Grassy Mountain Gold

In early October 2022, the Company filed an S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary on the Feasibility Study outlining a profitable small-footprint, high-grade underground mine which is progressing through state and federal permitting. The base case scenario gold and silver prices used in the FS were $1,750 and $22 respectively. The highlights of the study are as follows:
​​​​​​​

The highlights of the study are as follows:

In mid-2019, we announced the approval of the Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) for the proposed Grassy Mountain underground mine from Malheur County. During a public meeting held in May 2019, the Malheur County Planning Commission (the “Planning Commission”) voted unanimously to approve the CUP and to recommend approval of a Sage Grouse Rule Permit to the Malheur County Court. The approval of the CUP is a major milestone for our Company and exemplifies the level of commitment and support from the local communities as we continue our quest to advance Grassy Mountain towards construction. The Planning Commission has granted us an extension of the CUP through July 2025.

​​​​​​​As the permit name indicates, the county issued the CUP with conditions, which in the case of Grassy Mountain, are the following:

1.    The applicant will subscribe to the Vale rangeland fire protection Association;
2.    The applicant shall collaborate with the Malheur County sheriff’s office in regard to a security plan as well as law enforcement and emergency response plans;
3.    Any road improvements necessary to serve Grassy Mountain must be constructed according to county design standards to the satisfaction of the County Road Master; and
4.    The applicant shall obtain approval for its reclamation plan from Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (“DOGAMI”), prior to beginning mining operations. Unless otherwise prohibited by DOGAMI, the Applicant may conduct pre-construction and construction activities prior to obtaining approval for its reclamation plan.

The completion of Technical Reporting has been an integral component in completing the permitting process of Grassy. The Paramount team has worked diligently to submit all baseline data reports (“BDR”), which were included within the initial Consolidated Permit Application (“CPA”) submitted to the DOGAMI in November 2019. In July 2022, Paramount received approval of two critical BDR’s, the Geochemistry and Groundwater reports which are the final two of twenty-two pre-approved BDR’s. 

​​​​​​​Paramount was granted the water appropriation permit from the Oregon Water Resources Department (“OWRD”). This permit provides for a sufficient quantity of water for the proposed mining and processing operations throughout the mine life as detailed in the CPA.

Permitting success continued for Grassy with the OWRDs review of tailings data contained in the CPA. The OWRD approved the plans and specifications of the proposed tailings dam assigning the dam a low hazard risk rating, its lowest risk level. Additionally, the OWRD stated that the plans are construction ready from a safety perspective.
​​​​​​​

In October 2023, Grassy Mountain became the first mining project in the State of Oregon to receive a positive completeness determination from Tthe DOGAMI and cooperating agencies.  completed their initial review of the CPA and had provided Paramount a list of supplemental information and recommendations required to submit a modified CPA. In a collaborative effort, Paramount worked with the State agencies to ensure a complete application. Once deemed complete, the State will direct the permitting agencies to write draft permits and will initiate the Environmental Assessment.

Permitting momentum continued in November 2023 when Paramount received the Notice to Proceed from State regulators which is critical to securing all necessary permits to build and operate Grassy. This complete permitting package includes the Environmental and Socioeconomic evaluation (the “EE”). The EE, currently underway by Stantec, will serve as an additional resource in the States permit writing process. 

In February 2020, Paramount submitted an amended Plan of Operation (“PoO”) with the Federal Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) to continue with the federal Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) in accordance with the previously filed PoO which Paramount filed in September 2017.
​​​​​​​

The Company reviewed and addressed comments from the BLM’s review of the PoO submitted by Paramount, which were addressed and included in an amended POO submitted to the BLM. The Plan of Operations was deemed complete by the BLM in November of 2022. 

These were addressed and included in an amended POO submitted to the BLM. Once the BLM accepts the POO as complete they will register n March 2024 the BLM issued a Notice of Intent with the Federal Register thereby triggering the initiation of the Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) which will be completed by HDR Inc. The EIS process is expected to take 12 months.

Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors 

​​​​​​​ 

​​​​​​​Paramount is subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and this filing and other U.S. reporting requirements are governed by Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC. Additionally, Paramount is subject to certain reporting requirements under applicable Canadian securities laws with respect to our material mineral properties under National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101) We caution investors that certain terms used under Canadian reporting requirements and definitions of NI 43-101 to describe mineralization may not be classified as a “reserve” unless the determination has been made that the mineralization could be economically and legally produced or extracted at the time the reserve determination is made. Therefore, investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of the mineralized material contained at any of our material projects will ever be converted to Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K compliant reserves.

1. Mineral Resources estimates are reported exclusive of mineral reserves, are current as of June 30, 2022, and are reported using the definitions in SK 1300.
2. The Qualified Person firm responsible for the mineral resource estimate is RESPEC.
3. Assumed metal prices for 2022 estimated Mineral Resources were $1,750 per ounce of gold and $22.00 per ounce of silver, unless otherwise noted.

Mineral Resources potentially amenable to open pit mining methods are reported using a gold price of US$1,750/oz, a silver price of US$22/oz, a throughput rate of 5,000 tons/day, assumed metallurgical recoveries of 80% for Au and 60% for Ag, mining costs of US$2.50/ton mined, processing costs of US$13.00/ton processed, general and administrative costs of $2.22/ton processed, and refining costs of $5.00/oz Au and $0.50/oz Ag produced. Mineral Resources potentially amenable to underground mining methods are reported using a gold price of US$1,750/oz, a silver price of US$22/oz, a throughput rate of 5,000 tons/day, assumed metallurgical recoveries of 90% gold equivalent, mining costs of US$90/ton mined, processing costs of US$30/ton processed, general and administrative costs of $15.00/ton processed, and refining costs of $5.00/oz gold equivalent produced.

The in-pit resources were then tabulated by the application of a gold-equivalent cut-off of 0.011 opt (0.38 g/T).  The gold-equivalent grades were determined using a gold to silver ratio of a 106 to 1.
Processing is assumed to consist of crushing and milling followed by Carbon in Leach (“CIL”) recovery resulting in the production of a DORE bar on site.

Mineral Reserves

1. Mineral reserves are reported exclusive of mineral resource estimates, are current as of June 30, 2022, and are reported using the definitions in SK 1300
2. The Qualified Person firm responsible for the mineral reserves estimate is Arrowhead Underground LLC.
3. Assumed metal prices for 2022 estimated Mineral Reserves were $1,750 per ounce of gold and $22.00 per ounce of silver, unless otherwise noted

An underground mining scenario is assumed using mechanized cut-and-fill methods, which following ramp-up, is expected to produce 1,300–1,400 tons/day, four days a week.  This mining rate will provide sufficient material for the 750 ton/day mill and processing plant to operate at full capacity for seven days a week.

The Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves for Grassy Mountain were estimated by first calculating an economic cut-off grade of 0.1 AuEq oz/t (3.43 g/T) for mining underground stopes, then using the cut-off grade to design stope shapes centered on Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource blocks with gold grades greater than or equal to the cut-off grade.  All Inferred material was considered to be waste with no value or metal content.  Internal and external dilution and mining recoveries (ore loss) were estimated and applied as modifying factors based on the total tonnage of material inside of the final designs.

Bedrock outcrops in the vicinity of the Grassy Mountain property are typically composed of olivine-rich basalt and siltstones, sandstones, and conglomerates of the late Miocene Grassy Mountain Formation. These rocks are locally covered with relatively thin, unconsolidated alluvial and colluvial deposits. Erosion-resistant basalts cap local topographic highs. Arkosic sandstones have been encountered at the surface and at depth, but have not been correlated across the project area, in part due to lateral discontinuity associated with sedimentary facies changes and structural offset.

The basal unit to the Grassy Mountain Formation is the Kern Basin Tuff, a non-welded, pumiceous, crystal tuff which displays cross beds and local surge structures. The Kern Basin Tuff ranges in thickness from 300 ft on the south bluffs of Grassy Mountain, to 1,500 ft in a drill hole beneath the Grassy Mountain Project area.

