Axiom Mining : Further high grade mineralisation at Isabel Nickel

Hole

ID

Entire intersection^

Limonite intersection#

Saprolite intersection~

Easting*

Northing*

RL (m)

EOH (m)

ISD14-

0011

4.95m @1.06% Ni from 1.2m

578426

9066114

73

12.6

ISD14-

0021

5.4m @ 0.91% Ni from surface

578504

9066072

77

13.0

ISD14-

0031

20.7m @ 1.74% Ni from surface

12.45m @ 2.28%Ni from 8.25m

578786

9066164

123

30.6

ISD14-

0041

14.4m @ 1.94% Ni from 1.5m

2.8m @ 1.49% Ni from 5.5m

7.65m @ 2.67% Ni from 8.25m

578808

9066150

131

30.0

ISD14-

0052

18.25m @ 1.63% Ni from 4.75m

13.75m @ 1.83% Ni from 9.25m

578831

9066132

148

26.8

ISD15-

0012

7.5m @ 1.26% Ni from surface

3.0m @ 1.26% Ni from 1.5m

3.0m @ 1.37% Ni from 4.5m

578780

9066195

120

20.1

ISD15-

0022

6.6m @ 1.19% Ni from surface

4.6m @ 1.34%Ni from 2m

578906

9066094

150

25.4

ISD15-

0032

7.6m @ 0.99% Ni from surface

578906

9066134

160

30.0

ISD15-

034

16.8m @ 1.24% Ni from 1.0m

3.5m @ 1.59% Ni from 6.5m

5.0m @ 1.65% Ni from 10.0m

578756

9066165

131

20.9

ISD15-

035

10.9m @ 1.31% Ni from 1.6m

2.0m @ 1.47% Ni from 6.0m

3.5m @ 1.86% Ni from 8.0m

578728

9066100

122

20.7

ISD15-

036

5.3m @ 1.22% Ni from surface

578716

9066058

101

11.8

ISD15-

037

5.2m @ 0.80% Ni from 1.5m

578677

9066058

99

13.0

ISD15-

038

3.5m @ 0.82% Ni from surface

578703

9066162

108

8.7

ISD15-

039

2.4m @ 0.95% Ni from 1.1m

578714

9066158

109

12.0

ISD15-

040

9.4m @ 1.04% Ni from surface

1.5m @ 1.45% Ni from 7.9m

578726

9066157

117

13.8

ISD15-

041

8.6m @ 1.24% Ni from 2.0m

2.2m @ 1.87% Ni from 6.8m

578738

9066156

118

16.0

ISD15-

042

16.0m @ 1.17% Ni from 2.0m

2.7m @ 1.38% Ni from 6.0m

3.3m @ 1.98% Ni from 8.7m

578747

9066150

121

19.9

Hole

ID

Entire intersection^

Limonite intersection#

Saprolite intersection~

Easting*

Northing*

RL (m)

EOH (m)

