Exhibit 99.72

DATE AND SIGNATURE PAGE

The effective date of this technical report is March 18, 2026. The issue date of this technical report is March 31, 2026. See Appendix A, Technical Report Contributors and Professional Qualifications, for certificates of qualified persons. These certificates are considered the date and signature page of this technical report in accordance with Form 43-101F1.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

ii

JOHNSON CAMP MINE

FORM 43-101F1 TECHNICAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

iii

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

iv

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

v

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

vi

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

vii

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

viii

LIST OF FIGURES AND ILLUSTRATIONS

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

ix

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

x

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

xi

LIST OF TABLES

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

xii

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

xiv

M3 Engineering & Technology Corporation (M3) was commissioned by Gunnison Copper Corp. (GCC) to prepare a technical report in accordance with the Canadian National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) standards for reporting mineral properties, for the Johnson Camp Mine Restart Heap Leach Project (the “JCM Project” or the “Project”) in Cochise County, Arizona, USA. In 2025, GCC restarted mining, heap leaching and processing by solvent extraction-electrowinning (SX-EW) with the support of Nuton LLC (“Nuton”), a Rio Tinto venture. Nuton arranged to fund an industrial-scale demonstration of its bio-heap leaching technology on primary sulfides, referred to as the Nuton Demonstration. Nuton has a portfolio of proprietary nature-based leaching technologies and capabilities that offer the potential to economically unlock copper through bio-heap leaching, including from primary sulfide resources.

The JCM plant was upgraded in 2019 and 2020 with the intention of treating pregnant leach solution (PLS) from the Gunnison In-Situ Recovery (ISR) Project located south of JCM to effect copper recovery by SX-EW, producing salable copper cathodes. For the Johnson Camp Restart, a new leach pad, Pad 5, was constructed in 2024-25.

The Nuton Demonstration is expected to include 3 years of mining and 5 years of leaching. Simultaneously, Run-of-Mine (ROM) material will be mined, but not treated with Nuton™ technologies, and leached on a separate portion of the leach pad. PLS solutions from both sections of Pad 5 will be analyzed for flow and copper concentration before being comingled and processed at the existing JCM SX-EW facility.

The Johnson Camp Mine is located about 65 miles east of Tucson, Arizona, on the southeastern flank of the Little Dragoon Mountains in the Cochise Mining District. The property is within the copper porphyry belt of Arizona. The Johnson Camp Mine contains two open pit mines, the Burro pit and the Copper Chief pit, that contain copper oxide, transition, and sulfide mineralization with associated molybdenum (not recovered by heap leaching), in potentially economic concentrations. Mining by a former owner, Nord Resources Corporation (Nord), ceased in 2012.

The JCM Restart mine plan includes mining of oxide, transition, and sulfide materials from the Burro Pit for 3 years and heap leaching for an additional 2 years to produce copper cathode at a capacity of up to a nameplate capacity of 25 million pounds per annum (mppa). Heap leaching of primary sulfide copper using Nuton’s proprietary technology is proposed for a portion of the leach material described in this technical report.

To restart the Johnson Camp Mine, construction of a new heap leach pad, Pad 5, which was fully permitted, was completed in 2025. ROM materials commenced stacking in August 2025 and the Nuton processed materials began stacking in December 2025. Leach pad construction is complete and irrigation started in less than one year. All upgrades for pumping, piping, and electrical upgrades have been completed.

GCC is contract mining the Burro Pit for all mining-related activities and crushing and agglomerating, and placement of material on the leach pad. GCC is using JCM permanent staff for heap leach management, agglomeration, placement of material on the leach pad, SX-EW operation, and general site management.

GCC contracted RESPEC, Independent Mining Consultants, Call & Nicholas, Clear Creek Associates, and M3 Engineering to prepare this technical report. All consultants have abundant experience with the JCM property and the capability to support the Project.

The costs are based on 4th quarter 2025 U.S. dollars.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

1

The key results of this study are as follows.

The Project is located in Cochise County, Arizona, approximately 65 miles east of Tucson in the historic Johnson Camp mining district. Figure 1-1 is a general location map and property location near the I-10 freeway.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

2

Source: GCC, 2026

Figure 1-1: Location of the JCM Property – January 2026

The Project is held by GCC through its wholly owned subsidiaries Excelsior Mining Arizona, Inc. (GCAZ) and Excelsior Mining Holdings, Inc. (GCH). Acquisition of the Nord Resources Corporation assets took place through a court-appointed receiver in December 2015.

On July 31, 2023, GCC announced that it had entered into an option agreement (Nuton Option Agreement) with Nuton to further evaluate the use of its Nuton™ copper heap leaching technologies (Nuton™ technologies) at Johnson Camp.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

3

Under the Nuton Option Agreement, GCC remains the operator and Nuton funds GCC’s costs associated with a three-stage work program at Johnson Camp.

The Nuton Option Agreement required that if Nuton proceeded to Stage 2, it would make a US$5 million payment to GCC for the use of existing infrastructure at the Johnson Camp mine for the Stage 2 work program. Nuton would also be responsible for funding all of GCC’s costs associated with Stage 2. On May 15, 2024, GCC announced that Nuton had elected to proceed to Stage 2 of the existing Nuton Option Agreement.

After the completion of Stage 2, Nuton has the right to exercise the option to joint venture and form a joint venture with GCC for Johnson Camp per mutually agreeable terms whereby Nuton would hold an initial 49% and GCC an initial 51%. The purpose of the Joint Venture is to continue the development of the Johnson Camp Mine using Nuton™ technologies. Should Nuton not exercise the option to form a joint venture, Nuton and GCC will discuss in good faith Gunnison’s continued use of the Nuton™ technologies at the Johnson Camp Mine subject to certain licensing terms and conditions to be agreed.

The Project is located in a sparsely populated, flat to slightly undulating ranching and mining area about 65 road miles east of Tucson, Arizona. The Tucson metropolitan area is a major population center (approximately 1,000,000 persons) with a major airport and transportation hub and well-developed infrastructure and services that support the surrounding copper mining and processing industry. The nearby towns of Benson and Wilcox, along with Tucson, can supply sufficient skilled labor for the Project.

Access to the Project is via the Interstate (I-10) freeway from Tucson and Benson to the west or Willcox to the east. The Johnson Camp Mine can be accessed from the Johnson Road exit along 1.5 miles of improved dirt roads north of I-10.

The elevation on the property ranges from 4,500 to 5,500 feet above mean sea level in the eastern Basin and Range physiographic province of southeastern Arizona. The climate varies with elevation, but in general the summers are hot and dry, and winters are mild.

Vegetation on the property is typical of the upper Sonoran Desert and includes bunch grasses, yucca, mesquite, and cacti.

