HYCROFT MINING HOLDING CORP

Current report (Form 8-K) · Jun 2, 2026 · Acquisition or asset sale · Other material event · New debt obligation · +2 more

Ticker

HYMC

Documents

168

Primary topic

Acquisition or asset sale

Filed

Jun 2, 2026

Filing summary Workforce analysis SEC documents(168)Filing text Exhibits(4)

EX-99 · ex96-1.htm

Type

EX-99

File

ex96-1.htm

Document text
EX-99 · ex96-1.htm EX-99 5 ex96-1.htm EX-96.1 Exhibit 96.1 Hycroft Mine Project S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis Nevada, USA Effective Date: May 14, 2026 Report Date: May 29, 2026 Prepared for: Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation PO Box 3030 Winnemucca, Nevada, United States, 89446 Prepared by: Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. 595 S Meyer Ave, Tucson, Arizona, United States, 85701 Contributing Authors: Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. Independent Mining Consultants Inc. WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Date and Signature Page This technical report summary (“TRS”), entitled “Hycroft Mine Project, S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economics Analysis, Nevada, USA” is current as of May 14, 2026, and has been prepared by: Consulting Firm Responsible for the following sections Signature Date Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 2.1-2.4.1, 2.5-2.7, 10, 14-16, 18.1-18.2.3, 18.2.4- 18.2.7, 18.2.8.2-18.3.2, 18.3.4, 18.3.5, 19, 22.1, 22.5, 22.7-22.12, 22.13.1.3, 22.13.1.5-22.13.1.7, 22.13.2.2, 22.13.2.4, 22.13.2.5, 23.1, 23.4, 23.6, 24 and 25 “signed” May 29, 2026 Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation 1.3-1.7, 1.15,3-9, 12, 20, 22.2-22.4, 22.13.1.1, 22.13.1.2, 22.13.2.1, 23.1-23.3 and 24 “signed” May 29, 2026 Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. 1.9, 1.10, 1.15, 1.18, 2.4.2, 11, 13, 18.2.3, 18.2.8.1, 18.3.1, 18.3.3, 22.6, 22.13.1.4, 22.13.2.3, 23.1, 23.5 and 24 “signed” May 29, 2026 WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. 1.14, 17, 22.1, and 24 “signed” May 29, 2026 Hycroft Mine Project S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Terms of Reference 1 1.3 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, and Agreements 2 1.4 History 2 1.5 Geology and Mineralization 3 1.6 Exploration 4 1.7 Sampling 4 1.8 Metallurgical Testwork 4 1.9 Mineral Resource Estimate 5 1.10 Mining Methods 9 1.11 Processing and Recovery Methods 9 1.12 Infrastructure 10 1.12.4 Tailings Management Facility 11 1.12.5 Waste Rock Storage Facility (WRSF) 11 1.12.6 Power, Communications, and Fuel 11 1.12.7 Water Supply and Management 12 1.12.8 Hazard Considerations 12 1.13 Market Studies and Contracts 12 1.14 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations 12 1.14.1 Environmental Considerations 12 1.14.2 Permitting Considerations 13 1.14.3 Social Considerations 14 1.14.4 Closure and Reclamation Considerations 14 1.15 Capital and Operating Cost 14 1.15.1 Capital Cost Estimate 14 1.15.2 Operating Cost Estimate 15 1.16 Economic Analysis 15 1.16.1 Economic Summary 15 1.16.2 Sensitivity Analysis 18 1.17 Conclusions 19 1.18 Recommendations 19 Hycroft Mine Project Page i S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 2 Introduction 20 2.1 Introduction 20 2.2 Terms of Reference 20 2.3 Qualified Persons 21 2.4 Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection 21 2.4.1 Site inspection for Jonathan Cooper 21 2.4.2 Site inspection for John Marek 21 2.5 Effective Dates 21 2.6 Information Sources and References 21 2.6.1 General 21 2.6.2 Previous Technical Reports 22 2.7 Currency, Units, Abbreviations and Definitions 22 3 Property Description 26 3.1 Introduction 26 3.2 Property and Title in Jurisdiction 26 3.3 Project Ownership 27 3.4 Property Agreements 29 3.5 Surface Rights 32 3.6 Water Rights 32 3.7 Liabilities and Encumbrances 32 3.8 Environmental Considerations 32 3.9 Safety Considerations 33 3.10 Permitting Considerations 33 3.10.1 Hycroft Expansion Permitting and Timelines 35 3.10.2 Crofoot Heap Leach Facility Closure 37 3.11 Social License Considerations 37 3.12 Project Risks and Uncertainties 37 4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography 38 4.1 Physiography 38 4.2 Accessibility 38 4.3 Climate 38 4.4 Local Resources and Infrastructure 38 4.5 Seismicity 41 5 History 42 5.1 Regional History 42 5.2 Property Exploration History 42 5.3 Production 42 Hycroft Mine Project Page ii S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 6 Geological Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit 44 6.1 Geological Setting 44 6.1.1 Regional Geology 44 6.1.2 Local Geology 44 6.2 Mineralization and Alteration 45 6.2.1 Brimstone 46 6.2.2 Vortex 47 6.2.3 Bay 48 6.2.4 Central 50 6.2.5 Camel 50 6.3 Deposit Types 51 7 Exploration 52 7.1 Exploration 52 7.2 Geological Mapping 52 7.3 Geophysics 52 7.4 Soil Sampling 53 7.5 Rock-Chip Sampling 53 7.6 Drilling 53 7.6.1 Introduction 53 7.6.2 Exploration Drilling 54 7.7 Hydrogeology 58 7.8 Geotechnical 58 7.9 Exploration Targets 59 8 Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security 66 8.1 Introduction 66 8.2 Sample Preparation 66 8.3 Assay Methods 66 8.3.1 Sample Security 70 8.4 Sample Storage 70 8.5 Analytical Results 70 8.6 QP Comment 70 9 Data Verification 71 9.1 Verification Procedure 71 9.2 Certificate of Assay Checks 71 9.3 QA/QC 2005 – 2024 71 9.3.1 Standards 2005-2013 72 9.3.2 Blanks 2008 - 2014 74 Hycroft Mine Project Page iii S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 9.3.3 Check Assays 2011-2012 75 9.3.4 Standards 2021 – 2022 77 9.3.5 Blank Analysis Results 2021-2022 78 9.3.6 Duplicate Assays, 2021-2022 79 9.3.7 Standards 2023 – 2024 80 9.3.8 Blanks 2023-2024 81 9.3.9 Duplicate Assays 2023-2024 81 9.3.10 Check Assays 2023-2024 84 9.3.11 DDH vs. RC for Post 2000 Samples 85 9.3.12 Old vs. New Drilling 86 9.3.13 Downhole Surveys 87 9.4 QP Comment 87 10 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing 88 10.1 Introduction 88 10.2 Metallurgical Testwork 89 10.2.1 Summary of Metallurgical Testwork Programs 89 10.2.2 Mineralized Materials and Sampling 89 10.2.3 Hycroft Mineralization Domains 89 10.3 Legacy Testwork 91 10.3.1 Comminution Tests 91 10.3.2 Flotation 91 10.3.3 Direct Cyanidation 102 10.3.4 Concentrate Oxidation Tests 102 10.3.5 Solid-Liquid Separation Tests 109 10.3.6 Deleterious Elements 109 10.3.7 Metallurgical Parameters for Process Design Criteria and Financial Analysis 109 11 Mineral Resource Estimates 111 11.1 Summary 111 11.2 Model Location 111 11.3 Database 111 11.4 Basic Statistics 113 11.5 Geology 113 11.6 Lithology 113 11.7 Alteration 114 11.8 Structure 115 11.9 Domains 117 11.10 Assay Caps 120 Hycroft Mine Project Page iv S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 11.11 Bench Height Confirmation 121 11.12 Composites 122 11.13 Variography 125 11.14 Block Grade Estimation 126 11.14.1 Gold 126 11.14.2 Silver 126 11.14.3 Cyanide Ratio 129 11.14.4 Sulfide Sulfur 130 11.14.5 Density 132 11.14.6 Stockpile Grade Estimation 132 11.14.7 Treatment of 1982 – 1987 Data 133 11.15 Classification 134 11.16 Model Verification 135 11.16.1 Swath Plots 137 11.16.2 Smear Check 141 11.17 Mineral Resource Estimate 142 12 Mineral Reserve 149 13 Mining Methods 149 13.1 Overview 149 13.2 Geotechnical and Hydrologic Information 153 13.3 Phase Design 153 13.4 Production Schedule 157 13.5 Mining Equipment 171 13.6 Mine Manpower Requirements 172 14 Processing and Recovery Methods 175 14.1 Overview 175 14.2 Process Flowsheet 176 14.3 Plant Design 178 14.4 Process Description 180 14.4.1 Crushing Area 180 14.4.2 Grinding Circuit 181 14.4.3 Rougher Flotation 181 14.4.4 Concentrate Thickening 182 14.4.5 POX and Neutralization 182 14.4.6 Gold and Silver Recovery from Flotation Concentrate 185 14.4.7 CCD Circuit 185 14.4.8 Merrill-Crowe Precipitation and Refinery (Existing) 186 Hycroft Mine Project Page v S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 14.4.9 Cyanide Destruction 187 14.4.10 Final Tailings and Reclaim Water Transport 187 14.5 Energy, Water, and Process Materials Requirements 187 14.5.1 Reagent Handling and Storage 187 14.5.2 Fresh Water, Fire Water and Potable Water 189 14.5.3 Process Water, and Barren Solution 189 14.5.4 Oxygen Plant 190 14.5.5 Electrical Power 190 14.5.6 High-Pressure and Low-Pressure Air 190 15 Infrastructure 191 15.1 Introduction 191 15.2 Site Access 192 15.2.1 Offsite Access and Security 192 15.2.2 Onsite Access 193 15.2.3 Rail Spur 193 15.3 New Infrastructure 195 15.3.1 New and Existing Facilities Layout 195 15.3.2 Upgrades to Existing Facilities 203 15.3.3 Accommodation 203 15.4 Stockpiles 204 15.4.1 Mineralized Stockpiles 204 15.4.2 Growth Media Stockpile 204 15.4.3 Limestone Stockpile 204 15.5 Tailings Management Facilities 204 15.5.1 Facility Design Basis 205 15.5.2 TMF Design 208 15.6 Waste Rock Storage Facility 212 15.7 Power and Electrical 213 15.8 Communication 215 15.9 Fuel 215 15.10 Water Supply and Management 215 15.10.1 Fresh Water, Fire Water and Potable Water 216 15.10.2 Tailings Water Management 217 15.10.3 WRSF Water Management 218 15.10.4 Plant Site Stormwater Runoff and Drainage 219 15.10.5 Site Water Balance 219 15.10.6 Pit Dewatering 222 Hycroft Mine Project Page vi S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 15.11 Hazard Considerations 222 15.12 Comments on Project Infrastructure 222 16 Market Studies and Contracts 224 16.1 Market Studies 224 16.2 Commodity Price Projections 224 16.3 Contracts 224 17 Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plan, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups 225 17.1 Overview 225 17.2 Environmental Considerations 225 17.2.1 Baseline and Supporting Studies 225 17.2.2 Environmental Monitoring 228 17.2.3 Water Management 229 17.3 Permitting Considerations 229 17.3.1 Federal Permits 230 17.3.2 State of Nevada Permits 233 17.3.3 Additional Permits and Authorizations 234 17.4 Social Considerations 235 17.4.1 National Register of Historic Places 236 17.5 Closure and Reclamation Planning 237 17.5.1 Closure and Reclamation Plans 237 17.5.2 Closure Cost Estimates 237 17.6 Comments on Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community Impact 237 18 Capital and Operating Costs 238 18.1 Introduction 238 18.2 Capital Costs 238 18.2.1 Overview 238 18.2.2 Basis of Estimate 239 18.2.3 Mine Capital Costs 239 18.2.4 Process Capital Costs 241 18.2.5 Infrastructure Capital Costs 242 18.2.6 Indirect Capital Costs 242 18.2.7 Owner (Corporate) Capital Costs 243 18.2.8 Sustaining Capital 243 18.2.9 Contingency Costs 245 18.2.10 Closure and Reclamation Planning 245 18.3 Operating Costs 245 18.3.1 Overview 245 Hycroft Mine Project Page vii S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 18.3.2 Basis of Estimate 246 18.3.3 Mine Operating Costs 247 18.3.4 Process Operating Costs 248 18.3.5 General and Administrative Operating Costs 252 19 Economic Analysis 253 19.1 Overview 253 19.2 Methodologies Used 254 19.3 Financial Model Parameters 254 19.3.1 Assumptions 254 19.3.2 Taxes 254 19.3.3 Royalties 255 19.4 Economic Analysis 255 19.5 Sensitivity Analysis 260 20 Adjacent Properties 264 21 Other Relevant Data and Information 264 22 Interpretation and Conclusions 265 22.1 Introduction 265 22.2 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements 265 22.3 Geology and Mineralization 265 22.4 Exploration 265 22.5 Metallurgical Testwork 266 22.6 Mineral Resource Estimate 266 22.7 Recovery Plan 267 22.8 Infrastructure 268 22.8.1 Tailings Management Facility 269 22.9 Markets and Contracts 269 22.10 Capital Cost Estimate 269 22.11 Operating Cost Estimate 269 22.12 Economic Analysis 270 22.13 Risks and Opportunities 270 22.13.1 Risks 270 22.13.2 Opportunities 272 23 Recommendations 273 23.1 Estimated Program Costs 273 23.2 Exploration 273 23.3 Sample Preparation, Analysis and Security 274 Hycroft Mine Project Page viii S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 23.4 Metallurgical Testing 274 23.5 Mineral Resource Estimate 275 23.6 Infrastructure 275 23.6.1 TMF 275 24 References 277 25 Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant 281 Appendix A – Patented Claims 282 Appendix B – Unpatented Claims 283 List of Tables Table 1-1: Hycroft MRE as of January 21, 2026, US customary Units 6 Table 1-2: Hycroft MRE as of 21 January 2026, Metric Units 7 Table 1-3: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units 8 Table 1-4: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 68.57 g/tonne (2 oz/tonne) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units 8 Table 1-5: Principal Environmental Permits 13 Table 1-6: Other Notifications or Ministerial Permits 13 Table 1-7: Capital Cost Summary 14 Table 1-8: Operating Cost Summary 15 Table 1-9: Economic Analysis Summary 17 Table 2-1: Abbreviations and Acronyms 22 Table 2-2: Units of Measurement 24 Table 3-1: Hycroft Annual Land Holding Costs 29 Table 3-2: Hycroft Operating Permits 33 Table 3-3: Hycroft Miscellaneous Permits 34 Table 3-4: Hycroft Miscellaneous Permits 34 Table 3-5: Right-of-Way Payment and Renewal Schedule 34 Table 4-1: Hycroft Water Wells and Permitted Yearly Consumption 41 Table 7-1: Drilling from 2023 and 2024 Supporting the Updated MRE 56 Table 7-2: Significant Intercepts (2023) 60 Table 7-3: Significant Intercepts (2024) 62 Table 9-1: Nearest Neighbor Sample Comparison of RC vs Diamond Core Gold and Silver Assays 86 Table 9-2: Nearest Neighbor Sample Comparison of 1982-1987 Gold Assays Versus 2005 – 2024 Gold Assays 87 Hycroft Mine Project Page ix S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table 10-1: Metallurgical Testwork Summary 8 9 Table 10-2: Average Sulfur Contents of Oxide, Transition and Sulfide Mineralized Materials 90 Table 10-3: Summary of Test Samples 90 Table 10-4: Grindability Test Summary 91 Table 10-5: G&T Composites 1 through 24 Flotation Test Results 93 Table 10-6: G&T Composites M-1 through M-17 Flotation Test Results 94 Table 10-7: Flotation Reagent Schemes Studied 95 Table 10-8: Estimated Metallurgical Recoveries from 2016 Feasibility Study – Gold and Silver 103 Table 10-9: Hycroft Alkaline POX Testwork Summary 106 Table 10-10: Hycroft Acid POX Testwork Summary 106 Table 10-11: Summary Comparison Table – POX 3 to POX-7 108 Table 10-12: Settling Test Results 109 Table 10-13: Deleterious Element Assay 109 Table 10-14: Process Plant Overall Recovery Prediction 109 Table 11-1: Block Size and Model Size 110 Table 11-2: Data Available for the Assembly of the Resource Model for Au, Ag, AuCn, Sulfide Sulfur 111 Table 11-3: Assay Database (No Stockpile Assays, Inside the Model, and No Drilling from 1982 through 1987) 112 Table 11-4: Population Domains for Grade Estimation 117 Table 11-5: High-grade Silver Vein Domains 118 Table 11-6: Sulfide Domains 118 Table 11-7: Assay Cap Values 120 Table 11-8: Sulfide Cap Values Prior to Compositing 121 Table 11-9: Basic Statistics of Composites, In-Situ Rock, Eliminating Years 1982 to 1987 123 Table 11-10: Basic Statistics of 25 ft Sulfide Composites by Sulfide Domain 125 Table 11-11: Grade Estimation Parameters for Au, Ag 127 Table 11-12: Estimation Parameters for Cyanide Ratio, All Three Domains utilized 1/D3 130 Table 11-13: Sulfide Sulfur Estimation Parameters, All Three Domains Utilized 1/D3 131 Table 11-14: Sulfide Sulfur Default Values if Not Estimated 131 Table 11-15: Density Assigned to the Block Model 132 Table 11-16: Stockpiles Assigned Grades by Inverse Distance Estimation 133 Table 11-17: IMC Smear Check 141 Table 11-18: Economic and Technical Parameters for Hycroft MRE 144 Table 11-19: Hycroft MRE as of January 21, 2026, US customary Units 145 Table 11-20: Hycroft MRE as of 21 January 2026, Metric Units 146 Table 11-21: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units 147 Table 11-22: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 3 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units 147 Hycroft Mine Project Page x S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table 11-23: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 4 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units 148 Table 11-24: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 68.57 g/ton (2 oz/ton) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units 148 Table 11-25: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 102.86 g/ton (3 oz/ton) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units 148 Table 11-26: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 137.14 g/t (4 oz/ton) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units 148 Table 13-1: Hycroft Initial Assessment Mine Production Schedule, Measured and Indicated Mineralization 151 Table 13-2: Summary of Lerch-Grossman Computer Pit Generation 154 Table 13-3: Contained Tonnage by Internal Cutoff Grade 155 Table 13-4: Major Mine Equipment 172 Table 13-5: Mine Hourly Personnel 173 Table 13-6: Mine Salaried Staff 174 Table 14-1: Process Design Criteria 178 Table 14-2: Major Process Equipment 179 Table 14-3: Summary of Reagent Used in the Process Plant 188 Table 14-4: Annual Consumption for Major Reagents 189 Table 15-1: Existing Hycroft Buildings 196 Table 15-2: New Ancillary Facilities Planned over the LOM 203 Table 15-3: Proposed Upgrades for Existing Facilities 203 Table 15-4: Minimum Pre-feasibility Seismic Design Criteria for Stability for Very High Dam Classification 206 Table 15-5: Minimum Pre-feasibility Hydrologic Design Criteria for Very High Dam Classification 206 Table 15-6: Selected Ground Motions and Associated Seismic Coefficients 211 Table 15-7: Weather Station Summary 216 Table 15-8: Summary of Storm Event with Associated Rainfall Intensity 216 Table 15-9: Monthly Maximum Flows Demand 221 Table 17-1: Current Major Environmental Permits and Permits Necessary to Operate the Mine 230 Table 17-2: Ministerial Permits, Plans and Notifications 234 Table 18-1: Capital Cost Summary 238 Table 18-2: Baseline Mine Capital Cost (without Accuracy or Contingency adjustment) 240 Table 18-3: Process Plant Capital Cost Breakdown 241 Table 18-4: On-Site Infrastructure Capital Cost Breakdown 242 Table 18-5: Off-Site Infrastructure Capital Cost Breakdown 242 Table 18-6: Indirect Capital Cost Breakdown 243 Table 18-7: Mining Sustaining Capital Costs 244 Table 18-8: Operating Cost Summary 246 Table 18-9: Mine Operating Cost per Ton of Total Material Moved, US$/ton (Mine Costs) 248 Table 18-10: Process Plant Operating Cost Summary 248 Table 18-11: Process Plant Labor Cost Summary 249 Hycroft Mine Project Page xi S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table 18-12: Reagent Consumption Summary 250 Table 18-13: Process Plant Consumable Consumption Summary 251 Table 19-1: Economic Analysis Summary Table 256 Table 19-2: Life of Mine Economics 257 Table 19-3: Pre-Tax NPV (US$M) and IRR (%) Sensitivity Analysis 260 Table 19-4: Post-Tax NPV (US$M) and IRR (%) Sensitivity Analysis 261 Table 22-1: Hycroft Mineral Resources as of 21 January 2026, US customary Units 267 Table 22-2: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the Mineral Resource at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units 267 Table 23-1: Estimated Program Costs 273 Table 25-1: Information Provided by Hycroft 281 List of Figures Figure 1-1: Post-Tax Sensitivity Analysis Results 18 Figure 3-1: Hycroft Mine Location Map 27 Figure 3-2: Claim Map 30 Figure 3-3: Current Property and Facilities Layout (2025) 31 Figure 4-1: Onsite Lab, Admin, Maintenance, Truck Shop, and Warehouse 39 Figure 4-2: Crusher and Conveyor Belt Circuit 39 Figure 4-3: North Merrill-Crowe Facility 40 Figure 4-4: Stage 1 Heap Leach Pad and Ponds Along Jungo Road 40 Figure 6-1: Stratigraphic Column for Hycroft Deposit Area 45 Figure 6-2: Simplified East–West Cross Section Through the Hycroft Mine – Section 40600 N 45 Figure 6-3: Vortex Alteration Cross-Section – 40600 N 48 Figure 6-4: Bay Geologic Cross-Section at 50300-N 49 Figure 6-5: Generalized Epithermal Diagram 51 Figure 7-1: Drill Collar Location Plan 55 Figure 9-1: Results of Submitted Gold Standards 2005 - 2013 73 Figure 9-2: Results of Submitted Silver Standards 2005-2013 74 Figure 9-3: Results of Blank Submissions 75 Figure 9-4: Check Assay Results, Fire Assay Gold 2011 - 2012 76 Figure 9-5: Check Assay Results, Fire Assay Silver 2011 – 2011 77 Figure 9-6: Standards Results, 2021 – 2022 78 Figure 9-7: Blank Results, 2021 – 2022 79 Figure 9-8: Duplicate Assay Results, 2021 – 2022 79 Hycroft Mine Project Page xii S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Figure 9-9: Gold Standards 2023 – 2024 80 Figure 9-10: Blank Insertions 2004 81 Figure 9-11: Gold Duplicates, 2023-2024 82 Figure 9-12: Silver Duplicates, 2023-2024 83 Figure 9-13: Gold Check Assays 2023 – 2024 84 Figure 9-14: Silver Check Assays, 2023-2024 85 Figure 10-1: Recovery Vs. Time Plot, G&T Kamloops Tests, M Composites 96 Figure 10-2: Gold Grade Distribution Chart 97 Figure 10-3: Silver Grade Distribution Chart 97 Figure 10-4: Total Sulfur Grade Distribution 98 Figure 10-5: Sulfide Sulfur Grade Distribution 98 Figure 10-6: FLS Variability Flotation Recoveries under Optimal Conditions (137 Test Samples) 100 Figure 10-7: FLS Variability Flotation Gold Recoveries Based on Gold Head Grade Groups 101 Figure 10-8: FLS Variability Flotation Silver Recoveries Based on Head Grade Groups 101 Figure 10-9: Oxidation of Central Flotation Concentrate: Sulfate Spike Test 104 Figure 10-10: Demonstration Plant Cyanide Leach Recovery of Au and Ag 104 Figure 11-1: East–West Cross-Section 44000-N Looking North, Showing Lithology Types 114 Figure 11-2: East–West Cross-Section 44000-N Looking North, Showing Alterations 115 Figure 11-3: Structure and Domain Interpretation (Plan View) 116 Figure 11-4: Structure and Domain Interpretation with Silver Wireframes (plan view) 119 Figure 11-5: Bench Height Analysis 122 Figure 11-6: Gold Variograms for Silicic Material Between the Central Fault and East Fault 125 Figure 11-7: Gold Variograms for Silicic Material Between the Range Fault and Central Fault 125 Figure 11-8: E-W Cross-section at 41000-N, Showing Confidence Codes 135 Figure 11-9: E-W Cross-section at 41000-N, Visual Check of Gold Grades in Drillholes and Block Model 136 Figure 11-10: E-W Cross-section at 41000-N, Visual Check of Silver Grades in Drillholes and Block Model 137 Figure 11-11: Swath Plots for Gold, X = East and Y = North Slices, 160 ft Wide Slices 138 Figure 11-12: Swath Plots for Silver, X = East and Y = North Slices, 160 ft Slices 139 Figure 11-13: Swath Plots for Sulfide Sulfur, X = East and Y = North Slices, 160 ft Slices 140 Figure 13-1: Hycroft Initial Assessment Mine Plan Schedule 150 Figure 13-2: Summary of Lerch-Grossman Computer Pit Generation 155 Figure 13-3: Phase Schematic and Extraction Sequence 156 Figure 13-4: Approximate Recovered Gold by Year 158 Figure 13-5: Approximate Recovered Silver by Year 158 Figure 13-6: Approximate Recovered Equivalent Gold Ounces by Year Based on $3,100/oz Au and $36/oz Ag 159 Figure 13-7: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – Pre-production 160 Figure 13-8: Mine and Waste Storage Plan - End of Year 1 161 Figure 13-9: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 2 162 Figure 13-10: Mine and Waste Storage Plan - End of Year 3 163 Hycroft Mine Project Page xiii S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Figure 13-11: Mine and Waste Storage Plan - End of Year 4 164 Figure 13-12: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 5 165 Figure 13-13: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 10 166 Figure 13-14: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 20 167 Figure 13-15: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 30 168 Figure 13-16: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 40 169 Figure 13-17: Mine and Waste Storage Plan – End of Year 51 170 Figure 14-1: Sulfide Sulfur Process Plant Flowsheet 176 Figure 15-1: Site Layout 191 Figure 15-2: Site Access and Major Towns Near Hycroft Mine 192 Figure 15-3: Rail Spur Design 194 Figure 15-4: Overall Site Layout 197 Figure 15-5: Existing Crushing Facility and Surrounding Infrastructure 198 Figure 15-6: The Proposed Process Plant Generic Site Plan 199 Figure 15-7: Proposed Limestone Plant and Rail Spur 200 Figure 15-8: North Merrill-Crowe Plant 201 Figure 15-9: Existing Mine Ancillary Buildings 202 Figure 15-10: TMF Facility Layout 207 Figure 15-11: TMF Main Dam Section 208 Figure 15-12: TMF North Dam Section 209 Figure 15-13: TMF Closure Plan 212 Figure 15-14 Waste Rock Storage Facilities 213 Figure 15-15: Proposed Power Line from Imlay Relay Station (Nevada Historical Marker 49) to Jungo Road (49 Road) - NTS 214 Figure 15-16: Proposed Power Line along Jungo Road (Road 49) to Hycroft Mine Site (in total approximately 57 miles) - NTS 215 Figure 15-17: Hycroft Water Balance Schematic 220 Figure 15-18: Total Fresh Water Demand 221 Figure 19-1: Project Post-Tax Unlevered Cashflow 255 Figure 19-2: Pre-Tax Sensitivity Analysis Results 262 Figure 19-3: Post-Tax Sensitivity Analysis Results 263 Figure 20-1: Location of Rosebud Property 264 Hycroft Mine Project Page xiv S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction This technical report summary (TRS) has been prepared by Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. (Ausenco), Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (IMC), and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. (WestLand) for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (Hycroft), following the reporting requirements of the United States (US) Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Modernization of Property Disclosures of Mining Registrants under subpart 1300 and item 601 (96)(B)(iii) of Regulation S-K for an initial assessment (IA). This TRS is an initial assessment with an economic analysis (IA-EA) and, filed on Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR). The IA-EA is based on heap leaching the oxide material, while sulfide material is milled and processed using the pressure oxidation (POX) process. Transition material will be controlled by Hycroft grade control and may be processed with the sulfide material or heap leached with the oxide material. This TRS includes drill results received through March 17, 2025, which formed the basis of the Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) model. The Hycroft mine (the Mine) is situated on the western flank of the Kamma Mountains on the eastern edge of the Black Rock Desert approximately 54 miles west of Winnemucca in Humboldt and Pershing Counties, Nevada. The Mine property straddles Townships 34, 35, 35½ and 36 north and Ranges 28, 29 and 30 east (MDB&M) with its central coordinates at approximately latitude 40°52’ north and longitude 118°41’ west. The Mine is accessible via Nevada State Route 49 (Jungo Road), an unpaved road maintained by Humboldt County and Pershing County and Hycroft. The Union Pacific railway, a major east–west railway, runs immediately adjacent to the property. Hycroft, a past producer, has existing facilities on site including two administration buildings, a mobile maintenance shop, a light vehicle maintenance shop, a warehouse, multiple leach pads, primary, secondary and tertiary crushing systems, an assay lab, one Merrill-Crowe process plant, and a refinery. 1.2 Terms of Reference The firms and consultants who are providing Qualified Persons (QPs) responsible for the content of the TRS are, in alphabetical order, Ausenco, Hycroft, IMC and WestLand. The TRS presents the IA-EA for the mine based on the POX and Heap Leach processes. All units of measurement in the TRS are US customary, unless otherwise stated. The monetary units are in US dollars, unless otherwise stated. Mineral resources are reported in accordance with the US Securities and Exchange Commission Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 229.1300 – Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining operations (S-K 1300). Hycroft Mine Project Page 1 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.3 Mineral Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, and Agreements The Mine property consists of 25 private parcels with patented claims totaling approximately 1,855 acres, along with 3,249 unpatented mining claims covering approximately 62,298 acres, for a combined total of approximately 64,000 acres. On May 15, 2023, Hycroft expanded its holdings by acquiring a 50% undivided interest in three additional patented mining claims, adding approximately 61 acres at one location in Northern Nevada. Some mining claims overlap other Hycroft Mining claims to ensure there are no fractional gaps in mining claim coverage. These claims are contiguous or proximate to the original Crofoot and Lewis claims. Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Humboldt and Pershing Counties and payment of annual real property taxes for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are made every third quarter (Q3). Payments are current through the 2025–2026 claim years, with US$724,095 paid for 2025–2026. Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees and real property taxes are required to hold the Hycroft property in good standing. BLM annual maintenance fees for claims are due not later than September 1 of each year. Humboldt and Pershing County State annual holding fees beginning September 1 of each year are due no later than November 1 of each year. Annual real property taxes for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are due August 31 of the following year. Hycroft controls all surface and mineral rights within the Hycroft MRE area. No further land acquisition is required for the operation of the mine and contemplated processing facilities. 1.4 History The Mine location is in the Nevada Sulfur District, where mining for native sulfur began in the late 1800’s. In the early part of the 20 th century high-grade Ag was mined as were veins of nearly pure alunite (hydroxylated aluminum potassium sulfate mineral) in the southern part of the district. From 1941 to 1943, cinnabar (a mercury sulfide mineral) was also mined. Exploration for native sulfur commenced again in 1966 with the Duval Corporation (Duval) reporting elevated Au and Ag values but finding no significant evidence of a sulfur deposit at depth (Wallace, 1980). In 1977, the Cordex Syndicate mapped and rock-chip sampled the Hycroft property, recognizing the potential for a bulk tonnage, low-grade precious metal deposit. Homestake then took interest in the property and completed surface sampling and exploration drilling during 1981-1982. Mining officially began as a small heap leach operation in 1983 at what was then known as the Lewis Mine. In 1985, Vista gained control of the original Hycroft property. They also acquired the Lewis Mine in early 1987 from F. W. Lewis, Inc., and the Crofoot Mine in April 1988. From 1985 to 1999, they drilled 3,212 exploration holes, totaling 965,552 feet (ft) with the bulk of this drilling focused on oxide gold mineralization at Central, Bay and Brimstone. Production from the Brimstone pit commenced in 1985 and continued until December 1998. From 1983 to 1998, the Mine produced approximately 1.2 million ounces (Moz) of Au and 2.5 Moz of Ag. An additional 58,700 ounce (oz) of Au was produced from the leaching operations from 1999 through 2004. The remaining leasehold interest in the Lewis property was purchased by Vista in December 2005. Production followed at the former Crofoot property in the Bay, South Central, Boneyard, Gap, and Historic Cut-4 pits along the Central Zone. The Mine was placed on a care and maintenance program through 2007. In May 2007, the Nevada-based holdings of Vista were spun out into Allied Nevada Gold Corp. (Allied Nevada). The Mine was included as part of the transfer of ownership allowing Allied Nevada to explore, expand, and develop the resources. The Mine was reactivated in September 2007 and achieved planned ore production by the end of 2009. With the construction of the North leach pad in 2013, the total leach pad space was increased to more than 20 million square ft (ft 2 ). In 2010, the Mine began an expansion program that included construction of a 21,000 gallon per minute (gal/min.) Merrill-Crowe processing plant and a three-stage crushing facility as well as solution pumping capacity upgrades. Active mining was stopped again at the Mine in June 2015 due to low metal prices, but active leaching of previously mined ore continued through 2018. During this time, Allied Nevada emerged from its financial restructuring to become Hycroft Mining Corporation. Hycroft Mine Project Page 2 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 In late 2018, Hycroft began construction of new leach pads. In April 2019, active mining began with a focus on transition and sulfide minerals but were set aside for future processing. Active mining ceased in 2021, but gold and silver production continued through 2022. From September 2007 through July 2019 metal sales totaled approximately 900,000 oz of Au and 5.0 Moz of Ag. Active mining ceased and production at the Mine was terminated on November 11, 2021. Annual sales in ounces of Au and Ag produced from the Mine’s heap leach operations over years 2019 through 2022 total approximately 107,258 ounces of Au and 615,000 ounces of Ag. 1.5 Geology and Mineralization The Hycroft deposit is a low-sulfidation, epithermal, hot springs system that contains gold and silver mineralization. Radiometric dating indicates that the main phase of gold and silver mineralization was formed four million years ago, when hydrothermal fluids were fed upward along high angle, normal faults. Low-grade gold and silver mineralization were co-deposited with silica and potassium feldspar throughout porous rock types. A subsequent drop in permeability, due to sealing of the system, led to over pressuring and subsequent repeated hydrothermal brecciation. Additional precious metal mineralization was deposited during this event as breccia zones, veins, and sulfide flooding. Gold and silver mineralization was followed by an intense event of high sulfidation acid leaching of the mineralized volcanic rocks coincident with a regional water table drop. This allowed steam heated sulfur gases to condense into sulfuric acid and leach the upper portion of the mineralized rocks. Oxidation of sulfide mineralization occurs to variable depths over the deposit, depending upon proximity to faults, extent of acid leaching, and depth to water table. Sulfide content through the deposit is variable from 0% to 20%. A total of six major north-northeast trending, west dipping, normal fault zones appear to broadly control the distribution of alteration. From west to east, these fault zones are referred to as the Range, West Splay, Central, Break, Albert, and East Faults. These major structures down-drop stratigraphy and affect the distribution of alteration and mineralization. A post-mineral basin bounding fault appears to border the Camel Conglomerate and the adjacent Pleistocene Lahontan Lake sediments in the Black Rock Desert. Based on geophysics, this structure is approximately one to two miles west of the Mine site. There are several east–west trending structures that appear to provide post-mineral offset to the deposit. These form a series of horst and grabens within the deposit footprint. Hycroft Mine Project Page 3 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.6 Exploration The Hycroft property drill history covers the period from 1982 through 2024. Within the block model there are 5,813 drillholes, with 516,901 drill intervals amounting to 2,668,616 ft of drilling. During 2021 through 2024, Hycroft drilled 260 holes, 105 in 2021, 85 in 2022, 49 in 2023 and 21 in 2024. Most of the 2021 drilling was diamond core that was used for metallurgical testing and assay. The 2022 and 2023 drilling focused on extending mineralization and upgrading areas from inferred to measured and indicated classification. Since 2024, drilling has focused on high-grade mineralization in Brimstone and Vortex. 1.7 Sampling Hycroft provided IMC with the database which contained drilling information from 1982 through 2024. Assay data was received through March 2025. The current sample preparation analysis and security follow best practices and are acceptable for application to mineral resource reporting. The historic data collection is unknown. Components of the historic data have been found to be reliable. Some components are not reliable and have been removed or modified prior to incorporation into the MRE. After the noted adjustments, John Marek, the QP, finds the data applicable to the determination of the MRE. 1.8 Metallurgical Testwork Metallurgical testwork supporting the Hycroft process flowsheet has been conducted by several laboratories, including G&T Metallurgical Services Ltd. (G&T), SGS Mineral Services (SGS), Hazen Research Inc. (Hazen), FLSmidth Minerals Testing & Research Center (FLSmidth MTRC), and Kappes, Cassiday & Associates (KCA). The process design and metallurgical assumptions used in this study are primarily based on the most recent testwork completed by FLSmidth - MTRC and Hazen Research, with historical testwork from the other laboratories reviewed to support the interpretation of metallurgical performance and flowsheet development. Comminution testwork indicates that Hycroft mineralization is very high and requires relatively high grinding energy in ball mill grinding. Hycroft Mine Project Page 4 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 In 2021, Hycroft initiated a new metallurgical variability study to evaluate mineralized material characteristics within the current mine plan, validate the metallurgical performance across the deposit; and identify potential variations in processing conditions required to recover gold and silver. The objective of the study was to support development of a Hycroft process flowsheet, including definition of key process control points in crushing, grinding, capable of consistently achieving gold and silver recoveries across anticipated metallurgical variability. Key outcomes of this study included the development of the flotation process with significantly improved recoveries. The following key process controls parameters were identified during the flotation process development program: ● Optimal grind size is a P 80 of less than 85 micrometers (µm). ● Flotation time is 24 minutes. ● Adjusted pH level is 4.7. ● Flotation mass pull is 20 to 25% with 22% being the target. A total of 137 samples were tested under these selected conditions to achieve higher gold and silver recoveries to flotation concentrate. The results show that gold recovery exhibits a broader distribution, with values ranging from approximately 72 to 98% and a statistical median near 88%, indicating greater sensitivity across the tested samples. In contrast, silver recovery is generally higher, with recoveries spanning approximately 76 to 100% and a statistical median exceeding 92%. This is a significant improvement from the gold flotation recovery and silver flotation recovery values reported in a TRS prepared for Hycroft and filed in 2023 (the 2023 TRS). In 2025, Hycroft completed a series of POX tests demonstrating that POX at 225°C with oxygen overpressure, followed by hot cure, lime boil, and cyanide leaching, is a technically viable and repeatable processing route for the pyrite concentrate. Gold and silver recoveries of approximately 93% and 86%, respectively, were consistent with past performance. Overall, considering the full flowsheet involving flotation, POX, and leaching, gold recovery has improved to approximately 83% and silver recovery has improved to approximately 78%. Overall recovery for both gold and silver are exceeding the values assumed in the 2023 TRS. Hycroft existing heap leaching was discontinued in 2022. Heap leach operations are expected to restart once new oxide and transition material becomes available. 1.9 Mineral Resource Estimate The MRE on the Hycroft property is currently envisioned to be mined by way of a conventional hard rock open pit mine feeding two process facilities: 1. Run-of-mine (ROM) oxide material will be directed to cyanide heap leaching, producing a gold and silver doré. 2. Sulfide material will be directed to a crushing, flotation milling followed by POX of the concentrate to make a gold and silver doré. Transitional material will be directed to either (ROM) cyanide heap leaching or flotation milling followed by POX depending on the sulfide sulfur levels of the individual blocks, total sulfur content, and gold grade. The terms of reference for this MRE are mineralization in-place. The procedures described in the following paragraphs establish that the stated MRE has reasonable prospects for economic extraction of mineral resources. Mineral resources were developed using a computer-based block model for mineralization and pit optimization software to determine mineralization with reasonable prospectus for economic extraction. Hycroft Mine Project Page 5 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 The cutoff grade that is reported for this statement of mineral resources is based on mining and processing costs estimated by IMC and Ausenco combined with reasonable metal prices. The internal or marginal cutoff is applied and reported where the benefits of selling the recovered metal will pay for the processing and fixed general and administrative (G&A) costs. The cutoff is presented in terms of net of refining (NSR). Metal prices for the MRE were US$3,100/oz Au and US$36.00/oz Ag. Spot prices for gold and silver in 2025 ranged from US$2,798 to US$4,323/oz Au and US$31.34 to US$71.63/oz Ag. The spot prices for gold and silver on January 21, 2026, were US$4,726/oz Au and US$93.50/oz Ag. The prices selected for determination of the MRE are 35% below the spot gold price and 62% below the spot silver price on January 21, 2026. The risks to the MRE are project costs and project recoveries as well as metal prices that can have a substantial impact on the mineral resource both positively and negatively. The Hycroft MRE is sensitive to estimated parameters of operating costs, recoveries, and metal prices. That sensitivity may result in future variation in the mineral resource as costs and recoveries are refined. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied. Table 1-1: Hycroft MRE as of January 21, 2026, US customary Units Classification Cutoff Grade $ Net of Refining Approximate Cutoff, AuEq oz/ton Ktons Gold oz/ton Silver oz/ton Sulfide Sulfur % Contained Ounces Gold Oz x 1000 Silver Oz x 1000 Heap Leach Resource Measured $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 92,994 0.005 0.11 1.83 446 10,322 Indicated $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 110,374 0.004 0.09 1.54 475 9,492 Meas + Ind $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 203,368 0.005 0.10 1.67 921 19,814 Inferred $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 110,018 0.005 0.09 1.41 528 10,122 Flotation Mill + Concentrate Treatment by Pressure Oxidation and Cyanide Leach Measured $16.73 0.007 734,571 0.011 0.43 2.03 8,154 316,600 Indicated $16.73 0.007 748,876 0.010 0.30 1.84 7,339 226,161 Meas + Ind $16.73 0.007 1,483,447 0.010 0.37 1.93 15,493 542,761 Inferred $16.73 0.007 459,646 0.010 0.27 1.76 4,505 122,725 Combined Mineral Resources Leach Plus Mill Measured $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 827,565 0.010 0.40 2.01 8,600 326,922 Indicated $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 859,250 0.009 0.27 1.80 7,814 235,653 Meas + Ind $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 1,686,815 0.010 0.33 1.90 16,414 562,575 Inferred $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 569,664 0.009 0.23 1.69 5,033 132,847 Notes: 1. Mineral resources based on metal prices of $3,100/troy oz Au and $36.00/troy oz Ag. 2. Cutoffs are Income – Refining Cost = NSR. 3. Gold Equivalent (AuEq) for Heap Leach = Cyanide Gold + 0.0019 x Total Silver Assay, or at average gold leach recovery AuEq = Fire Gold + 0.0035 Total Silver Assay. 4. Gold Equivalent for Mill + Pressure Oxidation = Fire Gold + 0.0107 x Total Silver Assay. 5. Numbers may not match exactly due to rounding. 6. Mineral resources are contained within a computer-generated optimized pit. 7. Total material in that pit is 5.42 billion tons. Hycroft Mine Project Page 6 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 8. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied. 9. Modifying factors for mine and process design have not been applied. 10. All units are US customary. Ktons means 1,000 short tons. Au and Ag grades are in troy ounces per short ton (oz/ton). Table 1-2: Hycroft MRE as of 21 January 2026, Metric Units Classification Cutoff Grade $ Net of Refining Approximate Cutoff, AuEq g/tonne Ktonnes Gold Silver Sulfide Sulfur Contained Ounces Gold Silver g/tonne g/tonne % Oz x 1000 Oz x 1000 Heap Leach Resource Measured $2.07 - $4.00 0.027 - 0.055 84,364 0.164 3.80 1.83 446 10,322 Indicated $2.07 - $4.00 0.027 - 0.055 100,131 0.147 2.95 1.54 475 9,492 Meas + Ind $2.07 - $4.00 0.027 - 0.055 184,495 0.155 3.34 1.67 921 19,814 Inferred $2.07 - $4.00 0.027 - 0.055 99,808 0.164 3.15 1.41 528 10,122 Flotation Mill + Concentrate Treatment by Pressure Oxidation and Cyanide Leach Measured $18.44 0.206 666,403 0.380 14.76 2.03 8,154 316,600 Indicated $18.44 0.206 679,380 0.336 10.34 1.84 7,339 226,161 Meas + Ind $18.44 0.206 1,345,783 0.358 12.53 1.93 15,493 542,761 Inferred $18.44 0.206 416,991 0.336 9.14 1.76 4,505 122,725 Combined Mineral Resources, Leach Plus Mill Measured $2.07 - $18.44 0.027 - 0.206 750,767 0.356 13.53 2.01 8,600 326,922 Indicated $2.07 - $18.44 0.027 - 0.206 779,512 0.311 9.39 1.80 7,814 235,653 Meas + Ind $2.07 - $18.44 0.027 - 0.206 1,530,279 0.333 11.42 1.90 16,414 562,575 Inferred $2.07 - $18.44 0.027 - 0.206 516,799 0.303 7.99 1.69 5,033 132,847 Notes: 1. Mineral resources based on metal prices of $3,100/ oz Au and $36.00/ oz Ag. 2. Cutoffs are Income – Refining Cost = NSR. 3. Gold Equivalent for Heap Leach = Cyanide Gold + 0.0019 x Total Silver Assay. 4. Gold Equivalent for Mill + Pressure Oxidation = Fire Gold + 0.0107 x Total Silver Assay. 5. Numbers may not match exactly due to rounding. 6. Mineral resources are contained within a computer-generated optimized pit. 7. Total material in that pit is 4.92 billion tonnes. 8. All units on this table are metric: Ktonnes means 1,000 tonnes. Au and Ag grades are in grams per tonne (g/tonne). 9. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied. 10. Modifying factors for mine and process design have not been applied. Contained within the MRE at Hycroft are a series of high-grade silver veins at Brimstone and zones of higher silver concentrations in Vortex that are associated with a low angle breccia body. Table 1-3 and Table 1-4 are the tabulation of gold and silver within the domain volumes that are contained within the MRE at 2 oz/tonne cutoff grade in US customary and 68.57 g/tonne cutoff grade in metric. Hycroft Mine Project Page 7 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table 1-3: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units Classification Cutoff Grade Silver (oz/ton) Ktons Gold (oz/ton) Silver (oz/ton) Sulfide Sulfur (%) Gold Contained oz x 1000 Silver Contained oz x 1000 Brimstone Measured 2.00 3,195 0.011 8.35 1.33 35 26,686 Indicated 2.00 330 0.010 3.11 1.87 3 1,025 Meas + Ind 2.00 3,525 0.011 7.86 1.38 38 27,711 Inferred 2.00 15 0.008 3.52 1.13 0 52 Vortex Measured 2.00 9,126 0.018 3.81 1.49 160 34,781 Indicated 2.00 7,342 0.014 3.78 1.24 100 27,726 Meas + Ind 2.00 16,468 0.016 3.80 1.38 261 62,507 Inferred 2.00 3,644 0.014 3.65 1.27 50 13,307 Brimstone + Vortex Measured 2.00 12,322 0.016 4.99 1.45 195 61,467 Indicated 2.00 7,671 0.013 3.75 1.26 104 28,750 Meas + Ind 2.00 19,993 0.015 4.51 1.38 299 90,218 Inferred 2.00 3,659 0.014 3.65 1.27 51 13,359 Table 1-4: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 68.57 g/tonne (2 oz/tonne) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units Classification Cutoff Grade Silver (g/tonne) Ktonnes Gold (g/tonne) Silver (g/tonne) Sulfide Sulfur (%) Contained Ounces Gold Oz x 1000 Silver Oz x 1000 Brimstone Measured 68.57 2,899 0.372 286.35 1.33 35 26,686 Indicated 68.57 299 0.332 106.62 1.87 3 1,025 Meas + Ind 68.57 3,198 0.368 269.54 1.38 38 27,711 Inferred 68.57 13 0.289 120.74 1.13 0 52 Vortex Measured 68.57 8,279 0.603 130.67 1.49 160 34,781 Indicated 68.57 6,660 0.469 129.48 1.24 100 27,726 Meas + Ind 68.57 14,940 0.543 130.14 1.38 261 62,507 Inferred 68.57 3,306 0.475 125.20 1.27 50 13,307 Brimstone + Vortex Measured 68.57 11,178 0.543 171.04 1.45 195 61,467 Indicated 68.57 6,959 0.463 128.49 1.26 104 28,750 Meas + Ind 68.57 18,137 0.512 154.71 1.38 299 90,218 Inferred 68.57 3,319 0.474 125.18 1.27 51 13,359 Hycroft Mine Project Page 8 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.10 Mining Methods Hycroft is planned as a conventional hard rock open pit operation. IMC developed a mine plan that produces the required process feed and moves sufficient mine waste to assure continued release of the mineralization. The mine plan is based on measured and indicated mineralization that was estimated in the mineral resource block model described in Section 11. Inferred mineralization was not included within this initial assessment for two reasons: (1) there is sufficient measured and indicated mineralization to feed the process plant for over 50 years, and (2) to reduce the changes in the mine schedule and potentially minable material as the project moves toward a pre-feasibility study in the future. The mine will feed two processing facilities: 1. A flotation mill followed by pressure oxidation and leaching of the concentrate. 2. A ROM heap leach for mineralization that is amenable to direct cyanide leaching. The mine production schedule is summarized in Figure 13-1 with tabular detail in Table 13-1. 1.11 Processing and Recovery Methods Hycroft property is currently envisioned to be mined by way of a conventional hard rock open pit mine feeding two process facilities: 1. Oxide Material – ROM oxide material will be directed to cyanide heap leaching, producing gold and silver doré. 2. Sulfide Material – Sulfide material will be directed to a crushing and flotation milling circuit, followed by pressure oxidation (POX) of the concentrate to produce a gold and silver doré. Transitional material will be routed to either ROM cyanide heap leaching or flotation milling followed by POX, depending on the sulfide sulfur levels of the individual blocks, total sulfide sulfur content, and gold grade. The process route will be determined based on grade control The existing Heap Leach facilities (Brimstone Heap Leach Pad and North Heap Leach Pad) will be expanded to accommodate additional capacity. These facilities have existing collection ponds and pumping systems. The leach solution distribution network will be expanded as required to support increased throughput. Hycroft Mine Project Page 9 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 For sulfide processing, the plant will utilize the existing crushing plant. Consisting of three stages of crushing, reducing the mineralized material from a nominal top size of approximately 35 inches (“) to about ⅜”. The crushed material is fed to a two-stage ball milling circuit operating in closed circuit with hydrocyclones, producing a grind suitable for downstream processing. Cyclone overflow will be directed to rougher flotation for recovery of gold and silver into a flotation concentrate. Rougher flotation tailings will be thickened prior to transfer to the final tailings pumping system. The flotation concentrate will be processed through POX to oxidize sulfide minerals and liberate gold and silver for downstream recovery. Following oxidation, the oxidized slurry will undergo counter-current decantation (CCD) washing to recover dissolved metal values and remove acidic process solutions. The washed solids are then conditioned through lime boil and hot curing prior to cyanide leaching. The conditioned solids will be leached in cyanide leach tanks to dissolve gold and silver. Precious metals will be recovered from the leach solution using the existing Merrill-Crowe zinc precipitation circuit, producing gold-silver doré. Residual cyanide in the leach tailings will be destroyed using a sulfur dioxide–oxygen detoxification process, after which the detoxified tailings will be combined with flotation tailings and pumped to the tailings management facility (TMF) for disposal. 1.12 Infrastructure The Hycroft Mine infrastructure scope represents a brownfield development within an established mining complex. The proposed sulfide ore processing plant will be integrated into existing site infrastructure via tie-ins to current crushing facilities, utilities, and site services. Most existing access roads, haul roads, and ancillary structures will remain in service or be selectively upgraded. 1.12.1 Site Access and Haulage New road infrastructure includes 0.6 miles of plant access roads, a 5.6-mile TMF access road parallel to the tailings delivery pipeline corridor, and a 3.4-mile TMF construction haul road connecting the North WRSF to the TMF embankment. All roads are designed as dirt roads with a maximum 10% grade and 25 miles per hour (mph) speed limit. A rail spur extension from the adjacent Union Pacific line will receive reagents, consumables, and fuel, and facilitate export of salable metals. The spur design by Mountain States Contracting Inc. includes turnouts, derails, signals, ballast, bridges, civil works, and a bottom-dump hopper car loadout facility. 1.12.2 New Infrastructure New process plant facilities will tie into the existing crushing circuit and North Merrill-Crowe facility. New onsite infrastructure includes utility tie-ins, power distribution upgrades, substations, a process control system and control room, and reagent handling facilities including an oxygen plant and limestone offloading and slaking system. Six new ancillary facilities are planned over the LOM including a covered crushed ore stockpile dome (313 ft diameter × 104 ft height), new assay lab, fuel station, technical services building, maintenance shop, and crusher maintenance building. Ten existing structures will be upgraded, relocated, or repurposed. Workforce accommodation will be drawn primarily from Winnemucca (~54 miles east), with personnel transported via contracted bus service. Hycroft Mine Project Page 10 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.12.3 Stockpiles Coarse ore stockpile capacity is 56,000 tons live and 175,400 tons total; crushed ore stockpile capacity is 34,000 tons live and 113,000 tons total, covered by a round dome structure. These stockpiles support crushing circuit availability of 31.3% for primary and 65.1% for combined secondary and tertiary crushing. Growth medium stripped during TMF construction will be stockpiled for reclamation use. Limestone will be delivered by rail to a dedicated onsite stockpile. 1.12.4 Tailings Management Facility The TMF uses conventional designs and will be constructed in a total of eight stages and zero discharge of process solutions. The TMF will fill the broad valley immediately northeast of the mill site and require the main and the north embankments to impound an ultimate tailings storage capacity of 1.05 billion tons (Btons) at an average settled dry density for the ultimate facility of 92 pounds per cubic ft (pcf). The main embankment will cross the natural drainage on the west side of the TMF, and the secondary embankment will be constructed along the northern ridge. The facility will provide continuous containment of process solutions through the installation of a vertical chimney drain and engineered geomembrane liner systems, extending across the impoundment basin and below a portion of the main embankment and the upstream slope of the north embankment. The design is capable of storing runoff from the basin and direct precipitation on the facility, resulting from the 5,000-year, 24-hour storm event during operation and the 10,000-year, 24-hour storm event for post-closure. 