ELEMENT 25 LIMITED — Regulatory Filings 2017

May 16, 2017

ABOUT MONTEZUMA MINING

==> picture [143 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

17 MAY 2017

HIGH-GRADE NICKEL SULPHIDE TARGETS DEFINED AT THE PINNACLES PROJECT

• Ø Historic drilling includes a nickel sulphide intercept of 2m @ 2.3% Ni, 0.11% Cu, including 1m @ 3.5% Ni, 0.15% Cu in hole PNR266 .

• Ø Ni:Cu:Co ratios as well as down hole MgO and CrO profiles are indicative of sulphide mineralisation .

• Ø A recently completed Moving Loop Electro-Magnetic (MLEM) survey has defined two late-time bedrock conductors.

Listed in 2006, Montezuma Mining Company Ltd (ASX: MZM) is a diversified explorer primarily focused on gold and manganese. The Company’s primary objective is to achieve returns for shareholders through selected strategic acquisitions and targeted exploration.

Montezuma has 100% interests in the Yamarna Gold Project in the Yamarna Greenstone Belt, the Holleton Gold Project in the Wheat Belt region and the Butcherbird Manganese/Copper Project in the Murchison region, all located in Western Australia.

MARKET DATA

MARKET DATA
ASX code:	MZM
Share price:	$0.13
Shares on issue:	83.5M
Market capitalisation: Cash (at 31 March):	$10.9M ~$4.3M
Listed Investments:	~$6.8M

• Ø Surface projection of southern MLEM plate intersects

• historic nickel sulphide intercept in PNR266.

Montezuma Mining Company Ltd (“Montezuma” or “Company”) is pleased to advise that an ongoing historic data review has confirmed the potential for high grade nickel sulphide mineralisation at the Company’s 100% owned Pinnacles Cobalt-Nickel Project.

BOARD AND MANAGEMENT

Chairman Seamus Cornelius Executive Director Justin Brown Non-Executive Director John Ribbons Exploration Manager Dave O’Neill

The Project was extensively drilled for lateritic nickel mineralisation until 2004 and an updated JORC Mineral Resource Estimate is currently being compiled focussing on the higher grade cobalt zones within the overall mineralised corridor.

During this data compilation, a high grade intercept in PNR266 ( 2m @ 2.3% Ni, 0.11% Cu including 1m @ 3.5% Ni, 0.15% Cu) was highlighted by the technical team as likely to be derived from a primary sulphide source in contrast to the surrounding lateritic minealisation.

The indicators include the higher grade nickel, the coincident elevated copper grade (both being the highest intersected at the project to date) and the relative cobalt depletion in the highest grade interval. The interpretation is also supported by the magnesium and chromium profiles down hole, also indicating that the intercept may be located close to a basal contact position.

Due to the geological and empirical evidence for nickel sulphide, the Company commissioned a high powered Moving Loop Electromagnetic (MLEM) survey over the known intercept, covering approximately 1.7km of strike along the interpreted ultramafic sequence.

The survey was completed by Vortex Geophysics and has highlighted two late-time, bedrock EM anomalies within the area of interest.

Company information, ASX announcements, investor presentations, corporate videos and other investor material on the Company’s projects can be viewed at www.montezuma.com.au

The southern EM conductor (Plate 1) has been modelled approximately 260m below surface and within an interpreted high MgO ultramafic unit (and proximal to the contact) . The ultramafics appear to be hosted in mafic amphibolite and may be replicated due to folding. The historical highgrade nickel/copper intersection is located directly above the upper extent of the interpreted EM Plate 1.

The second EM conductor (Plate 2) is also located in a favourable location, and in an area with no historical drilling. This plate Is located at approximately 160m depth, and appears to be closely associated with the plunging fold of the same ultramafic unit.

An exploration program is currently being planned to test the conductors. Drilling will commence as soon as statutory approvals are received.