Modern mining and leaching operations at the Johnson Camp Mine began in the 1970s by Cyprus Minerals. Successor owners and operators include Arimetco, who mined JCM in the 1980s-early 90s, North Star, Summo Minerals, and Nord Resources Corporation (Nord) who commenced mining in 2009 until 2012. Nord mined fresh material until mid-2010 and maintained leaching operations until late 2015, when the property was purchased by GCC.

The Johnson Camp Mine is located within the Mexican Highland region of the Basin and Range province, which is characterized by fault-bounded mountain ranges, with large intrusions forming the cores of the ranges. The Project lies on the eastern edge of the Little Dragoon Mountains within the Cochise mining district. The Little Dragoon Mountains are an isolated, fault bounded horst block comprised of rocks spanning from 1.4 billion years ago (Ga) Pinal Group schists to Holocene sediments. The southern portion of the Little Dragoon Mountains consists predominately of the Texas Canyon Quartz Monzonite of Tertiary age, whereas the Pinal Group schists and a sequence of Paleozoic sedimentary units dominate the northern half of the range. At Johnson Camp, the important Paleozoic host is the Cambrian Abrigo Formation. The Texas Canyon Quartz Monzonite is porphyritic intrusion that crops out to the southwest of the Burro Pit at the Johnson Camp Mine.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

4

Several deformations have occurred in the area with the most recent being the latest Cretaceous-Paleocene Laramide Orogeny compression, followed by Miocene and younger Basin and Range extension that has modified the topography to its current appearance.

The stratigraphy of the Burro pit and Copper Chief pit includes, from lowest to highest, Pioneer shale, diabase sill, Bolsa quartzite, three members of the Abrigo formation, and the Martin dolomite. Most mineralization is hosted in the lower and middle members of the Abrigo formation.

Moderate to intense calc-silicate alteration including garnet, epidote, and diopside are common in various assemblages, most intense calc-silicate alteration in the Lower and Middle Abrigo formations. Pervasive quartz veining occurs in both the Abrigo Formation and underlying Bolsa Quartzite throughout the Johnson Camp Mine area. Quartz vein orientations are typically sub-parallel to the stratigraphic units.

Primary copper mineralization at the Johnson Camp Mine is dominantly found along bedding planes or in veins and replacements as chalcopyrite along with quartz and pyrite, closely associated with skarn and calc-silicate alteration in the rock. The host formations are generally within the Bolsa Quartzite, Diabase Units, Lower and Middle Abrigo Formations. Oxidized mineralization consists of chrysocolla, malachite, copper limonite, and manganiferous wad; decreases with depth; but penetrates faults and stratigraphic contacts. Supergene chalcocite and occasional native copper occur generally below the oxidized zone. Below the supergene zone, the mineralization transitions to primary sulfides with local zones of supergene mineralization.

The Johnson Camp Mine copper deposit is a type of copper skarn. The copper skarn at Johnson Camp and collectively in the Cochise mining district is presumably related to the Texas Canyon Quartz Monzonite. Copper skarns generally form in calcareous shales, dolomites, and limestones peripheral or adjacent to the margins of diorite to granite intrusions that range from dikes and sills to large stocks or phases of batholithic intrusions, and frequently are associated with mineralized intrusions. Copper mineralization forms along structurally complex and fractured rocks and convert the calcareous shales and limestones to andradite-rich garnet assemblages near the intrusive body, and to pyroxene and wollastonite rich assemblages at areas more distal to the intrusive that are subject to retrograde alteration with mineral hydrated silicate assemblages that overprint earlier garnet and pyroxene.

Mineralization at Johnson Camp occurs approximately 500 ft northeast of known occurrences of the Texas Canyon Quartz Monzonite intrusion as proximal skarn related to a porphyry copper system. This assumption is supported by the high abundance of garnet-epidote alteration in the mineralized zones, and the characterization of the deposits in numerous historical publications.

Open pit mining commenced in 1975 by Cyprus and replaced the underground mining operations following the completion of an exploratory drilling program that defined the reserve of the Burro deposit. Cyprus and Arimetco collectively drilled 254 holes within both the Burro and Copper Chief pits. In 1999, Nord focused drilling exploration efforts on prospective targets outside of the pits that added no copper mineralization could be classified as reserves. GCC completed an exploration drilling program in 2022, and a metallurgical drill program in 2023 and 2024, aimed to define sulfide zones and collect samples of sulfide material for column tests.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

5

The Johnson Camp Mine database contains 390 drill holes total 135,600 feet of drilling. Several drilling campaigns and operators span the contents of the database. Based on RESPEC’s current knowledge, historical operators of the campaigns include Cyprus Mining (187 drill holes), Arimetco (83 drill holes), Nord (31 drill holes), Sumitomo (12 drill holes), and 16 drill holes were completed by an operator unknown to RESPEC. GCC drilled 77 holes. Drilling is concentrated in and immediately around the historically producing open pits.

Table 1-1 is a breakdown of the drilling and operators in the Johnson Camp Mine area.

Table 1-1: Summary of Johnson Camp Drilling

The drilling sampling procedures provided samples that are representative and of sufficient quality for use in the resource estimations discussed in Section 14. The QP is unaware of any sampling or recovery factors that materially impact the mineral resources discussed in Section 14.

There is a general lack of down-hole deviation survey data for the historical holes in the Johnson Camp Mine area. The paucity of such data is not unusual for drilling done prior to the 1990s, the lack of deviation data contributes a level of uncertainty as to the exact locations of drill samples at depth. However, these uncertainties are mitigated to a significant extent by the vertical orientation of nearly all drill holes, and the open-pit nature of any potential future mining operation that is based in part on data derived from the historical holes.

All of the historical drilling, sample preparation and analysis of the samples presented in this technical report was under the control of the previous property owners. GCC drilled seventy-seven holes between 2022 and 2024 and conducted core-duplicate sampling in 2016 and 2017.

The laboratory sample preparation and analysis procedures used by the previous owners of the deposits are unknown; however, major commercial laboratories using best practices at the time completed the majority of analyses. Additionally, most of the historical data were generated by well-known mining companies.

The data, information, samples, and core from the deposits have been under the control and security of AzTech Minerals since November 2006 and then GCC since October 2010. The original Information and samples are stored at GCC’s core storage facility in Casa Grande, with numerous copies held by GCC at its Phoenix, Arizona office.

The certification status of some of the historical analytical laboratories is not known. Southwestern Assayers and Chemists is the predecessor to Skyline. Mr. Bickel believes the historical labs were independent commercial laboratories that were widely recognized and used by the mining industry at that time.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

6

Documentation of the methods and procedures used for historical sample preparation, analyses, and sample security, as well as for quality assurance/quality control procedures and results, is incomplete and in many cases not available. Despite this, some of the historical assay certificates have been preserved and GCC was able to reasonably duplicate the original results (described in 12.2.4). The QP is satisfied that the historical analytical data are adequate to support the current resources, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations summarized in this technical report.