1.12.5 Waste Rock Storage Facility Two initial waste rock storage facility (WRSF) locations — west and south of the pit — will merge into a single facility on the southwest perimeter by Mine Year 10. The dump is designed with an overall slope of 2.7H:1V and inter-bench geometry of 1.5H:1V slopes with 50 ft high and 60 ft wide benches, constructed over previously disturbed ground. Water management consists of upstream diversion channels for non-contact water and a seepage collection system for contact water, comprising double-walled HDPE pipes (300 mm main, 100 mm secondary) sized for the 100-year, 24-hour event. Seepage is conveyed to double-lined GCL and HDPE collection ponds for reuse at the process plant. Surface water diversion channels are sized for the 100-year, 24-hour event with a minimum 2% slope and riprap lining. Physical stability will be monitored via survey markers, vibrating wire piezometers, hydraulic piezometers, and inclinometers throughout the LOM. Topsoil and growth media will be harvested from areas adjacent to the WRSF during closure to support reclamation. 1.12.6 Power, Communications, and Fuel Two 120 kV powerlines will supply the site via the Nevada Power Imlay Substation. Installed load is 160 MW with an operating load of 124 MW; total load including the oxygen plant is 170 MW, requiring additional transmission capacity. Site communications are currently served by microwave, fiber optic, and cellular systems and will be upgraded as required during execution. Diesel fuel is priced at $3.76/gallon; supply contracts are in place on an annual or bi-annual basis. Fuel will be delivered by rail once the spur is operational. The existing fuel island will be replaced with a high-efficiency system in mine years 3 and 4. Hycroft Mine Project Page 11 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.12.7 Water Supply and Management Hycroft holds 16 water-right permits sufficient to support all planned facilities and process demands. Plant freshwater demand is estimated at 7,260 gal/min, supplied via four existing wells with four additional production wells to be drilled. Tailings will be transported as slurry at 48% solids through an HDPE-lined pipeline, distributed via a 36” manifold system. Return water will initially be managed via the Underdrain Collection Pond, transitioning to barge-mounted pumps in the TMF supernatant pool in later years. GoldSim Monte Carlo water balance modeling over 250 simulations indicates average make-up water demand starting at 6,500 gal/min in year 1, declining to 3,200 gal/min by years 14–15. Pit dewatering will be managed by four depressurization wells with groundwater at approximately 700 ft below ground surface (bgs), with water conveyed to the process plant. Plant site stormwater is managed via perimeter ditches and a 9,850 yd³ HDPE-lined sedimentation pond sized for the 100-year, 24-hour event. 1.12.8 Hazard Considerations The site climate is arid at 7.7 in/a average precipitation with winter temperatures between 20 °F and 40 °F, introducing freeze-thaw cycling risk in near-surface soils. Seismicity is assessed as low to moderate with no active or capable faults identified. Principal pit slope stability controls are the argillically altered Camel Conglomerate, Auld Lang Syne Formation siltstones, and the East Fault. 1.13 Market Studies and Contracts No formal marketing studies have been completed. Gold and silver doré will be sold on the spot market under terms typical of comparable doré contracts. Both metals are globally liquid commodities supporting reliable price discovery throughout the LOM. The economic analysis assumes base case prices of US$3,600/oz gold and US$48.00/oz silver, based on long-term consensus forecasts from numerous financial institutions as of April 2026. No refining, transportation, or hedging contracts are currently in place, though these are considered readily obtainable. Refining and transportation costs are estimated at US$5.00/oz gold and US$0.50/oz silver based on comparable project terms. 1.14 Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations 1.14.1 Environmental Considerations The Mine has conducted numerous environmental baseline studies as part of their previous permitting efforts and continues to collect certain environmental baseline data. The Mine area has been surveyed for surface water resources, including Waters of the United States (WOTUS), biological resources, cultural resources, and groundwater resources. In addition, the Mine has developed a series of environmental management and monitoring plans which are required to guide the development and operation of the Project to limit environmental impacts. These plans are developed to address legal requirements and committed Environmental Protection Measures (EPMs) made by the Mine during Project permitting and recent Plan of Operations amendments. Hycroft Mine Project Page 12 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.14.2 Permitting Considerations The Mine operates under a series of permits, which are issued by both federal and state regulators. The following table lists the principal environmental permits necessary to operate the Mine and the applicable issuing agency. Table 1-5: Principal Environmental Permits Operating Permits Issuing Agency Plan of Operations BLM Mercury Operating Permit to Construct NDEP Bureau of Air Pollution Control Class I Air Quality Operating Permit to Construct NDEP Bureau of Air Pollution Control Class II Air Quality Permit NDEP Bureau of Air Pollution Control Permit to Operate a Public Water System NDEP Bureau of Safe Drinking Water Water Pollution Control Permit-Crofoot Project NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation & Reclamation Water Pollution Control Permit-Hycroft Mine NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation & Reclamation Reclamation Permit NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation & Reclamation Mining General Stormwater Pollution Prevention Permit NDEP Bureau of Water Pollution Control Class III Landfill Waiver NDEP Bureau of Waste Management Artificial Pond Permit (Brimstone Process Ponds) NV Department of Wildlife Artificial Pond Permit (Crofoot Process Ponds) NV Department of Wildlife Artificial Pond Permit (North Process Ponds) NV Department of Wildlife Septic Onsite Disposal NDEP Bureau of Water Pollution Control Dam Safety Permits NV Division of Water Resources Hazardous Materials Storage Permit NV State Fire Marshal Special Use Permit Pershing County Special Use Permit Humboldt County Golden Eagle Take Permit US Fish & Wildlife Service In addition to the principal environmental permits outlined above, the following table lists other notifications or ministerial permits that may likely be necessary to operate the Project, as well as the applicable agency. Table 1-6: Other Notifications or Ministerial Permits Notification/Permit Agency Above Ground Storage Tank Permit Nevada Bureau of Corrective Actions Agreement for Road Maintenance Humboldt and Pershing Counties Explosives Permit Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Explosives User’s License (User’s Clearance) Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Fire and Life Safety Nevada State Fire Marshal Hazardous Materials Permit Nevada State Fire Marshal Industrial Artificial Pond Permit Nevada Department of Wildlife Leach Pad Commencement Nevada Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation Leach Pad As-Built Report Nevada Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation Process Plant As-Built Report Nevada Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation Dam Safety Permit Nevada Division of Water Resources Mine ID Number Mine Safety & Health Administration Mine Opening Notification Nevada Division of Minerals Mine Registry Nevada Division of Minerals Notification of Commencement of Operations Mine Safety & Health Administration Production/Dewatering Wells - Proof of Completion Nevada Division of Water Resources Radio License Federal Communications Commission RCRA Waste Mgt. ID - Mine Nevada Bureau of Sustainable Materials Management/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Well Drilling Permit (Notice of Intent to Drill) Nevada Division of Water Resources Potable Water System Nevada Bureau of Safe Drinking Water Septic System Nevada Bureau of Water Pollution Control Hycroft Mine Project Page 13 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.14.3 Social Considerations Social and community impacts are considered and evaluated for the revision to the Plan Application and would be used in the NEPA process. Potentially affected Native American tribes, tribal organizations, and/or individuals are consulted during the preparation of all plan amendments to advise on the proposed projects that may affect cultural sites, resources, and traditional activities. 1.14.4 Closure and Reclamation Considerations A Tentative Plan for Permanent Closure (TPPC) for the Mine is in place and is currently being updated for future submission to the BMRR with the application to modify the WPCP (NEV0094114). In the TPPC, the proposed TMF closure approach would consist of fluid management through evaporation, covering the TMF with a geosynthetic cover and growth media, and then revegetation. The design of the process components is not sufficiently advanced to determine the closure costs. Any residual TMF drainage will be managed with evaporation cells. Surface management surety bonds currently total US$58.7 million with US$58.3 million securing financial assurance requirements for the Mine and US$0.4 million securing financial assurance requirements for the water supply well field and exploration within the Project boundary. Future increases in reclamation bonding will either be through surety bonds supported by restricted cash balances or by letters of credit issued by banks. 1.15 Capital and Operating Cost The capital cost (CAPEX) and operating cost (OPEX) estimates were developed in Q1 2026 in U.S. dollars (US$). The estimates are based on budgetary quotations, supplemented with Ausenco’s in-house database, and informed by Ausenco’s experience from similar operations in North America. 1.15.1 Capital Cost Estimate The capital cost estimate was developed in Q1 2026 to target a level of accuracy of -30% to +50%, which aligns with an Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACE International) Class 5 level estimate. The CAPEX estimate includes the following: ● Initial capital cost to design, construct, and commission the mine, process plants, and supporting facilities and infrastructure. ● Sustaining capital to construct and commission equipment replacement and other major capital expenses expected after commercial production commences. ● Closure costs associated with reclaimation of the project site after operations have ceased. The initial, sustaining, and total costs of the project are summarized by major areas in Table 1-7. Table 1-7: Capital Cost Summary WBS Description Capital Cost (US$M) Sustaining Cost (US$M) Total Cost 1 (US$M) 1000 Mining 194 1,171 1,365 2000 Crushing 48 60 109 3000 Sulfide Process 915 776 1,692 4000 Oxide Process 16 46 63 5000 Waste Rock Storage & TMF 208 515 723 6000 Onsite Infrastructure 139 9 148 7000 Offsite Infrastructure 43 366 409 Total Direct Costs 1,563 2,944 4,507 8000 Indirects 382 27 409 9000 Provisions 448 136 584 10000 Owner’s Costs 41 - 41 Total Capital Cost 2,434 3,107 5,541 Note: 1. Totals may not match due to rounding Hycroft Mine Project Page 14 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.15.2 Operating Cost Estimate The operating cost estimate was developed in Q1 2026 to target a level of accuracy of -30% to +50%, which aligns with an Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACE International) Class 5 level estimate. The OPEX estimate for the project includes expenses incurred by the mine, process plant, and administration of the operation (G&A costs). A summary of the mining, processing, and G&A operational costs by LOM total cost and unit cost (US$/ton) is in Table 1-8. Table 1-8: Operating Cost Summary Cost Area LOM Total (US$M) 1 US$/ton milled % of Total Mining 8,683 2 6.91 31.5 Process 18,245 14.52 66.1 G&A 664 0.53 2.4 Total 27,592 21.96 100 Note: 1. Totals may not match due to rounding 2. Includes 10% contingency 1.16 Economic Analysis 1.16.1 Economic Summary The results of the economic analysis discussed in this section represent forward-looking information as defined under U.S. securities law. The results depend on inputs that are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those presented here. Information that is forward-looking includes: ● mineral resource estimates ● assumed commodity prices and exchange rates ● proposed mine production plan ● projected mining and process recovery rates ● assumptions as to mining dilution ● capital and operating cost estimates and working capital requirements ● assumptions as to closure costs and closure requirements ● assumptions as to environmental, permitting and social consideration and risks. Hycroft Mine Project Page 15 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Additional risks to the forward-looking information includes: ● changes to costs of production from what is assumed ● unrecognized environmental risks ● unanticipated reclamation expenses ● unexpected variations in quantity of mineralized material, grade or recovery rates ● geotechnical or hydrogeological considerations differing from what was assumed ● failure of mining methods to operate as anticipated ● failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated ● changes to assumptions as to the availability of electrical power, and the power rates used in the operating cost estimates and financial analysis ● ability to maintain the social license to operate ● accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry ● changes to interest rates ● changes to tax rates and availability of allowances for depreciation and amortization. The economic analysis was completed assuming a 5% discount rate. The pre-tax NPV discounted at 5% is US$5,437 million; the IRR is 18.9%, and payback period is 4.3 years. On a post-tax basis, the NPV discounted at 5% is US$4,344 million, the IRR is 16.9%, and the payback period is 4.7 years. A summary of project economics is listed in Table 1-9. Readers are cautioned that the assessment is preliminary in nature and there is no certainty that the economic assessment will be realized. However, it does not include any inferred mineral resources. Hycroft Mine Project Page 16 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table 1-9: Economic Analysis Summary Unit Value General Inputs Gold Price US$/oz 3,600 Silver Price US$/oz 48.00 Discount Rate % 5.0 LOM Production Total Mineralized Material Mined kst 1,496,134 Total Waste Mined kst 2,320,719 Average Strip Ratio w:o 1.55 Life of Mine years 50.5 Total Mill Feed Processed kst 1,046,284 Average Mill Feed Grade (Au) oz/st 0.012 Average Mill Feed Grade (Ag) oz/st 0.43 Total Leach Material Processed kst 210,010 Average Leach Feed Grade (Au) oz/st 0.005 Average Leach Feed Grade (Ag) oz/st 0.12 Total Recovered Gold koz 10,476 Total Recovered Silver koz 349,208 Average Mill Feed Gold Recovery % 82.8 Average Mill Feed Silver Recovery % 77.5 Average Leach Gold Recovery % 40.0 Average Leach Silver Recovery % 12.0 Life of Mine Payable Gold Production koz 10,424 Life of Mine Payable Silver Production koz 347,462 Life of Mine Payable Gold Equivalent Production koz 15,057 Refining, Royalties Gold Payable % 99.5 Silver Payable % 99.5 NSR Royalty % NSR 2.14 Refining Costs - Au US$/oz 5.00 Refining Costs - Ag US$/oz 0.50 LOM Operating Costs Mining Cost US$/st mined 2.28 Mining Cost US$/st processed 6.91 Processing Cost US$/st processed 14.52 G&A Cost US$/st processed 0.53 Total Operating Cost US$/st processed 21.96 Cash Costs 1 US$/oz AuEq 1,924 All-In Sustaining Cost 2 US$/oz AuEq 2,147 Capital Costs Initial Capital US$M 2,434 Sustaining Capital US$M 3,107 Closure Costs US$M 243 Financials Pre-Tax NPV (5%) US$M 5,437 Pre-Tax IRR % 18.9 Pre-Tax Payback years 4.3 Post-Tax NPV (5%) US$M 4,344 Post-Tax IRR % 16.9 Post-Tax Payback years 4.7 Notes: 1. Cash costs consist of mining costs, processing costs, mine-level G&A and refining charges and royalties 2. AISC includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs Hycroft Mine Project Page 17 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.16.2 Sensitivity Analysis A sensitivity analysis was conducted on the base case NPV and IRR of the project using the following variables: discount rate, head grade, recovery, total operating cost, initial capital cost, as well as silver and gold prices, which were encompassed in a single variable, metal price. As shown in Figure 1-1, the sensitivity analysis revealed that the project is most sensitive to changes in metal price, head grade, and recovery. Figure 1-1: Post-Tax Sensitivity Analysis Results Note: Metal price, head grade, and recovery series overlap on the above figure. Source: Ausenco, 2026 Hycroft Mine Project Page 18 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 1.17 Conclusions Hycroft, in conjunction with IMC, developed the Hycroft deposit block model based on 5,813 drillholes with 516,901 drill intervals amounting to 2,668,616 ft of drilling. The model was assembled by Ryan Rodney, C.P.G. of Hycroft. IMC worked with Hycroft and reviewed the final model. IMC is the qualified firm for the statement of mineral resources with John Marek, P.E., acting as the Engineer of Record. Previous metallurgical testwork programs conducted on the Hycroft sulfide deposit consisted of a series of comminution, flotation, concentrate oxidation, and cyanide leaching tests on mineralized materials, flotation tailings, and oxidized sulfide concentrates. Comminution testwork indicates that the Hycroft mineralization exhibits very high rock competency. Flotation testwork, conducted at a grind sizes of P 80 of 85 µm, under acidic conditions (pH of 4.7) using strong non-selective sulfide collectors, demonstrated improved flotation performance. Flotation residence time was identified as a key parameter, and optimized test conditions targeted a mass pull of approximately 22% to 25%, resulting in favorable Au and Ag recoveries. Metallurgical testwork conducted between 2021 and 2025 indicates that the Hycroft sulfide mineralization can be processed using a flotation and POX flowsheet. Flotation optimization resulted in improved gold and silver recoveries, and POX test results support the application of POX followed by hot cure, lime boil, and cyanide leaching for treatment of the pyrite concentrate. The MRE statement was developed using a conventional computer-based block model. Each block was evaluated to determine the net return from the following two processes: ● ROM cyanide heap leaching and Merrill-Crowe of oxide and some transition materials. ● Milling, Flotation, POX, Hot Cure, and Lime Boil followed by Cyanide Leach and Merrill-Crowe of sulfide and some transition materials. The Initial Assessment indicates that the selected development has the potential to support economic extraction of the Hycroft mineral resources based on the study adopted for mining, processing, infrastructure, capital and operating costs, and commodity prices. The economic analysis demonstrates positive project economics. However, project value remains sensitive to key factors including metal prices, metallurgical performance, capital cost estimates, and operating assumptions. Additional metallurgical testwork, engineering refinement, and economic optimization are recommended in the next study phase to reduce uncertainty and improve confidence in project outcomes. 1.18 Recommendations Recommendations cover the discipline areas of exploration and resource model refinement, mineral processing and metallurgical testing, and overall project configuration to support the evaluation at the PFS level. The total recommended budget estimate to complete the programs is $22,050,000. Hycroft Mine Project Page 19 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 2 Introduction 2.1 Introduction This technical report summary (TRS) summarizes the results of an initial assessment with an economic analysis (IA-EA) for the Mine located in northwestern Nevada. The work has been prepared at the request of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (Hycroft). The TRS follows the requirements and outline as described in the. US Securities and Exchange Commission Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 229.1300 – Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining operations (S-K 1300). This TRS has been completed by Ausenco Engineering South USA (Ausenco), Hycroft, Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (IMC) and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services (WestLand) (collectively, the Report Authors). The updated statement of mineral resources reflects information developed through 2025. This TRS supersedes all previous technical studies, including the TRS filed on EDGAR under Form 8-K on January 21, 2026. The MRE is based on information provided by Hycroft which has been checked and validated wherever possible by IMC. The MRE is based on information provided by Hycroft. IMC, an independent third party with necessary relevant experience, has checked and validated the MRE wherever possible, and is assuming responsibility for the published MRE. 2.2 Terms of Reference Some sections of this report were published previously as part of a previous technical report summary filed in January 2026 (the 2026 TRS) and are listed below in Section 2.6.2. The sections of these reports which were utilized have been reviewed by both IMC and Ausenco in sufficient detail so that the Qualified Persons (QPs) at IMC and Ausenco have assumed responsibility for this work. Hycroft staff have provided all requested information and have worked with Ausenco, IMC and Westland Engineering in an open and transparent manner throughout the Project period. All units of measurement in this report are in US customary units and currencies are expressed in United States dollars (symbol: US$ or currency: USD), unless otherwise stated. Precious metal grades are presented in units of troy ounces per short ton (oz/ton). The occasional use of non-US customary units will be clearly noted and explained in text when they occur. Tons mean short tons of 2,000 lbs, Ktons means 1,000 short tons. This TRS presents the MRE for the Hycroft Mine (the Mine), and an economic analysis based on pressure oxidation (POX) for sulfide material and Heap Leaching for oxide material. Transitional material may be processed by either process. Hycroft Mine Project Page 20 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Mineral resources are reported in accordance with SK-1300. 2.3 Qualified Persons Below is a list of the firms that acted as QPs in the preparation of this TRS: ● Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. is responsible for sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 2.1-2.4.1, 2.5-2.7, 10, 14-16, 18.1-18.2.3, 18.2.4- 18.2.7, 18.2.8.2-18.3.2, 18.3.4, 18.3.5, 19, 22.1, 22.5, 22.7-22.12, 22.13.1.3, 22.13.1.5-22.13.1.7, 22.13.2.2, 22.13.2.4, 22.13.2.5, 23.1, 23.4, 23.6, 24 and 25. ● Hycroft is responsible for sections 1.3-1.7, 1.15,3-9, 12, 20, 22.2-22.4, 22.13.1.1, 22.13.1.2, 22.13.2.1, 23.1-23.3, and 24. ● Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. is responsible for sections 1.9, 1.10, 1.15, 1.18, 2.4.2, 11, 13, 18.2.3, 18.2.8.1, 18.3.1, 18.3.3, 22.6, 22.13.1.4, 22.13.2.3, 23.1, 23.5 and 24. ● WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc., is responsible for Section 1.14, 17 and 24. 2.4 Site Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection 2.4.1 Site inspection for Jonathan Cooper Ausenco’s QP, Jonathan Cooper, P.Eng., completed a site visit of the Hycroft property from April 8 to 11, 2024 to inspect the existing infrastructure. 2.4.2 Site inspection for John Marek IMC’s QP, John Marek, P.E., completed a site visit on August 5, 2021, to review the existing core and logs. 2.5 Effective Dates The overall effective date of this report is May 14, 2026. 2.6 Information Sources and References 2.6.1 General The authors sourced information from documents listed in the References section of this report (Section 24). The reports and documents listed in Section 2.6.2 and Section 25 of this Report were also used to support preparation of the TRS. Hycroft Mine Project Page 21 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 2.6.2 Previous Technical Reports Hycroft previously filed the following technical reports: ● Hycroft Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment, Nevada, USA. Prepared by Ausenco Engineering South USA Inc for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation. Effective date: January 21, 2026. ● Initial Assessment Technical Report Summary; Humboldt and Pershing Counties. Prepared by Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation. Effective date: March 27, 2023. ● Technical Report Summary of Initial Assessment on the Hycroft Mine, Nevada, United States of America. Prepared by Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation, Effective date: February 18, 2022. ● Hycroft Project Technical Report Summary: Heap Leaching Feasibility Study, Winnemucca, Nevada, USA. Prepared by M3 Engineering & Technology Corp for Hycroft Mining Corporation. Effective date: July 31, 2019. Hycroft completed the following technical report in accordance Canada’s National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects and which are available on the SEDAR website (www.SEDARplus.ca) ● Hycroft Project NI 43-101 Technical Report: Mill Expansion Feasibility Study, Winnemucca, Nevada, USA. Prepared by M3 Engineering & Technology Corp. for Allied Nevada Gold Corp. Effective date: November 03, 2014. 2.7 Currency, Units, Abbreviations and Definitions All units of measurement in this report are US customary, and all currencies are expressed in US dollars (symbol: US$; currency: USD) unless otherwise stated. Contained gold metal is expressed as troy ounces (oz), where 1 oz = 31.1035 g. All material tons are expressed as dry tons unless stated otherwise. A list of abbreviations and acronyms is provided in Table 2-1, and units of measurement are listed in Table 2-2. Table 2-1: Abbreviations and Acronyms Abbreviation Description AAL American Assay Laboratories AAO atmospheric alkaline oxidation AAS atomic absorption spectroscopy AES atomic emission spectrometry Allied Nevada Allied Nevada Gold Corp. AR aqua regia Ag Silver ALS Auld Lang Syne formation Au Gold Ausenco Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. Az Azimuth BLM Bureau of Land Management BWi bond ball mill work index CCD counter-current decantation Hycroft Mine Project Page 22 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Abbreviation Description CNI Call & Nicholas, Inc. CWi bond crusher work index DDH diamond drill hole DSHA deterministic seismic hazard assessment EA Environmental Assessment EDGAR Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval FA fire assay FPCP Final Permanent Closure Plan G&A general and administration HLF Heap leach facility Hycroft Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation IA initial assessment ICP inductively coupled plasma ID2 inverse distance squared ID3 inverse distance cubed IMC Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. IA-EA Initial assessment with economic analysis IP induced polarization ISO International Organization for Standardization LECO Laboratory Equipment Corporation LOM life of mine LWIR Longwave Infrared LTI lost time incident M3 M3 Engineering and Technology Corp MRE mineral resource estimate MS mass spectrometry MWWAI Michael W. West and Associates Inc. NDEP Nevada Division of Environmental Protection NDOW Nevada Department of Wildlife NDWR Nevada Division of Water Resources NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NN nearest neighbor NSR net smelter return OES optical emission spectrometry POX pressure oxidation QA/QC quality assurance/quality control QP qualified person (as defined in National Instrument 43-101) RC reverse circulation drilling Hycroft Mine Project Page 23 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Abbreviation Description ROM run-of-mine RPEE reasonable prospects for economic extraction RQD rock quality designation SD standard deviation SEC Securities and Exchange Commission SHLF South Heap Leach Facility S-K 1300 US Securities and Exchange Commission Ruling S-K Subpart 1300 SRK SRK Consulting (US) Inc. SS sulfide sulfur SWIR Shortwave Infrared the Mine Hycroft Mine TMF tailings management facility TRIFR Total Recordable Incident Frequency Rate TRS technical report summary TSG Tertiary Sulfur Group USGS United States Geological Survey USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service Westland WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. WSP WSP Global Inc. Table 2-2: Units of Measurement Unit Description µm micrometer Ac acre Asl above sea level Axb hardness of ore in term of impact breakage, unitless B billion Bgs below ground surface Bton billion short tons °C Celsius Cfs cubic feet per second D day °F fahrenheit ft feet ft/a feet per year GWh/a gigawatt-hours per year Hycroft Mine Project Page 24 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Unit Description g gram (unit of weight) gal gallon gal/a gallons per year gal/min gallons per minute g/ton, gm/ton grams per short ton Hp horsepower hr hour in inch in/a inches per year kg kilogram km kilometer Km 2 Square kilometer kt kilotonne (1,000 metric tonnes) ktons kilo short tons kV kilovolt kWh/ton kilowatt-hours per ton lb pound M million masl Meters above sea level mi mile mi 2 square mile mm millimeters mph miles per hour Mt million tonnes Mtons million short tons Mtons/a million short tons per year min. minute Moz million troy ounces MW megawatt oz troy ounce oz/ton troy ounces per short ton pcf pounds per cubic foot ppm parts per million ppt parts per trillion psig pressure per square inch shifts/a shifts per year t metric tonne (1,000 kg) t/d tonnes per day ton short ton (2,000 pounds) ton/a short tons per year ton/d short tons per day tn short ton TSS total suspended solids units/a units per year US$, USD United States dollars (symbol; currency) US$/a United States dollars per year US$/ton United States dollars per short ton wt/wt weight percent % percent Hycroft Mine Project Page 25 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 3 Property Description 3.1 Introduction The Mine is an existing gold and silver operation located 54 miles west of Winnemucca in Humboldt County and Pershing County, Nevada, as shown in Figure 3-1. The Site is accessible via Nevada State Route 49 (Jungo Road), an all-weather, unpaved road that is maintained by Humboldt County and Hycroft. A major east–west railway runs immediately adjacent to the property. The Mine property straddles Townships 34, 35, 35½ and 36 north and Ranges 28, 29 and 30 east (MDB&M) with an approximate latitude 40°52’ north and longitude 118°41’ west. The mine is situated on the western flank of the Kamma Mountains on the eastern edge of the Black Rock Desert. The Mine property was consolidated through multiple transactions over several years and is described below. Some unpatented mining claims overlap other Hycroft patented and unpatented mining claims to ensure there are no fractional claim gaps. Existing facilities on site include two administration buildings, a mobile maintenance shop, a light vehicle maintenance shop, a warehouse, an assay laboratory, three heap leach pads – Crofoot, North, and Brimstone, primary, secondary and tertiary crushing systems, two Merrill-Crowe process plants and a refinery. It is considered that existing components of the mine property would be utilized for future development. The Mine operates under permit authorization from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP), Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) and County agencies. As of the effective date of this report, Hycroft has approximately 52 employees. 3.2 Property and Title in Jurisdiction The Mine is owned and managed by Hycroft Resources and Development, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation. Hycroft Mine Project Page 26 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Figure 3-1: Hycroft Mine Location Map Source: Nevada Bureau of Mines, 2023 3.3 Project Ownership The property containing the Mine property consists of 25 private parcels with patented claims totaling approximately 1,855 acres, along with 3,249 unpatented mining claims covering approximately 62,298 acres, for a combined total of approximately 64,000 acres. Some mining claims overlap other Hycroft Mining claims to ensure there are no fractional gaps in mining claim coverage. Hycroft Mine Project Page 27 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 There are 30 unpatented placer claims, and 3,219 unpatented lode claims are in Humboldt County and Pershing County, Nevada as follows: ● T36N, R29E, Sections: 28, 32, 33 ● T36N, R30E, Sections: 19, 28-34 ● T35 1/2N, R29E, Sections: 25, 26, 35, 36 ● T35N, R29E, Sections: 1-3, 10-15, 21-28, 31-36 ● T35N, R30E, Sections: 2-10, 15-23, 25-36 ● T34N, R28E, Sections: 1, 2, 11, 12, 13 ● T34N, R29E, Sections: 1-28, 33 ● T34N, R30E, Sections: 2-11, 17-20, 29, 30 The 25 private patented claims are located in Humboldt County and Pershing County, Nevada as follows: ● T35N, R29E, Sections: 24, 25, 35, 36 ● T35N, R30E, Sections: 19, 30, 31 ● T34N, R29E, Sections: 1, 2 The mining claim package is depicted in Figure 3-2. Individual mining claims for each township range and section are presented in Appendix A – Patented Claims and Appendix B – Unpatented Claims. The project centroid is defined in the following mine grid coordinates: 51500 N and 20500 E. This point is located central to all mine facilities. The project centroid shall be used to reference all other locations within one mile. Much of the project area is located on un-surveyed public and private land for which the sections, ranges, and townships listed above have been interpolated. Patented claims have been surveyed (Wilson, 2008; Prenn, 2006). The following is a list of land acquisitions/transactions made over the years which constitute the entire Hycroft land claim package and has been assembled through a series of transactions. The Crofoot property and approximately 3,500 acres of claims were acquired by Vista in 1985. The Crofoot property, originally held under lease, is owned by Hycroft. The Crofoot royalty was terminated January 7, 2026. The Lewis property and approximately 8,700 acres of claims were acquired by Vista in early 1987. In 2006, approximately 13,100 acres of additional claims were staked by Vista. These claims are contiguous or proximate to the original Crofoot and Lewis claims. From 2007 through 2015, Hycroft staked additional lode mining claims contiguous to existing Hycroft claims that cover approximately 37,373 acres. Some of these lode claims overlap existing placer claims. Hycroft Mine Project Page 28 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees to the BLM and Humboldt and Pershing Counties and payment of annual real property taxes for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are made every third quarter (Q3). Payments are current through the 2025–2026 claim years, with US$724,095 paid for 2025–2026. Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees and real property taxes are required to continue to hold the Hycroft property in good standing from. BLM annual maintenance fees for claims are due not later than September 1 of each year. Humboldt and Pershing County State annual holding fees beginning September 1 of each year are due no later than November 1 of each year. Annual real property taxes for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are due August 31 of the following year. Hycroft controls all surface and mineral rights within the Hycroft MRE area. No further land acquisition is required for the operation of the mine and contemplated processing facilities. Figure 3-3 shows the property layout including site facilities, mine workings, leach pads and waste dumps. 3.4 Property Agreements Table 3-1 shows the royalty amount and other annual land holding costs. Table 3-1: Hycroft Annual Land Holding Costs Month Due Lessor Type Amount Monthly Sprott Royalty 1 Net Smelter Return Royalty 1.5% NSR August-October US BLM, Humboldt & Pershing Counties Claim Fees US$724,095 Note: 1. The Sprott royalty is equal to 1.5% of Net Smelter Returns (NSR) free and clear of withholding taxes or similar taxes. Hycroft Mine Project Page 29 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Figure 3-2: Claim Map Source: Hycroft, 2026 Hycroft Mine Project Page 30 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Figure 3-3: Current Property and Facilities Layout (2025) Source: Hycroft, 2026 Hycroft Mine Project Page 31 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 3.5 Surface Rights Hycroft controls all surface and mineral rights within the Hycroft MRE area. No further land acquisition is required for the operation of the mine and contemplated processing facilities. 3.6 Water Rights Hycroft controls 16 separate water-right permits administered by the NDWR. These permits are held in ownership either by Hycroft, or by other private parties and leased to Hycroft. Water resources to support the Mine are controlled under 14 permits in the Black Rock Desert Basin totaling 20,414.9 acre-ft/a (6.65 billion gal/a). Two of these water permits are outside the Black Rock Desert Hydrographic Basin and used to support construction maintenance of Jungo Road with Humboldt County. 3.7 Liabilities and Encumbrances The consolidated financial statements of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation set forth its material liabilities as of the date of such financial statements. The assets of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the Company) are subject to encumbrances and obligations, including encumbrances and obligations under and associated with the Sprott Royalty Agreement dated May 29, 2020, by and between the Company and Sprott Private Resource Lending II (Co) Inc. 3.8 Environmental Considerations Gold production began on the property in 1983 and continued through 1985 when Standard Slag opened the Lewis Mine. There was a brief gap in mining until Hycroft acquired the Lewis Mine and the Crofoot claims and recommenced mining in 1988. Mining operations continued until 1998 when mining was placed on standby due to low metal prices. Process operations continued until 2004 when the property was placed on care and maintenance. Efforts began in 2003 to update the Reclamation Plan, associated cost estimate, and related amount of surety bond posted with the BLM. During the years 2011 and 2012, Hycroft increased collateral account balances to support additional surety bonds for the benefit of the BLM. These additional surety bonds allowed Hycroft to continue operations at the Mine and to expand exploration activities outside of the Mine. In 2011, Hycroft received a reimbursement of US$0.5 million related to reclamation costs that had been paid out. In January 2014, the BLM approved an updated reclamation cost estimate allowing for the phased bonding of the expansion activities. The required bond amount was lowered from US$63 million to US$58.3 million. Hycroft has Surface Management Surety Bonds with insurance companies that meet the financial requirements of the BLM to comply with the total requirement of US$58.3 million as detailed in the September 2013 reclamation cost estimate that requested the phasing of the mill expansion activities. Additionally, Hycroft has posted a bond with the BLM in the amount of US$0.6 million for the adjacent water supply well field, well field monitoring and exploration within the project boundary. Hycroft has US$14.4 million in restricted cash for collateral for these bonds. Hycroft Mine Project Page 32 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 The Hycroft area has been surveyed for surface water resources, including Waters of the United States, biological resources, cultural resources, and groundwater resources. The Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) is known to occur adjacent to the Hycroft Project. Hycroft is working with the BLM and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in the management of this species. 3.9 Safety Considerations The operation of the Mine is subject to regulation by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the Mine Act). MSHA inspects the Mine on a regular basis and issues various citations and orders when it believes a violation has occurred under the Mine Act. In years ending 2024 and 2025, after multiple inspections, MSHA has issued no (0) citations and no (0) “Significant and Substantial” Violations under section 104(a) of the Mine Act. There have been no fines including citations and orders issued to contractors for the year ending May 1, 2026. Hycroft mandated mine safety and health programs include employee and contractor training, risk management, workplace inspection, emergency response, accident investigation, and program auditing with a goal to have zero workplace injuries and occupational illness. In 2023, Hycroft implemented multifunctional workplace inspections and monthly employee engagement sessions. As a result, Hycroft has now operated for three consecutive years at a 0.0 Total Recordable Incident Frequency Rate (TRIFR) and achieved over 1.4 million hours without a Lost Time Incident (LTI). The Mine’s TRIFR per 200,000 man-hours worked including contractors was 0.0 on May 1, 2026. 3.10 Permitting Considerations The Mine operates under permit authorizations from the BLM, NDEP, NDOW, and NDWR. All operating and environmental permits, approved by the BLM, NDEP, NDOW and NDWR, are in good standing for mining operations. Table 3-2 summarizes the operating permits while Table 3-3 shows the miscellaneous permits for the property. Table 3-2: Hycroft Operating Permits Operating Permits Issuing Agency Number Status Plan of Operations BLM NVN-064641 Current Eagle Take Permit USFWS MB90099B-0 Current Mercury Operating Permit to Construct NDEP - BAPC AP1041-2255 Current Class I Air Quality Operating Permit to Construct NDEP - BAPC AP1041-2974 Incorporated into the Class II AQOP Class I Air Quality Operating Permit to Construct NDEP - BAPC AP1041-3344 Incorporated into the Class II AQOP Class I Air Quality Operating Permit NDEP - BAPC AP1041-2964 Current Permit to Operate a Public Water System NDEP - BSDW HU-0864-12NTNC Current Class II Air Quality Permit NDEP - BAPC AP1041-0334.05 Current Water Pollution Control Permit-Crofoot Project NDEP - BMRR NEV60013 Current Water Pollution Control Permit-Brimstone Project NDEP - BMRR NEV94114 Current (Application Shield) Bioremediation Facility Permit NDEP - BMRR GNV041995-HGP15 Superseded by Water Pollution Control Permit Reclamation Permit NDEP - BMRR 134 In Renewal Mining General Stormwater Pollution Prevention Permit NDEP - BWPC R300000: MSW-177 Current Class III Landfill Waiver NDEP - BSMM SWW-346 Current Artificial Pond Permit (Brimstone Process Ponds) NDOW HU019 – S503626 Current Artificial Pond Permit (Crofoot Process Ponds) NDOW HU009 – 39469 Current Artificial Pond Permit (North Process Ponds) NDOW HU022-39468 Current Artificial Pond Permit (Stage 1 Ponds) NDOW HU022-40377 Current General Onsite Sewage Disposal System NDEP - BWPC GNEVOSDS09 Current Dam Safety Permit (Crofoot Process Ponds) NDWR J-273 Current Dam Safety Permit (Brimstone Leach Event Pond) NDWR J-683 Current Dam Safety Permit (North Leach Event Ponds) NDWR J-687 Current Dam Safety Permit (Stage 1 Event Ponds) NDWR Pending Hazardous Materials Storage Permit NV State Fire Marshal 8250 Current Special Use Permit Pershing County SUP 12-04 Current Special Use Permit Humboldt County UH-12-04 Current Hycroft Mine Project Page 33 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 Table 3-3: Hycroft Miscellaneous Permits Operating Permits Issuing Agency Number Status Microwave Repeater; Sec. 29, 30 BLM NVN46292 Current ROW Wells/Pipeline/Power Line; Sec. 3 BLM NVN46564 Current ROW 2 Wells/Pipeline/Power Line BLM NVN46959 Current ROW Road and Waterline (Old Man camp to Lewis) BLM NVN39119 Current ROW Crofoot pipeline BLM NVN44999 Current ROW 24 kV Aerial Powerline, Lewis/Floka BLM NVN54893 Current Kamma Peak Station FCC WNER344 Current Sulfur Mine Station FCC WNER345 Current Winnemucca Mountain Station FCC WNER346 Current Base Station and 45 Mobile Units FCC WNKK336 Current Operating and miscellaneous permits that require annual maintenance fees are shown in Table 3-4. Fixed annual fees are required for storm water and public drinking water system permits based upon the current Nevada regulatory structure. The other annual fees are based on annual mining production, quantities and types of chemicals stored on site, existing and permitted surface disturbance, and the level of actual and permitted air emissions. The variable fees shown are based upon the 2025 operational conditions. Table 3-4: Hycroft Miscellaneous Permits Permit and Fee Description Annual Amount (US$) Air Quality Operating Permit AP1041-0334.05 Fees are incorporated into title V permit. Air Quality Operating Permit AP1041-2255 $16,958 Air Quality Operating Permit AP1041-2964 $47,448 Reclamation Permit $37,811 Nevada Radioactive Material License $2,000 Stormwater Permit $1,000 Artificial Pond Permit $31,625 Water Pollution Control Permit NEV94114 $66,000 Water Pollution Control Permit NEV60013 $60,000 State Fire Marshal $210 Public Drinking Water System $391 Septic System Permits $750 Toxic Release Inventory Annual Fee $5,500 Nevada LP-Gas License $795 Total $270,488 Hycroft currently holds six Right-of-Way (ROW) leases with two exploration notices with the BLM, as described in Table 3-5 along with fees and renewals. Table 3-5: Right-of-Way Payment and Renewal Schedule ROW Number Annual Payment Amount (estimated) Payment Date Expiration Date NVN46292 $125 01/01/2025 12/31/2048 NVN46564 $100 01/01/2025 12/31/2046 NVN46959 $610 01/01/2025 In Renewal NVN39119 $427 01/01/2025 In Renewal NVN44999 $279 01/01/2025 In Renewal NVN54893 $200 01/01/2025 In Renewal Hycroft Mine Project Page 34 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 3.10.1 Hycroft Expansion Permitting and Timelines Hycroft submitted a Plan of Operations for an expansion of its heap leach facilities, open pits and waste rock facilities to the BLM in April 2010. A major modification to the State Water Pollution Control Permit was submitted in 2011 for the process components that included engineering design reports from Golder Associates Inc. (Golder). The permit modification was issued in August 2012. An amended Plan of Operations that included a rail spur, open pit expansion and processing complex was submitted to the BLM in August 2012. The BLM determined that an Environmental Assessment (EA) was required, deemed the Plan of Operations complete, and initiated public scoping in December 2012. In March 2013, NV Energy submitted a ROW application for the power line associated with the Hycroft Mill. The BLM determined that this action should be analyzed with the Hycroft EA. Approval was received in December 2014. The permits required to construct and operate the crushing system and to begin mill construction were received in 2012. The air quality permit for operation of a mill was submitted in December 2012, and issuance was received in late 2013. The Plan of Operations for a rail spur, open pit expansion and processing complex, that included a tailings management facility (TMF) and expanded Heap Leach Facility (HLF), was completed in December 2014, with the BLM issuance of the Record of Decision authorizing the proposed action received in January 2015. A major modification to the State Water Pollution Control Permit was submitted in 2011 for the process components that included engineering design reports from Golder. The permit modification was issued in August 2012. All other permits required for the heap leach expansion have been received. A Plan of Operations for an alternate TMF, mining below the water table and expanded facilities was submitted to the BLM in April 2014. The BLM determined that a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) was required. In October 2019, the BLM issued a record of decision on the SEIS permitting the new TMF location, expanded facilities and deeper pit depths. In December 2010, Hycroft submitted a minor modification to the NDEP which proposed increasing the permitted processing rate from 10 to 12 Mtons/a. This modification was approved in February 2011. In May 2011, Hycroft proposed a major modification to build a new heap leach pad on the site of the closed Lewis pad and to increase the processing rate to 30 Mtons/a. This modification was approved by the NDEP in December 2011. In January of 2012, Hycroft submitted another major modification to construct a heap leach facility on the south extent of the property. The facility was referred to as the South Heap Leach Facility (SHLF). Around the same time, Hycroft submitted a modification proposing to add both a north and south processing area, increasing the Brimstone and Lewis heap leach pads permitted height to 400 ft, and increasing the permitted processing rate to 36 Mtons/a of ore. Both modifications were approved by the NDEP in September 2012. Later, in December 2012, Hycroft submitted a minor modification proposing to add a Merrill-Crowe facility at the North Process Area. NDEP approved this modification in May 2013. In March of 2013, Hycroft submitted another modification to construct a combined heap leach and tailings storage facility (TMF), referred to as the South Processing Complex (SPC), in the same location as the previously permitted SHLF. The SPC uses the new SHLF, constructed in a horseshoe shape, to provide the embankment for the Southwest TMF located in the central portion of the new SHLF. Also, as part of this modification, Hycroft proposed the construction of a mill and related facilities for processing high-grade ore at an approximate throughput of 65,000 tons per day (ton/d) during Phase 1 to a final phase capacity of 132,000 ton/d. Tailings were proposed to be pumped to the TMF at the SPC. These 2013 major modifications were approved by NDEP in August 2017. Hycroft Mine Project Page 35 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 In September 2014, Hycroft submitted a minor modification to expand the Brimstone-North HLF to the southeast by approximately 80 acres including an additional Event Pond at the existing North Area Merrill-Crowe facility. NDEP approved these minor modifications in March 2015. In April 2019, Hycroft submitted a major modification to construct a new heap leach facility named Hycroft Heap Leach Facility Stage 1 (Stage 1 HLF) north of the North Processing Facility. The Stage 1 HLF will have a storage volume of 29 Mtons and is the first stage of the larger facility (Hycroft HLF) with a storage capacity of 550 Mtons. The ultimate footprint of the Hycroft HLF will cover approximately 925 acres, with the Stage 1 footprint covering approximately 390 acres that includes ponds, channels, and roads. Of this area, 234 acres will be lined with geomembrane along with the HLF pad comprising 204 of these acres. Pregnant solution collected from the pad will be pumped to the existing North Merrill-Crowe process facility for precious metals recovery. The barren solution from the North Merrill-Crowe facility will then be returned to the top of each lift and applied over a designated cell area using a drip and sprinkler system. The major modification was approved by NDEP in July 2020. Currently, Hycroft has all permits required to restart the Mine and recently received the Federal Record of Decision for the Phase II Environmental Impact Statement supporting the life of mine (LOM) pit development. Received Record of Decision from BLM for Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (10-22-19): ● Current operating plan is fully permitted ● Existing operating permits will be amended as new facilities/infrastructure are required ● EIS allows flexibility: ○ Expanded pits ○ Construction of a TMF to the south of the property, if needed ● Phase 1 of the new leach pad is permitted ● Phase 1A of the new leach pad has completed earthwork and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) liner installation. A media cover has been added to protect the porous multimedia protective layer. Collection ponds are in place. Electrical switch gear, instrumentation, and pumps are in storage and will be added during construction restart. No mineralized ore has been added to the pad. Phase 1B of the new leach pad and future phases will be planned for construction from cash flows when needed. Any future expansion activities recommended in this TRS will require multiple federal, state and local permits. The USFWS will require modification to the Golden Eagle Take Permit for the NE TMF and extensions of the South (Vortex) Dump. Hycroft Mine Project Page 36 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026 3.10.2 Crofoot Heap Leach Facility Closure In 2023, NDEP asked Hycroft to update the 2017 Final Permanent Closure Plan (FPPC). Hycroft complied with this request and a new FPPC was submitted. The updated plan includes schedule of compliance (SOC) items and incorporates current regulations. There are six items in this plan. SOC Items 1 (Stormwater Controls), 2 (Heap Leach Drain-Down Channel), 3 (Update Monitoring Plan), 4 (Water Quality Evaluation Report), SOC Item 5 (updating FPCP), and 6 (Investigation of trend for Wells SP-23, SP-24, and SP-25). NDEP has accepted and approved SOC Items 2 (Heap Leach Drain-Down Channel) and Item 3 (Update Monitoring Plan). The other items are still under review. Construction of a drain-down collection system was completed in 2012. In 2024 and 2025, Hycroft completed steps to regrade the pad in preparation for closure. Hycroft will continue to re-contour the pad, as necessary for surface water management; apply medium, where required; and reseed the pad to complete the closure process. Hycroft is working in conjunction with NDEP, who will issue the final closure approval letter once these activities are reviewed and accepted. 3.11 Social License Considerations Social and community impacts have been considered and evaluated in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Potentially affected Native American tribes, tribal organizations, and/or individuals are consulted during the preparation of all plan amendments to advise on proposed projects that may influence cultural sites, resources, and traditional activities. Potential community impacts on the existing population and demographics, income, employment, economy, public finance, housing, community facilities, and community services are also evaluated during NEPA review processes. There are currently no social or community issues that materially impact Hycroft’s ability to extract mineral resources. 3.12 Project Risks and Uncertainties Timely filings and payments are required to maintain title and rights to claims, water rights and permits. Hycroft maintains pr…