ISD15-

043

18.0m @ 1.61% Ni from 1.0m

5.0m @ 2.09% Ni from 9.0m

4.4m @ 2.28% Ni from 14.0m

578776

9066154

131

20.9

ISD15-

044

17.6m @ 1.52% Ni from 1.0m

6.7m @ 2.40% Ni from 10.3m

578790

9066150

134

21.8

ISD15-

045

15.0m @ 1.31% Ni from 3.0m

8.1m @ 1.49% Ni from 6.0m

1.5m @ 2.20% Ni from 14.1m

578813

9066138

139

22.7

ISD15-

046

21.0m @ 1.20% Ni from 1.0m

3.7m @ 1.4% Ni from 6.0m

5.3m @ 1.88% Ni from 9.7m

578826

9066150

140

22.9

ISD15-

047

11.0m @ 1.30% Ni from 8.0m

6.0m @ 1.65% Ni from 12.0m

578834

9066140

23.1

23.1

ISD15-

048

11.8m @ 1.76% Ni from 5.0m

7.3m @ 2.21% Ni from 8.7m

578850

9066130

19.3

19.3

ISD15-

049

Assaying in progress

578774

9066128

131

19.3

ISD15-

050

Assaying in progress

578775

9066136

131

20.0

ISD15-

051

Assaying in progress

578775

9066201

134

14.4

ISD15-

052

Assaying in progress

578780

9066201

136

18.0

ISD15-

053

19.0m @ 1.55% Ni from 2.0m

10.9m @ 1.99% Ni from 9.2m

578777

9066212

138

25.1

ISD15-

054

5.9m @ 1.10% Ni from surface

578777

9066229

139

12.0

ISD15-

055

8.0m @ 1.26 % Ni from surface

2.2m @ 1.62% Ni from 2.0m

578778

9066228

136

13.8

ISD15-

056

7.0m @ 1.01 % Ni from surface

1.6m @ 1.38% Ni from 3.4m

578775

9066239

136

13.0

ISD15-

057

8.8m @ 1.03 % Ni from surface

578780

9066253

136

12.2

ISD15-

058

7.0m @ 1.04 % Ni from 2.0m

2.0m @ 1.34% Ni from 4.0m

578796

9066253

143

16.8

ISD15-

059

Assaying in progress

578778

9066267

135

18.4

ISD15-

060

Assaying in progress

578778

9066280

131

20.6

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Sampling techniques

Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut

channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.

Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.

Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.

In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases

more explanation may be required, such

as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.

HQ and NQ triple tube core in sampled intervals.

 Handheld XRF analysers were used in field for initial core analysis for geological control.

 Samples were collected either at a

range of intervals (minimum 1.0m) or geological intervals.

 Half and whole core samples were sent to the laboratory.

Drilling techniques

Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation,

open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).

Industry standard HQ and NQ triple tube by diamond drill rig.

 Holes were drilled vertically through the limonite and saprolite zones into underlying basement.

Drill sample recovery

Method of recording and assessing core

and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.

HQ and NQ diamond coring was by triple tube to maximise core recovery.

Industry standard techniques for mud and

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Measures taken to maximise sample

recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.

Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.

foams were used to assist in clear coring. Average sample recovery exceeded 90%. In some cases cavities or core losses were in defined zones-these were marked by spacers within the trays and noted in drillers' logs.

Axiom has implemented a dry drilling technique in the top limonite zone and a low water technique in lower saprolite zone-bringing average recoveries for later 2015 holes to more than 98%.

Logging

Whether core and chip samples have

been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.

Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.

The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.

All diamond core holes were:

 marked up for recovery calculations

 geologically marked up and logged

 photographed

Insitu wet density is determined by core displacement methods using whole core. Core was also geotechnically logged for hardness, fractures, fracture orientation, recovery and mining characteristics.

All laterite intersections were analysed by standard laboratory techniques for mine grade and trace element values.

Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation

If core, whether cut or sawn and whether

quarter, half or all core taken.

If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.

For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.

Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.

Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.

Half and whole core was delivered to the laboratory. All sample reduction protocols were by standard laboratory techniques.

A range of OREAS nickel laterite standards were inserted into the suite of samples. These were inserted 1 in every 50 (2%), samples for all drilling samples submitted.

Core duplicates are collected by splitting the previous sample interval. Duplicates are collected 1 in every 20 samples (5%) for all drilling samples submitted.

Laboratory standards and blanks were inserted into every 50 samples submitted plus repeats were completed every 50 samples.

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Whether sample sizes are appropriate to

the grain size of the material being sampled.

Quality of The nature, quality and appropriateness Standard laboratory techniques were

assay data of the assaying and laboratory undertaken.

and procedures used and whether the  All samples were weighed wet, dried laboratory technique is considered partial or total. at 90 degrees and then weighed dry tests For geophysical tools, spectrometers, to establish minimum moisture

handheld XRF instruments, etc, the ranges and density guides. parameters used in determining the  Standard reduction techniques were: analysis including instrument make and o jaw crusher

model, reading times, calibrations factors o pulveriser

applied and their derivation, etc.

o split to reduce sample to 200g.

Nature of quality control procedures  Ore grade by XRF fusion method.

adopted (eg standards, blanks,

duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.

