6. Nussir – Main Drillhole intersections, 2013-2019

  

YEAR BHID FROM TO Cu Length True Thickness
    m m % m m
2013 NUS-DD-13-001 17.0 21.8 1.18 4.8 4.5
NUS-DD-13-003    142.6 146.7 1.81 4.1 3.5
NUS-DD-13-004    380.2 389.5 1.30 9.3 6.3
NUS-DD-13-010 9.0 12.1 1.20 3.1 2.5
NUS-DD-13-011 24.0 30.0 1.87 6.0 5.4
NUS-DD-13-012 11.5 13.2 0.62 1.8 1.7
NUS-DD-13-018    417.2 427.2 0.00 10.0 6.4
NUS-DD-13-019 45.5 50.4 0.64 4.9 3.3
NUS-DD-13-020    588.7 594.9 1.33 6.2 4.9
2014 NUS-DD-14-001    1078.8 1088.4 0.93 9.7 7.4
NUS-DD-14-002    950.4 954.2 0.85 3.8 3.3
NUS-DD-14-003C   888.5 891.9 3.12 3.4 2.9
NUS-DD-14-004    803.8 808.0 0.97 4.2 3.6
NUS-DD-14-005    722.4 730.0 1.11 7.6 4.9
NUS-DD-14-006 10.2 12.7 0.53 2.5 2.5
NUS-DD-14-008    143.0 147.0 2.41 4.0 2.8
NUS-DD-14-011 15.2 18.5 0.92 3.3 3.0
NUS-DD-14-013 6.3 9.0 1.24 2.7 2.4
NUS-DD-14-014B 5.4 9.7 1.20 4.3 3.9
NUS-DD-14-015 17.8 22.0 1.57 4.2 3.8
NUS-DD-14-016 152.4 163.0 1.04 10.6 5.2
NUS-DD-14-017 98.3 102.8 1.58 4.6 2.8
NUS-DD-14-018 19.9 22.0 0.59 2.1 2.0
NUS-DD-14-019 27.3 28.9 0.94 1.6 1.5
NUS-DD-14-020 29.5 32.7 0.70 3.2 3.0
NUS-DD-14-024    313.1 316.5 1.26 3.4 2.6
NUS-DD-14-025    218.7 225.1 0.92 6.4 2.6
NUS-DD-14-026    259.5 267.7 0.36 8.2 2.9
NUS-DD-14-027    203.5 217.1 1.18 13.6 5.2
NUS-DD-14-028   121.0 125.7 1.48 4.7 2.6
NUS-DD-14-029B   271.4 275.0 1.04 3.6 1.4
NUS-DD-14-031 557.4 562.0 0.78 4.6 3.8

 

 
YEAR BHID FROM TO Cu Length True
Thickness
    m m % m m

2015

NUS-DD-15-001 398.8 403.5 1.49 4.7 4.1
NUS-DD-15-002 342.6 345.9 1.62 3.3 2.7
NUS-DD-15-003 296.7 300.3 1.12 3.6 2.6
NUS-DD-15-004 54.3 57.7 0.93 3.4 2.5
NUS-DD-15-006 238.0 245.4 1.71 7.4 2.8
NUS-DD-15-007 200.7 208.2 1.66 7.5 3.5
NUS-DD-15-008 83.0 98.5 1.44 15.5 8.4
NUS-DD-15-009 207.5 216.1 1.14 8.6 3.0
NUS-DD-15-010 180.0 190.5 0.59 10.5 4.2
NUS-DD-15-011 74.0 81.1 0.84 7.1 2.2
NUS-DD-15-013 80.6 88.5 0.87 7.9 3.4
NUS-DD-15-016 318.2 329.0 0.74 10.8 9.5
NUS-DD-15-017 340.8 345.0 1.64 4.2 3.6
NUS-DD-15-018 50.2 54.6 1.20 4.4 3.0
NUS-DD-15-020 531.9 536.5 1.43 4.6 4.0
NUS-DD-15-021 548.8 552.3 1.18 3.5 2.9
NUS-DD-15-022 560.2 572.0 1.24 11.8 9.9
NUS-DD-15-023 443.3 447.7 0.98 4.4 3.9
NUS-DD-15-024 397.7 401.0 1.44 3.3 2.9
NUS-DD-15-025 441.9 445.9 0.92 4.0 3.6
NUS-DD-15-026 512.0 518.0 0.92 6.0 4.9
NUS-DD-15-027 308.7 313.0 1.16 4.3 3.2
NUS-DD-15-028 101.2 107.0 1.24 5.8 4.0
NUS-DD-15-029 131.7 137.6 1.08 5.9 3.9
NUS-DD-15-030 445.6 449.2 1.22 3.6 3.2
NUS-DD-15-031 176.0 191.0 1.37 15.0 4.8
NUS-DD-15-032 221.0 231.0 1.32 10.0 4.3
NUS-DD-15-033 296.0 300.6 0.94 4.6 2.2
NUS-DD-15-034 393.1 397.6 1.16 4.5 4.0

2017

NUS-DD-179 86.8 91.0 2.01 4.2 3.1
NUS-DD-180 459.8 465.5 0.53 5.7 4.8
NUS-DD-181 403.9 407.9 0.53 4.0 2.7
NUS-DD-182 469.4 475.0 0.59 5.6 4.3
NUS-DD-183 481.9 484.6 0.79 2.7 1.8
NUS-DD-184 601.0 608.5 0.72 7.5 5.6
NUS-DD-185 493.5 496.4 0.60 2.9 1.3
NUS-DD-187 449.5 453.3 0.89 3.8 1.8
NUS-DD-188 20.5 38.0 1.93 17.5 7.2
NUS-DD-189 493.7 497.5 1.59 3.8 3.1
NUS-DD-190 446.8 451.0 1.18 4.2 3.6
NUS-DD-191 561.9 565.3 1.08 3.4 2.7
NUS-DD-192 508.0 513.0 1.25 5.0 3.7
NUS-DD-193 168.0 178.5 0.69 10.5 5.1
NUS-DD-194 552.9 561.2 0.88 8.3 6.2
NUS-DD-195 610.7 617.2 0.95 6.5 4.7
NUS-DD-196 74.2 81.6 0.95 7.4 3.7
NUS-DD-197 122.1 127.4 0.35 5.3 1.2
NUS-DD-198 52.0 56.2 2.18 4.2 2.8

2019

NUS-DD-199 465.0 468.0 0.68 3.0 1.9
NUS-DD-200 160.0 164.0 1.03 4.0 3.4
NUS-DD-201 277.0 280.6 1.79 3.6 2.2
NUS-DD-202 166.0 172.5 1.46 6.5 5.1
NUS-DD-203 298.9 301.0 1.92 2.1 0.8
NUS-DD-204 309.9 311.5 1.33 1.6 1.2
NUS-DD-205 292.3 296.0 0.86 3.7 2.8
NUS-DD-207 38.0 41.0 0.55 3.0 0.3
NUS-DD-208 417.0 422.0 1.27 0.0 2.6
NUS-DD-209 245.5 247.5 1.07 0.0 1.2

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects60

 

Figure 10-1. Plan of Drill Holes – Nussir

 

 

 

Figure 10-2. Example Drill Hole Cross-Sections – Nussir 

[Sections’ Orientation shown in Figure 10-1]

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects61

 

10.2 Ulveryggen

 

Complete sets of data from 134 diamond drillholes have now been collated for Ulveryggen, as summarised in Error! Reference source not found.. A plan and 3D view of these data are shown in Error! Reference source not found. Figure 10-3 and Figure 10-4Error! Reference source not found., respectively, with the wireframe models generated of the interpreted mineralised zones.

 

All the 2014 and 2017 drillholes are of NQ (47.6 mm) diameter. For the drilling since 2010, all remaining core is stored in the National core-storage facility at Løkken, except for core lengths near or inside the mineralised zones, which is kept at Blue Moon’s facility in Skaidi.

 

Table 10-7. Ulveryggen Drilling Summary

 
Sample Type  YEAR  Holes/
Channels
Length (m)   Avg. Length/
Hole (m)
Cu
Samples
 
Surface Drillholes   pre-2010 83 11,141 134 3,988  
           
2014 1 412 412 24  
2017 7 967 138 88  
  Sub-total 91 12,520 138 4,100  
U/g Drillholes     pre-2010 22 2,754 125 325  
2010 21 1,464 70 455  
 
Sub-total 43 4,219 98 780  
Total       134 16,738 125 4,880  
 

 

A summary of the drill hole collars is shown in Table 10-3 and Table 10-4, for underground and surface holes, respectively. A summary of the main drill hole intersections is shown in Table 10-5 and Table 10-6.

 

A reference plan and some typical example drill hole sections are shown in Figure 10-5 and Figure 10-6.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects62

 

Table 10-8. Ulveryggen Drillhole Collars – Underground Drill Holes

 
    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth Dip Length
          (o) (o) (m)

 Pre-2009

10255 396,804.2 7,816,084.1 228.4 340 -2 180
10256 396,806.2 7,816,080.1 228 155 -47 34
10257 396,806.2 7,816,080.1 228 155 0 63
10258 396,806.2 7,816,080.1 228 155 60 75
10259 396,805.2 7,816,082.1 227 0 90 147.1
10411 396,960.2 7,816,150.1 231 150 10 74.6
10631 397,143.2 7,816,265.1 226.3 326 -0 150
10632 397,143.2 7,816,265.1 228.5 334 -35 149.5
10633 397,143.2 7,816,264.1 226.1 330 46 166.8
10721 397,218.2 7,816,314.1 227 325 -38 140.4
10722 397,218.2 7,816,314.1 225.3 325 -1 157.8
10781 397,265.2 7,816,352.1 225 330 0 150
102510 396,804.2 7,816,084.1 228 340 30 170
102511 396,806.2 7,816,080.1 228 160 65 85.5
104331 396,970.2 7,816,162.1 231.4 335 20 195
104342 396,975.2 7,816,157.1 231.4 150 0 49
104831 397,010.2 7,816,188.1 226 330 -20 150
105313 397,060.2 7,816,218.1 226 324 -4 150
105324 397,060.2 7,816,218.1 228.2 325 -33 150.3
105812 397,100.2 7,816,238.1 226 330 0 150
110431 397,490.2 7,816,490.1 220 150 0 98.6
110442 397,490.2 7,816,490.1 220 150 -80 35.6

2010

201001 396,912.3 7,816,130.9 232.7 150 -60 79.4
201002 396,912.3 7,816,130.9 228.9 150 0 94.1
201003 396,974.5 7,816,162.8 228.2 150 0 65.8
201004 396,974.5 7,816,162.8 230.4 150 -45 62.3
201005 396,949.0 7,816,149.7 229.5 150 0 62.25
201006 396,949.0 7,816,149.7 227.5 150 35 75.9
201007 397,021.3 7,816,186.2 228 150 0 51.25
201008 397,021.3 7,816,186.2 226.5 150 35 30
201009 397,021.3 7,816,186.2 230.5 150 -45 30
201010 397,059.1 7,816,208.9 228 150 0 71.1
201011 397,059.1 7,816,208.9 230.1 150 -45 30
201012 397,117.5 7,816,248.9 228 150 0 30
201013 396,923.8 7,816,144.5 230.2 330 -30 166.8
201014 396,839.9 7,816,091.4 230 154 0 101.5
201015 396,839.9 7,816,091.4 232.5 150 -45 36.9
201016 396,839.9 7,816,091.4 228.5 150 30 43.7
201017 396,879.7 7,816,114.1 230 150 0 56.1
201018 396,879.7 7,816,114.1 228.8 150 35 84
201019 396,879.7 7,816,114.1 232.5 150 -45 50
201020 396,897.0 7,816,122.5 230 150 0 53.1
201021 396,793.3 7,816,074.1 230 204 0 54

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects63

 

Table 10-9. Ulveryggen Drillhole Collars – Surface Drill Holes

 
    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth Dip Length
          (o) (o) (m)

Pre-2010

4451 397,473.3 7,816,499.6 330.0 330.0 90.0 15.0
4453 397,477.8 7,816,514.4 330.0 330.0 -90.0 15.0
9371 396,050.2 7,815,635.1 409.0 150.0 45.0 92.0
9401 396,060.2 7,815,658.1 420.0 150.0 45.0 65.6
9501 396,177.2 7,815,672.1 421.0 330.0 45.0 98.7
9502 396,235.2 7,815,580.1 395.0 330.0 45.0 246.0
9541 396,175.2 7,815,751.1 419.0 330.0 45.0 74.0
9581 396,230.2 7,815,730.1 427.9 330.0 27.0 112.7
9582 396,230.2 7,815,730.1 427.6 330.0 46.0 119.5
9621 396,230.2 7,815,800.1 423.0 330.0 45.0 80.0
9622 396,240.2 7,815,775.1 422.0 330.0 50.0 104.5
9661 396,286.2 7,815,802.1 427.9 330.0 29.7 120.3
9662 396,285.2 7,815,790.1 426.6 330.0 42.3 54.8
9663 396,290.2 7,815,792.1 426.6 330.0 41.8 115.1
9681 396,290.2 7,815,836.1 426.0 330.0 43.5 72.3
9701 396,300.2 7,815,842.1 420.0 330.0 45.0 70.0
9702 396,318.2 7,815,822.1 430.0 330.0 44.5 116.2
9703 396,308.2 7,815,845.1 426.6 330.0 16.3 72.3
9721 396,345.2 7,815,835.1 432.8 330.0 29.0 121.8
9751 396,350.2 7,815,877.1 431.5 330.0 42.0 76.9
9752 396,372.2 7,815,860.1 433.2 330.0 43.4 110.4
9753 396,350.2 7,815,877.1 431.5 330.0 15.2 57.3
9781 396,366.2 7,815,904.1 433.8 330.0 34.3 61.8
9801 396,420.2 7,815,888.1 434.3 330.0 44.5 128.6
9802 396,380.2 7,815,924.1 438.8 330.0 20.0 55.0
9803 396,380.2 7,815,924.1 438.7 330.0 24.0 17.2
9804 396,392.2 7,815,905.1 436.9 330.0 45.0 108.1
9805 396,380.2 7,815,924.1 438.7 330.0 45.0 86.0
9871 396,455.2 7,815,925.1 431.0 150.0 45.0 91.5
9951 396,558.2 7,816,002.1 423.0 150.0 60.0 101.8
10051 396,580.2 7,816,065.1 426.0 150.0 45.0 144.5
10091 396,625.2 7,816,075.1 417.0 150.0 45.0 126.7
10121 396,660.2 7,816,088.1 417.5 150.0 45.0 61.0
10122 396,648.2 7,816,108.1 416.5 150.0 47.0 158.6
10161 396,698.2 7,816,100.1 424.0 150.0 45.0 104.3
10162 396,675.2 7,816,130.1 417.0 150.0 46.0 141.0
10163 396,664.2 7,816,148.1 417.0 150.0 50.0 191.7
10164 396,768.2 7,815,974.1 392.5 330.0 50.0 303.6
10201 396,720.2 7,816,131.1 413.0 150.0 44.0 132.7
10202 396,705.2 7,816,160.1 413.0 150.0 49.0 185.8
10251 396,764.2 7,816,154.1 414.0 150.0 45.0 130.0
10252 396,744.2 7,816,190.1 410.0 150.0 50.0 148.0
10253 396,860.2 7,816,000.1 386.0 330.0 45.0 301.9
10254 396,830.2 7,816,040.1 394.0 330.0 46.0 127.0
10281 396,778.2 7,816,200.1 402.0 150.0 35.0 129.8
10321 396,815.2 7,816,215.1 397.0 150.0 50.0 176.3

 

 

    Collar Coordinates (m)      
YEAR BHID Easting Northing Elev'n Azimuth Dip Length
          (o) (o) (m)
  10322 396,900.2 7,816,054.1 383.0 330.0 50.0 285.1
  10323 396,880.2 7,816,103.1 395.0 330.0 35.0 187.6
  10361 396,929.4 7,816,105.3 390.0 330.0 60.0 325.6
  10362 396,889.4 7,816,161.7 408.0 330.0 30.0 133.8
  10431 397,002.2 7,816,112.1 371.0 330.0 40.0 264.8
  10432 396,980.2 7,816,140.1 379.0 330.0 17.0 192.5
  10481 397,033.2 7,816,151.1 379.0 330.0 36.0 217.9
  10531 396,986.2 7,816,328.1 374.0 150.0 30.0 99.5
  10532 397,025.2 7,816,276.1 390.0 330.0 48.0 45.5
  10533 397,160.2 7,816,032.1 329.5 330.0 45.0 43.1
  10581 397,105.2 7,816,227.1 379.0 330.0 45.0 39.4
  10601 397,200.2 7,816,105.1 342.0 330.0 45.0 39.9
  10611 397,062.2 7,816,375.1 375.0 150.0 30.0 85.1
  10681 397,113.2 7,816,413.1 375.0 150.0 25.0 168.0
  10682 397,226.2 7,816,225.1 356.0 330.0 60.0 256.7
  10731 397,232.2 7,816,300.1 370.0 330.0 45.0 83.7
  10732 397,310.2 7,816,152.1 330.0 330.0 45.0 38.2
  10921 397,380.2 7,816,418.1 360.0 330.0 45.0 55.9
Pre-2010 10981 397,450.2 7,816,441.1 338.0 330.0 30.0 67.2
  11041 397,485.2 7,816,485.1 330.0 330.0 45.0 98.0
  11042 397,520.2 7,816,446.1 330.0 330.0 45.0 62.0
  11581 398,050.2 7,816,600.1 272.0 330.0 75.0 135.0
  11861 398,280.2 7,816,750.1 245.0 330.0 90.0 152.9
  11862 398,280.2 7,816,750.1 245.0 150.0 45.0 134.9
  19685 396,660.2 7,815,940.1 400.0 330.0 43.0 115.0
  19686 396,745.2 7,816,000.1 391.0 330.0 45.0 130.0
  19687 396,808.2 7,816,076.1 402.0 330.0 47.0 172.0
  19688 396,905.4 7,816,132.2 397.0 330.0 43.0 211.0
  95023 396,195.2 7,815,650.1 421.0 330.0 15.0 126.8
  95034 396,195.2 7,815,650.1 421.0 330.0 25.0 129.8
  95412 396,214.2 7,815,690.1 425.6 330.0 16.7 119.9
  95423 396,223.2 7,815,675.1 420.2 330.0 25.5 132.1
  196811 397,181.2 7,816,295.1 380.0 330.0 45.0 195.0
  196820 396,968.2 7,816,065.1 370.0 330.0 46.0 280.0
  196821 397,058.2 7,816,125.1 366.0 330.0 47.0 275.0
  196822 397,144.2 7,816,172.1 365.0 330.0 45.0 245.0
  196823 397,212.2 7,816,256.1 365.0 330.0 46.0 245.0
  196824 397,300.2 7,816,352.1 365.0 330.0 45.0 250.0
2014 ULV-DD-14-001 397,054.4 7,816,046.2 353.7 324.0 70.0 412.0
  ULV-DD-17-01   397,009.5 7,816,093.8 370.3 330.0 53.5 135.0
  ULV-DD-17-02   397,081.4 7,816,143.8 368.3 330.0 46.0 96.7
  ULV-DD-17-03   397,081.8 7,816,142.9 368.1 330.0 62.5 136.3
2017 ULV-DD-17-04 396,985.0 7,816,079.0 370.0 330.0 55.0 109.2
  ULV-DD-17-05   396,985.0 7,816,079.0 370.0 310.0 57.3 127.5
  ULV-DD-17-06   396,766.9 7,815,973.2 385.6 330.0 60.0 171.6
  ULV-DD-17-07 396,767.0 7,815,973.0 385.6 332.0 64.5 190.3