==> picture [334 x 456] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Pinnacles Project – known ultramafic units over aeromagnetics

Hole ID	Easting (MGA 94 Z51)	Northing (MGA 94 Z51)	RL (m)	Dip **(0) **	Azimuth **(mag0) **	Total Depth (m)	Depth From (m)	Depth To (m)	Intercept Width (m)	Ni (%)	Cu (%)	Co (%)
PNR266	435963	6642406	390	-60	270	53	37	39	2	2.3	0.11	0.13
					Including		38	39	1	3.5	0.15	0.05

Table 1: Selected drilling intercept from the Pinnacles Project ~~1~~ . The Interval shows a selected zone with >2% average grade. All intersections are downhole widths.

MLEM model	Centre top ofplate	Centre top ofplate	RL (m)	Dip **(0) **	Direction **(mag0) **	Length (m)	Depth (m)	Conductivity thickness (s)	Time constant (ms)
	Easting (MGA 94 Z51)	Northing (MGA 94 Z51)
Plate 1	435955	6442510	130	-90	295	400	600	1,000	20
Plate 2	436105	6643190	145	-80	125	500	500	1,518	90

Table 2: Met rics for the modelled MLEM plates for the Pinnacles Project.

5 Kanowna Lights NL ASX Release 28 October 1998 ‘First Quarter Activities Report’.

1 Paterson, P 1998, ‘Combined Annual Mineral - Exploration Report December 12th – April 30th 1998 E28/589, 590, 680’. WAMEX Item A 55268

==> picture [497 x 705] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Location and orientation of the two newly identified EM anomalies in relation to the interpreted host ultramafic stratigraphy. Plate 1 is located directly beneath high grade nickel sulphide mineralisation in historic drilling.

FOR MORE INFORMATION…

Justin Brown

Executive Director

Phone: +61 8 6315 1400

Email: jbrown@montezuma.com.au Company information, ASX announcements, investor presentations, corporate videos and other investor material on the Company’s projects can be viewed at: http://www.montezuma.com.au.

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results, Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves is based on information compiled by Mr David O’Neill who is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. At the time that the Exploration Results, Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves were compiled, Mr O’Neill was an employee of Montezuma Mining Company Ltd. Mr O’Neill is a geologist and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr O’Neill consents to the inclusion of this information in the form and context in which it appears in this report

Please note with regard to exploration targets, the potential quantity and grade is conceptual in nature, that there has been insufficient exploration to define a Mineral Resource and that it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the determination of a Mineral Resource.