The Kern Basin Tuff is overlain by a series of fluvial, lacustrine, and tuffaceous sediments. Most of the sedimentary units in the project area are silicified and strongly indurated. These sedimentary units include granitic clast conglomerate, arkosic sandstone, fine grained sandstone, siltstone, and tuffaceous siltstone/mudstone. The sedimentary facies of the Grassy Mountain Formation reportedly range from 300 to over 1,000 ft thick, and provide the host rocks of the Grassy Mountain mineral resource.

Several siliceous terraces are interbedded with the silicified sediments of the Grassy Mountain Formation. Terrace construction was apparently episodic and intermittently inundated by fluvial/lacustrine sediments and ash, resulting in an interbedded sequence of siltstone, tuffaceous siltstone, sandstone, conglomerate, and sinter terrace deposits. Proximal deposits are angular, inhomogeneous, clast-supported breccias of sandstone, siltstone, and sinter with indistinct clast boundaries in a sulfidic mud-textured matrix.

Grassy Mountain is a prominent, 150 ft. high, silicified and iron-stained knob. Bedding is approximately horizontal at the hilltop, and dips at 10° to 25° to the north-northeast on the northern and eastern flanks of the hill. The bedding dip steepens to 30° to 40° on the west side of the hill due to drag folding in the footwall of the N20W striking Antelope Fault. The southwest slope of Grassy Mountain is covered by silicified arkose landslide debris.

Grassy Mountain is a horst block which has been raised 50 to 200 ft. in a region of complex block faulting and rotation. Faulting at Grassy Mountain is dominated by post-mineral N30W to N10E striking normal faults developed during Basin and Range extension. On the northeast side of the deposit, these faults progressively down-drop mineralization beneath post-mineral cover. These offsets are suggested by interpreted offsets of a prominent white sinter bed in drill holes as well as intersections with fault gouge. The N70E striking Grassy Mountain Fault shows minor vertical offset of only 10 to 40 ft.

The surface expression of the Grassy Mountain system is indicated by weak to moderately strong silicification and iron staining with scattered chalcedonic veins/veinlets. Approximate dimensions of the Grassy Mountain deposit are 1600 ft. long by 1000 ft. wide by 600 ft. thick. The deposit has a general N70 E elongation and a 15° bedding plane dip to the north-northeast as a result of faulting and fault block rotation. There is an envelope of lower grade mineralization at depths of 200 to 800 ft. which contains a higher-grade zone of mineralization between 500 and 750 ft. below the surface. The well-defined base of higher grade mineralization from about 700 to 750 ft. in depth suggests a strong pressure-temperature control on gold deposition.  Sinters and breccias parallel the paleosurface present at the time of mineralization. Fractures created a stockwork pattern generally found below the sinter, though some vein extensions may extend to the surface. The stockwork is surrounded by silicified sediments.

Mineralized quartz-adularia stockwork and vein types include single, banded, colliform, brecciated, and calcite-pseudomorphed veins. Visible gold (0.5 mm) has been found within the stockwork portions of the boiling horizon. The gold mostly occurs as electrum along the fracture margins or within microscopic voids. A brassy color is imparted due to the high silver content. The average silver to gold ratio at Grassy Mountain is 2.5:1.
​​​​​​​

Silicification occurs both pervasively as silica flooding and as cross-cutting veins, veinlets and stockworks. The silicified envelope has plan dimensions of 3000 ft (N-S) by 2500 ft (E-W). Silicification is surrounded by barren, relatively unaltered, clay-rich (20-40% montmorillonite), tuffaceous siltstone and arkose with minor disseminated diagenetic pyrite. Many of the sinters occur as sheets instead of mounds, which suggests that they may be related to vents along faults rather than point sources.  Potassic alteration occurs as adularia flooding with destruction of biotite.  The adularia is extremely fine-grained and is identified microscopically or by cobaltinitrite staining.  Sulfate phases identified by XRD include jarosite and alunite in several mineralized samples.  Clast-supported breccias contain sub-rounded to sub-angular sand to boulder-sized clasts of silicified arkose and siltstone in a jarosite-sericite clay matrix.