#1Investor Presentation Perpetua Resources Perpetua Resources Responsible Mining Critical Resources. Clean Future. - November 2023 NASDAQ:PPTA TSX: PPTA#2FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS Information and statements contained in this presentation that are not historical facts are "forward-looking information" or "forward-looking statements" (collectively, "Forward-Looking Information") within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We use words such as "may," "would," "could," "should," "will," "likely," "expect," "anticipate," "believe," "intend," "plan," "forecast," "outlook," "project," "estimate" and similar expressions suggesting future outcomes or events to identify forward-looking statements or forward-looking information. Forward-Looking Information includes, but is not limited to, information concerning the business of Perpetua Resources Corp. (the "Company"), the Stibnite Gold Project (the "Project"), including but not limited to statements with respect to results of the FS (as defined below); disclosure regarding possible events, conditions or financial performance that is based on assumptions about future economic conditions and courses of action; next steps and courses of action including environmental clean up actions by us and our contractors; our ability to comply with and obtain permits related to the Stibnite Gold Project; actions to be taken by the USFS, the Department of Defense, the State of Idaho and other government agencies and regulatory bodies; negotiation of the definitized agreement and anticipated approval of reimbursement requests; our ability to successfully implement and fund the Project and the occurrence of the expected benefits from the Project; timing of the Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS"), Draft Record of Decision, Final Record of Decision and other anticipated milestones related to the Project; expected funding from the Department of Defense; predictions regarding improvements to water quality, water temperature, and fish habitats and other environmental conditions at the site, including with respect to process and timing of such improvements; reduction of the Project footprint and the anticipated benefits and other effects thereof; our ability to successfully implement the Project and the occurrence of the expected benefits from the Project, including contributions to the workforce, national security and clean energy transition; our and Ambri, Inc.'s ("Ambri") ability to perform under the supply agreement described in this presentation, which agreement is subject to certain conditions, including completion of the permitting process for the Project, commencement of commercial production of antimony, identification of one or more refiners to transform our antimony concentrate into antimony metal, and mutual agreement on certain material terms, including volume and pricing; the anticipated economic, environmental and other benefits of the Project; the viability of the Project; development and operating costs in the event that a production decision is made; success of exploration, development and environmental protection, closure and remediation activities; permitting time lines and requirements; requirements for additional capital; requirements for additional water rights and the potential effect of proposed notices of environmental conditions relating to mineral claims; risks and opportunities associated with the Project; planned exploration and development of properties and the results thereof; planned expenditures, production schedules and budgets and the execution thereof. Statements concerning mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates may also constitute Forward-Looking Information to the extent that they involve estimates of the mineralization that may be encountered if the Project is developed. In preparing the Forward-Looking Information herein, the Company has applied several material assumptions, including, but not limited to, assumptions that we will successfully negotiate a definitized agreement and that the full amount of the Defense Production Act award will be funded on the expected timeline; that the review process under the NEPA (including any joint review process involving the USFS, the State of Idaho and other agencies and regulatory bodies) as well as the FEIS will proceed in a timely manner and as expected; that we will be able to obtain sufficient funding to finance permitting, pre-construction and construction of the Project and that all requisite information will be available in a timely manner; the exchange rates for the U.S. and Canadian currencies will be consistent with the Company's expectations; that the current exploration, development, environmental and other objectives concerning the Project can be achieved and that its other corporate activities will proceed as expected; that the current price and demand for gold and antimony will be sustained or will improve; that general business and economic conditions will not change in a materially adverse manner and that all necessary governmental approvals for planned activities on the Project will be obtained in a timely manner and on acceptable terms; that permitting and operations costs will not materially increase; the continuity of the price of gold and other metals, economic and political conditions and operations; and the assumptions set out in the FS. Forward-Looking Information involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the Forward-Looking Information. Such risks and other factors include, among others, the industry-wide risks and project-specific risks identified in the FS; operations and contractual obligations; changes in exploration programs based upon results of exploration; changes in estimated mineral reserves or mineral resources; future prices of metals and minerals; availability of personnel and equipment; equipment failure; accidents, effects of weather and other natural phenomena and other risks associated with the mineral exploration industry; environmental risks, including environmental matters under US federal and Idaho rules and regulations; impact of environmental remediation requirements and the terms of existing and potential consent decrees on the Company's planned exploration and development activities on the Project; certainty of mineral title; community relations; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing; the