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects64

 

Table 10-10. Summary of Main Intersections- Ulveryggen (1 of 2)

 

        Complete Intersections Intersections >0.3%Cu
BHID Zone FROM TO Length True
Thickness
Cu Length True
Thickness
Cu
    m m m m    % m m    %
ULV-DD-14-001 4 170.3 184.5 14.2 10.5 0.62 11.8 8.8 0.73
ULV-DD-17-01 4 69.1 111.3 42.2 38.7 0.47 22.3 20.5 0.86
ULV-DD-17-03 4 116.3 126.5 10.2 8.5 0.20 5.1 4.2 0.39
ULV-DD-17-04 4 53.7 100.4 46.7 41.4 0.23 14.7 13.1 0.51
ULV-DD-17-05 4 70.2 127.5 57.3 45.1 0.03 2.5 2.0 0.78
ULV-DD-17-06 2 93.4 120.3 26.9 23.9 0.36 17.1 15.2 0.48
ULV-DD-17-07 2 121.1 128.8 7.7 6.3 0.63 7.7 6.3 0.63
10051 2 73.0 117.0 44.0 20.0 0.09 4.9 2.2 0.43
10091 2 29.0 123.0 94.0 33.5 0.24 32.2 11.5 0.50
10121 2 3.0 61.0 58.0 19.8 0.27 20.2 6.9 0.57
10122 2 48.0 139.0 91.0 33.2 0.52 53.1 19.6 0.75
10161 2 0.0 70.0 70.0 26.3 0.64 60.0 22.6 0.74
10162 2 30.0 141.0 111.0 45.8 0.63 83.3 33.9 0.80
10163 2 89.0 192.0 103.0 40.1 0.35 55.3 21.5 0.56
10164 2 98.0 129.0 31.0 29.2 0.71 23.3 21.9 0.90
10201 2 0.0 98.0 98.0 43.0 0.57 72.9 32.8 0.72
10202 2 3.6 170.0 166.4 63.9 0.36 77.0 28.4 0.64
10251 2 0.0 83.5 83.5 30.5 0.75 65.8 24.0 0.91
102511 2 44.0 77.0 33.0 0.2 0.69 33.0 0.2 0.69
10252 2 24.0 125.0 101.0 38.6 0.64 98.5 37.6 0.71
10253 2 116.0 125.0 9.0 8.7 0.90 9.0 8.7 0.90
10253 3 287.5 290.6 3.1 3.1 1.62 3.1 3.1 1.62
10254 2 77.0 103.0 26.0 24.7 0.61 18.2 17.3 0.81
10255 3 140.0 150.0 10.0 8.8 0.70 7.5 6.6 0.87
10256 2 11.0 32.0 21.0 19.4 0.69 18.4 17.0 0.79
10257 2 13.0 24.0 11.0 9.9 0.89 11.0 9.9 0.89
10258 2 40.0 73.0 33.0 2.8 0.42 27.9 2.4 0.46
10281 2 16.0 129.8 113.8 61.6 0.38 61.8 33.3 0.54
10321 2 8.0 250.8 242.8 62.8 0.32 110.1 28.5 0.72
10322 2 109.0 138.0 29.0 27.4 0.19 7.3 6.9 0.43
10322 3 262.0 266.0 4.0 3.9 0.82 4.0 3.9 0.82
10323 2 63.0 124.6 61.6 61.2 0.12 2.6 2.6 0.40
10323 3 174.0 177.0 3.0 3.0 0.32 3.0 3.0 0.32
10361 3 235.0 237.0 2.0 1.8 0.62 2.0 1.8 0.62
10362 2 11.4 39.0 27.6 27.5 1.08 25.1 25.0 1.17
10431 3 237.0 255.0 18.0 17.9 0.47 12.9 12.8 0.56
10431 4 34.0 88.0 54.0 52.9 0.30 24.5 24.0 0.49
10432 4 1.0 55.0 54.0 53.3 0.51 29.5 29.1 0.79
104331 3 139.0 148.0 9.0 8.9 0.69 9.0 8.9 0.69
104342 4 22.0 48.0 26.0 23.6 0.62 18.2 16.5 0.82
10481 4 28.0 56.0 28.0 27.7 0.53 22.9 22.6 0.59
10531 3 32.0 58.0 26.0 15.6 0.10 2.6 1.6 0.32
105313 6 112.0 117.0 5.0 4.3 0.32 2.5 2.2 0.36
10532 3 36.7 42.0 5.3 4.9 0.49 2.7 2.4 0.80

 

      Complete Intersections Intersections >0.3%Cu
BHID Zone FROM TO Length True
Thickness
Cu Length True
Thickness
Cu
    m m m m    % m m    %
10581 4 20.0 32.0 12.0 11.3 0.62 12.0 11.3 0.62
10611 3 9.0 37.0 28.0 16.1 0.28 12.7 7.3 0.40
10681 3 23.0 40.0 17.0 11.3 0.39 14.6 9.7 0.43
10682 4 128.0 130.0 2.0 1.9 1.02 2.0 1.9 1.02
10721 3 118.0 126.0 8.0 3.7 0.41 5.3 2.4 0.49
10721 6 27.0 33.0 6.0 2.7 0.38 3.0 1.4 0.51
10731 4 21.0 39.0 18.0 17.0 0.93 18.0 17.0 0.93
10781 5 113.0 145.0 32.0 29.0 0.27 12.3 11.2 0.52
10921 6 32.5 41.0 8.5 8.0 0.64 8.5 8.0 0.64
1103 6 0.0 20.0 20.0 17.9 0.45 20.0 17.9 0.45
1104 6 0.0 6.0 6.0 5.4 1.10 6.0 5.4 1.10
11041 6 27.0 31.0 4.0 3.8 0.94 4.0 3.8 0.94
110431 6 62.0 72.0 10.0 9.1 0.39 7.5 6.8 0.46
1105 6 21.0 39.0 18.0 15.6 0.89 18.0 15.6 0.89
1107 6 0.0 13.0 13.0 11.7 0.60 13.0 11.7 0.60
1110 6 0.0 38.0 38.0 34.4 0.65 38.0 34.4 0.65
1111 6 12.0 23.0 11.0 8.6 0.44 11.0 8.6 0.44
1112 1 0.0 9.0 9.0 8.2 0.75 9.0 8.2 0.75
1113 1 0.0 9.0 9.0 8.2 0.70 9.0 8.2 0.70
1114 1 6.0 9.0 3.0 2.7 0.80 3.0 2.7 0.80
1115 1 0.0 8.0 8.0 7.3 0.53 5.3 4.8 0.80
1116 1 0.0 4.0 4.0 3.6 1.50 4.0 3.6 1.50
1117 1 8.0 29.0 21.0 19.0 1.69 21.0 19.0 1.69
1118 1 0.0 6.0 6.0 5.4 0.40 6.0 5.4 0.40
1119 1 4.0 31.0 27.0 24.5 0.51 19.6 17.8 0.60
1120 1 20.0 34.0 14.0 12.7 1.23 14.0 12.7 1.23
196811 3 131.0 151.9 20.9 20.4 0.27 5.2 5.1 0.43
196811 4 4.5 27.5 23.0 21.7 1.24 23.0 21.7 1.24
196820 3 241.5 267.7 26.2 26.2 1.01 26.2 26.2 1.01
196821 4 86.0 95.5 9.5 9.3 0.50 7.1 7.0 0.56
196822 4 97.5 99.0 1.5 1.4 0.50 1.5 1.4 0.50
196823 3 188.3 189.7 1.4 1.4 0.47 1.4 1.4 0.47
196823 4 71.5 84.0 12.5 12.0 0.83 12.5 12.0 0.83
196823 6 132.0 144.5 12.5 12.2 0.82 12.5 12.2 0.82
196824 5 167.5 179.5 12.0 11.3 0.47 4.8 4.5 0.86
19685 2 65.5 115.0 49.5 48.8 0.16 5.0 4.9 1.54
19686 2 54.5 106.5 52.0 50.4 0.57 37.1 35.9 0.71
19687 2 7.0 75.4 68.4 64.1 0.58 38.0 35.7 0.94
19688 2 65.0 79.0 14.0 13.6 0.97 14.0 13.6 0.97
19688 3 169.5 190.5 21.0 21.0 0.64 15.8 15.7 0.83
201001 2 27.0 28.0 1.0 0.8 0.62 1.0 0.8 0.62
201002 4 47.3 49.4 2.1 1.9 2.46 2.1 1.9 2.46
201003 4 30.0 52.0 22.0 19.9 0.85 19.6 17.7 0.93
201004 4 20.0 54.0 34.0 31.9 0.92 29.1 27.4 1.03

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects65

 

Table 10-11. Summary of Main Intersections- Ulveryggen (2 of 2)

 

        Complete Intersections Intersections >0.3%Cu
BHID  Zone  FROM  TO Length  True
Thickness
Cu Length True
Thickness
Cu
    m m m m % m m %
201005 4 28.0 46.0 18.0 16.3 0.17 5.1 4.7 0.32
201006 4 57.0 63.0 6.0 3.0 0.35 3.0 1.5 0.46
201006 6 5.0 9.0 4.0 2.0 0.47 2.0 1.0 0.67
201007 4 7.0 14.0 7.0 6.3 1.02 7.0 6.3 1.02
201008 4 13.0 19.0 6.0 3.0 0.97 6.0 3.0 0.97
201009 4 8.0 29.0 21.0 19.7 0.40 7.9 7.4 0.79
2010101 4 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.81 0.5 0.0 0.81
201014 2 1.0 18.7 17.7 16.0 0.24 7.8 7.1 0.36
201015 2 0.0 16.0 16.0 15.0 0.24 5.3 5.0 0.37
201016 2 0.0 19.0 19.0 10.9 0.51 14.3 8.2 0.61
201017 2 0.0 48.0 48.0 43.5 0.07 5.1 4.6 0.47
201017 4 52.0 54.0 2.0 1.8 0.48 2.0 1.8 0.48
201018 2 1.0 45.7 44.7 22.3 0.14 8.1 4.1 0.56
201019 2 1.0 54.0 53.0 49.8 0.07 5.5 5.2 0.47
201020 4 48.0 52.0 4.0 3.6 0.78 4.0 3.6 0.78
201021 2 11.0 26.0 15.0 8.0 0.37 10.0 5.3 0.47
2206 2 0.0 15.0 15.0 13.4 0.94 15.0 13.4 0.94
2207 2 0.0 13.0 13.0 11.6 0.58 13.0 11.6 0.58
2208 2 0.0 38.0 38.0 33.9 1.26 38.0 33.9 1.26
2209 2 7.0 21.0 14.0 12.5 0.97 14.0 12.5 0.97
2210 2 0.0 69.0 69.0 61.6 0.92 69.0 61.6 0.92
2212 2 0.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 1.65 9.0 8.0 1.65
2213 2 0.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 1.90 10.0 9.0 1.90
2214 2 0.0 9.0 9.0 8.1 0.60 9.0 8.1 0.60
2215 2 0.0 88.0 88.0 79.5 1.33 88.0 79.5 1.33
2216 2 0.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 0.50 10.0 9.0 0.50
2217 2 24.0 104.0 80.0 72.2 0.80 55.0 49.7 1.06
2218 2 44.0 87.0 43.0 38.8 2.03 43.0 38.8 2.03
2218 4 0.0 15.0 15.0 13.5 1.01 10.0 9.0 1.47
3301 4 10.0 39.0 29.0 26.3 1.02 24.2 21.9 1.18
3302 4 0.0 18.0 18.0 16.1 1.52 18.0 16.1 1.52
3303 4 0.0 34.0 34.0 30.7 1.08 34.0 30.7 1.08
3304 4 10.0 27.0 17.0 15.4 0.46 4.9 4.4 1.53
3305 4 16.0 28.0 12.0 10.8 1.70 12.0 10.8 1.70
3306 4 0.0 13.0 13.0 11.7 2.50 13.0 11.7 2.50
3307 4 0.0 12.0 12.0 10.9 0.68 12.0 10.9 0.68
3350 4 2.0 32.0 30.0 27.2 0.42 22.5 20.4 0.56
3351 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 2.0 1.95 25.0 2.0 1.95
3352 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 22.7 1.30 22.5 20.4 1.42
3353 4 0.0 22.0 22.0 19.6 1.13 22.0 19.6 1.13
3354 4 0.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 0.70 11.0 10.0 0.70
3401 3 0.0 24.0 24.0 21.8 0.70 24.0 21.8 0.70
3402 3 0.0 19.0 19.0 17.2 1.08 11.9 10.8 1.70
3403 3 0.0 23.0 23.0 20.8 0.70 23.0 20.8 0.70

 

 
        Complete Intersections Intersections >0.3%Cu
BHID  Zone  FROM  TO  Length  True
Thickness
Cu  Length  True
Thickness
Cu 
    m m m m % m m %
3404 3 10.0 40.0 30.0 26.8 0.40 30.0 26.8 0.40
4401 6 7.0 14.0 7.0 6.3 1.54 7.0 6.3 1.54
4402 6 8.0 24.0 16.0 14.3 1.29 16.0 14.3 1.29
4450 6 0.0 46.0 46.0 41.7 2.04 46.0 41.7 2.04
4451 6 0.0 27.5 27.5 11.6 1.10 27.5 11.6 1.10
4452 6 4.0 20.0 16.0 14.5 1.61 16.0 14.5 1.61
4453 6 0.0 15.0 15.0 6.3 2.36 15.0 6.3 2.36
9371 6 47.0 80.0 33.0 11.3 0.25 22.2 7.6 0.38
9401 6 50.0 65.0 15.0 5.1 0.23 2.5 0.9 0.45
9501 1 76.0 98.0 22.0 20.7 0.20 4.9 4.6 0.47
9501 6 11.0 38.0 27.0 25.4 0.26 9.8 9.2 0.42
9502 1 194.0 201.0 7.0 6.6 0.22 2.3 2.2 0.44
95023 1 103.0 105.0 2.0 2.0 0.82 2.0 2.0 0.82
95034 1 85.0 97.0 12.0 12.0 0.39 9.6 9.6 0.47
9541 1 0.0 35.4 35.4 33.3 0.84 27.8 26.1 1.01
95412 1 70.0 101.0 31.0 30.7 0.64 20.7 20.5 0.85
95423 1 85.0 125.0 40.0 40.0 0.43 14.3 14.3 0.66
9581 1 91.0 95.0 4.0 4.0 0.33 4.0 4.0 0.33
9582 1 51.0 113.0 62.0 57.9 0.39 42.8 40.0 0.65
9621 1 0.0 57.0 57.0 53.6 1.35 54.9 51.6 1.48
9622 1 70.0 95.0 25.0 22.7 0.45 17.5 15.9 0.55
9661 1 37.0 85.0 48.0 47.8 0.55 27.4 27.4 0.84
9662 1 32.0 54.8 22.8 21.8 0.27 12.7 12.1 0.36
9663 1 49.0 115.1 66.1 63.2 0.46 29.8 28.5 0.86
9681 1 28.0 61.0 33.0 31.3 0.73 20.3 19.3 1.14
9701 1 37.0 58.0 21.0 19.7 0.76 18.4 17.3 0.84
9702 1 92.0 116.2 24.2 22.8 0.89 14.5 13.7 1.39
9703 1 22.0 40.0 18.0 17.8 0.88 12.9 12.7 1.22
9721 1 73.0 98.0 25.0 24.9 0.53 10.0 10.0 1.15
9721 6 40.0 51.0 11.0 11.0 0.54 8.3 8.2 0.71
9751 1 65.8 76.2 10.4 9.9 1.47 10.4 9.9 1.47
9751 6 13.0 16.0 3.0 2.9 0.48 3.0 2.9 0.48
9752 6 15.0 22.0 7.0 6.6 0.46 7.0 6.6 0.46
9753 1 51.0 53.0 2.0 2.0 0.51 2.0 2.0 0.51
9753 6 6.0 34.0 28.0 27.6 0.53 28.0 27.6 0.53
9781 1 43.0 44.0 1.0 1.0 0.43 1.0 1.0 0.43
9801 6 19.0 44.0 25.0 23.6 0.73 25.0 23.6 0.73
9802 1 0.0 14.0 14.0 13.9 0.44 14.0 13.9 0.44
9803 1 0.0 17.2 17.2 17.2 0.28 9.8 9.8 0.48
9804 1 27.0 37.0 10.0 9.4 0.29 5.0 4.7 0.42
9805 1 0.0 19.0 19.0 17.9 0.36 14.3 13.4 0.43
9951 2 5.0 37.8 32.8 2.9 0.44 22.7 2.0 0.56

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects66

 

Figure 10-3. Plan of Drillholes and Mineralised Zones - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Figure 10-4. 3D View of Drillholes Looking NE - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects67

 

Figure 10-5. Plan of Drill Holes

 

 

  

Figure 10-6. Example Drill Hole Sections 

[Sections lines referenced in Figure 10-5]

  

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects68

 

11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS AND SECURITY

 

11.1 Nussir

 

11.1.1 1984 to 1996

 

Descriptions of historical sampling methods, preparation and analysis by ASPRO have been recorded. The sample intervals are well defined. The sample intervals were picked based on mineralized or geological boundaries. Chemical analysis was normally made for one-meter intervals.

