Exhibit 99.1

TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE CORTEZ

COMPLEX, LANDER AND EUREKA

COUNTIES, STATE OF NEVADA, USA

NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT

 

Prepared for:

Barrick Gold Corporation

Prepared by:

Mr. Craig Fiddes, RM SME

Mr. Jay D. Olcott, RM SME

Mr. Timothy Webber, RM SME

Mr. Nathan Bennett, RM SME

Mr. John W. Langhans Jr., MMSA QP

Report effective date:

December 31, 2021.

 

 

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON: CRAIG FIDDES

I, Craig Fiddes, SME (RM), as an author of this report entitled “Technical Report on the Cortez Complex, Lander and Eureka Counties, State of Nevada, USA” prepared for Barrick Gold Corporation by Nevada Gold Mines LLC and dated March 18, 2022 with an effective date of December 31, 2021 do hereby certify that:

 

1.	I am the Manager - Resource Modelling with Nevada Gold Mines LLC, Nevada.

 

2.	I am a graduate of the University of Otago, New Zealand, graduating in 1998 with a BSc (Hons) degree in Geology.

 

3.

I am a SME Registered Member, #04197758. I have worked as a geologist and resource modeler for over 20 years since my graduation. My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is: Over 20 years of mining industry experience, including direct involvement in exploration, geologic interpretation and resource estimation, mine geology and reconciliation (both open pit and underground), compilation and reporting of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, and pre-feasibility and feasibility studies for gold deposits.

 

4.	As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) for those sections of the technical report that I am responsible for preparing.

 

5.	I work at the Nevada Gold Mines Elko Business Office, with regular visits to operational sites including the Cortez Complex to oversee resource modeling work and review other activities at site including geologic data collection and modeling, grade control, production, and reconciliation.

 

6.	I am responsible for the following Sections of the Technical Report; 1.1, 1.2, 1.12 - 1.14, 1.18, 1.19, 1.22 - 1.25, 2, 3, 14.1 – 14.7, 14.9 – 14.11, 15.5 – 15.7, 16.5, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25.1, 25.6, 25.7, 25.12, 25.17, 26, and 27.

 

7.	I am not independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

 

8.	I have had prior involvement with the Cortez Complex since July 2019 in my current role.

 

9.	I have read NI 43-101, and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.

 

10.	At the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated 18th day of March, 2022

“signed and stamped”

Craig Fiddes

Craig Fiddes, SME (RM)

 

March 2022

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON: JAY D. OLCOTT

I, Jay D. Olcott, SME (RM), as an author of this report entitled “Technical Report on the Cortez Complex, Lander and Eureka Counties, State of Nevada, USA” prepared for Barrick Gold Corporation by Nevada Gold Mines LLC and dated March 18, 2022 with an effective date of December 31, 2021 do hereby certify that:

 

1.	I am a Geoscientist with Nevada Gold Mines LLC, Nevada.

 

2.	I am a graduate of Brigham Young University, graduating in 2001 with a BSc degree in Geology.

 

3.

I am a SME Registered Member, #4173430. My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is; over 18 years of mining experience, including ore control, drilling, QA/QC, modeling, reconciliation, mine planning, cost estimation, economic analysis, permitting and environmental studies. I have worked as a geologist for most of my career; including the past 10 years as a Chief Geologist at an underground mine and as a Study Director and Project Manager for both underground and open pit scoping to prefeasibility level projects.

 

4.	As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) for those sections of the technical report that I am responsible for preparing.

 

5.	I work at the Nevada Gold Mines Elko Business Office

 

6.	I am responsible for the following Sections of the Technical Report; 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.23, 1.24, 1.25, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16.2.6, 16.3.1.4.8, 16.3.2.5, 17.4, 18, 20, 25.2, 25.3, 25.4, 25.10, 25.11, 26 and 27.

 

7.	I am not independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

 

8.	I have read NI 43-101, and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.

 

9.	At the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated 18th day of March, 2022

“signed and stamped”

Jay D. Olcott

Jay D. Olcott, SME (RM)

 

March 2022

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON: TIMOTHY WEBBER

I, Timothy Webber, SME (RM), as an author of this report entitled “Technical Report on the Cortez Complex, Lander and Eureka Counties, State of Nevada, USA” prepared for Barrick Gold Corporation by Nevada Gold Mines LLC and dated March 18, 2022 with an effective date of December 31, 2021 do hereby certify that:

 

1.	I am the Mine Manager, Goldrush Underground Operations, with Nevada Gold Mines LLC, Nevada.

 

2.	I am a graduate of the Colorado School of Mines, graduating in 2003 with a BSc in Mining Engineering, and in 2004 with a MSc in Engineering and Technology Management (ETM).

 

3.

I am a SME Registered Member, #4131311. I have worked as a mining engineer for most of my career; including the past 10 years in Chief Mine Engineer/Engineering Superintendent roles for several underground mines. My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is: Over 17 years of mining industry experience, including direct involvement in mine design, mine scheduling, cost estimation, economic analysis, and optimization; compilation and reporting of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates; and pre-feasibility and feasibility studies for gold deposits.

 

4.	As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) for those sections of the technical report that I am responsible for preparing.

 

5.	I currently work for Nevada Gold Mines as the Underground Mine Manager for Goldrush. I am on-site most weekdays.

 

6.	I am responsible for the following Sections of the Technical Report; 1.1, 1.2, 1.11, 1.23 – 1.25, 2, 3, 14.8 - 14.11, 15.1, 15.3, 15.5 – 15.7, 16.1, 16.3, 16.5 – 16.8, 21.1 – 21.4, 22, 25.6 – 25.8, 25.13 – 25.17, 26, and 27.

 

7.	I am not independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

 

8.	I have had prior involvement with the Cortez Complex since February 2021, and I assisted with the NGM internal review of the EOY2020 Reserve and Resource declaration for both Cortez Hills Underground and Goldrush.

 

9.	I have read NI 43-101, and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.

 

10.	At the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated 18th day of March, 2022

“signed”

Timothy Webber

Timothy Webber, SME (RM)

 

March 2022

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON: NATHAN BENNETT

I, Nathan Bennett, SME (RM), as an author of this report entitled “Technical Report on the Cortez Complex, Lander and Eureka Counties, State of Nevada, USA” prepared for Barrick Gold Corporation by Nevada Gold Mines LLC and dated March 18, 2022 with an effective date of December 31, 2021 do hereby certify that:

 

1.	I am the Mine Manager, Cortez Surface Operations, with Nevada Gold Mines LLC, Nevada.

 

2.	I am a graduate of the Colorado School of Mines, graduating in 1997 with a BS in Mining Engineering. I am a graduate of Weber State University, graduating in 2005 with a Masters of Business Administration.

 

3.

I am a SME Registered Member, #4061298. I have worked as a mine engineer for over 20 years since my graduation. My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is: Over 20 years of mining industry experience, including direct involvement in open pit mine design, economic analysis, mine scheduling and optimization, operations research, compilation and reporting of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, and pre-feasibility and feasibility studies for gold deposits.

 

4.	As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) for those sections of the technical report that I am responsible for preparing.

 

5.	I work at the Nevada Gold Mines Elko Cortez Complex, where I manage open pit operations, including mine operations, maintenance, and engineering.

 

6.	I am responsible for the following Sections of the Technical Report; 1.1, 1.2, 1.11, 1.13, 1.15, 1.17, 1.20 – 1.25, 2, 3, 14.8 – 14.11, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.6, 16.1, 16.2, 16.4 – 16.8, 21.1 – 21.4, 22, 23, 24, 25.1, 25.8, 25.13 - 25.17, 26, and 27.

 

7.	I am not independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

 

8.	I have had prior involvement with the Cortez Complex since July 2019 in my current role.

 

9.	I have read NI 43-101, and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.

 

10.	At the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated 18th day of March, 2022

“signed”

Nathan Bennett

Nathan Bennett, SME (RM)

 

March 2022

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON: JOHN W. LANGHANS JR.

I, John W. Langhans Jr., MMSA (QP), as an author of this report entitled “Technical Report on the Cortez Complex, Lander and Eureka Counties, State of Nevada, USA” prepared for Barrick Gold Corporation by Nevada Gold Mines LLC and dated March 18, 2022 with an effective date of December 31, 2021 do hereby certify that:

 

1.	I am the Technical Specialist, Metallurgy, with Nevada Gold Mines LLC, Nevada.

 

2.	I am a graduate of the University of Nevada, Reno, graduating in 1984 with a BSc degree in Chemical Engineering.

 

3.

I am a MMSA QP, #1563. I have worked as a metallurgist for nearly 38 years since my graduation. My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report includes: Metallurgical testing, research and evaluation, in-depth knowledge of analytical methods, operating data collection and evaluation, plant optimization/modifications, recovery modeling, ounce allocations, and project development and implementation for a variety of gold deposits.

 

4.	As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) for those sections of the technical report that I am responsible for preparing.

 

5.

I work at the Nevada Gold Mines Elko Business Office, with regular visits to operational sites including the Cortez Complex to oversee metallurgical testing and evaluation to include recovery modeling of current and future ore sources, and reviewing other activities at site including plant data collection and interpretation with emphasis on recovery performance, analytical methods, and plant modifications.

