Revival Gold Inc.
145 King St. West, Suite 2870 Toronto, Ontario M5H 1J 8
info@revival-gold.com
https://www.revival-gold.com
ANNUALINFORMATION FORM FINANCIALYEAR ENDED J UNE 30, 2025
Dated as of DECEMBER 8, 2025
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTORY NOTES 1
ITEM 1: CORPORATE STRUCTURE 5
ITEM 2: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS 5
ITEM 3: NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS 9
Infrastructure 20, 41
Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social Impact 20, 42
Capital & Operating Costs 21, 42
Economic Analysis 22, 44
Conclusions 25, 46
Opportunities 25, 47
Risks 26, 47
Recommendations 27, 49
ITEM 4: RISK FACTORS 52
ITEM 5: DIVIDENDS AND DISTRIBUTIONS 65
ITEM 6: DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STRUCTURE 66
ITEM 7: MARKET FOR SECURITIES 66
ITEM 8: DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS 67
ITEM 9: CORPORATE CEASE TRADE ORDERS, BANKRUPTCIES, PENALTIES OR SANCTIONS 71
ITEM 10: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 72
ITEM 11: PROMOTERS 73
ITEM 12: LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND REGULATORY ACTIONS 73
ITEM 13: INTEREST OF MANAGEMENT AND OTHERS IN MATERIAL TRANSACTIONS 73
ITEM 14: TRANSFER AGENTS AND REGISTRAR 74
ITEM 15: MATERIAL CONTRACTS 74
ITEM 16: INTERESTS OF EXPERTS 74
ITEM 17: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 75
INTRODUCTORY NOTES CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTSThis annual information form ("AIF") contains "forward-looking information" and "forward-looking statements", as defined under applicable securities laws (collectively referred to herein as "forward-looking statements") which may include, but is not limited to, statements with respect to the future financial or operating performance of Revival Gold Inc. ("Revival Gold", the "Company", or the "Corporation"), its subsidiaries and its projects, including information derived from the Mercur PEA (as defined herein) and the Beartrack-Arnett PFS (as defined herein), the future price of gold and other metal prices, the estimation of mineral reserves and resources, the realization of mineral reserve estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, capital, operating and exploration expenditures, costs and timing of the development of new deposits, costs and timing of future exploration, requirements for additional capital, government regulation of mining operations, environmental risks, reclamation expenses, title disputes or claims, limitations of insurance coverage and the timing and possible outcome of pending litigation and regulatory matters. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as "plans", "expects", "is expected", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates", or "believes" or variations (including negative variations) of such words and phrases, or statements that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved. Information inferred from the interpretation of drilling results and information concerning mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to be forward-looking statements, as it constitutes a prediction of what might be found to be present when and if a project is actually developed. Although the Company believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements.
The following table outlines certain significant forward-looking statements contained in this AIF and provides the material assumptions used to develop such forward-looking statements and material risk factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. In addition to those principal assumptions and risk factors set out in the table below, the assumptions and risk factors described below the following table may also be applicable to the forward-looking statements described below and elsewhere in this AIF.
Forward-Looking Information | Assumptions | Risk factors |
Revival Gold's properties may contain economic deposits of gold. | Financing will be available for future exploration and development of Revival Gold's properties; the actual results of Revival Gold's exploration and development activities will be favourable; complete earn-in agreements and continue to develop Beartrack-Arnett and Mercur (see Projects section below); operating, exploration and development costs will not exceed Revival Gold's expectations; the Company will be able to retain and attract skilled staff; all requisite regulatory and governmental approvals for exploration projects and other operations will be received on a timely basis upon terms acceptable to | Gold price volatility; uncertainties involved in interpreting geological data and confirming title to acquired properties; exercise of the Mercur option under the Barrick Mercur Agreement (as defined below) or the Beartrack earn-in under the Beartrack Agreement (as defined below) the possibility that future exploration results will not be consistent with Revival Gold's expectations; availability of financing for and actual results of Revival Gold's exploration and development activities; increases in costs; environmental compliance and changes in environmental and other local legislation and regulation; |
Forward-Looking Information | Assumptions | Risk factors |
Revival Gold, and applicable political and economic conditions are favourable to Revival Gold; the price of gold and applicable interest and exchange rates will be favourable to Revival Gold; no material title disputes exist with respect to the Company's properties. | permitting standards, requirements and regulation; events of force majeure; interest rate and exchange rate fluctuations; changes in economic and political conditions; the Company's ability to retain and attract skilled staff. | |
The Company may be required to raise additional capital to meet its ongoing operating expenses and complete its planned exploration activities on all of its current projects for the twelve-month period ending June 30, 2026. | The operating and exploration activities of the Company for the twelve-month period ending June 30, 2026, and the costs associated therewith, will be consistent with Revival Gold's current expectations; debt and equity markets, exchange and interest rates and other applicable economic conditions are favourable to Revival Gold. | Changes in debt and equity markets; timing and availability of external financing on acceptable terms; increases in costs; environmental compliance and changes in environmental and other local legislation and regulation; interest rate and exchange rate fluctuations; changes in economic conditions. |
The proposed programs for the twelve-month period ending June 30, 2026 on the Mercur Gold Project are to update mineral resources and to prepare a preliminary feasibility study ("PFS"). The goal of proposed programs on the Beartrack-Arnett Gold Project is to drill exploration targets and make mine permitting preparations. | Financing will be available for these programs; assumptions underlying the Mercur PEA remain reasonable; mineral-resource and metallurgical parameters will be confirmed through further drilling and test work; gold prices and input costs (energy, labour, materials, transportation) will remain within modeled ranges; required permits and licences will be received in a timely manner; and the Company will comply with environmental, health and safety requirements. | General business, economic and political uncertainties; potential cost overruns or schedule delays; failure to obtain required permits or approvals; variations in ore grade, recovery or metallurgical response; risks inherent in scaling from the preliminary economic assessment stage to a preliminary feasibility; changes in project design parameters; limited availability of skilled labour or equipment; and uncertainties in geotechnical, hydrological or metallurgical data. |
Management's outlook regarding future trends. | Financing will be available for Revival Gold's exploration and operating activities; the price of gold will be favourable to Revival Gold. | Gold price volatility; changes in debt and equity markets; interest rate and exchange rate fluctuations; and changes in economic and political conditions. |
The Mercur PEA is preliminary in nature, includes Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves, and there is no certainty that the PEA results will be realized.
Inherent in forward-looking statements are risks, uncertainties and other factors beyond the Company's ability to predict or control. Please also refer to those risk factors referenced in the section entitled "Item 4: Risk Factors" in this AIF. Readers are cautioned that the above chart does not contain an exhaustive list of the factors or assumptions that may affect the forward-looking statements, and that the assumptions underlying such statements may prove to be incorrect. Actual results and developments are likely to differ,
and may differ materially, from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in this AIF.
Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, general business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties; ongoing uncertainties; the price of gold; uncertainty of additional capital; speculative nature of the Company's business; exploration, development and operating risks; estimates of Revival Gold's mineral reserves and resources, development and integration of assets, ongoing uncertainties relating to current global financial conditions; Canada-US trade relations and protectionist policies, the actual results of current exploration activities; potential mineralization, actual results of reclamation activities; the estimation of mineral resources, reliance of Mercur and Beartrack-Arnett, conclusions of economic evaluations; changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined; possible variations of ore grade or recovery rates; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the mining industry; title disputes and claims including Aboriginal land claims and Aboriginal rights; the results of prior exploration work; political instability; insurrection or war; conflicts of interest; competition; legal proceedings; maintenance of licences and permits; failure to convert estimated mineral resources to reserves; the inability to complete a feasibility study which recommends a production decision; the preliminary nature of metallurgical test results; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing or in the completion of development or construction activities, development and integration of assets, amendments to U.S. Mining Laws, development of new mines, shareholder activism, ESTMA compliance, internal control systems and disclosure and controls procedures, as well as those factors discussed in the section entitled "Item 4: Risk Factors" elsewhere in this AIF. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events, or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events, or results to differ from those anticipated, estimated or intended. Forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of the date of this AIF and the Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether because of new information, future events, or results or otherwise, except as required by law.
The forward-looking statements contained in this AIF reflect the Company's current views with respect to future events and are necessarily based upon several assumptions that, while considered reasonable by the Company, are inherently subject to significant operational, business, economic and regulatory uncertainties and contingencies. These assumptions include: the Company's mineral reserve and resource estimates and the assumptions upon which they are based, including geotechnical and metallurgical characteristics of rock confirming to sampled results and metallurgical performance; ore grades; success of the Company's projects; prices for gold remaining as estimated; currency exchange rates remaining as estimated; availability of funds for the Company's projects; prices for energy inputs, labour, materials, supplies and services (including transportation); all necessary permits, licences and regulatory approvals are received in a timely manner; and the ability to comply with environmental, health and safety laws. The foregoing list of assumptions is not exhaustive.
There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and should note that the assumptions and risk factors discussed under this "Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" section and the "Item 4: Risk Factors" section in this AIF do not contain an exhaustive list of the factors or assumptions that may affect the forward-looking statements, and that the assumptions underlying such statements may prove to be incorrect. Actual results and developments are likely to differ, and may differ materially, from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in this AIF.