 

No cores before 1986 are available. Cores from 1986 to 1996 are stored at the central Norwegian core facility at the Norwegian Geological Survey, Lokken in Trondheim. Sampling and splitting of the cores were done by the company at the site, and sample preparation such as crushing and pulverizing was done by the laboratories.

 

Mercury Analytical Ltd. was responsible for assay analysis from 1984 to 1985. In 1988, six diamond drill holes were drilled. The holes were analysed by Caleb Brett Laboratories, England. In both cases, the analytical methods are not known, and the analysed core lengths are usually one meter or shorter.

 

These pre-2000 samples were analysed for Cu, Ag and Au. Cu-oxide mineralization is confined typically to the upper level of the deposit and, historically, non-sulphide Cu was not universally quantified by analysis of soluble Cu.

 

In 2002, 63 samples from nine holes were re-analysed for 47 elements by Aqua Regia digestion and ICP by OMAC Laboratories, Ireland. Only Ag among the precious metals was analysed. The samples are from drill holes Bh 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 35, 38 and 40, but only a few meters of each of the drill holes were analysed. The core was usually analysed for one-meter sections.

 

11.1.2 Terra Control/Nussir ASA 2006 to 2019

 

From 2006 to 2008, TerraControl (now Nussir ASA) and Nussir ASA drilled 43 (five were abandoned) diamond drill holes on the Nussir property.

 

Most of the core samples from 2006 and 2007 were marked on core boxes, and cut in half by the on-site geologist, Kjell Nilsen. The samples were placed in boxes and shipped to OMAC, Ireland, for analysis. The drill core boxes from the 2008 drilling campaign were shipped to ALS Chemex in Sweden, which did all the sample preparation based on the marked intervals made by Nussir`s on-site geologist.

 

Between 2006 and 2008, samples from 20 percussion drillholes and nine diamond drill holes were analysed for 46 elements using Aqua Regia digestion and ICP-OES by OMAC Laboratories, Ireland.

 

In 2008, 199 samples from four diamond drillholes (Bh 19, 20, 39, 40) were re-analysed for 46 elements, using four-acid ICP-AES and Pt, Pd, Au 30g Fire Acid ICP. Samples from 30 diamond drillholes were analysed in 2008 by 46 elements four-acid ICP-AES and Pt, Pd, Au 30g Fire Acid ICP.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects69

 

In 2011, six diamond drillholes were analysed by ALS Chemex laboratory in Sweden by 33 element four acid ICP-AES and Au, Pt and Pd 30 g Fire Assay ICP. In this campaign, intersections for assaying were identified by initial assaying using handheld XRF. In 2011 and 2013, external check samples were sent to SGS.

 

For the drilling campaigns in 2015, 2017 and 2019, ALS Chemex was used as the primary laboratory, and Labtium as the external check laboratory.

 

Sample preparation work has been done using ALS Chemex in Piteå, under instructions from Nussir’s geologists, using the following steps:

 

1.Sawing of core into two halves.
2.Crushing of one-half sample, 70% < 2mm.
3.Riffle splitting of crushed sample.
4.Pulverising to 85% < 75 µm.
5.Taking of sample for analysis.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects70

 

11.1.3 Quality Assurance/ Quality Control

 

2008

 

During 2008, 1443 assay measurements were also made by OMAC, from core stemming from the 1990 drilling campaigns. Most of these were taken to provide measurements of previously unassayed core, but 69 overlapped with previous assays, measured in either Mercury Analytical or Caleb Brett laboratories. A diagram depicting these reassayed duplicates is shown in Figure 11-1 and a check analysis study of this data is summarised in Table 11-1.

 

Figure 11-1. Nussir - Reassayed Grade Comparison

 

 

 

Table 11-1. Summary of Reassay Cu Analysis - 2008

 

  HARD   Slope of  
Number of Precision Correlation Regression Proportion
Pairs @90% Rank Coefficient Line Misclassified
69 31% 95.7% 0.993 7.6%

 

Notes

 

. Misclassification based on 0.3% Cu 

. HARD = Half Absolute Relative Difference 

. In HARD calculation, 10pmm used as level of precision

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects71

  

2009-2011

 

This combined set of 110 check samples was analysed for the 2009 campaign, and the Cu grades are displayed diagrammatically in Figure 11-2.

 

Figure 11-2. Check Assay Scatterplot – 2009 Campaign.

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects72

 

The results of an additional 2011 check analysis study are shown in the table below.

 

Table 11-2. Summary of 2011 Nussir Cu Check Assay Analysis

 

  HARD   Slope of  
Number of Precision Correlation Regression Proportion
Pairs @90% Rank Coefficient Line Misclassified
110 17.0% 97.98% 1.018 3.60%

 

Notes

 

. Misclassification based on 0.3% Cu 

. HARD = Half Absolute Relative Difference 

. In HARD calculation, 10pmm used as level of precision

 

For the samples associated with the 2011 drilling campaign, the following quality control measures were taken:

 

-Standards (certified by Geostat Pty. Ltd.) and blanks were inserted for every ten samples, and at the start of every batch.

 

-ALS inserted their own internal duplicates in the laboratory. Of the 141 samples assayed for the 2011 campaign, 4 internal duplicates were taken, as depicted in diagram in Figure 11-3 and summarised in Table 11-3.

 

Figure 11-3. ALS Internal Duplicate Assays – 2011 Drilling Campaign

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects73

 

Table 11-3. Summary of 2011 ALS Internal Duplicates

 

    Slope of  
Number Correlation Regression Proportion
of Pairs Coefficient Line Misclassified
4 99.8% 0.997 0.0%

 

Notes

 

. Misclassification based on 0.3% Cu 

. All HARD (Half Absolute Relative Difference) levels below 5%

 

2013

 

For the 2013 campaign, 6-7 internal coarse duplicates were taken, out of 152 primary assays. The results from these duplicates are shown in Figure 11-4 and Table 11-4.

 

Figure 11-4. Internal Coarse Cu Duplicates - 2013

 

 

 

Table 11-4. Summary of Internal Coarse Duplicates - 2013

 

      Slope of
Metal Number of Correlation Regression
  Pairs Coefficient Line
Cu 7 99.9% 0.99
Au 6 99.9% 1.12
Pd 6 99.7% 0.92

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects74

 

During the 2013 campaign one blank was inserted for approximately every 10 samples. These blanks were prepared from local gabbro source. Of these 26 samples, only 2 showed any Cu grades above expected blank levels, as shown in Figure 11-5, representing 8% of the samples analysed. The cause of the 2 error values is not known.

 

Figure 11-5. Blanks’ Results – 2013

 

 

 

During 2013, 27 external duplicates were assayed at SGS, stemming from pulp material returned by ALS from the 2011 and spring 2013 campaigns. These results are summarised in Figure 11-6 and Table 11-5.

 

Figure 11-6. External Duplicates - 2013

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects75

 

Table 11-5. External Duplicates’ Summary – 2013  

 

    HARD   Slope of  
Metal Number Precision Correlation Regression Proportion
  of Pairs @90% Rank Coefficient Line Misclassified
Cu 27 8.2% 99.8% 0.901 3.7%
Ag 27 25.0% 99.1% 0.980  
Au 27 28.0% 99.2% 1.090  
Pd 24 29.0% 99.9% 0.963  
Pt 12 14.0% 99.9% 1.060  

 

Notes

. Misclassification based on 0.3% Cu

. HARD = Half Absolute Relative Difference

  

Three external standard samples were purchased from Geostat. The results of assays on two of these standards are shown in Figure 11-7. These cover both 2011 and 2013 results.

 

Figure 11-7. Standards’ Results - 2013

 

 

 

The results from these 2 standards are acceptable, with no check assays outside of 2 x standard deviation limits. Another lower grade standard was also assayed, and produced consistent results, but there appears to have been a misallocation of the standard ID, and so these results have not been used.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects76

 

2014-2015

 

A summary of the QA/QC samples taken through the 2014 and 2015 campaigns is shown below in Table 11-6.

 

Table 11-6. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2014 and 2015

 

Type of Control

 

Number of

Samples

Number Frequency  
 
Twin Samples TS 265 24 9%  
Coarse Duplicates CD 265 2 0.8%  
Fine Duplicates PD 265 19 7%  
Standards STD 265 16 6%  
Coarse Blanks CB 265 16 6%  
Fine Blanks FB 265 21 8%  
External Controls EC 265 30 11%  
      Total 48%  

 

A summary of the 2015 field duplicates’ results is shown in Figure 11-8. These results show a relatively high proportion of errors. The 2014 and 2015 pulp duplicates’ results are shown in Figure 11-9. Both sets of results are acceptable.

 

In the 2014 campaign, primary samples were assayed at Labtium, with external assaying done at ALS. In the 2015 campaign, primary samples were assayed at ALS, with external assaying done at Labtium.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects77

  

Figure 11-8. 2015 Field Duplicates – Precision Analysis

 

 

 

Figure 11-9. Pulp Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects78

 

The external duplicates’ results are shown in Figure 11-10. These results are acceptable.

 

Figure 11-10. External Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015

 

 

 

The coarse blanks’ results are shown in Figure 11-11. These results are acceptable.

 

Figure 11-11. Blanks’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects79

 

2017

 

A summary of the QA/QC samples taken through the 2017 drilling campaign is shown in Table 11-7.

 

Table 11-7. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2017

 

Type of Control   Number of Number Frequency  
  Samples  
Twin Samples TS 265 24 9%  
Coarse Duplicates CD 265 2 0.8%  
Fine Duplicates PD 265 19 7%  
Standards STD 265 16 6%  
Coarse Blanks CB 265 16 6%  
Fine Blanks FB 265 21 8%  
External Controls EC 265 30 11%  
      Total 48%  

 

Precision analysis results for field duplicates are summarised in Figure 11-12 and Table 11-8. The proportion of errors is greater than the usual 10% error threshold for acceptability. However, one of the error pairs is almost directly on the error limit failure line. If this one error was removed, the proportion of errors would be reduced to 13%.

 

Figure 11-12. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017

 

 

 

Table 11-8. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017

 

  Number of    
Type Pairs Failed Error %
PD - Cu 24 4 17%

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects80

 

Coarse duplicate measurements were very limited but are shown graphically in Figure 11-13. Precision analysis results for pulp duplicates are summarised in Figure 11-14 and Table 11-9. These results are quite acceptable.

 

Figure 11-13. Precision Analysis – Coarse Duplicates - 2017

 

 

 

Figure 11-14. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017

 

 

 

Table 11-9. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017

 

Type Number of Pairs Failed Error %
PD - Cu 18 1 5.6%

 

Results for standards’ analysis are shown in Figure 11-15 and Table 11-10. These results are consistently acceptable.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects81

 

 

Figure 11-15. Standard Analyses’ Graphs – Cu% - 2017

 

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects82

 

Table 11-10. Standards’ Results Summary and Global Accuracy - 2017

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects83

 

Coarse blanks’ results are summarised in Figure 11-16. This shows consistently acceptable results, as well as no relationship with previous assays, indicating no contamination during sample preparation.

 

Figure 11-16. Coarse Blanks’ Assays - 2017

 

 

All fine blanks’ Cu assays were below the level of detection, indicating no contamination during analysis.

 

The lack of coarse duplicates results means there is no direct measure of the precision of sample preparation. That withstanding, it may be concluded that overall, the 2017 QA/QC results are generally acceptable.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects84

 

2019

 

A summary of the QA/QC samples taken through the 2019 drilling campaign is shown in Table 11-11.

 

Table 11-11. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2019

 

Type of   Number of    
Control   Primary Samples Number Frequency
Twin Samples TS 100 9 9%
Coarse Duplicates CD 100 11 11%
Fine Duplicates PD 100 11 11%
Standards STD 100 5 5%
Coarse Blanks CB 100 9 9%
Fine Blanks FB 100 0 0%
External Controls EC 100 10 10%
      Total 55%

 

Precision analysis results for all forms of duplicates are shown in Figure 11-17, Figure 11-18 and Figure 11-19: no errors were apparent.

 

Standards’ results are summarised in Figure 11-21 and Figure 11-22; no errors were apparent.

 

Coarse blanks’ results are shown in Figure 11-20. Although of the assays are rather high, there appears to be no relationship with the previous assays.

 

Figure 11-12 and Table 11-8. The proportion of errors is greater than the usual 10% error threshold for acceptability. However, one of the error pairs is almost directly on the error limit failure line. If this one error was removed, the proportion of errors would be reduced to 13%.

 

Results for the external check Cu samples, which were sent to Labtium, are shown in Figure 11-23. The show very low bias results, and those check samples which were outliers had extremely low grades, of less than 0.005% Cu.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects85

 

Figure 11-17. Field Duplicates’ Results -2019

 

 

Figure 11-18. Coarse Duplicates’ Results -2019

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects86

 

Figure 11-19. Pulp Duplicates’ Results -2019

 

  

Figure 11-20. Coarse Blanks’ Results – 2019

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects87

 

Figure 11-21. Standard 910-11 Results 2017-2019

 

 

Figure 11-22. Standard 310-1 Results 2017-2019

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects88

 

Figure 11-23. External Check Sample Results – 2019

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects89

 

11.1.4 Density Measurements

 

Density measurements were done by Promin. Selected drill core billets were accurately cut and then polished to have a cut that was as close to 90° as possible (at SINTEF). The length was then measured four times around the circumference of the drill core and averaged.

 

The same was done with the diameter of the core; measured 4 times and averaged. The resulting volume was then used as the volume for the core billet. Along with the dry weight, the density was then calculated. The drill cores were also inspected for any chippings or other damage to the cylinder shape, to check the volume calculation was not affected.

 

11.1.5 Summary

 

Up to the end of 2013, the Nussir deposit database stemmed primarily from 108 drillholes, with 1,974 samples. In the 2009 sampling campaign, assays were obtained from OMAC and ALS laboratories. During April-May 2011, 93 samples were sent for check assay to the ALS laboratory (which had originally been assayed by OMAC) and 17 samples were sent for check assay to the OMAC laboratory (which had originally been assayed by ALS). Up to the end of 2009, this gave 110 check assay measurements, approximately 1 in 12 of the available assays, which was considered an acceptable proportion of samples.

 

For the 2011 and 2013 drilling campaigns, primary samples were analysed by ALS Chemex in Sweden, using four-acid ICP-AES. External duplicates were analysed at SGS laboratories in Bor, Serbia.

 

In the 2014 campaign, primary samples were assayed at Labtium, with external assaying done at ALS. In the 2015-2019 campaigns, primary samples were assayed at ALS, with external assaying done at Labtium.

 

The standards (Geostats Pty, Ltd.) used for Nussir work are summarised below:

 

Table 11-12. Summary of Sample Standards

  

Campaigns Standard Certified Cu Grade
    Cu %
Prior to 2014 GBM303-8 1.395
GBM309-4 2.233
2014 -2019 GBM907-14 0.813
GBM310-1 0.579
GBM910-11 0.131

 

11.2 Ulveryggen

 

11.2.1 Sample Preparation and Analysis

 

In 2014 and 2017, the diamond drillhole samples were analysed by ALS Chemex laboratory in Sweden by four acid ICP-AES. The selection of intersections for assaying was also assisted by initial assaying using handheld XRF.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects90

 

Sample preparation work has been done using ALS Chemex in Piteå, under instructions from Nussir’s geologists, using the following steps:

 

1.Sawing of core into two halves.
2.Crushing of one-half sample, 70% < 2mm.
3.Riffle splitting of crushed sample.
4.Pulverising to 85% < 75 µm.
5.Taking of sample for analysis.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects91

 

11.2.2 Quality Assurance/ Quality Control

 

2014

 

In terms of sample preparation and QA/QC, the Ulveryggen drillholes completed in 2014 were part of the drilling campaign for the neighbouring Nussir deposit. A summary of the QA/QC samples taken through the 2014 and 2015 campaigns for Nussir is shown below in Table 11-13.

 

Table 11-13. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2014 and 2015

 

  2014 2015 Combined
  Number Proportion Number Proportion Number Proportion
Primary Samples 324   247   571  
Field Duplicates 0 0.0% 23 9.3% 23 4.0%
Pulp Duplicates 4 1.2% 21 8.5% 25 4.4%
External Duplicates 14 4.3% 13 5.3% 27 4.7%
Blanks 4 1.2% 12 4.9% 16 2.8%
Standards 14 4.3% 18 7.3% 32 5.6%
Total   11.1%   35.2%   21.5%

 

A summary of the 2015 field duplicates’ results is shown in Figure 11-2. These results show a relatively high proportion of errors. The 2014 and 2015 pulp duplicates’ results are shown in Figure 11-25. Both sets of results are acceptable.

 

In the 2014 campaign, primary samples were assayed at Labtium, with external assaying done at ALS. In the 2015 campaign, primary samples were assayed at ALS, with external assaying done at Labtium.

 

Standards’ results were acceptable, and although there were not sufficient of them for the same standard ID to present graphically. The standards used are summarised below.

 

Table 11-14. Summary of Standards Used for Ulveryggen

 

Standards Target Range
  Cu ppm
GBM908-5 447-549
MRGeo08 567-695
OGGeo08 7680-9400
OREAS-45P 992-1215

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects92

 

Figure 11-24. 2015 Field Duplicates – Precision Analysis

 

 

Figure 11-25. Pulp Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects93

 

The external duplicates’ results are shown in Figure 11-26. These results are acceptable.

 

Figure 11-26. External Duplicates’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015

 

 

The coarse blanks’ results are shown in Figure 11-27. These results are acceptable.

 

Figure 11-27. Blanks’ Analyses – 2014 and 2015

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects94

 

2017

 

In terms of sample preparation and QA/QC, the seven Ulveryggen drillholes completed in 2017 were part of the drilling campaign for the neighbouring Nussir deposit. A summary of the QA/QC samples taken through the 2017 campaign for Nussir is shown below in Table 11-15. Of the 265 total primary samples assayed, 177 came from the Nussir drilling, 88 came from Ulveryggen.

 

Table 11-15. Summary of QAQC Samples – 2017

 

Type of Control   Number of Number Frequency  
  Samples  
Twin Samples TS 265 24 9%  
Coarse Duplicates CD 265      
Fine Duplicates PD 265 19 7%  
Standards STD 265 16 6%  
Coarse Blanks CB 265 16 6%  
Fine Blanks FB 265 21 8%  
External Controls EC 265 30 11%  
      Total 48%  

 

Precision analysis results for field duplicates are summarised in Figure 11-28 and Table 11-16. The proportion of errors is greater than the usual 10% error threshold for acceptability. However, one of the error pairs is almost directly on the error limit failure line. If this one error was removed, the proportion of errors would be reduced to 13%.