Company's dependence on one mineral project; the nature of mineral exploration and mining and the uncertain commercial viability; the Company's lack of operating revenues; governmental regulations and the ability to obtain necessary licenses and permits; risks related to prior unregistered agreements, transfers or claims and other defects in title to mineral projects; currency fluctuations; changes in environmental laws and regulations and changes in the application of standards pursuant to existing laws and regulations; risks related to dependence on key personnel; COVID-19 risks to employee health and safety and a slowdown or temporary suspension of operations in geographic locations impacted by an outbreak; estimates used in budgeting and financial statements proving to be incorrect; risks related to unforeseen delays in the review process including availability of personnel from the USFS, State of Idaho and other stated, federal and local agencies and regulatory bodies (including, but not limited to, future US government shutdowns); risks related to opposition to the Project; risks related to increased or unexpected costs in operations or the permitting process; risks that necessary financing will be unavailable when needed on acceptable terms, or at all; risks related to the outcome of litigation and potential for delay of the Project, as well as those factors discussed in the Company's public disclosure record. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could affect the Company and may cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in Forward-Looking Information, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that Forward-Looking Information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Because it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors, this list cannot be considered a complete set of all potential risks or uncertainties. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on Forward-Looking Information. For further information on these and other risks and uncertainties that may affect the Company's business and liquidity, see the "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" sections of the Company's filings with the SEC, are available at www.sec.gov and with the Canadian securities regulators, which are available at www.sedar.com. Except as required by law, the Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update the Forward-Looking Information herein. 2#3CAUTIONARY NOTE & TECHNICAL DISCLOSURE The presentation has been prepared by Perpetua Resources management and does not represent a recommendation to buy or sell these securities. Investors should always consult their investment advisors prior to making any investment decisions. All references to "dollars" or "$" shall mean United States dollars unless otherwise specified. The material scientific and technical information in respect of the Stibnite Gold Project in this presentation, unless otherwise indicated, is based upon information contained in the technical report titled "Stibnite Gold Project, Feasibility Study Technical Report, Valley County, Idaho" dated effective December 22, 2020 and issued January 27, 2021 (the "FS" or "2020 Feasibility Study"). The 2020 Feasibility Study was prepared in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101"). NI 43-101 is a rule developed by the Canadian Securities Administrators that establishes standards for all public disclosure an issuer makes of scientific and technical information concerning mineral projects. These standards differ from the mining property disclosure rules specified in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K under the United States Securities Act of 1933 ("Subpart 1300") promulgated by the SEC. Accordingly, information concerning mineral deposits from the 2020 Feasibility Study set forth herein may not be comparable with information made public by companies that report in accordance with U.S. standards. The Company has issued its inaugural Technical Report Summary (the "TRS"), dated as of December 31, 2021, and amended as of June 6, 2022, developed for the Stibnite Gold Project in accordance with the mining property disclosure rules specified in Subpart 1300 promulgated by the SEC. The TRS summarizes, in accordance with the mining property disclosure rules specified in Subpart 1300, the FS, which was completed under NI 43-101, with the following notable differences between the FS and the TRS: . . • The TRS Mineral Resource estimates were developed based on a gold price of $1,500/oz versus the $1,250/oz gold price assumed for the FS. The change in gold price results from higher trailing average gold prices at the date of preparation for the respective reports. The Measured Mineral Resources in the FS were reclassified to Indicated Mineral Resources in the TRS due to differences in Subpart 1300 versus NI 43-101 Mineral Resources classification guidelines. The Proven Mineral Reserves from the FS were reclassified as Probable Mineral Reserves for the TRS resulting from the reclassification of the Measured Mineral Resources to Indicated Mineral Resources due to differences in Subpart 1300 versus NI 43-101 Mineral Resources classification guidelines. The TRS is classified as a Preliminary Feasibility level study whereas the FS was classified as a Feasibility level study. This change was driven by the Subpart 1300 requirement that a compliant Feasibility level TRS include a capital cost contingency allowance no greater than 10%, whereas the initial capital cost estimate for the FS included a more conservative allowance at approximately 15%. All other technical analyses, design information, capital and operating cost information, economic analyses, permitting and legal assumptions, conclusions and recommendations are consistent between the TRS and the FS. Readers are encouraged to read the TRS and the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 3, 2021, as amended by the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the SEC on June 8, 2022, which are available under the Company's profile on EDGAR. Readers are also encouraged to read the FS, which is available on the Company's website and under the Company's profile on SEDAR, for detailed information concerning the Project. See also "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. This presentation contains certain mineral reserve, production, costs, valuation, capitalization, trading data