GCC’s sample preparation and analyses were performed at a well-known certified laboratory, and the sample security and QA/QC procedures are adequate to support the current resources, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations summarized in this technical report.

Data verification, the process of confirming that data has been generated with proper procedures, has been accurately transcribed from the original source and is suitable to be used, has been performed by Mr. Bickel through reviews of original data and certificates, drill core, a site visit, and audits and analyses of GCC’s drill-hole database. As a part of the verification of historical assays, RESPEC also analyzed core-duplicate data generated by GCC in 2016 and 2017 and compared the results to historical assays. The results are discussed in Section 12. There were no limitations on, or failure to conduct, the data verification for this technical report other than those discussed in this technical report. Mr. Bickel has verified that the Project data are adequate as used in this technical report, most significantly to support the estimation and classification of the mineral resources reported herein.

Metallurgical testwork has been conducted in numerous campaigns by previous operators and owners including Superior Oil, Quintana Minerals, Phelps Dodge, Magma Copper, Arimetco, and Nord Resources. Testwork included many rounds of bottle roll and column testing. Early test programs indicated that total sulfuric acid consumption (before the electrowinning credit) will be approximately 9 lb H₂SO₄/lb of copper dissolved, that average PLS grade will be as high as 1.5 gpl Cu, and that about 65% of the total copper will dissolve, while as much as 95% of the ASCu could dissolve after sufficient contact time. This prior test work did not include augmented sulfide and transitional mineral leaching.

Nord Resources conducted eight column tests in 2011 on crushed and agglomerated material and 35 column tests in 2012 on crushed material minus 1” and minus 6”. Of these columns, 23 provided useful results to determine copper recovery and acid consumption. The column testing programs are described in Section 13.2.1. The results of some of the column tests produced ambiguous results regarding acid consumption (higher with a 6” crush than a 1” crush).

Lacking recent laboratory testing and comparison of results with current heap performance, a precise estimation of near-term operating results requires further test work. However, for the purpose of this study it is not unreasonable to expect up to 86% ASCu extraction, up to 76% CNCu extraction. Net acid consumptions in pounds per ton of mineralized ROM material are expected to be as follows: Upper Abrigo, 70; Middle Abrigo, 70; Lower Abrigo, 26, and Bolsa Quartzite, 22. For minus 1-inch crushed and agglomerated heap feed, the net acid consumption will be about 35% higher for each lithology.

GCC management, in collaboration with an industry-leading organization that is developing heap leaching applications to primary copper sulfide mineralization, have launched a sampling and metallurgical column testing program for material from the Burro pit, focusing on sulfide and mixed sulfide/transition/oxide mineralization. As the JCM pits deepen and non-ASCu copper minerals begin to overtake predominantly non-sulfide species, total copper extraction will decline, and the rate of extraction will diminish. Biologically-augmented heap leaching at elevated temperatures is designed to counteract this effect.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

7

The mineral resource estimation for the Johnson Camp Mine was completed for disclosure in accordance with NI 43-101 with an effective date of December 31, 2025. The Johnson Camp Mine mineral resources are classified in order of increasing geological and quantitative confidence into Inferred, Indicated, and Measured categories in accordance with the “CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves” (2014). All mineral resources in this estimate are classified as Inferred. A full description of the Johnson Camp mineral resource estimation methodology is presented in Section 14.

The Johnson Camp Mine copper resources were modeled and estimated using information provided by GCC. The information is derived from historical core holes drilled by Cyprus Mining, Arimetco, Summo USA Corp., and Nord Resources Corp. The drill hole database also includes analyses performed by GCC on the historical core.

Mineral domains were modeled by RESPEC to respect the lithologic and structural interpretations of the deposit. Following statistical evaluation of the drillhole data, mineral domains were modeled on cross sections for total copper (“TCu”). Low-, mid-, and high-grade domains were modeled for total copper and were numbered 100, 200, and 300, respectively. Grade domains were interpreted based on copper grade domains that ideally correspond to the underlying geology. The grade domain ranges are shown in Table 1-2 below.

Table 1-2: Grade Domain Ranges

Soluble copper ratios were estimated within the total copper domains and lithologic units and used to calculate a soluble copper grade. A full description of the soluble copper estimate is in Section 14.6.2.

Mineral resources were estimated for total copper (“TCu”), acid-soluble copper (“ASCu”), cyanide-soluble copper (“CNCu”), and sulfide copper (“CuS”). Once the final estimate was complete, a pit optimization using the inputs described in Section 14.10 were applied to the resource to evaluate if it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction. The contained resources within the cut-off grade defined by the pit optimization are given in Table 1-3.

Table 1-3: Johnson Camp Mineral Resources

(0.12% TCu cut-off)

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

8

Table 1-4 provides a breakdown of tons and grade of the JCM mineral resources by oxidation groups defined in modeling at a cut-off grade of 0.12% TCu that fit within the simulated economic pit shell.

Table 1-4: Johnson Camp Mineral Resources by Oxidation Group

(0.12% TCu cut-off)

Future drilling, exploration, and resource definition at Johnson Camp Mine should focus on increasing the understanding of the distribution of cyanide soluble copper mineralization. Infill drilling in key areas to increase drill density, and drill-testing of the unconstrained limits of the deposit, particularly down-dip from known mineralization, should be prioritized.

No mineral reserves are reported in this technical report. The author cautions that GCC has decided to commence construction and proceed to production at the Project. GCC did not base this production decision on any feasibility study of Mineral Reserves demonstrating economic and technical viability of the mines. As a result, there may be increased uncertainty and risks of achieving any level of recovery of minerals from the mine at the Project or the costs of such recovery. As the Project does not have established Mineral Reserves, GCC faces higher risks that anticipated rates of production and production costs will not be achieved, each of which risks could have a material adverse impact on GCC’s ability to continue to generate anticipated revenues and cash flows to fund operations from the Project and ultimately the profitability of the operation.

Mining of the Johnson Camp (JCM) deposit for the Nuton Demonstration is planned to be accomplished using conventional open pit hard rock mining methods. One and a half years remain of the 2.5-year mine plan that was developed to produce sulfide material for the Nuton Demonstration as quickly as possible. Mining of the deposit is expected to be accomplished with front end loaders and 70-100 ton haul trucks. Mining is planned on 20-ft bench heights. Mining will be performed by a contract miner.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

9

The Johnson Camp Mine has a fully working SX-EW plant with a nameplate capacity of 25 million lbs of cathode copper per year when fully operating. For the Nuton Demonstration, a new heap leach pad, designated Pad 5, was completed. The leach pad hosts both ROM and crushed and agglomerated material separated by a dividing berm. Most of the new equipment will be located on top of Pad 5 with leach material transported to the pad by haul truck. The crushed and agglomerated material will be stacked with conveyors into an engineered heap. This material will be aerated and irrigated by a series of blowers and perforated piping.