 

Figure 11-28. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects95

 

Table 11-16. Precision Analysis – Field Duplicates - 2017

 

  Number of    
Type Pairs Failed Error %
PD - Cu 24 4 17%

 

Precision analysis results for pulp duplicates are summarised in Figure 11-29 and Table 11-17 These results are quite acceptable.

 

Figure 11-29. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017

 

 

Table 11-17. Precision Analysis – Pulp Duplicates - 2017

 

Type Number of Pairs Failed Error %
PD - Cu 18 1 5.6%

 

Results for standards’ analysis are shown in Figure 11-30 and Table 11-18. These results are consistently acceptable.

 

Coarse blanks’ results are summarised in Figure 11-31. This shows consistently acceptable results, as well as no relationship with previous assays, indicating no contamination during sample preparation.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects96

 

Figure 11-30. Standard Analyses’ Graphs – Cu% - 2017

 

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects97

 

Table 11-18. Standards’ Results Summary and Global Accuracy - 2017

 

 

Figure 11-31. Coarse Blanks’ Assays - 2017

 

 

All fine blanks’ Cu assays were below the level of detection, indicating no contamination during analysis. The absence of coarse duplicates results means there is no direct measure of the precision of sample preparation. That withstanding, it may be concluded that overall the 2017 QA/QC results are generally acceptable.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects98

 

11.3 Core and Sample Storage

 

Drill core is stored at Blue Moon’s’s facility at Skaidi and at the NGU national archive in Løkken. Both are secure lockable facilities. The Author has visited them both. A summary of the core inventories is shown in Table 11-8.

 

Table 11-19. Summary of Core Inventories

 

Location Description Holes Length Average Length  
m per Hole (m)  
Skaidi Nussir Complete Holes 11 3,028 275  
  Nussir Mineralised Intersections 79 1,162 15  
Lokken Nussir   166 33,909 204  
  Ulveryggen 23 1,805 78  

 

Rejects and pulp material from 29 Nussir holes (all from 2014) and 1 Ulveryggen hole are stored at Løkken, stemming from the preparation of 289 samples. There is also reject and pulp material at the core shack in Skaidi, but there is no inventory available for this at the current time.

 

11.4 Overview

 

There have been five laboratories associated with the Nussir and Ulveryggen project over the year (Table 11-20). Three of the five laboratories have ISO 17025 accreditation. It should be noted that none of the laboratories involved in either project have or have had interests in the project or the operators, which includes Nussir ASA.

 

In the opinion of the Author, the QA/QC results overall are acceptable and support the use of the available samples for resource estimation purposes on the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits.

 

Table 11-20. Summary of Analytical Laboratories

 

  Years Accreditation
Mercury Analytical 1984-1985  
Caleb Brett Laboratories 1988  
OMAC Laboratories 2002-2008 ISO/IEC 17025
Labtium 2014 ISO/IEC 17025
ALS Chemex 2008-2019 ISO/IEC 17025

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects99

 

12 DATA VERIFICATION

 

During the most recent site visit, the Author undertook the following data verification steps completed by the Author include:

 

·Site visits to Nussir, before, during, and after exploration drilling campaigns.
·Site visit to Ulveryggen, including open pits and exploration adit.
·Check review of example Nussir and Ulveryggen deposit drill core, at Skaidi and the NGU core storage in Lokken.
·Check of collar positions relative to surface maps.
·Check of data base integrity through drillhole data processing, statistical analysis, visualisation and plotting.
·Additional checking of Ulveryggen sample data relative to underground adit model.

 

12.1 Site Visits

 

In 2007, the Author walked the entire strike length of the Nussir deposit outcrop and project area. In 2014, the Author visited Nussir during that year’s drilling campaign. Pictures of the general topography at Nussir and a typical drill rig set-up are shown in Figure 12-1 and Figure 12-2, respectively. The Author most recently visited Nussir between January 14 and 16, 2025.

 

The Author has also done check review work of example Nussir and Ulveryggen drill core, at Skaidi (Figure 12-5) and the NGU core storage in Løkken.

 

The Author also visited the Ulveryggen site in 2010, which included the old open pit areas and the underground drilling locations. He also visited Ulveryggen between January 14 to 16, 2025. A picture of some of the old pit workings is shown in Figure 12-3. This shows copper-staining on the pit wall, the sheared nature of mineralized zones, and looks across to the hills just to the west of the Nussir deposit. A picture directly into the some of the old pit workings is shown in Figure 12-4.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects100

 

Figure 12-1. Looking West Along Topography at Nussir

 

 

Figure 12-2. Looking North at Drilling Rig Set-Up – Nussir

 

 

Figure 12-3. South-East Wall of Holvedfelt Pit, Ulveryggen

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects101

 

Figure 12-4. Looking Eastwards into Old Pit Workings, Ulveryggen

 

 

Figure 12-5. Skaidi Core Shack

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects102

 

12.2 Drillhole Data

 

12.2.1 Collar Data

 

The Author did his own GPS verifications of 5 historic and recent drillhole collar positions at Nussir during his 2014 site visit. Any XY errors were within 2 m accuracy of the information in the databases, and the Author found no anomalies that would be material to any mineral resource estimate.

 

The drillhole collars for both Nussir and Ulveryggen, which have been measured by DPOS or CPOS, have been checked for elevation against LiDAR topographical data. Histograms comparing LiDAR elevation differences, and the DPOS/CPOS systems, is shown in Figure 12-6. A summary of the elevation differences from this check exercise for Nussir is shown in Table 12-2 , and elevation differences have been plotted as histograms in Figure 12-7. A summary of the elevation differences for Ulveryggen is shown in Table 12-3, and elevation differences have been plotted as histograms in Figure 12-8.

 

The Author also reviewed results from a 2019 resurveying exercise of azimuths at drillhole collars. For the original survey file, 65 holes only had one measurement, i.e. 156 had a proper series of downhole measurements. Of these 65, 33 hole-collars’ azimuths were remeasured in 2019 using Devico equipment. The results of the horizontal displacements, at end of these holes due to the azimuth differences, is shown in Table 12-1.

 

Table 12-1. Summary of Horizontal Displacements - Azimuth Differences – Nussir

 

Parameter Value
Number of Collars 30
Mean 4.90
Median 37.76
Prop'n exceeding 0.5m 33%
Prop'n exceeding 1m 23.3%
Prop'n exceeding 5m 10.0%

 

For these check data, observations include:

 

·For Nussir deposit, there does not appear to be in appreciable difference in elevation accuracy between DPOS and CPOS measurements as verified by the Author.

 

·The azimuth validation review by the Author has identified 3 of the holes with high differences. Two of these three holes did not intersection mineralisation, and the remaining hole has negligible effect of the zones’ interpretation.

 

·In general, the elevation differences seem worse for Ulveryggen deposit than Nussir deposit. However, this might be due to difficult type of topography at Ulveryggen deposit, with many very steep faces and slopes left by the open pit mining, making the LiDAR pick-up more difficult without more detailed DPOS or CPOS measurements for calibration.

 

·The distribution of LiDAR errors is near normal, not indicating any positive or negative bias in the opinion of the Author.

 

·The proportion of +2m and +5m LiDAR errors are rather high, and efforts in the future should be made to increase the precision.

 

·There does not appear to be any relationship between higher elevation differences and X-Y positioning, as shown in Figure 12-9.

 

·It is considered the errors encountered from this validation exercise do not have any appreciable effect on the current MRE.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects103

 

Figure 12-6. Histograms of Collars’ LiDAR Errors - Nussir

 

 

Figure 12-7. Histograms of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR - Nussir

 

 

Table 12-2. Summary of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR - Nussir

 

Parameter All Holes Mineralised  
Holes  
Number of Collars 221 178  
Mean Absolute Difference (m) 1.66 1.42  
Median Absolute Difference (m) 0.83 0.80  
Prop'n exceeding Mean+3SD 2.7% 2.2%  
Prop'n exceeding 2m 21.7% 18.5%  
Prop'n exceeding 5m 7.2% 5.1%  
Prop'n exceeding 10m 2.7% 1.7%  

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects104

 

Figure 12-8. Histograms of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR - Ulveryggen

 

 

Table 12-3. Summary of Collars’ Elevation Differences with LiDAR – Ulveryggen

 

Parameter All Holes * Mineralised  
Holes  
Number of Collars 93 67  
Mean Absolute Difference (m) 2.48 2.76  
Median Absolute Difference (m) 1.77 2.11  
Prop'n exceeding Mean+3SD 0.1% 0.0%  
Prop'n exceeding 2m 46.2% 50.7%  
Prop'n exceeding 5m 14.0% 16.4%  
Prop'n exceeding 10m 2.2% 3.0%  

 

Notes

* Surface holes unaffected by open pit mining

 

Figure 12-9. Plan of LiDAR Differences with Collar Elevation - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects105

 

12.2.2 Drillhole Core

 

The Author’s site visits included a review of selected Nussir and Ulveryggen deposit drill core, at Skaidi and the NGU core storage in Lokken, in order to validate and verify the information in the databases against data entry. The drill holes from which mineralised intersections were verified are summarised in Figure 12-10. The items reviewed during this work included:

 

·Correspondence between logged/database lithologies, and actual lithologies in the core boxes.
·Correspondence between mineralisation and marked sample limits with the database.
·Any notable aspects of copper mineralisation.

 

Examples of core photos from the Author’s core review at Lokken are shown in Figure 12-11 to Figure 12-16. The red blocked-out sections are the main zone intersections, with average zone intersection grades shown above. In these reviews the mineralisation and lithologies observed correspond well with the database information.

 

Figure 12-10. 3D View of Holes, Showing Holes of Core Review

 

 

12.3 Database

 

Check of database integrity was through operations including:

 

·Range checks.
·Checks of tabulated data against original logged data.
·Drillhole data processing.
·Statistical analysis
·Visualisation and plotting.

 

The Author completed all of the above verification steps. In the case of Ulveryggen, there was additional checking by the Author of Ulveryggen sample data relative to the underground adit model and the old open pit workings.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects106

 

Figure 12-11. Hole NUS-DD-90-009

[24-27.8m, 1.48%Cu, 35.3g/tAg, 0.07g/tAu]

 

 

Figure 12-12. Hole NUS-DD-90-017

[73.85-77.7m; 1.82%Cu, 16.1g/tAg, 0.15g/tAu]

 

 

Figure 12-13. Hole NUS-DD-90-021

[97-100m; 1.23%Cu, 15.5g/tAg, 0.15g/tAu]

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects107

 

 

Figure 12-14. Hole NUS-DD-14-001

[1078.85-1088.4m, 0.94%Cu, 11.7g/tAg, 0.28g/tAu]

 

 

Figure 12-15. Hole NUS-DD-15-030

[445.6-449.2m; 1.22%Cu, 27.3g/tAg, 0.16g/tAu]

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects108

 

Figure 12-16. Hole ULV-DD-17-06

[95.3-100.2m; 0.58%Cu]

 

 

12.4 Overview

 

The data verification procedures applied by the Author are described in sections 12.1, 12,2 and 12.3 above. Please note that the Author was not able to verify surface drillhole collar locations at Ulveryggen deposit, owing to surface mining activities after drilling, as well as extensive snow cover at the time of the Author’s visits. However, the additional validation step of comparison drill collar locations with LIDAR data, as well as analysis of sections of the pit workings relative to drillhole data, have led the Author to believe that the Ulveryggen deposit, surface drillhole collar data are valid and therefore verified for resource estimation purposes.

 

In the Author’s opinion, the geological data in the databases are also adequate for the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposit, resource estimation work, and that this technical information was collected in line with industry best practices, as defined in the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects109

 

13 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

 

13.1 Overview

 

Several metallurgical test work programs have been executed under Nussir ASA project development on the Nussir and Ulveryggen copper deposits. Three major test work programs were performed between 2010/11 and 2019:

 

·“An Investigation into RECOVERY OF COPPER FROM THE KVALSUND DEPOSIT” prepared for NUSSIR ASA, SGS Project 12527-001 – Final report, dated May 9, 2011.
·For a historical PFS in 2016; “SGS Lakefield “An Investigation into PRE-FEASIBILITY LEVEL METALLURGICAL TESTING ON SAMPLES FROM NUSSIR AND ULVERYGGEN COPPER DEPOSITS” prepared for NUSSIR ASA, SGS Project 12527-003 – Final Report, dated Aug 17, 2016.

 

All test work has been done by SGS Lakefield, Canada, and are documented in separate reports. Canadian consultant and flotation provider, Woodgrove Technologies, took part in coordinating the test programs. The Ulveryggen deposit was in production from 1972 to 1979, with documented process plant performance.

 

The two deposits yield copper concentrate grades and copper recoveries that are very high compared to most copper deposits in the world. The reason for the high concentrate grade is due to the high amount of bornite and chalcocite in the deposits. The high copper recovery is due to the clean ore with practically no other sulphides, no oxidised ore and beneficial grind size for efficient flotation.

 

The following types of metallurgical samples were taken in the historical 2019 DFS testwork and sent to SGS for different metallurgical tests, including but not limited to grindability and flotation testing.

 

1.Composite Samples. Three different spatial composites from Nussir were prepared.

 

2.Variability Samples. 15 were taken from Nussir, and 3 from Ulveryggen.

 

The spatial composites from Nussir are summarised in Table 13-1 and are depicted in long section in Figure 13-1. QEMSCAN analysis verified their original assay results, as well as providing additional metallurgical data on the mineralogical makeup of the composites. All three composites were dominated by bornite, with lesser chalcopyrite (Composite 3) and chalcocite (Composite 1).

 

Table 13-1. Summary of Nussir Composite Metallurgical Samples

 

Element Unit Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3
Cu % 1.10 1.53 1.18
Au g/t 0.19 0.16 0.11
Ag g/t 17.6 20.1 12.4
S % 0.36 0.67 0.61
Total Weight kg 10.43 28.42 47.07
Number of Holes   3 5 6

 

A more detailed breakdown of the assays from the three prepared composites is shown in Table 13-2.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects110

 

Table 13-2. Assay Breakdown of Nussir Composite Metallurgical Samples

 

Sample ID Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3
Au g/t 0.19 0.16 0.11
Ag g/t 17.6 20.1 12.4
Pt g/t 0.13 0.16 < 0.02
S % 0.36 0.67 0.61
Cu seq H2SO4 % 0.024 0.025 0.016
Cu seq. NaCN % 0.99 1.4 0.86
Cu seq. A/R % 0.037 0.14 0.3
Cu % 1.10 1.53 1.18
Ag g/t 17 21 11
Al g/t 46200 46300 40400
As g/t < 30 < 30 < 30
Be g/t 0.8 0.76 0.7
Bi g/t < 20 < 20 < 20
Ca g/t 130000 126000 125000
Cd g/t < 2 < 2 < 2
Co g/t 11 13 14
Cr g/t 31 30 27
Fe g/t 12800 13600 16500
K g/t 26200 24400 19500
Li g/t < 20 < 20 < 20
Mg g/t 10700 13300 36800
Mn g/t 3500 3110 4380
Mo g/t < 20 < 20 < 20
Na g/t 12700 16300 13800
Ni g/t < 20 30 24
P g/t 352 417 284
Pb g/t < 20 < 20 < 20
Sb g/t < 10 < 10 < 10
Se g/t < 40 < 40 < 40
Sn g/t < 40 < 40 < 40
Sr g/t 196 178 123
Ti g/t 1530 1510 1320
Tl g/t < 30 < 30 < 30
U g/t < 20 < 20 < 20
V g/t 46 45 42
Y g/t 11.2 10.9 9.2
Zn g/t < 40 < 40 < 40

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects111

 

Figure 13-1. Nussir Long Section - Locations of Composite Metallurgical Samples

 

 

Figure 13-2. Nussir Long Section – Drillholes Used for Variability Metallurgical Samples

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects112

 

13.2 Variability and Hardness Testing

 

The drillholes used for providing the variability samples from Nussir are depicted in long section in Figure 13-2. The grades of all the variability samples are summarised in Table 13-3. The variability samples were submitted for comminution testwork, including SAG Power Index test (SPI®), Bond Ball Mill Work Index (BWI), ModBond test, and Bond Abrasion Index (AI) test. These results are summarised in Table 13-4.

 

Table 13-3. Variability Samples Head Assays

 

Sample ID Bore Hold ID Cu, % Au, g/t Ag, g/t S, %
Nussir Deposit
VAR 1 NUS-DD-188 1.84 0.16 34.2 0.51
VAR 2 NUD-DD-189 0.31 < 0.02 1.3 0.19
VAR 3 NUD-DD-190 1.11 0.05 3.8 0.69
VAR 4 NUS-DD-191 0.49 0.03 5.2 0.22
VAR 5 NUS-DD-192 1.48 0.19 14.8 0.64
VAR 6 NUS-DD-195 1.03 0.17 23.3 0.42
VAR 7 NUS-DD-196 0.12 < 0.02 < 0.5 0.10
VAR 10 NUS-DD-193 0.61 0.11 8.0 0.25
VAR 11 NUS-DD-194 0.77 0.12 7.0 0.42
VAR 12 NUS-DD-198 1.63 0.14 12.4 0.65
VAR 14 NUS-DD-179 1.51 0.93 20.0 0.50
VAR 15 NUS-DD-181 1.31 0.38 18.5 0.51
VAR 16 NUS-DD-183 0.83 0.30 25.4 0.28
VAR 17 NUS-DD-185 0.45 0.06 3.9 0.16
VAR 18 NUS-DD-186 0.54 0.18 8.8 0.27
Ulveryggen Deposit
VAR 8 ULV-DD-17-01 0.84 < 0.02 1.4 0.31
VAR 9 ULV-DD-17-04 0.50 < 0.02 0.7 0.13
VAR 13 ULV-DD-17-05 0.95 0.02 2.1 0.28

 

Table 13-4. Nussir Deposit Grindability Statistics

  

    BWI (kWh/t)  
Statistic SPI® Full Mod AI
  (Min) Bond Bond (g)
Number of samples 21 4 23 3
Maximum 112 12.6 15.1 0.27
Minimum 34.1 11.6 9.13 0.13
Average 77.4 12.0 11.5 0.18
Relative Std Dev, % 25.0 3.76 12.5 44.4
75th Percentile 87.1 12.2 12.3 0.20
25th Percentile 66.6 11.7 10.7 0.13

 

Based on statistical analysis of the results, the SPI and BWI results indicate the Nussir material as being soft to moderately hard, and slightly abrasive. The Ulveryggen sample results were categorised as moderately hard to hard, and very abrasive.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects113

 

13.3 Locked Cycle Testing

 

A series of locked cycle tests and comparable open-circuit batch tests for each of the spatial composites. The batch and locked cycle test results compared well, with concentrate grades slightly higher in the batch tests and recoveries approximately 2-4% higher in the locked cycle tests. The two ore bodies gave similar results under the conditions tested.