and similar information regarding certain other mineral projects and peer companies. Such data was derived from publicly available reports by such companies and other trade and industry sources. While the company believes such sources to be reliable, the company has not independently verified such information. Furthermore, information regarding mineral reserves, production and similar mineral project information for each company is based on estimates, assumptions and reporting standards applied to available data by each company and their reserve engineers in their respective reports, which may differ materially from the estimates, assumptions and reporting standards applied by us, and therefore may not be comparable among the companies presented. As a result, comparisons of such data made in this presentation, while considered reasonable at the time they are made, are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties which could cause actual events or results of each company to differ materially from those reflected and there can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve similar results at similar stages of development. Investors should be aware that the publication of the SDEIS and the permitting schedule, and the identification by the USFS of the Modified Mine Plan as the Preferred Alternative in the SDEIS, does not indicate any commitments on the part of the USFS with regard to the content or timing of a final decision. In developing the FEIS, the next phase of the NEPA planning process, the USFS may select various actions based on the Modified Mine Plan or each of the alternatives analyzed in the SDEIS. Furthermore, the USFS is not bound by the permitting schedule and anticipated milestones may be delayed materially or not be satisfied. 3#4WHY PERPETUA RESOURCES? Coeur d'Alene McCall Stibnite Gold Project Perpetua Resources Au-Sb • Cascade • Boise ✓ Redeveloping one of largest, highest grade and lowest cost gold projects in the U.S. * ✓ Superior project economics with ~15 year reserve life and <3 year payback period * ✓ Establishing a national strategic asset with a critical mineral essential for national defense and the clean energy transition ✓ Located in stable mining jurisdiction with Idaho community and political support ✓ Sustainable approach to restoring the environment, improving a legacy, and creating value for all stakeholders ✓ Attractive valuation with significant near-term catalysts *Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study ("FS") which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation.#5THE STIBNITE GOLD PROJECT Our goal is to transform an area abandoned after 100 years of mining activity into a national strategic asset for critical mineral and gold production through responsible mining and a sustainable approach to restore the environment for the benefit of all stakeholders. LO#6PERPETUA'S COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE The Stibnite Gold Project can deliver long term solutions and sustained value for all stakeholders Only reserve of antimony in U.S. "Perpetua's Stibnite-Gold Project produced antimony trisulfide for the U.S. ammunition industrial base during World War II and the Korean War, and it is the sole domestic geologic reserve of antimony that can meet Department of Defense (DoD) requirements." - U.S. Department of Defense Press Release, December 19, 2022 Site restoration and legacy clean-up "Restoration of stream and lake habitats and riparian vegetation within the active mine area after reclamation would result in a net increase in stream length and accessible fish habitat post-closure relative to baseline conditions and volitional fish access to habitats upstream of the Yellow Pine pit lake." - Supplemental Draft EIS, Chapter 4 Section 12 Low-cost gold production "The Project's exceptional grade and low strip ratio would place this Project in the lowest quartile of the global gold mining industry cost curve..." - Stibnite Gold Project Feasibility Study, December 2020#7LARGEST INDEPENDENT¹ U.S. GOLD RESERVE Independent Gold Project Mineral Reserves¹ Perpetua (Stibnite)² Castle Mountain Marigold Haile Round Mountain DeLamar South Railroad Florida Canyon 1.6 0.9 Wharf 0.9 Hasbrouck Bald Mountain 0.8 0.6 Mesquite 0.5 0.0 1.0 Source: Latest available company materials as of April 21, 2023 1.8 2.0 2.5 2.2 2.8 3.0 2022 Year-End Mineral Reserves - Gold (Moz) 4.8 4.2 4.0 5.0 1. Independent refers to gold projects as not owned by Barrick or Newmont; Independent projects shown are from the lower 48 states in the U.S. 2. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 7#8HIGH-GRADE, OPEN PIT GOLD DEPOSIT Independent Open Pit Gold Deposits¹ Perpetua (Stibnite) Yrs 1-4² Haile 2.2 1.7 Perpetua (Stibnite) LoM² 1.4 Wharf South Railroad Round Mountain Hasbrouck Castle Mountain Bald Mountain Mesquite 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 Marigold 0.5 DeLamar 0.5 Florida Canyon 0.3 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 2022 Year-End Mineral Reserves - Gold Grade (g/t) Source: Latest available company materials as of April 21, 2023 1. Independent refers to gold projects as not owned by Barrick or Newmont; Independent projects shown are from the lower 48 states in the U.S. 2. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation.#9POISED TO BE ONE OF LARGEST U.S. GOLD MINES Independent Projects and Producing Gold Mines¹ Perpetua (Stibnite) Yrs 1-43 Perpetua (Stibnite) LoM 3 Round Mountain Bald Mountain Marigold Haile South Railroad* Mesquite DeLamar* Wharf Hasbrouck* Florida Canyon Castle Mountain 297 226 214 195 176 124 124 110 80 70 49 49 23 0 50 50 100 150 200 250 463 *Comparable projects not yet in production 300 350 400 450 500 Source: Latest available company materials as of April 21, 2023 2022 Annual Gold Production² (koz) 1. Independent refers to gold projects as not owned by Barrick or Newmont; Independent projects shown are from the lower 48 states in the U.S. 2. 2022 annual gold production for the peer group producing mines; future life-of-mine average annual production for the South Railroad, DeLamar, and Hasbrouck projects based on the most recent technical studies available; Perpetua (Stibnite) is based on estimated future production from the 2020 Feasibility Study. 3. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation.#10LOWEST QUARTILE ALL-IN SUSTAINING COSTS¹ Among lowest cost North American developers... ...and lowest cost relative to senior producers 3 3 Perpetua (Stibnite) Yrs 1-4° $438 Perpetua (Stibnite) Yrs 1-4 Perpetua (Stibnite) LoM LoM³ 3 $636 3 Perpetua (Stibnite) LoM Skeena (Eskay Creek) $652 Agnico Eagle Novagold (Donlin) Ascot (Premier) Artemis (Blackwater) Integra (Delamar) Marathon (Valentine) $692 $769 Newmont $850 Barrick $955 Kinross $1,046 $0 $300 $600 $900 $1,200 $438 $636 $1,090 $1,211 $1,222 $1,271 $0 $300 $600 $900 $1,200 $1,500 North American Gold Developer All-in Sustaining Costs ($/oz) 1,2 North American Senior Gold Producer All-in Sustaining Costs ($/oz) 1,2 Valuable antimony by-product credit of $70/oz over life of mine³ 1. All-in Sustaining Cost ("AISC") is a non-GAAP measure. See "Non-GAAP measures" at the end of this presentation. 2. North American gold developer project all-in sustaining costs are based on the most recent available technical reports. North American senior gold producer all-in sustaining costs represent FY 2022 actuals from company reports and filings. 3. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. Antimony by-product credit is calculated using antimony price of $3.50/lb. 10#11SIGNIFICANT LEVERAGE TO HIGHER GOLD PRICES TRADING AT DEEP DISCOUNT TO PROJECT NET PRESENT VALUE Gold Price (US$/oz) $2,350 $2,100 $1,850 $1,600 $1,350 Perpetua Mkt Cap² 2 $0 $237 $771 $1,320 $1,434 $2,943 $3,815 $2,404 $3,026 $1,864 $2,232 Current Mkt Cap² Only 13% of NPV² (5%) at $1,850/oz Gold Price $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 NPV at 0% NPV at 5% $4,000 $4,603 $5,000 After Tax Net Present Value¹ ($M) 1. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 2. Perpetua Resources market cap based on fully diluted market cap using closing price as of October 24, 2023 (US$3.57 share price and fully diluted shares of 66 million) 11#12Ambri Batteries for clean energy ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL STRATEGIC ASSET ANTIMONY - IT'S CRITICAL ✓ Essential to economic and national security ✓ U.S. has no domestic mined production ✓ Clean energy & national defense applications ✓ China & Russia dominate the world supply (>70%) World Antimony 2022 Production (USGS) Turkey 1.2% Other Bolivia 2.3% Burma 3.6% 2% USES FOR ANTIMONY Energy Australia 3.6% Tajikistan 15.5% China 54.5% Russia 18.2% Other countries that produce less than 1% of global supply: Mexico, Iran, Vietnam, Kazakhstan, Guatemala, Pakistan, Canada Flame Retardants CRITICAL MINERAL ANTIMONY National Security & Defense Ceramics & Glass POWER 3.30 SCL 12#13Antimony (lbs) EXPECTED TO AVERAGE ~35% OF U.S. DEMAND 1,2 Stibnite Gold Project Recovered Antimony² 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 15% 10,000,000 2022 U.S. Annual Consumption¹ 51% 44% 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 33% 34% 21% Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Stibnite Gold Project - Year of Operation Perpetua Resources plans to re-establish domestic antimony production, protecting America's future 1. Source: 2023 USGS Antimony commodity summary 2. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 13#14DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AWARDS Critical minerals awards of >$40 million combined to advance antimony research, construction readiness, permitting, and engineering. Demonstrate mil-spec antimony trisulfide SBIR Program Small Business Innovation Research Grant (SBIR) Amount Scope Government Entity $200,000 ($100,000 each) 1) Test existing samples of antimony trisulfide from the Project for development into military specification ("mil-spec") 2) Study alternative processing opportunities to synthesize mil-spec from high purity antimony metal Defense Logistics Agency & Small Business Innovation Research Lab DOTC Defense Ordnance Technology Consortium (DOTC) Up to $15.5 million Obtain additional core samples from the Project site, conduct a pilot plant study to produce mil-spec antimony trisulfide, design a full-scale process circuit, and deliver a modular pilot plant for Department of Defense use. DOTC, U.S. Army Advance permitting & construction readiness DPA Title III Defense Production Act Title III (DPA) $24.8 million Complete environmental and engineering studies necessary to obtain a Final EIS, a Final Record of Decision, and other ancillary permits. Advance construction readiness. U.S. Air Force 14#15PERPETUA TO POWER AMBRI'S LOW-COST BATTERY Agreement to supply only responsible & domestically mined source of antimony for stationary, long duration, daily cycle energy storage enabling the transition to cleaner energy SUPPLY AGREEMENT¹: Current commitment of Perpetua's antimony can power over 13 GWh of energy storage or >8x the total additions to entire U.S. energy storage market in 2020 Based on standard commercial terms with options for fixed pricing and higher volumes Partnering with Ambri to identify opportunities to reduce carbon emissions in operations through renewable energy | combined with battery storage Ambri secured $144M from Reliance Industries, Paulson & Co., Bill Gates and others to accelerate growth and recently announced a tripling of its manufacturing capacity in the U.S. 1. Ambri Batteries for clean energy Liquid Metal Battery K Energy storage system High temperature chemistry Source: https://ambri.com/ Liquid Metal+ Battery + Outperforms lithium-ion Zero maintenance Redefining how modern mining companies can be part of climate change solutions Platform Subject to completion of the permitting process for the Project, commencement of commercial production of antimony, identification of one or more refiners to transform our antimony concentrate into antimony metal, and mutual agreement on certain material terms, including volume and pricing. For additional information regarding the risks and uncertainties surrounding our supply agreement with Ambri, see "Forward-Looking Statements" at the beginning of this presentation. 15#16RESTORING AN ABANDONED BROWNFIELDS SITE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS FUNDED THROUGH MINE DEVELOPMENT SEDIMENTATION Early repair of the largest source of sedimentation METAL LEACHING Pick up, reprocess, reuse and safely store 10.5M tons of tailings and spent ore BLOCKED FISH MIGRATION Re-establish fish migration and provide temporary and permanent river restoration 16#17PATH FORWARD FOR THE STIBNITE GOLD PROJECT¹ U.S. Forest Service identified Perpetua's Proposed Plan as Preferred Alternative² in Supplemental EIS March 2024 Final Record of Decision December 2023 Final EIS and Draft Record of Decision October 2022 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identified Preferred Alternative Mid 2024 Ancillary permits and Project Financing Mid 2024 Construction Decision 2027 Commercial operations and ongoing restoration Preferred Alternative a major milestone providing clarity for remainder of the NEPA process 1 See forward-looking statements at the beginning of this presentation. Based on USFS schedule published in October 2023. 