Document text

EX-99 · ex96-1.htm

EX-99
 5
 ex96-1.htm
 EX-96.1

 Exhibit 96.1

 Hycroft
 Mine Project

 S-K
 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis

 Nevada,
 USA

 Effective
 Date: May 14, 2026

 Report
 Date: May 29, 2026

 Prepared
 for:

 Hycroft
 Mining Holding Corporation

 PO
 Box 3030

 Winnemucca,
 Nevada, United States, 89446

 Prepared
 by:

 Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc.

 595
 S Meyer Ave, Tucson, Arizona, United States, 85701

 Contributing
 Authors:

 Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc.

 Independent
 Mining Consultants Inc.

 WestLand
 Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.

 Date
and Signature Page

 This technical report summary (&ldquo;TRS&rdquo;), entitled &ldquo;Hycroft
Mine Project, S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economics Analysis, Nevada, USA&rdquo; is current as of May
14, 2026, and has been prepared by:

 Consulting
 Firm
 Responsible
 for the following sections
 Signature
 Date

 Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc.

 1.1,
1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 2.1-2.4.1, 2.5-2.7, 10, 14-16, 18.1-18.2.3, 18.2.4- 18.2.7, 18.2.8.2-18.3.2, 18.3.4,
18.3.5, 19, 22.1, 22.5, 22.7-22.12, 22.13.1.3, 22.13.1.5-22.13.1.7, 22.13.2.2, 22.13.2.4, 22.13.2.5, 23.1, 23.4, 23.6, 24 and 25

 &ldquo;signed&rdquo;

 May
 29, 2026

 Hycroft
 Mining Holding Corporation

 1.3-1.7,
 1.15,3-9, 12, 20, 22.2-22.4, 22.13.1.1, 22.13.1.2, 22.13.2.1, 23.1-23.3 and 24

 &ldquo;signed&rdquo;

 May
 29, 2026

 Independent
 Mining Consultants, Inc.

 1.9,
 1.10, 1.15, 1.18, 2.4.2, 11, 13, 18.2.3, 18.2.8.1, 18.3.1,

 18.3.3,
 22.6, 22.13.1.4, 22.13.2.3, 23.1, 23.5 and 24

 &ldquo;signed&rdquo;

 May
 29, 2026

 WestLand
 Engineering &

 Environmental
 Services, Inc.