 

Figure 13-3. Locked Cycle Test Flowsheet

 

 

The results of the locked cycle tests and the comparable open-circuit batch tests for each composite, as well as two of the variability samples were also selected for locked cycle testing along with the comparable open-circuit batch test. The results are provided in Table 13-5.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects114

 

Table 13-5. Locked Cycle and Open Circuit Test Results Summary

 

Composite Test No. Product Assays, %
Cu
% Distribution
Cu
Comp 1 LCT2 Cu Conc 59.5 97.0
F27 Cu Conc 63.9 93.4
Comp 2 LCT 3 Cu Conc 50.1 95.3
F26 Cu Conc 53.1 92.7
Comp 3 LCT1 Cu Conc 36.9 96.7
F25 Cu Conc 41.4 92.3

 

Bore Hole ID Composite Test No. Product Assays, %
Cu
% Distribution
Cu
NUS-DD-188 VAR 1 LCT 4 Cu Conc 62.6 95.6
F28 Cu Conc 62.8 91 .8
ULV-DD-17-01 VAR 8 LCT 5 Cu Conc 53.6 95.9
F35R Cu Conc 54.8 93.6

 

The average copper grade of the final concentrates was 53.3% Cu and recovery was 92.5%. The average copper grade of the final concentrates for the three Ulveryggen samples was 60.8% Cu and recovery was 90.4%.

 

There was no evidence of a relationship between the copper head grade and copper recovery. Overall, the test results indicated that high copper grades and recoveries are feasible for all samples under the conditions applied.

 

13.4 Material Sorting Studies

 

A sorting study on Nussir copper mineralization was conducted by Comex and it was completed on December 19, 2024. The objective of the study was to evaluate the potential of employing a multi-sensor sorting technology, utilizing X-ray Transmission (XRT) and X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) sensors. Drill core samples containing copper minerals were provided by the Nussir ASA and crushed to optimize grain shape and element release before testing. The XRT sensor classified the material into three categories: high-grade, low-grade, and waste. Initial results indicated that a significant portion of the waste fraction still contained copper, necessitating an additional refinement step using XRF to further separate copper-rich particles.

 

The combined sorting process achieved a pre-concentration of the feed material from 0.57% Cu to 1.28% Cu while reducing the waste fraction by 31.1% of the total input. The final waste contained only 0.11% Cu, resulting in a metal recovery efficiency of 94.4% with minimal copper losses. The study confirmed that sorting technology is a viable method for pre-concentration, allowing for the removal of low-grade material early in processing. However, Comex is recommending larger-scale tests to account for variability in the copper mineralization and therefore further optimize the sorting parameters to maximize effectiveness.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects115

 

14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

 

14.1 Nussir

 

14.1.1 Data Collation

 

The sample database has been updated by a Norwegian geologist (who has a mining degree from the Norwegian university of Science and Technology), culminating in a single updated Excel workbook, with separate sheets including:

 

·Collar coordinates. As compared with previous estimates, all coordinates have been updated for the UTM system, WGS84, zone 35. All of the drillhole collars from 1985 to 2019 were measured by DPOS GPS, with an accuracy of 0.2-0.5 m. After this, drillhole collars have been measured with a handheld GPS, with an accuracy of approximately 5 m. During 2017, there was a CPOS survey campaign (tied into a base station), campaign going over old and current drill holes, with an accuracy of 2-5 cm. This was done for almost all drill holes, and also included re-measuring of drillholes’ collars from 2008 or later, that had not been previously measured with DPOS.

 

·Downhole Survey data. Measurements in holes from 2008, 2011 and resurveying of 21 holes drilled in 1990 and 94, stem from a magnetic PeeWee tool rented from Devico in Norway. All 21 holes drilled in 2013 were surveyed by the drilling crew using a Reflex gyro instrument. 16 holes were surveyed prior to 2011 with magnetic equipment and 30 diamond drill holes, and 20 percussion holes remain un-surveyed. Since 2014, two different Devico devices were used. A Deviflex instrument has been mostly used, which employs lasers and gravitation, where the azimuth Is dependent on the first assumed azimuth. A Devishot instrument has also been used (in approximately 9% of survey measurements), which is a magnetic instrument.

 

·Assay Results. The contained assayed grades of Cu, reassayed Cu (handheld XRF, where measured), Ag, Au, reassayed Au, Pd and Pt. A summary of all drillholes and Cu sample data is shown in Table 14-1.

 

·Lithology Logs. This contained log data fields which included:

 

·Geological grouping
·Formation
·Lithological code
·Mineralisation codes
·Alteration code
·Structural code
·Geological description

 

·Density Measurements.

 

After import of these data sets into Datamine, the data files were combined and then ‘desurveyed’ so as to obtain the complete three-dimensional coordinates of each sample. These data could then be viewed in three-dimensions, plan, cross-section or long-section.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects116

 

Table 14-1. Holes and Cu Sample Data Summary - Nussir

 

Sample   Holes/   Cu  
Type YEAR Channels Length (m) Samples  
Channel 1985 10 35 10  
Samples  
  1985 6 264 31  
  1986 2 496 28  
  1988 6 1,325 69  
  1990 24 1,893 431  
  1995 4 724 59  
  1996 4 1,182 66  
  2006 7 2,687 101  
Diamond 2007 1 78 17  
Drillholes 2008 30 7,116 605  
  2011 6 1,996 141  
  2013 21 3,222 126  
  2014 34 9,308 326  
  2015 33 10,572 283  
  2017 20 7,947 186  
  2019 13 3,912 100  
  Total DD 211 52,723 2,569  
  Total ALL 221 52,757 2,579  

 

In the process of this data collation, the following validation steps were taken:

 

a)Range checks
b)Sequential FROM-TO checks
c)Visual examination
d)Cross-referencing different log-types and reports

 

These checks enabled some few small transcription errors in assay and survey data to be resolved.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects117

 

14.1.2 Interpretation

 

The Nussir Cu-mineralized zone is an almost continuous layer over a strike length of 10 km, which is dolomite-dominated in the west and mostly calcite-dominated sandstone-limestone, along with medium dark schist with chalcocite/bornite dissemination, in the east. This mineralized zone is within the Gorohatjohca sedimentary formation, which predominantly consists of claystone, and is 200- 400m thick in the west, thinning out to a few metres wide in the east. The Gorohatjohca overlies the Stangvatn conglomerate formation and underlies the Nussir volcanic formation.

 

Interpretation of the mineralized zone was based primarily on a 0.3% Cu cut-off, along with the physical controls of the lithologies within the Gorohatjohca formation. Leapfrog Geo software (version 4.3.1 in 2018 and version 5.0.3 in 2019) was used in this interpretation work, creating wireframe models of the mineralized zone and the Gorohatjohca formation. In the western-most 3 km of the deposit, the mineralized layer is folded in an S-shaped macroscopic structure with the axial plane dipping moderately to the north-west.

 

There is a specific break in Cu mineralisation in the central part of the deposit, representing an effective ‘dry zone’ about 400m along strike length. It is situated along the southern flank of the major fold and is interpreted as a local extensional normal fault where the mineralized layers have been pulled apart. It has not been possible to model the continuation of this fault zone, and other faults between adjacent drillholes. This is due to lower number of drillholes in this area. In future work, it is recommended that more drilling is needed in this area, and corresponding analysis of any fault outlines from topographic data.

 

For subsequent resource modelling, the interpreted mineralized zones have in general been extrapolated a maximum distance of approximately 100 m, both laterally and down-dip, from the outer-most drillhole intersections. The drilling grid spacing used generally has been 200-250m, so this extrapolation distance is approximately half of the typical grid spacing. An extrapolation of 100 m - 250 m would seem a reasonable extent for consideration an exploration target category.

 

A horizontal section at 0 m elevation, of the eastern part of the deposit, is shown in Figure 14-1, showing the mineralized zone as well as the Gorohatjohca formation. Example sections of the same structures (with reference lines shown in Figure 14-1) are shown in Figure 14-2. A plan view of the mineralized zone is shown in Figure 14-3, with 3D views in Figure 14-4 and Figure 14-5.

 

Figure 14-1. Nussir Horizontal Section at 0mRL, with Lithological Interpretation

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects118

 

Figure 14-2. Nussir Example Sections - Lithological Interpretation

[All sections looking westwards]

 

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects119

 

Figure 14-3. Plan View of Drillholes and Interpretation Limits - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects120

 

Figure 14-4. 3D View of Nussir Mineralized Zones – East Side

 

 

Figure 14-5. 3D View of Nussir Mineralized Zones – West Side

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects121

 

14.1.3 Exploratory Data Analysis

 

Some intersections with grades lower than 0.3% Cu were also included in the mineralized interpretation for continuity purposes. Summary statistics were generated for all sample data, as well as just for the sample data inside the revised intersections, and are shown in Table 14-2. A histogram of original sample lengths is shown in Figure 14-8.

 

Table 14-2. Sample Statistics – Nussir

 

      Number             Log Coefficient
      of Number>         Standard Estimate of Variation
  FIELD Unit Samples Trace Minimum Maximum Mean Variance Deviation of Mean %
All Cu % 2,947 2,693 0 9.44 0.36 0.51 0.71 2.44 198
Samples Ag g/t 2,947 1,147 0 146.5 4.1 103.5 10.2 12.8 249
  Au g/t 2,947 1,989 0 13.73 0.06 0.15 0.38 0.08 638
  Pd ppb 2,947 1,736 0 5,800 20.3 19,394 139.3 16.8 685
  Pt ppb 2,947 1,123 0 13,500 30.6 71,031 266.5 41.3 871

 

      Number             Log Coefficient
      of Number>         Standard Estimate of Variation
  FIELD Unit Samples Trace Minimum Maximum Mean Variance Deviation of Mean %
Within Cu % 846 846 0.001 9.44 1.11 0.86 0.93 1.53 84
Mineralized Ag g/t 846 761 0 146.5 13.2 228.6 15.1 16.4 115
Intersections Au g/t 846 769 0 4.34 0.14 0.08 0.28 0.18 210
  Pd ppb 669 442 0 5,800 45.7 68,862 262.4 39.1 574
  Pt ppb 669 217 0 13,500 72.2 284,970 533.8 214.7 740

 

The upper ‘All Sample’ section of the table relates to the overall extent of samples taken. The lower ‘Just Intersections’ part shows the main information for the samples inside the interpreted mineralized zones, which were processed onwards for resource estimation purposes. Log probability plots were also prepared for the intersection samples, are shown in Appendix A and Figure 14-6. For all of the metal grades, the populations are approaching log normal. For Cu grades, the lower 10% of samples, below 0.25% Cu, appear to have different characteristics. To also assist with the assessment of outlier grades, a coefficient of variation (cv) analysis was also made on the mineralized samples, along with decile analyses. The cv plots are shown overleaf, which demonstrates the top-cut levels selected, which were applied after compositing. A summary of the top-cut levels used, and the effects of these top-cut applications, is summarised in Table 14-3.

 

Table 14-3. Summary of Top-Cuts Applied – Nussir

 

          Proportion    
    Top-Cut No. of No . Cut % Cut Uncut Cut
Metal Unit Level Composites Applied Applied Mean Mean
Cu % 4.75 172 - 0.0 1.10 1.10
Ag g/t 80 170 - 0.0 13.4 13.4
Au g/t 1.5 164 1 0.6 0.15 0.15
Pd ppb 700 124 1 0.8 64.6 59.4
Pt ppb 1650 104 1 1.0 189.1 184.6

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects122

 

Figure 14-6. Log-Probability Plots of Mineralized Zone Samples - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects123

 

Figure 14-7. Coefficient of Variation Analyses’ Graphs - Nussir

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects124

 

Figure 14-8. Sample Length Histogram - Nussir

 

 

14.1.4 Compositing

 

Composites were created across each identified intersection. These composites were therefore of variable length. Statistics of the composite samples are summarised below in Table 14-4. True thickness values were also calculated for each intersection. The statistics summaries shown in Table 14-4 are shown for grade values directly, as well as grade values weighted by true thickness. The true thickness values have been calculated after generation of the composites and stored with the composites thereafter. This weighting has little effect on the calculated statistics. This is due to the relative uniform thickness of the mineralized zones, generally from 2 to 5 m. A histogram of all the composites’ true thickness values is shown in Figure 14-9.

 

Table 14-4. Composite Statistics – Nussir

 

      Number of Number >         Standard Log Estimate Coefficient of
  FIELD Unit Samples Trace Minimum Maximum Mean Variance Deviation of Mean Variation %
  Cu % 173 172 0.00 3.12 1.10 0.23 0.48 1.14 44
  Ag g/t 173 170 0.0 52.5 13.4 92.8 9.6 15.0 72
  Au g/t 173 164 0.00 1.50 0.15 0.03 0.16 0.15 111
Unweighted Cu Accumulation 173 172 0.00 13.94 3.82 5.81 2.41 4.15 63
  Thickness m 173 173 0.26 9.87 3.40 2.47 1.57 3.47 46
  Pd ppb 124 124 0.97 700 59.4 10,017 100.1 73.9 169
  Pt ppb 104 104 2.19 1,650 184.6 80,754 284.2 273.4 154
  Cu % 173 172 0.00 3.12 1.12 0.21 0.46 1.16 41
  Ag g/t 173 170 0.0 52.5 13.6 91.6 9.6 15.1 70
Weighted Au g/t 173 164 0.00 1.50 0.14 0.02 0.13 0.14 92
By Length Pd ppb 124 124 1.0 700 58.9 12,702 112.7 68.2 191
  Pt ppb 104 104 2.2 1,650 196.7 104,174 322.8 273.6 164

 

Figure 14-9. Histogram of Composite True Thicknesses - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects125

 

14.1.5 Geostatistics

 

Statistical plots for the composite copper grades are shown in Figure 14-10. This also shows a scatterplot of composite grades versus true thickness, which demonstrates that there is no particular relationship between grade and thickness.

 

Figure 14-10. Statistical Cu Plots, Composites - Nussir

 

 

 

Histograms and log-probability plots for the other metals in the composites, Ag, Au, Pd and Pt, are shown in Figure 14-11. In all cases the approximately single log-normal populations are apparent.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects126

 

Figure 14-11. Histograms/ Log-Probability Plots- - Composites Au, Ag. Pd, Pt

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects127

 

The composites were used to generate experimental variograms for the composited metal grades, from which model variograms were developed, as shown in Figure 14-12. Most of the model variograms have a range of approximately 200 m. The model variogram parameters are summarised in Table 14-5. An isotropic model has been fitted in all cases, as this corresponded with the experimental variograms both along-strike and down-dip

 

Figure 14-12. Experimental and Model Variograms - Nussir

 

 

Table 14-5. Model Variogram Parameters – Nussir

 

Field Nugget Range (m) C1
Cu 0.09 177 0.161
Ag 6.6 223 45.1
Au 0.01 251 0.01
Pd 2,238 166 5,113
Pt 2,024 358 8,194

 

Notes

. All models isotropic

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects128

 

14.1.6 Volumetric Modelling

 

The interpreted Leapfrog Geo (version 4.3.1 in 2018 and version 5.0.3 in 2019) wireframe models of the mineralized models have also been combined with the topography. The overall stratigraphic package has not been built into the block model. A plan, W-E long-sections and a three dimensional view are shown in Figure 14-14, Figure 14-15 and Figure 14-16, respectively.

 

Because of the overall folded nature of the deposit, three separate block models were used, each with separate rotated structures, as depicted with the model prototypes shown in Figure 14 -17. However, for evaluation purposes, three separate regions have been demarcated: western, central and eastern, as summarised below, and depicted in the plan shown in Figure 14 -13.

 

a)Western Region. West of 392,050mE.

 

b)Central Region. This extends from 392,050mE to approximately 394,650mE.

 

c)Eastern Region. East of 394,650mE.

 

Figure 14-13. Plan of Evaluation Regions - Nussir

 

 

The wireframe models were used as the basis for filling the mineralized zones with blocks. A parent block size of 150m x 150m was used in the along-strike and down-dip directions. Across the true thickness of the zones, sub-blocks were used to provide single blocks across the mineralized zones at any point. The sub-blocks measured 5m along-strike, 5m down-dip and variable length across-strike, according to mineralisation thickness.

 

Details of these different model prototypes are shown in Table 14-6.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects129

 

Figure 14-14. Plan View of Mineralized Wireframe Model - Nussir

 

 

Figure 14-15. W-E Long Section of Wireframe Model - Nussir

[5:1 Vertical Exaggeration]

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects130

 

Figure 14-16. 3D View of Wireframe Model – View from SW - Nussir

 

 

Figure 14-17. 3D View of Model Prototype Structures– View from SW - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects131

 

Table 14-6. Model Prototype Definitions - Nussir

 

 

  

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects132

 

14.1.7 Density

 

Density measurements from core samples were collated. A statistical summary of these measurements is shown in Table 14-7. Histograms displaying the density measurements by broad rock type, and by lithology, are shown in Figure 14-19 and Figure 14-20. There does not appear to be any major changes in density with lithology. A graph of Cu grade versus density values, for density measurements from the mineralized zone, is shown in Figure 14-18. There does not seem to be any clear relationship between density and Cu grade.

 

Figure 14-18. Grade vs Density Graph – Mineralized Zone Measurements - Nussir

 

 

It was therefore decided to average density measurements over mineralized zone intersections and assign these to the mineralized zone composite set. A statistical summary of these composite density values is shown in Table 14-8.

 

Table 14-7. Statistical Summary of Density Measurements - Nussir

 

DESCRIPTION NUMBER MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEAN VARIANCE STANDARD
DEVIATION
MEDIAN
Footwall 27 2.66 2.87 2.71 0.0021 0.0457 2.71
Hanging Wall 33 2.66 3.02 2.79 0.0091 0.0953 2.77
Mineralized Zone 53 2.63 2.87 2.76 0.0034 0.0581 2.75

 

Table 14-8. Statistical Summary of Composite Densities - Nussir

 

            STANDARD  
DESCRIPTION NUMBER MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEAN VARIANCE DEVIATION MEDIAN
Mineralized Zone 14 2.67 2.87 2.75 0.0029 0.0540 2.75

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects133

 

Figure 14-19. Density Histograms by Rock Type - Nussir

 

 

Figure 14-20. Density Histograms by Lithology - Nussir

 

 

A 3D picture of the density composites is shown in Figure 14-21. It can be seen that these density measurements are all in the eastern part of the deposit. These composites were used to estimate density values into the resource model, using inverse-distance weighting. For model blocks where density composites are not nearby (over a distance of 450 m), an average density value of 2.76 t/m3 has been set.

