New EM conductors at West Kambalda nickel prospects

58 King William Road T: (61 8) 8378 8200 ASX Code: MTH
Goodwood, South Australia, 5034 F: (61 8) 8378 8299 Issued Shares: 252,557,750 Page 1 of 9
www.mithrilresources.com.au E: admin@mithrilresources.com.au Market Capitalisation: $3.54 million
Figure 1: West Kambalda Project Location Plan
New EM conductors at West Kambalda nickel prospects
 New EM conductor at Hendrix immediately adjacent historic drill intercept of 9.1m @ 2.5% nickel
 Drilling to commence as soon as possible once statutory approvals received in early June Quarter
Mithril Resources Ltd (ASX: MTH) is pleased to advise that electromagnetic (EM) geophysical surveying has identified
new conductors at both the Hendrix and Floyd nickel prospects at its West Kambalda Project, located approximately 30
kilometres west of the Kambalda Nickel Mining Centre in Western Australia (Figure 1).
Hendrix and Floyd occur within the Logan’s Find area which is
subject to a Farm-in and Joint Venture Agreement with KalNorth
Gold Mines Limited (ASX:KGM) whereby Mithril can to earn up to
an 80% interest by completing expenditure of $2 million over 4
years (Figure 2).
Shallow drilling previously undertaken in 1970 by International
Nickel Australia Limited (INCO) at Hendrix intersected a broad
zone of strongly anomalous nickel including 9.1m @ 2.5%Ni from
10.7 metres which up until now has not been followed up (ASX
Announcement dated 7 March 2014).
Mithril has just finished a program of geological mapping, and
Moving Loop EM (MLEM) geophysical surveying with the aim of
identifying geophysical anomalies potentially indicative of nickel
sulphide mineralisation at depth.
At Hendrix, a 300-metre long zone of anomalous conductivity was
identified within ultramafic rocktypes immediately adjacent the
nickel mineralised zone drilled by INCO (Figure 3). Interpretation
of the geophysical data suggests a substantial deepening of the
weathering profile, the significance of which will need to be
established with follow-up drilling (Figure 4).
At Floyd, a sub vertical bedrock conductor (with modelled
conductivity of 1500-2000 Siemens) has been defined over a 600-
metre strike length, proximal to an ultramafic / basalt contact.
The ultramafic at Floyd is interpreted to be the southern
equivalent (i.e. same stratigraphic horizon) to the Hendrix ultramafic (Figure 5).
The conductor has not been previously tested; however one traverse of shallow vertical holes was drilled across the
southern end of the conductor by INCO in 1970. Resampling of drill spoils collected at surface by Mithril returned
anomalous nickel and copper (Sample R08569 – 1,135 ppm copper, 363 ppm nickel).
Mithril will drill test these new EM conductors as soon as possible once all statutory approvals have been received early
in the June 2014 Quarter.
ASX Release – 27 March 2014

Figure 4: Hendrix nickel prospect – line 2 cross-section showing INCO drill results, interpreted geology and zone of
anomalous conductivity
Figure 2: Logan’s Find area location plan Figure 3: Hendrix nickel prospect showing ch15 EM image (Z-
axis), anomalous conductivity (red) and rock chip results

Figure 5: Floyd nickel prospect summary plan showing EM conductor axis and rock chip results