 

6.	I am responsible for the following Sections of the Technical Report; 1.1, 1.2, 1.10, 1.16, 1.21, 1.23 - 1.25, 2, 3, 13, 17.1 – 17.3, 17.5, 23, 24, 25.5, 25.17, 25.9, 26, and 27.

 

7.	I am not independent of the Issuer applying the test set out in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

 

8.	I have had prior involvement with the Cortez Complex since July 2019 in my current role.

 

9.	I have read NI 43-101, and the parts of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101.

 

10.	At the effective date of the Technical Report, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.

Dated 18th day of March, 2022

“signed”

John W. Langhans Jr.

John W Langhans Jr., MMSA (QP)

 

March 2022

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

CONTENTS

 

 

1.0    SUMMARY		1-1
1.1   Introduction		1-1
1.2   Terms of Reference		1-1
1.3   Project Setting		1-1
1.4   Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements		1-2
1.5   History		1-3
1.6   Geology and Mineralization		1-3
1.7   Exploration		1-4
1.8   Drilling and Sampling		1-4
1.9   Data Verification		1-6
1.10  Metallurgical Testwork		1-6
1.11  Mineral Resource Estimation		1-7
1.12  Mineral Resource Statement		1-9
1.13  Mineral Reserve Estimation		1-12
1.13.1   Open Pits		1-12
1.13.2   Underground		1-12
1.13.2.1   Cortez Hills		1-12
1.13.2.2   Goldrush		1-13
1.14  Mineral Reserve Statement		1-13
1.15  Mining Methods		1-16
1.15.1   Open Pits		1-16
1.15.2   Underground		1-17
1.15.2.1   Cortez Hills		1-17
1.15.2.2   Goldrush		1-17
1.16  Recovery Methods		1-18
1.17  Project Infrastructure		1-18
1.18  Market Studies and Contracts		1-19
1.19  Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations		1-20
1.19.1   Environmental Considerations		1-20
1.19.2   Closure and Reclamation Planning		1-21
1.19.3   Permitting Considerations		1-21
1.19.4   Social Considerations		1-22
1.20  Capital Cost Estimates		1-23
1.21  Operating Cost Estimates		1-23
1.22  Economic Analysis		1-24
1.23  Risks and Opportunities		1-24
1.23.1   Risks		1-24
1.23.2   Opportunities		1-25
1.24  Interpretation and Conclusions		1-26
1.25  Recommendations		1-26
2.0    INTRODUCTION		2-1
2.1   Introduction		2-1
2.2   Terms of Reference		2-1
2.3   Qualified Persons		2-4
2.4   Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection		2-4
2.5   Effective Dates		2-5
2.6   Information Sources and References		2-6

 

March 2022				Page i

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

2.7   Previous Technical Reports		2-8
3.0    RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS		3-1
4.0    PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION		4-1
4.1   Introduction		4-1
4.2   Property and Title in Nevada		4-1
4.2.1   Mineral Title		4-1
4.2.2   Surface Rights		4-2
4.2.3   Water Rights		4-2
4.2.4   State Royalties		4-2
4.2.5   Environmental Regulations		4-2
4.3   Project Ownership		4-3
4.4   Mineral Tenure		4-3
4.5   Surface Rights		4-17
4.6   Water Rights		4-17
4.7   Royalties and Encumbrances		4-18
4.7.1   Claims Royalties		4-18
4.7.2   NGM Royalty		4-20
4.7.3   State Royalties		4-20
4.8   Property Agreements		4-20
4.9   Permitting Considerations		4-20
4.10  Environmental Considerations		4-21
4.11  Social Considerations		4-21
4.12  QP Comments on “Item 4; Property Description and Location”		4-21
5.0    ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY		5-1
5.1   Accessibility		5-1
5.2   Climate		5-1
5.3   Local Resources and Infrastructure		5-1
5.4   Physiography		5-2
5.5   Seismicity		5-2
5.6   QP Comments on “Item 5; Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, And Physiography”		5-2
6.0    HISTORY		6-1
6.1   Exploration and Development History		6-1
6.2   Production		6-1
7.0    GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION		7-1
7.1   Regional Geology		7-1
7.2   Local Geology		7-3
7.2.1   Lithologies		7-3
7.2.2   Structure		7-3
7.2.3   Weathering		7-3
7.2.4   Alteration		7-3
7.2.5   Mineralization		7-9
7.3   Deposit Descriptions		7-9
7.3.1   Cortez		7-9
7.3.1.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-9
7.3.1.2    Deposit Setting		7-9
7.3.1.3    Mineralization		7-10
7.3.2   Cortez Hills		7-10

 

March 2022				Page ii

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

7.3.2.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-10
7.3.2.2    Deposit Setting		7-13
7.3.2.3    Mineralization		7-13
7.3.3   Crossroads		7-14
7.3.3.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-14
7.3.3.2    Deposit Setting		7-14
7.3.3.3    Mineralization		7-14
7.3.4   Gold Acres		7-21
7.3.4.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-21
7.3.4.2    Deposit Setting		7-21
7.3.4.3    Mineralization		7-21
7.3.5   Goldrush		7-24
7.3.5.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-24
7.3.5.2    Deposit Setting		7-24
7.3.5.3    Mineralization		7-24
7.3.6   Pipeline		7-29
7.3.6.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-29
7.3.6.2    Deposit Setting		7-29
7.3.6.3    Mineralization		7-29
7.3.7   Robertson		7-30
7.3.7.1    Deposit Dimensions		7-30
7.3.7.2    Deposit Setting		7-30
7.3.7.3    Mineralization		7-35
7.4   Prospects/Exploration Targets		7-35
7.5   QP Comments on “Item 7: Geological Setting and Mineralization”		7-35
8.0    DEPOSIT TYPES		8-1
8.1   Overview		8-1
8.1.1   Carlin-Type Mineralization		8-1
8.1.2   Intrusive-Related Mineralization		8-1
8.2   QP Comments on “Item 8: Deposit Types”		8-2
9.0    EXPLORATION		9-1
9.1   Overview		9-1
9.2   Grids and Surveys		9-1
9.3   Geological Mapping		9-1
9.4   Geochemical Sampling		9-1
9.5   Geophysics		9-2
9.6   Petrology, Mineralogy, and Research Studies		9-2
9.7   Exploration Potential		9-4
9.8   QP Comments on “Item 9: Exploration”		9-4
10.0   DRILLING		10-1
10.1  Introduction		10-1
10.2  Drill Methods		10-1
10.2.1   Surface Air and Mud Drilling Methods		10-9
10.2.2   Surface Reverse Circulation Drilling Methods		10-9
10.2.3   Underground Reverse Circulation Drilling		10-9
10.2.4   Surface Core Drilling		10-9
10.2.5   Underground Core Drilling		10-10
10.3  Logging Procedures		10-10
10.3.1   RC		10-10

 

March 2022				Page iii

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

10.3.2   Core		10-10
10.4  Recovery		10-11
10.4.1   RC		10-11
10.4.2   Core		10-11
10.5  Collar Surveys		10-12
10.5.1   RC		10-12
10.5.2   Core		10-12
10.6  Downhole Surveys		10-13
10.6.1   RC		10-13
10.6.2   Core		10-13
10.7  Geotechnical and Hydrological Drilling		10-14
10.8  Metallurgical Drilling		10-14
10.9  Grade Control		10-14
10.9.1   Surface		10-14
10.9.2   Underground		10-15
10.10   Sample Length/True Thickness		10-15
10.11   QP Comments on “Item 10: Drilling”		10-15
11.0   SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES, AND SECURITY		11-1
11.1  Sampling Methods		11-1
11.1.1   Air-Rotary and Mud-Rotary Drill Sampling		11-1
11.1.2   RC Drill Sampling		11-1
11.1.3   Core Sampling		11-1
11.1.4   Blasthole Sampling		11-1
11.1.5   Underground Sampling		11-2
11.1.6   Geotechnical Sampling		11-2
11.2  Density Determinations		11-2
11.3  Analytical and Test Laboratories		11-3
11.4  Sample Preparation		11-5
11.5  Analysis		11-5
11.6  Quality Assurance and Quality Control		11-9
11.6.1   Introduction		11-9
11.6.2   Standards		11-9
11.6.3   Blanks		11-10
11.6.4   Duplicates		11-10
11.6.5   Check Assays		11-10
11.6.6   Screen Assays		11-11
11.7  Databases		11-11
11.7.1   Exploration and Drill Data		11-11
11.7.2   Database Security		11-12
11.7.3   Density		11-12
11.7.4   Geotechnical		11-12
11.7.5   Open Pit		11-12
11.7.6   Underground		11-12
11.8  Sample Security		11-13
11.9  Sample Storage		11-13
11.10   QP Comments on “Item 11: Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security”		11-14
12.0   DATA VERIFICATION		12-1
12.1  Internal Data Verification		12-1
12.1.1   Data Reviews		12-1

 