2 Under NEPA, a "Preferred Alternative" is identified by a Federal Agency in a DEIS to let the public know which action the agency is leaning toward selecting as final. 17#18GAINING MOMENTUM WITH NEAR-TERM CATALYSTS Perpetua Resources Recent Accomplishments: Awarded Department of Defense SBIR funding (Sep 2022) Supplemental Draft EIS published (Oct 2022) Awarded $24.8 million under Defense Production Act (Dec 2022) Supplemental Draft EIS comment period closed (Jan 2023) ✓ Added to the Russell 2000® Index (Jun 2023) Began 2023 legacy cleanup activities (Jun 2023) Clean Water Act Settlement Agreement filed (Aug 2023) Welcomed new Vice President of Projects (Aug 2023) Awarded up to $15.5 million in Department of Defense funding to demonstrate a fully domestic antimony trisulfide supply chain (Aug 2023) Anticipated Milestones': ☐ Final Environmental Impact Statement & Draft Record of Decision (Dec 2023)² Final Record of Decision (Mar 2024)² ☐ Ancillary permits & financing (mid 2024) ☐ Construction, legacy restoration (summer 2024) ☐ Commercial operations, ongoing restoration (2027) 1 See forward-looking statements at the beginning of this presentation 2 Based on USFS schedule published in October 2023. 18#19VALUATION EXPECTED TO RE-RATE ONCE PERMITTED Market Cap As % of Spot NAV³,4 50% 25% 0% 13% 32% 29% 42% 42% 40% Perpetua¹² Marathon Skeena Ascot Artemis NovaGold 1. Perpetua Resources market cap based on fully diluted market cap using closing price as of October 24, 2023 (US$3.57 share price and fully diluted shares of 66 million) 2. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 3. NAV's based on after-tax NPV (5% discount rate) based on last available NAV within $1,850/oz gold price. 4. Market Caps based on October 24, 2023 closing stock prices. 19#20EXPOSURE TO GOLD AT ATTRACTIVE ENTRY PRICE Leading Gold Reserves per share... ...at an attractive price per gold Reserve ounce Perpetua NovaGold 1 Artemis 34 Skeena Marathon 5 Ascot 2 30 49 73 20 40 60 80 Skeena Ascot Artemis NovaGold Marathon Perpetua¹ $0 $49 $50 $76 $68 $100 $111 $136 $134 $150 North American Peers' Gold P&P Reserves per 1,000 shares 2,3 North American Peers' Price (US$) per Gold P&P Reserve ounce²,3 1. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 2. North American peer Proven & Probable (P&P) gold Reserve ounces are based on the most recent available technical reports and company materials. 3. Per share metrics are presented on a fully diluted basis using publicly available information; market caps as of October 24, 2023 close prices, converted to U.S. dollars using the Bank of Canada exchange rate as of October 24, 2023. 20 20#21A UNIQUE AMERICAN OPPORTUNITY ✓ Redeveloping one of largest, highest grade and lowest cost gold projects in the U.S. * ✓ Superior project economics with ~15 year reserve life and <3 year payback period * ✓ Establishing a national strategic asset with a critical mineral essential for national defense and the clean energy transition ✓ Located in stable mining jurisdiction with Idaho community and political support ✓ Sustainable approach to restoring the environment, improving a legacy, and creating value for all stakeholders ✓ Attractive valuation with significant near-term catalysts *Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 21#22Perpetua Resources CORP. Appendix#23DIVERSE, EXPERIENCED LEADERSHIP TEAM EXECUTIVE TEAM 1913 Laurel Sayer Board Director & CEO Jessica Largent Chief Financial Officer Mckinsey Lyon VP, External Affairs Alan Haslam VP, Permitting Michael Bogert Michael Wright General Counsel VP, Projects CORPORATE BOARD Marcelo Kim Chairman Paulson & Co Bob Dean Director Former Allen & Company Laura Dove Director Former Ford Motor Company, Secretary for the Majority of the U.S. Senate Rich Haddock Director Former Barrick Jeff Malmen Director Idaho Power, Former Chief of Staff Governor Otter Chris Papagianis Director Hudson Bay Capital Chris Robison Director Former Newmont, Rio Tinto Minerals & Kennecott Utah Copper Alex Sternhell Director Sternhell Group, Democrat Dpty. Staff Director US Senate Cm. Banking 23#24IDAHO: A PREMIER MINING JURISDICTION • • Well-defined Permitting Process Substantial Community and Political Support Low Geopolitical Risk Strong infrastructure & low-cost power • Talented & experienced workforce Golden Chest Mine Idaho Strategic Resources Sunshine Mine Sunshine Silver IDAHO Coeur d'Alene Lucky Friday Mine Hecla Mining Stibnite Gold Project (Au-Sb) Perpetua Resources Galena Complex Americas Gold and Silver Beartrack-Arnett Project Revival Gold Idaho Cobalt Operations Jervois McCall Cascade Thompson Creek Mine Centerra Gold Iron Creek Electra BOISE DeLamar Project Kilgore Project Excellon Integra Resources Oakley Project Excellon Phosphate District Itafos, Simplot, Bayer Twin Creeks Barrick/Newmont Turquoise Ridge Barrick/Newmont Goldstrike Mine Barrick/Newmont Cortez Barrick/Newmont Black Pine Project Liberty Gold UTAH 24 24#25CHANGING THE FACE OF MINING 67% of executive management are female Cindy Kneen, Camp Supervisor 43% of employees are female 2020 Laurel Sayer named CEO of Perpetua Resources Corp & Perpetua Resources Idaho Laurel Sayer, CEO 60% of Perpetua Resources Idaho, Inc board members are female STRONG ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL & GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES BUILT INTO CORE BUSINESS PLANS ✓ Community Agreement signed in 2018. ✓ Adopted ESG policy in 2019 ✓ Annual Sustainability Reporting ✓ 60k+ Trees Planted ✓ 104+ Months No Reportable Spills ✓ Dark Skies commitments ✓ Launched Sustainability Roadmap in 2022 Installed solar power to reduce current reliance on fuel ✓ Belinda Provancher, Community Relations Manager April Whitney, Perpetua Resources Idaho Board Member Note: Numbers reflect Perpetua Resources Idaho, Inc. staff and board members as of January 2022 25 25#26IMPROVING A LEGACY PLAN DESIGNED WITH POST MINING RESTORATION GOALS IN MIND, INCLUDING WILDLIFE, FISHERIES & DISPERSED RECREATION • • • • • • • Create a self-sustaining natural environment Support healthy fish and wildlife population Significant concurrent reclamation & restoration Revegetation, reforestation & wetland mitigation Address historical impacts from legacy mining 10+ year post-operations closure period 25 years of water treatment estimated Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. See the section titled "Forward-Looking Statements" at the beginning of this presentation. 