 

Figure 14-21. 3D View of Density Measurement Locations - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects134

 

14.1.8 Grade Estimation

 

Metal grades were estimated direct from the average grades of the intersection composites. The grade interpolation parameters applied are summarised below in Table 14-9. The primary grades were estimated using ordinary kriging (OK), using the variogram parameters shown in Table 14-5. For comparative purposes, copper grades were also interpolated by inverse-distance weighting and nearest-neighbour. Six progressively larger searches were made, so that if insufficient composites were found on the first search, the next larger search would be applied.

 

Table 14-9. Grade Estimation Parameters – Nussir

 

      Minimum No.
      of
Search Distances (m)   Composites/
Along-Strike Down-Dip Search Drillholes
125 125 1st 3
225 225 2nd 2
450 450 3rd 2
500 500 4th 1
750 750 5th 1
1000 1000 6th 1

 

Notes:

 

. Maximum number of composites/drillholes used = 12

. Cu, Ag, Au, Pd and Pt grades interpolated using ordinary kriging

. Check grades were also determined by NN and Inverse-Distance(^2)

. Density values estimated using inverse-distance weighting

. Estimations are done within plane of each zone, projected according to orientations:

 

  Dip Direction
West 1 45 70
West 2 65 0
East 55 -20

 

A 3D view of estimated Cu grades is shown in Figure 14-22. A long section depicting the variation of the estimated Cu grades are shown in Figure 14-23. Figure 14-24 shows a long section of the resource classification.

 

Figure 14-22. 3D View of Estimated Cu Grades - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects135

 

Figure 14-23. Long Section of Modelled Cu Grades - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects136

 

Figure 14-24. Long Section of Resource Classification - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects137

 

14.1.9 Resource Classification

 

Definitions for resource categories used in this report are consistent with CIM (2014) definitions incorporated by reference into NI 43-101. In the CIM classification, a Mineral Resource is defined as “a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity, and other geological characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated, or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling. Mineral Resources are classified into Measured, Indicated, and Inferred categories. A Mineral Reserve is defined as the “economically mineable part of a Measured and/or Indicated Mineral Resource” demonstrated by studies at pre-feasibility or feasibility level as appropriate. Mineral Reserves are classified into Proven and Probable categories.

 

In order to test resource classification criteria, a conditional simulation exercise was completed, which focussed on the precision of evaluation that may be obtained with different drillhole spacings, related to mining blocks containing more broadly equivalent to 3 months of production and 1 year of production. This analysis was completed with the following stages:

 

1.             A panel was defined, in the eastern part of the Nussir deposit, with an assumed average thickness of 3m, and along-strike and down-dip dimensions of 245 m. These dimensions were selected, so that this block contains approximately 0.5 Mt of material, which is roughly equivalent to 3 months of production (based on an assumed production rate of 2 Mtpa). This was used to create a volumetric test model.

 

2.             Based on all available drillholes in the same area, a grid of densely spaced pseudo-samples was generated, based on the same statistical parameters as the original distribution of actual samples. Using this data set, samples corresponding to any different theoretical drilling grids could be selected. In this way, different composite groups were created for drilling grids spaced at 25 m, 50 m, etc up to 500 m.

 

3.             The complete composite set for the eastern part of Nussir was converted into normal score form, and used to provide experimental variograms, from which model variograms were determined, for Cu, Cu x Thickness (accumulation) and Thickness quantities. An example is shown in Figure 14-25.

 

4.             A conditional simulation was then run using each of the different pseudo-drilling grid sets. The parameters used for these simulation runs included:

 

a)Sequential gaussian simulation.
b)An internal point density of 5m x 5m inside the test area.
c)50 simulation runs were completed for each test.
d)Normal transformed model variograms used.
e)Horizontal search distances of 400m were used.
f)Minimum/Maximum no. of composites = 2 / 20

 

5.             For each conditional simulation run, and for each of the three variables, the distribution of overall average values was approximately normally distributed, as shown in the example in

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects138

 

Figure 14-26. The standard deviation of these results was then used to calculate the relative error of the overall average grade, at the 90% probability level.

 

6.            From these results, the relative errors at the 90% probability level were also determined for a block corresponding to approximately one year’s production.

 

A summary of these results is shown in Table 6-11. For the assessment of resource classification, it has been assumed that Measured Resources should be known within ±15%, with 90% confidence for a production quarter (3 months). Similarly, it has been assumed that Indicated Resources should be known within ±15%, with 90% confidence on an annual basis. This method of resource classification is gaining wide acceptance and has been applied to similar deposits as Nussir (e.g. Copperwood – AMEC).

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects139

 

Figure 14-25. Normal Score Variogram for Cu - Nussir

 

 

Figure 14-26. Example Histogram of Simulated Average Cu Grades

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects140

 

Table 14-10. Conditional Simulation Results for Nussir

[3 Month and 1 Year Test Blocks]

 

    Results for Quarterly Mining Block(0.5 Mt)  
            +/-   Relative
            Tolerance   Error for
  Drilling         at 90%   Annual
  Grid         Probability Relative Block
FIELD Spacing MEAN STANDDEV MINIMUM MAXIMUM Level Error (2Mt)
  m         % % %
CU 25 0.99 0.02 0.93 1.03 0.03 3.5 1.7
CU 50 0.95 0.04 0.89 1.04 0.06 6.2 3.1
CU 75 1.03 0.07 0.86 1.19 0.11 11.1 5.5
CU 100 0.88 0.08 0.65 1.06 0.14 15.9 8.0
CU 125 0.98 0.10 0.67 1.20 0.16 16.5 8.3
CU 150 0.97 0.14 0.58 1.29 0.24 24.2 12.1
CU 175 1.13 0.15 0.70 1.46 0.25 21.9 10.9
CU 200 1.08 0.15 0.59 1.34 0.25 23.4 11.7
CU 225 0.88 0.15 0.51 1.17 0.24 27.1 13.6
CU 250 0.92 0.25 0.33 1.42 0.41 44.5 22.3
CU 275 0.98 0.20 0.48 1.40 0.32 33.0 16.5
CU 300 1.62 0.41 0.90 3.11 0.67 41.5 20.8
CU 325 1.09 0.28 0.38 1.83 0.45 41.5 20.7
CU 350 0.90 0.37 0.19 2.01 0.61 68.3 34.1
CU 375 0.92 0.33 0.23 1.90 0.54 59.2 29.6
CU 400 0.89 0.32 0.20 1.70 0.52 57.9 29.0

 

From the results produced for Nussir, as summarised in Table 14-11, the following conclusions have been developed with respect to resource classification:

 

Measured Resources. A drill grid spacing of 125m gives quarterly 90% confidence levels of ±16.5% for Cu grade.

 

Indicated Resources. A drill grid spacing of 225m gives annual 90% confidence levels of ±13.6% for Cu grade.

 

The applied resource classification criteria are summarised in Table 14-11. These categories were set into the resource block models based on perimeters defined in long section.

 

Table 14-11. Resource Classification Criteria - Nussir

 

Category Criteria
Measured At least 3 drillholes with a spacing of at least 125m
Indicated At least 3 drillholes with a spacing of at least 225m
Inferred Greater grid spacings of 225m, max extrapolation of 100m

 

Plan and 3D views depicting the resultant resource classifications are shown in Figure 14-27 and Figure 14-28. The areas allocated with a Measured resource category have been intersected with predominantly post-2000 diamond drilling. The parts of the block model allocated as Measured have used an average number of 5 drillholes for estimation. Those parts allocated as Indicated have used an average number of 4 drillholes for estimation.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects141

 

Figure 14-27. Resource Classification – Plan- Nussir

 

 

Figure 14-28. Resource Classification – 3D View from NE, With Drillholes – Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects142

 

14.1.10       Model Validation

 

Visual Examination

 

Long sections of the block model contents were prepared for the west and east zones. These were oriented to be approximately perpendicular to the respective zones. The models blocks shown were colour-coded, and overlain with the corresponding data from the drillhole composites.

 

Global Comparison of Grades

 

The overall average sample and composite metal grades were compared with global average grades from the block model, as interpolated by kriging, inverse-distance weighting and nearest neighbour. These results are summarised below in Table 14-12.

 

Table 14-12. Global Comparison of Grades – Nussir

 

          BLOCK MODEL
ZONE FIELD Unit SAMPLES COMPOSITES OK NN ID
E Cu % 1.12 1.12 1.16 1.19 1.17
W1 Cu % 1.17 1.17 1.13 1.09 1.12
W2 Cu % 1.20 1.07 1.16 1.22 1.18
E Ag g/t 13.7 12.2 19.9 20.3 20.1
W1 Ag g/t 21.9 21.4 11.8 11.2 11.5
W2 Ag g/t 17.8 15.2 13.9 13.5 14.2
E Au g/t 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15
W1 Au g/t 0.11 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.14
W2 Au g/t 0.23 0.20 0.21 0.17 0.20
E Pd ppb 57.6 52.3 114.9 112.8 116.6
W1 Pd ppb 237.8 134.0 65.7 72.7 68.8
W2 Pd ppb 50.9 37.1 43.7 69.7 48.9
E Pt ppb 172.9 177.4 305.8 266.1 308.9
W1 Pt ppb 813.3 358.3 197.8 200.5 201.6
W2 Pt ppb 269.2 197.3 213.3 307.3 220.3

 

Notes

 

  . No cut-off applied        
  . Grades derived from all resource categories      
  . OK ordinary kriging        
  . NN nearest neighbour        
  . ID inverse-distance weighting (^2)        
  . ZONE IDs:          
    E Main Eastern area        
    W1 Main Western area        
    W2 Western extension        

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects143

 

Local Comparison of Grades

 

Average model grades along vertical columnar (200 m thick) model block slices were determined, stemming from the kriged, inverse-distance and nearest neighbour grades. These were shown, along with the average composites’ grades and total tonnages on the same slices, in comparative swath plots for all estimated metal grades, as shown in Figure 14-29. The models’ grades shown are for both all resource categories. These graphs show some degree of smoothing, but in general reflect well the trends in the corresponding average composite grades.

 

From this analysis it was decided to use the kriged grades as the principal estimated grades for all metals in the resource estimation.

 

Figure 14-29. Swath Plots - Nussir

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects144

 

14.1.11       Resource Evaluation

 

For reporting purposes for a resource estimate connected with a potential underground mining operation, complying with ‘reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction’ guidelines, the following steps were completed:

 

1)Cut-Off. An economic cut-off grade was determined, applicable to underground mining at the Nussir deposit, as summarised in Table 14-15.

 

2)Minimum Mining Width. The prepared in-situ block model has columnar blocks representing the true width of the mineralised zones, as interpreted. These model blocks were processed, such any parts narrower than 2m were diluted up to 2m, reducing the grades accordingly.

 

3)Constraining Volumes. A mineable shape optimisation was run (Datamine process MSO), to generate reasonably practical constraining wireframe volumes for a resource evaluation. The parameters used in this optimisation are summarised in Table 14-31. A long section of resultant constrained resources is shown in Figure 14-44. This applied selectivity means that a small amount of sub-0.3%Cu material is taken within the evaluation (‘must-take’) and some +0.3%Cu material is excluded.

 

4)Evaluation. The evaluation was broken down by resource class, as well as by west, central and eastern partitions, as depicted in Figure 14-31. The evaluation summary in Table 14-18 shows grades of Cu, Ag and Au. A grade-tonnage table of the measured and Indicated resources is shown in Table 14-17. A copper-equivalent (CuEq) grade has also been calculated, purely to provide extra information. The CuEq grade has been calculated based on the different assumed Cu, Ag and Au prices as well as average metallurgical recoveries from testwork, as shown in Table 14-15. Corresponding average true thickness values are shown in Table 14-14.

 

Table 14-13. MSO Parameters – Nussir

Factor Unit Value
Cut-Off %Cu 0.3
Minimum width m 2
Minimum length along -strike m 10
Minimum length down-dip m 10
Minimum waste pillar width m 10
Surface crown pillar (excluded) m 15

 

Table 14-14. Average Resource True Thickness

[Derived from MSO Constrained Resources]

Average True Thickness (m)
Region Meas+Ind Inferred
West 4.2 6.1
Central 3.6 3.7
East 2.7 2.5

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects145

 

Table 14-15. Cut-Off Grade Calculation
      Values  
Cu Metal Price     4.2 $/lb
      9,259 $/t
Processing        
Processing Recovery     96.0%  
Concentrate Grade     45% % Cu
Assumed Feed Grade     0.83% % Cu
Smelter Terms        
Minimum Deduction        
Treatment, Refining and Freight Charge 87.5 $/t conc
Concentrate ref     0.0875  
Payability     97.30%  
         
Operating Costs        
Mining     20 $/t
G&A & infra & closure & royalty   0.65 $/t
Processing     5.5 $/t
Total     26.15 $/t
Total (excluding op devt)   26.15 $/t
       
Breakeven Cut-Off     0.30 %Cu
         

 

  Table 14-16. Copper-Equivalent Calculations
           
  Unit   Values    
Prices          
Cu Price $/lb   4.2    
  $/t Cu_Price 9259    
Ag Price $/oz   27.00    
  $/g Ag_price 0.868    
Au Price $/oz   2,200    
  $/g Au_Price 70.73    
Processing          
Cu Processing Recovery Cu_Recov 96.0%    
Ag Processing Recovery Ag_Recov 80.0%    
Au Processing Recovery Au_Recov 93.0%    
         
Cu Equiv Coefficients - Price and Recovery        
  Per g/t Ag Ag_Coeff 0.00781 = Ag_Price*Ag_Recov/(Cu_Price*Cu_Recov)
  Per g/t Au Au_Coeff 0.740 = Au_Price*Au_Recov/(Cu_Price*Cu_Recov)
         
Test Calculations - Based on M&I Resource Grades        
  % Cu Grade 1.01    
  g/t Ag Grade 12.30    
  g/t Au Grade 0.12    
  % Cu_Eq 1.19 = Cu_Grade + (Ag_Coeff*Ag_Grade) + (Au_Coeff*Au_Grade)
         

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects146

 

Table 14-17. Grade-Tonnage Table – Measured and Indicated Resources Only

 

Cu Cut-Off Tonnes Cu Ag Au  
% Mt % g/t g/t
0.3 28.72 1.0 12.33 0.12
0.4 28.03 1.04 12.61 0.12
0.5 27.12 1.06 12.90 0.11
0.6 26.64 1.07 13.02 0.11
0.7 25.75 1.08 13.20 0.11
0.8 22.83 1.12 14.08 0.11
0.9 20.01 1.16 14.92 0.12
1.0 17.01 1.20 15.47 0.12
1.1 12.30 1.26 16.28 0.12
1.2 6.91 1.34 17.01 0.13
1.3 2.93 1.46 18.61 0.12
1.4 1.62 1.57 20.01 0.12
1.5 0.86 1.67 23.08 0.11

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects147

 

Table 14-18. Constrained Resource Evaluation Statement – Nussir deposit

Effective Date: 20th January, 2025

 

  Measured Resources Indicated Resources Measured + Indicated Resources
Region Tonnes Cu Ag Au Cu Eq Tonnes Cu Ag Au Cu Eq Tonnes Cu Ag Au Cu Eq
  Mt % g/t g/t % Mt % g/t g/t % Mt % g/t g/t %
West           5.52 1.03 19.6 0.10 1.25 5.52 1.03 19.6 0.10 1.25
Central 0.59 1.44 15.6 0.10 1.64 12.84 1.03 9.4 0.10 1.18 13.43 1.05 9.7 0.10 1.20
East 2.10 0.98 12.0 0.20 1.22 7.68 0.97 11.9 0.13 1.16 9.77 0.97 11.9 0.15 1.17
TOTAL 2.69 1.08 12.8 0.18 1.31 26.03 1.01 12.3 0.11 1.19 28.72 1.02 12.3 0.12 1.20

 

  Inferred Resources  
Region Tonnes Cu Ag Au Cu Eq  
  Mt % g/t g/t %  
West 22.45 1.07 17.4 0.13 1.31  
Central 7.95 0.93 8.1 0.14 1.10  
East 1.59 0.60 6.5 0.17 0.78  
TOTAL 31.99 1.01 14.6 0.14 1.23  

 

Notes:

1 . CIM definitions were followed for MRE.
2 . A minimum mining width of 2.0 m was applied in making the MRE constraint wireframes. These wireframes were generated using a preliminary MSO.
3 . Density values for Nussir were estimated from density sample values or assigned default average values where insufficient samples occur nearby.
4 . MRE constraint wireframes were generated for a cut-off grade of 0.30%Cu, related to potential underground mining.
5 . Metal prices assumed for this MRE were US$4.20/lb Cu, US$27.00/Oz Ag and US$2,200oz Au, which represent reasonable long-term consensus metal pricing.
6 . Metallurgy recovery assumptions were 96% Cu, 80% Ag and 93% Au, which stem from SGS metallurgical testwork completed in 2022. 
7 . The cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu was derived from the price and recovery values above, as well as a smelter payability of 97.3% and an assumed total operating cost $26.20/t of ore.
8 . Rounding may result in apparent summation differences between tonnes, grades and metal content; not considered material.
9 . Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects148

 

Figure 14-30. Constrained Resource Evaluation Long Section – Nussir (looking north)

 

Figure 14-31. Long Section - Resource Model Partitions – Nussir (looking north)

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects149

 

14.2 Ulveryggen

 

14.2.1 Data Collation

 

The sample database has been updated by a Norwegian geologist, culminating in a single updated Excel workbook, with separate sheets for:

 

·Collar coordinates. As compared with previous estimates, all coordinates have been updated for the UTM system, WGS84, zone 35. All the drillhole collars from 1985 to 2008 were measured by DPOS GPS, with an accuracy of 0.2-0.5m. Drillhole collars from the 2014 and 2017 campaigns have been measured by CPOS by Geonord.

 

·Downhole Survey data. A Deviflex instrument has been used which used lasers and gravitation, where the azimuth Is dependent on the first assumed azimuth. A Devishot instrument has also been used, which is a magnetic instrument.