March 2022				Page iv

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

12.1.2   Bias Evaluations		12-1
12.1.3   RC Contamination Reviews		12-1
12.1.4   Sampling Reviews		12-1
12.2  External Data Verification		12-2
12.3  QP’s Personal Verification		12-2
12.4  Comments on Data Verification		12-3
13.0   MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING		13-1
13.1  Introduction		13-1
13.2  Metallurgical Testwork		13-1
13.2.1   Overview		13-1
13.2.2   Cortez Hills Underground		13-2
13.2.3   Cortez Hills Open Pit		13-3
13.2.4   Cortez Pits		13-3
13.2.5   Pipeline–Crossroads		13-4
13.2.6   Goldrush		13-6
13.2.7   Robertson		13-9
13.3  Metallurgical Variability		13-11
13.4  Recovery Estimates		13-11
13.5  Deleterious Elements		13-13
13.6  QP Comments on “Item 13: Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testwork”		13-14
14.0   MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES		14-1
14.1  Introduction		14-1
14.2  Cortez Pits		14-1
14.2.1   Geological Modelling		14-1
14.2.2   Domains		14-2
14.2.3   Exploratory Data Analysis		14-2
14.2.4   Composites		14-2
14.2.5   Grade Capping/Outlier Restriction		14-3
14.2.6   Density Assignment		14-4
14.2.7   Variography		14-4
14.2.8   Estimation/Interpolation Methods		14-4
14.2.9   Block Model Validation		14-4
14.2.10  Confidence Classifications		14-5
14.3  Cortez Hills		14-5
14.3.1   Geological Modelling		14-5
14.3.2   Domains		14-5
14.3.3   Exploratory Data Analysis		14-5
14.3.4   Composites		14-6
14.3.5   Grade Capping/Outlier Restriction		14-6
14.3.6   Density Assignment		14-7
14.3.7   Variography		14-7
14.3.8   Estimation/Interpolation Methods		14-7
14.3.9   Block Model Validation		14-7
14.3.10  Confidence Classifications		14-8
14.4  Gold Acres		14-8
14.4.1   Geological Modelling		14-8
14.4.2   Domains		14-9
14.4.3   Exploratory Data Analysis		14-9
14.4.4   Composites		14-9

 

March 2022				Page v

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

14.4.5   Grade Capping/Outlier Restriction		14-9
14.4.6   Density Assignment		14-9
14.4.7   Variography		14-9
14.4.8   Estimation/Interpolation Methods		14-10
14.4.9   Block Model Validation		14-10
14.4.10  Confidence Classifications		14-10
14.5  Pipeline		14-11
14.5.1   Geological Modelling		14-11
14.5.2   Domains		14-12
14.5.3   Exploratory Data Analysis		14-12
14.5.4   Composites		14-12
14.5.5   Grade Capping/Outlier Restriction		14-12
14.5.6   Density Assignment		14-12
14.5.7   Variography		14-14
14.5.8   Estimation/Interpolation Methods		14-14
14.5.9   Block Model Validation		14-15
14.5.10  Confidence Classifications		14-15
14.6  Goldrush		14-16
14.6.1   Geological Modelling		14-16
14.6.2   Domains		14-16
14.6.3   Exploratory Data Analysis		14-16
14.6.4   Composites		14-18
14.6.5   Grade Capping/Outlier Restriction		14-18
14.6.6   Density Assignment		14-18
14.6.7   Variography		14-18
14.6.8   Estimation/Interpolation Methods		14-18
14.6.9   Block Model Validation		14-19
14.6.10  Confidence Classifications		14-19
14.7  Robertson		14-19
14.7.1   Geological Modelling		14-19
14.7.2   Domains		14-20
14.7.3   Exploratory Data Analysis		14-20
14.7.4   Composites		14-20
14.7.5   Grade Capping/Outlier Restriction		14-21
14.7.6   Density Assignment		14-21
14.7.7   Variography		14-21
14.7.8   Block Model		14-21
14.7.9   Estimation/Interpolation Methods		14-21
14.7.10  Block Model Validation		14-21
14.7.11  Confidence Classifications		14-22
14.8  Reasonable Prospects of Eventual Economic Extraction		14-22
14.8.1   Cortez Pits		14-22
14.8.2   Cortez Hills		14-22
14.8.3   Gold Acres		14-27
14.8.4   Pipeline		14-27
14.8.5   Robertson		14-28
14.8.6   Goldrush		14-28
14.9  Mineral Resource Statement		14-28
14.10   Factors That May Materially Affect the Mineral Resource Estimate		14-31

 

March 2022				Page vi

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

14.11   QP Comments on “Item 14: Mineral Resource Estimates”		14-31
15.0   MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES		15-1
15.1  Introduction		15-1
15.2  Open Pit Mineral Reserves		15-1
15.2.1   Estimation Procedure		15-1
15.2.2   Cut-off Grade		15-1
15.2.3   Dilution and Mining Recovery		15-6
15.3  Underground Mineral Reserves		15-6
15.3.1   Cortez Hills		15-6
15.3.1.1   Estimation Procedure		15-6
15.3.1.2   Cut-off Grade		15-6
15.3.1.3   Dilution and Mining Recovery		15-6
15.3.2   Goldrush		15-8
15.3.2.1   Estimation Procedure		15-8
15.3.2.2   Cut-off Grade		15-8
15.3.2.3   Dilution and Mining Recovery		15-9
15.4  Stockpiles		15-9
15.5  Mineral Reserve Statement		15-10
15.6  Factors That May Materially Affect the Mineral Reserve Estimates		15-13
15.7  QP Comments on “Item 15: Mineral Reserve Estimates”		15-13
16.0   MINING METHODS		16-1
16.1  Overview		16-1
16.2  Open Pit		16-1
16.2.1   Geotechnical Considerations		16-1
16.2.2   Hydrological Considerations		16-4
16.2.3   Mining Method		16-4
16.2.4   Mine Design		16-4
16.2.5   Production Plan		16-8
16.2.6   Grade Control		16-8
16.3  Underground Mining		16-13
16.3.1   Cortez Hills		16-13
16.3.1.1   Geotechnical Considerations		16-13
16.3.1.1.1 Overview		16-13
16.3.1.1.2 Middle and Lower Zones		16-14
16.3.1.1.3 Deep South Zone		16-14
16.3.1.2   Hydrological Considerations		16-16
16.3.1.2.1 General		16-16
16.3.1.2.2 Deep South Zone		16-16
16.3.1.3   Mining Method		16-16
16.3.1.4   Mine Designs		16-18
16.3.1.4.1 Access		16-18
16.3.1.4.2 Ore and Waste Haulage		16-18
16.3.1.4.3 Facilities		16-21
16.3.1.4.4 Power		16-21
16.3.1.4.5 Backfill		16-21
16.3.1.4.6 Ventilation		16-22
16.3.1.4.7 Production Plan		16-22
16.3.1.4.8 Ore Control		16-22
16.3.2   Goldrush		16-25

 

March 2022				Page vii

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

16.3.2.1   Geotechnical Considerations		16-25
16.3.2.1.1 Overview		16-25
16.3.2.1.2 Stope Stability Assessments		16-25
16.3.2.1.3 Monitoring		16-26
16.3.2.2   Hydrological Considerations		16-26
16.3.2.3   Mining Method		16-27
16.3.2.4   Mine Designs		16-27
16.3.2.4.1 Access		16-30
16.3.2.4.2 Ore and Waste Haulage		16-31
16.3.2.4.3 Facilities		16-31
16.3.2.4.4 Power		16-32
16.3.2.4.5 Backfill		16-32
16.3.2.4.6 Ventilation		16-32
16.3.2.4.7 Production Plan		16-35
16.3.2.5   Ore Control		16-35
16.3.2.6   Materials Handling		16-36
16.4  Waste Rock Storage Facilities		16-36
16.5  Stockpiles		16-36
16.6  Blasting and Explosives		16-38
16.6.1   Surface		16-38
16.6.2   Cortez Hills Underground		16-38
16.6.3   Goldrush		16-38
16.7  Mining Equipment		16-38
16.7.1   Surface		16-38
16.7.2   Underground		16-40
16.8  QP Comments on “Item 16: Mining Methods”		16-40
17.0   RECOVERY METHODS		17-1
17.1  Introduction		17-1
17.2  Process Flow Sheet		17-1
17.3  Plant and Process Design		17-1
17.3.1   Pipeline Mill		17-1
17.3.2   Heap Leach		17-7
17.3.3   Carlin Refractory Processing		17-8
17.4  Energy, Water, and Process Materials Requirements		17-9
17.5  QP Comments on “Item 17: Recovery Methods”		17-9
18.0   PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE		18-1
18.1  Introduction		18-1
18.1.1   Existing Infrastructure		18-1
18.1.2   Goldrush Planned Infrastructure		18-3
18.2  Road and Logistics		18-6
18.3  Stockpiles		18-6
18.4  Waste Storage Facilities		18-6
18.5  Tailings Storage Facilities		18-6
18.6  Water Management		18-7
18.6.1   Pipeline		18-7
18.6.2   Crescent Valley		18-7
18.6.3   Goldrush		18-7
18.7  Water Supply		18-8
18.7.1   Current Operations		18-8

 