Cautionary Note to United States Readers Concerning Estimates of Mineral Reserves and ResourcesAny Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource estimates in this AIF and any documents incorporated by reference herein have been disclosed in accordance with NI 43-101, which references the guidelines set out in the CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves ("CIM Definition Standards"), adopted by the CIM Council, as amended. However, these standards differ materially from the mineral property disclosure requirements of the SEC in Regulation S-K Subpart 1300 (the "SEC Modernization Rules") under the United States Securities Act of 1934, as amended. The Corporation does not file reports with the SEC and is not required to provide disclosure on its mineral properties under the SEC Modernization Rules and will continue to provide disclosure under NI 43-101 and the CIM Definition Standards.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, following the adoption of the SEC Modernization Rules, the SEC now recognizes estimates of "Measured Mineral Resources", "Indicated Mineral Resources" and "Inferred Mineral Resources." In addition, the SEC has amended its definitions of "Proven Mineral Reserves" and "Probable Mineral Reserves" to be "substantially similar" to the corresponding standards under NI 43-101. While the SEC will now recognize "Measured Mineral Resources", "Indicated Mineral Resources" and "Inferred Mineral Resources", U.S. readers should not assume that any part or all of the mineralization in these categories will ever be converted into a higher category of Mineral Resources or into Mineral Reserves. Mineralization described using these terms has a greater amount of uncertainty as to its existence and feasibility than mineralization that has been characterized as reserves. Accordingly, U.S. readers are cautioned not to assume that any Measured Mineral Resources, Indicated Mineral Resources, or Inferred Mineral Resources that the Company reports are or will be economically or legally mineable. Further, "Inferred Mineral Resources" have a greater amount of uncertainty as to their existence and as to whether they can be mined legally or economically. Therefore, U.S. readers are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of the "Inferred Mineral Resources" exist. There is no assurance that any Mineral Reserves or Mineral Resources that the Company may report as "Proven Mineral Reserves", "Probable Mineral Reserves", "Measured Mineral Resources", "Indicated Mineral Resources" and "Inferred Mineral Resources" under NI 43-101 would be the same had the Company prepared the reserve or resource estimates under the standards adopted under the SEC Modernization Rules.
Currency PresentationThis AIF contains references to Canadian dollars. All dollar amounts referenced, unless otherwise indicated, are expressed in Canadian dollars and referred to as "$". All references to "C$" are to Canadian dollars. All references to "US$" are to dollars of the United States of America. As at the date of this AIF, the rate of exchange between the US$ and the C$ was US$1 = C$1.3837.
Conventions Adopted from the Technical Report and used in this AIFUnless otherwise stated all units used in the below reproduced portions of the technical report are metric apart from all historical information, which has been reported in original imperial units for report completeness.
ITEM 1: CORPORATE STRUCTURE Name, Address and IncorporationThe Company was incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act (the "CBCA") under the name 6919472 Canada Inc. on February 7, 2008, and was classified as a Capital Pool Company as defined in the TSX Venture Exchange (the "TSX-V" or the "Exchange") Policy 2.4 and domiciled in Canada. The Company changed its name to JBZ Capital Inc. on September 29, 2008, to Strata Minerals Inc. on November 3, 2011, and to Revival Gold Inc. on July 5, 2017.
The Company's registered office and principal business office is located at 145 King St. West, Suite 2870, Toronto, Ontario M5H 1J8.
Intercorporate RelationshipsThe Company's corporate structure includes two directly held and wholly-owned subsidiaries, being:
Revival Gold (Idaho) Inc. ("Revival Idaho"), existing under the laws of the state of Idaho; and
Ensign Minerals Inc. ("Ensign"), existing under the laws of the province of British Columbia.
Ensign has one wholly-owned subsidiary, being and Ensign Gold (US) Corp. ("Ensign US"), existing under the laws of the state of Nevada.
ITEM 2: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS Overview of BusinessRevival Gold is a pure gold, mine developer operating in the western United States. The Company is advancing engineering and economic studies on the Mercur Gold Project in Utah ("Mercur" or the "Mercur Gold Project") and ongoing exploration and mine permitting preparations at the Beartrack-Arnett Gold Project located in Idaho ("Beartrack-Arnett" or the "Beartrack-Arnett Gold Project").
Revival Gold is listed on the TSX Venture Exchange under the ticker symbol "RVG" and trades on the OTCQX Market under the ticker symbol "RVLGF". The Company is headquartered in Toronto, Canada, with its exploration and development office located in Salmon, Idaho.
HistoryThe following events contributed materially to the development of the Company's business:
Acquisition of Ensign Minerals Inc. and the Mercur Gold ProjectOn May 30, 2024, the Company completed a business combination with Ensign Minerals Inc. (the "Ensign Transaction"), pursuant to which Revival Gold acquired all the issued and outstanding shares of Ensign, owner of Mercur, in consideration for 61,376,098 common shares of Revival Gold (the "Consideration Shares") at a deemed price per Consideration Share of $0.3569. The transaction was completed under a statutory three-cornered amalgamation in accordance with the Business Corporations Act (British
Columbia). Following completion of the Ensign Transaction, Ensign became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Revival Gold and Mercur became the Company's second principal asset.
The Company subsequently completed the Mercur PEA, which is summarized under "Item 3: Narrative Description of the Business - Mineral Projects". Mercur includes mineral and/or surface rights in 475 patented mining claims, 426 fee land tax parcels, 502 unpatented lode mining claims, three unpatented mill site claims, and six Utah state metalliferous minerals leases that cover a footprint of approximately 7,208 hectares (17,811 acres). The Company has 100% ownership or the option to own 100% of approximately 5,163 hectares (12,758 acres). The Company has at least 50% ownership in the majority of the remaining hectares. Certain areas of the Mercur Project are subject to royalties in varying percentages. The Company estimates that the weighted average of the royalties in the areas of known (as at the date of the Mercur PEA) gold mineralization to be equal to approximately a 2.1% net smelter returns royalty. The foregoing is qualified by the detailed description of the royalties and encumbrances on the Mercur Project as described under the "Agreements and Encumbrances" of the Mercur PEA. See below under the heading "Narrative Description of the Business - Mercur Gold Project"
Revival Gold filed a Form 51-102F4 "Business Acquisition Report", dated August 6, 2024, with respect to the Ensign Transaction which is available under the Company's profile on SEDAR+ at https://www.sedarplus.ca.
Acquisition of the Beartrack Gold ProjectOn August 31, 2017, the Company signed an earn-in and related stock purchase agreement (as amended and amended and restated, the "Beartrack Agreement") with Meridian Gold Company ("Meridian"), now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pan American Silver Corporation ("Pan American"), pursuant to which Revival Gold acquired an earn-in option to acquire a 100% interest in Meridian Beartrack Co. ("Meridian Beartrack"), owner of the Beartrack Gold Project (the "Beartrack Gold Project" or "Beartrack") located in Lemhi County, Idaho, USA. The Beartrack Agreement was amended on May 8, 2019, and on May 20, 2020, restated and amended on August 31, 2022, and subsequently amended on August 30, 2024 (the "2024 Beartrack Amendment").
Pursuant to the Beartrack Agreement, as amended and restated, Revival Gold may acquire Meridian Beartrack, owner of Beartrack (the "Acquisition"), by making certain cash and share payments and incurring qualifying exploration expenditures spending requirements that pertain to the Acquisition, all of which have been completed. The final material requirement is the funding of certain site operating and maintenance costs during an earn-in period ending on or before October 2, 2027. Revival Gold commenced funding site operating and maintenance costs on October 2, 2021. Upon closing of the Beartrack Agreement, the Company will be required to assume the site reclamation bonding. Under the Beartrack Agreement, Pan American will maintain site bonding surety for Meridian Beartrack (current face value of US$10.2 million) and Revival Gold will reimburse Pan American for all site-related operating and maintenance costs (estimated to be about US$850,000 per year, including surety fees). In consideration for the 2024 Beartrack Amendment, Revival Gold agreed that upon closing of the Beartrack Agreement, Revival Gold will grant Pan American a Net Smelter Return ("NSR") royalty of 1.8% on the mineral claims subject to the Beartrack Agreement, an increase of 0.3% from the 1.5% NSR royalty under the previous agreement. The Company will have the right to extinguish 0.5% of such 1.8% NSR royalty upon payments totaling US$2 million.
In addition to the acquisition of an interest in Beartrack pursuant to the Beartrack Agreement, Revival Gold has staked unpatented lode claims surrounding the Beartrack Gold Project. In total, as at the date of this AIF, the Company controls 604 claims at the Beartrack Gold Project, resulting in the project aggregating to approximately 3,277 net hectares (approximately 8,098 acres). The Company commenced field operations across Beartrack shortly after closing the Beartrack Agreement. Operations have included
mapping, rock chip and geochemical sampling, geophysical surveys, core drilling, metallurgical testing, geotechnical and hydrological field testing, engineering studies and environmental and permitting preparations.