26#27· • ANTIMONY-BASED LIQUID METAL BATTERIES ABOUT AMBRI: Combining technological innovation with commercial application to store energy longer, in a scalable way that will change the way power grids operate Low-cost battery comprised of a liquid calcium alloy anode, a molten salt electrolyte and a cathode comprised of solid particles of antimony Ambri secured $144M in capital led by Reliance New Energy Solar (Reliance Industries), Paulson & Co., Bill Gates, Fortistar, Goehring & Rozencwajg and Japan Energy Fund to accelerate growth and build domestic manufacturing facility • Reliance appointed JV Partner in India as part of broader plans to invest $10B billion in Green Energy Giga Complex Source: https://ambri.com/ 4. Charging Batteries absorb power from the grid Half-reactions (3) CaSbx Ca2+ + Sbx + 2e (4) Ca2+ + 2e Ca Overall charge reaction CaSbx+ Energy → Ca + Sbx Ambri Batteries for clean energy 1. Charged State Ca and Sb separated Liquid Metal Calcium (Ca) alloy (negative electrode) Ca Sb Ca Ca2+ Sb CalCl₂-based salt electrolyte e- Ca- Sb e- Solid antimony (Sb) particles (positive electrode) 2. Discharging Batteries provide power to the grid Half-reactions (1) Ca Ca2+ + 2e (2) Ca2+ + Sbx + 2e ⇒ CaSbx Ca Ca2+ Sb 3. Discharged State Ca and Sb form an intermetallic alloy Overall discharge reaction Ca + Sbx CaSby + Energy 27#28PERMITTING - NEXT STEPS FOREST SERVICE QUAS ARTMENT OF AGRICUL Submittal Administrative of PRO Approval Pre-work & Planning EIS Project Initiation & Public Scoping Alternatives & Environmental Analysis Prepare Draft EIS We are here Engineering & Design NOA for DEIS In Federal Register DEIS Comment Period Project Approved ROD Dependent Permits Publish Final ROD NOA for FEIS & Draft ROD in Federal Register Public Objection Period, Objection Resolution SDEIS Published Review and Respond to Comments on DEIS Construction Ancillary Permits (Additional state and federal permits and approvals required) EIS: Environmental Impact Statement DEIS: Draft Environmental Impact Statement FEIS: Final Environmental Impact Statement NOA: Notice of Availability PRO: Plan of Restoration and Operations ROD: Record of Decision 28#291 NEPA SCOPE NARROWED FOLLOWING SDEIS¹ 2020 DEIS 2022 Supplemental DEIS Preferred Alternative Identified Plan of Restoration and Operations (PRO) Modified Mine Plan - Burntlog Route Alternative Modified Mine Plan - Burntlog Route Alternative Modified PRO Modified Mine Plan - Johnson Creek Route Alternative Alternative Tailings Location No Action Alternative Johnson Creek Access Route No Action Alternative 2022 SDEIS Preferred Alternative: Incorporates water management & closure activities reducing long- term water treatment duration. Incorporates measures to manage stream temperatures. Reduces potential for impacts associated with access, transportation, and hazardous materials on Johnson Creek and the East Fork SFSR. Perpetua's Proposed Plan identified as Preferred Alternative in Supplemental Draft EIS 1 Under NEPA, a "Preferred Alternative" is identified by a Federal Agency in a DEIS to let the public know which action the agency is leaning toward selecting as final. 29#30MINERAL RESOURCES & RESERVES¹ Proven & Probable Mineral Reserves²: 4.8 Mozs Gold @1.43 g/t 148 Mlbs antimony at 0.06% contained in 104 Mt 3.500 Measured & Indicated Mineral Resources³: 6.0 Mozs Gold @1.42g/t 206 Mlbs antimony at 0.07% contained in 132 Mt Gold (thousands ounces) 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Gold M&I Mineral Resource 120,000 Gold P&P Mineral Reserve Antimony M&I Mineral Resource Antimony P&P Mineral Reserve 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 Antimony (thousands lbs) Yellow Pine Hangar Flats West End Historical Tailings 1 Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. The Mineral Reserves are contained within the Mineral Resources. 2 Mineral Reserves were calculated using an Au price of $1600/oz and Sb price of $3.50/lb and variable cut off grade of 0.39-0.49 g/t Au. The Proven Mineral Reserves from the 2020 FS were reclassified as Probable Mineral Reserves for the TRS. 3 Mineral Resources were calculated using a $1250/oz Au price and sulfide cut off grade of 0.45 g/t Au and oxide COG of 0.4 g/t Au based on the 2020 Feasibility Study. Based on a gold price of $1,500/oz in the TRS, Mineral Resources increased to 6.3Mozs @1.33 g/t using a sulfide cut off grade of 0.40 g/t Au and oxide cut off grade of 0.35 g/tAu. The Measured Mineral Resources from the 2020 FS were reclassified to Indicated Mineral Resources in the TRS due to differences in the S-K 1300 versus NI 43-101 Mineral Resources classification guidelines. 30#31EXPLORATION UPSIDE* EXPANSIVE LAND PACKAGE EXISTING DEPOSITS: Mineral Resources 2021 Feasibility Mineral Reserve Pit Gold Prospects Antimony-Gold Prospects PRII Mineral Rights & Claims Under Option Northeast of Yellow Pine Deposit • . Below Hangar Flats pit & Old Defense Minerals Exploration Act (DMEA) working area West End along strike and at depth PRIORITY EXPLORATION TARGETS: High grade targets (Garnet, Scout, Upper Midnight) Bulk tonnage targets (Cinnamid-Ridgetop, Saddle-Fern, Rabbit) Undefined airborne targets (Mule, Salt & Pepper, Blow-out) PIPELINE OF ANTIMONY-RICH TARGETS * Some of the prospects are conceptual in nature, there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the target being delineated as a mineral resource. See the section titled "Forward-Looking Statements" at the beginning of this presentation. 