 1.14,
 17, 22.1, and 24

 &ldquo;signed&rdquo;

 May
 29, 2026

 Hycroft Mine Project

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 Table
of Contents

 1
 Executive Summary
 1

 1.1
 Introduction
 1

 1.2
 Terms
 of Reference
 1

 1.3
 Mineral
 Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, and Agreements
 2

 1.4
 History
 2

 1.5
 Geology
 and Mineralization
 3

 1.6
 Exploration
 4

 1.7
 Sampling
 4

 1.8
 Metallurgical
 Testwork
 4

 1.9
 Mineral
 Resource Estimate
 5

 1.10
 Mining
 Methods
 9

 1.11
 Processing
 and Recovery Methods
 9

 1.12
 Infrastructure
 10

 1.12.4
 Tailings
 Management Facility
 11

 1.12.5
 Waste
 Rock Storage Facility (WRSF)
 11

 1.12.6
 Power,
 Communications, and Fuel
 11

 1.12.7
 Water
 Supply and Management
 12

 1.12.8
 Hazard
 Considerations
 12

 1.13
 Market
 Studies and Contracts
 12

 1.14
 Environmental,
 Permitting and Social Considerations
 12

 1.14.1
 Environmental
 Considerations
 12

 1.14.2
 Permitting
 Considerations
 13

 1.14.3
 Social
 Considerations
 14

 1.14.4
 Closure
 and Reclamation Considerations
 14

 1.15
 Capital
 and Operating Cost
 14

 1.15.1
 Capital
 Cost Estimate
 14

 1.15.2
 Operating
 Cost Estimate
 15

 1.16
 Economic
 Analysis
 15

 1.16.1
 Economic
 Summary
 15

 1.16.2
 Sensitivity
 Analysis
 18

 1.17
 Conclusions
 19

 1.18
 Recommendations
 19

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page i

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 2
 Introduction
 20

 2.1
 Introduction
 20

 2.2
 Terms
 of Reference
 20

 2.3
 Qualified
 Persons
 21

 2.4
 Site
 Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection
 21

 2.4.1
 Site
 inspection for Jonathan Cooper
 21

 2.4.2
 Site
 inspection for John Marek
 21

 2.5
 Effective
 Dates
 21

 2.6
 Information
 Sources and References
 21

 2.6.1
 General
 21

 2.6.2
 Previous
 Technical Reports
 22

 2.7
 Currency,
 Units, Abbreviations and Definitions
 22

 3
 Property
 Description
 26

 3.1
 Introduction
 26

 3.2
 Property
 and Title in Jurisdiction
 26

 3.3
 Project
 Ownership
 27

 3.4
 Property
 Agreements
 29

 3.5
 Surface
 Rights
 32

 3.6
 Water
 Rights
 32

 3.7
 Liabilities
 and Encumbrances
 32

 3.8
 Environmental
 Considerations
 32

 3.9
 Safety
 Considerations
 33

 3.10
 Permitting
 Considerations
 33

 3.10.1
 Hycroft
 Expansion Permitting and Timelines
 35

 3.10.2
 Crofoot
 Heap Leach Facility Closure
 37

 3.11
 Social
 License Considerations
 37

 3.12
 Project
 Risks and Uncertainties
 37

 4
 Accessibility,
 Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography
 38

 4.1
 Physiography
 38

 4.2
 Accessibility
 38

 4.3
 Climate
 38

 4.4
 Local
 Resources and Infrastructure
 38

 4.5
 Seismicity
 41

 5
 History
 42

 5.1
 Regional
 History
 42

 5.2
 Property
 Exploration History
 42

 5.3
 Production
 42

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page ii

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 6
 Geological
 Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit
 44

 6.1
 Geological
 Setting
 44

 6.1.1
 Regional
 Geology
 44

 6.1.2
 Local
 Geology
 44

 6.2
 Mineralization
 and Alteration
 45

 6.2.1
 Brimstone
 46

 6.2.2
 Vortex
 47

 6.2.3
 Bay
 48

 6.2.4
 Central
 50

 6.2.5
 Camel
 50

 6.3
 Deposit
 Types
 51

 7
 Exploration
 52

 7.1
 Exploration
 52

 7.2
 Geological
 Mapping
 52

 7.3
 Geophysics
 52

 7.4
 Soil
 Sampling
 53

 7.5
 Rock-Chip
 Sampling
 53

 7.6
 Drilling
 53

 7.6.1
 Introduction
 53

 7.6.2
 Exploration
 Drilling
 54

 7.7
 Hydrogeology
 58

 7.8
 Geotechnical
 58

 7.9
 Exploration
 Targets
 59

 8
 Sample
 Preparation, Analyses, and Security
 66

 8.1
 Introduction
 66

 8.2
 Sample
 Preparation
 66

 8.3
 Assay
 Methods
 66

 8.3.1
 Sample
 Security
 70

 8.4
 Sample
 Storage
 70

 8.5
 Analytical
 Results
 70

 8.6
 QP
 Comment
 70

 9
 Data
 Verification
 71

 9.1
 Verification
 Procedure
 71

 9.2
 Certificate
 of Assay Checks
 71

 9.3
 QA/QC
 2005 &ndash; 2024
 71

 9.3.1
 Standards
 2005-2013
 72

 9.3.2
 Blanks
 2008 - 2014
 74

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page iii

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 9.3.3
 Check
 Assays 2011-2012
 75

 9.3.4
 Standards
 2021 &ndash; 2022
 77

 9.3.5
 Blank
 Analysis Results 2021-2022
 78

 9.3.6
 Duplicate
 Assays, 2021-2022
 79

 9.3.7
 Standards
 2023 &ndash; 2024
 80

 9.3.8
 Blanks
 2023-2024
 81

 9.3.9
 Duplicate
 Assays 2023-2024
 81

 9.3.10
 Check
 Assays 2023-2024
 84

 9.3.11
 DDH
 vs. RC for Post 2000 Samples
 85

 9.3.12
 Old
 vs. New Drilling
 86

 9.3.13
 Downhole
 Surveys
 87

 9.4
 QP
 Comment
 87

 10
 Mineral
 Processing and Metallurgical Testing
 88

 10.1
 Introduction
 88

 10.2
 Metallurgical
 Testwork
 89

 10.2.1
 Summary
 of Metallurgical Testwork Programs
 89

 10.2.2
 Mineralized
 Materials and Sampling
 89

 10.2.3
 Hycroft
 Mineralization Domains
 89

 10.3
 Legacy
 Testwork
 91

 10.3.1
 Comminution
 Tests
 91

 10.3.2
 Flotation
 91

 10.3.3
 Direct
 Cyanidation
 102

 10.3.4
 Concentrate
 Oxidation Tests
 102

 10.3.5
 Solid-Liquid
 Separation Tests
 109

 10.3.6
 Deleterious
 Elements
 109

 10.3.7
 Metallurgical
 Parameters for Process Design Criteria and Financial Analysis
 109

 11
 Mineral
 Resource Estimates
 111

 11.1
 Summary
 111

 11.2
 Model
 Location
 111

 11.3
 Database
 111

 11.4
 Basic
 Statistics
 113

 11.5
 Geology
 113

 11.6
 Lithology
 113

 11.7
 Alteration
 114

 11.8
 Structure
 115

 11.9
 Domains
 117

 11.10
 Assay
 Caps
 120

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page iv

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 11.11
 Bench
 Height Confirmation
 121

 11.12
 Composites
 122

 11.13
 Variography
 125

 11.14
 Block
 Grade Estimation
 126

 11.14.1
 Gold
 126

 11.14.2
 Silver
 126

 11.14.3
 Cyanide
 Ratio
 129

 11.14.4
 Sulfide
 Sulfur
 130

 11.14.5
 Density
 132

 11.14.6
 Stockpile
 Grade Estimation
 132

 11.14.7
 Treatment
 of 1982 &ndash; 1987 Data
 133

 11.15
 Classification
 134

 11.16
 Model
 Verification
 135

 11.16.1
 Swath
 Plots
 137

 11.16.2
 Smear
 Check
 141

 11.17
 Mineral
 Resource Estimate
 142

 12
 Mineral Reserve
 149

 13
 Mining Methods
 149

 13.1
 Overview
 149

 13.2
 Geotechnical
 and Hydrologic Information
 153

 13.3
 Phase
 Design
 153

 13.4
 Production
 Schedule
 157

 13.5
 Mining
 Equipment
 171

 13.6
 Mine
 Manpower Requirements
 172

 14
 Processing
 and Recovery Methods
 175

 14.1
 Overview
 175

 14.2
 Process
 Flowsheet
 176

 14.3
 Plant
 Design
 178

 14.4
 Process
 Description
 180

 14.4.1
 Crushing
 Area
 180

 14.4.2
 Grinding
 Circuit
 181

 14.4.3
 Rougher
 Flotation
 181

 14.4.4
 Concentrate
 Thickening
 182

 14.4.5
 POX
 and Neutralization
 182

 14.4.6
 Gold
 and Silver Recovery from Flotation Concentrate
 185

 14.4.7
 CCD
 Circuit
 185

 14.4.8
 Merrill-Crowe
 Precipitation and Refinery (Existing)
 186

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page v

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 14.4.9
 Cyanide
 Destruction
 187

 14.4.10
 Final
 Tailings and Reclaim Water Transport
 187

 14.5
 Energy,
 Water, and Process Materials Requirements
 187

 14.5.1
 Reagent
 Handling and Storage
 187

 14.5.2
 Fresh
 Water, Fire Water and Potable Water
 189

 14.5.3
 Process
 Water, and Barren Solution
 189

 14.5.4
 Oxygen
 Plant
 190

 14.5.5
 Electrical
 Power
 190

 14.5.6
 High-Pressure
 and Low-Pressure Air
 190

 15
 Infrastructure
 191

 15.1
 Introduction
 191

 15.2
 Site
 Access
 192

 15.2.1
 Offsite
 Access and Security
 192

 15.2.2
 Onsite
 Access
 193

 15.2.3
 Rail
 Spur
 193

 15.3
 New
 Infrastructure
 195

 15.3.1
 New
 and Existing Facilities Layout
 195

 15.3.2
 Upgrades
 to Existing Facilities
 203

 15.3.3
 Accommodation
 203

 15.4
 Stockpiles
 204

 15.4.1
 Mineralized
 Stockpiles
 204

 15.4.2
 Growth
 Media Stockpile
 204

 15.4.3
 Limestone
 Stockpile
 204

 15.5
 Tailings
 Management Facilities
 204

 15.5.1
 Facility
 Design Basis
 205

 15.5.2
 TMF
 Design
 208

 15.6
 Waste
 Rock Storage Facility
 212

 15.7
 Power
 and Electrical
 213

 15.8
 Communication
 215

 15.9
 Fuel
 215

 15.10
 Water
 Supply and Management
 215

 15.10.1
 Fresh
 Water, Fire Water and Potable Water
 216

 15.10.2
 Tailings
 Water Management
 217

 15.10.3
 WRSF
 Water Management
 218

 15.10.4
 Plant
 Site Stormwater Runoff and Drainage
 219

 15.10.5
 Site
 Water Balance
 219

 15.10.6
 Pit
 Dewatering
 222

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page vi

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 15.11
 Hazard
 Considerations
 222

 15.12
 Comments
 on Project Infrastructure
 222

 16
 Market
 Studies and Contracts
 224

 16.1
 Market
 Studies
 224

 16.2
 Commodity
 Price Projections
 224

 16.3
 Contracts
 224

 17
 Environmental
 Studies, Permitting, and Plan, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups
 225

 17.1
 Overview
 225

 17.2
 Environmental
 Considerations
 225

 17.2.1
 Baseline
 and Supporting Studies
 225

 17.2.2
 Environmental
 Monitoring
 228

 17.2.3
 Water
 Management
 229

 17.3
 Permitting
 Considerations
 229

 17.3.1
 Federal
 Permits
 230

 17.3.2
 State
 of Nevada Permits
 233

 17.3.3
 Additional
 Permits and Authorizations
 234

 17.4
 Social
 Considerations
 235

 17.4.1
 National
 Register of Historic Places
 236

 17.5
 Closure
 and Reclamation Planning
 237

 17.5.1
 Closure
 and Reclamation Plans
 237

 17.5.2
 Closure
 Cost Estimates
 237

 17.6
 Comments
 on Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community Impact
 237

 18
 Capital
 and Operating Costs
 238

 18.1
 Introduction
 238

 18.2
 Capital
 Costs
 238

 18.2.1
 Overview
 238

 18.2.2
 Basis
 of Estimate
 239

 18.2.3
 Mine
 Capital Costs
 239

 18.2.4
 Process
 Capital Costs
 241

 18.2.5
 Infrastructure
 Capital Costs
 242

 18.2.6
 Indirect
 Capital Costs
 242

 18.2.7
 Owner
 (Corporate) Capital Costs
 243

 18.2.8
 Sustaining
 Capital
 243

 18.2.9
 Contingency
 Costs
 245

 18.2.10
 Closure
 and Reclamation Planning
 245

 18.3
 Operating
 Costs
 245

 18.3.1
 Overview
 245

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page vii

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 18.3.2
 Basis
 of Estimate
 246

 18.3.3
 Mine
 Operating Costs
 247

 18.3.4
 Process
 Operating Costs
 248

 18.3.5
 General
 and Administrative Operating Costs
 252

 19
 Economic Analysis
 253

 19.1
 Overview
 253

 19.2
 Methodologies
 Used
 254

 19.3
 Financial
 Model Parameters
 254

 19.3.1
 Assumptions
 254

 19.3.2
 Taxes
 254

 19.3.3
 Royalties
 255

 19.4
 Economic
 Analysis
 255

 19.5
 Sensitivity
 Analysis
 260

 20
 Adjacent Properties
 264

 21
 Other
 Relevant Data and Information
 264

 22
 Interpretation
 and Conclusions
 265

 22.1
 Introduction
 265

 22.2
 Mineral
 Tenure, Surface Rights, Water Rights, Royalties and Agreements
 265

 22.3
 Geology
 and Mineralization
 265

 22.4
 Exploration
 265

 22.5
 Metallurgical
 Testwork
 266

 22.6
 Mineral
 Resource Estimate
 266

 22.7
 Recovery
 Plan
 267

 22.8
 Infrastructure
 268

 22.8.1
 Tailings
 Management Facility
 269

 22.9
 Markets
 and Contracts
 269

 22.10
 Capital
 Cost Estimate
 269

 22.11
 Operating
 Cost Estimate
 269

 22.12
 Economic
 Analysis
 270

 22.13
 Risks
 and Opportunities
 270

 22.13.1
 Risks
 270

 22.13.2
 Opportunities
 272

 23
 Recommendations
 273

 23.1
 Estimated
 Program Costs
 273

 23.2
 Exploration
 273

 23.3
 Sample
 Preparation, Analysis and Security
 274

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page viii

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 23.4
 Metallurgical
 Testing
 274

 23.5
 Mineral
 Resource Estimate
 275

 23.6
 Infrastructure
 275

 23.6.1
 TMF
 275

 24
 References
 277

 25
 Reliance
 on Information Provided by the Registrant
 281

 Appendix A &ndash; Patented Claims
 282

 Appendix
 B &ndash; Unpatented Claims
 283

 List
of Tables

 Table
 1-1:
 Hycroft
 MRE as of January 21, 2026, US customary Units
 6

 Table
 1-2:
 Hycroft
 MRE as of 21 January 2026, Metric Units
 7

 Table
 1-3:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units
 8

 Table
 1-4:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 68.57 g/tonne (2 oz/tonne) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units
 8

 Table
 1-5:
 Principal
 Environmental Permits
 13

 Table
 1-6:
 Other
 Notifications or Ministerial Permits
 13

 Table
 1-7:
 Capital
 Cost Summary
 14

 Table
 1-8:
 Operating
 Cost Summary
 15

 Table
 1-9:
 Economic
 Analysis Summary
 17

 Table
 2-1:
 Abbreviations
 and Acronyms
 22

 Table
 2-2:
 Units
 of Measurement
 24

 Table
 3-1:
 Hycroft
 Annual Land Holding Costs
 29

 Table
 3-2:
 Hycroft
 Operating Permits
 33

 Table
 3-3:
 Hycroft
 Miscellaneous Permits
 34

 Table
 3-4:
 Hycroft
 Miscellaneous Permits
 34

 Table
 3-5:
 Right-of-Way
 Payment and Renewal Schedule
 34

 Table
 4-1:
 Hycroft
 Water Wells and Permitted Yearly Consumption
 41

 Table
 7-1:
 Drilling
 from 2023 and 2024 Supporting the Updated MRE
 56

 Table
 7-2:
 Significant
 Intercepts (2023)
 60

 Table
 7-3:
 Significant
 Intercepts (2024)
 62

 Table
 9-1:
 Nearest
 Neighbor Sample Comparison of RC vs Diamond Core Gold and Silver Assays
 86

 Table
 9-2:
 Nearest
 Neighbor Sample Comparison of 1982-1987 Gold Assays Versus 2005 &ndash; 2024 Gold Assays
 87

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page ix

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 Table
 10-1:
 Metallurgical
 Testwork Summary
 8 9

 Table
 10-2:
 Average
 Sulfur Contents of Oxide, Transition and Sulfide Mineralized Materials
 90

 Table
 10-3:
 Summary
 of Test Samples
 90

 Table
 10-4:
 Grindability
 Test Summary
 91

 Table
 10-5:
 G&T
 Composites 1 through 24 Flotation Test Results
 93

 Table
 10-6:
 G&T
 Composites M-1 through M-17 Flotation Test Results
 94

 Table
 10-7:
 Flotation
 Reagent Schemes Studied
 95

 Table
 10-8:
 Estimated
 Metallurgical Recoveries from 2016 Feasibility Study &ndash; Gold and Silver
 103

 Table
 10-9:
 Hycroft
 Alkaline POX Testwork Summary
 106

 Table
 10-10:
 Hycroft
 Acid POX Testwork Summary
 106

 Table
 10-11:
 Summary
 Comparison Table &ndash; POX 3 to POX-7
 108

 Table
 10-12:
 Settling
 Test Results
 109

 Table
 10-13:
 Deleterious
 Element Assay
 109

 Table
 10-14:
 Process
 Plant Overall Recovery Prediction
 109

 Table
 11-1:
 Block
 Size and Model Size
 110

 Table
 11-2:
 Data
 Available for the Assembly of the Resource Model for Au, Ag, AuCn, Sulfide Sulfur
 111

 Table
 11-3:
 Assay
 Database (No Stockpile Assays, Inside the Model, and No Drilling from 1982 through 1987)
 112

 Table
 11-4:
 Population
 Domains for Grade Estimation
 117

 Table
 11-5:
 High-grade
 Silver Vein Domains
 118

 Table
 11-6:
 Sulfide
 Domains
 118

 Table
 11-7:
 Assay
 Cap Values
 120

 Table
 11-8:
 Sulfide
 Cap Values Prior to Compositing
 121

 Table
 11-9:
 Basic
 Statistics of Composites, In-Situ Rock, Eliminating Years 1982 to 1987
 123

 Table
 11-10:
 Basic
 Statistics of 25 ft Sulfide Composites by Sulfide Domain
 125

 Table
 11-11:
 Grade
 Estimation Parameters for Au, Ag
 127

 Table
 11-12:
 Estimation
 Parameters for Cyanide Ratio, All Three Domains utilized 1/D3
 130

 Table
 11-13:
 Sulfide
 Sulfur Estimation Parameters, All Three Domains Utilized 1/D3
 131

 Table
 11-14:
 Sulfide
 Sulfur Default Values if Not Estimated
 131

 Table
 11-15:
 Density
 Assigned to the Block Model
 132

 Table
 11-16:
 Stockpiles
 Assigned Grades by Inverse Distance Estimation
 133

 Table
 11-17:
 IMC
 Smear Check
 141

 Table
 11-18:
 Economic
 and Technical Parameters for Hycroft MRE
 144

 Table
 11-19:
 Hycroft
 MRE as of January 21, 2026, US customary Units
 145

 Table
 11-20:
 Hycroft
 MRE as of 21 January 2026, Metric Units
 146

 Table
 11-21:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units
 147

 Table
 11-22:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 3 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units
 147

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page x

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 Table
 11-23:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 4 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units
 148

 Table
 11-24:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 68.57 g/ton (2 oz/ton) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units
 148

 Table
 11-25:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 102.86 g/ton (3 oz/ton) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units
 148

 Table
 11-26:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the MRE at 137.14 g/t (4 oz/ton) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units
 148

 Table
 13-1:
 Hycroft
 Initial Assessment Mine Production Schedule, Measured and Indicated Mineralization
 151

 Table
 13-2:
 Summary
 of Lerch-Grossman Computer Pit Generation
 154

 Table
 13-3:
 Contained
 Tonnage by Internal Cutoff Grade
 155

 Table
 13-4:
 Major
 Mine Equipment
 172

 Table
 13-5:
 Mine
 Hourly Personnel
 173

 Table
 13-6:
 Mine
 Salaried Staff
 174

 Table
 14-1:
 Process
 Design Criteria
 178

 Table
 14-2:
 Major
 Process Equipment
 179

 Table
 14-3:
 Summary
 of Reagent Used in the Process Plant
 188

 Table
 14-4:
 Annual
 Consumption for Major Reagents
 189

 Table
 15-1:
 Existing
 Hycroft Buildings
 196

 Table
 15-2:
 New
 Ancillary Facilities Planned over the LOM
 203

 Table
 15-3:
 Proposed
 Upgrades for Existing Facilities
 203

 Table
 15-4:
 Minimum
 Pre-feasibility Seismic Design Criteria for Stability for Very High Dam Classification
 206

 Table
 15-5:
 Minimum
 Pre-feasibility Hydrologic Design Criteria for Very High Dam Classification
 206

 Table
 15-6:
 Selected
 Ground Motions and Associated Seismic Coefficients
 211

 Table
 15-7:
 Weather
 Station Summary
 216

 Table
 15-8:
 Summary
 of Storm Event with Associated Rainfall Intensity
 216

 Table
 15-9:
 Monthly
 Maximum Flows Demand
 221

 Table
 17-1:
 Current
 Major Environmental Permits and Permits Necessary to Operate the Mine
 230

 Table
 17-2:
 Ministerial
 Permits, Plans and Notifications
 234

 Table
 18-1:
 Capital
 Cost Summary
 238

 Table
 18-2:
 Baseline
 Mine Capital Cost (without Accuracy or Contingency adjustment)
 240

 Table
 18-3:
 Process
 Plant Capital Cost Breakdown
 241

 Table
 18-4:
 On-Site
 Infrastructure Capital Cost Breakdown
 242

 Table
 18-5:
 Off-Site
 Infrastructure Capital Cost Breakdown
 242

 Table
 18-6:
 Indirect
 Capital Cost Breakdown
 243

 Table
 18-7:
 Mining
 Sustaining Capital Costs
 244

 Table
 18-8:
 Operating
 Cost Summary
 246

 Table
 18-9:
 Mine
 Operating Cost per Ton of Total Material Moved, US$/ton (Mine Costs)
 248

 Table
 18-10:
 Process
 Plant Operating Cost Summary
 248

 Table
 18-11:
 Process
 Plant Labor Cost Summary
 249

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page xi

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 Table
 18-12:
 Reagent
 Consumption Summary
 250

 Table
 18-13:
 Process
 Plant Consumable Consumption Summary
 251

 Table
 19-1:
 Economic
 Analysis Summary Table
 256

 Table
 19-2:
 Life
 of Mine Economics
 257

 Table
 19-3:
 Pre-Tax
 NPV (US$M) and IRR (%) Sensitivity Analysis
 260

 Table
 19-4:
 Post-Tax
 NPV (US$M) and IRR (%) Sensitivity Analysis
 261

 Table
 22-1:
 Hycroft
 Mineral Resources as of 21 January 2026, US customary Units
 267

 Table
 22-2:
 High-grade
 Silver Bearing Domains, Contained within the Mineral Resource at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units
 267

 Table
 23-1:
 Estimated
 Program Costs
 273

 Table
 25-1:
 Information
 Provided by Hycroft
 281

 List
of Figures

 Figure
 1-1:
 Post-Tax
 Sensitivity Analysis Results
 18

 Figure
 3-1:
 Hycroft
 Mine Location Map
 27

 Figure
 3-2:
 Claim
 Map
 30

 Figure
 3-3:
 Current
 Property and Facilities Layout (2025)
 31

 Figure
 4-1:
 Onsite
 Lab, Admin, Maintenance, Truck Shop, and Warehouse
 39

 Figure
 4-2:
 Crusher
 and Conveyor Belt Circuit
 39

 Figure
 4-3:
 North
 Merrill-Crowe Facility
 40

 Figure
 4-4:
 Stage
 1 Heap Leach Pad and Ponds Along Jungo Road
 40

 Figure
 6-1:
 Stratigraphic
 Column for Hycroft Deposit Area
 45

 Figure
 6-2:
 Simplified
 East&ndash;West Cross Section Through the Hycroft Mine &ndash; Section 40600 N
 45

 Figure
 6-3:
 Vortex
 Alteration Cross-Section &ndash; 40600 N
 48

 Figure
 6-4:
 Bay
 Geologic Cross-Section at 50300-N
 49

 Figure
 6-5:
 Generalized
 Epithermal Diagram
 51

 Figure
 7-1:
 Drill
 Collar Location Plan
 55

 Figure
 9-1:
 Results
 of Submitted Gold Standards 2005 - 2013
 73

 Figure
 9-2:
 Results
 of Submitted Silver Standards 2005-2013
 74

 Figure
 9-3:
 Results
 of Blank Submissions
 75

 Figure
 9-4:
 Check
 Assay Results, Fire Assay Gold 2011 - 2012
 76

 Figure
 9-5:
 Check
 Assay Results, Fire Assay Silver 2011 &ndash; 2011
 77

 Figure
 9-6:
 Standards
 Results, 2021 &ndash; 2022
 78

 Figure
 9-7:
 Blank
 Results, 2021 &ndash; 2022
 79

 Figure
 9-8:
 Duplicate
 Assay Results, 2021 &ndash; 2022
 79

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page xii

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 Figure
 9-9:
 Gold
 Standards 2023 &ndash; 2024
 80

 Figure
 9-10:
 Blank
 Insertions 2004
 81

 Figure
 9-11:
 Gold
 Duplicates, 2023-2024
 82

 Figure
 9-12:
 Silver
 Duplicates, 2023-2024
 83

 Figure
 9-13:
 Gold
 Check Assays 2023 &ndash; 2024
 84

 Figure
 9-14:
 Silver
 Check Assays, 2023-2024
 85

 Figure
 10-1:
 Recovery
 Vs. Time Plot, G&T Kamloops Tests, M Composites
 96

 Figure
 10-2:
 Gold
 Grade Distribution Chart
 97

 Figure
 10-3:
 Silver
 Grade Distribution Chart
 97

 Figure
 10-4:
 Total
 Sulfur Grade Distribution
 98

 Figure
 10-5:
 Sulfide
 Sulfur Grade Distribution
 98

 Figure
 10-6:
 FLS
 Variability Flotation Recoveries under Optimal Conditions (137 Test Samples)
 100

 Figure
 10-7:
 FLS
 Variability Flotation Gold Recoveries Based on Gold Head Grade Groups
 101

 Figure
 10-8:
 FLS
 Variability Flotation Silver Recoveries Based on Head Grade Groups
 101

 Figure
 10-9:
 Oxidation
 of Central Flotation Concentrate: Sulfate Spike Test
 104

 Figure
 10-10:
 Demonstration
 Plant Cyanide Leach Recovery of Au and Ag
 104

 Figure
 11-1:
 East&ndash;West
 Cross-Section 44000-N Looking North, Showing Lithology Types
 114

 Figure
 11-2:
 East&ndash;West
 Cross-Section 44000-N Looking North, Showing Alterations
 115

 Figure
 11-3:
 Structure
 and Domain Interpretation (Plan View)
 116

 Figure
 11-4:
 Structure
 and Domain Interpretation with Silver Wireframes (plan view)
 119

 Figure
 11-5:
 Bench
 Height Analysis
 122

 Figure
 11-6:
 Gold
 Variograms for Silicic Material Between the Central Fault and East Fault
 125

 Figure
 11-7:
 Gold
 Variograms for Silicic Material Between the Range Fault and Central Fault
 125

 Figure
 11-8:
 E-W
 Cross-section at 41000-N, Showing Confidence Codes
 135

 Figure
 11-9:
 E-W
 Cross-section at 41000-N, Visual Check of Gold Grades in Drillholes and Block Model
 136

 Figure
 11-10:
 E-W
 Cross-section at 41000-N, Visual Check of Silver Grades in Drillholes and Block Model
 137

 Figure
 11-11:
 Swath
 Plots for Gold, X = East and Y = North Slices, 160 ft Wide Slices
 138

 Figure
 11-12:
 Swath
 Plots for Silver, X = East and Y = North Slices, 160 ft Slices
 139

 Figure
 11-13:
 Swath
 Plots for Sulfide Sulfur, X = East and Y = North Slices, 160 ft Slices
 140

 Figure
 13-1:
 Hycroft
 Initial Assessment Mine Plan Schedule
 150

 Figure
 13-2:
 Summary
 of Lerch-Grossman Computer Pit Generation
 155

 Figure
 13-3:
 Phase
 Schematic and Extraction Sequence
 156

 Figure
 13-4:
 Approximate
 Recovered Gold by Year
 158

 Figure
 13-5:
 Approximate
 Recovered Silver by Year
 158

 Figure
 13-6:
 Approximate
 Recovered Equivalent Gold Ounces by Year Based on $3,100/oz Au and $36/oz Ag
 159

 Figure
 13-7:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; Pre-production
 160

 Figure
 13-8:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan - End of Year 1
 161

 Figure
 13-9:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 2
 162

 Figure
 13-10:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan - End of Year 3
 163

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page xiii

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 Figure
 13-11:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan - End of Year 4
 164

 Figure
 13-12:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 5
 165

 Figure
 13-13:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 10
 166

 Figure
 13-14:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 20
 167

 Figure
 13-15:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 30
 168

 Figure
 13-16:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 40
 169

 Figure
 13-17:
 Mine
 and Waste Storage Plan &ndash; End of Year 51
 170

 Figure
 14-1:
 Sulfide
 Sulfur Process Plant Flowsheet
 176

 Figure
 15-1:
 Site
 Layout
 191

 Figure
 15-2:
 Site
 Access and Major Towns Near Hycroft Mine
 192

 Figure
 15-3:
 Rail
 Spur Design
 194

 Figure
 15-4:
 Overall
 Site Layout
 197

 Figure
 15-5:
 Existing
 Crushing Facility and Surrounding Infrastructure
 198

 Figure
 15-6:
 The
 Proposed Process Plant Generic Site Plan
 199

 Figure
 15-7:
 Proposed
 Limestone Plant and Rail Spur
 200

 Figure
 15-8:
 North
 Merrill-Crowe Plant
 201

 Figure
 15-9:
 Existing
 Mine Ancillary Buildings
 202

 Figure
 15-10:
 TMF
 Facility Layout
 207

 Figure
 15-11:
 TMF
 Main Dam Section
 208

 Figure
 15-12:
 TMF
 North Dam Section
 209

 Figure
 15-13:
 TMF
 Closure Plan
 212

 Figure
 15-14
 Waste
 Rock Storage Facilities
 213

 Figure
 15-15:
 Proposed
 Power Line from Imlay Relay Station (Nevada Historical Marker 49) to Jungo Road (49 Road) - NTS
 214

 Figure
 15-16:
 Proposed
 Power Line along Jungo Road (Road 49) to Hycroft Mine Site (in total approximately 57 miles) - NTS
 215

 Figure
 15-17:
 Hycroft
 Water Balance Schematic
 220

 Figure
 15-18:
 Total
 Fresh Water Demand
 221

 Figure
 19-1:
 Project
 Post-Tax Unlevered Cashflow
 255

 Figure
 19-2:
 Pre-Tax
 Sensitivity Analysis Results
 262

 Figure
 19-3:
 Post-Tax
 Sensitivity Analysis Results
 263

 Figure
 20-1:
 Location
 of Rosebud Property
 264

 Hycroft Mine Project
 Page xiv

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis
 May 14, 2026

 1 Executive
 Summary

 1.1 Introduction

 This technical report summary (TRS) has been prepared by Ausenco
Engineering USA South Inc. (Ausenco), Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (IMC), and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services,
Inc. (WestLand) for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (Hycroft), following the reporting requirements of the United States (US) Securities
and Exchange Commission&rsquo;s (SEC) Modernization of Property Disclosures of Mining Registrants under subpart 1300 and item 601 (96)(B)(iii)
of Regulation S-K for an initial assessment (IA).

 This TRS is an initial assessment with an economic analysis (IA-EA)
and, filed on Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR). The IA-EA is based on heap leaching the oxide material, while
sulfide material is milled and processed using the pressure oxidation (POX) process. Transition material will be controlled by Hycroft
grade control and may be processed with the sulfide material or heap leached with the oxide material. This TRS includes drill results
received through March 17, 2025, which formed the basis of the Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) model.

 The
Hycroft mine (the Mine) is situated on the western flank of the Kamma Mountains on the eastern edge of the Black Rock Desert
approximately 54 miles west of Winnemucca in Humboldt and Pershing Counties, Nevada. The Mine property straddles Townships 34, 35, 35&frac12;
and 36 north and Ranges 28, 29 and 30 east (MDB&M) with its central coordinates at approximately latitude 40&deg;52&rsquo; north
and longitude 118&deg;41&rsquo; west.

 The
Mine is accessible via Nevada State Route 49 (Jungo Road), an unpaved road maintained by Humboldt County and Pershing County and Hycroft.
The Union Pacific railway, a major east&ndash;west railway, runs immediately adjacent to the property.

 Hycroft, a past producer, has existing facilities on site including
two administration buildings, a mobile maintenance shop, a light vehicle maintenance shop, a warehouse, multiple leach pads, primary,
secondary and tertiary crushing systems, an assay lab, one Merrill-Crowe process plant, and a refinery.

 1.2 Terms
 of Reference

 The firms and consultants who are providing Qualified Persons (QPs)
responsible for the content of the TRS are, in alphabetical order, Ausenco, Hycroft, IMC and WestLand.

 The TRS presents the IA-EA for the mine based on the POX and Heap
Leach processes.

 All
units of measurement in the TRS are US customary, unless otherwise stated.

 The
monetary units are in US dollars, unless otherwise stated.

 Mineral resources are reported in accordance with the US Securities
and Exchange Commission Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 229.1300 &ndash; Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining operations (S-K
1300).

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 1

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

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

 The
Mine property consists of 25 private parcels with patented claims totaling approximately 1,855 acres, along with 3,249 unpatented mining
claims covering approximately 62,298 acres, for a combined total of approximately 64,000 acres. On May 15, 2023, Hycroft expanded its
holdings by acquiring a 50% undivided interest in three additional patented mining claims, adding approximately 61 acres at one location
in Northern Nevada. Some mining claims overlap other Hycroft Mining claims to ensure there are no fractional gaps in mining claim coverage.

 These
claims are contiguous or proximate to the original Crofoot and Lewis claims.

 Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees to the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) and Humboldt and Pershing Counties and payment of annual real property taxes for patented claims in Humboldt
and Pershing Counties are made every third quarter (Q3). Payments are current through the 2025&ndash;2026 claim years, with US$724,095
paid for 2025&ndash;2026. Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees and real property taxes are required to hold the Hycroft
property in good standing. BLM annual maintenance fees for claims are due not later than September 1 of each year. Humboldt and Pershing
County State annual holding fees beginning September 1 of each year are due no later than November 1 of each year. Annual real property
taxes for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are due August 31 of the following year.