Acquisition of the Arnett Gold Project and Surrounding PropertiesOn June 2, 2017, the Company, pursuant to a series of the agreements with vendors (collectively, the "Arnett Agreements") acquired: i) a 100% interest in 16 unpatented mining claims ("Otis Claims"); ii) 68 unpatented mining claims ("ACE Claims"); and iii) 10 additional unpatented mining claims (the "Mapatsie & Poco Claims"), comprising a total of approximately 1,930 acres located in Lemhi County, Idaho and known as the Arnett Gold Project (collectively the "Arnett Gold Project" or "Arnett").
In addition, the Company has staked or acquired additional claims including an undivided 100% interest in the 18-acre Haidee patented mining claim ("Haidee") and the 20-acre Mapatsie #18A unpatented mining claim.
As part of the purchase of the ACE Claims, the Mapatsie & Poco Claims, and Haidee claim, the vendors all retained a 0.75%, 2% and 2%, respectively, NSR, which may be purchased by the Company at any time for US$2 million, US$2 million and US$1 million, respectively (total for all three NSRs of US$5 million).
On August 31, 2023, the Company closed the termination of a 1% NSR on the Otis Claims in exchange for a $75,000 cash payment and 200,000 common shares (valued at $102,000). In total, as at the date of this AIF, the Company controls 375 claims at the Arnett Gold Project resulting in the project aggregating to approximately 3,015 net hectares (approximately 7,450 acres). The Company commenced field operations in 2017. Operations have included mapping, rock chip and geochemical sampling, geophysical surveys, metallurgical testing, core drilling, engineering studies, and environmental and permitting preparations.
The Company considers the Beartrack and Arnett as a single project known as the Beatrack-Arnett Gold Project and has consolidated such projects to achieve operational and logistical synergies. In total, as at the date of this AIF, the Beatrack-Arnett Gold Project is comprised of approximately 6,292 net hectares (approximately 15,548 acres).
Private Placement Financings and Warrant and Option ExercisesOn December 29, 2022, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement of 5,000,000 units of the Company for gross proceeds of $3,000,000 at a price of $0.60 per unit. Each unit consisted of one common share and one-half of one common share purchase warrant of the Company. Each whole common share purchase warrant entitles the holder thereof to acquire one common share at a price of $0.80 for a period of 24 months.
On May 16, 2023, the Company closed a brokered private placement of 11,846,150 units of the Company for gross proceeds of $6,159,998 at a price of $0.52 per unit. Each unit consisted of one common share and one-half of one common share purchase warrant of the Company. Each whole common share purchase warrant entitles the holder thereof to acquire one common share at a price of $0.72 for a period of 36 months.
On November 30, 2023, the Company closed the first of two tranches of a non-brokered private placement of 6,234,644 units of the Company at a price of $0.35 per unit for gross proceeds of $2,182,125. On December 14, 2023, the Company closed the second and final tranche of the non-brokered private placement, under the same terms of the initial tranche, consisting of an additional 2,994,485 units of the Company for gross proceeds of $1,048,070. Each unit consisted of one Common Share and one-half of one Common Share purchase warrant of the Company. Each whole Common Share purchase warrant entitles
the holder thereof to purchase one Common Share of the Company at a price of $0.45 for a period of 36 months.
On May 2, 2024, the Company closed a brokered private placement for 22,398,325 subscription receipts in Revival Gold Amalgamation Corp ("Revival Subco") (the "Subscription Receipts"), a subsidiary of the Company, for gross proceeds of $7,167,464, at a price of $0.32 per Subscription Receipt. The private placement was completed in connection with the Ensign Transaction. Each Subscription Receipt provided the holder the right, upon satisfaction of certain conditions and without payment of additional consideration, to receive one common share of Revival Subco ("Revival Subco Shares") and one-half of one Revival Subco common share purchase warrant (each whole, a "Revival Subco Warrant". The proceeds of the private placement were held in escrow until the closing of the acquisition of the Ensign Transaction and the satisfaction of various other conditions.
On May 30, 2024, upon the satisfaction of the outstanding conditions for the conversion of the Subscription Receipts and release of the escrowed funds, the Subscription Receipts converted into Revival Subco Shares and Revival Subco Warrants, and upon completion of the Ensign Transaction on the same date, such Revival Subco Shares and Revival Subco Warrants were exchanged for Common Shares and Common Share purchase warrants of the Company, respectively. Each such whole Common Share purchase warrant entitles the holder thereof to purchase one Common Share at a price of $0.45 for a period of 36 months.
On February 28, 2025, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement consisting of 11,500,000 units at a price of $0.32 per unit for gross proceeds of $3,680,000. Each unit consisted of one Common Share and one-half of one Common Share purchase warrant of the Company. Each whole Common Share purchase warrant entitles the holder thereof to purchase one Common Share of the Company at a price of
$0.45 for a period of 24 months. Dundee Corporation (TSX:DC.A) through its wholly owned subsidiary, Dundee Resources Limited ("Dundee") purchased 10,000,000 units of the Company. The Company granted Dundee a first right of refusal to maintain its equity ownership interest in the Company through the right to participate in any equity financings for a term of six months following the close of the private placement.
During the years ended June 30, 2023, and 2024, no stock options were exercised. During the year ended June 30, 2025, 1,660,712 stock options were exercised, and 350,000 warrants were exercised.
On July 31, 2025, after the end of the Company's most recently completed financial year, the Company closed a non-brokered private placement with EMR Capital Management Limited ("EMR") consisting of the issuance of 32,069,531 Common Shares at a price of $0.48 per Common Share for gross proceeds of US$11.3 million ($15.4 million) (the "EMR Strategic Placement"). In addition to the EMR Strategic Placement, the Company closed a concurrent non-brokered private placement consisting of the sale of 28,517,502 Common Shares at a price of $0.48 per Common Share for gross proceeds of $13.68 million (the "Concurrent Offering") Dundee exercised its participation right and participated in the Concurrent Offering to maintain its equity ownership in Revival Gold. Upon closing, EMR's and Dundee's pro-forma interest in Revival Gold were approximately 11.8% and 5.3% on a non-diluted basis, respectively. In connection with the EMR Strategic Placement, the Company entered into an investor rights agreement with EMR (the "Investor Rights Agreement") pursuant to which the Company granted EMR the right to nominate one director to the board of directors of the Company and customary anti-dilution rights to maintain its equity ownership interest in the Company through the right to participate in future equity financings and a top-up right. EMR's director nominee was Mr. Anthony Manini, a Co-Founder and Executive Director at EMR.
Outlook for Fiscal Year 2026The Company expects to continue advancing both the Mercur Gold Project in Utah and the Beartrack-Arnett Gold Project in Idaho, consistent with its strategy to be one of the largest pure-play U.S. gold mine development companies.
At Mercur, the Company intends to advance engineering and economic studies towards a PFS to further refine mine design, metallurgical parameters, and project development options. Revival Gold also plans to continue environmental baseline data collection and initiate early-stage permitting activities in coordination with state and federal regulators.
At Beartrack-Arnett, the Company will focus on ongoing exploration, and targeted definition drilling to expand known mineralized zones.
Significant AcquisitionRevival Gold did not have any "significant acquisitions" as defined under National Instrument 51-102 -
Continuous Disclosure Obligations during its last financial year ended June 30, 2025.
ITEM 3: NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS Description of the Company's BusinessRevival Gold is a pure gold, mine developer operating in the western United States. The Company controls interests or rights to acquire interests to explore and develop the Mercur Gold Project. The Company's interest in the Mercur Gold Project is principally comprised of five key agreements with mining companies, several leases with private parties, and the staking of 249 additional mining claims. The Beartrack-Arnett Project consists of two contiguous land positions comprised of the Beartrack Gold Project and the Arnett Gold Project. The Company has the right to acquire a 100% interest in Meridian Beartrack, owner of the Beartrack Gold Project located in Lemhi County, Idaho. Revival Gold also owns a 100% interest in the Arnett Gold Project, which neighbours the Beartrack Gold Project. Additionally, the Company is pursuing other gold exploration and development opportunities and holds a 51% interest in the Diamond Mountain Phosphate Project located in Uintah County, Utah. Revival Gold trades on the TSX-V in Canada as its primary listing under the symbol "RVG" as well as on the OTCQX market in the United States under the symbol "RVLGF". Mineral exploration and development involves a high degree of risk, which a combination of experience, knowledge and careful evaluation might not be able to overcome. See "Item 4: Risk Factors".
Principal ProductsThe Company is a gold exploration and development company. The Company does not currently produce any mineral or other products, however, if successful in its exploration and development efforts, it intends to produce mineral products consisting primarily of gold. There is a global market into which any such metals could be sold, and, as a result, the Company is not dependent on a particular purchaser with regards to the sale of any such metals produced. The Company has limited financial resources, has not earned revenue since commencing operations and has no source of operating cash flow. See "Item 4: Risk Factors".
Competitive ConditionsThe exploration and mining business is a competitive business. The Company competes with numerous companies for funding, capital, attractive mineral properties, qualified service providers, and personnel. The Company's ability to successfully compete in these areas in the future will depend on its ability to develop, operate and produce products from its present properties and on its ability to identify and acquire suitable producing properties or prospects for development or exploration in the future. See "Item 4: Risk Factors".