March 2022				Page viii

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

18.7.2   Goldrush		18-8
18.8  Built Infrastructure		18-9
18.9  Camps and Accommodation		18-9
18.10   Power and Electrical		18-9
18.11   QP Comments on “Item 18: Project Infrastructure”		18-10
19.0   MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS		19-1
19.1  Market Studies		19-1
19.2  Commodity Price Projections		19-1
19.3  Contracts		19-1
19.4  QP Comments on “Item 19: Market Studies and Contracts”		19-1
20.0   ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY IMPACT		20-1
20.1  Baseline and Supporting Studies		20-1
20.2  Environmental Considerations/Monitoring Programs		20-1
20.3  Closure and Reclamation Plans		20-1
20.4  Permitting		20-2
20.4.1   Current Operations		20-2
20.4.2   Goldrush		20-2
20.5  Considerations of Social and Community Impacts		20-4
20.6  QP Comments on “Item 20: Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Social or Community Impacts”		20-5
21.0   CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS		21-1
21.1  Introduction		21-1
21.2  Capital Costs		21-1
21.3  Operating Costs		21-1
21.4  QP Comments on “Item 21: Capital and Operating Costs”		21-4
22.0   ECONOMIC ANALYSIS		22-1
23.0   ADJACENT PROPERTIES		23-1
24.0   OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION		24-1
25.0   INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS		25-1
25.1  Introduction		25-1
25.2  Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements		25-1
25.3  Geology and Mineralization		25-1
25.4  Exploration, Drilling and Analytical Data Collection in Support of Mineral Resource Estimation		25-2
25.5  Metallurgical Testwork		25-3
25.6  Mineral Resource Estimates		25-3
25.7  Mineral Reserve Estimates		25-4
25.8  Mining Methods		25-5
25.9  Recovery Methods		25-5
25.10   Infrastructure		25-5
25.11   Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations		25-6
25.11.1  Environmental Considerations		25-6
25.11.2  Closure		25-6
25.11.3  Permitting		25-6
25.11.4  Social Considerations		25-7
25.12   Market Studies and Contracts		25-7
25.13   Capital Cost Estimates		25-7
25.14   Operating Cost Estimates		25-8
25.15   Economic Analysis		25-8

 

March 2022				Page ix

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

25.16   Risks and Opportunities		25-9
25.16.1  Risks		25-9
25.16.2  Opportunities		25-10
25.17   Conclusions		25-10
26.0   RECOMMENDATIONS		26-1
27.0   REFERENCES		27-1

TABLES

 

 

Table 1-1:		Mineral Resource Estimate			1-10
Table 1-2:		Mineral Reserve Estimate			1-14
Table 4-1:		Agreements, Easements, and Royalties by Area			4-21
Table 6-1:		Exploration and Development History			6-2
Table 6-2:		Operations History			6-4
Table 6-3:		Production History, 1969-2021			6-5
Table 7-1:		Stratigraphic Table			7-7
Table 10-1:		Project Drill Summary Table			10-2
Table 10-2:		Drilling Used in Mineral Resource Estimation			10-4
Table 11-1:		Density Table			11-4
Table 11-2:		Analytical Laboratories			11-6
Table 13-1:		Testwork Results, Deep South Zone			13-4
Table 13-2:		AuTec Recoveries, Crossroads			13-6
Table 13-3:		Oxide Mill Recoveries			13-12
Table 13-4:		Heap Leach Recoveries			13-12
Table 13-5:		Goldstrike Roaster Recoveries			13-13
Table 13-6:		Gold Quarry Roaster Recoveries			13-13
Table 14-1:		Bulk Density Values, Gold Acres			14-10
Table 14-2:		Drill Hole Spacings, Resource Classification, Goldrush			14-20
Table 14-3:		Cut-off Grade Input Criteria, Cortez			14-23
Table 14-4:		Cut-off Grade Input Criteria, Cortez Hills Underground			14-26
Table 14-5:		Cut-off Grade Input Criteria, Goldrush			14-27
Table 14-6:		Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Mineral Resource Statement, Cortez Complex			14-29
Table 15-1:		Pit Shell Input Parameters			15-2
Table 15-2:		Cut-off Grades and Input Parameters, Crossroads and Pipeline			15-4
Table 15-3:		Cut-off Grades and Input Parameters, Cortez Hills Underground			15-7
Table 15-4:		Cut-off Grades and Input Parameters, Goldrush			15-9
Table 15-5:		Mineral Reserves Statement			15-11
Table 16-1:		Production Plan, Open Pit			16-12
Table 16-2:		Production Plan, Underground			16-24
Table 16-3:		WRSFs LOM Capacities and Status			16-37
Table 16-4:		Mine Equipment List, Surface Operations			16-39
Table 16-5:		Mine Equipment List, Cortez Hills Underground			16-41
Table 16-6:		Mine Equipment List Goldrush			16-41
Table 20-1:		Major Permits and Approvals, Goldrush			20-3
Table 21-1:		LOM Capital Cost Estimate			21-2
Table 21-2:		LOM Mining Costs			21-3
Table 21-3:		LOM Processing Costs per Tonne Processed by Facility			21-3

 

March 2022				Page x

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

FIGURES

 

 

Figure 2-1:		Project Location Plan			2-2
Figure 2-2:		Cortez Operations, Major Deposits			2-3
Figure 4-1:		Joint Venture Area of Influence			4-4
Figure 4-2:		Cortez PoO Boundary			4-5
Figure 4-3:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 1 of 7			4-6
Figure 4-4:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 2 of 7			4-7
Figure 4-5:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 3 of 7			4-8
Figure 4-6:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 4 of 7			4-9
Figure 4-7:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 5 of 7			4-10
Figure 4-8:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 6 of 7			4-11
Figure 4-9:		Mineral Claims Within Cortez PoO Boundary, Sheet 7 of 7			4-12
Figure 4-10:		Goldrush Proposed PoO Boundary			4-13
Figure 4-11:		Mineral Claims Within Proposed Goldrush PoO Boundary			4-14
Figure 4-12:		Robertson Exploration PoO Boundary			4-15
Figure 4-13:		Mineral Claims Within The Robertson Exploration PoO Boundary			4-16
Figure 4-14:		Royalty Regions			4-19
Figure 7-1:		Regional Geology Plan			7-2
Figure 7-2:		Regional Geological Cross-Section, Pipeline–Cortez Hills			7-4
Figure 7-3:		Stratigraphic Column, Cortez Area			7-5
Figure 7-4:		Generalized Tectono-Stratigraphic Column, Robertson			7-6
Figure 7-5:		Geology Plan, Cortez			7-11
Figure 7-6:		Cross-section Showing Drilling in Relation to Mineralization, Cortez			7-12
Figure 7-7:		Geology Plan, Cortez Hills			7-15
Figure 7-8:		Cross-section Showing Drilling in Relation to Mineralization, Cortez Hills			7-16
Figure 7-9:		Plan and Isometric Views, Underground Mineralization, Cortez Hills			7-17
Figure 7-10:		Geology Plan, Crossroads			7-18
Figure 7-11:		Cross-section Showing Pit Outline in Relation to Mineralization, Crossroads			7-19
Figure 7-12:		Cross-Section, Crossroads			7-20
Figure 7-13:		Gold Acres Geology Plan			7-22
Figure 7-14:		Gold Acres Cross-section Showing Drilling in Relation to Mineralization			7-23
Figure 7-15:		Geology Plan, Goldrush			7-25
Figure 7-16:		Long Section Showing Drilling in Relation to Mineralization, Fourmile–Goldrush			7-26
Figure 7-17:		Cross-section Showing Mineralization Distribution, Goldrush Crow’s Nest Domain			7-27
Figure 7-18:		Goldrush Type Section			7-28
Figure 7-19:		Geology Plan, Pipeline			7-31
Figure 7-20:		Cross-section Showing Geology, Pipeline			7-32
Figure 7-21:		Cross-section Showing Drilling in Relation to Mineralization, Pipeline			7-33
Figure 7-22:		Cross-Section, Pipeline			7-34
Figure 7-23:		Geology Plan, Robertson			7-36
Figure 7-24:		Cross-section Showing Geology and Mineralization, Robertson			7-37
Figure 9-1:		Location Plan, Geophysical Surveys			9-3
Figure 9-2:		Exploration Prospective Areas			9-5
Figure 10-1:		Project Drill Collar Location Plan			10-3
Figure 10-2:		Drill Collar Location Plan, Cortez Hills–Cortez Pits			10-5
Figure 10-3:		Drill Collar Location Plan, Goldrush			10-6
Figure 10-4:		Drill Collar Location Plan, Pipeline			10-7
Figure 10-5:		Drill Collar Location Plan, Robertson			10-8

 

March 2022				Page xi

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Figure 13-1:		Ore Characterization Map, Goldrush			13-8
Figure 14-1:		Estimation Domains, Cortez Pits			14-3
Figure 14-2:		Cortez Hills			14-6
Figure 14-3:		Modelled Domains, Pipeline			14-13
Figure 14-4:		Goldrush Modelling Domains			14-17
Figure 16-1:		Site Layout Plan, Pipeline Area			16-2
Figure 16-2:		Site Layout Plan, Cortez and Cortez Hills Area			16-3
Figure 16-3:		Pit Design Recommendations, Pipeline			16-5
Figure 16-4:		Pit Design Sector Locations, Crossroads			16-6
Figure 16-5:		Pit Design Sector Locations, Cortez Pits			16-7
Figure 16-6:		Final Pit Layout Plan, Crossroads			16-9
Figure 16-7:		Final Pit Layout Plan, Pipeline			16-10
Figure 16-8:		Final Pit Layout Plan, Cortez Pits			16-11
Figure 16-9:		Schematic Showing Mining Method			16-17
Figure 16-10:		Final Underground Layout Schematic, Middle Zone			16-19
Figure 16-11:		Final Underground Layout Schematic, Lower Zone			16-20
Figure 16-12:		Ventilation Schematic			16-23
Figure 16-13:		Goldrush Underground LOM Design Schematic Showing Sub-Area Limits			16-28
Figure 16-14:		Surface Infrastructure Layout Plan, Goldrush Project			16-33
Figure 16-15:		Ventilation Schematic			16-34
Figure 17-1:		Process Flowsheet, Pipeline Mill			17-2
Figure 17-2:		Process Flowsheet, Heap Leach			17-3
Figure 17-3:		Process Flowsheet, Goldstrike Roaster			17-4
Figure 17-4:		Process Flowsheet, Goldstrike Autoclave			17-5
Figure 17-5:		Process Flowsheet, Gold Quarry Roaster			17-6
Figure 18-1:		Infrastructure Layout Map, Goldrush			18-4
Figure 18-2:		Goldrush Layout Map			18-5