 

·Assay Results. Grades of Cu, re-assayed Cu (where measured), Ag, Au, re-assayed Au,

 

·Lithology Logs. These include logged codes lithology, mineralisation and alteration.

 

·Geotechnical Logs. These include RQD and Q values.

 

·Magnetization Logs.

 

After import of these data sets into Datamine, the different assay, collars and survey data files were combined and then ‘de-surveyed’ to obtain the complete three-dimensional coordinates of each sample. A summary of all processed sample data is shown in Table 14-19.

 

Table 14-19. Sample Data Summary - Ulveryggen

 

Sample Type YEAR Holes/
Trenches
Length (m) Avg. Length/
Hole (m)
Cu
Samples
  pre-2010 83 11,141 134 3,988
Surface          
Drillholes 2014 1 412 412 24
  2017 7 967 138 88
  Sub-total 91 12,520 138 4,100
  pre-2010 22 2,754 125 325
U/g Drillholes 2010 21 1,464 70 455
           
  Sub-total 43 4,219 98 780
Surface          
trenches pre-2010 51 1,421 28 116
Total   185 18,159 98 4,996

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects150

 

In the process of this data collation, the following validation steps were taken, which enabled some few small transcription errors in assay and survey data to be resolved.

 

a)Range checks

 

b)Sequential FROM-TO checks

 

c)Visual examination

 

d)Cross-referencing previous data and reports

 

14.2.2 Interpretation

 

Discussions with Nussir geologists, as well considerations of potential economic grades, led to the use of 0.3%Cu cut-off in the re-interpretation of overall mineralized zone limits. This was applied in the interpretation of zone limits on 36 different profiles. Most of these profiles were spaced approximately 40m apart, with a small number of other profiles spaced at either 20m or 15m apart.

 

Internal waste zones were created during the generation of the resource block model by projecting these zones directly from <0.3% intersections, which essentially reflect the gaps between shear-hosted mineralisation. An example of the resultant interpretation is shown in the example below in Figure 14-32, for Section 20.

 

Figure 14-32. Example Interpretation of Ulveryggen Mineralized Zones – Section 20

 

 

Most of the interpreted outer envelopes were linked together to form three-dimensional wireframe models. In some cases where the zones were not continuous, the individual perimeters were used directly during the modelling process. Six different physical zones were identified, as shown in a plan, long section and a 3D view in Figure 14-33 - Figure 14-35.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects151

 

Figure 14-33. Plan View of Interpreted Mineralized Zones – Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Figure 14-34. Long Section of Mineralized Zones - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects152

 

Figure 14-35. 3D View of Mineralized Zones, Looking North-East - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects153

 

14.2.3 Exploratory Data Processing

 

Sample Selection

 

The interpreted wireframe zones were used to create a selected sample set, which included all samples inside the interpreted structures. A breakdown of the whole selected sample set is shown in Table 14-20.

 

Table 14-20. Summary of Selected Samples - Ulveryggen

 

Sample
Type
YEAR Holes/
Trenches
Length
(m)
Avg.
Length/
Hole (m)
Cu
Samples
  2009 75 2,798 37 2,135
Surface 2014 1 14 14 9
Drillholes          
  2017 7 199 28 54
  Sub-Total 83 3,011 36 2,198
  2009 11 204 19 106
U/g          
Drillholes 2010 19 432 23 254
  Sub-Total 30 636 21 360
Surface          
Trenches 2009 47 1,049 22 91
Total   160 4,696 29 2,649

 

The majority of these drillhole samples were 1m or less in length.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects154

 

Statistics

 

Summary statistics were generated for all selected sample data, as well as just for the sample data inside +0.3% Cu intersections, and are shown in Table 14-21.

 

Table 14-21. Cu Sample Statistics - Ulveryggen

 

    Number           Log  
    of         Standard Estimate Coefficient
  ZONE Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Variance Deviation of Mean of Variation
All selected samples All 2,694 0.00 4.72 0.69 0.42 0.65 0.90 93.3
  1 325 0.30 4.72 0.96 0.49 0.70 0.95 73.3
  2 755 0.30 4.00 0.90 0.34 0.58 0.89 64.8
Just 3 94 0.30 2.95 0.74 0.22 0.47 0.73 63.7
samples 4 275 0.30 3.51 1.09 0.45 0.67 1.10 61.0
>0.3% Cu 5 13 0.32 1.58 0.74 0.17 0.42 0.73 56.5
  6 94 0.32 2.79 1.09 0.43 0.66 1.09 60.5
  All 1,556 0.30 4.72 0.95 0.39 0.63 0.94 65.9

 

A log probability plots was prepared for all selected samples, as shown in Figure 14-36. This shows a marked break at around 0.2-0.3%Cu and so supports the use of 0.3%Cu for the separate modelling of internal waste. Otherwise, the grade population is approximately log normal. A decile analysis was also completed, as shown in Table 14-22, which does not indicate any outlier grade values.

 

Figure 14-36. Log Probability Plot of All Selected Samples - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects155

 

Table 14-22. Decile Analysis of Selected Samples >0.3% Cu, - Ulveryggen

 

DECILE COUNT CU MIN MAX ACCUM PERCENT
0-10 156 0.32 0.30 0.35 69.0 2.6
10-20 156 0.37 0.35 0.39 73.0 2.7
20-20 156 0.42 0.39 0.46 124.7 4.6
30-40 156 0.50 0.46 0.54 95.4 3.5
40-50 156 0.59 0.54 0.64 164.7 6.1
50-60 156 0.70 0.64 0.75 238.0 8.8
60-70 156 0.85 0.76 0.94 182.4 6.8
70-80 156 1.07 0.94 1.22 379.2 14.1
80-90 156 1.46 1.22 1.70 511.8 19.0
90-100 152 2.18 1.70 4.72 854.8 31.7
90-91 16 1.74 1.70 1.80 28.6 1.1
91-92 16 1.83 1.80 1.89 87.3 3.2
92-93 16 1.93 1.89 1.95 96.9 3.6
93-94 16 1.98 1.96 2.03 109.0 4.0
94-95 16 2.05 2.03 2.15 223.0 8.3
95-96 16 2.24 2.16 2.33 48.9 1.8
96-97 16 2.43 2.36 2.51 100.4 3.7
97-98 16 2.75 2.51 2.88 69.5 2.6
98-99 16 3.21 2.89 3.51 54.9 2.0
99-100 8 4.04 3.55 4.72 36.3 1.3
TOTAL 1,556 0.95     2,693 100.0

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects156

 

14.2.4 Compositing

 

The compositing procedure used may be outlined as follows:

 

 

a)All selected samples were first composited to 2.5 m. This composite length was applied slightly variable, to provide equal length composites across each intersection.

 

b)These composites were then flagged as being either below or above 0.3%Cu. This demarcation was made for the modelling and separate grade handling of internal waste zones.

 

The breakdown of composites by zone is shown in Table 14-23.

 

 

Table 14-23. Summary of 2.5m Composites - Ulveryggen

 
ZONE Waste
<0.3% Cu
Mineralised
>=0.3% Cu
1 88 178
2 402 577
3 36 87
4 115 221
5 11 7
6 21 125
Total 673 1,195

 

As discussed in Section 4.2, composites were created across each identified intersection, with a length of 2.5 m. Those composites with average Cu grade values below 0.3% were then flagged as internal waste and handled separately. Statistics of the composite samples are summarised in Table 14-24.

 

Table 14-24. Composite Statistics – Ulveryggen

 

                Log  
              Standard Estimate of Coefficient
  ZONE Number Minimum Maximum Mean Variance Deviation Mean of Variation
All <0.3% Cu 496 0.00 0.30 0.10 0.01 0.10 0.18 95.2
Composites >=0.3% Cu 1195 0.30 4.00 0.89 0.31 0.56 0.88 62.9
  1 178 0.30 2.88 0.88 0.33 0.57 0.87 65.0
+0.3%Cu 2 577 0.30 4.00 0.84 0.26 0.51 0.83 61.2
Composites 3 87 0.32 2.00 0.71 0.18 0.42 0.70 59.3
By Zone 4 221 0.31 2.87 1.02 0.38 0.62 1.02 61.0
  5 7 0.32 1.22 0.62 0.09 0.29 0.62 47.1
  6 125 0.31 2.36 1.04 0.41 0.64 1.05 61.5

 

A log-probability plot of the composite data in the different zones is shown in Figure 14-37. Although there are some differences in populations (particularly zones 3 and 5, which have much fewer composites), the grade populations are quite similar.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects157

 

Figure 14-37. Log Probability Plot of +0.3%Cu Composites - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects158

 

14.2.5 Geostatistics

 

Owing to the similarity between copper grade distributions for the +0.3% Cu composites, experimental directional variograms were generated with the complete set of +0.3% Cu composites, and subsequently modelled, as shown in Figure 14-38.

 

Figure 14-38. Cu Variogram Models - Ulveryggen

 

 

These variograms show a range along-strike and down-dip of approximately 50 m, with a much shorter range of influence cross-strike. This pairwise relative variogram model was subsequently used in setting up kriging and other model estimation parameters. The model variogram parameters are summarised below in Table 14-25.

 

Table 14-25. Model Variogram Parameters - Ulveryggen

 

  1st Structure  2nd Structure 
NUGGET  Ranges     Ranges   
Co X Y Z C1 X Y Z C2
0.042 29 30 4    0.104 54 54 16 0.080

 

Notes

 

. Rotation used of 150o about Z-axis, then 70o about X-axis

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects159

 

14.2.6 Volumetric Modelling

 

The mineralized zone wireframes, and additional sectional perimeters, were used in the generation of a volumetric block model for the Ulveryggen deposit. The model prototype parameters used are summarised below in Table 14-26.

 

Table 14-26. Model Prototype - Ulveryggen

 

  Origin Size (m) Number Range
X 396,069 10 179 1,790
Y 7,815,497 5 131 655
Z 58 10 47 470

 

Notes

 

. A model rotation of -30 degrees was use d about the z-axis, so that the rotated axes become:

 

Xalong-strike

Ycross-strike

Zdown-dip

 

. Sub-cells down to a minimum width of 2.5m were use d for modelling internal waste

 

14.2.7 Grade Estimation

 

During the modelling process, internal waste blocks were first generated from <0.3% Cu composites. The projection of internal waste, as well as subsequent grade interpolation, was also controlled by a set of centreline dip and strike strings, to allow for directional anisotropy within the deposit. Example vertical and horizontal sections, showing the resultant block model structure, are shown in Figure 14-39 and Figure 14-40.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects160

 

Figure 14-39. Example Vertical Section of Block Model Structure- Ulveryggen

 

Figure 14-40. Example Horizontal Section of Block Model Structure – Ulveryggen

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects161

 

Based on the model variograms generated, copper grades were interpolated using ordinary kriging. The internal waste demarcation of 0.3% Cu was used as a hard boundary – so only composites flagged as +0.3% Cu were used for grade estimation into the main +0.3% mineralized blocks. For comparative and validation purposes, copper grades were also interpolated by two other ways - inverse-distance weighting and nearest-neighbour. Three progressively larger searches were made, so that if insufficient composites were found on the first search, the next larger search would be applied, and so on. The search distances used stemmed from the model variograms – the first search was based on 2/3 of the variability of the model variogram, and then the next search was based on the variogram ranges. If blocks still had not encountered enough composites, a much larger search was made to try to ensure that all blocks modelled as mineralized did receive grades. The grade estimation parameters are summarised below in Table 14-27.

 

Table 14-27. Grade Estimation Parameters - Ulveryggen

 

Search Distances (m)  Search Minimum
Along-Strike Down-Dip  Cross-Strike   Composites
20 20 5 1st 5
50 50 12.5 2nd 3
60 60 15 3rd 1

 

Notes:

 

. Maximum number of composites used = 24

. All grades interpolated using ordinary kriging

. Alternative grades also determined by IPD(^2) and NN

. Zones' orientations modelling using directional anisotropy

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects162

 

14.2.8 Density

 

 

20 density measurements were taken from core samples in six of the holes in the 2010 drilling campaigns. 42 density measurements were also taken from core samples in two of the holes in the 2017 drilling campaigns. Measurements were derived from dry core weights in air and then suspended in water. No wax was used.

 

These results are summarised in Table 14-28. A histogram of density results in mineralised samples is shown in Figure 14-41.

 

Table 14-28. Summary of Density Measurements - Ulveryggen

 

Campaign Type Number of
Samples

Average

Density

t/m 3

Standard

Deviation

         

2010

 

Mineralised 14 2.71 0.043
       
Unmineralised 6 2.69 0.014
         

2017

 

Mineralised 28 2.71 0.015
       
Unmineralised 14 2.70 0.022

 

Figure 14-41. Histogram of Densities – Mineralised Samples 2017 - Ulveryggen

 

 

The average value for mineralised rock, 2.71 t/m3, was used as the global density value for subsequent evaluation purposes.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects163

 

14.2.9 Resource Classification

 

The resource classification system was also based predominantly on the variography results. The system applied is summarised below in Table 14-29.

 

Table 14-29. Resource Classification System - Ulveryggen

 

Measured At 5 composites, within a 20m x 20m x 5m search, from at least 3 drillholes or trench lines.
Indicated At 5 composites, within a 50m x 50m x 12.5m search, from at least 3 drillholes or trench lines.
Inferred Within delineated zones - max extrapolation of 60m.

 

An example section of the applied resource classification system is shown in Figure 14-42.

 

Very little material has been drilled off sufficiently closely to be classified as measured, so all the resources in this case have been classified as either indicated or inferred.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects164

 

Figure 14-42. Example Block Model Section, Showing Resource Classes – Ulveryggen

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects165

 

14.2.10       Model Validation

 

Based on the block models generated, the following model validation steps were taken.

 

Visual Examination

 

Cross-sections through all the zones were generated, as shown in Appendix F. These compared the block model grades with the original sample grades, and in general compared well.

 

Global Comparison of Grades

 

The overall average sample and composite copper grades were compared with global average grades from the block model, as interpolated by kriging, inverse-distance weighting and nearest neighbour. These results are summarised below in Table 14-30. It can be seen that these results compare fairly well.

 

Table 14-30. Global Comparison of Cu Grades - Ulveryggen

 

      Block Model Average Grades
Zone Samples Composites OK ID NN
1 0.96 0.88 0.89 0.86 0.90
2 0.90 0.84 0.71 0.70 0.71
3 0.74 0.71 0.67 0.67 0.68
4 1.09 1.02 0.89 0.84 0.88
5 0.74 0.62 0.64 0.65 0.64
6 1.09 1.04 0.81 0.79 0.81

 

Notes

 

. Evaluation restricted to +0.3% blocks/samples

. Block model evaluation - indicated + inferred

. OK ordinary kriging

. ID inverse distance weighting (^2)

. NN nearest neighbour

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects166

 

Local Comparison of Grades

 

Average model grades along vertical columnar model block slices were determined, stemming from both the kriged and nearest neighbour grades. A comparative swath plot was then produced for copper, as shown in Figure 14-43. This shows that the kriged grades are smoothed within the extremes exhibited by the nearest neighbour grades, but in general all 3 grades show the same trends. All three grades are much closer together in the areas with the highest tonnages and more drilling.

 

From this analysis it was decided to use the kriged copper grade as the principal copper grade for the resource estimation.

 

Figure 14-43. Cu Swath Plot - Ulveryggen

 

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects167

 

14.2.11       Resource Evaluation

 

For reporting purposes for a resource estimate connected with a potential underground mining operation, and complying with ‘reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction’ guidelines, the following steps were completed:

 

1)Cut-Off. An economic cut-off grade was determined, applicable to underground mining at Nussir and Ulveryggen, as summarised in Table 14-15.

 

2)Constraining Volumes. A preliminary mineable shape optimisation was run (Datamine process MSO) to generate reasonably practical constraining wireframe volumes for a resource evaluation. The parameters used in this optimisation are summarised in Table 14-31. A 3D plot of the output constraining envelopes is shown in Figure 14-44.

 

3)Evaluation. The evaluation was broken down by resource class and zone, as shown in Table 14-32. A grade-tonnage table for the Indicated resources is shown in Table 14-33. Approximately 24% of the Indicated material, and 13% of the Inferred material, is within 15 m of the current pit and natural topography. Owing to the complex geometry of mineralised zones, true thickness values are not applicable and were therefore not calculated.

 

Table 14-31. MSO Parameters - Ulveryggen

 

Factor Unit Value
Cut-Off %Cu 0.3
Minimum width m 3
Minimum length along -strike m 10
Minimum length down-dip m 10
Minimum waste pillar width m 10

 

Figure 14-44. 3D Plot of MSO Stopes Shapes – Ulveryggen

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects168

 

Table 14-32. Resource Evaluation Summary – Ulveryggen

(As of End-January, 2025)

 

  Indicated  Inferred 
ZONE Tonnes Cu Tonnes Cu
  Kt % Kt %
1 761 0.73 393 0.70
2 1,936 0.59 818 0.56
3 149 0.48 1,151 0.62
4 1,205 0.71 563 0.90
5     247 0.51
6     525 0.79
Total 4,052 0.65 3,697 0.68

 

Notes

 

. MSO constraints based on a cut-off grade of 0.3%Cu

. Minimum thickness = 3m

. Minimum selectivity = 10m along-strike and down-dip

. Based on Dec 2018 resource block model

 

Table 14-33. Grade-Tonnage Table - Indicated Resources Only- Ulveryggen

 

Cu Cut-Off
%

0.3

Tonnes
Kt

4,048

Cu
%

0.65

 
0.4 3,968 0.66
0.5 3,268 0.70
0.6 2,003 0.79
0.7 1,212 0.89
0.8 730 0.98
0.9 427 1.08
1.0 257 1.17
1.1 131 1.30
1.2 98 1.35
1.3 55 1.45
1.4 34 1.50
1.5 17 1.57

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects169

 

15 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

 

Not applicable

 

16 MINING METHODS

 

Not applicable

 

17 RECOVERY METHODS

 

Not applicable

 

18 PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE

 

Not applicable

 

19 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS

 

Not applicable

 

20 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING AND SOCIAL IMPACT

 

Not applicable

 

21 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

 

Not applicable

 

22 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

 

Not applicable

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects170

 

23 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

 

There are other claim holders in the Repparfjord area, as shown in the plan in Figure 23-1. The companies holding the claims, beside Nussir, are:

 

·Grønnstein AS, Norwegian exploration company.

 

·Aurum Future Minerals AS, owned by Ireland-based Aurum Discovery Ltd

 

As can be seen from the plan, these other claims are either immediately to the west or east of Nussir’s claims.