PLS flows from the crushed and ROM sections of the pad are measured and sampled independently before reporting to the existing PLS pond via a new pipeline. The PLS is being treated in the JCM SX-EW facility.

The Johnson Camp Mine is an existing and operating copper hydrometallurgical plant. The site includes two open pits, waste dumps, SX-EW plant facilities and mine infrastructure is in use now that mining operations in the Burro Pit have resumed. The new heap leach pad, Pad 5 was completed in 2025 for the placement of newly mined material (Figure 1-2).

Source: M3, 2024

Figure 1-2: Site Plan of the Johnson Camp Mine showing the location of new leach pad, Pad 5

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

10

Water is supplied by two wells on site that produce 266 gpm of process make-up water. Additional water will be available from hydraulic control wells from the Gunnison wellfield and from pit dewatering.

An existing 69 kV power line runs to the JCM substation where power is stepped down to 5 kV for distribution around the JCM mine site. Power distribution to the equipment located on Pad 5 will be fed with power stepped up to 13.8 kV from the main JCM substation. The average power consumption for the JCM project is estimated to be 7.1 MW with a demand load of 10.7 MW.

GCC and Nuton have agreed that Nuton will receive 100% of the revenue generated from the sale of copper cathode production from JCM until Nuton recoups its Stage 2 funding and then GCC will retain 100% of the revenue until a joint venture is formed or the Nuton Option Agreement is terminated. Nuton also has the right to market 100% of the copper cathode production from JCM until Nuton recoups its Stage 2 funding and will enter into off-take agreements for such purpose.

Please refer to Section 19 of this technical report for other relevant Market Studies and Contracts.

The Johnson Camp Mine (JCM) is an active open pit mine. A processing (SX-EW) plant and associated ponds located at JCM are used to process pregnant leach solutions (PLS) from JCM. JCM has resumed mining of the open pit and will resume the heap leaching process using the mineralized material that will be placed on a new heap leach pad. Existing permits have been modified to address resumption of mining at JCM. Section 20 of this technical report describes the environmental permits that have been obtained for JCM.

The JCM Mineral Resource Estimate includes inferred resources. Inferred Mineral Resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. In addition, NI 43-101 prohibits the disclosure of the results of an economic analysis that includes or is based on Inferred Mineral Resources. As a result, the author has determined that it is not permitted to provide forecasts of future capital or operating costs. As a result, the disclosure in this section is limited to a description of the capital and operating costs, and disclosure of historical amounts.

The total capital cost requirements to restart the JCM heap leach operation included mining cost (pre-stripping and waste dump relocation), the development of Leach Pad 5, new piping and pumping for solutions, upgrades to the electrical power distribution infrastructure, upgrades to some SX-EW infrastructure and minor Owners costs.

The Johnson Camp Mine SX-EW plant was upgraded in 2019 and 2020 as part of the Stage 1 execution of the Gunnison ISR Copper Project. Upgrades included the replacement of the Raffinate pumps, the addition of three sulfuric acid tanks, and the addition of a third electrolyte filter in the Tank Farm. There were additional modifications and upgrades to some components of the JCM SX-EW plant as part of the JCM restart operation such as a new LNG storage tank and vaporizer, new organic tank, upgrades to Tankhouse 2 and SX second train, in addition to new anodes and cathodes.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

11

The summary categories of expenditures are listed in Table 1-5 below.

Table 1-5: Capital Costs Incurred

The above table excludes mining costs of $47,794 incurred in 2025 that were accounted for as: $19,057 to ore stockpile inventory and $28,737 to capitalized deferred stripping costs.

The plant operating cost includes labor, crushing/agglomerating, stacking, heap leach operation, and SX-EW costs. The plant operating costs exclude some of the direct costs specific to the Nuton Demonstration process and reagents, which are proprietary. Note that operating costs on a per-pound of copper basis are high due to the ramp up of copper production during the period.

Table 1-6: Operating Costs

Reclamation and closure costs for the JCM Project include reclamation of the leach pads, stockpiles, and waste dumps, closure of the JCM plant site and ponds, the JCM heaps and stockpiles and demolition of the ancillary buildings. Reclamation activities will be spread over three years sometime after the cessation of operations. The Closure Bond for these activities is

$7,281,757.

There are no current estimates of Mineral Reserves on the Project. While the Project has a current Mineral Resource Estimate, the future production forecast is not based on that Mineral Resource Estimate. GCC made decisions to commence construction and enter production at the Project without having completed final feasibility studies.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

12

Accordingly, GCC did not base its construction and production decisions on any feasibility studies of Mineral Reserves demonstrating economic and technical viability of the Project, with positive cash flow. As a result, there is increased uncertainty and risks of achieving any level of recovery of minerals from the Project or the costs of such recovery. As the Project does not have established Mineral Reserves, GCC faces higher risks that the anticipated rates of production and production costs, such as those provided in this technical report, will not be achieved. These risks could have a material adverse impact on GCC’s ability to continue to generate anticipated revenues and cash flows to fund operations from and ultimately achieve or maintain profitable operations at the Project.

The Mineral Resource Estimate on the Project includes inferred resources. Inferred Mineral Resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. In addition, NI 43-101 prohibits the disclosure of the results of an economic analysis that includes or is based on inferred Mineral Resources. As a result, the author has determined that it is not permitted to provide an economic analysis of the Project.

There are no relevant adjacent properties that are not controlled by GCC.

The JCM SX-EW plant was upgraded in 2019 and 2020, and JCM ponds are fully operational.

The full capital cost for restarting the JCM heap leaching operation includes mining pre-production, first fills/Owners costs, leach pad construction, new leach pad stackers and haul road construction. This project is an opportunity to exploit existing mineral resources with considerable upside if long-term copper prices and sulfuric acid prices remain favorable.

A sampling and metallurgical testing program was launched to evaluate the leaching strategy proposed in this study. The sampling and testwork program will assess the metallurgical zonation within the pits to estimate copper recoveries more accurately from each zone including testing the solubility of sulfide species. This program will help determine the long-term outlook for open pit mining and heap leaching at JCM.

The current Nuton Demonstration mine plan includes contract crushing and agglomeration with conveying and stacking the agglomerated material on the leach pad. In the future, GCC will look at replacing the contract crushing with its own equipment. GCC should refine the cost to reactivate the crushing-agglomerating plant, design the conveyor system, and the stacking plan for the life of the mine.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

13

The Johnson Camp Mine (JCM) is an open pit, heap leach operation that commenced mining by Cyprus Minerals in the early 1970s. The operation initially focused on the Burro Pit and later expanded to a second pit, Copper Chief. Under its third owner, Nord Resources, a two-stage crushing-agglomerating circuit was added. The existing SX-EW plant was expanded to a maximum production capacity of 25 million pounds of cathode copper per year. The solution ponds included a PLS pond, an Intermediate Pond (ILS) and a raffinate pond.