 

March 2022				Page xii

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information

This report contains forward-looking statements. All statements, other than statements of historical fact regarding Nevada Gold Mines LLC, Barrick Gold Corporation, Newmont Corporation, or the Cortez Complex, are forward-looking statements. The words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “contemplate”, “target”, “plan”, “intend”, “project”, “continue”, “budget”, “estimate”, “potential”, “may”, “will”, “can”, “could” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. In particular, this report contains forward looking statements with respect to cash flow forecasts, projected capital, operating and exploration expenditure, targeted cost reductions, mine life and production rates, potential mineralization and metal or mineral recoveries and information pertaining to potential improvements to financial and operating performance and mine life at the Cortez Complex, including the development of the Goldrush and Robertson projects. All forward-looking statements in this report are necessarily based on opinions and estimates made as of the date such statements are made and are subject to important risk factors and uncertainties, many of which cannot be controlled or predicted. Material assumptions regarding forward-looking statements are discussed in this report, where applicable. In addition to such assumptions, the forward-looking statements are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to: fluctuations in the spot and forward price of commodities (including gold, diesel fuel, natural gas and electricity); the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development; changes in mineral production performance, exploitation and exploration successes; diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; increased costs, delays, suspensions, and technical challenges associated with the construction of capital projects; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities, including disruptions in the maintenance or provision of required infrastructure and information technology systems; damage to Nevada Gold Mines LLC’s, Barrick Gold Corporation’s, or Newmont Corporation’s reputation due to the actual or perceived occurrence of any number of events, including negative publicity with respect to the handling of environmental matters or dealings with community groups, whether true or not; risk of loss due to acts of war, terrorism, sabotage and civil disturbances; uncertainty whether the Cortez Complex will meet Nevada Gold Mines LLC’s or Barrick Gold Corporation’s capital allocation objectives; the impact of global liquidity and credit availability on the timing of cash flows and the values of assets and liabilities based on projected future cash flows; the impact of inflation; fluctuations in the currency markets; changes in interest rates; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls or regulations and/or changes in the administration of laws, policies and practices, expropriation or nationalization of property and political or economic developments in USA; failure to comply with environmental and health and safety laws and regulations; timing of receipt of, or failure to comply with, necessary permits and approvals; non-renewal of key licences by governmental authorities; litigation; contests over title to properties or over access to water, power and other required infrastructure; increased costs and physical risks including extreme weather events and resource shortages, related to climate change; availability and increased costs associated with mining inputs and labor; and risks associated with diseases, epidemics and pandemics, including the effects and potential effects of the global Covid-19 pandemic. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of mineral exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold ore losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks).

Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can affect Nevada Gold Mines LLC’s actual results and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Nevada Gold Mines LLC. All of the forward-looking statements made in this report are qualified by these cautionary statements. Nevada Gold Mines LLC and the Qualified Persons who authored this report undertake no obligation to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information or future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law.

 

March 2022				Page xiii

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

1.0

SUMMARY

 

1.1

Introduction

Mr. Craig Fiddes, Mr. Jay D. Olcott, Mr. Timothy Webber, Mr. Nathan Bennett and Mr. John W. Langhans Jr. prepared this Technical Report (the Report) for Barrick Gold Corporation (Barrick) on the Cortez Complex (Cortez Complex, Cortez Operations or the Project), in Nevada, USA.

The Project is operated as a joint venture (JV) through Nevada Gold Mines, LLC (NGM). Barrick is the JV operator and owns 61.5%, with Newmont Corporation (Newmont) owning the remaining 38.5% JV interest. On March 10, 2019, Barrick entered into an implementation agreement with Newmont to create a joint venture combining the companies’ respective mining operations, assets, reserves and talent in Nevada, USA. This included Barrick’s Cortez, Goldstrike, Turquoise Ridge and Goldrush properties (Barrick-Contributed Mines) and Newmont’s Carlin, Twin Creeks, Phoenix, Long Canyon and Lone Tree properties (Newmont-Contributed Mines). On July 1, 2019, the transaction closed, establishing NGM, and Barrick began consolidating the operating results, cash flows and net assets of NGM from that date forward.

The Cortez Complex consists of the open pits at Pipeline, Crossroads, and Cortez Pits, the Cortez Hills underground mine, a carbon-in-pulp (CIP) process plant, heap leach pads and heap leach processing plants. Additional infrastructure includes power, tailings, waste, process water, potable water, and communication facilities, offices, and road and rail connections. Development activities are underway on the Goldrush underground deposit.

Mineral Resources are estimated for the Cortez Pits (open pit), Cortez Hills (underground), Crossroads (open pit), Gold Acres (open pit), Goldrush (underground), Robertson (open pit), and Pipeline (open pit) deposits. Mineral Reserves are estimated for the Cortez Hills (underground), Crossroads (open pit), Cortez Pits (open pit), Goldrush (underground) and Pipeline (open pit) deposits. Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves also include stockpiled material.

 

1.2

Terms of Reference

The purpose of this report is to support the public disclosure of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates at the Cortez Complex as of December 31, 2021.

The Cortez Complex is situated in a jurisdiction that uses United States (US) Customary units. The Report uses metric units unless otherwise specified. The Report uses Canadian English.

Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves are reported using the confidence categories in the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (May 2014; 2014 CIM Definition Standards) as incorporated by reference in NI 43-101.

 

1.3

Project Setting

The Cortez Complex is situated approximately 100 km southwest of Elko, Nevada, USA, in Eureka and Lander Counties.

The Cortez Complex is reached by travelling approximately 51 km east from Battle Mountain, Nevada, on US Interstate 80. Alternative access is from Elko, Nevada, approximately 70 km west

 

March 2022				Page 1-1

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

to the Beowawe exit, then approximately 56 km south on Nevada State Route 306, which extends southward from US Interstate 80. Both US Interstate 80 and Nevada State Route 306 are paved roads.

The Cortez Complex is also crossed by a network of gravel roads, providing easy access to various portions of the operations. All roads are suitable for all weather conditions; however, in extreme winter conditions, roads may be closed for short periods for snow removal.

The Union Pacific Rail line runs parallel to US Interstate 80 to the north of the operations.

Elko, the closest city to the operations, is serviced by daily commercial airline flights to Salt Lake City, Utah.

The Cortez Complex is situated in the high desert region of the Basin and Range physiographic province. Operations are conducted year-round.

The Cortez Complex is located at elevations between 1,370–2,270 m above mean sea level. In general, vegetation is relatively sparse.

 

1.4

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

The Cortez Complex covers an area of about 36,096 ha in a total of 5,137 lode, mill site, patented and placer claims located within the Plans of Operations (PoOs) areas.

Lode and mill site claims that are located on public lands are held subject to the paramount title of the federal government. The claims are maintained on an annual basis, and do not expire as long as the maintenance fee payments are timely filed with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Patented and fee lands require annual payment of tax assessments to Lander and Eureka Counties. All fees have been timely paid.

Surface rights are either held by NGM outright, or administered by the BLM. There are sufficient surface rights to support the life-of-mine (LOM) plan assumptions for the individual mines within the Cortez Complex.

Water rights have been and are projected to be sufficient to support all future mining activities. NGM also maintains additional consumptive rights with other manners of use that can be made available to the mine operation if deemed necessary.

The PoO is broken up into six distinct royalty regions, with different royalties payable to third-parties on different deposits. Royalty types include gross value royalties, net value royalties, gross smelter return royalties, and net smelter return royalties. Royalty payments vary, as the payments depend upon actual tonnages mined, the amount of gold recovered from that mined material, the deposit being mined, the receiving entity, and the type of royalty.

In connection with the formation of Nevada Gold Mines, each of Barrick and Newmont was granted a 1.5% net smelter returns royalty over the respective properties they contributed to the NGM JV. Each of these “retained royalties” is only payable once the aggregate production from the properties subject to the royalty exceeds the publicly-reported Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2018.

State royalties are also payable.

 

March 2022				Page 1-2

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

1.5

History

Prior to Barrick and NGM’s Project interest, companies who had interests in the Cortez Operations area included: American Exploration & Mining Co., Cortez JV; ECM, Inc.; Royal Gold Inc., and Placer Dome Inc. Work conducted by these companies included geological mapping, geochemical samples (stream sediment, soil, and rock chip samples), geophysical surveys (airborne and ground), sonic, mud, reverse circulation (RC) and core drilling, metallurgical testwork, Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, mining studies and mine operations.

Barrick and NGM have continued exploration and drilling activities, performed metallurgical testwork and undertaken Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, mining studies and mine operations.

 

1.6

Geology and Mineralization

Major mineralization styles within the Cortez Complex are examples of Carlin-style and intrusive related deposits.