EmployeesAs of June 30, 2025, the Company had ten (10) employees (excluding non-executive Directors), which includes both salaried and hourly staff, and utilized the services of select professionals on a contract and consulting basis to carry out exploration and development work.
Specialized Skill and KnowledgeThe Company's business requires specialized skills and knowledge, including geological interpretation, mining, engineering, milling and production, construction, mine planning, regulatory compliance, accounting and capital markets expertise. The Company has found that it can locate and retain employees and consultants with such skills and knowledge. See "Item 4: Risk Factors".
Environmental ProtectionThe Company's current and future operations, including development activities on its properties or areas in which it has an interest, are subject to laws and regulations governing exploration, development, tenure, productions, taxes, labour standards, occupational health, waste disposal, protection and reclamation of the environment, mine safety, toxic substances and other matters. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations requires forethought and diligence in the conduct of the Company's activities. See "Item 4: Risk Factors: Licences and Permits". The financial and operational effect of environmental protection requirements on the capital expenditures and potential future earnings of the Company's mineral properties are not significantly different than that of mineral properties of a similar size and stage in the same jurisdictions of Utah and Idaho, and therefore should not have a negative effect on the Company's competitive position in the future.
Environmental protection requirements did not materially affect the capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position of the Company during the financial year ended June 30, 2025 and are not expected to do so in the current year.
Foreign OperationsThe Company's activities are currently focused on the exploration and the potential to develop the Mercur Gold Project and the Beartrack-Arnett Gold Project, located in Utah and Idaho, United States, respectively, which exposes it to various levels of political, economic and other risks and uncertainties associated with operating in a foreign jurisdiction. The United States is generally considered to be a stable mining jurisdiction, however, the Company remains subject to certain risks, including but not limited to changes to or invalidation of government mining regulations; expropriation or revocation of land or property rights; and changes in foreign ownership rights. See "Item 4: Risk Factors".
Intangibles, Cycles and Changes to ContractsThe Company's business is not materially affected by intangibles such as licences, patents and trademarks, nor is it significantly affected by seasonal changes. Other than as disclosed in this AIF, the Company is not aware of any aspect of its business which may be affected in the current financial year by renegotiation or termination of contracts. The Company's contracts are reviewed and negotiated periodically to ensure they remain competitive and aligned within industry norms for projects in similar settings in Utah and Idaho.
Bankruptcy and Similar ProceduresDuring the three most recently completed financial years and up to the date hereof, the Company has not been the subject of any bankruptcy, receivership or similar proceedings.
ReorganizationsExcept for the Ensign Transactions and the transaction contemplated thereby, the Company has not undergone any material reorganization within the three most recently completed financial years nor does the Company intend to undergo any material reorganization in the current financial year. Additional information on the Ensign Transaction can be found in this AIF under the sections entitled, "Item 2: Acquisition of Ensign Minerals Inc. and the Mercur Gold Project" and "Item 3: Narrative Description of the Business".
Qualified PersonsThe technical and scientific information in this AIF was reviewed and approved by John Meyer, P.Eng., VP Exploration & Development, Revival Gold Inc., and Dan Pace, RM, SME., Chief Geologist, Revival Gold Inc., both Qualified Persons (each person, a "QP") under NI 43-101.
Mercur Gold ProjectThe scientific and technical information in this AIF relating to the Mercur Gold Project is supported by the technical report entitled "NI 43-101 Technical Report - Preliminary Economic Assessment for the Mercur Gold Project, Camp Floyd and Ophir Mining District, Tooele and Utah Counties, Utah, USA," prepared by Kappes, Cassiday & Associates, and RESPEC Company LLC, with an effective date of March 25, 2025 (the "Mercur PEA"). The Mercur PEA Technical Report has been filed under the Company's profile on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca) and may also be accessed on the Company's website.
The following summary does not purport to be a complete summary of the Mercur PEA but is derived from, and qualified in its entirety by reference to, the full text of that report. The Mercur PEA has been prepared in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects, including Form 43-101F1, and supersedes the previous technical report dated May 24, 2024 with respect to Mercur. Readers are encouraged to review the Mercur PEA in its entirety, including all figures, tables, and appendices. The full report is incorporated by reference into this AIF. The disclosure in the following summary under the heading "Summary of the Mercur PEA Technical Report" is qualified in its entirety by Mercur PEA.
For recent facts and circumstances applicable to the Mercur Gold Project arising since the Mercur PEA, please refer to the section below titled, "Developments in respect of the Mercur Gold Project since the Mercur PEA".
Summary of the Mercur PEA Technical ReportProperty Description and Ownership
The Project is located 35 mi (57 km) southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah in the Camp Floyd and Ophir mining districts in the southern Oquirrh Mountains, centered at approximately 40.32°N, 112.22°W, and includes four informally named areas known as Main Mercur, South Mercur, West Mercur and North Mercur.
The Mercur property includes the real property interests as listed in Appendix A of the Mercur PEA (the "Mercur Property"). As of the date of the Mercur PEA, the Mercur Property included interests in 450 unpatented lode claims, three unpatented millsite claims, 475 patented mining claims, 426 fee land tax parcels comprised of surveyed lots, and six Utah state metalliferous minerals leases that cover approximately 16,378 acres (6,628 hectares) of mineral rights. The holding costs for the Mercur Property are estimated to be $271,418 for 2025.
Figure 1-1: Mercur PropertyOn April 10, 2024, Revival Gold, Ensign, and Revival Gold Amalgamation Corp. entered into a definitive business combination agreement (the "Business Combination Agreement") dated April 9, 2024, whereby Revival will acquire all the issued and outstanding shares of Ensign, a private company and owner of Mercur, in exchange for an aggregate of 61,376,098 shares of the Company based on a share exchange ratio of 1.1667 Revival shares for each common share of Ensign. The consideration implies a purchase price of C$0.4164 per Ensign Share, or gross consideration of approximately C$21.9 million. On May 30, 2024, Revival completed the acquisition of Ensign, and therefore, the Mercur project.
The title to the Mercur Property is held by Ensign's wholly owned subsidiary, Ensign Gold (US) Corp. ("EGUS"), by way of five key agreements with mining companies, four leases with private parties, and the staking of 200 additional mining claims. The five key agreements include:
A mineral lease option agreement (the "Barrick Mercur Agreement") with Barrick Gold Exploration Inc. ("BGEI") and Barrick Resources (USA) Inc. ("Barrick"), the entity that owns the Mercur mine properties, on May 13, 2021, under which Ensign paid C$1,000,000 and issued 3,000,000 warrants for shares of Ensign, exercisable at C$0.25/share, for an option to explore Barrick's reclaimed Mercur mine property. The mineral lease option agreement was amended on June 13, 2022, May 15, 2023, and April 9, 2024, to extend the option exercise period and to restructure the option price. The amended agreement calls for Ensign to pay BGEI $5,000,000 by January 2, 2026, and three additional $5,000,000 payments to be made on the first, second and third anniversary of commercial production. At BGEI's election, the payments may be made in cash or in Ensign common shares at market price. Ensign has already completed a work commitment to spend C$6,000,000 on the Barrick property during the option period.
An option and assignment agreement with Geyser Marion Gold Mining Company ("Geyser Marion") on October 25, 2021, as amended on October 13, 2023, under which Geyser Marion granted Ensign a five-year option to explore its mineral interests in exchange for 1,050,000 shares of Ensign stock, and an option to purchase its properties for $127,188. The properties include mineral interests at Main Mercur, as well as mineral interests at West Mercur that were already under lease to Ensign. The October 13, 2023 amendment also expanded the definition of an 'initial public offering' in the option and assignment agreement to include Ensign's completion of a business combination transaction with a corporation listed on the TSXV.
An option and assignment agreement with Sacramento Gold Mining Company ("Sacramento") on October 25, 2021, as amended on October 13, 2023, under which Sacramento granted Ensign a five-year option to explore its mineral interests at Main Mercur in exchange for 150,000 shares of Ensign stock, and an option to purchase its properties for $37,500. The October 13, 2023 amendment also expanded the definition of an 'initial public offering' in the option and assignment agreement to include Ensign's completion of a business combination transaction with a corporation listed on the TSXV.
A merger agreement on August 17, 2020, under which Priority Minerals Limited ("Priority") merged into EGUS in exchange for 4,200,000 shares of Ensign, delivered to Energold Minerals Inc., the parent of Priority. With this merger, Ensign acquired mineral interests in the South Mercur area.
An assignment agreement dated August 3, 2020, under which Rush Valley Exploration Inc. agreed to assign its properties to EGUS in exchange for 4,000,000 shares of Ensign. These properties of mineral interests are primarily located in the West Mercur area.
Exploration and Mining History
Mercur was the first Carlin-type gold deposit identified and mined in the Great Basin of the western US. Some Carlin-type districts in Nevada, such as Gold Acres, Getchell, Carlin and Cortez, have produced more than 10 million ounces of gold.