Infrastructure includes administrative offices, a small lab, a truck shop/maintenance shop, and a 69 kV power connection to Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative’s electrical grid. Water supply was from wells and an old mine adit on the property. Until 2025, JCM open pits had not been operated since 2012 when Nord’s contract miner ceased operations. Three adjacent heap leach pads, known as Pad 123 continued with residual leaching through 2017 and drain down from the heaps continues today. Pad 123 are now in closure with occasional drain down after rainstorms.

In 2006, Nord commissioned a series of studies to build a new heap leach pad called Pad 5. A feasibility study was prepared by Bikerman Engineering and Technology Associates (BETA, 2007) that was followed by a detailed engineering design package for Pad 5 by Glasgow Engineering of Littleton, Colorado (2010), and an updated feasibility study to re-open JCM by Curtis Associates (2011). The plan for Pad 5 included building the new leach pad so that one side of it was to be used for higher grade crushed agglomerated material and the other side for lower grade run-of-mine (ROM) heap leach material. Pad 5 was never constructed due to Nord’s poor financial condition.

In 2015, GCC (formerly named Excelsior Mining Corp.) purchased the property to augment its land position and capacity for its nearby Gunnison In-Situ Recovery (ISR) project across Interstate 10. GCC refurbished the existing JCM SX-EW plant and ponds for the first stage development of the Gunnison ISR operation in 2020. At that time, GCC made numerous upgrades to the JCM SX-EW plant and ponds to accommodate the initial PLS flows from the Gunnison in-situ wellfield. Those improvements included the addition of three 1000-ton sulfuric acid storage tanks at JCM, the installation of a third electrolyte filter in the JCM Tank Farm, the addition of a crud centrifuge and various electrical upgrades to the SX-EW transformers and EW transformer-rectifiers.

In 2023, GCC signed the Nuton Option Agreement with Nuton, a Rio Tinto venture. Together, they have been conducting a commercial scale demonstration, fully funded by Nuton, of Nuton’s enhanced sulfide heap leaching technology on a portion of Pad 5. The Nuton Demonstration which will run for five years of leaching will include aeration and bacterial leaching to oxidize sulfides to increase the leach kinetics and improve leach recoveries of sulfide copper resources.

During 2025, a contract miner commenced open pit mining at the Burro pit. Pad 5 is constructed for initial material loading for Stage 2 ROM and Nuton leaching. Heap leaching of ROM commenced in August 2025 and the Nuton Demonstration leaching commenced in December 2025. New power infrastructure and process piping has been installed to Pad 5 facilities as part of the new development. Material that was placed on Pad 5 included Run-of-Mine (ROM) oxide and transition material from the Burro Pit, followed by crushed and agglomerated of sulfide material under NutonTM conditions.

GCC retained several consultants, including M3, to provide an update of work on the JCM Restart Project and to prepare technical information to support this technical report in accordance with the Canadian NI 43-101 reporting standards. Mr. John Woodson, P.E., of M3 is the principal author and Qualified Person responsible for the preparation of this technical report, as well as for the process plant infrastructure, development of the capital and operating costs and economic analysis. Mr. Woodson has not visited the JCM property. As the other Qualified Persons have visited the site, including many colleagues from M3, Mr. Woodson has determined that a formal site visit to the JCM property was not required as he received a report on the site visits completed by other Qualified Persons.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

14

Other contributing authors and Qualified Persons responsible for preparing sections of this technical report include Abyl Sydykov of M3 for recovery methods; Scott Freestone of M3 for infrastructure, Dr. Terence McNulty, metallurgical consultant; Douglas Bartlett of Clear Creek Associates (CCA) for hydrology and environmental/social/permitting topics; Jacob W. Richey of Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (IMC) for mining methods and mine costs; Thomas M. Ryan of Call & Nicholas, Inc. (CNI) for pit slope angles; and Jeffrey Bickel of RESPEC Company LLC (RESPEC) for geology, drilling and the estimation of JCM resources.

Mr. Freestone, P.E., served as Engineering Manager during the JCM Restart Project during 2025 and 2026. He visited the site on January 27, 2025, to review the site layout, engineering plans and construction progress. He has worked extensively on copper and other mining projects at M3 for 21 years.

R. Douglas Bartlett, CPG, of Clear Creek Associates (CCA), is responsible for the preparation of Section 16.9 - Mining Methods and Section 20– Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Social Impact. Mr. Bartlett visited the site May 15, 2019.

Dr. Terence P. McNulty, P.E., is responsible for reviewing the historical metallurgical testing programs for the Johnson Camp heap leach evaluation. Dr. McNulty is responsible for the preparation of Section 13 – Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing. Dr. McNulty visited the Johnson Camp Site in 1990s. Dr. McNulty has worked extensively on copper hydrometallurgical projects in the US and elsewhere.

This technical report covers the current status of the Johnson Camp Mine as it has restarted production.

Site visits and areas of responsibility are summarized in Table 2-1 for the Qualified Persons.

Table 2-1: Dates of Site Visits and Areas of Responsibility

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

15

This technical report is in English units. Tons are short tons and ktons mean 1,000 short tons. Copper grades are in percentage by weight. All tonnages reported in this document are in dry tons. Lengths are in feet (except where noted) and currency is in U.S. dollars (except if noted otherwise).

Table 2-2: Units, Terms and Abbreviations

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

16

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

17

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

18

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

19

The authors, as Qualified Persons under NI 43-101, have examined the historical and current data for the Johnson Camp Mine provided by GCC, and have relied upon the basic data to support the statements and opinions presented in this technical report. In the opinion of the authors, the Johnson Camp Mine historical data, in conjunction with borehole assays conducted by GCC, are present in sufficient detail to prepare this technical report and are generally correlative, credible, and verifiable. The Project data are a reasonable representation of the Johnson Camp Mine. Any statements in this technical report related to deficiency of information are directed at information that, in opinion of the authors, is recommended by the authors to be acquired.

The authors relied on reports by John C. Lacy of the law firm, DeConcini, McDonald, Yetwin, & Lacy, for legal determination of lands on the Johnson Camp side of the property. GCC also obtained an ALTA Title Insurance Policy from First American Title Insurance Company for the patented mining claims and fee lands of the Johnson Camp property which was reviewed and is being relied on by the authors.

Clear Creek Associates (CCA) reviewed and updated the environmental report for the Johnson Camp Mine from the Phase I Site Assessment by Golder (2015) that documented the environmental condition of the Johnson Camp Mine. A new environmental section is provided in Section 20 for the Johnson Camp Mine heap leach operation. CCA has relied on information provided by GCC operations personnel and reports filed with agencies since the commencement of Stage 1 mining activities at the Gunnison Project in 2020 (Johnson Camp Mine).

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

20

The Property is held by GCC through its wholly owned subsidiaries Excelsior Mining Arizona, Inc. (GCAZ) and Excelsior Mining Holdings, Inc. (GCH). In December 2015, GCAZ purchased all assets of Nord Resources Corporation, as they relate to the JCM Property, through a court-appointed receiver.