The geology of northern Nevada displays a complicated sequence of orogeny and tectonism. Mineralization is hosted in lower Paleozoic sedimentary rocks or associated with Late Jurassic–Eocene intrusions. The majority of the deposits have some structural control, with mineralization commonly associated with the Roberts Mountains thrust. Pervasiveness and intensity of alteration varies both within and between gold deposits, depending on magnitude of the mineralizing system, nature of the host rock, and structural preparation.

Carlin Trend-style mineralization consists primarily of micrometre-sized gold and sulfides disseminated in zones of siliciclastic and decarbonated calcareous rocks and commonly associated with jasperoids. Mineralization is predominantly in the form of oxides, sulfides, or sulfide minerals in carbonaceous rocks, and the ore type determines how and where it is processed. Copper oxide mineralization locally contains minor amounts chalcanthite, malachite, chrysocolla, azurite, and lesser cuprite. In hypogene mineralization, chalcopyrite occurs as disseminations and bedded replacements with skarn and silicate minerals, and in conjunction with pyrite.

Intrusive-related mineralization consists primarily of free gold, with particle sizes ranging from 1 µm up to hundreds of micrometres in length. Gold is commonly associated with faults and brecciation but can also be found inside sheeted quartz–sulfide veins. Gold mineralization can be, but is not always, associated with an early retrograde skarn phase consisting of a chlorite–actinolite–pyrrhotite–chalcopyrite–pyrite mineral assemblage. Supergene copper mineralization most commonly consists of malachite, chrysocolla and chalcocite, with rarer digenite and some native copper in gossan zones. Hypogene copper is characterized primarily by chalcopyrite, with very rare bornite noted in historical drill logs.

Exploration potential exists adjacent to many of the deposits, along strike and at depth along favorable mineralized structures and within the favorable host lithologies. NGM continues to actively explore in the immediate and near-mine areas. Multiple opportunities also exist in the district to discover additional mineralization.

 

March 2022				Page 1-3

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

1.7

Exploration

The entire district is geologically mapped to varying scales from 1:50,000 to 1:20,000. The carbonate windows are mapped to a greater detail ranging to 1:5,000 scale. Specific targets are typically mapped to 1:1,000 to 1:600 scale, whereas pit wall and underground mapping ranges from 1:20 to 1:100.

Owing to the long mining history of the Cortez Complex area, geochemical soil sampling techniques used for grassroots exploration purposes have been typically superseded by data from drilling and open pit and underground mining. Current exploration combines the use of surface sampling methods (rock chips and soils) along with structural modelling and drilling (down hole geochemistry) to explore for mineralization at depth under cover.

Geophysical methods have been used in the Cortez district since the early 1970s. Geophysical tools were initially primarily regarded as support tools, due to the initial discoveries cropping out on surface, or only having a thin veneer of cover, and the inability of the early methods to directly detect the deposits. Later, geophysical methods were used as a structural mapping and deposit vectoring tool.

Methods adopted included modern airborne and ground magnetics, radiometrics and electromagnetics, gravity, resistivity, and controlled-source audio-frequency telluromagnetics, self-potential and induced-polarization. A trial set of seismic lines were also conducted. Typically, airborne surveys were performed by contract companies, whereas ground surveys were performed by company personnel or contract crews.

 

1.8

Drilling and Sampling

Drilling in the Cortez Complex database consists of 29,321 drill holes (4,782,250 m). The drill totals and metreage numbers are known to be incomplete, as a significant portion of the drilling completed by companies other than NGM, Barrick, and the former Cortez Joint Venture has not been incorporated in the digital database.

Logging conducted depended on the operator at the time the information was collected, and the drill type. Typically, logging collected information such as lithology, stratigraphy, basic structural data, recovery, alteration, and mineralization. For mining operations, logging could also record metallurgical type, intensity codes for metallurgy and alteration, and geotechnical parameters.

Collar surveys have used optical surveys (1960s through late 1980s), field estimates, Brunton compass and pacing, compass-and-string distance, and most recently the use of laser survey or global positioning system (GPS) measurements.

Determination of the hole trace was historically accomplished in the Cortex Complex open pit mines by projection of the initial collar orientation, using a downhole single-shot or multi-shot film camera (typical for most underground surveys), use of a downhole precession gyroscopic survey tool, or a gyroscopic tool requiring initial orientation with a compass. Current practice includes the use of gyroscopic surveys.

For the underground operations, historically, surveys included magnetic and gyro instruments, but currently a combination of north-seeking and conventional gyros is used.

Grade control drilling in the open pits is performed aiming to minimize geological risk in the orebodies, such that drill hole spacing is determined by risk. For example, where post-mineral

 

March 2022				Page 1-4

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

dikes are present, tighter-spaced drilling is required. Resource classification is completed on a domain basis and that classification determines the drill hole spacing. Both core and RC drilling are completed.

In the underground operations, grade control drilling is carried out from drill platforms that drill multiple holes from a single drill station perpendicular to mineralization, or from development drifts located above mineralization.

Sampling is variable by deposit and mineralization style. Mud-rotary and RC drill holes were sampled at 1.5–3 m intervals.

Most drill core from Pipeline and Cortez Hills was sampled and assayed at 3 m intervals, although some drill holes were assayed at 1.5 m or variable geological intervals early in the drilling programs. Since 2004, exploration core holes have been sampled on 3 m intervals in barren rock and on geologically defined intervals up to 1.5 m in mineralization. The Goldrush core programs used nominal 1.5 m intervals in zones of mineralization and an envelope surrounding the mineralization, and nominal 3 m intervals in zones of waste. At Robertson, core was sampled on 1.5 m sample intervals, with sample breaks at lithological, structural and alteration boundaries. Underground core is typically sampled on 1.5 m intervals; however, samples can range from 0.6–1.8 m, depending on lithological or mineralization contacts. Almost all core was sawn in half by a technician, except for underground core where whole core is sampled.

Current open pit practice is to single sample 12 or 15 m blastholes (depending on bench height). Double samples may be taken representing the upper and lower halves (6 or 8 m) of a blasthole when split benching is used for extraction of thinner ore horizons. Underground muck samples are taken with a scoop from muck piles at a rate of about one sample per 90 t.

Standard practice since 1999 has been to collect density samples at 11–12 m intervals in mineralized rock and one sample within 15 m in the hanging wall and footwall. Generally, density samples are taken every 12–15 m, sampling any material that may be mined. Density is primarily determined by the wax coat/water immersion method.

Given the long history of the Cortez Complex, there are numerous laboratories that were used over the Project history. Laboratories were both independent and non-independent. In the earlier stages of Project testwork, the idea of laboratory accreditation had not been invented. In later assay campaigns, accreditations were not typically recorded in the database. Currently, all independent laboratories used for chemical analysis are accredited for selected analytical techniques.

Sample preparation has varied over the 50 years of modern Project history, in line with advancing scientific knowledge, changes in equipment, and operational experience. Currently, sample preparation procedures include drying, crushing and pulverizing. As with sample preparation, analytical methods have changed over the Project history. Current methods include:

 

●

Gold: standard fire assay (FA) with a gravimetric finish on one-assay ton (29.18 g) pulp aliquots; FA and atomic absorption (AA) finish; cyanide leach with an atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) finish;

 

●

Carbon and sulfur: LECO;

 

●

Multi-element analyses by aqua regia digestion/inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES)/ICP-mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS), 51 elements or 48 element analyses by four acid and ICP-AES/ICP-MS.

 

March 2022				Page 1-5

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Prior to the mid-1990s, few companies had rigorous quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) programs in place. QA/QC had typically consisted, where undertaken, of reanalysis of drill core or other samples when later sampling indicated a potential problem. In the case of the Cortez Complex, QA/QC samples were submitted for RC and core samples from about 1991.

Current procedures include insertion of blanks and certified standard samples into sample streams to the mine and commercial laboratories, check assays of pulp duplicates by commercial laboratories, and assaying of coarse reject duplicates. Since 2006, Barrick and NGM corporate geochemists have inspected the laboratories that undertake analysis and sample preparation for the Cortez Complex.

 

1.9

Data Verification

Validation checks are performed by NGM operations personnel on data used to support estimation consisting of checks on surveys, collar coordinates, lithology data (cross-checking from photographs), and assay data. Errors noted are rectified in the database prior to data being flagged as approved for use in resource estimation.

Several third-party consultants have performed external data reviews. These external reviews were undertaken in support of acquisitions, support of feasibility-level studies, and in support of technical reports, producing independent assessments of the database quality. No significant problems with the database, sampling protocols, flowsheets, check analysis program, or data storage were noted.

 

1.10

Metallurgical Testwork

As a result of the approximately 50 year mining and processing history of the Cortez Complex, a significant number of metallurgical studies including laboratory scale and/or pilot plant testwork were completed, and historical operating data are available. The Cortez Complex has used numerous processing methods including carbon-in-leach (CIL) for higher-grade oxide ore, heap leaching for lower-grade oxide ore, roasting for carbonaceous refractory ore, and pressure oxidation (POX) for higher-grade sulfidic ore.