The Mercur Project area experienced four cycles of mining activity beginning with the underground mining of small bonanza-grade silver deposits in 1870-1881, which yielded more than 438,000 ounces of silver. Sedimentary rock-hosted, disseminated gold deposits (Carlin-type) were discovered at Mercur in 1883. In 1890, the first commercial use of cyanide for gold extraction was developed and later proved successful at Mercur. The Golden Gate mill was constructed at Mercur and was the largest gold mill in the US in 1900, with a capacity of 1,000 short tons (907 metric tonnes) per day. By 1917, Mercur had
produced over 920,000 ounces of gold - decades before similar Carlin-type deposits in Nevada were discovered.
Mercur experienced renewed activity on a small scale between 1931 and 1945. Recorded production for this period totals 194,194 ounces of gold and 173,955 ounces of silver.
In the 1970s and early 1980s, Getty Oil Company ("Getty") consolidated a large land position at Mercur and Homestake Mining Company consolidated a large land position around the historical underground mines at South Mercur. Getty's work ultimately led to the development of the Mercur open pit mine and CIL mill complex in 1983. Homestake's South Mercur project was vended to Priority and that area remains undeveloped.
In 1985, Getty sold the Mercur mine to a subsidiary of American Barrick Resources Corporation (later renamed Barrick Gold Corporation). Barrick added a run-of-mine heap leach circuit for low-grade material and a pressure oxidation circuit to pretreat refractory material for the CIL mill. Total gold production by Getty and Barrick from 1983 to 1998 was 1.49 million ounces of gold.
Historical calculations of the cumulative mining in the Mercur district between 1890 and 1988 indicate a total of 41.4 million tons (37.6 million tonnes) of mineralized material were mined at an average gold grade of 0.084 oz/t (2.88 g/T) containing 3.49 million ounces of gold, from which 2.61 million ounces of gold were recovered. Silver production is recorded at 1.18 million ounces, about half mined from primary silver deposits and the other half produced as a by-product of the gold deposits.
In 2011 a founder of Rush Valley Exploration Inc. ("RVX") noted a remote sensing anomaly in the pediment 3 mi (5 km) west of Mercur in what is now known as the West Mercur area. A field check of the anomalous area revealed previously unmapped limestone outcrops in the alluvium, along with local outcrops of gold-bearing jasperoid. These findings generated interest in the potential for gold deposits concealed by thin alluvial cover along the range front near Mercur. RVX consolidated a large land position at West Mercur, compiled historical data, and collected rock and soil samples to generate exploration targets.
Ensign acquired the RVX properties in 2020 and commenced acquisition of additional prospective lands throughout the Mercur district. Ensign evaluated the extensive historical data, collected 836 soil samples, conducted geologic mapping and rock sampling in select areas, and drilled 114 holes totaling 59,850 feet (18,242 meters).
Geology and Mineralization
The Mercur Project encompasses a large portion of the Ophir anticline, a north-northwest trending, doubly plunging fold which exposes a very thick sequence of Mississippian carbonate platform stratigraphy. The important host unit for gold mineralization is the approximately 1,000 m-thick Mississippian Great Blue Limestone. This unit is subdivided into the Lower Great Blue Member, the Mercur Member, the Long Trail Shale Member, and the Upper Great Blue Member. The known mineralization along the east flank of the Ophir anticline (North, South and Main Mercur) occurs in the Mercur Member. Along the west flank of the Ophir anticline (West Mercur), the known mineralization occurs in the Upper Great Blue Member, near the contact with the overlying Pennsylvanian Manning Canyon Shale.
The gold deposits at Mercur are classified as Carlin-type gold deposits, in which micron-size gold particles tend to be disseminated in silty, calcareous, and carbonaceous marine sedimentary rocks. At Mercur, the mineralization was deposited in favorable beds of the Mercur Member, where faulting and fracturing structurally prepared the rocks and provided pathways for hydrothermal transport of mineralizing fluids.
There is an apparent spatial and temporal association of gold mineralization with early Oligocene dikes and sills of Eagle Hill Rhyolite.
Drilling, Database and Data Verification
As of the effective date of the Mercur PEA, Revival's digital project database includes location and other data from 3,149 holes, for a total of more than 966,000 feet (294,400 meters), that were drilled by Newmont, Getty, Homestake, Touchstone Resources, Barrick, Priority, Kennecott, and Ensign. This database includes 114 holes totaling 59,850 feet (18,242 meters) drilled and sampled by Ensign in the South, West and Main Mercur areas between 2020 and 2022.
The original datum, projections and precise base point for the local Mercur Mine and South Mercur grids are not known. Transformations were developed by Barrick to convert between the global and local coordinate systems. Ensign verified collar locations using various historical maps, LiDAR surveys and aerial imagery; Ensign modified coordinates as warranted.
Collar, survey and assay data from drilling was evaluated and verified with respect to the most original documentation available. In the case of assay data, a manual audit was performed against scans of original assay certificates on 6.7% of the total of 94,748 records in the pre-Ensign drill-hole database, as received from Revival. The manual audit yielded an acceptable 0.03% error rate. All of Ensign's data were compared to original assay certificates downloaded directly from the laboratories. Any significant errors found in both sets of assay data were corrected by Revival in the database.
The available information regarding sample preparation, analysis, security and QA/QC data is limited for pre-Ensign exploration sampling and drilling programs. As a result, the quality of historical drilling and assay results cannot be fully evaluated. However, most assays are documented with original or scans of assay certificates, and the assay results supported a successful mining operation.
Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing
The Mercur mine most recently produced 1.49 million ounces of gold between 1983 and 1998 utilizing three process flowsheets including a carbon-in-leach ("CIL") process for high-grade oxide material, a runof-mine ("ROM") dump leach for low-grade oxide material and pressure oxidation ("POX") followed by CIL to treat refractory sulfide materials. Life of mine ("LOM") gold recoveries for the historical operation averaged 77% for the CIL, 49% for the ROM dump leach and 75% for the POX and CIL circuit with an overall recovery of approximately 69%.
Variability bottle roll leach tests were commissioned by Ensign in 2022 and 2023 and column and bottle roll leach test programs were commissioned by Revival in 2024 to evaluate a potential heap leaching operation. The results of these recent test programs along with an expansive database of CIL and direct cyanide leach (DCN) tests collectively form the basis for the following metallurgical recommendations and conclusions:
Crush size of 100% passing ½ inches (1.27 cm)
Overall average gold recovery of 75% (based on variable recovery applied to the minable resource on a block-by-block basis).
Design leach cycle of 80 days.
Lime consumption of 1.80 lbs/t (0.90 kg/T).
Cyanide consumption of 0.36 lbs/t (0.18 kg/T).
The key design parameters are based on limited test work performed on geochemically representative samples which will need to be validated as part of future test work programs. In general, the available test results show good correlation between the column and bottle-roll leach tests with similar metallurgical recoveries for all materials tested. Gold recovery has been estimated by applying a 5% discount factor to the DCN or CIL recovery estimates from the mine resource model on a block-by-block basis, with the DCN value used in cases where both results were available. Carbonaceous zones with pre-robbing behavior are present in the Mercur deposits, which presents a moderate risk to overall gold recovery.
Mineral Resource Estimates
Two gold domains were modeled at grade boundaries based on cumulative probability plots of gold data. Revival's geologic model was used to guide domain modeling, which generally followed specific, favorable stratigraphic horizons. Gold domains were coded into separate block models for Main and South Mercur. The block size (25 ft x 25 ft x 25 ft) of the block models was chosen in consideration of potential exploitation by open pit mining and heap leach extraction, and resources were reported within pits optimized using current economic parameters. All modeling processes and inputs that were used to estimate the gold resources, including the mineral domain modeling, grade capping, grade estimation, and density assignment, were completed independent of potential mining methods. Reported mineral resources were interpolated using inverse-distance with a power of three inside modeled gold domains.
The Main and South Mercur mineral resources were classified considering confidence in the underlying database, sample integrity, analytical precision/reliability, QA/QC results, drilling methods, variography, the status of metallurgical test work, the available density data, and confidence in the top-of-bedrock surface and geological interpretations. Pit optimization parameters for resource reporting are provided in Table 1-1 and estimates of the Indicated and Inferred mineral resources for both Main and South Mercur are shown in Table 1-2.