Table 1. Rock chip sampling details and results
Sample_ID Prospect Easting Northing Ni_ppm Cu_ppm Pd_ppb Pt_ppb
R08512 Hendrix 350,242 6,531,035 1,251 121 5 16
R08513 Hendrix 350,254 6,531,032 1,235 188 10 15
R08514 Hendrix 350,289 6,530,947 1,025 223 29 16
R08515 Hendrix 350,293 6,530,948 1,972 138 15 23
R08516 Hendrix 350,304 6,530,942 765 93 6 8
R08517 Hendrix 350,302 6,530,925 1,883 156 12 10
R08518 Hendrix 350,312 6,530,896 1,561 300 5 7
R08519 Hendrix 350,312 6,530,896 1,679 435 6 19
R08520 Hendrix 350,125 6,530,885 1,719 28 4 7
R08521 Hendrix 350,113 6,530,882 3,448 119 7 10
R08522 Hendrix 350,081 6,530,929 1,553 20 4 7
R08523 Hendrix 350,217 6,531,127 980 170 6 13
R08524 Hendrix 350,140 6,531,199 579 23 4 5
R08525 Hendrix 350,090 6,531,210 1,057 83 8 13
R08526 Hendrix 350,061 6,531,210 3,606 80 5 8
R08527 Hendrix 349,998 6,531,310 2,990 58 30 36
R08528 Hendrix 349,940 6,531,263 1,170 71 4 8
R08529 Hendrix 349,919 6,531,250 1,427 119 9 16
R08530 Hendrix 349,946 6,531,111 1,455 42 10 8
R08531 Hendrix 350,319 6,531,381 19 30 1 2
R08532 Hendrix 350,326 6,531,349 41 73 2 3
R08556 Scott 351,099 6,527,381 1,230 199 5 9
R08557 Scott 351,050 6,527,261 1,471 52 4 8
R08558 Scott 351,048 6,527,198 115 213 4 5
R08559 Scott 351,059 6,527,161 402 180 5 9
R08560 Scott 351,087 6,527,086 98 131 9 9
R08561 Scott 351,126 6,527,034 122 247 11 21
R08564 Floyd 350,783 6,528,487 1,305 76 11 30
R08565 Floyd 350,783 6,528,487 433 101 10 26
R08566 Floyd 350,755 6,528,483 1,232 173 19 30
R08567 Floyd 350,730 6,528,527 1,572 249 15 39
R08568 Floyd 350,824 6,528,431 1,258 227 16 35
R08569 Floyd 350,990 6,528,408 363 1,135 6 27
R08570 Floyd 350,967 6,528,229 1,073 100 21 21
R08571 Floyd 351,113 6,528,184 164 205 4 7