The Cortez Complex has extensive metallurgical testing facilities so much of the testwork is done on site, however, NGM uses external laboratories when specific expertise is needed or when timing dictates that the data are needed sooner than the in-house laboratory can provide it. Testing was conducted by laboratories including McClelland Laboratories Inc. located in Reno, Nevada, USA, (McClelland), FLSmidth in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA (FLSmidth), Hazen Research Inc. located in Golden, Colorado, USA (Hazen), Kappes, Cassiday Associates located in Reno, Nevada, USA, the NGM Goldstrike laboratory located north of Carlin, Nevada, USA (NGM Goldstrike), and AuTec located in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (AuTec). McClelland, FLSmidth, Hazen, and AuTec are currently independent of NGM. The NGM Goldstrike laboratory is not independent. The AuTec laboratory was not independent at the time that metallurgical testwork on the Goldrush deposit was performed.

Metallurgical testwork conducted included head characterization, mineralogy, comminution, bottle roll tests, column and direct cyanide leach tests, carbon-in-leach (CIL) tests, flotation, optimization and variability tests, alkaline pressure leach tests, thiosulfate resin in leach, bench and pilot roast, and acid and alkaline autoclaving.

 

March 2022				Page 1-6

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Ore routing is conducted based on cyanide leaching amenability (CNAA) to fire assay (FA) ratio and preg robbing (preg rob) potential. If the AA to FA ratio is >50% and preg rob is <40%, the ore is designated as oxide ore. If the AA to FA ratio is <50% or preg rob is >40%, the ore is designated as refractory. The oxide ore will be routed to the Pipeline Mill or a heap leach pad depending on the gold grade. The refractory ore is routed to NGM’s Carlin Complex for processing at one of the roasting facilities or the autoclaving facility.

Samples selected for metallurgical testing during feasibility and development studies were representative of the various styles of mineralization within the different deposits. Samples were selected from a range of locations within the deposits. Sufficient samples were taken, and tests were performed using sufficient sample mass for the respective tests undertaken. Variability assessments are supported by mill production and extensive open pit and underground exposures.

The recovery of gold is a function of the processing method (CIL, heap leaching, roasting, and arsenic concentration for refractory ore) and the lithology of the mineralization being processed. The recoveries used to support Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates are based on recovery equations that are derived from feasibility studies, metallurgical laboratory testwork, and historical production data.

The recovery estimates include consideration of the head grade, cyanide-soluble gold to fire assay gold ratio, sulfide sulfur concentration, and total organic carbon concentration. In most cases, the estimated and actual gold recoveries correlate well which indicates that the recovery estimates are accurate.

Depending upon the specific processing facility, several processing factors or deleterious elements could have an economic impact on extraction efficiency of a certain ore source, based either on the presence, absence, or concentration of the following constituents in the processing stream: organic carbon, sulfide sulfur, carbonate carbon, arsenic, mercury, antimony, copper. However, under normal ore routing and blending practices at NGM where material from several sites may be processed at one facility, that list of processing factors/deleterious elements is typically not a concern.

 

1.11

Mineral Resource Estimation

Mineral Resource estimates were prepared for the Pipeline, Crossroads, Cortez Pits, Gold Acres, Robertson, Goldrush, and Cortez Hills deposits.

Geological, structural and alteration interpretations were provided by onsite geologists. Three-dimensional solids and surfaces constructed from these interpretations were used as the basis for defining mineralization domains for each estimate.

Exploratory data analysis was performed by domain on raw data for each element to understand the elemental distributions. Modeled geology, modeled mineralization, and domains were subject to statistical analysis to determine any distinct subsets of the general grade population. Resulting statistics guided decisions made regarding modeling, capping values, estimation parameters, and classification.

Depending on the deposit, mineralization style, and proposed mining method, composites could be regularized to 1.5 m (Cortez Pits), 3 m (Cortez Hills, Gold Acres, Goldrush), or 8 m (Pipeline) intervals. At Cortez Pits, the 1.5 m interval was re-blocked to 6 m for mine planning purposes.

 

March 2022				Page 1-7

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Grade capping was used to limit the influence of high-grade samples, based on, depending on the deposit, analysis of cumulative probability graphs and/or histograms by domain. Individual high-grade samples considered too small to be modeled that fell within the low-grade extremities were handled by limiting their search influence during the low-grade estimation.

Bulk densities were typically assigned as averages. Depending on the deposit, the assignments could vary by mineralized domain, rock formation or unit, and refractory and oxide material.

Variography was performed to provide search ranges for the different estimation domain groups. Search ellipses were based on the ranges modelled in the variograms and preferred orientations of modelled mineralized zones.

Estimation methods varied by deposit:

 

●

Cortez Pits: nested two-pass inverse distance weighting to the second power (ID2) estimation within high grade, low grade, and waste domains. Sample search ellipses were aligned with local mineralization controls;

 

●

Cortez Hills: nested two-pass inverse distance weighting to the third power (ID3) estimation within domains defined by geological controls and sub-domains designated high grade, low grade, or waste. Locally varying anisotropy aligned with nearby mineralization controls was applied to sample search ellipses;

 

●

Gold Acres: multiple pass ID3 estimation within high grade, low grade, and waste domains using search ellipses aligned with nearby mineralization control interpretations;

 

●

Pipeline: nested two-pass ID3 estimation within high-grade, low-grade, and waste domains using search ellipses aligned with nearby mineralization control interpretations;

 

●

Goldrush: ordinary kriged (OK) grade estimation within interpreted mineralization domains. A single pass estimation with dynamic alignment of sample search ellipses with nearby mineralization controls;

 

●

Robertson: nested three-pass ID3 grade estimation was applied within high-grade, low-grade, and waste domains. Locally varying anisotropy aligned sample searches with mineralization controls.

Model validation checks could include: visual comparisons of interpolated gold grades relative to drill hole composite values on sections and plans; review of conformity to drill hole data, continuity, similarity between sections, overlaps, appropriate terminations between holes and into undrilled areas, and minimum mining thicknesses; comparison of alternate estimates including ID2, ID3, inverse distance weighting to the fifth power (ID5), OK; comparison of final estimates with nearest neighbour estimation for bias assessment; and swath plots, to ensure block grades are similar to composite grades based on elevation, northings and eastings.

Resource classification methodology and parameters varied by deposit. Generally, an initial classification based on proximity to nearby data was assigned by block. Subsequent modifications could be made based on relative confidence in the underlying geological interpretation, or other factors affecting the estimates. The application of classification smoothing could be used, through categorical smoothing algorithms or manual adjustments, to minimize isolated volumes of inconsistent classification.

 

March 2022				Page 1-8

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

The Cortez Pits, Gold Acres, Robertson, Pipeline and Crossroads deposits are potentially amenable to open pit mining methods. Cortez Hills is currently mined via longhole primary/secondary stope and underhand cut-and-fill mining methods at a minimum width of 5.5 m. Goldrush, for the purposes of determining the mining method for resource estimation, was assumed to be mined by longhole stope mining methods with a minimum width of 5.5 m.

Mineral Resource estimates are reported for each deposit using cut-off grades that were established on a per-deposit basis.

 

1.12

Mineral Resource Statement

Mineral Resources are reported in Table 1-1 using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards, and have an effective date of December 31, 2021. Mineral Resources are reported using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards. Mineral Resources are reported on a 100% basis. Barrick owns a 61.5% JV interest, with Newmont owning the remaining 38.5% JV interest.

Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of those Mineral Resources that were converted to Mineral Reserves. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

The Qualified Person for the estimates is Mr. Craig Fiddes, RM SME, a NGM employee.

Factors that may materially impact the Mineral Resource estimates include: changes to long-term gold price assumptions; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological shape and continuity assumptions; changes to grade estimation methods and parameters; changes to metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the operating cut-off assumptions for open pit and underground mining methods; changes to the input assumptions used to derive the pit shell used to constrain the open pit estimates; changes to the input assumptions used to derive the mineable shapes used to constrain the underground estimates; changes to the marginal cut-off grade assumptions used to constrain the estimates; variations in geotechnical, hydrogeological and mining assumptions; changes to environmental, permitting and social license assumptions; and changes to the current regulatory regime.

 

March 2022				Page 1-9

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Table 1-1:        Mineral Resource Estimate

 

		Measured						Indicated						Measured + Indicated						Inferred
		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)
Surface
Open Pit
Cortez Pits		—		—		—		8.1		2.02		0.53		8.1		2.02		0.53		2.5		1.2		0.094
Crossroads		0.24		1.88		0.014		59		1.65		3.1		60		1.65		3.2		3.2		0.3		0.033
Gold Acres		—		—		—		0.29		3.33		0.031		0.29		3.33		0.031		5.0		3.0		0.49
Pipeline		—		—		—		8.3		0.54		0.14		8.3		0.54		0.14		1.2		0.6		0.022
Robertson		—		—		—		74		0.56		1.3		74		0.56		1.3		88		0.4		1.1
Open Pit Sub-Total		0.24		1.88		0.014		150		1.07		5.2		150		1.07		5.2		100		0.5		1.8
Stockpile
Open pit leach		0.0031		0.82		0.000082		—		—		—		0.0031		0.82		0.000082		—		—		—
Open pit mill		1.0		1.15		0.038		—		—		—		1.0		1.15		0.038		—		—		—
Open pit refractory		0.98		2.81		0.089		—		—		—		0.98		2.81		0.089		—		—		—
Underground mill		0.018		11.45		0.0066		—		—		—		0.018		11.45		0.0066		—		—		—
Underground refractory		0.028		9.72		0.0086		—		—		—		0.028		9.72		0.0086		—		—		—
Stockpile Sub-Total		2.1		2.15		0.14		—		—		—		2.1		2.15		0.14		—		—		—
Surface Total		2.3		2.12		0.16		150		1.07		5.2		150		1.09		5.3		100		0.5		1.8
Underground
Cortez Hills (CHUG)		2.0		8.06		0.51		15		8.20		4.0		17		8.18		4.5		0.78		3.4		0.085
Goldrush								37		7.07		8.5		37		7.07		8.5		24		6.0		4.5
Underground Total		2.0		8.06		0.51		52		7.40		12		54		7.42		13		24		5.9		4.6
Cortez Total		4.3		4.88		0.67		200		2.71		18		210		2.75		18		120		1.6		6.4

 

March 2022				Page 1-10

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Notes to accompany Mineral Resource table for Cortez Complex

 

1.