 

The Author has not visited these other properties and is therefore unable to verify information pertaining to the presence of mineralization on the adjacent properties. These properties are not necessarily indicative of the mineralization associated with the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects that is the subject of this report. The information provided in this section is simply intended to provide examples of other properties that exist in the region.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects171

 

Figure 23-1. Claims in the Repparfjord Area

 

[Source: Norwegian Directorate of Mining]

 

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects172

 

 

24 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION

 

Non-applicable.

 

25 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

 

25.1 Risks and Uncertainties

 

There are several risks and uncertainties associated with the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects that should be considered; however, there are also several generic risks that are associated with nearly all exploration and mining project, including but not limited to the following:

 

·Sensitivity of the mineral resource to metal pricing

 

·Supply chain cost escalation for contractors and service providers

 

·Possible exploration permitting difficulties, related costs, and resulting delays

 

The project specific risks and uncertainties that the Author has identified are discussed in this section of the report.

 

25.1.1 Drillholes

 

There are some errors associated with elevation of drillhole collars when compared to the LiDAR data. In general, the elevation differences seem worse for the Ulveryggen deposit than at the Nussir deposit. However, this observation might be due to the sharp changes in topography at the Ulveryggen deposit, where many very steep faces and slopes are left by the historical open pit mining, making the LiDAR pick-up more difficult. The risk of errors having any appreciable effect on resource estimation is minimal. These errors can be mitigated with more accurate measurements of historical and recent drillhole collars. The Author concludes that the data management of drillholes is of sufficient quality to support the estimation of a mineral resource.

 

25.1.2 Density Measurements.

 

For both the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects, the density measurements taken do not cover the full extent of the deposit, nor do they fully cover all strata associated with the mineralization. As such, there is a risk associated with the assumed densities in some parts of the deposit. This risk can be mitigated in the future with the collection of further density measurements with each successive drilling program and by analysing these results for refinement of any future estimations of a mineral resource for the projects. The Author concludes that the density measurement are sufficient to support the estimation of a mineral resource.

 

25.1.3 Rejects/Pulps Inventory.

 

There is a small risk associated with incomplete inventories of available rejects and pulps, for both Nussir and Ulveryggen. This risk can be mitigated by preparing updated inventories for both Løkken and Skaidi.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects173

 

25.1.4 Historic QA/QC Procedures.

 

The little QAQC information is available for the data prior to 2008 at Nussir (representing approximately 30% of all current samples) and prior to 2010 at Ulveryggen (representing approximately 85% of all current samples). There is a risk of potential bias and lack of precision associated with this older data. In later years, QA/QC procedures have been applied progressively more rigorously. The weakness of this old data can be mitigated in the future with further sampling and new data. The Author concludes that the historical QAQC is sufficient to support the estimation of a mineral resource.

 

25.1.5 Fault Zones - Nussir.

 

At the Nussir deposit, there are some fault intersections in drillholes in the Eastern part of the deposit, which were could not be built into coherent fault models, so faults are not represented in the current geological model. Given the overall continuity of the mineralised structures at Nussir, and the observed outcrop continuity, it does not appear likely that faults significantly affect the resource model and subsequent estimation. However, to mitigate this risk, it is recommended that fault models are interpreted as the project develops, using additional drilling results and more detailed mapping of surface topography. The Author concludes that the continuity of strata and mineralization, along with the current interpretations of fault structures is of sufficient quality to support the estimation of a mineral resource.

 

25.1.6 Structural Modelling - Nussir.

 

The wide-spaced drilling at the Nussir deposit could be possibly picking up other structural geological features that might affect the overall geometry of mineralised zones. To mitigate this risk, it is recommended that any other structural geological details are accounted for as the project develops, using further drilling results and more detailed mapping of surface topography. The Author concludes that the current stead of the structural information available for the deposit is sufficient to support the estimation of a mineral resource.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects174

 

25.2 Results and Interpretations

 

There are several opportunities to improve the current results that should be investigated further as part of the ongoing development of the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects.

 

25.2.1 Exploration Targets - Nussir.

 

The Nussir deposit is open to the west and to depth. In particular, the current limit of Inferred category resources excludes the influence of thee deep drillhole intersections, because they are excessively distant to the grid of holes above. The exploration target potential was derived by modelling the identified mineralization. The volume of the modelled areas determines the potential tonnage statement in the exploration target. The grade range given in the exploration target is determined with consideration to the drill results within the modelled exploration target area and consideration of the geological setting in an established mineral resource estimate area. The potential tonnages and grades are therefore conceptual in nature and are based on previous drill results that defined the approximate length, thickness, depth and grade of the portion of the mineral resource estimate. There has been insufficient exploration and data collection to define a current mineral resource for the exploration target and the Issuer cautions that there is a risk that further exploration will not result in the delineation of a mineral resource. The exploration target around these deeper intersections therefore represents a tonnage between 8.5 Mt and 16.5Mt, and a Cu grade between 0.7 and 1.3% Cu, between 9 and 17 g/t silver, and 0.1 and 0.15g/t gold.

 

There are also a number of mineralized targets occur both downdip and along strike of the mineralized exploration target that has been defined. This mineral potential has not been properly tested by drilling. Additionally, a number of mineral targets currently outside of the resource area of the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits are supported by geological mapping and limited drilling. This means that additional infill and exploration drilling is warranted to more fully test favourable stratigraphy both regionally and directly at Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits.

 

25.2.2 Exploration Targets - Ulveryggen

 

The Ulveryggen deposit is open to depth, and based on geochemical sampling and geophysics, there are drilling targets both along strike and down-dip.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects175

 

25.2.3 Double Mineralised Intersections – Nussir deposit

 

There are some instances at Nussir, mainly in the more folded west end, of single drillholes picking up two mineralised intersections. This could be due to reverse faulting, and when drilled sufficiently in the future, could lead to an improved interpretation with more mineralised material that is currently modelled. These potentially repeated strata are only known to occur over 2.5 of the 10 km strike length of known mineralization. Limited drilling has been done to date to fully test the mineral potential of this possible extension. Given the presence of a mineral resource adjacent to this parallel zone of favourable strata, it means additional drilling is warranted but there is no guarantee that additional drilling will result in the delineation of a mineral resource in these areas.

 

25.2.4 Inferred Resource Conversion – Nussir deposit

 

The Nussir deposit is open to depth over much of its strike length, as well as westwards. If the project progresses and the proposed underground development commences, this could allow much closer and offset access for drilling of deeper zones. This would provide an opportunity to significantly extend Indicated resources to depth and westwards. Additional drilling should be designed in order to enable a significant proportion of the deposit to be reclassified into a higher category of confidence, such as Indicated category, as well as provide a more accurate interrelation and structural geology and mineralised zones. Stakeholders should be cautioned that addition drilling is not a guarantee for upgrading the resource category.

 

Inferred Resource Conversion – Ulveryggen deposit

 

There are numerous areas currently modelled at the Ulveryggen deposit, where the current drilling density does not support an Indicated resource categorisation. Additional drilling should be designed to enable a significant proportion of the deposit to be reclassified into a higher category of confidence, such as Indicated category, as well as provide a more accurate interrelation and structural geology and mineralised zones. Stakeholders should be cautioned that additional drilling is not a guarantee for upgrading the resource category.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects176

 

25.3 Conclusions

 

The updated mineral resource estimate with an effective date of January 20, 2025, has these conclusions from the Author and are as follows:

 

·The geological setting and character of the sedimentary-hosted copper mineralization identified to date on the Project, and specifically at the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits, are of sufficient enough merit to justify additional exploration expenditures.

 

·The majority of drill holes completed to date were targeting the mineral resource totalling 345 core drill holes for 69,440 metres.

 

·Drilling has identified extensive, conformable, sedimentary strata that are well mineralized that remain open for growth. Geological mapping on surface and drilling both along strike and downdip of the mineral resource have identified the same favorable host rocks for copper mineralization indicating mineral potential warranting additional drilling to more fully test these favorable strata both regionally and at the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits.

 

·There is a parallel zone of mineralization that has been identified that is believed to be a potential fault repetition, tested only by limited drilling over a 2.5 km stretch of the 10 km strike extent of the favorable strata. A number of additional mineral occurrences occur outside of the deposits, such as the Western zone, that require addition exploration beyond infill and exploration drilling directly around the mineral resource wireframes.

 

·There is general support for the project at the exploration stage of mineral resource development from the affected communities in the area, as those communities will benefit from local employment.

 

·The Author has reviewed the procedures for drilling, sampling, sample preparation and analysis, and is of the opinion that they are appropriate for the deposit style and mineralization.

 

·The Author has reviewed the quality control results (QA/QC) and did not find any material issues, so the Author is of the opinion that the databases for the mineral resource are of sufficient quality to estimate mineral resources.

 

·Mineral resources were estimated using a 0.30% copper cutoff value for potential underground extraction that will need to be studied further in the future.

 

·Measured mineral resources for the Nussir deposit are presented in Table 25-1.

 

·For the Ulveryggen deposit, the Indicated mineral resources are presented in Table 25-2.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects177

 

Table 25-25-1. Nussir Resource Estimation Summary

Effective Date: 20th January, 2025    

 

Category Tonnes Cu Ag Au Cu Eq Cu Metal Ag Metal Au Metal
  Mt % g/t g/t % Kt Koz Koz
Measured 2.69 1.08 12.8 0.18 1.31 29 1,103 16
Indicated 26.03 1.01 12.3 0.11 1.19 263 10,288 92
Meas+Ind 28.72 1.02 12.3 0.12 1.20 292 11,391 108
                 
Inferred 31.99 1.01 14.6 0.14 1.23 324 14,972 143

 

Notes:

 

1 . CIM definitions were followed for MRE.

 

2 . A minimum mining width of 2.0 m was applied in making the MRE constraint wireframes. These wireframes were generated using a preliminary MSO.

 

3 . Density values for Nussir were estimated from density sample values or assigned default average values where insufficient samples occur nearby.

 

4 . MRE constraint wireframes were generated for a cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu, related to potential underground mining.

 

5 . Metal prices assumed for this MRE were US$4.20 lb Cu, US$27.00/Oz Ag and US$2,200oz Au, which represent reasonable long-term consensus metal pricing.

 

6 . Metallurgy recovery assumptions were 96% Cu, 80% Ag and 93% Au, which stem from SGS metallurgical testwork completed in 2022.

 

7 . The cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu was derived from the price and recovery values above, as well as a smelter payability of 97.3% and an assumed total operating cost $26.20/t of ore.

 

8 . Rounding may result in apparent summation differences between tonnes, grades and metal content; not considered material.

 

9 . Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects178

 

Table 25-25-2. Ulveryggen Resource Estimation Summary

Effective Date: 20th January, 2025

 

Resource Tonnes Cu Cu Metal
Category Mt % Kt
Indicated 4.05 0.65 26.3
       
Inferred 3.70 0.68 25.0

 

Notes:

 

1 . CIM definitions were followed for MRE.

 

2 . A minimum mining width of 2.0 m was applied in making the MRE constraint wireframes. These wireframes were generated using a preliminary MSO.

 

3 . A global density value was assigned for Ulveryggen, based on analysis of density measurements.

 

4 . MRE constraint wireframes generated for a cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu, related to potential underground mining.

 

5 . The assumed metal price assumed for this MRE was 4.20 $/lb Cu, which represents a reasonable long-term value.

 

6 . The assumed metallurgical recovery was 96% Cu, which stems from SGS metallurgical testwork completed in 2022.

 

7 . The cut-off grade of 0.30% Cu was derived from the price and recovery values above, as well as a smelter payability of 97.3% and an assumed total operating cost $26.20/t of ore.

 

8 . Rounding may result in apparent summation differences between tonnes, grades and metal content; not considered material.

 

9 . Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.

 

26 RECOMMENDATIONS

 

26.1 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

 

·Develop rigorous quality control and quality assurance (“QA/QC”) policy for standards, blanks and duplicate sample when drilling that is monitored on a batch-by-batch basis when data is received from the accredited laboratory.

 

·Consider the use of prep- and or reject duplicate samples to enhance the QA/QC

 

·Select certified reference material (CRM) that are more aligned to the grades of the Nussir and Ulveryggen deposits for copper, gold and silver; being mindful that if geochemically testing for platinum and or palladium, it might require a different CRM.

 

·Develop an umpire or secondary independent laboratory, remitting approximately 10 to 15% of the total samples, and select analysis methodologies that are similar to the primary laboratory. This will provide future assurances that the range of grades seen in the analytical certificates are valid and respected.

 

·Consider centralizing all pulp and reject storage

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects179

 

26.2 Data Verification

 

·Finish the drill collar validations done in 2019, referencing the Devisight system from Devico for the X and Y coordinates, and then validating elevation (or Z) data between the surveys for each of the drill collar locations against the LiDAR survey. Having a valid elevation data strengthens the respect of the mineral resource modelling.

 

·Consider a more rigorous check analysis program, if the analytical pulps are available from prior drilling program results. At a minimum, select approximately 100 to 200 pulps from each round of drilling that would be re-run at both the primary and secondary laboratory.

 

·Consider moving point and vector data from drilling into a proper database management system such as MX Deposit. This includes but is not limited to drill collar information, lithological data, structural data, sample data, and analytical results. The advantage of such a cloud-based database management system is that it negates expensive software purchasing and it can be linked to major 3D modelling programs such as Seequent’s Leapfrog Geo and other programs.

 

26.3 Further Studies

 

·An optimization and or trade-off study should be done to assess a conventional tailings facility approach for any future engineering studies

 

·Consider building a Leapfrog Geo model of all lithological units and structures that is maintained and updated regularly when new surficial mapping and or drilling is completed. This will help better guide future studies and mineral resource estimation processes.

 

·Consider adding RMR to the geomechanical (rock mechanics) data collection in addition to the RQD work already part of the core logging process. This methodology is typically done for deposits that potentially could be extracted through an underground.

 

·Consider adding point load testing (“PLT”) to the geomechanical data collection process in the coreshack. The addition of this process will provide rock quality and strength information that will be invaluable when assessing ground stability in future engineering studies. It will also provide a large dataset that can be used in conjunction with any analytical program carried out at a rock mechanics laboratory

 

·Consider a regular analytical process at a rock mechanics laboratory to backstop geomechanical data collection. Testing could include UCS, BTS, and Triaxial measurements. If a PLT is collecting

 

·Consider taking a coreshack measurement of specific gravity for each sample marked for collection or add an analytical pulp or reject measurement at the primary laboratory. The addition of a larger number of specific gravity measurements will greatly enhance the estimation of the tonnes on a block by block basis in the mineral resource model, as currently the estimations are using average values for lithologies.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects180

 

26.4 Exploration Program and Budget

 

For further development of the project, The Author recommends a work program at the Nussir and Ulveryggen projects that includes the preparation of the development of an exploration decline (including logistics and support), exploration drilling and optimization studies including engineering. A summary breakdown of this work program is presented below along with associated estimated costs expected to cost C$13.0 million (Table 26-1).

 

Table 26-1. Proposed Budget

 

Item (C$000)
Underground access (decline) preparation, exploration logistics and support 4,000
Exploration – drilling 25,000 to 30,000 m 6,000
Optimization studies including engineering studies 3,000
Total 13,000

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025
  

Technical Report on the Mineral Resources of the Nussir and Ulveryggen Projects181

 

27 REFERENCES

 

Dalsegg, Einar. Elvebakk, Harald and Rønning, Jan S. 2013. Geofysiske bakke- og borehullsmålinger ved Nussir i 2013, Kvalsund kommune, Finnmark. Trondheim : Norwegian Geological Survey, 2013.052 ISSN0800-3416.

 

Dalsegg, Einar and Rønning, Jan S. 2011. Geofysiske målinger Nussir- Ulveryggen, Kvalsund kommune, Finnmark. Trondheim : Norwegian Geological Survey, 2011.072 ISSN0800-3416.

 

Girard, Romain, Pullman, Bryan, and Balding, Barry. Nussir & Ulveryggen Copper Project PFS, 2017.

 

Heincke, Bjørn H. Koziel, Janusz. Walker, Peter and Lynum, Rolf. 2008. Helicopter-borne geophysical measurements for mineral exploration at Nussir, Kvalsund, Finnmark. Trondheim : Norwegian Geological Survey, 2008.020 ISSN0800-3416.

 

Hitzman, Murray W. 2008. A New view of the Zambian Copperbelt. Misty Hills, South Africa : Colorado School of mines, 2008.

 

Nilsen, Kjell S., 2019. Nussir and Ulveryggen – Geological Report.

 

Pharaoh, Tim C, Jansen, Øystein and Ramsey, Donald M. 1983. Stratigraphy and structure of the northern part of Repparfjord-Komagfjord Window, Finnmark, Northern Norway. Trondheim : Universitetsforlaget, 1983. B0007B7JF6.

 

Rønning, Jan S., Dalsegg, Einar and Walker, Peter. 2007. Vurdering av helikoptergeofysikk over Nussirforekomsten. Trondheim : Norwegian Geological Survey, 2007. ISSN0800-3416.

 

Sandstad, Jan Sverre., Viola, G. & Nilsson, L. 2007. Reconnaissance structural geologic mapping and field XRF analyses of the Ulveryggen copper deposit, Finnmark, Norway. Norges geologiske undersøkelse Report 2007.060.

 

Sandstad, Jan Sverre. 2010. Microscope and SEM investigations of thin sections from the Nussir copper deposit, Kvalsund, Finnmark, Northern Norway. Trondheim : Norges geologiske institutt, 2010.025 ISSN0800-3416.

 

SGS, 2019. An Investigation into the Recovery of Copper from the Nussir Deposit. Project 12527-04 0 Report 2.

 

Simonsen Vogtwiig, 19/12/2024. “Title and Corporate Opinion’ from Blue Moon”.

 

Viola, Giulio. Sandstad, Jan S. Nilsson, Lars P. Heincke, Bjørn. 2008. Structural and ore geological studies in the northwestern part of the Repparfjord Window, Kvalsund, Finnmark, Norway. Trondheim : Norgesgeologiske institutt, 2008.029, ISSN0800-3416.

 

Wheeler, Adam. May 2012. “Nussir Report Estimation Updated May 2012”.

 

Wheeler, Adam. March 2014. “Nussir Report Estimation Updated March 2014”.

 

Wheeler, Adam. October 2016. “Nussir Report Estimation Updated May 2016”.

 

Wheeler, Adam. January 2018. “Nussir Report Estimation Updated May 2018”.

 

Adam WheelerSeptember 2025