Amended and Restated NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Mineral Resource Estimates Crawford Nickel-Cobalt Sulphide Project: Main Zone (Update) and East Zone (Initial) Deposits

1.

The independent Qualified Person for the Mineral Resource Estimate, as defined by NI 43-101, is Dr. Scott Jobin-Bevans (P.Geo., APGO #0183), of Caracle Creek International Consulting Inc. and Atticus Chile S.A.  The effective date of the Mineral Resource Estimate is December 11, 2020.

2.

These Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves as they do not have demonstrated economic viability. The quantity and grade of reported Inferred Resources in this Mineral Resource Estimate are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred Resources as Indicated or Measured, however it is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.

3.

A cut-off grade of 0.15% Ni was used for the low-grade domains (Main and East zones) and cut-off grades of 0.25% Ni (Main Zone) and 0.21% Ni (East Zone) were used for the high-grade domains. Cut-offs were determined on the basis of core assay geostatistics and drill core lithologies for the deposit, and by comparison to analogous deposit types.  Given the current stage of the Project, the mineral resources contained within the Main and East zone deposits have not been constrained by open pit optimization. The Company is planning to complete open pit optimization and present pit-constrained mineral resources as part of its Preliminary Economic Assessment (“PEA”) scheduled to be completed by the end of the first quarter, 2021.

4.

Geological and block models for the Mineral Resource Estimate used data from a total of 62 surface drill holes (51 in the Main Zone and 11 in the East Zone), completed by Spruce Ridge Resources (4 holes in 2018) and Noble Mineral Exploration and Canada Nickel Company (58 holes in 2019-2020). The drill database was validated prior to resource estimation and QA/QC checks were made using industry-standard control charts for blanks, core duplicates and commercial certified reference material inserted into assay batches by CNC and by comparison of umpire assays performed at a second laboratory.

5.

Estimates in Table 1 have been rounded to two significant figures.

6.

The mineral resource estimates have also been revised in the Amended Technical Report to include a conceptual pit envelope constraint that was developed using the optimization parameters included in the Amended Technical Report. Metal prices used (US$) were $7.75/lb nickel, $15/lb cobalt, $90/tonne magnetite $1,600/oz Pd, and $800/oz Pt. Different pit slopes were used for each layer (in degrees): 9.5 in clay, 21.8 in gravel and 45 in rock. Exchange rate utilized was US$/C$ of $0.75. Mining costs utilized different values for overburden (clay, gravel), selective mining and bulk mining ranging from C$1.75 to C$3.15/t mined. Processing costs and G&A for 100ktpd operation were C$6.18/t. Based on the range of grade and ratio of sulphur to nickel at Crawford, recovery could be expected to range from 10% – 60%. It has also been assumed that 30 – 40% of total iron would be recovered to a saleable magnetite concentrate.

7.

The Mineral Resource Estimate was prepared following the CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines (November 29, 2019).

MAIN ZONE:

8.

The geological model as applied to the Mineral Resource Estimate for the Main Zone comprises three mineralized domains hosted by variably serpentinized ultramafic rocks: a relatively high-grade core (largely dunite) and two northern and southern lower grade envelopes (combination of dunite and peridotite). Individual wireframes were created for each domain.

9.

The block model was prepared using Micromine 2020. A 12 m x 12 m x 9 m block model was created and samples were composited at 4.5 m intervals. Grade estimation from drill hole data was carried out for Ni, Co, Fe, S, Pd and Pt using the Ordinary Kriging interpolation method.

10.

Grade estimation was validated by comparison of input and output statistics (nearest neighbour and inverse distance cubed), swath plot analysis, and by visual inspection of the assay data, block model, and grade shells in cross-sections.

11.

Density estimation was carried out for the mineralized domains using the Ordinary Kriging interpolation method, on the basis of 3,270 specific gravity measurements collected during the core logging process, using the same block model parameters of the grade estimation. As a reference, the average estimated density value within the high-grade is 2.64 g/cm3 (t/m3), while low-grade domains of the resource model yielded averages of 2.63 g/cm3 (t/m3) in the north and 2.71 g/cm3 (t/m3) in the south.

EAST ZONE:

12.

The geological model as applied to the Mineral Resource Estimate for the East Zone comprises three mineralized domains hosted by variably serpentinized ultramafic rocks: a relatively high-grade core (largely dunite) and two northern and southern lower grade envelopes (largely peridotite). Individual wireframes were created for each domain.

13.

The block model was prepared using Micromine 2020. A 20 m x 20 m x 15 m block model was created and samples were composited at 3 m intervals. Grade estimation from drill hole data was carried out for Ni, Co, Fe and S using the Inverse Distance Squared method.

14.

Grade estimation was validated by comparison of input and output statistics (nearest neighbour), swath plot analysis, and by visual inspection of the assay data, block model, and grade shells in cross-sections.

15.

An average bulk density value for each mineralized domain was calculated on the basis of 244 specific gravity measurements collected during the core logging process. Blocks within the high-grade were assigned a single bulk density value of 2.62 g/cm3 (t/m3), while low-grade domains of the resource model were assigned single bulk density values of 2.66 g/cm3 (t/m3) in the north and 2.72 g/cm3 (t/m3) in the south.