The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Craig Fiddes, RM SME, a NGM employee. The estimate has an effective date of 31 December, 2021.

 

2.

Mineral Resources are reported using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards, and are inclusive of those Mineral Resources that were converted to Mineral Reserves. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

 

3.

Mineral Resources are reported within conceptual open pit shells for Mineral Resources potentially amenable to open pit mining methods and mineable shapes for Mineral Resources potentially amenable to underground mining methods. Mineral Resources that are potentially amenable to open pit mining methods were constrained used the following input parameters: gold price of US$1,500/oz; gold refining costs ranging from US$0.17–US$0.57/oz; payable gold assumption of 99.9%, a royalty range of 1.29–10.65%; a mining cost range of US$1.81-2.43/t mined; variable pit slope angles that range from 20.5–47°; metallurgical recoveries that vary from 62–81%; processing costs that range from US$2.04–US$24.42/t processed; general and administrative costs ranging from US$0.22–US$2.69/t processed; variable sustaining capital costs of US$0.04–US$2.36/t processed; and transportation costs of US$8.01/t processed. Mineral Resources potentially amenable to open pit mining methods are reported above cut-off grades that vary from 0.14–12.06 g/t Au. Mineral Resources that are potentially amenable to underground mining methods were constrained used the following input parameters: gold price of US$1,500/oz; gold refining costs ranging from US$0.17–US$0.57/oz; payable gold assumption of 99.9%, a royalty range of 1.29–10.65%; metallurgical recoveries that range from 84–88.6%; ore mining costs that vary from US$68.98–US$97.15/t mined; processing costs that range from US$10.62–US$29.28/t processed; variable general and administrative costs from US$11.19–US$15.19/t processed; sustaining capital costs that range from US$5.45–US$5.47/t processed; and variable transportation costs of US$17.88-24.31/t. Mineral Resources potentially amenable to underground mining methods are reported above cut-off grades that vary from 2.7–4.13 g/t Au.

 

4.

Mineral Resources are reported on a 100% basis. Barrick’s and Newmont’s attributable shares of the Mineral Resources are 61.5% and 38.5%, respectively.

 

5.

Numbers may not add up due to rounding. Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent differences between tonnes, grade and contained metal content. Tonnages are reported as metric units. Gold ounces are estimates of metal contained in tonnages and do not include allowances for processing losses.

 

March 2022				Page 1-11

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

1.13

Mineral Reserve Estimation

Mineral Reserves are estimated for three open pit deposits (Cortez Pits, Pipeline, and Crossroads), three underground zones in the Cortez Hills deposit (Middle Zone, Lower Zone, and the Deep South Zone), Goldrush, and surface stockpiles. Mineral Reserves are converted from Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources. Inferred Mineral Resources are set to waste.

 

1.13.1

Open Pits

The optimized economic pit shells selected for the basis of open pit designs were created using the Whittle 4X software package.

Royalties for the Mineral Reserves to be mined by open pit methods vary by area, metal price, and processing type. The various royalties cover different areas, which are described internally as royalty areas to assess Mineral Reserves for each area. Certain royalties are held by subsidiaries of Barrick, and these royalties are excluded from consideration in the cut-off grade estimation. The royalty is estimated for each of five different areas, and a realized gold price net of the royalty is estimated for use in the cut-off grade calculation. Process and overhead costs for the various processing options were estimated along with recovery. Cut-off grades consider the general and administrative (G&A) costs as part of the process cost. Originally, a cut-off grade of 0.14 Au g/t was used due to the detection limits of the Cortez assay laboratory’s fire assay method. An “AA finish” method was developed and implemented in December 2020, allowing lower grades to be evaluated. However, evaluation of a cut-off grade of 0.1 g/t Au found that the low amenabilities rendered that grade uneconomical, so the original cut-off grade of 0.14 g/t Au was not changed.

Dilution and extraction in the open pit Mineral Reserve estimates are addressed by diluting to whole blocks, at a block size that is considered to be representative of the selective mining unit. No further external factors are applied. The open pit design is based upon 100% extraction of the open pit Mineral Reserves.

 

1.13.2

Underground

 

1.13.2.1

Cortez Hills

Stope designs are based on:

 

●

Roaster long hole stope: US$1,200/oz Au for Lower Zone (A, B, and C);

 

●

Roaster cut-and-fill: US$1,200/oz Au for Middle Zone;

 

●

Oxide long hole stope: US$1,200/oz Au for Lower Zone D (Deep South).

Design shapes were grouped into two categories: stoping shapes (bulk shapes and associated development for the bulk shape), and cut-and-fill development shapes. Grade, short tons, class (Measured, Indicated, Inferred) and ore type (oxide and refractory) in each individual shape were obtained by interrogation using Vulcan software.

 

March 2022				Page 1-12

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Cut-off grades used in stope reporting included:

 

●

Refractory: 4.6 g/t Au;

 

●

Oxide: 3.4 g/t Au;

 

●

Cut-and-fill: incremental refractory cut-off grade of 3.9 g/t Au;

 

●

Cut-and-fill: incremental oxide cut-off grade of 2.7 g/t Au;

 

●

Stope development: incremental refractory cut-off grade of 3.5 g/t Au;

 

●

Stope development: incremental oxide cut-off grade of 2.3 g/t Au.

A dilution factor of 1% and mining recovery of 95% were applied to the primary stopes, and a dilution factor of 10% and mining recovery of 97% were applied to the secondary stopes. A dilution factor of 3% was used in all top cuts and 5% in bottom cuts.

 

1.13.2.2

Goldrush

Stopes were created using Stope Optimizer software, and run against a cut-off grade of 3.8 g/t Au (US$1,200/oz gold cut-off). At present, this cut-off has been applied to the Goldrush deposit.

Estimated mining recovery is 95%, and a 2% dilution factor was applied to grade.

 

1.14

Mineral Reserve Statement

Mineral Reserves are reported in Table 1-2, using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards with an effective date of December 31, 2021. The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Craig Fiddes, RM SME, a NGM employee.

Mineral Reserves are reported using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards. Mineral Resources are reported on a 100% basis. Barrick owns a 61.5% JV interest, with Newmont owning the remaining 38.5% JV interest.

Factors that may materially affect the Mineral Reserve estimates include: changes to long-term gold price assumptions; changes in local interpretations of mineralization geometry and continuity of mineralized zones; changes to geological shape and continuity assumptions; changes to metallurgical recovery assumptions; changes to the operating cut-off assumptions for open pit and underground mining methods; changes to the marginal cut-off grade assumptions used to constrain the estimates; geotechnical and design parameter changes impacting dilution and mining recovery factors; potential for lower mill recovery in new mining areas or from long-term stockpiles; fluctuations in commodity price and exchange rates; and mining cost assumptions; changes to environmental, permitting and social license assumptions; and changes to the current regulatory regime.

 

March 2022				Page 1-13

		Cortez Complex Nevada NI 43-101 Technical Report

 

Table 1-2:        Mineral Reserve Estimate

 

		Proven						Probable						Proven + Probable
		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)		Tonnes (Mt)		Grade (g/t)		Contained Au (Moz)
Surface
Open Pit
Cortez Pits		—		—		—		4.3		1.85		0.26		4.3		1.85		0.26
Crossroads		0.22		1.90		0.013		56		1.65		3.0		56		1.65		3.0
Pipeline		—		—		—		0.90		1.08		0.031		0.90		1.08		0.031
Open Pit Sub-Total		0.22		1.90		0.013		61		1.66		3.2		61		1.66		3.3
Stockpile
Open pit leach		0.0031		0.82		0.000082		—		—		—		0.0031		0.82		0.000082
Open pit mill		1.0		1.15		0.038		—		—		—		1.0		1.15		0.038
Open pit refractory		0.98		2.81		0.089		—		—		—		0.98		2.81		0.089
Underground mill		0.018		11.45		0.0066		—		—		—		0.018		11.45		0.0066
Underground refractory		0.028		9.72		0.0086		—		—		—		0.028		9.72		0.0086
Stockpile Sub-Total		2.1		2.15		0.14		—		—		—		2.1		2.15		0.14
Surface Total		2.3		2.13		0.16		61		1.66		3.2		63		1.68		3.4
Underground
Cortez Hills (CHUG)		1.3		8.57		0.35		9.0		9.55		2.8		10		9.43		3.1
Goldrush		—		—		—		33		7.29		7.8		33		7.29		7.8
Underground Total		1.3		8.57		0.35		42		7.77		11		43		7.79		11
Cortez Total		3.5		4.43		0.50		100		4.16		14		110		4.17		14

 

March 2022				Page 1-14