1190000 1182000 1174000 1166000 Yellow Pine Deposit 2738000 2746000 1198000 West End Deposit 1190000 Upper Midnight Saddle 118000 Garnet Scout Hangar Flats Deposit Rabbit Blow-Out 27 2000 2730000 2738000 Mule MILES 2746000 1174000 1166000 31#32ORE PROCESSING FLOW SHEET Dore metallurgical recoveries • Gold at 68% 91% (88.9% average) • Silver at 23.2% Average Antimony concentrate metallurgical recoveries 1,2 • Antimony at 84% - 91% (89.5% average) • Gold at 1% - 2% • Silver at 59% -65% High-grade antimony concentrate (Sb 55-65%) Low levels of impurities = no penalties Gold and silver likely by-product payables in Sb concentrates Potential Antimony processing options include • Conventional pyrometallurgical (smelting and roasting) Hydrometallurgical (solvent extraction) Bench and pilot scale testing indicates both options are viable processes for Sb concentrates. reporting LOM averages by ore type 2 excluding historical tailings Crushing, SAG & Ball Milling Oxide High Sb Sulfide Stibnite Flotation Antimony Concentrate Low Sb Sulfide Pyrite Flotation Transitional POX Residuals Gold Leach Electrowinning Dore Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation 32#33FEASIBILITY STUDY - HIGHLIGHTS¹ Total Recovered Gold Component Total Recovered Antimony Cash Costs Net of By-Product Credits² Early Production Years 1-4 1,853 koz Life-of-Mine Average Annual Recovered Gold 74 Mlbs 463 koz/yr $328/koz All-in Sustaining Costs Net of By-Product Credits² 2 $438/koz Initial Capital including Contingency $1,263 million $1,600/oz gold - $20/oz silver - $3.50/lb antimony After-Tax Net Present Value at 5% Discount Rate Annual Average EBITDA 2 Annual Average After Tax Free Cash Flow² After Tax Internal Rate of Return $1,320 million $566 million $500 million After Tax Payback Period 22.3% 2.9 years $1,850/oz gold - $24/oz silver - $3.50/lb antimony After-Tax Net Present Value at 5% Discount Rate $1,864 million Annual Average EBITDA² $678 million Annual Average After Tax Free Cash Flow² $584 million After Tax Internal Rate of Return After Tax Payback Period Years 1-15 4,238 koz 115 Mlbs 297 koz/yr $538/koz $636/koz $292 million $242 million Notes: = 1. In this presentation, "M" million, "k" thousand, all = amounts in US$, gold and silver reported in troy ounces ("oz") 2. Cash costs, All-in Sustaining Costs, EBITDA and After Tax Free Cash Flow are non-GAAP measures. See "Non-GAAP measures" at the end of this presentation. 3. The FS assumes 100% equity financing of the Project. 27.7% 2.5 years $360 million $295 million Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 333#34- FEASIBILITY STUDY - CAPITAL COST SUMMARY Area Detail Initial CAPEX Sustaining Closure CAPEX CAPEX (M $) (M $) (M $) (2) Mine Costs (1) 84 119 Total CAPEX (M$) 203 Processing Plant 433 49 483 Direct Costs Notes: 1. Initial mining CAPEX includes environmental remediation costs. 2. Closure and mitigation assume self-performed costs, which will differ for those assumed for financial assurance calculations required by regulators. Costs include stream and wetland On-Site Infrastructure 191 84 275 restoration and reclamation costs. Off-Site Infrastructure 116 116 3. Numbers have been rounded and may not sum correctly. Indirect Costs 233 - - 233 Owner's Costs 38 Offsite Environmental Mitigation Costs 14 I I 38 Onsite Mitigation, Monitoring and 3 23 98 125 Closure Costs (2) Total CAPEX without Contingency (3) 1,113 275 98 1,487 Contingency 150 20 1 171 14 Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. Total CAPEX with Contingency (3) 1,263 296 99 1,658 34 44#35FEASIBILITY STUDY - OPERATING COST SUMMARY Years 1-4 Life of Mine Total Production Cost Item ($/t milled) ($/oz Au) ($/t milled) Mining 9.71 156 8.22 ($/oz Au) 205 Processing 13.13 211 12.76 318 G&A (including Water Treatment) 3.54 57 3.43 85 Cash Costs Before By-Product Credits 26.38 424 24.41 608 By-Product Credits (5.99) (96) (2.81) (70) Cash Costs After of By-Product Credits 20.40 328 21.60 538 Royalties 1.69 27 1.09 27 Refining and Transportation 0.46 7 0.24 6 Total Cash Costs 1 Sustaining CAPEX 22.54 362 22.94 571 4.64 75 2.83 70 1 All-In Sustaining Costs Reclamation and Closure² Initial (non-sustaining) CAPEX³ All-In Costs 27.23 438 25.54 636 0.95 24 11.65 290 38.14 950 Notes: 1. Cash costs and All-in Sustaining Costs are non-GAAP measures. See "Non-GAAP measures" at the end of this presentation. 2. Defined as non-sustaining reclamation and closure costs in the post-operations period. 3. Initial Capital includes capitalized preproduction. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 35#36After-Tax Cash Flow (M$) $4,000 ANNUAL AFTER-TAX CASH FLOW (@ $1,850 GOLD PRICE) 1 $3,000 $255 $82 $67 $17 $244 $160 $149 $178 $226 $2,000 $294 $423 $637 $1,000 $688 $0 -$202 $617 -$473 $394 -$1,000 -$649 -$2,000 -3 -2 -1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 6 Year of Operation 1. Based on the 2020 Feasibility Study (FS) which is intended to be read as a whole and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context. The information in this presentation is subject to the assumptions, exclusions and qualifications contained in the FS. See "Regulatory Information" at the end of this presentation. For a summary of differences between the FS and TRS, see "Cautionary Note and Technical Disclosure" at the beginning of this presentation. 36#37SUPPORTIVE SHAREHOLDER BASE SHAREHOLDERS Blackrock B. Riley 1.9% Krilogy 2.6% 2.3% ** CAPITAL STRUCTURE* Issued & Outstanding 63.17 Million Options 1.77 Million ✰ Share Units 1.38 Million Sun Valley Gold 7.9% Kopernik 8.3% ✰ Fully Diluted 66.31 Million Estimated Cash Balance* ~$14 Million Other public float 37.8% *Capital structure estimate as of June 30, 2023 **Based on most recent shareholder filings Paulson 39.2% Perpetua Resources RESEARCH COVERAGE B. Riley Financial - Lucas Pipes H.C. Wainwright - Heiko Ihle Cantor Fitzgerald - Mike Kozak ❖ Roth Capital - Mike Niehuser 37#38REGULATORY INFORMATION The FS was compiled by M3 Engineering & Technology Corporation ("M3") in accordance with NI 43-101 under the direction of independent qualified persons (as defined in NI 43-101) ("Independent QPs"). Independent QPs for the FS include: Richard Zimmerman, SME-RM (onsite and offsite infrastructure, cost estimating and financial modeling) and Art Ibrado, P.E. (mineral processing) with M3; Garth Kirkham, P.Geo. (mineral resources) with Kirkham Geosystems Ltd.; Christopher Martin, C.Eng. (metallurgy) with Blue Coast Metallurgy Ltd.; Grenvil Dunn, C.Eng. (hydrometallurgy) with Hydromet WA (Pty) Ltd.; Chris Roos, P.E. (mineral reserves) and Scott Rosenthal P.E. (mine planning) with Value Consulting, Inc.; and Peter Kowalewski, P.E. (tailings storage facility and closure) with Tierra Group International, Ltd. The TRS was compiled by M3 in compliance with Subpart 1300 promulgated by the SEC under the direction of Independent