 Hycroft
controls all surface and mineral rights within the Hycroft MRE area. No further land acquisition is required for the operation
of the mine and contemplated processing facilities.

 1.4 History

 The
Mine location is in the Nevada Sulfur District, where mining for native sulfur began in the late 1800&rsquo;s. In the early part of the
20 th century high-grade Ag was mined as were veins of nearly pure alunite (hydroxylated aluminum potassium sulfate mineral)
in the southern part of the district. From 1941 to 1943, cinnabar (a mercury sulfide mineral) was also mined. Exploration for native
sulfur commenced again in 1966 with the Duval Corporation (Duval) reporting elevated Au and Ag values but finding no significant evidence
of a sulfur deposit at depth (Wallace, 1980).

 In
1977, the Cordex Syndicate mapped and rock-chip sampled the Hycroft property, recognizing the potential for a bulk tonnage, low-grade
precious metal deposit. Homestake then took interest in the property and completed surface sampling and exploration drilling during 1981-1982.
Mining officially began as a small heap leach operation in 1983 at what was then known as the Lewis Mine. In 1985, Vista gained control
of the original Hycroft property. They also acquired the Lewis Mine in early 1987 from F. W. Lewis, Inc., and the Crofoot Mine in April
1988. From 1985 to 1999, they drilled 3,212 exploration holes, totaling 965,552 feet (ft) with the bulk of this drilling
focused on oxide gold mineralization at Central, Bay and Brimstone. Production from the Brimstone pit commenced in 1985 and continued
until December 1998.

 From
1983 to 1998, the Mine produced approximately 1.2 million ounces (Moz) of Au and 2.5 Moz of Ag. An additional 58,700 ounce (oz) of Au
was produced from the leaching operations from 1999 through 2004. The remaining leasehold interest in the Lewis property was purchased
by Vista in December 2005. Production followed at the former Crofoot property in the Bay, South Central, Boneyard, Gap, and Historic
Cut-4 pits along the Central Zone. The Mine was placed on a care and maintenance program through 2007. In May 2007, the Nevada-based
holdings of Vista were spun out into Allied Nevada Gold Corp. (Allied Nevada). The Mine was included as part of the transfer of ownership
allowing Allied Nevada to explore, expand, and develop the resources. The Mine was reactivated in September 2007 and achieved planned
ore production by the end of 2009. With the construction of the North leach pad in 2013, the total leach pad space was increased to more
than 20 million square ft (ft 2 ). In 2010, the Mine began an expansion program that included construction of a 21,000 gallon
per minute (gal/min.) Merrill-Crowe processing plant and a three-stage crushing facility as well as solution pumping capacity upgrades.
Active mining was stopped again at the Mine in June 2015 due to low metal prices, but active leaching of previously mined ore continued
through 2018. During this time, Allied Nevada emerged from its financial restructuring to become Hycroft Mining Corporation.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 2

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 In
late 2018, Hycroft began construction of new leach pads. In April 2019, active mining began with a focus on transition and sulfide minerals
but were set aside for future processing. Active mining ceased in 2021, but gold and silver production continued through 2022.

 From
September 2007 through July 2019 metal sales totaled approximately 900,000 oz of Au and 5.0 Moz of Ag. Active mining ceased and production
at the Mine was terminated on November 11, 2021. Annual sales in ounces of Au and Ag produced from the Mine&rsquo;s heap leach operations
over years 2019 through 2022 total approximately 107,258 ounces of Au and 615,000 ounces of Ag.

 1.5 Geology
 and Mineralization

 The
Hycroft deposit is a low-sulfidation, epithermal, hot springs system that contains gold and silver mineralization. Radiometric
dating indicates that the main phase of gold and silver mineralization was formed four million years ago, when hydrothermal fluids
were fed upward along high angle, normal faults.

 Low-grade
gold and silver mineralization were co-deposited with silica and potassium feldspar throughout porous rock types.

 A
subsequent drop in permeability, due to sealing of the system, led to over pressuring and subsequent repeated hydrothermal brecciation.
Additional precious metal mineralization was deposited during this event as breccia zones, veins, and sulfide flooding.

 Gold
and silver mineralization was followed by an intense event of high sulfidation acid leaching of the mineralized volcanic rocks coincident
with a regional water table drop. This allowed steam heated sulfur gases to condense into sulfuric acid and leach the upper portion of
the mineralized rocks.

 Oxidation
of sulfide mineralization occurs to variable depths over the deposit, depending upon proximity to faults, extent of acid leaching, and
depth to water table. Sulfide content through the deposit is variable from 0% to 20%.

 A total of six
major north-northeast trending, west dipping, normal fault zones appear to broadly control the distribution of alteration. From west
to east, these fault zones are referred to as the Range, West Splay, Central, Break, Albert, and East Faults. These major structures
down-drop stratigraphy and affect the distribution of alteration and mineralization.

 A
post-mineral basin bounding fault appears to border the Camel Conglomerate and the adjacent Pleistocene Lahontan Lake sediments in the
Black Rock Desert. Based on geophysics, this structure is approximately one to two miles west of the Mine site. There are several east&ndash;west
trending structures that appear to provide post-mineral offset to the deposit. These form a series of horst and grabens within the deposit
footprint.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 3

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.6 Exploration

 The
Hycroft property drill history covers the period from 1982 through 2024. Within the block model there are 5,813 drillholes, with
516,901 drill intervals amounting to 2,668,616 ft of drilling.

 During 2021 through 2024, Hycroft drilled 260 holes, 105 in 2021,
85 in 2022, 49 in 2023 and 21 in 2024. Most of the 2021 drilling was diamond core that was used for metallurgical testing and assay. The
2022 and 2023 drilling focused on extending mineralization and upgrading areas from inferred to measured and indicated classification.
Since 2024, drilling has focused on high-grade mineralization in Brimstone and Vortex.

 1.7 Sampling

 Hycroft
provided IMC with the database which contained drilling information from 1982 through 2024. Assay data was received through March 2025.

 The
current sample preparation analysis and security follow best practices and are acceptable for application to mineral resource reporting.

 The
historic data collection is unknown. Components of the historic data have been found to be reliable. Some components are not reliable
and have been removed or modified prior to incorporation into the MRE.

 After the noted adjustments, John Marek, the QP, finds the data applicable
to the determination of the MRE.

 1.8 Metallurgical
 Testwork

 Metallurgical testwork supporting the Hycroft process flowsheet has been conducted by several laboratories, including
G&T Metallurgical Services Ltd. (G&T), SGS Mineral Services (SGS), Hazen Research Inc. (Hazen), FLSmidth Minerals Testing &
Research Center (FLSmidth MTRC), and Kappes, Cassiday & Associates (KCA). The process design and metallurgical assumptions used in
this study are primarily based on the most recent testwork completed by FLSmidth - MTRC and Hazen Research, with historical testwork from
the other laboratories reviewed to support the interpretation of metallurgical performance and flowsheet development.

 Comminution testwork indicates that Hycroft mineralization is very
high and requires relatively high grinding energy in ball mill grinding.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 4

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 In 2021, Hycroft initiated a new metallurgical variability study
to evaluate mineralized material characteristics within the current mine plan, validate the metallurgical performance across the deposit;
and identify potential variations in processing conditions required to recover gold and silver. The objective of the study was to support
development of a Hycroft process flowsheet, including definition of key process control points in crushing, grinding, capable of consistently
achieving gold and silver recoveries across anticipated metallurgical variability.

 Key
outcomes of this study included the development of the flotation process with significantly improved recoveries. The following key process
controls parameters were identified during the flotation process development program:

 ● Optimal
grind size is a P 80 of less than 85 micrometers (&micro;m).

 ● Flotation
 time is 24 minutes.

 ● Adjusted
 pH level is 4.7.

 ● Flotation
 mass pull is 20 to 25% with 22% being the target.

 A total of 137 samples were tested under these selected conditions
to achieve higher gold and silver recoveries to flotation concentrate. The results show that gold recovery exhibits a broader distribution,
with values ranging from approximately 72 to 98% and a statistical median near 88%, indicating greater sensitivity across the tested samples.
In contrast, silver recovery is generally higher, with recoveries spanning approximately 76 to 100% and a statistical median exceeding
92%. This is a significant improvement from the gold flotation recovery and silver flotation recovery values reported in a TRS prepared
for Hycroft and filed in 2023 (the 2023 TRS).

 In
2025, Hycroft completed a series of POX tests demonstrating that POX at 225&deg;C with oxygen overpressure, followed by hot cure, lime
boil, and cyanide leaching, is a technically viable and repeatable processing route for the pyrite concentrate. Gold and silver recoveries
of approximately 93% and 86%, respectively, were consistent with past performance. Overall, considering the full flowsheet involving
flotation, POX, and leaching, gold recovery has improved to approximately 83% and silver recovery has improved to approximately 78%.
Overall recovery for both gold and silver are exceeding the values assumed in the 2023 TRS.

 Hycroft
existing heap leaching was discontinued in 2022. Heap leach operations are expected to restart once new oxide and transition material
becomes available.

 1.9 Mineral
 Resource Estimate

 The MRE on the Hycroft property is currently envisioned to be mined
by way of a conventional hard rock open pit mine feeding two process facilities:

 1. Run-of-mine
 (ROM) oxide material will be directed to cyanide heap leaching, producing a
 gold and silver dor&eacute;.

 2. Sulfide
 material will be directed to a crushing, flotation milling followed by POX of the concentrate
 to make a gold and silver dor&eacute;.

 Transitional material will be directed to either (ROM) cyanide heap
leaching or flotation milling followed by POX depending on the sulfide sulfur levels of the individual blocks, total sulfur content, and
gold grade.

 The terms of reference for this MRE are mineralization in-place.
The procedures described in the following paragraphs establish that the stated MRE has reasonable prospects for economic extraction of
mineral resources.

 Mineral resources were developed using a computer-based block model
for mineralization and pit optimization software to determine mineralization with reasonable prospectus for economic extraction.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 5

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 The cutoff grade that is reported for this statement of mineral resources
is based on mining and processing costs estimated by IMC and Ausenco combined with reasonable metal prices. The internal or marginal cutoff
is applied and reported where the benefits of selling the recovered metal will pay for the processing and fixed general and administrative
(G&A) costs. The cutoff is presented in terms of net of refining (NSR).

 Metal prices for the MRE were US$3,100/oz Au and US$36.00/oz Ag.
Spot prices for gold and silver in 2025 ranged from US$2,798 to US$4,323/oz Au and US$31.34 to US$71.63/oz Ag. The spot prices for gold
and silver on January 21, 2026, were US$4,726/oz Au and US$93.50/oz Ag. The prices selected for determination of the MRE are 35% below
the spot gold price and 62% below the spot silver price on January 21, 2026.

 The risks to the MRE are project costs and project recoveries as
well as metal prices that can have a substantial impact on the mineral resource both positively and negatively. The Hycroft MRE is sensitive
to estimated parameters of operating costs, recoveries, and metal prices. That sensitivity may result in future variation in the mineral
resource as costs and recoveries are refined.

 Mineral
resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied.

 Table
1-1: Hycroft MRE as of January 21, 2026, US customary Units

 Classification
 Cutoff
 Grade

 $
 Net

 of
 Refining

 Approximate

 Cutoff,
 AuEq oz/ton

 Ktons
 Gold

 oz/ton

 Silver

 oz/ton

 Sulfide

 Sulfur
 %

 Contained
 Ounces

 Gold

 Oz
 x 1000

 Silver

 Oz
 x 1000

 Heap
 Leach Resource

 Measured
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 92,994
 0.005
 0.11
 1.83
 446
 10,322

 Indicated
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 110,374
 0.004
 0.09
 1.54
 475
 9,492

 Meas
 + Ind
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 203,368
 0.005
 0.10
 1.67
 921
 19,814

 Inferred
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 110,018
 0.005
 0.09
 1.41
 528
 10,122

 Flotation
 Mill + Concentrate Treatment by Pressure Oxidation and Cyanide Leach

 Measured
 $16.73
 0.007
 734,571
 0.011
 0.43
 2.03
 8,154
 316,600

 Indicated
 $16.73
 0.007
 748,876
 0.010
 0.30
 1.84
 7,339
 226,161

 Meas
 + Ind
 $16.73
 0.007
 1,483,447
 0.010
 0.37
 1.93
 15,493
 542,761

 Inferred
 $16.73
 0.007
 459,646
 0.010
 0.27
 1.76
 4,505
 122,725

 Combined
 Mineral Resources Leach Plus Mill

 Measured
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 827,565
 0.010
 0.40
 2.01
 8,600
 326,922

 Indicated
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 859,250
 0.009
 0.27
 1.80
 7,814
 235,653

 Meas
 + Ind
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 1,686,815
 0.010
 0.33
 1.90
 16,414
 562,575

 Inferred
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 569,664
 0.009
 0.23
 1.69
 5,033
 132,847

 Notes:

 1. Mineral
 resources based on metal prices of $3,100/troy oz Au and $36.00/troy oz Ag.

 2. Cutoffs
 are Income &ndash; Refining Cost = NSR.

 3. Gold
 Equivalent (AuEq) for Heap Leach = Cyanide Gold + 0.0019 x Total Silver Assay, or at average
 gold leach recovery AuEq = Fire Gold + 0.0035 Total Silver Assay.

 4. Gold
 Equivalent for Mill + Pressure Oxidation = Fire Gold + 0.0107 x Total Silver Assay.

 5. Numbers
 may not match exactly due to rounding.

 6. Mineral
 resources are contained within a computer-generated optimized pit.

 7. Total
 material in that pit is 5.42 billion tons.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 6

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 8. Mineral
 resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied.

 9. Modifying
 factors for mine and process design have not been applied.

 10. All
 units are US customary. Ktons means 1,000 short tons. Au and Ag grades are in troy
 ounces per short ton (oz/ton).

 Table
1-2: Hycroft MRE as of 21 January 2026, Metric Units

 Classification
 Cutoff
 Grade

 $
 Net

 of
 Refining

 Approximate

 Cutoff,
 AuEq g/tonne

 Ktonnes
 Gold
 Silver
 Sulfide Sulfur
 Contained
 Ounces

 Gold
 Silver

 g/tonne
 g/tonne
 %
 Oz
 x 1000
 Oz
 x 1000

 Heap
 Leach Resource

 Measured
 $2.07
 - $4.00
 0.027
 - 0.055
 84,364
 0.164
 3.80
 1.83
 446
 10,322

 Indicated
 $2.07
 - $4.00
 0.027
 - 0.055
 100,131
 0.147
 2.95
 1.54
 475
 9,492

 Meas
 + Ind
 $2.07
 - $4.00
 0.027
 - 0.055
 184,495
 0.155
 3.34
 1.67
 921
 19,814

 Inferred
 $2.07
 - $4.00
 0.027
 - 0.055
 99,808
 0.164
 3.15
 1.41
 528
 10,122

 Flotation
 Mill + Concentrate Treatment by Pressure Oxidation and Cyanide Leach

 Measured
 $18.44
 0.206
 666,403
 0.380
 14.76
 2.03
 8,154
 316,600

 Indicated
 $18.44
 0.206
 679,380
 0.336
 10.34
 1.84
 7,339
 226,161

 Meas
 + Ind
 $18.44
 0.206
 1,345,783
 0.358
 12.53
 1.93
 15,493
 542,761

 Inferred
 $18.44
 0.206
 416,991
 0.336
 9.14
 1.76
 4,505
 122,725

 Combined
 Mineral Resources, Leach Plus Mill

 Measured
 $2.07
 - $18.44
 0.027
 - 0.206
 750,767
 0.356
 13.53
 2.01
 8,600
 326,922

 Indicated
 $2.07
 - $18.44
 0.027
 - 0.206
 779,512
 0.311
 9.39
 1.80
 7,814
 235,653

 Meas
 + Ind
 $2.07
 - $18.44
 0.027
 - 0.206
 1,530,279
 0.333
 11.42
 1.90
 16,414
 562,575

 Inferred
 $2.07
 - $18.44
 0.027
 - 0.206
 516,799
 0.303
 7.99
 1.69
 5,033
 132,847

 Notes:

 1. Mineral
 resources based on metal prices of $3,100/ oz Au and $36.00/ oz Ag.

 2. Cutoffs
 are Income &ndash; Refining Cost = NSR.

 3. Gold
 Equivalent for Heap Leach = Cyanide Gold + 0.0019 x Total Silver Assay.

 4. Gold
 Equivalent for Mill + Pressure Oxidation = Fire Gold + 0.0107 x Total Silver Assay.

 5. Numbers
 may not match exactly due to rounding.

 6. Mineral
 resources are contained within a computer-generated optimized pit.

 7. Total
 material in that pit is 4.92 billion tonnes.

 8. All
 units on this table are metric: Ktonnes means 1,000 tonnes. Au and Ag grades are in grams
 per tonne (g/tonne).

 9. Mineral
 resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied.

 10. Modifying
 factors for mine and process design have not been applied.

 Contained
within the MRE at Hycroft are a series of high-grade silver veins at Brimstone and zones of higher silver concentrations in Vortex that
are associated with a low angle breccia body. Table 1-3 and Table 1-4 are the tabulation of gold and silver within the domain volumes
that are contained within the MRE at 2 oz/tonne cutoff grade in US customary and 68.57 g/tonne cutoff grade in metric.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 7

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Table
1-3: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 2 oz/ton Cutoff Grade, US customary Units

 Classification
 Cutoff
 Grade Silver (oz/ton)
 Ktons
 Gold

 (oz/ton)

 Silver

 (oz/ton)
 Sulfide
 Sulfur (%)
 Gold
 Contained

 oz x 1000
 Silver
 Contained

 oz x 1000

 Brimstone

 Measured
 2.00
 3,195
 0.011
 8.35
 1.33
 35
 26,686

 Indicated
 2.00
 330
 0.010
 3.11
 1.87
 3
 1,025

 Meas
 + Ind
 2.00
 3,525
 0.011
 7.86
 1.38
 38
 27,711

 Inferred
 2.00
 15
 0.008
 3.52
 1.13
 0
 52

 Vortex

 Measured
 2.00
 9,126
 0.018
 3.81
 1.49
 160
 34,781

 Indicated
 2.00
 7,342
 0.014
 3.78
 1.24
 100
 27,726

 Meas
 + Ind
 2.00
 16,468
 0.016
 3.80
 1.38
 261
 62,507

 Inferred
 2.00
 3,644
 0.014
 3.65
 1.27
 50
 13,307

 Brimstone
 + Vortex

 Measured
 2.00
 12,322
 0.016
 4.99
 1.45
 195
 61,467

 Indicated
 2.00
 7,671
 0.013
 3.75
 1.26
 104
 28,750

 Meas
 + Ind
 2.00
 19,993
 0.015
 4.51
 1.38
 299
 90,218

 Inferred
 2.00
 3,659
 0.014
 3.65
 1.27
 51
 13,359

 Table
1-4: High-grade Silver Bearing Domains, Contained Within the MRE at 68.57
g/tonne (2 oz/tonne) Cutoff Grade, Metric Units

 Classification
 Cutoff
 Grade Silver (g/tonne)
 Ktonnes
 Gold

 (g/tonne)
 Silver

 (g/tonne)
 Sulfide
 Sulfur (%)
 Contained
 Ounces

 Gold

 Oz x 1000
 Silver

 Oz x 1000

 Brimstone

 Measured
 68.57
 2,899
 0.372
 286.35
 1.33
 35
 26,686

 Indicated
 68.57
 299
 0.332
 106.62
 1.87
 3
 1,025

 Meas
 + Ind
 68.57
 3,198
 0.368
 269.54
 1.38
 38
 27,711

 Inferred
 68.57
 13
 0.289
 120.74
 1.13
 0
 52

 Vortex

 Measured
 68.57
 8,279
 0.603
 130.67
 1.49
 160
 34,781

 Indicated
 68.57
 6,660
 0.469
 129.48
 1.24
 100
 27,726

 Meas
 + Ind
 68.57
 14,940
 0.543
 130.14
 1.38
 261
 62,507

 Inferred
 68.57
 3,306
 0.475
 125.20
 1.27
 50
 13,307

 Brimstone
 + Vortex

 Measured
 68.57
 11,178
 0.543
 171.04
 1.45
 195
 61,467

 Indicated
 68.57
 6,959
 0.463
 128.49
 1.26
 104
 28,750

 Meas
 + Ind
 68.57
 18,137
 0.512
 154.71
 1.38
 299
 90,218

 Inferred
 68.57
 3,319
 0.474
 125.18
 1.27
 51
 13,359

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 8

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.10 Mining
Methods

 Hycroft
is planned as a conventional hard rock open pit operation. IMC developed a mine plan that produces the required process feed and moves
sufficient mine waste to assure continued release of the mineralization. The mine plan is based on measured and indicated mineralization
that was estimated in the mineral resource block model described in Section 11.

 Inferred
mineralization was not included within this initial assessment for two reasons: (1) there is sufficient measured and indicated mineralization
to feed the process plant for over 50 years, and (2) to reduce the changes in the mine schedule and potentially minable material as the
project moves toward a pre-feasibility study in the future.

 The
mine will feed two processing facilities:

 1. A
 flotation mill followed by pressure oxidation and leaching of the concentrate.

 2. A
 ROM heap leach for mineralization that is amenable to direct cyanide leaching.

 The
mine production schedule is summarized in Figure 13-1 with tabular detail in Table 13-1.

 1.11 Processing
 and Recovery Methods

 Hycroft
property is currently envisioned to be mined by way of a conventional hard rock open pit mine feeding two process facilities:

 1. Oxide
 Material &ndash; ROM oxide material will be directed to cyanide heap leaching, producing
 gold and silver dor&eacute;.

 2. Sulfide
 Material &ndash; Sulfide material will be directed to a crushing and flotation milling circuit,
 followed by pressure oxidation (POX) of the concentrate to produce a gold and silver dor&eacute;.

 Transitional
material will be routed to either ROM cyanide heap leaching or flotation milling followed by POX, depending on the sulfide sulfur levels
of the individual blocks, total sulfide sulfur content, and gold grade. The process route will be determined based on grade control

 The
existing Heap Leach facilities (Brimstone Heap Leach Pad and North Heap Leach Pad) will be expanded to accommodate additional capacity.
These facilities have existing collection ponds and pumping systems. The leach solution distribution network will be expanded as required
to support increased throughput.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 9

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 For
sulfide processing, the plant will utilize the existing crushing plant. Consisting of three stages of crushing, reducing the mineralized
material from a nominal top size of approximately 35 inches (&ldquo;) to about ⅜&rdquo;. The crushed material is fed to a two-stage
ball milling circuit operating in closed circuit with hydrocyclones, producing a grind suitable for downstream processing. Cyclone overflow
will be directed to rougher flotation for recovery of gold and silver into a flotation concentrate.

 Rougher
flotation tailings will be thickened prior to transfer to the final tailings pumping system. The flotation concentrate will be processed
through POX to oxidize sulfide minerals and liberate gold and silver for downstream recovery.

 Following
oxidation, the oxidized slurry will undergo counter-current decantation (CCD) washing to recover dissolved metal values and remove acidic
process solutions. The washed solids are then conditioned through lime boil and hot curing prior to cyanide leaching.

 The
conditioned solids will be leached in cyanide leach tanks to dissolve gold and silver. Precious metals will be recovered from the leach
solution using the existing Merrill-Crowe zinc precipitation circuit, producing gold-silver dor&eacute;.

 Residual
cyanide in the leach tailings will be destroyed using a sulfur dioxide&ndash;oxygen detoxification process, after which the detoxified
tailings will be combined with flotation tailings and pumped to the tailings management facility (TMF) for disposal.

 1.12 Infrastructure

 The
Hycroft Mine infrastructure scope represents a brownfield development within an established mining complex. The proposed sulfide ore
processing plant will be integrated into existing site infrastructure via tie-ins to current crushing facilities, utilities, and site
services. Most existing access roads, haul roads, and ancillary structures will remain in service or be selectively upgraded.

 1.12.1 Site
 Access and Haulage

 New
road infrastructure includes 0.6 miles of plant access roads, a 5.6-mile TMF access road parallel to the tailings delivery pipeline corridor,
and a 3.4-mile TMF construction haul road connecting the North WRSF to the TMF embankment. All roads are designed as dirt roads with
a maximum 10% grade and 25 miles per hour (mph) speed limit. A rail spur extension from the adjacent Union Pacific line will receive
reagents, consumables, and fuel, and facilitate export of salable metals. The spur design by Mountain States Contracting Inc. includes
turnouts, derails, signals, ballast, bridges, civil works, and a bottom-dump hopper car loadout facility.

 1.12.2 New
 Infrastructure

 New
process plant facilities will tie into the existing crushing circuit and North Merrill-Crowe facility. New onsite infrastructure includes
utility tie-ins, power distribution upgrades, substations, a process control system and control room, and reagent handling facilities
including an oxygen plant and limestone offloading and slaking system. Six new ancillary facilities are planned over the LOM including
a covered crushed ore stockpile dome (313 ft diameter &times; 104 ft height), new assay lab, fuel station, technical services building,
maintenance shop, and crusher maintenance building. Ten existing structures will be upgraded, relocated, or repurposed. Workforce accommodation
will be drawn primarily from Winnemucca (~54 miles east), with personnel transported via contracted bus service.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 10

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.12.3 Stockpiles

 Coarse
ore stockpile capacity is 56,000 tons live and 175,400 tons total; crushed ore stockpile capacity is 34,000 tons live and 113,000 tons
total, covered by a round dome structure. These stockpiles support crushing circuit availability of 31.3% for primary and 65.1% for combined
secondary and tertiary crushing. Growth medium stripped during TMF construction will be stockpiled for reclamation use. Limestone will
be delivered by rail to a dedicated onsite stockpile.

 1.12.4 Tailings
 Management Facility

 The
TMF uses conventional designs and will be constructed in a total of eight stages and zero discharge of process solutions. The TMF will
fill the broad valley immediately northeast of the mill site and require the main and the north embankments to impound an ultimate tailings
storage capacity of 1.05 billion tons (Btons) at an average settled dry density for the ultimate facility of 92 pounds per cubic ft (pcf).
The main embankment will cross the natural drainage on the west side of the TMF, and the secondary embankment will be constructed along
the northern ridge. The facility will provide continuous containment of process solutions through the installation of a vertical chimney
drain and engineered geomembrane liner systems, extending across the impoundment basin and below a portion of the main embankment and
the upstream slope of the north embankment. The design is capable of storing runoff from the basin and direct precipitation on the facility,
resulting from the 5,000-year, 24-hour storm event during operation and the 10,000-year, 24-hour storm event for post-closure.

 1.12.5 Waste
 Rock Storage Facility

 Two
initial waste rock storage facility (WRSF) locations &mdash; west and south of the pit &mdash; will merge into a single facility
on the southwest perimeter by Mine Year 10. The dump is designed with an overall slope of 2.7H:1V and inter-bench geometry of 1.5H:1V
slopes with 50 ft high and 60 ft wide benches, constructed over previously disturbed ground. Water management consists of upstream diversion
channels for non-contact water and a seepage collection system for contact water, comprising double-walled HDPE pipes (300 mm main, 100
mm secondary) sized for the 100-year, 24-hour event. Seepage is conveyed to double-lined GCL and HDPE collection ponds for reuse at the
process plant. Surface water diversion channels are sized for the 100-year, 24-hour event with a minimum 2% slope and riprap lining.
Physical stability will be monitored via survey markers, vibrating wire piezometers, hydraulic piezometers, and inclinometers throughout
the LOM. Topsoil and growth media will be harvested from areas adjacent to the WRSF during closure to support reclamation.

 1.12.6 Power,
 Communications, and Fuel

 Two
120 kV powerlines will supply the site via the Nevada Power Imlay Substation. Installed load is 160 MW with an operating load of 124
MW; total load including the oxygen plant is 170 MW, requiring additional transmission capacity. Site communications are currently served
by microwave, fiber optic, and cellular systems and will be upgraded as required during execution. Diesel fuel is priced at $3.76/gallon;
supply contracts are in place on an annual or bi-annual basis. Fuel will be delivered by rail once the spur is operational. The existing
fuel island will be replaced with a high-efficiency system in mine years 3 and 4.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 11

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.12.7 Water
 Supply and Management

 Hycroft
holds 16 water-right permits sufficient to support all planned facilities and process demands. Plant freshwater demand is estimated at
7,260 gal/min, supplied via four existing wells with four additional production wells to be drilled. Tailings will be transported as
slurry at 48% solids through an HDPE-lined pipeline, distributed via a 36&rdquo; manifold system. Return water will initially
be managed via the Underdrain Collection Pond, transitioning to barge-mounted pumps in the TMF supernatant pool in later years. GoldSim
Monte Carlo water balance modeling over 250 simulations indicates average make-up water demand starting at 6,500 gal/min in year 1, declining
to 3,200 gal/min by years 14&ndash;15. Pit dewatering will be managed by four depressurization wells with groundwater at approximately
700 ft below ground surface (bgs), with water conveyed to the process plant. Plant site stormwater is managed via perimeter ditches and
a 9,850 yd&sup3; HDPE-lined sedimentation pond sized for the 100-year, 24-hour event.

 1.12.8 Hazard
 Considerations

 The
site climate is arid at 7.7 in/a average precipitation with winter temperatures between 20 &deg;F and 40 &deg;F, introducing freeze-thaw
cycling risk in near-surface soils. Seismicity is assessed as low to moderate with no active or capable faults identified. Principal
pit slope stability controls are the argillically altered Camel Conglomerate, Auld Lang Syne Formation siltstones, and the East Fault.

 1.13 Market
 Studies and Contracts

 No
formal marketing studies have been completed. Gold and silver dor&eacute; will be sold on the spot market under terms typical of comparable
dor&eacute; contracts. Both metals are globally liquid commodities supporting reliable price discovery throughout the LOM. The economic
analysis assumes base case prices of US$3,600/oz gold and US$48.00/oz silver, based on long-term consensus forecasts from numerous financial
institutions as of April 2026. No refining, transportation, or hedging contracts are currently in place, though these are considered
readily obtainable. Refining and transportation costs are estimated at US$5.00/oz gold and US$0.50/oz silver based on comparable project
terms.

 1.14 Environmental,
 Permitting and Social Considerations

 1.14.1 Environmental
 Considerations

 The
Mine has conducted numerous environmental baseline studies as part of their previous permitting efforts and continues to collect certain
environmental baseline data. The Mine area has been surveyed for surface water resources, including Waters of the United States (WOTUS),
biological resources, cultural resources, and groundwater resources. In addition, the Mine has developed a series of environmental management
and monitoring plans which are required to guide the development and operation of the Project to limit environmental impacts. These plans
are developed to address legal requirements and committed Environmental Protection Measures (EPMs) made by the Mine during Project permitting
and recent Plan of Operations amendments.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 12

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.14.2 Permitting
 Considerations

 The
Mine operates under a series of permits, which are issued by both federal and state regulators. The following table lists the principal
environmental permits necessary to operate the Mine and the applicable issuing agency.

 Table
1-5: Principal Environmental Permits

 Operating
 Permits
 Issuing
 Agency

 Plan
 of Operations
 BLM

 Mercury
 Operating Permit to Construct
 NDEP
 Bureau of Air Pollution Control

 Class
 I Air Quality Operating Permit to Construct
 NDEP
 Bureau of Air Pollution Control

 Class
 II Air Quality Permit
 NDEP
 Bureau of Air Pollution Control

 Permit
 to Operate a Public Water System
 NDEP
 Bureau of Safe Drinking Water

 Water
 Pollution Control Permit-Crofoot Project
 NDEP
 Bureau of Mining Regulation & Reclamation

 Water
 Pollution Control Permit-Hycroft Mine
 NDEP
 Bureau of Mining Regulation & Reclamation

 Reclamation
 Permit
 NDEP
 Bureau of Mining Regulation & Reclamation

 Mining
 General Stormwater Pollution Prevention Permit
 NDEP
 Bureau of Water Pollution Control

 Class
 III Landfill Waiver
 NDEP
 Bureau of Waste Management

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (Brimstone Process Ponds)
 NV
 Department of Wildlife

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (Crofoot Process Ponds)
 NV
 Department of Wildlife

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (North Process Ponds)
 NV
 Department of Wildlife

 Septic
 Onsite Disposal
 NDEP
 Bureau of Water Pollution Control

 Dam
 Safety Permits
 NV
 Division of Water Resources

 Hazardous
 Materials Storage Permit
 NV
 State Fire Marshal

 Special
 Use Permit
 Pershing
 County

 Special
 Use Permit
 Humboldt
 County

 Golden
 Eagle Take Permit
 US
 Fish & Wildlife Service

 In
addition to the principal environmental permits outlined above, the following table lists other notifications or ministerial permits
that may likely be necessary to operate the Project, as well as the applicable agency.

 Table
1-6: Other Notifications or Ministerial Permits

 Notification/Permit
 Agency

 Above
 Ground Storage Tank Permit
 Nevada
 Bureau of Corrective Actions

 Agreement
 for Road Maintenance
 Humboldt
 and Pershing Counties

 Explosives
 Permit
 Bureau
 of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

 Explosives
 User&rsquo;s License (User&rsquo;s Clearance)
 Bureau
 of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

 Fire
 and Life Safety
 Nevada
 State Fire Marshal

 Hazardous
 Materials Permit
 Nevada
 State Fire Marshal

 Industrial
 Artificial Pond Permit
 Nevada
 Department of Wildlife

 Leach
 Pad Commencement
 Nevada
 Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation

 Leach
 Pad As-Built Report
 Nevada
 Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation

 Process
 Plant As-Built Report
 Nevada
 Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation

 Dam
 Safety Permit
 Nevada
 Division of Water Resources

 Mine
 ID Number
 Mine
 Safety & Health Administration

 Mine
 Opening Notification
 Nevada
 Division of Minerals

 Mine
 Registry
 Nevada
 Division of Minerals

 Notification
 of Commencement of Operations
 Mine
 Safety & Health Administration

 Production/Dewatering
 Wells - Proof of Completion
 Nevada
 Division of Water Resources

 Radio
 License
 Federal
 Communications Commission

 RCRA
 Waste Mgt. ID - Mine
 Nevada
 Bureau of Sustainable Materials Management/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

 Well
 Drilling Permit (Notice of Intent to Drill)
 Nevada
 Division of Water Resources

 Potable
 Water System
 Nevada
 Bureau of Safe Drinking Water

 Septic
 System
 Nevada
 Bureau of Water Pollution Control

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 13

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.14.3 Social
 Considerations

 Social
and community impacts are considered and evaluated for the revision to the Plan Application and would be used in the NEPA process. Potentially
affected Native American tribes, tribal organizations, and/or individuals are consulted during the preparation of all plan amendments
to advise on the proposed projects that may affect cultural sites, resources, and traditional activities.