Table 1-1: Mineral Resource Pit Optimization ParametersGeneral | ||
Mineral Resource Gold Price | $2,000 /oz Au | |
Mining & Heap Leaching Rate | 20,000 tons/day 18,144 tonnes/day | |
Average Gold Leach Recovery (Main Mercur) | 74 % | |
Average Gold Leach Recovery (South Mercur) | 79 % | |
Operating Expenditures | ||
Mining - Rock | $2.50 /ton mined | $2.76 /tonne mined |
Mining - Fill | $2.14 /ton mined | $2.36 /tonne mined |
Haul to Crusher (Main Mercur) | $0.32 /ton processed | $0.35 /tonne processed |
Haul to Crusher (South Mercur) | $0.82 /ton processed | $0.90 /tonne processed |
Heap Leaching | $4.05 /ton processed | $4.46 /tonne processed |
General & Administrative Costs | $0.82 /ton processed | $0.90 /tonne processed |
Other Costs | ||
Refining & Freight | $5.00 /oz Au recovered | |
Royalties1 | 2.1 % Net Smelter Return | |
Note: 1. Royalties for the property are variable and were calculated on a block-by-block basis. This value represents the block-weighted average net smelter return royalty for the Main and South Mercur PEA pits. | ||
Project Area | Indicated Mineral Resources | Inferred Mineral Resources | ||||||||
Tonnage | Gold Grade | Contained Gold | Tonnage | Gold Grade | Contained Gold (koz) | |||||
(ktons) | (ktonnes) | (oz/ton) | (g/tonne) | (koz) | (ktons) | (ktonnes) | (oz/ton) | (g/tonne) | ||
Main Mercur | 31,558 | 28,629 | 0.018 | 0.63 | 581.0 | 36,574 | 33,179 | 0.016 | 0.53 | 567.0 |
South Mercur | 7,352 | 6,670 | 0.023 | 0.77 | 165.0 | 3,380 | 3,066 | 0.018 | 0.60 | 59.0 |
Total Mercur | 38,910 | 35,299 | 0.019 | 0.66 | 746.0 | 39,954 | 36,246 | 0.016 | 0.54 | 626.0 |
Notes:
| ||||||||||
Mining Methods
The PEA mine plan was developed assuming the use of the conventional open-pit, truck-and-shovel mining method and with extraction of gold by the cyanide heap-leach method. Waste rock would be extracted using 150-ton haul trucks and transported to designated waste rock storage facilities ("WRSF"s). Leach material would be mined from the open pits, processed through a crusher and stacked on a heap leach pad for leaching gold. Ultimate pit limits were developed using pit optimization techniques based on the block models of estimated mineral resources. Production schedules have been developed using the preliminary pit designs and the estimated mineral resources with those pit designs for a total expected mine life of 10 years after a one-year pre-production period.
Indicated and Inferred mineral resources have been used to determine potentially mineable resources for the PEA. Note that:
A preliminary economic assessment is preliminary in nature, and it includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied that would enable them to be classified as mineral reserves, and there is no certainty that the preliminary assessment will be realized.
Mineral resource pit optimization parameters that are summarized in Table 1-2 were developed for the anticipated 20,000 tpd (18,144 Tpd) mineralized material mining and processing rate. Based on the resulting pit optimizations, pit designs were developed and phased for both Main Mercur and South Mercur. The resulting mineral resources and associated waste rock for the designed pits are summarized in Table 1-3.
Table 1-3: In-Pit Mineralized Material and Associated Waste RockProject Area | Parameter | Units | Mineralized Material | Waste Rock | Total Mined | Strip Ratio | |
Indicated | Inferred | ||||||
Main Mercur | Tonnage | (ktons) | 29,649 | 32,915 | 160,914 | 223,477 | 2.57 |
(ktonnes) | 26,897 | 29,860 | 145,979 | 202,735 | |||
Gold Grade | (oz/ton) | 0.019 | 0.016 | ||||
(g/tonne) | 0.64 | 0.54 | |||||
Contained Gold | (koz) | 551 | 514 | ||||
South Mercur | Tonnage | (ktons) | 6,868 | 2,915 | 38,421 | 48,204 | 3.93 |
(ktonnes) | 6,230 | 2,645 | 34,855 | 43,730 | |||
Gold Grade | (oz/ton) | 0.023 | 0.018 | ||||
(g/tonne) | 0.79 | 0.62 | |||||
Contained Gold | (koz) | 158 | 53 | ||||
Total Project | Tonnage | (ktons) | 36,516 | 35,830 | 199,335 | 271,681 | 2.76 |
(ktonnes) | 33,127 | 32,504 | 180,834 | 246,465 | |||
Gold Grade | (oz/ton) | 0.019 | 0.016 | ||||
(g/tonne) | 0.67 | 0.54 | |||||
Contained Gold | (koz) | 708 | 567 | ||||
Note: Mineralized material is based on indicated and inferred mineral resources and is meant only to allow a calculation of the cash-flow value and does not imply that any economics will be realized from the mining of the leachable material. | |||||||
Mine production scheduling was done using MineSched software (version 2024). Scheduling targeted production of 7.3 million tons (6.6 million tonnes) of leachable material per year.
The production schedule for the LOM was created using monthly periods so that appropriate lag times for gold recovery could be used for the process production schedule. The schedule was then summarized in yearly periods. The Mercur mining schedule, shown in Table 1-4 (in US units) and Table 1-5 (in metric units), assumes mining will utilize an equipment fleet with a maximum of 16 150-ton trucks, one 29-cu yd shovel and one 30-cu yd loader as the primary mining equipment.
Table 1-4: Mine Production Schedule (US Units)Parameter | Units | Yr -1 | Yr 1 | Yr 2 | Yr 3 | Yr 4 | Yr 5 | Yr 6 | Yr 7 | Yr 8 | Yr 9 | Yr 10 | Totals | |
Mineralized Rock | Pit to Stockpile | k tons | 938 | 2,716 | 3,021 | 2,898 | 3,205 | 4,119 | 3,131 | 2,862 | 3,888 | 2,483 | 1,789 | 31,051 |
Pit to Crusher | k tons | - | 4,727 | 4,393 | 4,274 | 4,678 | 5,992 | 3,059 | 5,316 | 4,174 | 3,365 | 1,316 | 41,295 | |
Total Mined | k tons | 938 | 7,444 | 7,414 | 7,172 | 7,883 | 10,112 | 6,191 | 8,179 | 8,062 | 5,848 | 3,104 | 72,346 | |
Crusher to Heap | k tons | - | 6,964 | 7,300 | 7,320 | 7,300 | 7,300 | 7,300 | 7,320 | 7,300 | 7,300 | 6,942 | 72,346 | |
Gold Grade | oz/ton | - | 0.017 | 0.015 | 0.017 | 0.017 | 0.013 | 0.017 | 0.019 | 0.019 | 0.025 | 0.021 | 0.018 | |
Contained Gold | k oz | - | 128 | 124 | 110 | 121 | 125 | 91 | 122 | 136 | 141 | 177 | 1275 | |
Recovery | % | - | 84% | 79% | 76% | 77% | 76% | 74% | 80% | 78% | 71% | 58% | 75% | |
Recoverable Gold | k oz | - | 107 | 98 | 84 | 94 | 95 | 68 | 98 | 106 | 100 | 102 | 951 | |
Waste Rock | Rock to Dumps | k tons | 942 | 20,626 | 18,958 | 18,695 | 15,778 | 18,971 | 21,581 | 18,304 | 17,477 | 16,761 | 4,218 | 172,311 |
Fill to Dumps | k tons | 633 | 3,459 | - | 20 | 92 | 412 | 436 | 1,836 | 11,649 | 8,228 | 260 | 27,024 | |
Total to Dumps | k tons | 1,575 | 24,085 | 18,958 | 18,716 | 15,870 | 19,382 | 22,017 | 20,139 | 29,126 | 24,989 | 4,478 | 199,335 | |
All Rock | Total Mined | k tons | 2,513 | 31,528 | 26,373 | 25,887 | 23,753 | 29,494 | 28,208 | 28,318 | 37,188 | 30,837 | 7,582 | 271,681 |
Strip Ratio | wr:mr | 1.7 | 3.2 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 3.6 | 2.5 | 3.6 | 4.3 | 1.4 | 2.8 | |
Parameter | Units | Yr -1 | Yr 1 | Yr 2 | Yr 3 | Yr 4 | Yr 5 | Yr 6 | Yr 7 | Yr 8 | Yr 9 | Yr 10 | Totals | |
Mineralized Rock | Pit to Stockpile | k tonnes | 851 | 2,464 | 2,741 | 2,629 | 2,908 | 3,737 | 2,841 | 2,597 | 3,527 | 2,253 | 1,623 | 28,169 |
Pit to Crusher | k tonnes | - | 4,288 | 3,985 | 3,877 | 4,243 | 5,436 | 2,776 | 4,823 | 3,787 | 3,053 | 1,194 | 37,462 | |
Total Mined | k tonnes | 851 | 6,753 | 6,726 | 6,506 | 7,151 | 9,173 | 5,616 | 7,419 | 7,314 | 5,305 | 2,816 | 65,631 | |
Crusher to Heap | k tonnes | - | 6,317 | 6,622 | 6,641 | 6,622 | 6,622 | 6,622 | 6,641 | 6,622 | 6,622 | 6,298 | 65,631 | |
Gold Grade | g/tonne | - | 0.58 | 0.52 | 0.57 | 0.59 | 0.43 | 0.57 | 0.64 | 0.66 | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.60 | |
Contained Gold | k oz | - | 128 | 124 | 110 | 121 | 125 | 91 | 122 | 136 | 141 | 177 | 1275 | |
Recovery | % | - | 84% | 79% | 76% | 77% | 76% | 74% | 80% | 78% | 71% | 58% | 75% | |
Recoverable Gold | k oz | - | 107 | 98 | 84 | 94 | 95 | 68 | 98 | 106 | 100 | 102 | 951 | |
Waste Rock | Rock to Dumps | k tonnes | 855 | 18,712 | 17,199 | 16,960 | 14,314 | 17,210 | 19,578 | 16,605 | 15,854 | 15,205 | 3,827 | 156,318 |
Fill to Dumps | k tonnes | 574 | 3,138 | - | 18 | 84 | 373 | 395 | 1,665 | 10,568 | 7,464 | 236 | 24,516 | |
Total to Dumps | k tonnes | 1,429 | 21,849 | 17,199 | 16,978 | 14,397 | 17,583 | 19,973 | 18,270 | 26,422 | 22,670 | 4,062 | 180,834 | |
All Rock | Total Mined | k tonnes | 2,280 | 28,602 | 23,925 | 23,484 | 21,549 | 26,757 | 25,590 | 25,690 | 33,736 | 27,975 | 6,879 | 246,465 |
Strip Ratio | wr:mr | 1.7 | 3.2 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 3.6 | 2.5 | 3.6 | 4.3 | 1.4 | 2.8 | |
Recovery Methods
Test work results completed to date indicate that the minable Mineral Resource for the Mercur project, including for the Main Mercur and South Mercur pits, are amenable to cyanide leaching for the recovery of gold. Based on the Mineral Reserve of 72.3 million tons (65.6 million tonnes) and established the processing rate of 20,000 tons (18,144 tonnes) per day, the Project has an estimated life of 10 years and will produce approximately 950,000 ounces of gold.