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 report – Pinnacles Project

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or		•The drilling data presented herein is sourced from historic reports
techniques	specific specialised industry	standard measurement tools	and as such the sampling technique, and its nature and quality,
	appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole		cannot be determined with certainty.
	gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These		•It can be assumed that industry standard methods have been
	examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of		utilised by the previous holders.
	sampling.		•The Moving Loop Electro-Magnetic (MLEM) geophysical data
	• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample		collected in 2017 was captured by Vortex Geophysics using EMIT
	representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement		SMARTFluxgate sensors and a Vortex VTX-100 transmitter
	tools or systems used.		(500V/100A).
	• 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.
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary		•Reverse Circulation (RC) Percussion and Air-Core (AC) Drilling
techniques	air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter,		was used for the reported program, using a KT42 Schramm Rig
	triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or		and RC42-2T face hammer.
	other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method,		•3 holes were drilled with a Diamond Drilling Rig (type unknown).
	_etc). _
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample		•Due to the historic nature of the data, recovery cannot be
recovery	recoveries and results assessed.		determined with confidence.
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure		•The relationship between sample recovery and grade has not
	_representative nature of the _	_samples. _	beendetermined.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	• 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.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and		•All logs were hand written and uploaded into a digital database by
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate		previous holders.
	Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical		•Not all geological data for the drilling is available. Where data is
	studies.		available, it has been compiled into a company database.
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
	costean, channel, etc) photography.
	• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections
	_logged. _
Sub-	• If core, whether cut or sawn	and whether quarter, half or all core	•All samples reported are taken from a 1-4 metre drilling interval.
sampling	taken.		•The sample preparation and sample size information is not
techniques	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and		available due to the historic nature of the data.
and sample	whether sampled wet or dry.		•The methods of core preparation and sampling are not available
preparation	• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of		due to the historic nature of the data.
	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.
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the
	_material being sampled. _
Quality of	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and		•QAQC protocols are not provided in the historic data.
assay data	laboratory procedures used	and whether the technique is
and	considered partial or total.
laboratory	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments,
tests	etc, the parameters used in	determining the analysis including
	instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors
	applied and their derivation,	etc.
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards,
	blanks, duplicates, external	laboratory checks) and whether
	acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	_been established. _
Verification	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent		•The historic data cannot be verified and it has been collected from
of sampling	or alternative company personnel.		publicly available sources.
and	• The use of twinned holes.
assaying	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar		•The survey method for collar co-ordinates is not recorded in the
data points	and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other		historic data. Visual checks have been applied where possible
	locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.		using aerial photography and/or Google Earth imagery to locate
	• Specification of the grid system used.		holes correctly if errors are discovered. Selected drill collars have
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.		been field checked using handheld GPS with excellent correlation.
			•The MLEM geophysical data location was captured using 12
			channel GPS receivers.
Data	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.		•Data has been collected at various spacings (<25m in places).
spacing and	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish		•Compositing has been applied to selected samples.
distribution	the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the		•The 2017 MLEM receiver stations were spaced at 200 x 100m
	Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and		intervals in a Slingram configuration, with a 200m single turn loop.
	classifications applied.
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling		•The historic data is to be used as a guide to future exploration and
of data in	of possible structures and the extent to which this is known,		at face value has been collected in a manner that is sensible with
relation to	considering the deposit type.		respect to general geological trends and deposit types.
geological	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the		•More detailed interpretation will be required to assess this further.
structure	orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have		•The MLEM survey was designed with a 100m sensor spacing
	introduced a sampling bias,	this should be assessed and reported	across the strike of the stratigraphy (ie E-W), and a 200m spacing
	if material.		along strike. This resolution is considered adequate and was
			planned with forward modelling of a number of potential target
			sizes and geometries.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.		•Due to the historic nature of the data presented, this cannot be
security			determined.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and		•No external audits or reviews have been conducted apart from
reviews	data.		internal company review during the compilation of the historical
			data.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including		•The Pinnacles Project consists of a single granted exploration
tenement	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint		license (E28/2577), and two pending exploration licenses
and land	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,		(E28/2688 and E28/2701)
tenure	historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental		•The granted tenure is 100% owned by Montezuma Mining
status	settings.		Corporation Ltd.
	• 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.
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.		•The historical exploration data has been collected by various
done by			parties and has been reported to high standards.
other			•The methods of exploration and techniques used are considered
parties			appropriate for the deposit types sought (Ni, Cu, Co, Au)
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.		•The majority of the historical exploration has been focused on the
			discovery of Archean greenstone derived lateritic nickel and cobalt
			mineralisation.
			•A minor amount of exploration has been completed for Archean
			lode style gold and nickel sulphide mineralisation
Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the		•Refer to document and associated table.
Information	exploration results including	a tabulation of the following	•The drilling presented in schematic sections is selective and
	information for all Material drill holes:		represents a small portion of the overall drilling database.
	o easting and northing of the drill hole collar
	o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in
	metres) of the drill hole collar
	o dip and azimuth of the hole
	o down hole length and interception depth
	o hole length.
Data	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,		•Results have been presented as collected from historic data
aggregation	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high		sources.
methods	grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be

Criteria	JORC Code explanation		Commentary
	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.
Relationshi	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole		•Only downhole lengths are reported.
p between	angle is known, its nature should be reported.		•However, due to the nature of the mineralisation and deposit type,
mineralisati	• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported,		these widths are believed to be close to true widths.
on widths	there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole		•Further work is required to determine exact orientations.
and	length, true width not known’).
intercept
lengths
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of		•Refer to document.
	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. _
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not		•The historic data presented is selective to illustrate trends only.
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades
	and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
	Exploration Results.
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be		•Refer to document.
substantive	reported including (but not limited to): geological observations;
exploration	geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk
data	samples – size and method	of treatment; metallurgical test results;
	bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics;
	potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
Further	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral		•Future work will include further compilation and detailed
work	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).		interrogation of the historic data.
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,		•Based on the outcomes of the ongoing exploration, follow-up and
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling		or extension work will be carried out on the project.
	_areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. _