 1.14.4 Closure
 and Reclamation Considerations

 A
Tentative Plan for Permanent Closure (TPPC) for the Mine is in place and is currently being updated for future submission to the BMRR
with the application to modify the WPCP (NEV0094114). In the TPPC, the proposed TMF closure approach would consist of fluid management
through evaporation, covering the TMF with a geosynthetic cover and growth media, and then revegetation. The design of the process components
is not sufficiently advanced to determine the closure costs. Any residual TMF drainage will be managed with evaporation cells. Surface
management surety bonds currently total US$58.7 million with US$58.3 million securing financial assurance requirements for the Mine and
US$0.4 million securing financial assurance requirements for the water supply well field and exploration within the Project boundary.
Future increases in reclamation bonding will either be through surety bonds supported by restricted cash balances or by letters of credit
issued by banks.

 1.15 Capital
 and Operating Cost

 The
capital cost (CAPEX) and operating cost (OPEX) estimates were developed in Q1 2026 in U.S. dollars (US$). The estimates are based on
budgetary quotations, supplemented with Ausenco&rsquo;s in-house database, and informed by Ausenco&rsquo;s experience from similar operations
in North America.

 1.15.1
 Capital
 Cost Estimate

 The
capital cost estimate was developed in Q1 2026 to target a level of accuracy of -30% to +50%, which aligns with an Association for the
Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACE International) Class 5 level estimate. The CAPEX estimate includes the following:

 ● Initial
 capital cost to design, construct, and commission the mine, process plants, and supporting
 facilities and infrastructure.

 ● Sustaining
 capital to construct and commission equipment replacement and other major capital expenses
 expected after commercial production commences.

 ● Closure
 costs associated with reclaimation of the project site after operations have ceased.

 The
initial, sustaining, and total costs of the project are summarized by major areas in Table 1-7.

 Table
1-7: Capital Cost Summary

 WBS
 Description
 Capital
 Cost (US$M)
 Sustaining
 Cost (US$M)
 Total
 Cost 1 (US$M)

 1000
 Mining
 194
 1,171
 1,365

 2000
 Crushing
 48
 60
 109

 3000
 Sulfide
 Process
 915
 776
 1,692

 4000
 Oxide
 Process
 16
 46
 63

 5000
 Waste
 Rock Storage & TMF
 208
 515
 723

 6000
 Onsite
 Infrastructure
 139
 9
 148

 7000
 Offsite
 Infrastructure
 43
 366
 409

 Total
 Direct Costs
 1,563
 2,944
 4,507

 8000
 Indirects
 382
 27
 409

 9000
 Provisions
 448
 136
 584

 10000
 Owner&rsquo;s
 Costs
 41
 -
 41

 Total
 Capital Cost
 2,434
 3,107
 5,541

 Note:

 1. Totals
 may not match due to rounding

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 14

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.15.2 Operating
 Cost Estimate

 The
operating cost estimate was developed in Q1 2026 to target a level of accuracy of -30% to +50%, which aligns with an Association for
the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACE International) Class 5 level estimate. The OPEX estimate for the project includes
expenses incurred by the mine, process plant, and administration of the operation (G&A costs). A summary of the mining, processing,
and G&A operational costs by LOM total cost and unit cost (US$/ton) is in Table 1-8.

 Table
1-8: Operating Cost Summary

 Cost
 Area
 LOM
 Total (US$M) 1
 US$/ton
 milled
 %
 of Total

 Mining
 8,683 2
 6.91
 31.5

 Process
 18,245
 14.52
 66.1

 G&A
 664
 0.53
 2.4

 Total
 27,592
 21.96
 100

 Note:

 1. Totals
 may not match due to rounding

 2. Includes
 10% contingency

 1.16 Economic
 Analysis

 1.16.1 Economic
 Summary

 The
results of the economic analysis discussed in this section represent forward-looking information as defined under U.S. securities law.
The results depend on inputs that are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause
actual results to differ materially from those presented here.

 Information
that is forward-looking includes:

 ● mineral
 resource estimates

 ● assumed
 commodity prices and exchange rates

 ● proposed
 mine production plan

 ● projected
 mining and process recovery rates

 ● assumptions
 as to mining dilution

 ● capital
 and operating cost estimates and working capital requirements

 ● assumptions
 as to closure costs and closure requirements

 ● assumptions
 as to environmental, permitting and social consideration and risks.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 15

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Additional
risks to the forward-looking information includes:

 ● changes
 to costs of production from what is assumed

 ● unrecognized
 environmental risks

 ● unanticipated
 reclamation expenses

 ● unexpected
 variations in quantity of mineralized material, grade or recovery rates

 ● geotechnical
 or hydrogeological considerations differing from what was assumed

 ● failure
 of mining methods to operate as anticipated

 ● failure
 of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated

 ● changes
 to assumptions as to the availability of electrical power, and the power rates used in the
 operating cost estimates and financial analysis

 ● ability
 to maintain the social license to operate

 ● accidents,
 labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry

 ● changes
 to interest rates

 ● changes
 to tax rates and availability of allowances for depreciation and amortization.

 The
economic analysis was completed assuming a 5% discount rate. The pre-tax NPV discounted at 5% is US$5,437 million; the IRR is 18.9%,
and payback period is 4.3 years. On a post-tax basis, the NPV discounted at 5% is US$4,344 million, the IRR is 16.9%, and the payback
period is 4.7 years. A summary of project economics is listed in Table 1-9.

 Readers
are cautioned that the assessment is preliminary in nature and there is no certainty that the economic assessment will be realized. However,
it does not include any inferred mineral resources.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 16

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Table
1-9: Economic Analysis Summary

 Unit
 Value

 General
 Inputs

 Gold
 Price
 US$/oz
 3,600

 Silver
 Price
 US$/oz
 48.00

 Discount
 Rate
 %
 5.0

 LOM
 Production

 Total
 Mineralized Material Mined
 kst
 1,496,134

 Total
 Waste Mined
 kst
 2,320,719

 Average
 Strip Ratio
 w:o
 1.55

 Life
 of Mine
 years
 50.5

 Total
 Mill Feed Processed
 kst
 1,046,284

 Average
 Mill Feed Grade (Au)
 oz/st
 0.012

 Average
 Mill Feed Grade (Ag)
 oz/st
 0.43

 Total
 Leach Material Processed
 kst
 210,010

 Average
 Leach Feed Grade (Au)
 oz/st
 0.005

 Average
 Leach Feed Grade (Ag)
 oz/st
 0.12

 Total
 Recovered Gold
 koz
 10,476

 Total
 Recovered Silver
 koz
 349,208

 Average
 Mill Feed Gold Recovery
 %
 82.8

 Average
 Mill Feed Silver Recovery
 %
 77.5

 Average
 Leach Gold Recovery
 %
 40.0

 Average
 Leach Silver Recovery
 %
 12.0

 Life
 of Mine Payable Gold Production
 koz
 10,424

 Life
 of Mine Payable Silver Production
 koz
 347,462

 Life
 of Mine Payable Gold Equivalent Production
 koz
 15,057

 Refining,
 Royalties

 Gold
 Payable
 %
 99.5

 Silver
 Payable
 %
 99.5

 NSR
 Royalty
 %
 NSR
 2.14

 Refining
 Costs - Au
 US$/oz
 5.00

 Refining
 Costs - Ag
 US$/oz
 0.50

 LOM
 Operating Costs

 Mining
 Cost
 US$/st
 mined
 2.28

 Mining
 Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 6.91

 Processing
 Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 14.52

 G&A
 Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 0.53

 Total
 Operating Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 21.96

 Cash
 Costs 1
 US$/oz
 AuEq
 1,924

 All-In
 Sustaining Cost 2
 US$/oz
 AuEq
 2,147

 Capital
 Costs

 Initial
 Capital
 US$M
 2,434

 Sustaining
 Capital
 US$M
 3,107

 Closure
 Costs
 US$M
 243

 Financials

 Pre-Tax
 NPV (5%)
 US$M
 5,437

 Pre-Tax
 IRR
 %
 18.9

 Pre-Tax
 Payback
 years
 4.3

 Post-Tax
 NPV (5%)
 US$M
 4,344

 Post-Tax
 IRR
 %
 16.9

 Post-Tax
 Payback
 years
 4.7

 Notes:

 1. Cash
 costs consist of mining costs, processing costs, mine-level G&A and refining charges
 and royalties

 2. AISC
 includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 17

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.16.2 Sensitivity
 Analysis

 A
sensitivity analysis was conducted on the base case NPV and IRR of the project using the following variables: discount rate, head grade,
recovery, total operating cost, initial capital cost, as well as silver and gold prices, which were encompassed in a single variable,
metal price.

 As
shown in Figure 1-1, the sensitivity analysis revealed that the project is most sensitive to changes in metal price, head grade, and
recovery.

 Figure
1-1: Post-Tax Sensitivity Analysis Results

 Note:
Metal price, head grade, and recovery series overlap on the above figure. Source: Ausenco, 2026

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 18

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 1.17 Conclusions

 Hycroft,
in conjunction with IMC, developed the Hycroft deposit block model based on 5,813 drillholes with 516,901 drill intervals amounting to
2,668,616 ft of drilling. The model was assembled by Ryan Rodney, C.P.G. of Hycroft. IMC worked with Hycroft and reviewed the final model.
IMC is the qualified firm for the statement of mineral resources with John Marek, P.E., acting as the Engineer of Record.

 Previous
metallurgical testwork programs conducted on the Hycroft sulfide deposit consisted of a series of comminution, flotation, concentrate
oxidation, and cyanide leaching tests on mineralized materials, flotation tailings, and oxidized sulfide concentrates.

 Comminution
testwork indicates that the Hycroft mineralization exhibits very high rock competency. Flotation testwork, conducted at a grind sizes
of P 80 of 85 &micro;m, under acidic conditions (pH of 4.7) using strong non-selective sulfide collectors, demonstrated improved
flotation performance. Flotation residence time was identified as a key parameter, and optimized test conditions targeted a mass pull
of approximately 22% to 25%, resulting in favorable Au and Ag recoveries.

 Metallurgical
testwork conducted between 2021 and 2025 indicates that the Hycroft sulfide mineralization can be processed using a flotation and POX
flowsheet. Flotation optimization resulted in improved gold and silver recoveries, and POX test results support the application of POX
followed by hot cure, lime boil, and cyanide leaching for treatment of the pyrite concentrate.

 The
MRE statement was developed using a conventional computer-based block model. Each block was evaluated to determine the net return from
the following two processes:

 ● ROM
 cyanide heap leaching and Merrill-Crowe of oxide and some transition materials.

 ● Milling,
 Flotation, POX, Hot Cure, and Lime Boil followed by Cyanide Leach and Merrill-Crowe of sulfide
 and some transition materials.

 The
Initial Assessment indicates that the selected development has the potential to support economic extraction of the Hycroft mineral resources
based on the study adopted for mining, processing, infrastructure, capital and operating costs, and commodity prices. The economic analysis
demonstrates positive project economics. However, project value remains sensitive to key factors including metal prices, metallurgical
performance, capital cost estimates, and operating assumptions. Additional metallurgical testwork, engineering refinement, and economic
optimization are recommended in the next study phase to reduce uncertainty and improve confidence in project outcomes.

 1.18 Recommendations

 Recommendations
cover the discipline areas of exploration and resource model refinement, mineral processing and metallurgical testing, and overall project
configuration to support the evaluation at the PFS level. The total recommended budget estimate to complete the programs is $22,050,000.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 19

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 2 Introduction

 2.1 Introduction

 This
technical report summary (TRS) summarizes the results of an initial assessment with an economic analysis (IA-EA) for the Mine located
in northwestern Nevada. The work has been prepared at the request of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (Hycroft). The TRS follows the
requirements and outline as described in the. US Securities and Exchange Commission Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 229.1300 &ndash;
Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining operations (S-K 1300). This TRS has been completed by Ausenco Engineering South USA (Ausenco),
Hycroft, Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (IMC) and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services (WestLand) (collectively, the
Report Authors).

 The
updated statement of mineral resources reflects information developed through 2025.

 This
TRS supersedes all previous technical studies, including the TRS filed on EDGAR under Form 8-K on January 21, 2026.

 The
MRE is based on information provided by Hycroft which has been checked and validated wherever possible by IMC. The MRE is based on information
provided by Hycroft. IMC, an independent third party with necessary relevant experience, has checked and validated the MRE wherever possible,
and is assuming responsibility for the published MRE.

 2.2 Terms
 of Reference

 Some
sections of this report were published previously as part of a previous technical report summary filed in January 2026 (the 2026 TRS)
and are listed below in Section 2.6.2. The sections of these reports which were utilized have been reviewed by both IMC and Ausenco in
sufficient detail so that the Qualified Persons (QPs) at IMC and Ausenco have assumed responsibility for this work.

 Hycroft
staff have provided all requested information and have worked with Ausenco, IMC and Westland Engineering in an open and transparent manner
throughout the Project period.

 All
units of measurement in this report are in US customary units and currencies are expressed in United States dollars (symbol: US$
or currency: USD), unless otherwise stated. Precious metal grades are presented in units of troy ounces per short ton (oz/ton). The occasional
use of non-US customary units will be clearly noted and explained in text when they occur. Tons mean short tons of 2,000 lbs,
Ktons means 1,000 short tons.

 This
TRS presents the MRE for the Hycroft Mine (the Mine), and an economic analysis based on pressure oxidation (POX) for sulfide material
and Heap Leaching for oxide material. Transitional material may be processed by either process.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 20

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Mineral
resources are reported in accordance with SK-1300.

 2.3 Qualified
 Persons

 Below
is a list of the firms that acted as QPs in the preparation of this TRS:

 ● Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc. is responsible for sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15,
 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 2.1-2.4.1, 2.5-2.7, 10, 14-16, 18.1-18.2.3, 18.2.4- 18.2.7, 18.2.8.2-18.3.2,
 18.3.4, 18.3.5, 19, 22.1, 22.5, 22.7-22.12, 22.13.1.3, 22.13.1.5-22.13.1.7, 22.13.2.2, 22.13.2.4,
 22.13.2.5, 23.1, 23.4, 23.6, 24 and 25.

 ● Hycroft
 is responsible for sections 1.3-1.7, 1.15,3-9, 12, 20, 22.2-22.4, 22.13.1.1, 22.13.1.2,
 22.13.2.1, 23.1-23.3, and 24.

 ● Independent
 Mining Consultants, Inc. is responsible for sections 1.9, 1.10, 1.15, 1.18, 2.4.2, 11,
 13, 18.2.3, 18.2.8.1, 18.3.1, 18.3.3, 22.6, 22.13.1.4, 22.13.2.3, 23.1, 23.5 and 24.

 ● WestLand
 Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc., is responsible for Section 1.14, 17 and 24.

 2.4 Site
 Visits and Scope of Personal Inspection

 2.4.1 Site
 inspection for Jonathan Cooper

 Ausenco&rsquo;s
QP, Jonathan Cooper, P.Eng., completed a site visit of the Hycroft property from April 8 to 11, 2024 to inspect the existing infrastructure.

 2.4.2 Site
 inspection for John Marek

 IMC&rsquo;s
QP, John Marek, P.E., completed a site visit on August 5, 2021, to review the existing core and logs.

 2.5 Effective
 Dates

 The
overall effective date of this report is May 14, 2026.

 2.6 Information
 Sources and References

 2.6.1 General

 The
authors sourced information from documents listed in the References section of this report (Section 24).

 The
reports and documents listed in Section 2.6.2 and Section 25 of this Report were also used to support preparation of the TRS.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 21

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 2.6.2 Previous
 Technical Reports

 Hycroft
previously filed the following technical reports:

 ● Hycroft
 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment, Nevada, USA. Prepared by Ausenco Engineering
 South USA Inc for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation. Effective date: January 21, 2026.

 ● Initial
 Assessment Technical Report Summary; Humboldt and Pershing Counties. Prepared by Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation. Effective date: March 27,
 2023.

 ● Technical
 Report Summary of Initial Assessment on the Hycroft Mine, Nevada, United States of America.
 Prepared by Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc for Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation, Effective
 date: February 18, 2022.

 ● Hycroft
 Project Technical Report Summary: Heap Leaching Feasibility Study, Winnemucca, Nevada, USA.
 Prepared by M3 Engineering & Technology Corp for Hycroft Mining Corporation. Effective
 date: July 31, 2019.

 Hycroft
completed the following technical report in accordance Canada&rsquo;s National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral
Projects and which are available on the SEDAR website (www.SEDARplus.ca)

 ● Hycroft
 Project NI 43-101 Technical Report: Mill Expansion Feasibility Study, Winnemucca, Nevada,
 USA. Prepared by M3 Engineering & Technology Corp. for Allied Nevada Gold Corp. Effective
 date: November 03, 2014.

 2.7 Currency,
 Units, Abbreviations and Definitions

 All
units of measurement in this report are US customary, and all currencies are expressed in US dollars (symbol: US$; currency: USD)
unless otherwise stated. Contained gold metal is expressed as troy ounces (oz), where 1 oz = 31.1035 g. All material tons are expressed
as dry tons unless stated otherwise. A list of abbreviations and acronyms is provided in Table 2-1, and units of measurement are listed
in Table 2-2.

 Table 2-1: Abbreviations and Acronyms

 Abbreviation
 Description

 AAL
 American
 Assay Laboratories

 AAO
 atmospheric
 alkaline oxidation

 AAS
 atomic
 absorption spectroscopy

 AES
 atomic
 emission spectrometry

 Allied
 Nevada
 Allied
 Nevada Gold Corp.

 AR
 aqua
 regia

 Ag
 Silver

 ALS
 Auld
 Lang Syne formation

 Au
 Gold

 Ausenco
 Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc.

 Az
 Azimuth

 BLM
 Bureau
 of Land Management

 BWi
 bond
 ball mill work index

 CCD
 counter-current
 decantation

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 22

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Abbreviation
 Description

 CNI
 Call
 & Nicholas, Inc.

 CWi
 bond
 crusher work index

 DDH
 diamond
 drill hole

 DSHA
 deterministic
 seismic hazard assessment

 EA
 Environmental
 Assessment

 EDGAR
 Electronic
 Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval

 FA
 fire
 assay

 FPCP
 Final
 Permanent Closure Plan

 G&A
 general
 and administration

 HLF
 Heap
 leach facility

 Hycroft
 Hycroft
 Mining Holding Corporation

 IA
 initial
 assessment

 ICP
 inductively
 coupled plasma

 ID2
 inverse
 distance squared

 ID3
 inverse
 distance cubed

 IMC
 Independent
 Mining Consultants, Inc.

 IA-EA
 Initial
 assessment with economic analysis

 IP
 induced
 polarization

 ISO
 International
 Organization for Standardization

 LECO
 Laboratory
 Equipment Corporation

 LOM
 life
 of mine

 LWIR
 Longwave
 Infrared

 LTI
 lost
 time incident

 M3
 M3
 Engineering and Technology Corp

 MRE
 mineral
 resource estimate

 MS
 mass
 spectrometry

 MWWAI
 Michael
 W. West and Associates Inc.

 NDEP
 Nevada
 Division of Environmental Protection

 NDOW
 Nevada
 Department of Wildlife

 NDWR
 Nevada
 Division of Water Resources

 NEPA
 National
 Environmental Policy Act

 NN
 nearest
 neighbor

 NSR
 net
 smelter return

 OES
 optical
 emission spectrometry

 POX
 pressure
 oxidation

 QA/QC
 quality
 assurance/quality control

 QP
 qualified
 person (as defined in National Instrument 43-101)

 RC
 reverse
 circulation drilling

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 23

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Abbreviation
 Description

 ROM
 run-of-mine

 RPEE
 reasonable
 prospects for economic extraction

 RQD
 rock
 quality designation

 SD
 standard
 deviation

 SEC
 Securities
 and Exchange Commission

 SHLF
 South
 Heap Leach Facility

 S-K
 1300
 US
 Securities and Exchange Commission Ruling S-K Subpart 1300

 SRK
 SRK
 Consulting (US) Inc.

 SS
 sulfide
 sulfur

 SWIR
 Shortwave
 Infrared

 the
 Mine
 Hycroft
 Mine

 TMF
 tailings
 management facility

 TRIFR
 Total
 Recordable Incident Frequency Rate

 TRS
 technical
 report summary

 TSG
 Tertiary
 Sulfur Group

 USGS
 United
 States Geological Survey

 USFWS
 US
 Fish and Wildlife Service

 Westland
 WestLand
 Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.

 WSP
 WSP
 Global Inc.

 Table 2-2: Units of Measurement

 Unit
 Description

 &micro;m
 micrometer

 Ac
 acre

 Asl
 above
 sea level

 Axb
 hardness
 of ore in term of impact breakage, unitless

 B
 billion

 Bgs
 below
 ground surface

 Bton
 billion
 short tons

 &deg;C
 Celsius

 Cfs
 cubic
 feet per second

 D
 day

 &deg;F
 fahrenheit

 ft
 feet

 ft/a
 feet
 per year

 GWh/a
 gigawatt-hours
 per year

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 24

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Unit
 Description

 g
 gram
 (unit of weight)

 gal
 gallon

 gal/a
 gallons
 per year

 gal/min
 gallons
 per minute

 g/ton,
 gm/ton
 grams
 per short ton

 Hp
 horsepower

 hr
 hour

 in
 inch

 in/a
 inches
 per year

 kg
 kilogram

 km
 kilometer

 Km 2
 Square
 kilometer

 kt
 kilotonne
 (1,000 metric tonnes)

 ktons
 kilo
 short tons

 kV
 kilovolt

 kWh/ton
 kilowatt-hours
 per ton

 lb
 pound

 M
 million

 masl
 Meters
 above sea level

 mi
 mile

 mi 2
 square
 mile

 mm
 millimeters

 mph
 miles
 per hour

 Mt
 million
 tonnes

 Mtons
 million
 short tons

 Mtons/a
 million
 short tons per year

 min.
 minute

 Moz
 million
 troy ounces

 MW
 megawatt

 oz
 troy
 ounce

 oz/ton
 troy
 ounces per short ton

 pcf
 pounds
 per cubic foot

 ppm
 parts
 per million

 ppt
 parts
 per trillion

 psig
 pressure
 per square inch

 shifts/a
 shifts
 per year

 t
 metric
 tonne (1,000 kg)

 t/d
 tonnes
 per day

 ton
 short
 ton (2,000 pounds)

 ton/a
 short
 tons per year

 ton/d
 short
 tons per day

 tn
 short
 ton

 TSS
 total
 suspended solids

 units/a
 units
 per year

 US$,
 USD
 United
 States dollars (symbol; currency)

 US$/a
 United
 States dollars per year

 US$/ton
 United
 States dollars per short ton

 wt/wt
 weight
 percent

 %
 percent

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 25

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 3 Property
 Description

 3.1 Introduction

 The
Mine is an existing gold and silver operation located 54 miles west of Winnemucca in Humboldt County and Pershing County, Nevada, as
shown in Figure 3-1. The Site is accessible via Nevada State Route 49 (Jungo Road), an all-weather, unpaved road that is maintained by
Humboldt County and Hycroft. A major east&ndash;west railway runs immediately adjacent to the property.

 The
Mine property straddles Townships 34, 35, 35&frac12; and 36 north and Ranges 28, 29 and 30 east (MDB&M) with an approximate latitude
40&deg;52&rsquo; north and longitude 118&deg;41&rsquo; west. The mine is situated on the western flank of the Kamma Mountains on the
eastern edge of the Black Rock Desert.

 The
Mine property was consolidated through multiple transactions over several years and is described below. Some unpatented mining claims
overlap other Hycroft patented and unpatented mining claims to ensure there are no fractional claim gaps. Existing facilities on site
include two administration buildings, a mobile maintenance shop, a light vehicle maintenance shop, a warehouse, an assay laboratory,
three heap leach pads &ndash; Crofoot, North, and Brimstone, primary, secondary and tertiary crushing systems, two Merrill-Crowe process
plants and a refinery. It is considered that existing components of the mine property would be utilized for future development. The Mine
operates under permit authorization from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP), Nevada
Department of Wildlife (NDOW), Nevada Division of Water Resources (NDWR) and County agencies. As of the effective date of this report,
Hycroft has approximately 52 employees.

 3.2 Property
 and Title in Jurisdiction

 The
Mine is owned and managed by Hycroft Resources and Development, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 26

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Figure 3-1: Hycroft Mine Location Map

 Source:
Nevada Bureau of Mines, 2023

 3.3 Project
 Ownership

 The
property containing the Mine property consists of 25 private parcels with patented claims totaling approximately 1,855 acres, along with
3,249 unpatented mining claims covering approximately 62,298 acres, for a combined total of approximately 64,000 acres. Some mining claims
overlap other Hycroft Mining claims to ensure there are no fractional gaps in mining claim coverage.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 27

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 There
are 30 unpatented placer claims, and 3,219 unpatented lode claims are in Humboldt County and Pershing County, Nevada as follows:

 ● T36N,
 R29E, Sections: 28, 32, 33

 ● T36N,
 R30E, Sections: 19, 28-34

 ● T35
 1/2N, R29E, Sections: 25, 26, 35, 36

 ● T35N,
 R29E, Sections: 1-3, 10-15, 21-28, 31-36

 ● T35N,
 R30E, Sections: 2-10, 15-23, 25-36

 ● T34N,
 R28E, Sections: 1, 2, 11, 12, 13

 ● T34N,
 R29E, Sections: 1-28, 33

 ● T34N,
 R30E, Sections: 2-11, 17-20, 29, 30

 The
25 private patented claims are located in Humboldt County and Pershing County, Nevada as follows:

 ● T35N,
 R29E, Sections: 24, 25, 35, 36

 ● T35N,
 R30E, Sections: 19, 30, 31

 ● T34N,
 R29E, Sections: 1, 2

 The
mining claim package is depicted in Figure 3-2. Individual mining claims for each township range and section are presented in Appendix
A &ndash; Patented Claims and Appendix B &ndash; Unpatented Claims. The project centroid is defined in the following mine grid coordinates:
51500 N and 20500 E.

 This
point is located central to all mine facilities. The project centroid shall be used to reference all other locations within one mile.

 Much
of the project area is located on un-surveyed public and private land for which the sections, ranges, and townships listed above have
been interpolated. Patented claims have been surveyed (Wilson, 2008; Prenn, 2006). The following is a list of land acquisitions/transactions
made over the years which constitute the entire Hycroft land claim package and has been assembled through a series of transactions.

 The
Crofoot property and approximately 3,500 acres of claims were acquired by Vista in 1985. The Crofoot property, originally held under
lease, is owned by Hycroft. The Crofoot royalty was terminated January 7, 2026. The Lewis property and approximately 8,700 acres of claims
were acquired by Vista in early 1987. In 2006, approximately 13,100 acres of additional claims were staked by Vista. These claims are
contiguous or proximate to the original Crofoot and Lewis claims.

 From
2007 through 2015, Hycroft staked additional lode mining claims contiguous to existing Hycroft claims that cover approximately 37,373
acres. Some of these lode claims overlap existing placer claims.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 28

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Payment
of annual claim maintenance and holding fees to the BLM and Humboldt and Pershing Counties and payment of annual real property taxes
for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are made every third quarter (Q3). Payments are current through the 2025&ndash;2026
claim years, with US$724,095 paid for 2025&ndash;2026. Payment of annual claim maintenance and holding fees and real property taxes are
required to continue to hold the Hycroft property in good standing from. BLM annual maintenance fees for claims are due not later than
September 1 of each year. Humboldt and Pershing County State annual holding fees beginning September 1 of each year are due no later
than November 1 of each year. Annual real property taxes for patented claims in Humboldt and Pershing Counties are due August 31 of the
following year.

 Hycroft
controls all surface and mineral rights within the Hycroft MRE area. No further land acquisition is required for the operation of the
mine and contemplated processing facilities.

 Figure
3-3 shows the property layout including site facilities, mine workings, leach pads and waste dumps.

 3.4 Property
 Agreements

 Table
3-1 shows the royalty amount and other annual land holding costs.

 Table
3-1: Hycroft Annual Land Holding Costs

 Month
 Due
 Lessor
 Type
 Amount

 Monthly
 Sprott
 Royalty 1
 Net
 Smelter Return Royalty
 1.5%
 NSR

 August-October
 US
 BLM, Humboldt & Pershing Counties
 Claim
 Fees
 US$724,095

 Note:

 1. The
 Sprott royalty is equal to 1.5% of Net Smelter Returns (NSR) free and clear of withholding
 taxes or similar taxes.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 29

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Figure
3-2: Claim Map

 Source:
Hycroft, 2026

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 30

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Figure
3-3: Current Property and Facilities Layout (2025)

 Source:
Hycroft, 2026

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 31

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 3.5 Surface
 Rights

 Hycroft
controls all surface and mineral rights within the Hycroft MRE area. No further land acquisition is required for the operation of the
mine and contemplated processing facilities.

 3.6 Water
 Rights

 Hycroft
controls 16 separate water-right permits administered by the NDWR. These permits are held in ownership either by Hycroft, or by other
private parties and leased to Hycroft. Water resources to support the Mine are controlled under 14 permits in the Black Rock Desert Basin
totaling 20,414.9 acre-ft/a (6.65 billion gal/a). Two of these water permits are outside the Black Rock Desert Hydrographic Basin
and used to support construction maintenance of Jungo Road with Humboldt County.

 3.7 Liabilities
 and Encumbrances

 The
consolidated financial statements of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation set forth its material liabilities as of the date of such financial
statements. The assets of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the Company) are subject to encumbrances
and obligations, including encumbrances and obligations under and associated with the Sprott Royalty Agreement dated May 29, 2020, by
and between the Company and Sprott Private Resource Lending II (Co) Inc.

 3.8 Environmental
 Considerations

 Gold
production began on the property in 1983 and continued through 1985 when Standard Slag opened the Lewis Mine. There was a brief gap in
mining until Hycroft acquired the Lewis Mine and the Crofoot claims and recommenced mining in 1988. Mining operations continued until
1998 when mining was placed on standby due to low metal prices. Process operations continued until 2004 when the property was placed
on care and maintenance.

 Efforts
began in 2003 to update the Reclamation Plan, associated cost estimate, and related amount of surety bond posted with the BLM. During
the years 2011 and 2012, Hycroft increased collateral account balances to support additional surety bonds for the benefit of the BLM.
These additional surety bonds allowed Hycroft to continue operations at the Mine and to expand exploration activities outside of the
Mine. In 2011, Hycroft received a reimbursement of US$0.5 million related to reclamation costs that had been paid out.

 In
January 2014, the BLM approved an updated reclamation cost estimate allowing for the phased bonding of the expansion activities. The
required bond amount was lowered from US$63 million to US$58.3 million. Hycroft has Surface Management Surety Bonds with insurance companies
that meet the financial requirements of the BLM to comply with the total requirement of US$58.3 million as detailed in the September
2013 reclamation cost estimate that requested the phasing of the mill expansion activities. Additionally, Hycroft has posted a bond with
the BLM in the amount of US$0.6 million for the adjacent water supply well field, well field monitoring and exploration within the project
boundary. Hycroft has US$14.4 million in restricted cash for collateral for these bonds.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 32

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 The
Hycroft area has been surveyed for surface water resources, including Waters of the United States, biological resources, cultural resources,
and groundwater resources. The Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) is known to occur adjacent to the Hycroft Project. Hycroft is working
with the BLM and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in the management of this species.

 3.9 Safety
 Considerations

 The
operation of the Mine is subject to regulation by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) under the Federal Mine Safety
and Health Act of 1977 (the Mine Act). MSHA inspects the Mine on a regular basis and issues various citations and orders when it believes
a violation has occurred under the Mine Act. In years ending 2024 and 2025, after multiple inspections, MSHA has issued no (0) citations
and no (0) &ldquo;Significant and Substantial&rdquo; Violations under section 104(a) of the Mine Act. There have been no fines
including citations and orders issued to contractors for the year ending May 1, 2026.

 Hycroft
mandated mine safety and health programs include employee and contractor training, risk management, workplace inspection, emergency response,
accident investigation, and program auditing with a goal to have zero workplace injuries and occupational illness. In 2023, Hycroft implemented
multifunctional workplace inspections and monthly employee engagement sessions. As a result, Hycroft has now operated for three consecutive
years at a 0.0 Total Recordable Incident Frequency Rate (TRIFR) and achieved over 1.4 million hours without a Lost Time Incident (LTI).
The Mine&rsquo;s TRIFR per 200,000 man-hours worked including contractors was 0.0 on May 1, 2026.

 3.10 Permitting
 Considerations

 The
Mine operates under permit authorizations from the BLM, NDEP, NDOW, and NDWR. All operating and environmental permits, approved by the
BLM, NDEP, NDOW and NDWR, are in good standing for mining operations. Table 3-2 summarizes the operating permits while Table 3-3 shows
the miscellaneous permits for the property.