Mineralized material from the Main Mercur and South Mercur pits will be hauled to the central West Mercur processing site and crushed to 100% passing ½" at an average rate of 20,000 tons (18,144 tonnes) per day using a three-stage closed crushing circuit. Pebble lime will be added to the material for pH control before being stacked onto the heap using a conveyor stacking system. The heap will be leached with a dilute cyanide solution with the resulting pregnant leach solution flowing by gravity to a pregnant solution pond before being pumped to a carbon adsorption circuit. Gold values loaded onto carbon from the adsorption circuit will be stripped using a modified pressure Zadra process and recovered by electrowinning. The
resulting precious metal sludge will be treated in a retort to recover mercury before being smelted to produce the final doré product. Doré will be sold to a third-party refiner.
Carbon will be acid-washed before every strip to remove scale and other inorganic contaminants. All activated carbon will be thermally regenerated after each strip using a rotary kiln.
Infrastructure
Plant infrastructure and most buildings from the previous Mercur mining operation were removed as part of the site reclamation; however, wherever possible, the remaining site infrastructure will be refurbished and reused, including the site access road and gate, the electrical power supply and distribution lines and equipment, the site roads, and the administration building.
New buildings to be constructed for the Project include the mine truck shop/warehouse, administration and process office trailers, a recovery plant, and a laboratory facility. A haul road will be constructed for transportation of the mineralized material from the Main Mercur and South Mercur pits to the processing facility at West Mercur and will be designed to accommodate two-way traffic with 150-ton (136-tonne) haul trucks. The project considers one leach pad that will be constructed at the West Mercur site and will be used to leach material from both Main and South Mercur. Solution storage will require construction of a pregnant solution pond, an event/overflow pond, and a barren solution tank. The fuel storage system will consist of several above ground tanks including a diesel tank and a gasoline tank.
Power will be delivered to the project by an existing 43.8 kV transmission line and distributed using a 4.16 kV, 3 Ph, 60 Hz distribution power line and will be stepped down to 480V or 110/220V as needed. Emergency power for the recovery plant and process solution pumps will be provided by a diesel generator.
Raw water for process requirements and makeup water will be taken from the existing historical production wells located approximately 3 miles (5 kilometers) from the West Mercur site and will be pumped to a head tank for distribution to other areas. A portion of the head tank will be used to provide fire water storage. Potable water is planned to be delivered to the site and distributed using a potable water storage and transfer pumping system.
Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social Impact
The lead agency for all mine permitting in Utah is the Utah Division of Oil, Gas, & Mining ("UDOGM"). UDOGM has an organized and efficient approach to mine permitting as they have pre-established agreements with applicable state and federal regulatory agencies. The primary regulatory agencies that would be involved in permitting at Mercur, and coordinated through UDOGM, include: Utah Department of Environmental Quality ("UDEQ"); Utah State Historic Preservation Office ("SHPO"); Utah Division of Water Rights ("UDWR"); School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration ("SITLA"); and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management ("BLM").
The Mercur PEA was developed with the objective that all mining and processing facilities would be located on State of Utah-managed land, with the majority designated as private. The only two Project facilities located on federally managed land would be the water supply pipeline, and the haul roads connecting the Main Mercur and South Mercur mines to the processing facility.
The primary permits/agreements that are expected to drive the overall Mercur permitting schedule include:
Large Mining Operation Permit (UDOGM)
Reclamation Permit (UDOGM)
SITLA Mining Lease (SITLA)
Air Quality Permit (UDOGM)
Groundwater Discharge Permit (UDEQ)
Dam Safety Permit (UDWR)
Rights-of Way (BLM)
Permitting of the Project is estimated to take approximately 2 years once the necessary supplemental baseline studies have been completed.
Capital & Operating Costs
Capital and operating costs for the process and general and administration ("G&A") components of the Project were estimated by KCA. Mining costs were estimated by RESPEC based on owner mining and a leased mining fleet. Reclamation and closure costs have been estimated as an allowance based on total tons of material processed. The costs are presented in first quarter 2025 US dollars and are considered to have an accuracy of +/-35%. A summary of the project capital cost requirements and operating costs are presented in Table 1-6 and Table 1-7, respectively.
Table 1-6: PEA Capital Cost SummaryDescription | Costs ($,000) |
Pre-Production Capital | |
Process & Infrastructure (including spare parts) | $115,036 |
Mining Capital & Mining Pre-Production | $32,586 |
Indirect & Owner's Costs | $4,258 |
Engineering, Procurement & Construction Management (EPCM) | $13,804 |
Contingency | $28,753 |
Total Pre-Production Capital | $194,439 |
Working Capital & Initial Fills | |
Mining Working Capital | $9,343 |
Process Working Capital | $3,782 |
G&A Working Capital | $567 |
Initial Fills | $201 |
Total Working Capital | $13,893 |
Total Pre-Production & Working Capital | $208,332 |
Sustaining Capital | |
Process & Infrastructure | $13,496 |
Indirect & EPCM | $2,024 |
Mining | $87,132 |
Contingency | $7,461 |
Total Sustaining Capital | $110,113 |
Reclamation & Closure Allowance (Gross) | $39,790 |
LoM Total Capital Costs (Excluding Working Capital) | $344,342 |
Operating Cost Area | Unit Operating Costs | |
($/ton processed) | ($/tonne processed) | |
Mining | $10.38 | $11.44 |
Processing & Support | $4.20 | $4.63 |
G&A | $0.63 | $0.69 |
Total | $15.21 | $16.77 |
Economic Analysis
Based on the estimated production schedule, capital costs and operating costs, KCA prepared a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet-based Discounted Cash Flow ("DCF") model, which estimates the Net Present Value ("NPV") of future cash flow streams. The PEA economic model was developed based on the following assumptions:
The mine production schedule from RESPEC.
Period of analysis of 15 years including one year of investment and pre-production, 10 years of production and 4 years for reclamation and closure.
Gold price of $2,175/oz.
Processing rate of 20,000 t/d (18,144 T/d).
Overall average recovery of 75% for gold.
Capital and operating costs as developed in Section 21 of the Mercur PEA Technical Report.
The Project economics based on these criteria from the DCF are summarized in Table 1-8.
Table 1-8: PEA Economic Analysis SummaryFinancial Parameters | Results | |
Internal Rate of Return (Pre-Tax) | 30.8 % | |
Internal Rate of Return (After-Tax) | 26.5 % | |
Average Annual Cashflow (Pre-Tax) | $83 million | |
NPV @ 5% (Pre-Tax) | $373 million | |
Average Annual Cashflow (After-Tax) | $71 million | |
NPV @ 5% (After-Tax) | $295 million | |
Gold Price Assumption | $2,175 /ounce Au | |
Pay-Back Period (based on After-Tax) | 3.6 years | |
Capital Costs (Sales Tax Included) | ||
Initial Capital | $194 million | |
Working Capital & Initial Fills | $14 million | |
LOM Sustaining Capital | $110 million | |
Reclamation & Closure (Gross) | $40 million | |
Operating Costs (Average LOM) | ||
Mining | $10.38 /ton processed | $11.44 /tonne processed |
Processing & Support | $4.20 /ton processed | $4.63 /tonne processed |
G&A | $0.63 /ton processed | $0.69 /tonne processed |
All-in Sustaining Cost | $1,363 /ounce Au | |
Cash Cost | $1,205 /ounce Au | |
Production Data | ||
Life of Mine | 9.95 years | |
Average Daily Process Throughput | 20,000 tons/day | 18,144 tonnes/day |
LOM Average Metallurgical Gold Recovery | 75 % | |
Average Annual Gold Production | 95,600 ounces Au | |
Total Gold Produced | 951,000 ounces Au | |
LOM Strip Ratio (Waste Rock : Mineralized Rock) | 2.8 | |
Figure 1-2 presents the estimated annual gold production and cumulative after-tax cash flow from pre-production through mine closure at $2,175 per ounce of gold.