Verification The verification of significant Previous Axiom diamond drill holes have

of sampling intersections by either independent or twinned a series of INCO and Kaiser and alternative company personnel. Engineers pits and INCO GEMCO holes. assaying The use of twinned holes.

Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.

Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

Location of Accuracy and quality of surveys used to Initial collar location was by handheld GPS

data points locate drill holes (collar and down-hole reading to 5m accuracy.

surveys), trenches, mine workings and

other locations used in Mineral Resource All collars are to be picked up by surveyors

estimation. by differential GPS (DGPS) to 10mm

accuracy.

Specification of the grid system used.

Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

Data spacing and distribution

Data spacing for reporting of Exploration  The current release covers drilling

Results. both for 12.5 m geostatistical

Whether the data spacing and modelling and for 25m grid pattern

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

distribution is sufficient to establish the

degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.

Whether sample compositing has been applied.

drilling below the previous 2014 and

2015 Kolosori Ridge diamond core holes

Orientation of data in relation to geological structure

Whether the orientation of sampling

achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.

If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

The nickel laterite is a weathered geomorphic surface drape over ultramafic source units.

All holes and pits were vertical and will be

100% true intersection.

Sample security

The measures taken to ensure sample

security.

All samples were escorted offsite to a secure locked facility at the site camp.

Onsite security was provided for samples.

Chain of custody protocols in place for transport from laboratories.

Audits or reviews

The results of any audits or reviews of

sampling techniques and data.

Axiom has employed highly experienced nickel laterite consultants to review all procedures and results from the 2014 and

2015 drilling phases.

This includes, drill types, depths, collar patterns, assay and other statistical methods.

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status

Type, reference name/number, location

and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.

The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.

Prospecting Licence 74/11-80% held by

Axiom.

50-year land lease-80% owned by Axiom. The validity of both the Prospecting

Licence and the leasehold was tested and confirmed in a recent Solomon Islands High Court judgment.

The hearing for the appeal against this judgment is pending.

Exploration done by other parties

Acknowledgment and appraisal of

exploration by other parties.

 INCO

 Kaiser Engineers

Geology

Deposit type, geological setting and style

of mineralisation.

Wet tropical laterite.

Drill hole

Information

A summary of all information material to

the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all material drill holes:

 easting and northing of the drill hole collar

 elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar

 dip and azimuth of the hole

 down hole length and interception depth

 hole length.

If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

Axiom completed diamond coring using HQ and NQ triple tube to maximise recoveries within the mineralised horizons.

A number of previous holes twin previous Kaiser and INCO test pits, auger holes and the mined area.

Data

In reporting Exploration Results,

Only length weighting has been applied to

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

aggregation methods

weighting averaging techniques,

maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.

Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.

The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

reporting for the program.

Assay intervals are generally undertaken on 1m regular intervals. The intervals are adjusted to geological boundaries with some intervals ranging up to 2m.

There are no outlier values requiring adjustment.

An initial 0.6% cut-off is used to define mineralised nickel laterite envelopes. This was also used as the basis for previous Kaiser resource modelling.

A second higher grade 1.2% Ni cut-off combined with the geological data is also used to provide a higher grade saprolite intercept more appropriate to some direct shipping requirements.

Relationship between minerali- sation

widths and intercept lengths

These relationships are particularly

important in the reporting of Exploration

Results.

If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.

If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known').

The laterite is thin but laterally extensive. The intercepts are perpendicular to the mineralisation.

Diagrams

Appropriate maps and sections (with

scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported.

These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.

See figure 1.

Balanced reporting

Where comprehensive reporting of all

Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting

Both low and higher grade intercepts are reported.

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

of Exploration Results.

Other substantive exploration data

Other exploration data, if meaningful

and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples

- size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.

Both INCO and Kaiser Engineers undertook circa 6000 drill holes and pits, feasibility studies and economic analysis.

Most of these studies were conducted prior to the establishment of the JORC Code.

Further work

The nature and scale of planned further

work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).

Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

Ongoing testing:

 Focus on smaller portion of deposit to prove up a resource compliant with the JORC Code, in anticipation of mining and to establish a direct shipping of ore operation

 Testing of the larger deposit for long-

term development.