 Table
3-2: Hycroft Operating Permits

 Operating
 Permits
 Issuing
 Agency
 Number
 Status

 Plan
 of Operations
 BLM
 NVN-064641
 Current

 Eagle
 Take Permit
 USFWS
 MB90099B-0
 Current

 Mercury
 Operating Permit to Construct
 NDEP
 - BAPC
 AP1041-2255
 Current

 Class
 I Air Quality Operating Permit to Construct
 NDEP
 - BAPC
 AP1041-2974
 Incorporated
 into the Class II AQOP

 Class
 I Air Quality Operating Permit to Construct
 NDEP
 - BAPC
 AP1041-3344
 Incorporated
 into the Class II AQOP

 Class
 I Air Quality Operating Permit
 NDEP
 - BAPC
 AP1041-2964
 Current

 Permit
 to Operate a Public Water System
 NDEP
 - BSDW
 HU-0864-12NTNC
 Current

 Class
 II Air Quality Permit
 NDEP
 - BAPC
 AP1041-0334.05
 Current

 Water
 Pollution Control Permit-Crofoot Project
 NDEP
 - BMRR
 NEV60013
 Current

 Water
 Pollution Control Permit-Brimstone Project
 NDEP
 - BMRR
 NEV94114
 Current
 (Application Shield)

 Bioremediation
 Facility Permit
 NDEP
 - BMRR
 GNV041995-HGP15
 Superseded
 by Water Pollution Control Permit

 Reclamation
 Permit
 NDEP
 - BMRR
 134
 In
 Renewal

 Mining
 General Stormwater Pollution Prevention Permit
 NDEP
 - BWPC
 R300000:
 MSW-177
 Current

 Class
 III Landfill Waiver
 NDEP
 - BSMM
 SWW-346
 Current

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (Brimstone Process Ponds)
 NDOW
 HU019
 &ndash; S503626
 Current

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (Crofoot Process Ponds)
 NDOW
 HU009
 &ndash; 39469
 Current

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (North Process Ponds)
 NDOW
 HU022-39468
 Current

 Artificial
 Pond Permit (Stage 1 Ponds)
 NDOW
 HU022-40377
 Current

 General
 Onsite Sewage Disposal System
 NDEP
 - BWPC
 GNEVOSDS09
 Current

 Dam
 Safety Permit (Crofoot Process Ponds)
 NDWR
 J-273
 Current

 Dam
 Safety Permit (Brimstone Leach Event Pond)
 NDWR
 J-683
 Current

 Dam
 Safety Permit (North Leach Event Ponds)
 NDWR
 J-687
 Current

 Dam
 Safety Permit (Stage 1 Event Ponds)
 NDWR

 Pending

 Hazardous
 Materials Storage Permit
 NV
 State Fire Marshal
 8250
 Current

 Special
 Use Permit
 Pershing
 County
 SUP
 12-04
 Current

 Special
 Use Permit
 Humboldt
 County
 UH-12-04
 Current

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 33

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 Table
3-3: Hycroft Miscellaneous Permits

 Operating
 Permits
 Issuing
 Agency
 Number
 Status

 Microwave
 Repeater; Sec. 29, 30
 BLM
 NVN46292
 Current

 ROW
 Wells/Pipeline/Power Line; Sec. 3
 BLM
 NVN46564
 Current

 ROW
 2 Wells/Pipeline/Power Line
 BLM
 NVN46959
 Current

 ROW
 Road and Waterline (Old Man camp to Lewis)
 BLM
 NVN39119
 Current

 ROW
 Crofoot pipeline
 BLM
 NVN44999
 Current

 ROW
 24 kV Aerial Powerline, Lewis/Floka
 BLM
 NVN54893
 Current

 Kamma
 Peak Station
 FCC
 WNER344
 Current

 Sulfur
 Mine Station
 FCC
 WNER345
 Current

 Winnemucca
 Mountain Station
 FCC
 WNER346
 Current

 Base
 Station and 45 Mobile Units
 FCC
 WNKK336
 Current

 Operating
and miscellaneous permits that require annual maintenance fees are shown in Table 3-4. Fixed annual fees are required for storm water
and public drinking water system permits based upon the current Nevada regulatory structure. The other annual fees are based on annual
mining production, quantities and types of chemicals stored on site, existing and permitted surface disturbance, and the level of actual
and permitted air emissions. The variable fees shown are based upon the 2025 operational conditions.

 Table
3-4: Hycroft Miscellaneous Permits

 Permit
 and Fee Description
 Annual
 Amount (US$)

 Air
 Quality Operating Permit AP1041-0334.05
 Fees
 are incorporated into title V permit.

 Air
 Quality Operating Permit AP1041-2255
 $16,958

 Air
 Quality Operating Permit AP1041-2964
 $47,448

 Reclamation
 Permit
 $37,811

 Nevada
 Radioactive Material License
 $2,000

 Stormwater
 Permit
 $1,000

 Artificial
 Pond Permit
 $31,625

 Water
 Pollution Control Permit NEV94114
 $66,000

 Water
 Pollution Control Permit NEV60013
 $60,000

 State
 Fire Marshal
 $210

 Public
 Drinking Water System
 $391

 Septic
 System Permits
 $750

 Toxic
 Release Inventory Annual Fee
 $5,500

 Nevada
 LP-Gas License
 $795

 Total
 $270,488

 Hycroft
currently holds six Right-of-Way (ROW) leases with two exploration notices with the BLM, as described in Table 3-5 along with fees and
renewals.

 Table
3-5: Right-of-Way Payment and Renewal Schedule

 ROW
 Number
 Annual
 Payment Amount (estimated)
 Payment
 Date
 Expiration
 Date

 NVN46292
 $125
 01/01/2025
 12/31/2048

 NVN46564
 $100
 01/01/2025
 12/31/2046

 NVN46959
 $610
 01/01/2025
 In
 Renewal

 NVN39119
 $427
 01/01/2025
 In
 Renewal

 NVN44999
 $279
 01/01/2025
 In
 Renewal

 NVN54893
 $200
 01/01/2025
 In
 Renewal

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 34

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 3.10.1 Hycroft
 Expansion Permitting and Timelines

 Hycroft
submitted a Plan of Operations for an expansion of its heap leach facilities, open pits and waste rock facilities to the BLM in April
2010. A major modification to the State Water Pollution Control Permit was submitted in 2011 for the process components that included
engineering design reports from Golder Associates Inc. (Golder). The permit modification was issued in August 2012. An amended Plan of
Operations that included a rail spur, open pit expansion and processing complex was submitted to the BLM in August 2012. The BLM determined
that an Environmental Assessment (EA) was required, deemed the Plan of Operations complete, and initiated public scoping in December
2012. In March 2013, NV Energy submitted a ROW application for the power line associated with the Hycroft Mill. The BLM determined that
this action should be analyzed with the Hycroft EA. Approval was received in December 2014. The permits required to construct and operate
the crushing system and to begin mill construction were received in 2012. The air quality permit for operation of a mill was submitted
in December 2012, and issuance was received in late 2013.

 The
Plan of Operations for a rail spur, open pit expansion and processing complex, that included a tailings management facility (TMF) and
expanded Heap Leach Facility (HLF), was completed in December 2014, with the BLM issuance of the Record of Decision authorizing the proposed
action received in January 2015. A major modification to the State Water Pollution Control Permit was submitted in 2011 for the process
components that included engineering design reports from Golder. The permit modification was issued in August 2012. All other permits
required for the heap leach expansion have been received.

 A
Plan of Operations for an alternate TMF, mining below the water table and expanded facilities was submitted to the BLM in April 2014.
The BLM determined that a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) was required. In October 2019, the BLM issued a record of
decision on the SEIS permitting the new TMF location, expanded facilities and deeper pit depths.

 In
December 2010, Hycroft submitted a minor modification to the NDEP which proposed increasing the permitted processing rate from 10 to
12 Mtons/a. This modification was approved in February 2011. In May 2011, Hycroft proposed a major modification to build a new heap leach
pad on the site of the closed Lewis pad and to increase the processing rate to 30 Mtons/a. This modification was approved by the NDEP
in December 2011. In January of 2012, Hycroft submitted another major modification to construct a heap leach facility on the south extent
of the property. The facility was referred to as the South Heap Leach Facility (SHLF). Around the same time, Hycroft submitted a modification
proposing to add both a north and south processing area, increasing the Brimstone and Lewis heap leach pads permitted height to 400 ft,
and increasing the permitted processing rate to 36 Mtons/a of ore. Both modifications were approved by the NDEP in September 2012. Later,
in December 2012, Hycroft submitted a minor modification proposing to add a Merrill-Crowe facility at the North Process Area. NDEP approved
this modification in May 2013. In March of 2013, Hycroft submitted another modification to construct a combined heap leach and tailings
storage facility (TMF), referred to as the South Processing Complex (SPC), in the same location as the previously permitted SHLF. The
SPC uses the new SHLF, constructed in a horseshoe shape, to provide the embankment for the Southwest TMF located in the central portion
of the new SHLF. Also, as part of this modification, Hycroft proposed the construction of a mill and related facilities for processing
high-grade ore at an approximate throughput of 65,000 tons per day (ton/d) during Phase 1 to a final phase capacity of 132,000 ton/d.
Tailings were proposed to be pumped to the TMF at the SPC. These 2013 major modifications were approved by NDEP in August 2017.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 35

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 In
September 2014, Hycroft submitted a minor modification to expand the Brimstone-North HLF to the southeast by approximately 80 acres including
an additional Event Pond at the existing North Area Merrill-Crowe facility. NDEP approved these minor modifications in March 2015.

 In
April 2019, Hycroft submitted a major modification to construct a new heap leach facility named Hycroft Heap Leach Facility Stage 1 (Stage
1 HLF) north of the North Processing Facility. The Stage 1 HLF will have a storage volume of 29 Mtons and is the first stage of the larger
facility (Hycroft HLF) with a storage capacity of 550 Mtons. The ultimate footprint of the Hycroft HLF will cover approximately 925 acres,
with the Stage 1 footprint covering approximately 390 acres that includes ponds, channels, and roads. Of this area, 234 acres will be
lined with geomembrane along with the HLF pad comprising 204 of these acres. Pregnant solution collected from the pad will be pumped
to the existing North Merrill-Crowe process facility for precious metals recovery. The barren solution from the North Merrill-Crowe facility
will then be returned to the top of each lift and applied over a designated cell area using a drip and sprinkler system. The major modification
was approved by NDEP in July 2020.

 Currently,
Hycroft has all permits required to restart the Mine and recently received the Federal Record of Decision for the Phase II Environmental
Impact Statement supporting the life of mine (LOM) pit development.

 Received
Record of Decision from BLM for Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (10-22-19):

 ● Current
 operating plan is fully permitted

 ● Existing
 operating permits will be amended as new facilities/infrastructure are required

 ● EIS
 allows flexibility:

 ○ Expanded
 pits

 ○ Construction
 of a TMF to the south of the property, if needed

 ● Phase
 1 of the new leach pad is permitted

 ● Phase
 1A of the new leach pad has completed earthwork and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) liner
 installation. A media cover has been added to protect the porous multimedia protective layer.
 Collection ponds are in place. Electrical switch gear, instrumentation, and pumps are in
 storage and will be added during construction restart. No mineralized ore has been added
 to the pad. Phase 1B of the new leach pad and future phases will be planned for construction
 from cash flows when needed.

 Any
future expansion activities recommended in this TRS will require multiple federal, state and local permits. The USFWS will require modification
to the Golden Eagle Take Permit for the NE TMF and extensions of the South (Vortex) Dump.

 Hycroft Mine Project Page 36

 S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis May 14, 2026

 3.10.2 Crofoot
 Heap Leach Facility Closure

 In
2023, NDEP asked Hycroft to update the 2017 Final Permanent Closure Plan (FPPC). Hycroft complied with this request and a new FPPC was
submitted. The updated plan includes schedule of compliance (SOC) items and incorporates current regulations. There are six items in
this plan. SOC Items 1 (Stormwater Controls), 2 (Heap Leach Drain-Down Channel), 3 (Update Monitoring Plan), 4 (Water Quality Evaluation
Report), SOC Item 5 (updating FPCP), and 6 (Investigation of trend for Wells SP-23, SP-24, and SP-25). NDEP has accepted and approved
SOC Items 2 (Heap Leach Drain-Down Channel) and Item 3 (Update Monitoring Plan). The other items are still under review.

 Construction
of a drain-down collection system was completed in 2012. In 2024 and 2025, Hycroft completed steps to regrade the pad in preparation
for closure. Hycroft will continue to re-contour the pad, as necessary for surface water management; apply medium, where required; and
reseed the pad to complete the closure process. Hycroft is working in conjunction with NDEP, who will issue the final closure approval
letter once these activities are reviewed and accepted.

 3.11 Social
 License Considerations

 Social
and community impacts have been considered and evaluated in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Potentially affected
Native American tribes, tribal organizations, and/or individuals are consulted during the preparation of all plan amendments to advise
on proposed projects that may influence cultural sites, resources, and traditional activities. Potential community impacts on the existing
population and demographics, income, employment, economy, public finance, housing, community facilities, and community services are also
evaluated during NEPA review processes. There are currently no social or community issues that materially impact Hycroft&rsquo;s ability
to extract mineral resources.

 3.12 Project
 Risks and Uncertainties

 Timely
filings and payments are required to maintain title and rights to claims, water rights and permits. Hycroft maintains pr…

EX-99.1 · ex99-1.htm

Type

EX-99.1

File

ex99-1.htm

Document text
EX-99.1 · ex99-1.htm EX-99.1 6 ex99-1.htm EX-99.1 Exhibit 99.1 Hycroft Delivers $10 Billion NPV from Technical Report at Spot Prices While Advancing High-Grade Brimstone and Vortex Silver Discoveries WINNEMUCCA, NV, June 2, 2026 – Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (Nasdaq: HYMC) (“Hycroft” or “the Company”), is pleased to announce the results from its S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment (the “TRS”), which outlines the economics and mine plan for a milling operation utilizing conventional pressure oxidation (“POX”) and heap leach processing at the Hycroft Mine in Nevada, USA. All amounts are in US dollars, and all figures are presented in US customary units. The TRS demonstrates that Hycroft hosts a large-scale, long-life precious metals project with compelling economics and strong leverage to rising gold and silver prices, reinforcing its position as a multi-generational, world-class asset in a Tier-1 jurisdiction. The TRS is being filed concurrently with the SEC on EDGAR and is available on the Company’s website . Basis of the Technical Report ● Base case commodity prices: $3,600 per ounce for gold and $48.00 per ounce for silver ● Spot prices (1) : $4,569 per ounce of gold and $77.94 per ounce of silver ● Mine plan based on the 2026 Mineral Resource Estimate (16.4 million ounces of gold and 562.6 million ounces of silver Measured and Indicated) ● Inferred mineral resources of 5.0 million ounces of gold and 132.8 million ounces of silver are not included in the mine plan and represent an upside to the TRS economics ● Drill results from the 2025-2026 exploration program are not included in the mine plan and represents further upside Highlights: ● Robust Economics Demonstrate the Scale and Value of the Hycroft Mine: ○ Base Case Net Present Value at 5% (“NPV 5 ”) of $5.4 billion (pre-tax) and $4.3 billion (post-tax) ○ Internal Rate of Return (“IRR”) of 18.9% (pre-tax) and 16.9% (post-tax) ○ NPV 5 at spot prices of $10.0 billion and IRR of 30.1% (post-tax) ○ Post-Tax Payback: 4.7 years at Base case prices and 2.9 years at spot prices ○ Gross revenues: $54.2 billion at Base case prices ● Significant Leverage to Commodity Prices: ○ For every $100 increase in gold price per ounce, the post-tax NPV 5 increases by $300 million ○ For every $5.00 increase in silver price per ounce, the post-tax NPV 5 increases by $460 million ● Multi-Decade Production Profile at Meaningful Scale: ○ 51 year mine life ○ Average annual production: ■ 204,000 ounces of gold ■ 6.8 million ounces of silver ■ 295,000 ounces gold equivalent (2) (“AuEq”) (1) Spot prices for gold and silver as of May 25, 2026 (2) Silver is converted to AuEq using the ratio of $48.00/oz Ag to $3,600/oz Au 1 ○ First 10 years deliver enhanced production averaging more than 330,000 ounces AuEq ○ Life of Mine (“LOM”) production: ■ 10.4 million ounces of gold ■ 347.5 million ounces of silver ■ 15.1 million ounces AuEq ● Conventional Plant Design, Layout and Processing: ○ Proven POX processing technology ○ Existing infrastructure on-site allows for reduced capital expenditures ○ Plant designed to process 57,100 tons per day of mineralized material ○ LOM average cash cost (3) of $1,924 per ounce AuEq and all-in sustaining cost (“AISC”) (4) of $2,147 per ounce AuEq ○ Initial capital costs: $2.4 billion and LOM sustaining capital costs of $3.1 billion Significant Upside and Optionality Remains: ● Potential mine plan upside opportunities include: ○ Further drilling to reclassify waste and inferred gold and silver resources to measured and indicated resources enabling integration into future mine plans ○ Accelerated access to high-grade zones at Brimstone and Vortex early in the mine life through targeted optimization ○ Combining underground mine option alongside the open pit benefiting from large scale production and bringing high-grade ounces forward earlier in the mine life ○ New oxide targets have been identified for potential heap leach early in the mine life ○ Extending mine life or expanding production by processing stockpiled low-grade mill feed material within the current mine plan but not included in the economic analysis ● Current mineral resource comprises less than 15% of the +64,000-acre land position as the Hycroft system remains open in all directions and at depth for future growth ○ New exploration targets identified for potential resource expansion opportunities including high-grade and oxide targets ○ Significant drilling campaign underway with two core drill rigs at Brimstone and Vortex, increasing to four core drill rigs over the next quarter to expand and define these two high-grade systems that currently remain open in all directions and at depth ● Roasting test work is pending as an alternative processing option which could potentially enhance project economics including potentially adding a meaningful third revenue stream from the by-product production and sale of sulfuric acid, a strategically important industrial chemical Diane R. Garrett, Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, commented: “This Technical Study confirms the scale, quality, and long-term potential of the Hycroft Mine. The project delivers strong economics and significant leverage to rising gold and silver prices, reinforcing Hycroft’s position as one of the sector’s most compelling large-scale development opportunities, located in a Tier 1 jurisdiction. (3) Cash costs consist of mining costs, processing costs, mine-level G&A, and refining charges and royalties (4) All-in sustaining costs includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs 2 Importantly, we believe the most meaningful value creation opportunity remains ahead of us. By advancing the high-grade Brimstone and Vortex silver systems, we see a clear path to further improving project economics and unlocking additional value. The Hycroft land package remains a highly prospective environment, and we believe we are only at the beginning of demonstrating its true potential.” For additional context on the TRS, please visit our pre-recorded event with 6ix. About Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation is a US-based gold and silver company exploring and developing the Hycroft Mine, among the world’s largest precious metals deposits, located in northern Nevada, a Tier-1 mining jurisdiction. Hycroft is engaged in a robust exploration drill program (2025-2026 exploration drill program) to expand and advance the two new high-grade silver systems – Brimstone and Vortex. These discoveries represent a significant value driver for the Hycroft Mine. For further information, please contact: E: info@hycroftmining.com Investor Relations Phone: 775-245-0564 www.hycroftmining.com Media: Tavistock, Jos Simson / Emily Moss E: hycroft@tavistock.co.uk Phone: +44 207 920 3150 Cautionary Statements Regarding the Initial Assessment and Mineral Resources The Initial Assessment is a preliminary technical and economic study that indicates the economic potential of the mineralization to support the disclosure of mineral resources at the Hycroft Mine. The Initial Assessment, however, does not represent a feasibility study or a pre-feasibility and does not demonstrate economic viability nor does it support a development decision, for which additional project planning and design are needed. As a result, Hycroft plans to continue to estimate its resources at the Hycroft Mine and further develop the project economics. As used in this news release, the terms “pre-feasibility study,” “feasibility study,” “initial assessment,” “mineral reserve,” “mineral resource,” “measured mineral resource,” “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource”, as applicable, and other terms used herein are defined and used in accordance with S-K 1300. The Initial Assessment also does not include the conversion of mineral resources to mineral reserves. Under subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K, mineral resources may not be classified as “mineral reserves” unless the determination has been made by a QP that the mineral resources can be the basis of an economically viable project. Investors are specifically cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral deposits (including any mineral resources) in these categories will ever be converted into mineral reserves, as defined by the SEC. In addition, estimates of inferred mineral resources have too high of a degree of uncertainty as to their existence and may not be converted to a mineral reserve. Therefore, investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists, that it can be the basis of an economically viable project, or that it will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Likewise, investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of measured or indicated mineral resources will ever be converted to mineral reserves. Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements Certain information set forth in this news release contains “forward-looking statements” and “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable United States securities law (referred to herein as forward-looking statements). Forward-looking statements are often identified by the use of words such as “may”, “will”, “could”, “would”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “expect”, “intend”, “potential”, “estimate”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “plans”, “planned”, “forecasts”, “goals” and similar expressions. Except for statements of historical fact, certain information contained herein constitutes forward-looking statements which includes, but is not limited to, statements with respect to: the future financial or operating performance of the Company, the Hycroft Mine and its mineral properties; results from work performed to date; the estimation of mineral resources and reserves; the realization of mineral resource and reserve estimates; the development, operational and economic results of the PEA for the Hycroft Mine, including cash flows, revenue potential, development, expenditures, and timing thereof, extraction rates, LOM projections and cost estimates; timing of completion of a technical report summarizing the results of the PEA; magnitude or quality of mineral deposits; anticipated advancement of the Project mine plan; exploration expenditures, costs and timing of the development of new deposits; costs and timing of future exploration; permitting; construction and optimization planning; estimates of metallurgical recovery rates; anticipated advancement of the Hycroft Mine, future prospects and prospective inclusion of mineral resources in future mining activities; requirements for additional capital; the future price of metals; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; the timing and possible outcome of pending regulatory matters; the realization of the expected economics of the Project; future growth potential of the Project; and future development plans. Forward-looking statements are based on a number of factors and assumptions made by management and considered reasonable at the time such statement was made. Assumptions and factors include: the Company’s ability to complete its planned exploration and development programs; the absence of adverse conditions at the Hycroft Mine; no unforeseen operational delays; no material delays in obtaining necessary permits; results of independent engineer technical reviews; the possibility of cost overruns and unanticipated costs and expenses; the price of gold remaining at levels that continue to render the Hycroft Mine and the Company’s mineral properties economic; the Company’s ability to continue raising necessary capital to finance operations; and the ability to realize on the mineral resource. Forward-looking statements necessarily involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual performance and financial results in future periods to differ materially from any projections of future performance or result expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: general business, economic and competitive uncertainties; the actual results of current and future exploration activities; conclusions of economic evaluations; meeting various expected cost estimates; benefits of certain technology usage; changes in the Hycroft Mine parameters and/or economic assessments as plans continue to be refined; future prices of metals; possible variations of mineral grade or recovery rates; the risk that actual costs may exceed estimated costs; geological, mining and exploration technical problems; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing; risks related to local communities; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development (including the risks of obtaining necessary licenses, permits and approvals from government authorities); title to properties; and other factors beyond the Company’s control and as well as those factors included herein and elsewhere in the Company’s public disclosure. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. Readers are advised to study and consider risk factors disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, and all other quarterly filings, available on the EDGAR profile for the Company at www.sec.gov. 3 Investors are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of the date of this news release and, accordingly, are subject to change after such date. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements or the foregoing list of assumptions or factors, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. Investors are urged to read the Company’s filings with U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission which can be viewed online under the Company’s profile on EDGAR at www.sec.gov. Cautionary Note Regarding Non-GAAP Financial Measures Alternative performance measures in this news release such as “cash cost”, “AISC”, and Free Cash Flow are furnished to provide additional information. These non-GAAP performance measures are included in this news release because these statistics are used as key performance measures that management uses to monitor and assess performance of the Hycroft Mine, and to plan and assess the overall effectiveness and efficiency of mining operations. These performance measures do not have a standardized meaning within the accounting principles generally accepted in the Unites States of America (“GAAP”) and, therefore, amounts presented may not be comparable to similar data presented by other mining companies. These performance measures should not be considered in isolation as a substitute for measures of performance in accordance with GAAP. Cash Costs Cash costs include site operating costs (mining, processing, site G&A), refining charges and royalties (excludes corporate office G&A and exploration expenses). While there is no standardized meaning of the measure across the industry, the Company believes that this measure is useful to external users in assessing operating performance. All-In Sustaining Cost Site level AISC includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs. The Company believes that this measure is useful to external users in assessing operating performance and the Company’s ability to generate free cash flow from potential operations. Free Cash Flow Free cash flows are revenues net of operating costs, royalties, capital expenditures, and cash taxes. The Company believes that this measure is useful to the external users in assessing the Company’s ability to generate cash flows. 4 Appendix The S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis was prepared by Ausenco Engineering South USA with contributing authors Ausenco Engineering South USA Inc., Independent Mining Consultants Inc. and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. The following are summaries of or excerpts from the TRS, do not purport to be complete and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the full text of the TRS. The Hycroft Mine The Hycroft mine is among the world’s largest precious metals deposits. It is situated on the western flank of the Kamma Mountains on the eastern edge of the Black Rock Desert approximately 54 miles west of Winnemucca in Humboldt and Pershing Counties, Nevada, a Tier-1 mining jurisdiction. The Technical Study is based on the 2026 Mineral Resource Estimate of 16.4 million ounces of gold and 562.5 million ounces of silver (measured and indicated). An additional 5.0 million ounces of gold and 132.8 million ounces of silver exist in the inferred mineral resource category which was not included in this study. In 2023, Hycroft announced the discovery of two new high-grade silver systems within the known resource area and the Company is engaged in a significant exploration drill program (2025-2026 drill program) designed to expand these two systems in addition to targeting newly identified high-grade opportunities. These discoveries represent a significant value driver for the Hycroft Mine. The mine has existing facilities on site including administration buildings, mobile maintenance and light vehicle maintenance shops, warehouse, leach pads, primary, secondary and tertiary crushing systems, assay lab, Merrill-Crowe process plants, refinery and components for a larger second refinery. Current Property and Facilities Layout 5 Technical Study Overview The Technical Study evaluates a heap leaching and milling operation at the Hycroft Mine based on a conventional flotation with POX flowsheet, followed by hot cure, lime boil, cyanide leach, Merrill-Crowe precipitation and refining. The Technical Study was prepared by Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. (“Ausenco”), Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (“IMC”), and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. (“WestLand”) in accordance with S-K 1300 and encompasses a mine life of 51 years, processing approximately 57,100 tons per day of sulfide and transition mineralized material. Economic Analysis Summary Unit Value General Inputs Gold Price USD$/oz 3,600 Silver Price USD$/oz 48 Discount Rate % 5 LOM Production Total Mineralized Material Mined kst 1,496,134 Total Waste Mined kst 2,320,719 Average Strip Ratio w:o 1.55 Life of Mine years 51 Total Mill Feed Processed kst 1,046,284 Average Mill Feed Grade (Au) oz/st 0.012 Average Mill Feed Grade (Ag) oz/st 0.43 Total Leach Material Processed kst 210,010 Average Heap Leach Feed Grade (Au) oz/st 0.005 Average Heap Leach Feed Grade (Ag) oz/st 0.12 Average Mill Process Gold Recovery % 82.8 Average Mill Process Silver Recovery % 77.5 Average Heap Leach Gold Recovery % 40.0 Average Heap Leach Silver Recovery % 12.0 Life of Mine Payable Gold Production koz 10,424 Life of Mine Payable Silver Production koz 347,462 Life of Mine Payable Gold Equivalent Production koz 15,057 Transport, Refining, Royalties Gold Payable % 99.5 Silver Payable % 99.5 NSR Royalty (1.5% plus gross up) % NSR 2.14 Refining Costs - Au US$/oz 5.00 Refining Costs - Ag US$/oz 0.50 6 Unit Value LOM Operating Costs Mining Cost US$/st mined 2.28 Mining Cost US$/st processed 6.91 Mill Processing Cost US$/st processed 16.65 Heap Leach Processing Cost US$/st processed 2.49 G&A Cost US$/st processed 0.53 Total Operating Cost US$/st processed 21.96 Cash Costs 1 US$/oz AuEq 1,924 All-In Sustaining Cost 2 US$/oz AuEq 2,147 Capital Costs Initial Capital US$M 2,434 Sustaining Capital US$M 3,107 Closure Costs US$M 243 Financials Pre-Tax NPV (5%) US$M 5,437 Pre-Tax IRR % 18.9 Pre-Tax Payback years 4.3 Post-Tax NPV (5%) US$M 4,344 Post-Tax IRR % 16.9 Post-Tax Payback years 4.7 1 Cash costs consist of mining costs, processing costs, mine-level G&A and refining charges and royalties 2 AISC includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs Significant Leverage to Gold and Silver Prices 7 LOM Revenue Capital Costs Description Capital Cost (US$M) Sustaining Cost (US$M) Total Cost (US$M) Mining 194 1,171 1,365 Crushing 48 60 109 Sulfide Process 915 776 1,692 Oxide Process 16 46 63 Waste Rock Storage & TMF 208 515 723 Onsite Infrastructure 139 9 148 Offsite Infrastructure 43 366 409 Total Direct Costs 1,563 2,944 4,507 Indirects 382 27 409 Provisions 448 136 584 Owner’s Costs 41 - 41 Total Capital Cost 2,434 3,107 5,541 Note: Includes contingencies Operating Costs The total operating costs are estimated at $21.96/ton or $27.6 billion over the 51-year mine life. These operating costs do not include pre-production operating costs. A summary of operating costs is presented in the table below. Cost Area LOM Total (US$M) US$/ton processed % of Total Mining 8,683 6.91 31.5 Process 18,245 14.52 66.1 G&A 664 0.53 2.4 Total 27,592 21.96 100.0 Note: Includes contingencies The TRS is based on the 2026 Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources Estimate (“MRE”). The mine plan is based only on measured and indicated mineralization that was estimated in the mineral resource block model. Inferred mineralization was not included within the TRS. 8 Hycroft Mineral Resource Estimate as of 21 January 2026, US customary Units Classification Cutoff Grade $ Net of Refining Approximate Cutoff, AuEq oz/ton Ktons Gold oz/ton Silver oz/ton Sulfide Sulfur % Contained Ounces Gold Oz x 1000 Silver Oz x 1000 Heap Leach Resource Measured $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 92,994 0.005 0.11 1.83 446 10,322 Indicated $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 110,374 0.004 0.09 1.54 475 9,492 Meas + Ind $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 203,368 0.005 0.10 1.67 921 19,814 Inferred $1.88 - $3.63 0.001 - 0.002 110,018 0.005 0.09 1.41 528 10,122 Flotation Mill + Concentrate Treatment by Pressure Oxidation and Cyanide Leach Measured $16.73 0.007 734,571 0.011 0.43 2.03 8,154 316,600 Indicated $16.73 0.007 748,876 0.010 0.30 1.84 7,339 226,161 Meas + Ind $16.73 0.007 1,483,447 0.010 0.37 1.93 15,493 542,761 Inferred $16.73 0.007 459,646 0.010 0.27 1.76 4,505 122,725 Combined Mineral Resources Leach Plus Mill Measured $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 827,565 0.010 0.40 2.01 8,600 326,922 Indicated $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 859,250 0.009 0.27 1.80 7,814 235,653 Meas + Ind $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 1,686,815 0.010 0.33 1.90 16,414 562,575 Inferred $1.88 - $16.73 0.001 - 0.007 569,664 0.009 0.23 1.69 5,033 132,847 Notes: 1. Mineral resources based on metal prices of $3,100/troy oz Au and $36.00/troy oz Ag 2. Cutoffs are Income – Refining Cost = NSR 3. Gold Equivalent (AuEq) for Heap Leach = Cyanide Gold + 0.0019 x Total Silver Assay, or at average gold leach recovery AuEq = Fire Gold + 0.0035 Total Silver Assay 4. Gold Equivalent for Mill + Pressure Oxidation = Fire Gold + 0.0107 x Total Silver Assay 5. Numbers may not match exactly due to rounding 6. Mineral resources are contained within a computer-generated optimized pit 7. Total material in that pit is 5.42 billion tons 8. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied 9. Modifying factors for mine and process design have not been applied 10. All units are US customary Ktons means 1,000 short tons. Au and Ag grades are in troy ounces per short ton (oz/ton) Mining Methods Hycroft is planned as a conventional hard rock open pit operation. The mine plan is based on measured and indicated mineralization that was estimated in the mineral resource block model. Independent Mining Consultants developed a mine plan that produces the required process feed and moves sufficient mine waste to assure continued release of the mineralization. The mine will feed two processing facilities: 1. A flotation mill followed by pressure oxidation and leaching of the concentrate, and 2. A Run-of-Mine (“ROM”) heap leach for mineralization that is amenable to direct cyanide leaching. The cutoff grade for the schedule is based on income net of process: ● Income net of process = Net Return after Refining – Process Costs Total mined material begins with 11.3 million tons per annum in preproduction and increases to 71.2 million tons per annum in Years 1 through 3. Additional equipment is acquired later in the mine life with total material movement increasing to 82.0 million tons per annum from Years 5 to 27. From Year 28 until the end of the mine life (Year 51) the total material mined reduces to 70 million tons per annum. 9 The material planned for milling and leaching on the production schedule is potentially minable material. They do not constitute mineral reserves at this time. Low-grade mill feed material is stockpiled throughout the mine life. This material is not fed to the mill and is not part of the economic analysis in this report. Further trade-off studies will analyze the opportunity to feed this additional material through the process plant. Mined Tons & Payable Gold Equivalent Ounces Production Schedule The following graphs reflect the approximate recovered metal produced over the mine life and the relative metal contribution of the heap leach compared to the mill. Recovered Gold and Silver by Year 10 Processing and Recovery Methods A significant portion of the gold and silver in the material going to the process plant is refractory due to its association with pyrite, marcasite, and other sulfide minerals. Oxide and some transition material will be processed on a heap leach pad. A process flowsheet was developed to treat sulfide and certain transition mineralization. These materials are ground and floated to produce a concentrate. The concentrate is then oxidized in the POX plant and subsequently cyanide leached to extract gold and silver. The key process plant design criteria are: ● Major equipment is designed for a nominal throughput of 57,100 tons/day ● Plant process recovery of 82.8% gold and 77.5% silver, given the LOM average grades ● Existing crushing circuit consists of primary, secondary, and tertiary crushing, supported by a coarse ore stockpile and a crushed ore stockpile with dedicated feeders to provide continuous feed to the downstream process plant ● Process flowsheets include three stages of crushing followed by two stages of ball milling, flotation, POX, a cyanide leaching circuit for oxidized flotation concentrate, Merrill-Crowe circuit, and Tailings Management Facilities (“TMF”), with an overall availability of 92% Pregnant solution from the cyanide leach circuit will be processed in the existing Merrill-Crowe zinc cementation facilities. Infrastructure The Hycroft Mine benefits from substantial existing infrastructure constructed and operated over decades of prior production. Key existing facilities include: ● Crushing facility ● Heap leach pads ● North Merrill-Crowe facility ● Onsite access, haul roads and a major east–west railway pass adjacent to the Hycroft property ● Truck shop ● Maintenance building ● Laboratory and administrative buildings ● Power is supplied to the site from nearby power lines ● Potable water is sourced from a well 11 New infrastructure to be constructed includes the Northeast TMF, a Waste Rock Storage Facility, the Process Plant Site and associated infrastructure, a Limestone Plant, and a new rail spur. The proposed processing facility is designed to be inclusive with (or “of”) the existing crushing circuit and North Merrill-Crowe facility. The proposed scope of work includes electrical distribution upgrades, new substations, process control systems, reagent handling facilities (including oxygen and limestone systems), and selective expansion or repurposing of existing maintenance and administrative buildings. The site currently has access to grid power. Additional transmission capacity is required to support the new plant. The total estimated load factoring for load growth, including power for the oxygen plant, is 160 MW. Tie-ins to existing utilities will include water, compressed air, and potable and sewer systems. The development of a freshwater production well field is also planned to support freshwater needs throughout the LOM. A rail spur extension from the Union Pacific line is planned to support delivery of reagents, consumables, and fuel. Additionally, the existing fuel island is to be replaced with a higher-efficiency system during the LOM. Ancillary structures including a covered crushed ore stockpile, new laboratory and maintenance facilities, fuel station upgrades, and technical services expansion are proposed to support operations over the LOM. In addition to this, selected existing buildings will be relocated, expanded, rehabilitated, or repurposed. Contracts Hycroft Mine is subject to a royalty agreement (Sprott Royalty Agreement) with SPRL II which was initiated on May 29, 2020. The royalty is accounted for by Hycroft as a deferred gain liability in which Hycroft received a cash consideration of US$30.0 million in exchange for a perpetual royalty equal to 1.5% (2.14% including withholding tax gross up) of Net Smelter Returns (NSR) from Hycroft Mine. Environmental, Permitting and Social Considerations The Mine is located on public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) and private land controlled by Hycroft Resources and Development, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hycroft Mining Holding Company. Hycroft is currently authorized to operate under a plan of operations (“POO”) for ore extraction and processing, water management, engineering, environmental studies, and exploration. In 2012, the BLM issued a Record of Decision (“ROD”) for an EIS conducted for the Mine to expand heap leach operations, open pits, and waste rock facilities. In 2014, the BLM issued a Decision Record with an Environmental Assessment authorizing Hycroft’s POO for construction and operations of a rail spur, open pit expansion, and construction of a processing complex, including the TMF located northeast of the Mine. The TRS outlines development of additional infrastructure to support the modified Project including construction of a new TMF, waste rock storage facilities, rail spur, and a new process plant area. Review and approval of proposed revisions to the POO by the BLM constitutes a federal action under the National Environmental Policy Act and applicable BLM regulations. Accordingly, BLM review of the Plan Application will require preparation of either an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement. 12

Document text

EX-99.1 · ex99-1.htm

EX-99.1
 6
 ex99-1.htm
 EX-99.1

 Exhibit
99.1

 Hycroft
Delivers $10 Billion NPV from Technical Report at Spot Prices

 While
Advancing High-Grade Brimstone and Vortex Silver Discoveries

 WINNEMUCCA,
NV, June 2, 2026 &ndash; Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (Nasdaq: HYMC) (&ldquo;Hycroft&rdquo; or &ldquo;the Company&rdquo;),
is pleased to announce the results from its S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment (the &ldquo;TRS&rdquo;), which outlines
the economics and mine plan for a milling operation utilizing conventional pressure oxidation (&ldquo;POX&rdquo;) and heap leach processing
at the Hycroft Mine in Nevada, USA. All amounts are in US dollars, and all figures are presented in US customary units.