Figure 1-2: Annual Gold Production and Cumulative After-Tax Cash Flow180 $600,000
Cumulative After-Tax Cashflow ($,000)
160 $500,000
Annual Gold Production (koz)
140 $400,000
120 $300,000
100 $200,000
80 $100,000
60 $0
40 -$100,000
20 -$200,000
0
-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years
-$300,000
A sensitivity analysis was performed on the Project economics. Figure 1-3 and Figure 1-4 are charts showing the relative sensitivity of the after-tax IRR and NPV to the gold price, capital cost, and operating cost.
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
Gold Price
Capital Cost Operating Cost
0%
75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125%
Percentage of Base CaseAfter-Tax IRR (%) Figure 1-3: After-Tax Sensitivity Analysis - IRR (KCA, 2025)
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
Gold Price
$0
Operating Costs
Capital Costs
-$100,000
75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125%
Percentage of Base Case
Arter-Tax NPV @ 5% ($,000)
Figure 1-4: After-Tax Sensitivity Analysis - NPV @5% (KCA, 2025)Conclusions
The work completed to date has demonstrated that resumption of operations at the Mercur site as a heap-leach-only operation is technically and economically viable. The Project is accessible year-round via Interstate 80 and State Routes 36 and 73, which are well-maintained roads from Salt Lake City, Utah. The Project also benefits from existing infrastructure from the previous operation including the site access road, the electrical power transmission and distribution lines, the site roads, and the administration building at the Main Mercur Site.
The Project considers open pit mining from multiple pits with heap leaching for recovery of gold from predominantly oxide material. The material will be crushed to 100% passing ½ inches, stockpiled, reclaimed and conveyor stacked onto a leach pad centrally located at the West Mercur site at an average rate of 20,000 t/d (18,144 T/d). Stacked ore will be leached using low-concentration sodium cyanide solution and the resulting pregnant leach solution will be processed in an ADR plant where gold will be adsorbed onto activated carbon, stripped, and recovered by electrowinning followed by treatment in a mercury retort and smelting to produce the final doré product.
Metallurgical test work completed indicates that the material is amenable to cyanide leaching for the recovery of gold with low to moderate reagent requirements. The overall gold recovery for the project is estimated at 75% and will produce an estimated 951,000 ounces of gold.
Opportunities
Key opportunities identified by the Study Authors include:
Low-risk infill drilling will increase drill-hole density in areas of wide-spaced drilling, which will potentially upgrade the classification of mineral resources. Infill drilling would also test
Risks
the current gold domain model, and confirmation would allow for the upgrade of Inferred material to Indicated or potentially Measured.
The best potential to expand resources at Main and South Mercur with step-out drilling is in local areas down-dip to the east, although pit expansion is more difficult due to increasing overburden in that direction.
Outside the existing modeled deposits, there are opportunities to discover new mineralization that could eventually add to current mineral resources. These include:
Mineralized feeder structures and deeper stratigraphic host units at Main Mercur.
The northeast extension of the favorable Mercur Series host units at Main Mercur.
New en echelon pods of mineralization at South Mercur.
Greenfields exploration in the West Mercur pediment.
Early-stage exploration at North Mercur.
Potential to identify mineralized material within the historical Main Mercur waste rock and ROM heap leach facilities, and historical South Mercur underground mine tailings piles to increase mineral resources and reduce the overall Project strip ratio.
Potential to increase the production rate with the discovery of additional mineral resources amenable to heap leach recovery.
Review and extraction of additional historical data to potentially improve the geological, geotechnical, metallurgical, and hydrogeological understanding of the site.
Risks identified by the Study Authors that could negatively impact the Project economics include:
The original datum, projections and precise base point for the local Mercur Mine and South Mercur grids are not known. Although transformations were developed by Barrick and Ensign verified collar locations using various indirect sources, there is uncertainty and risk associated with collar coordinates.
The precise location of the top-of-bedrock surface at Main Mercur is not known in backfilled areas within the pits.
At South Mercur there was a small amount of historical production from the Overland and Sunshine underground mines, and there is a risk that some material predicted by the resource model no longer exists.
Rock density measurements were not available for the Mercur project. A global tonnage factor was applied to all bedrock material based on historical mining, however, actual tonnages of material mined will be variable.
Samples used for the column leach tests were derived from a limited number of core holes that do not represent the full range of metallurgical behavior of the Mercur mineral resources.
Additional drilling, sampling and testing will be required to increase confidence in the heap leach recovery estimates to support a PFS and continued Project development.
The Mercur mine pits have known carbonaceous material that could impact overall heap performance if this material is not well understood and managed in any future operation. Steps have been taken to identify this material, and the PEA mine schedule was developed such that the material would be stockpiled and leached at the end of mine life.
Geotechnical studies are required to verify the pit slope assumptions for both Main and South Mercur.
The Mercur land position includes claim interests optioned from Barrick Resources (USA) Inc. and others and requires future lease fees and earn-in payments.
Recommendations
The Study Authors have recommended additional work to increase the level of detail, potentially improve the PEA economics, and de-risk certain aspects of the Project. These recommendations have been separated into core items that support moving the Project forward by completing a PFS, and discretionary items such as some exploration and Project permitting activities. A summary of the recommendations include:
Complete additional infill and step-out drilling in the Main and South Mercur Mineral Resource areas to test the gold domain model, potentially upgrade the classification of modeled material, expand the existing deposits, and collect samples for metallurgical and geotechnical testing.
Conduct exploration drilling, rock sampling, soil sampling, and geophysical surveys to explore for potential new discoveries from targets in Main, North, West and South Mercur that could extend the LOM.
Obtain spatially representative density data from drill core, pit wall samples, or other representative sources, and sufficiently distinguish the various lithologic, alteration and oxidation types.
Search existing historical collar coordinate information for transformations between local and State Plane systems.
Undertake additional heap leach metallurgical testing including column leach and compacted permeability tests to determine the optimum crush size, increase confidence in the recovery model for a range of rock types including potentially carbonaceous and sulfidic materials, and validate the reagent requirements.
Complete foundation geotechnical studies in the key infrastructure areas at West Mercur.
Initiate wildlife and cultural baseline studies to supplement existing data and compress the permitting schedule.
A PFS should be completed on the Project once supporting lab and field studies referenced above have been sufficiently advanced and the Mineral Resource estimate has been updated.
The total cost for completing the core work is estimated at $8.96 million with an additional $2.92 million for discretionary items.
Developments in respect of the Mercur Gold Project since the Mercur PEA
Key developments are as summarized below:
As of the date hereof, the Mercur Property includes interests in 502 unpatented lode claims, three unpatented millsite claims, 475 patented mining claims, 426 fee land tax parcels comprised of surveyed lots, and six Utah state metalliferous minerals leases that cover approximately 17,811 acres (7,208 hectares) of surface and/or mineral rights. The holding costs for the Mercur Property are estimated to be $270,000 for 2025.
Completed soil sampling program of approximately 1,000 samples over an area of about
5.7 square kilometers to establish a robust base of geochemical data to help guide resource conversion and expansion drilling north and west of the historically mined Main Mercur area.
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. and KTW Environmental Consultants LLC engaged to evaluate the existing environmental baseline information, identify supplemental baseline data requirements and develop baseline work plans.
Kappes, Cassiday & Associates engaged to oversee metallurgical sample collection, design metallurgical composites in support of future metallurgical testing, and coordinate with our permitting team to develop a project description and footprint to optimize project permitting timelines and project economics.
Subterra LLC engaged to support drilling-related geotechnical data collection and to develop PFS-level open-pit geotechnical models.
RESPEC Company LLC retained to refine and update 3D models for mineral resource estimating purposes in support of a PFS.
The 2025 drilling program includes 3,000 meters of PQ core drilling to support future metallurgical and geotechnical testing and 10,000 meters of RC drilling to upgrade and potentially expand on Mercur's Mineral Resources (see July 9, 2025, press release for details).
Revival Gold has completed over 100 drill holes and about 11,000 meters of the planned 13,000-meter drilling program. Assay results from thirty-seven drill holes have been released to-date, including an intersection of 1.4 g/T gold over 44.2 meters width in RM25-
117. Weighted average intercept grade of 0.73 g/T gold and ratio of cyanide soluble to fire assay gold grade of 83%. Average intercept depths are within 100 meters of surface, highlighting the shallow nature of the Mercur gold deposit. The results continue confirmation of gold occurrence, grade and leachability with Mercur PEA estimates (see November 17, 2025, press release for detailed results).
Attachments
- Original document
- Permalink
Disclaimer
Revival Gold Inc. published this content on December 09, 2025, and is solely responsible for the information contained herein. Distributed via Public Technologies (PUBT), unedited and unaltered, on December 09, 2025 at 18:51 UTC.