The Property is located in Cochise County, Arizona, approximately 65 miles east of Tucson. Figure 4-1 is a general location map and property location near the I-10 freeway. The Project includes portions of Section 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 34, 35 and 36 T15S R22E, Sections 4,T16S R22E, and is centered at 32º 05’ 59” N latitude and 110º 04’ 05” W longitude. Total area of the Project is approximately 4,495 acres (1,820 Ha).

Figure 4-2 shows the claim status for the JCM Property as of January 2026. Table 4-1 contains a summary of the land packages that constitute the JCM Property. Following the table is brief descriptions of the claims, permits and land holdings. Appendix B contains a detailed list of all the mining claims and land packages.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

21

Source: GCC, 2026

Figure 4-1: Location of the JCM Property – January 2026

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

22

Source: GCC, 2026

Figure 4-2: Property Mineral Rights by Claim Type – January 2026

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

23

Table 4-1: Summary of Land Packages that Constitute the Johnson Camp Property

Ownership of the unpatented mining claims is in the name of the holder (locator), subject to the paramount title of the United States of America, under the administration of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”). Under the Mining Law of 1872, which governs the location of unpatented mining claims on federal lands, the locator has the right to explore, develop, and mine minerals on unpatented mining claims without payments of production royalties to the U.S. government, subject to the surface management regulation of the BLM. As of the effective date, annual claim-maintenance fees are the only federal payments related to unpatented mining claims, and GCC represents these fees have been paid in full to August 31, 2025. The current annual holding costs for JCM is estimated at $19,111.04, including the county recording fees.

GCC has the right to use the surface of the Project in the form of patented mining claims and fee land parcels. The federal unpatented claims grant surface access but do not provide for surface ownership. Unpatented mining claims give the owner the right to develop and exploit valuable minerals contained within the claim, so long as the claim is properly located and validly maintained. There are sufficient surface rights held by GCC to conduct mining operations at the JCM Property.

There are 53 patented mining claims held in the name of GCAZ totaling 759 acres (307 ha). A complete list of the claims is provided in Appendix B. The claims include all surface and mineral rights. The claims are located on the ground and have no expiration dates.

There are 83 unpatented mining claims held by GCC in the name of GCAZ and GCH totaling 1,293 acres (524 ha). A complete list of the claims is provided in Appendix B. The unpatented claims are for minerals only, with no surface ownership. The BLM requires that all unpatented claims use a rental year from September 1 through August 31; claims for which fees are not paid by August 31st are automatically forfeited. The claims otherwise have no expiration dates and under current mining law can be held indefinitely if properly maintained. The claims are located on the ground and the location descriptions are filed with the BLM.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

24

The JCM Property acquired by GCAZ includes Fee Simple Lands. There are four parcels of Fee Simple Lands all situated in Township 15S, Range 22E. Parcel 1 is situated on Section 26 and covers approximately 139 acres. Parcel 2 is situated on Section 26 and covers approximately 1 acre. Parcel 3 is situated on Sections 24 and 25 and covers approximately 53.44 acres. Parcel 4 is situated on Sections 23, 24, 25, and 26 and covers approximately 423.47 acres.

GCAZ has entered into an option agreement with certain landowners that provide GCAZ the right to acquire approximately 2,563.05 acres of Fee Simple Lands that are referred to as the “Smith Option”. The terms of the Smith Option agreement commenced in September 2022 and require an upfront fee of $40,000 and an annual fee of $30,000. GCAZ has a period of seven years to exercise the option at a price that starts at $3,500/acre in Year 1 and increases over the seven-year term at $500 per year to $6,500/acre in Year 7.

GCAZ has entered into an option agreement with certain landowners that provide GCAZ the right to acquire approximately 3898.14 acres of Fee Simple Lands that are referred to as the “Benson Option”. The terms of the Benson Option agreement commenced on November 12, 2024 and require an upfront fee of $1,000,000 and an annual fee of $250,000 in years two, three, four, five and six. GCAZ has a period of six years to exercise the option at a price that starts at $28,000,000 in Year 1 (with the $1 million credited against the purchase price) and increases over the six-year term at a rate of $2,000,000 per year (plus the $250,000 annual fee which is credited against the purchase price), to $37,000,000 in Year 6.

Triple Flag Royalty: Triple Flag USA Royalties Ltd. (“Triple Flag Royalties”) holds a 3.0% gross revenue royalty over the JCM Property. The gross revenue royalty is defined as royalty percentage times receipts, which is the sum of physical product receipts and deemed receipts. The Triple Flag Royalties royalty applies to the entirety of the JCM Property and production therefrom.

The JCM Property is also subject to a Metal Stream Agreement with Triple Flag International Ltd. (“Triple Flag”) that is applicable to all oxide minerals production from the parts of the Project located in the “Stream Area”. The Metal Stream Agreement is summarized in Table 4-2.

Table 4-2: Triple Flag Metal Stream Agreement for the JCM Property

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

25

RG Royalties, LLC holds a 2.5% net smelter returns (“NSR”) royalty interest in minerals produced and sold from the 15 patented claims. These 15 patented claims are also subject to the terms of a “Royalty Deed and Assignment of Royalty,” recorded with the Cochise County Recorder’s Office on June 19, 2009, at No. 2009-14847, and the “Grant of Production Payment” recorded with the Cochise County Recorder’s Office on June 10, 1999, at No. 1999-18419, as modified by a certain “Assignment of Production Payment” between Arimetco, Inc. and Styx Partners, L.P. (collectively, the “Production Payment Agreements”). The Production Payment Agreements provide for a non-participating payment of $0.02 per pound out of production during the calendar month in which copper produced from the 15 patented claims. The production payment is only payable when copper prices are in excess of $1.00 per pound and is capped at an aggregate of $1,000,000, of which

$480,836 has been paid and/or accrued as of December 31, 2025.

On July 31, 2023, GCC announced that it had entered into an option to joint venture agreement (Nuton Option Agreement) with Nuton to further evaluate the use of its Nuton™ copper heap leaching technologies (Nuton™ technologies) at Johnson Camp. Under the Nuton Option Agreement, GCC remains the operator and Nuton funds GCC’s direct and indirect costs associated with a two-stage work program at Johnson Camp with Nuton having discretion to exit after Stage 1 and at certain defined milestones during Stage 2. Nuton provided a US$3 million pre-payment to GCC for Stage 1 costs and a payment of US$2 million for an exclusive option to form a joint venture with GCC over the Johnson Camp Mine after the completion of Stage 2.