Qualified Persons (as defined in Subpart 1300) ("QPs"). QPs for the TRS include: Richard Zimmerman, SME-RM (onsite and offsite infrastructure, cost estimating, mineral processing, financial modeling) with M3; Garth Kirkham, P.Geo. (mineral resources) with Kirkham Geosystems Ltd.; Christopher Martin, C.Eng. (metallurgy) with Blue Coast Metallurgy Ltd.; Grenvil Dunn, C.Eng. (hydrometallurgy) with Hydromet WA (Pty) Ltd.; Scott Rosenthal P.E. (mine planning and mineral reserves) with Value Consulting, Inc.; and Peter Kowalewski, P.E. (tailings storage facility and closure) with Tierra Group International, Ltd. The material scientific and technical information in respect of the Project in this presentation, unless otherwise indicated, is based upon information contained in the FS, with notable differences between the FS and the TRS identified. Readers are encouraged to read the TRS and the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 3, 2021, as amended by the Company's Current Report on Form 8- K/A filed with the SEC on June 8, 2022, which are available under the Company's profile on EDGAR. Readers also are encouraged to read the FS, which is available under the Company's profile on SEDAR and on the Company's website, for detailed information concerning the Project. All disclosure contained in this presentation regarding the mineral reserves and mineral resource estimates and economic analysis on the property is fully qualified by the full disclosure contained in the FS and the TRS. Information of a scientific or technical nature in this presentation has been approved by Christopher Dail, AIPG CPG #10596, Exploration Manager for Perpetua Resources Idaho, Inc. and a qualified person (as defined in NI 43-101 and as defined in Subpart 1300). All mineral resources have been estimated in accordance with CIM definitions, with notable differences to Subpart 1300 identified. Mineral resources are reported in relation to a conceptual pit shell to demonstrate potential for economic viability, as required under NI 43-101; mineralization lying outside of these pit shells is not reported as a mineral resource. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. Mineral resource estimates include inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. It is reasonably expected that the majority of inferred mineral resources could be upgraded to indicated mineral resources. The mineral resources and mineral reserves at the Stibnite Gold Project are contained within areas that have seen historic disturbance resulting from prior mining activities. In order for the Company to advance its interests at the Stibnite Gold Project, the Project will be subject to a number of federal, state and local laws and regulations and will require permits to conduct its activities. See also "Cautionary Note" at the beginning of this presentation. OTHER Certain monetary amounts, percentages and other figures included in this presentation have been subject to rounding adjustments. Certain other amounts that appear in this presentation may not sum due to rounding. 38#39NON-GAAP MEASURES NON-GAAP MEASURES To provide investors with additional information in connection with our results as determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States ("GAAP"), we disclose certain projected non-GAAP financial measures. The projected non-GAAP financial measures include Cash Costs, EBITDA, All-in Sustaining Costs and After-Tax Free Cash Flow estimates and related calculations as published in the Company's 2020 Feasibility Study. 1. Cash Costs and All-in Sustaining Costs (AISC) Cash Costs is a non-GAAP metric defined as the sum of cash operating costs (mining, processing, G&A), by-product credits, refining and transportation costs and royalties and is used to evaluate the Company's future operating performance and provide visibility into the economics of our future mining operations. All-in Sustaining Costs (AISC) is a non-GAAP metric defined as the sum of cash costs (from above), sustaining capital costs and non-revenue-based taxes (i.e. property tax) and is used to evaluate the Company's future operating performance and the ability to generate cash flow from operations. 2. EBITDA Earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) is a non-GAAP metric is generated from adding back taxes, interest, depreciation to net income and is used to evaluate the Company's future operating performance. 3. After-Tax Free Cash Flow (FCF) After-Tax Free Cash Flow (FCF) is a non-GAAP metric and is defined as net cash provided from operating activities less capital expenditures and less taxes and is used to evaluate the Company's future operating performance and ability to generate excess cash flow but it does not entirely represent cash available for discretionary expenditures due to the fact that the measure does not deduct the payments required for debt service and other items. We believe the projected non-GAAP financial measures included in this presentation provide readers with additional meaningful comparisons between the Company's 2020 Feasibility Study and its peer companies. These projected non-GAAP financial measures are not historical measures of financial performance and are not presented in accordance with GAAP. They may exclude items that will be significant in understanding and assessing our financial results. Therefore, these measures should not be considered in isolation or as an alternative or superior to GAAP measures. You should be aware that our presentation of these measures may not be comparable to similarly-titled measures used by other companies. The projected non-GAAP measures included in this presentation cannot be reconciled to comparable GAAP measures without unreasonable effort. The non-GAAP financial measures included in this presentation are projections based on the 2020 Feasibility Study. They are forward-looking statements and remain subject to the risks and uncertainties set forth in the section titled "Forward-Looking Statements" at the beginning of this presentation. See the 2020 Feasibility Study for additional information regarding the non-GAAP financial measures included in this presentation. The economic model described in the 2020 Feasibility Study is not a true cash flow model as defined by financial accounting standards but rather a representation of Project economics at a level of detail appropriate for a feasibility study level of engineering and design. 39