 The
TRS demonstrates that Hycroft hosts a large-scale, long-life precious metals project with compelling economics and strong leverage to
rising gold and silver prices, reinforcing its position as a multi-generational, world-class asset in a Tier-1 jurisdiction. The TRS
is being filed concurrently with the SEC on EDGAR and is available on the Company&rsquo;s website .

 Basis
of the Technical Report

 ● Base
 case commodity prices: $3,600 per ounce for gold and $48.00 per ounce for silver

 ● Spot
 prices (1) : $4,569 per ounce of gold and $77.94 per ounce of silver

 ● Mine
 plan based on the 2026 Mineral Resource Estimate (16.4 million ounces of gold and 562.6
 million ounces of silver Measured and Indicated)

 ● Inferred
 mineral resources of 5.0 million ounces of gold and 132.8 million ounces of silver are not
 included in the mine plan and represent an upside to the TRS economics

 ● Drill
 results from the 2025-2026 exploration program are not included in the mine plan and represents
 further upside

 Highlights:

 ● Robust
 Economics Demonstrate the Scale and Value of the Hycroft Mine:

 ○ Base
 Case Net Present Value at 5% (&ldquo;NPV 5 &rdquo;) of $5.4 billion (pre-tax)
 and $4.3 billion (post-tax)

 ○ Internal
 Rate of Return (&ldquo;IRR&rdquo;) of 18.9% (pre-tax) and 16.9% (post-tax)

 ○ NPV 5
 at spot prices of $10.0 billion and IRR of 30.1% (post-tax)

 ○ Post-Tax
 Payback: 4.7 years at Base case prices and 2.9 years at spot prices

 ○ Gross
 revenues: $54.2 billion at Base case prices

 ● Significant
 Leverage to Commodity Prices:

 ○ For
 every $100 increase in gold price per ounce, the post-tax NPV 5 increases by $300
 million

 ○ For
 every $5.00 increase in silver price per ounce, the post-tax NPV 5 increases by
 $460 million

 ● Multi-Decade
 Production Profile at Meaningful Scale:

 ○ 51
 year mine life

 ○ Average
 annual production:

 ■ 204,000
 ounces of gold

 ■ 6.8
 million ounces of silver

 ■ 295,000
 ounces gold equivalent (2) (&ldquo;AuEq&rdquo;)

 (1)
Spot prices for gold and silver as of May 25, 2026

 (2)
Silver is converted to AuEq using the ratio of $48.00/oz Ag to $3,600/oz Au

 1

 ○ First
 10 years deliver enhanced production averaging more than 330,000 ounces AuEq

 ○ Life
 of Mine (&ldquo;LOM&rdquo;) production:

 ■ 10.4
 million ounces of gold

 ■ 347.5
 million ounces of silver

 ■ 15.1
 million ounces AuEq

 ● Conventional
 Plant Design, Layout and Processing:

 ○ Proven
 POX processing technology

 ○ Existing
 infrastructure on-site allows for reduced capital expenditures

 ○ Plant
 designed to process 57,100 tons per day of mineralized material

 ○ LOM
 average cash cost (3) of $1,924 per ounce AuEq and all-in sustaining cost (&ldquo;AISC&rdquo;) (4)
 of $2,147 per ounce AuEq

 ○ Initial
 capital costs: $2.4 billion and LOM sustaining capital costs of $3.1 billion

 Significant
Upside and Optionality Remains:

 ● Potential
 mine plan upside opportunities include:

 ○ Further
 drilling to reclassify waste and inferred gold and silver resources to measured and indicated
 resources enabling integration into future mine plans

 ○ Accelerated
 access to high-grade zones at Brimstone and Vortex early in the mine life through targeted
 optimization

 ○ Combining
 underground mine option alongside the open pit benefiting from large scale production and
 bringing high-grade ounces forward earlier in the mine life

 ○ New
 oxide targets have been identified for potential heap leach early in the mine life

 ○ Extending
 mine life or expanding production by processing stockpiled
 low-grade mill feed material within the current mine plan but not included in the economic
 analysis

 ● Current
 mineral resource comprises less than 15% of the +64,000-acre land position as the Hycroft
 system remains open in all directions and at depth for future growth

 ○ New
 exploration targets identified for potential resource expansion opportunities including high-grade
 and oxide targets

 ○ Significant
 drilling campaign underway with two core drill rigs at Brimstone and Vortex, increasing to
 four core drill rigs over the next quarter to expand and define these two high-grade systems
 that currently remain open in all directions and at depth

 ● Roasting
 test work is pending as an alternative processing option which could potentially enhance
 project economics including potentially adding a meaningful third revenue stream from the
 by-product production and sale of sulfuric acid, a strategically important industrial chemical

 Diane
R. Garrett, Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, commented: &ldquo;This Technical Study confirms the scale, quality, and long-term
potential of the Hycroft Mine. The project delivers strong economics and significant leverage to rising gold and silver prices, reinforcing
Hycroft&rsquo;s position as one of the sector&rsquo;s most compelling large-scale development opportunities, located in a Tier 1 jurisdiction.

 (3)
 Cash costs consist of mining costs, processing costs, mine-level G&A, and refining charges and royalties

 (4)
All-in sustaining costs includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs

 2

 Importantly,
we believe the most meaningful value creation opportunity remains ahead of us. By advancing the high-grade Brimstone and Vortex silver
systems, we see a clear path to further improving project economics and unlocking additional value. The Hycroft land package remains
a highly prospective environment, and we believe we are only at the beginning of demonstrating its true potential.&rdquo;

 For
additional context on the TRS, please visit our pre-recorded event with 6ix.

 About
Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation

 Hycroft
Mining Holding Corporation is a US-based gold and silver company exploring and developing the Hycroft Mine, among the world&rsquo;s largest
precious metals deposits, located in northern Nevada, a Tier-1 mining jurisdiction. Hycroft is engaged in a robust exploration drill
program (2025-2026 exploration drill program) to expand and advance the two new high-grade silver systems &ndash; Brimstone and Vortex.
These discoveries represent a significant value driver for the Hycroft Mine.

 For
further information, please contact:

 E:
info@hycroftmining.com

 Investor
Relations Phone: 775-245-0564

 www.hycroftmining.com

 Media:
Tavistock, Jos Simson / Emily Moss

 E:
 hycroft@tavistock.co.uk

 Phone:
+44 207 920 3150

 Cautionary
 Statements Regarding the Initial Assessment and Mineral Resources

 The
Initial Assessment is a preliminary technical and economic study that indicates the economic potential of the mineralization to support
the disclosure of mineral resources at the Hycroft Mine. The Initial Assessment, however, does not represent a feasibility study or a
pre-feasibility and does not demonstrate economic viability nor does it support a development decision, for which additional project
planning and design are needed. As a result, Hycroft plans to continue to estimate its resources at the Hycroft Mine and further develop
the project economics.

 As
used in this news release, the terms &ldquo;pre-feasibility study,&rdquo; &ldquo;feasibility study,&rdquo; &ldquo;initial assessment,&rdquo;
&ldquo;mineral reserve,&rdquo; &ldquo;mineral resource,&rdquo; &ldquo;measured mineral resource,&rdquo; &ldquo;indicated mineral resource&rdquo;
and &ldquo;inferred mineral resource&rdquo;, as applicable, and other terms used herein are defined and used in accordance with S-K 1300.

 The
Initial Assessment also does not include the conversion of mineral resources to mineral reserves. Under subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K,
mineral resources may not be classified as &ldquo;mineral reserves&rdquo; unless the determination has been made by a QP that the mineral
resources can be the basis of an economically viable project. Investors are specifically cautioned not to assume that any part or all
of the mineral deposits (including any mineral resources) in these categories will ever be converted into mineral reserves, as defined
by the SEC.

 In
addition, estimates of inferred mineral resources have too high of a degree of uncertainty as to their existence and may not be converted
to a mineral reserve. Therefore, investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists, that
it can be the basis of an economically viable project, or that it will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Likewise, investors are
cautioned not to assume that all or any part of measured or indicated mineral resources will ever be converted to mineral reserves.

 Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements

 Certain
information set forth in this news release contains &ldquo;forward-looking statements&rdquo; and &ldquo;forward-looking information&rdquo;
within the meaning of applicable United States securities law (referred to herein as forward-looking statements). Forward-looking statements
are often identified by the use of words such as &ldquo;may&rdquo;, &ldquo;will&rdquo;, &ldquo;could&rdquo;, &ldquo;would&rdquo;, &ldquo;anticipate&rdquo;,
&ldquo;believe&rdquo;, &ldquo;expect&rdquo;, &ldquo;intend&rdquo;, &ldquo;potential&rdquo;, &ldquo;estimate&rdquo;, &ldquo;budget&rdquo;,
&ldquo;scheduled&rdquo;, &ldquo;plans&rdquo;, &ldquo;planned&rdquo;, &ldquo;forecasts&rdquo;, &ldquo;goals&rdquo; and similar expressions.
Except for statements of historical fact, certain information contained herein constitutes forward-looking statements which includes,
but is not limited to, statements with respect to: the future financial or operating performance of the Company, the Hycroft Mine and
its mineral properties; results from work performed to date; the estimation of mineral resources and reserves; the realization of mineral
resource and reserve estimates; the development, operational and economic results of the PEA for the Hycroft Mine, including cash flows,
revenue potential, development, expenditures, and timing thereof, extraction rates, LOM projections and cost estimates; timing of completion
of a technical report summarizing the results of the PEA; magnitude or quality of mineral deposits; anticipated advancement of the Project
mine plan; exploration expenditures, costs and timing of the development of new deposits; costs and timing of future exploration; permitting;
construction and optimization planning; estimates of metallurgical recovery rates; anticipated advancement of the Hycroft Mine, future
prospects and prospective inclusion of mineral resources in future mining activities; requirements for additional capital; the future
price of metals; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; the timing and possible outcome of pending regulatory
matters; the realization of the expected economics of the Project; future growth potential of the Project; and future development plans.

 Forward-looking
statements are based on a number of factors and assumptions made by management and considered reasonable at the time such statement was
made. Assumptions and factors include: the Company&rsquo;s ability to complete its planned exploration and development programs; the
absence of adverse conditions at the Hycroft Mine; no unforeseen operational delays; no material delays in obtaining necessary permits;
results of independent engineer technical reviews; the possibility of cost overruns and unanticipated costs and expenses; the price of
gold remaining at levels that continue to render the Hycroft Mine and the Company&rsquo;s mineral properties economic; the Company&rsquo;s
ability to continue raising necessary capital to finance operations; and the ability to realize on the mineral resource. Forward-looking
statements necessarily involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual performance and financial results in
future periods to differ materially from any projections of future performance or result expressed or implied by such forward-looking
statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: general business, economic and competitive uncertainties;
the actual results of current and future exploration activities; conclusions of economic evaluations; meeting various expected cost estimates;
benefits of certain technology usage; changes in the Hycroft Mine parameters and/or economic assessments as plans continue to be refined;
future prices of metals; possible variations of mineral grade or recovery rates; the risk that actual costs may exceed estimated costs;
geological, mining and exploration technical problems; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents,
labor disputes and other risks of the mining industry; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing; risks related to local
communities; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development (including the risks of obtaining necessary licenses, permits
and approvals from government authorities); title to properties; and other factors beyond the Company&rsquo;s control and as well as
those factors included herein and elsewhere in the Company&rsquo;s public disclosure. Although the Company has attempted to identify
important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking
statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. Readers
are advised to study and consider risk factors disclosed in the Company&rsquo;s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended, for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2025, and all other quarterly filings, available on the EDGAR profile for the Company at www.sec.gov.

 3

 Investors
are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of
the date of this news release and, accordingly, are subject to change after such date. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation
to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements or the foregoing list of assumptions or factors, whether as a result
of new information, future events or otherwise, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. Investors are urged to read the
Company&rsquo;s filings with U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission which can be viewed online under the Company&rsquo;s profile on
EDGAR at www.sec.gov.

 Cautionary
Note Regarding Non-GAAP Financial Measures

 Alternative
performance measures in this news release such as &ldquo;cash cost&rdquo;, &ldquo;AISC&rdquo;, and Free Cash Flow are furnished to provide
additional information. These non-GAAP performance measures are included in this news release because these statistics are used as key
performance measures that management uses to monitor and assess performance of the Hycroft Mine, and to plan and assess the overall effectiveness
and efficiency of mining operations. These performance measures do not have a standardized meaning within the accounting principles generally
accepted in the Unites States of America (&ldquo;GAAP&rdquo;) and, therefore, amounts presented may not be comparable to similar data
presented by other mining companies. These performance measures should not be considered in isolation as a substitute for measures of
performance in accordance with GAAP.

 Cash
Costs

 Cash
costs include site operating costs (mining, processing, site G&A), refining charges and royalties (excludes corporate office G&A
and exploration expenses). While there is no standardized meaning of the measure across the industry, the Company believes that this
measure is useful to external users in assessing operating performance.

 All-In
Sustaining Cost

 Site
level AISC includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs. The Company believes that this measure is useful to external
users in assessing operating performance and the Company&rsquo;s ability to generate free cash flow from potential operations.

 Free
Cash Flow

 Free
cash flows are revenues net of operating costs, royalties, capital expenditures, and cash taxes. The Company believes that this measure
is useful to the external users in assessing the Company&rsquo;s ability to generate cash flows.

 4

 Appendix

 The
S-K 1300 Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economic Analysis was prepared by Ausenco Engineering South USA with contributing
authors Ausenco Engineering South USA Inc., Independent Mining Consultants Inc. and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services,
Inc.

 The following are summaries of or
excerpts from the TRS, do not purport to be complete and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the full text of the TRS.

 The
Hycroft Mine

 The
Hycroft mine is among the world&rsquo;s largest precious metals deposits. It is situated on the western flank of the Kamma Mountains
on the eastern edge of the Black Rock Desert approximately 54 miles west of Winnemucca in Humboldt and Pershing Counties, Nevada, a Tier-1
mining jurisdiction.

 The
Technical Study is based on the 2026 Mineral Resource Estimate of 16.4 million ounces of gold and 562.5 million ounces of silver (measured
and indicated). An additional 5.0 million ounces of gold and 132.8 million ounces of silver exist in the inferred mineral resource category
which was not included in this study.

 In
2023, Hycroft announced the discovery of two new high-grade silver systems within the known resource area and the Company is engaged
in a significant exploration drill program (2025-2026 drill program) designed to expand these two systems in addition to targeting newly
identified high-grade opportunities. These discoveries represent a significant value driver for the Hycroft Mine.

 The
mine has existing facilities on site including administration buildings, mobile maintenance and light vehicle maintenance shops, warehouse,
leach pads, primary, secondary and tertiary crushing systems, assay lab, Merrill-Crowe process plants, refinery and components for a
larger second refinery.

 Current
Property and Facilities Layout

 5

 Technical
Study Overview

 The
Technical Study evaluates a heap leaching and milling operation at the Hycroft Mine based on a conventional flotation with POX flowsheet,
followed by hot cure, lime boil, cyanide leach, Merrill-Crowe precipitation and refining.

 The
Technical Study was prepared by Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. (&ldquo;Ausenco&rdquo;), Independent Mining Consultants, Inc. (&ldquo;IMC&rdquo;),
and WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. (&ldquo;WestLand&rdquo;) in accordance with S-K 1300 and encompasses a mine
life of 51 years, processing approximately 57,100 tons per day of sulfide and transition mineralized material.

 Economic
Analysis Summary

 Unit
 Value

 General
 Inputs

 Gold
 Price
 USD$/oz
 3,600

 Silver
 Price
 USD$/oz
 48

 Discount
 Rate
 %
 5

 LOM
 Production

 Total
 Mineralized Material Mined
 kst
 1,496,134

 Total
 Waste Mined
 kst
 2,320,719

 Average
 Strip Ratio
 w:o
 1.55

 Life
 of Mine
 years
 51

 Total
 Mill Feed Processed
 kst
 1,046,284

 Average
 Mill Feed Grade (Au)
 oz/st
 0.012

 Average
 Mill Feed Grade (Ag)
 oz/st
 0.43

 Total
 Leach Material Processed
 kst
 210,010

 Average
 Heap Leach Feed Grade (Au)
 oz/st
 0.005

 Average
 Heap Leach Feed Grade (Ag)
 oz/st
 0.12

 Average
 Mill Process Gold Recovery
 %
 82.8

 Average
 Mill Process Silver Recovery
 %
 77.5

 Average
 Heap Leach Gold Recovery
 %
 40.0

 Average
 Heap Leach Silver Recovery
 %
 12.0

 Life
 of Mine Payable Gold Production
 koz
 10,424

 Life
 of Mine Payable Silver Production
 koz
 347,462

 Life
 of Mine Payable Gold Equivalent Production
 koz
 15,057

 Transport,
 Refining, Royalties

 Gold
 Payable
 %
 99.5

 Silver
 Payable
 %
 99.5

 NSR
 Royalty (1.5% plus gross up)
 %
 NSR
 2.14

 Refining
 Costs - Au
 US$/oz
 5.00

 Refining
 Costs - Ag
 US$/oz
 0.50

 6

 Unit
 Value

 LOM
 Operating Costs

 Mining
 Cost
 US$/st
 mined
 2.28

 Mining
 Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 6.91

 Mill
 Processing Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 16.65

 Heap
 Leach Processing Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 2.49

 G&A
 Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 0.53

 Total
 Operating Cost
 US$/st
 processed
 21.96

 Cash
 Costs 1
 US$/oz
 AuEq
 1,924

 All-In
 Sustaining Cost 2
 US$/oz
 AuEq
 2,147

 Capital
 Costs

 Initial
 Capital
 US$M
 2,434

 Sustaining
 Capital
 US$M
 3,107

 Closure
 Costs
 US$M
 243

 Financials

 Pre-Tax
 NPV (5%)
 US$M
 5,437

 Pre-Tax
 IRR
 %
 18.9

 Pre-Tax
 Payback
 years
 4.3

 Post-Tax
 NPV (5%)
 US$M
 4,344

 Post-Tax
 IRR
 %
 16.9

 Post-Tax
 Payback
 years
 4.7

 1 Cash
costs consist of mining costs, processing costs, mine-level G&A and refining charges and royalties

 2 AISC
includes cash costs plus sustaining capital and closure costs

 Significant
Leverage to Gold and Silver Prices

 7

 LOM
Revenue

 Capital
Costs

 Description
 Capital

Cost (US$M)
 Sustaining

Cost (US$M)
 Total
Cost

(US$M)

 Mining
 194
 1,171
 1,365

 Crushing
 48
 60
 109

 Sulfide
 Process
 915
 776
 1,692

 Oxide
 Process
 16
 46
 63

 Waste
 Rock Storage & TMF
 208
 515
 723

 Onsite
 Infrastructure
 139
 9
 148

 Offsite
 Infrastructure
 43
 366
 409

 Total
 Direct Costs
 1,563
 2,944
 4,507

 Indirects
 382
 27
 409

 Provisions
 448
 136
 584

 Owner&rsquo;s
 Costs
 41
 -
 41

 Total
 Capital Cost
 2,434
 3,107
 5,541

 Note:
Includes contingencies

 Operating
Costs

 The
total operating costs are estimated at $21.96/ton or $27.6 billion over the 51-year mine life. These operating costs do not include pre-production
operating costs. A summary of operating costs is presented in the table below.

 Cost
 Area
 LOM
 Total (US$M)
 US$/ton
 processed
 %
 of Total

 Mining
 8,683
 6.91
 31.5

 Process
 18,245
 14.52
 66.1

 G&A

 664
 0.53
 2.4

 Total
 27,592
 21.96
 100.0

 Note:
Includes contingencies

 The
TRS is based on the 2026 Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources Estimate (&ldquo;MRE&rdquo;). The mine plan is based only on measured
and indicated mineralization that was estimated in the mineral resource block model. Inferred mineralization was not included within
the TRS.

 8

 Hycroft
Mineral Resource Estimate as of 21 January 2026, US customary Units

 Classification
 Cutoff
 Grade

 $
 Net

 of
 Refining

 Approximate

 Cutoff,
 AuEq oz/ton

 Ktons
 Gold

 oz/ton

 Silver

 oz/ton

 Sulfide

 Sulfur
 %

 Contained
 Ounces

 Gold

 Oz
 x 1000

 Silver

 Oz
 x 1000

 Heap
 Leach Resource

 Measured
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 92,994
 0.005
 0.11
 1.83
 446
 10,322

 Indicated
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 110,374
 0.004
 0.09
 1.54
 475
 9,492

 Meas
 + Ind
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 203,368
 0.005
 0.10
 1.67
 921
 19,814

 Inferred
 $1.88
 - $3.63
 0.001
 - 0.002
 110,018
 0.005
 0.09
 1.41
 528
 10,122

 Flotation
 Mill + Concentrate Treatment by Pressure Oxidation and Cyanide Leach

 Measured
 $16.73
 0.007
 734,571
 0.011
 0.43
 2.03
 8,154
 316,600

 Indicated
 $16.73
 0.007
 748,876
 0.010
 0.30
 1.84
 7,339
 226,161

 Meas
 + Ind
 $16.73
 0.007
 1,483,447
 0.010
 0.37
 1.93
 15,493
 542,761

 Inferred
 $16.73
 0.007
 459,646
 0.010
 0.27
 1.76
 4,505
 122,725

 Combined
 Mineral Resources Leach Plus Mill

 Measured
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 827,565
 0.010
 0.40
 2.01
 8,600
 326,922

 Indicated
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 859,250
 0.009
 0.27
 1.80
 7,814
 235,653

 Meas
 + Ind
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 1,686,815
 0.010
 0.33
 1.90
 16,414
 562,575

 Inferred
 $1.88
 - $16.73
 0.001
 - 0.007
 569,664
 0.009
 0.23
 1.69
 5,033
 132,847

 Notes:

 1. Mineral
 resources based on metal prices of $3,100/troy oz Au and $36.00/troy oz Ag

 2. Cutoffs
 are Income &ndash; Refining Cost = NSR

 3. Gold
 Equivalent (AuEq) for Heap Leach = Cyanide Gold + 0.0019 x Total Silver Assay,

 or at average gold leach recovery AuEq = Fire Gold + 0.0035 Total Silver Assay

 4. Gold
 Equivalent for Mill + Pressure Oxidation = Fire Gold + 0.0107 x Total Silver Assay

 5. Numbers
 may not match exactly due to rounding

 6. Mineral
 resources are contained within a computer-generated optimized pit

 7. Total
 material in that pit is 5.42 billion tons

 8. Mineral
 resources are not mineral reserves, and detailed economic considerations have not been applied

 9. Modifying
 factors for mine and process design have not been applied

 10. All
 units are US customary Ktons means 1,000 short tons. Au and Ag grades are in troy ounces
 per short ton (oz/ton)

 Mining
Methods

 Hycroft
is planned as a conventional hard rock open pit operation. The mine plan is based on measured and indicated mineralization that was estimated
in the mineral resource block model. Independent Mining Consultants developed a mine plan that produces the required process feed and
moves sufficient mine waste to assure continued release of the mineralization.

 The
mine will feed two processing facilities:

 1. A
 flotation mill followed by pressure oxidation and leaching of the concentrate, and

 2. A
 Run-of-Mine (&ldquo;ROM&rdquo;) heap leach for mineralization that is amenable to direct
 cyanide leaching.

 The
cutoff grade for the schedule is based on income net of process:

 ● Income
 net of process = Net Return after Refining &ndash; Process Costs

 Total
mined material begins with 11.3 million tons per annum in preproduction and increases to 71.2 million tons per annum in Years 1 through
3. Additional equipment is acquired later in the mine life with total material movement increasing to 82.0 million tons per annum from
Years 5 to 27. From Year 28 until the end of the mine life (Year 51) the total material mined reduces to 70 million tons per annum.

 9

 The
material planned for milling and leaching on the production schedule is potentially minable material. They do not constitute mineral
reserves at this time.

 Low-grade
mill feed material is stockpiled throughout the mine life. This material is not fed to the mill and is not part of the economic analysis
in this report. Further trade-off studies will analyze the opportunity to feed this additional material through the process plant.

 Mined
Tons & Payable Gold Equivalent Ounces

 Production
Schedule

 The
following graphs reflect the approximate recovered metal produced over the mine life and the relative metal contribution of the heap
leach compared to the mill.

 Recovered
Gold and Silver by Year

 10

 Processing
and Recovery Methods

 A
significant portion of the gold and silver in the material going to the process plant is refractory due to its association with pyrite,
marcasite, and other sulfide minerals. Oxide and some transition material will be processed on a heap leach pad. A process flowsheet
was developed to treat sulfide and certain transition mineralization. These materials are ground and floated to produce a concentrate.
The concentrate is then oxidized in the POX plant and subsequently cyanide leached to extract gold and silver.

 The
key process plant design criteria are:

 ● Major
 equipment is designed for a nominal throughput of 57,100 tons/day

 ● Plant
 process recovery of 82.8% gold and 77.5% silver, given the LOM average grades

 ● Existing
 crushing circuit consists of primary, secondary, and tertiary crushing, supported by a coarse
 ore stockpile and a crushed ore stockpile with dedicated feeders to provide continuous feed
 to the downstream process plant

 ● Process
 flowsheets include three stages of crushing followed by two stages of ball milling, flotation,
 POX, a cyanide leaching circuit for oxidized flotation concentrate, Merrill-Crowe circuit,
 and Tailings Management Facilities (&ldquo;TMF&rdquo;), with an overall availability of 92%

 Pregnant
solution from the cyanide leach circuit will be processed in the existing Merrill-Crowe zinc cementation facilities.

 Infrastructure

 The
Hycroft Mine benefits from substantial existing infrastructure constructed and operated over decades of prior production. Key existing
facilities include:

 ● Crushing
 facility

 ● Heap
 leach pads

 ● North
 Merrill-Crowe facility

 ● Onsite
 access, haul roads and a major east&ndash;west railway pass adjacent to the Hycroft property

 ● Truck
 shop

 ● Maintenance
 building

 ● Laboratory
 and administrative buildings

 ● Power
 is supplied to the site from nearby power lines

 ● Potable
 water is sourced from a well

 11

 New
infrastructure to be constructed includes the Northeast TMF, a Waste Rock Storage Facility, the Process Plant Site and associated infrastructure,
a Limestone Plant, and a new rail spur.

 The
proposed processing facility is designed to be inclusive with (or &ldquo;of&rdquo;) the existing crushing circuit and North Merrill-Crowe
facility. The proposed scope of work includes electrical distribution upgrades, new substations, process control systems, reagent handling
facilities (including oxygen and limestone systems), and selective expansion or repurposing of existing maintenance and administrative
buildings.

 The
site currently has access to grid power. Additional transmission capacity is required to support the new plant. The total estimated load
factoring for load growth, including power for the oxygen plant, is 160 MW. Tie-ins to existing utilities will include water, compressed
air, and potable and sewer systems. The development of a freshwater production well field is also planned to support freshwater needs
throughout the LOM.

 A
rail spur extension from the Union Pacific line is planned to support delivery of reagents, consumables, and fuel. Additionally, the
existing fuel island is to be replaced with a higher-efficiency system during the LOM.

 Ancillary
structures including a covered crushed ore stockpile, new laboratory and maintenance facilities, fuel station upgrades, and technical
services expansion are proposed to support operations over the LOM. In addition to this, selected existing buildings will be relocated,
expanded, rehabilitated, or repurposed.

 Contracts

 Hycroft
Mine is subject to a royalty agreement (Sprott Royalty Agreement) with SPRL II which was initiated on May 29, 2020. The royalty is accounted
for by Hycroft as a deferred gain liability in which Hycroft received a cash consideration of US$30.0 million in exchange for a perpetual
royalty equal to 1.5% (2.14% including withholding tax gross up) of Net Smelter Returns (NSR) from Hycroft Mine.

 Environmental,
Permitting and Social Considerations

 The
Mine is located on public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (&ldquo;BLM&rdquo;) and private land controlled by Hycroft
Resources and Development, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hycroft Mining Holding Company.

 Hycroft
is currently authorized to operate under a plan of operations (&ldquo;POO&rdquo;) for ore extraction and processing, water management,
engineering, environmental studies, and exploration. In 2012, the BLM issued a Record of Decision (&ldquo;ROD&rdquo;) for an EIS conducted
for the Mine to expand heap leach operations, open pits, and waste rock facilities. In 2014, the BLM issued a Decision Record with an
Environmental Assessment authorizing Hycroft&rsquo;s POO for construction and operations of a rail spur, open pit expansion, and construction
of a processing complex, including the TMF located northeast of the Mine.

 The
TRS outlines development of additional infrastructure to support the modified Project including construction of a new TMF, waste rock
storage facilities, rail spur, and a new process plant area. Review and approval of proposed revisions to the POO by the BLM constitutes
a federal action under the National Environmental Policy Act and applicable BLM regulations. Accordingly, BLM review of the Plan Application
will require preparation of either an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement.

 12

EX-99.2 · ex99-2.htm

Type

EX-99.2

File

ex99-2.htm

Document text
EX-99.2 · ex99-2.htm EX-99.2 7 ex99-2.htm EX-99.2 Exhibit 99.2

EX-23.1 · ex23-1.htm

Type

EX-23.1

File

ex23-1.htm

Document text
EX-23.1 · ex23-1.htm EX-23.1 2 ex23-1.htm EX-23.1 Exhibit 23.1 Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. 595 S. Meyer Ave. Tucson, AZ 85701 CONSENT OF THIRD-PARTY QUALIFIED PERSON Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. (“Ausenco”), in connection with the filing of the Report on Form 8-K of Hycroft Mining Holding Corporation (the “Form 8-K”), consents to: ● the filing of the technical report summary titled “Hycroft Technical Report Summary and Initial Assessment with Economics on the Hycroft Mine, Nevada, United States of America” (the “TRS”), with an effective date of May 14, 2026, as an exhibit to and referenced in the Form 8-K; ● the incorporation by reference of the TRS in the Company’s Registration Statements on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-264293), Form S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-257567, 333-279292, 333-290760 and 333-292470) and Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-249620, 333-265434, 333-292803 and 333-280193) (collectively, the “Registration Statements”); ● the use of and references to our name in connection with the Form 8-K, the Registration Statements and the TRS; and ● the information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by us, that we supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by us, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K and the Registration Statements. Ausenco is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to the following Sections of the TRS: 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 2.1-2.4.1, 2.5-2.7, 10, 14 – 16, 18.1-18.2.3, 18.2.4-18.2.7,18.2.8.2-18.3.2, 18.3.4, 18.3.5, 19, 22.1, 22.5, 22.7-22.12, 22.13.1.3, 22.13.1.5-22.13.1.7, 22.13.2.2, 22.13.2.4, 22.13.2.5, 23.1, 23.4, 23.6, 24 and 25. May 28, 2026 /s/ David Thomas Signature of Authorized Person for Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc. David Thomas Print name of Authorized Person for Ausenco Engineering USA South Inc.

Document text

EX-23.1 · ex23-1.htm

EX-23.1
 2
 ex23-1.htm
 EX-23.1

 Exhibit
23.1

 Ausenco
Engineering USA South Inc.

 595 S. Meyer Ave.

 Tucson,
AZ 85701

 CONSENT
OF THIRD-PARTY QUALIFIED PERSON

 Ausenco
Engineering USA South Inc. (&ldquo;Ausenco&rdquo;), in connection with the filing of the Report on Form 8-K of Hycroft Mining Holding
Corporation (the &ldquo;Form 8-K&rdquo;), consents to:

 ●
 the
 filing of the technical report summary titled “Hycroft Technical Report Summary and
 Initial Assessment with Economics on the Hycroft Mine, Nevada, United States of America”
 (the “TRS”), with an effective date of May 14, 2026, as an exhibit to and referenced
 in the Form 8-K;

 ●
 the
 incorporation by reference of the TRS in the Company’s Registration Statements on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-264293), Form
 S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-257567, 333-279292, 333-290760 and 333-292470) and Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-249620, 333-265434,
 333-292803 and 333-280193) (collectively, the “Registration Statements”);

 ●
 the
 use of and references to our name in connection with the Form 8-K, the Registration Statements and the TRS; and

 ●
 the
 information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the TRS, or portions thereof, that was prepared by us, that we supervised
 the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by us, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 8-K and
 the Registration Statements.

 Ausenco
is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to the following Sections of the TRS: 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15,
1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 2.1-2.4.1, 2.5-2.7, 10, 14 &ndash; 16, 18.1-18.2.3, 18.2.4-18.2.7,18.2.8.2-18.3.2, 18.3.4, 18.3.5, 19, 22.1, 22.5,
22.7-22.12, 22.13.1.3, 22.13.1.5-22.13.1.7, 22.13.2.2, 22.13.2.4, 22.13.2.5, 23.1, 23.4, 23.6, 24 and 25.

 May
28, 2026

 /s/
 David Thomas

 Signature
 of Authorized Person for

 Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc.

 David
 Thomas

 Print
 name of Authorized Person for

 Ausenco
 Engineering USA South Inc.

Open on SEC

All SEC filings HYCROFT MINING HOLDING CORP profile HYCROFT MINING HOLDING CORP layoffs Signals