The Nuton Option Agreement required that if Nuton proceeded to Stage 2, it would make a US$5 million payment to GCC for the use of existing infrastructure at the Johnson Camp mine for the Stage 2 work program. Nuton is also responsible for funding all of GCC’s direct and indirect costs associated with Stage 2 subject to full recoupment from sales of copper generated at JCM during Stage 2. The full Stage 2 work program is anticipated to take up to five years but will proceed based on milestones related to engineering and mobilization, infrastructure and construction, mining, leaching, copper production and post-leach rinsing. The completion of all milestones would result in full scale commercial production over several years at Johnson Camp utilizing Nuton™ technologies. Revenue from operations will first be used to pay back Stage 2 funding to Nuton, which also includes Nuton’s direct and indirect Stage 2 costs, and will then be credited to GCC’s account until a joint venture is formed or the Nuton Option Agreement is terminated.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

26

On May 15, 2024, GCC announced that Nuton had elected to proceed to Stage 2 of the existing Nuton Option Agreement.

After the completion of Stage 2, Nuton will have the right to exercise the option and form a joint venture on Johnson Camp per mutually agreeable terms whereby Nuton will hold an initial 49% and GCC an initial 51%. The purpose of the joint venture is to continue the development of the Johnson Camp Mine using Nuton™ technologies. Should Nuton not exercise the option, Nuton and GCC will discuss in good faith Gunnison’s continued use of the Nuton™ technologies at the Johnson Camp Mine subject to negotiated licensing terms and conditions.

The JCM Property is subject to an annual property tax from Cochise County based on the full cash value of the deposit. The total property taxes for 2024 were $542,075.

JCM operates under an Aquifer Protection Permit (APP), Air Quality Permit (AQP), a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) site specific ID number. All of these permits are issued and administered by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The on-site septic system is grandfathered under the APP regulations and therefore does not require a permit. These permits have been amended as required to address the restart of open pit mining and construction of a new heap leach pad. JCM has a site wide Reclamation Plan approved by Arizona State Mine Inspector (ASMI).

Existing closure liabilities at the JCM are covered under the APP and the ASMI Reclamation Plan. These include closure of the existing ponds, the leach pad, and all other disturbed grounds. There are existing bonds in place to cover all closure obligations. The amended APP includes a compliance schedule item for updating closure costs and subsequent bonding of the leach pad closure in ten years from issuance of the amended APP.

There are no other known significant factors or risks that may affect access, title, or the right or ability to perform work on the property.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

27

The Johnson Camp Mine (JCM) is located in a sparsely populated, slightly undulating ranching and mining area about 65 road miles east of Tucson, Arizona. The Tucson metropolitan area is a major population center (approximately 1,000,000 persons) with a major airport and transportation hub including well developed infrastructure (highways and rail) and services that support the surrounding copper mining industry. The nearby towns of Benson and Wilcox, along with Tucson, can supply sufficient skilled labor for the Project.

Access to JCM is via the Interstate10 (I-10) freeway from Tucson and Benson in the west or Wilcox in the east. JCM can be accessed from the Johnson Road exit along 1.5 miles of improved dirt roads north of I-10.

JCM encompasses approximately 4,495 acres within Cochise County, Arizona and includes patented claims, unpatented mining claims, and Fee Simple private land. Unpatented mining claims give the Owner exclusive right to possess the ground (surface rights) covered by the claim, as well as the right to develop and exploit valuable minerals contained within the claim, so long as the claim is properly located and validly maintained.

The Project has existing, well-developed infrastructure sufficient for copper exploitation. JCM has an existing complete SX-EW plant, process ponds, 69 kV power line, fresh water supply wells, a complete road network, and an assortment of ancillary buildings that can be used for administration, maintenance, laboratory, warehousing, and safety.

The main Union Pacific Southern Pacific railway runs 6 miles south of JCM.

The existing 69 kV electrical power line enters the eastern border of the property and lands at the main JCM substation.

Freshwater supply will be provided from existing wells and mine adits located on or near the JCM Property. There are sufficient water resources on the Property to satisfy freshwater make-up for the SX, leach pad irrigation, losses from evaporation and transpiration from the leach pad and ponds, the SX circuit, EW tankhouse operations, and reagent mixing as well as potable water supply for human consumption.

The elevation on the property ranges from 4,500 to 5,500 feet above mean sea level in terrain of the eastern Basin and Range physiographic province of southeastern Arizona. The climate varies with elevation, but in general the summers are hot and dry, and winters are mild.

The area experiences two rain seasons in general, one during the winter months of December to March and a second summer season from July through mid-September. The summer rains are typical afternoon thunderstorms that can be locally heavy. Average annual rainfall for Dragoon is 13.2 inches and the average highs range from 58ºF in January to 94ºF in June. Occasional light snow falls at higher elevations in the winter months. Exploration programs and mining activities operate year-round in the region.

Vegetation on the property is typical of the upper Sonoran Desert and includes bunchgrasses, yucca, mesquite, and cacti (Figure 5-1). The original leach pad can be seen in the background of this figure.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

28

Figure 5-1: Typical Vegetation and Topography below the Johnson Camp Mine

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

29

The information summarized in this section has been extracted and modified to a significant extent from (Zimmerman et al., 2017), sources therein, unpublished company files, as well as other sources as cited. The author has reviewed this information and believe this information is suitable for inclusion in this technical report.

The Cochise district has seen considerable copper, zinc, silver, and tungsten mining beginning in the 1880s and extending to the present day. Prior to the 1880s, miners are said to have worked copper deposits cropping south of the JCM area. Between 1882 and 1981, the district produced 12 million tons of material containing 146 million pounds of copper, 94 million pounds of zinc, 1.3 million pounds of lead, 720 thousand ounces of silver, and minor quantities of gold (Keith et al., 1983). Much of the historical production came from small-scale underground copper-zinc mines located on what is now the Johnson Camp property controlled by GCC. The most significant of these producers were the Republic and Moore mines illustrated in Figure 6-1. From 1904-1940, material from these mines reportedly contained 4 to 4.5 percent copper and 0.5-0.75 ounces of silver per ton (Cooper et al., 1964). The zinc content for this period was not reported. After 1940, the material contained 1.5 to 3 percent copper, 5 to 10 percent zinc, and about 0.3 ounces of silver per ton. The Republic mine was the site of the historical concentrating plant in the district. Smaller underground mines in the area, such as the Peabody, reportedly yielded very high-grade mineralized material which averaged 7.5 percent copper, 4 ounces of silver per ton, and contained as much as 44 percent zinc (Cooper et al., 1964).

Copper-oxide mineralization has been mined at the Johnson Camp open-pit operation since 1975, most recently by Nord Resources Corporation from 2008 until 2010 Mining consisted of two open pits (Burro Pit and Copper Chief Pit), which are separated by roughly 2,000 feet along strike. The operation mined copper and processed the material via heap-leach and SX-EW. Previous operators include Cyprus Mines, Arimetco, and Nord Resources. This property is now controlled by GCC. Historically prior to GCC ownership, approximately 39 million tons of material and 187 million pounds of copper have been produced out of the Johnson Camp open pits.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

30

Source: GCC, December 2025

Figure 6-1: Historical Mines Near Johnson Camp with historical Property Outline

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

31

The information summarized in this section has been extracted and modified from various historical reports and records. The author has reviewed this information and believe this summary is materially accurate.

In the 1880s, a rail line was constructed approximately four miles south of what is now the JCM area and was the catalyst to the growth of the underground mining operations and processing of copper sulfide, copper oxide, silver, and zinc. By the 1900s, production surged, however, the surge was met with the decrease in copper prices, which eventually led to the forced closure of the Moore, Peabody, and Republic mine shown in Figure 6-1. The following summarizes the historical mining and exploratory operations by company that have taken place at the JCM area in ascending order.

Cyprus Mines Corporation (Cyprus) 1942 – 1986 With the abandonment and forced closure of the Republic mine in the early 1900’s, the 20-year vacancy resulted in flooding of the mine. In 1942, Cyprus reopened the mine and began mitigating the flooding and the construction of a mill. As the copper prices rose and fell, Cyprus converted the underground mining operations to an open pit mine with the discovery of the Burro deposit in 1975, that hosted an estimated 22-million-ton reserve. In 1986 operations ceased with the declining economic value of copper. Within that period, Cyprus mined over 100 million pounds of copper bearing material with 51 percent total copper (% TCu) (Curtis Associates, 2011).

Arimetco 1989-1998 With the purchase of the Johnson Camp property, Arimetco continued mining the Burro deposit (now known as the Burro Pit). Advancements during Arimetco’s ownership included expanding leach pads, construction of a crushing plant for better recovery, and open pit mining at the Copper Chief pit. Within the 10 years, Arimetco mined over 50 million pounds with 43% TCu. The property was eventually sold to Nord Resources Corporation (Curtis Associates, 2011).

Nord Resources Corporation (Nord) 1999 – 2015 Nord continued open pit mining at the Johnson Camp property until the fall of copper pricing occurred in 2003. Production ramped up in 2007 after Nord introduced better processing techniques via a new crushing and conveyor system, as well as expanding and upgrading the JCM. Again, production ceased due to economics, however, during the 11 years the Johnson Camp property was owned and operated by Nord, over 25 million tons were produced with an approximate 30% TCu recorded in the years of 2009 and 2010 (Curtis Associates, 2011).

Gunnison Copper Corporation (GCC) 2015-Present GCC purchased all assets of Nord Resources as they related to the Johnson Camp Mine, through a court appointed receiver, in December of 2015 (Zimmerman et. al, 2017). Prior to 2024, no production occurred at the Johnson Camp Mine has occurred since GCC purchased the property in 2015. Processing facilities have been upgraded.

A number of estimations of mineralized materials at the Johnson Camp Mine were carried out by historical operators, only a few of which are summarized herein.

The classification terminology is presented as described in the original references. It is not known if this terminology conforms to the meanings ascribed to the Measured, Indicated, and Inferred mineral resource classifications, or the Proven and Probable reserve classifications of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum’s “CIM Definition Standards - For Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines” (“CIM Standards”). The presentation of the historic mineral resources and mineral reserves does not imply that these are current or that there is a mineral reserve at Johnson Camp.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

32

In March 2000, the Winters Company prepared a Feasibility Study for Nord Copper Corporation (subsequently Nord Resources Corporation). The mineral resources were summarized in the report at various cut-off grades for both the Burro and Copper Chief pits. At a 0.2% total copper cut-off, the Burro Pit deposit was estimated to contain 67.2 million tons of material at a grade 0.397% total copper equating to 532.8 million pounds of contained copper. According to the report, 59% of the contained copper pounds were classified as measured, 29% of the contained copper pounds were classified as indicated, and 12% of the contained copper pounds were classified as inferred at the Burro Pit. At Copper Chief, the mineral resources reported at a 0.2% total copper cut-off were 68.9 million tons at a grade of 0.344% total copper equating to 474.1 million pounds of contained copper. The Copper Chief mineral resources were classified as follows: 35% of contained copper pounds were classified as measured, 18% of the contained copper pounds were classified as indicated, and 47% of the contained copper pounds were classified as inferred. The estimate was summarized from a block model containing 50-foot by 50-foot by 20-foot-high blocks. The block grades were estimated in two distinct methods, according to the report: a nearest neighbor estimation for any blocks pierced by drill holes and a kriged estimate for all other blocks. The kriging consisted of five separate runs constrained by rock type. The feasibility study reported a proven and probable reserve for both pits of 33.3 million tons at a total copper grade of 0.426%.

In October of 2005, Winters, Dorsey & Company, LLC prepared a Feasibility Study for Nord Resources Corporation. According to the report, the Feasibility Study used the same resource estimate as presented in the 2000 Feasibility Study. The study reported a proven and probable reserve for both pits of 35.1 million tons at a total copper grade of 0.393%.

Another feasibility study was prepared in September of 2007 by Bikerman Engineering & Technology Associates, Inc. (“BETA”) for Nord Resources Corporation. The report indicated that the resources were summarized from the study and estimation by the Winters Company in March of 2000. BETA used the mineral resource estimation to report proven and probable mineral reserve estimates based on total copper assays and recoveries for the Burro and Copper Chief deposits. From the historical data available, BETA concluded the reserve estimates to be conceptual in nature in that the reported reserves would reflect an over-estimation based on the use of total copper assays rather than acid soluble copper assays. The total of proven and probable reserves based on the methodology and approach of BETA was 73.4 million tons of material with a total copper grade of 0.335%. Also noted by [Bikerman et al., 2007] was historical estimates for the JCM Burro copper oxide deposit reported by Cyprus, as a 22-million-ton mineral reserve with a total copper grade of 0.85%. The mineral reserve was defined from a drilling program that led to open pit mining in 1975.

In 2010, Mincom, Inc generated a resource estimate for Nord Resources. According to the associated report, the new estimate was intended to address the problem of calculated acid soluble copper assays influencing previous estimates. It is unclear to the author if the estimate was ever released into the public domain. The existing internal technical report for the estimate provides several tabulations of resources with various estimation methods and sources of data.

In 2011, Curtis Associates updated the mineral reserves previously reported by BETA in 2007. The new approach for defining the mineral reserves was based on acid soluble copper instead of total copper. This method generated a proven and probable reserve of 111.3 million tons at a total copper grade of 0.29%. The report does not provide the acid soluble grade in the mineral reserve. The report does mention that the new reserve estimate contained 17% less recoverable acid soluble copper pounds than what was originally reported by BETA in 2007.

These historical estimates are relevant only for historical completeness and are not considered reliable. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves. GCC is not treating these historical estimates as current mineral resources or mineral reserves. All of these historical estimates are superseded by the mineral resource estimates presented in Section 14 of this technical report and are not to be relied upon; they are presented here only for ease of reference and historical completeness.

M3-PN210313.008 31 March 2026 Revision 0

33