Table 2. Electromagnetic (EM) geophysical surveying details
Item Details
Operator Outer Rim Exploration Services (ORE)
Sensor EMIT Smart Flux B-field Magnetometer
Receiver EMIT SmartEM-24
Transmitter Terra Tx-50
Configuration In-loop
Loop Size 100x100m
Number of Turns 1
Tx Frequency 30-40A
Base Frequency 0.5 to 1.56 Hz
Station Spacing 50m
Line Spacing 100m
Quality Control Measures Repeat readings at each station
JORC TABLE 1
Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data
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.
Rock chip samples were collected at various locations over the
Hendrix and Floyd Prospects (West Kambalda Project). Samples of
around 1 – 3kg were collected of either outcrop, subcrop or
float/lag material.
Moving Loop Electromagnetic (MLEM) geophysical surveying was
also undertaken over the Hendrix and Floyd Prospects. Technical
specifications of the Moving Loop Electromagnetic (MLEM)
geophysical surveying is also given in Table 2 of this Report.
Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample
representivity and the appropriate calibration of any
measurement tools or systems used.
Each rock chip location (easting and northing) was collected by a
handheld GPS. A brief sample description and additional
comments as necessary, were recorded at every sample location.
All sampling protocols remained constant throughout the
program.
The MLEM surveys were designed to cover an area consisting of
the immediate targets and surrounding rocks to ensure
geophysical surveying was representative of the prospect area.
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 (e.g. ‘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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant
disclosure of detailed information.
1 – 3kg rock chip samples were collected from either outcrop or
subcrop and placed inside calico sample bags for transport to the
laboratory and subsequent geochemical analysis.
In the laboratory, samples were crushed (~10mm) and pulverised
to produce a representative 25g sub-sample for analysis using fire
assay with ICP-MS finish for Au, Pt, and Pd (FA25MS3 – Lab Code)
and four acid digest with ICP-OES finish for Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Bi,
Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Ni, P, Pb, S,
Sb, Sc, Sn, Sr, Te, Ti, Tl, V, W, and Zn (MA4010 – Lab Code).
Drilling
techniques
Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer,
rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g.
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.).
Not applicable as no drilling techniques are utilised during rock
chip sample and / or MLEM geophysical surveying.
Drill sample
recovery
Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample
recoveries and results assessed.
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.
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.
Rock chip samples have been described geologically but not to a
level of detail suitable for Mineral Resource estimation, mining
and metallurgical studies.
Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature.
Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography
Logging of rock chip samples is of a qualitative nature.
Samples are logged for lithology and sometimes logged for colour,
texture, weathering, minerals and alteration. An overall sample
description and general comment on location is also included.
The total length and percentage of the relevant
intersections logged.
Logging was restricted to describing individual rock sample
collected for analysis.
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.
Samples were collected from outcrop, subcrop or float and all
samples were dry.
For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.
The sample preparation of the rock chip samples follows industry
best practice, involving oven drying (110°C) where necessary,
crushing and pulverising (~90% less than 75μm).
Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling
stages to maximise representivity of samples.
The laboratory completed repeats analysis on samples returning
>100ppb Au. Routine (around 1 in 30) repeats and regular blanks
and standards analysed throughout.
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.
No field duplicates were taken. All samples collected were ~1 –
3kg, and entire sample pulverized.
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of
the material being sampled
Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the exploration
method.
Quality of
assay data
and
laboratory
tests
The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying
and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique
is considered partial or total.
Four acid digest is considered a near total digest and is
appropriate for the type of exploration undertaken. The Fire Assay
method used is considered to be a total digest and appropriate for
the re-assay work undertaken.
For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF
instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the
analysis including instrument make and model, reading
times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
No geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments,
etc. were used during rock chip sampling.
Details of geophysical tools used during the EM geophysical
surveying are given in Table 2.
Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g.
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks)
and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias)
and precision have been established.
The laboratory completed repeats analysis on samples returning
>100ppb Au. Routine (around 1 in 30) repeats and regular blanks
and standards analysed throughout. From results achieved it is
determined an acceptable level of accuracy and precision has
been established.
Verification
of sampling
and
assaying
The verification of significant intersections by either
independent or alternative company personnel.
The geophysical anomalies were identified by the Company’s
consulting geophysicist and verified by the Company’s Geology
Manager.
The use of twinned holes. Not applicable as no drilling was undertaken.
Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures,
data verification, data storage (physical and electronic)
protocols.
Handwritten data entry was used for documenting the rock chip
sampling.
Raw data for the geophysical surveying was captured
electronically in the field and transferred by the contractor to the
Company’s consultant geophysicist in Perth for processing and
interpretation.
Discuss any adjustment to assay data None undertaken
Location of
data points
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes
(collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings
and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.
Data points (rock chip sample locations and EM stations) were
recorded using a handheld GPS with an expected accuracy of+/-
5m. For the nature of the program completed, this level of
accuracy is considered to be suitable. No down-hole surveys were

completed.
Specification of the grid system used.
Data points have been quoted in this Report using the GDA1994
MGA, Zone 51 coordinate system.
Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
An RL value using the handheld GPS was recorded at each rock
chip sample location
Data
spacing
and
distribution
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.
The rock chip samples were randomly located based on where
prospective rocks occurred as either outcrop or subcrop at the
surface.
Details of the EM surveying data spacing are given in Table 2 of
this Report.
Whether the data spacing and 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.
No mineral resource or ore reserve estimation has been
undertaken. Rock chip sample results and geophysical results are
not suitable for incorporation into mineral resource or ore reserve
estimations.
Whether sample compositing has been applied. No composite sampling has been applied.
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.
Rock chip sampling was of a reconnaissance nature only and it is
not possible to determine whether the rock chip sampling has
achieved an unbiased sampling of possible structures.
Given that the geophysical data was collected over a large area
from regularly-spaced stations and not designed to test any
specific orientation, it may be considered to be unbiased.
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.
No orientation based sampling bias has been identified.
Sample
security The measures taken to ensure sample security.
All rock chip samples were collected by Company personnel and
stored in a secure location until completion of the program.
Samples were taken to the Ausdrill Pty Ltd storage area
(Kalgoorlie) and sent directly to the laboratory in Perth.
Audits or
reviews
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques
and data.
All results were reviewed by Company personnel including the
Geology Manager and Managing Director. No negative issues
were identified from these reviews.
JORC TABLE 1
Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results
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 rock chip sampling and Moving Loop Electromagnetic
(MLEM) geophysical surveying program was completed over
2 tenements (P15/5216 and P15/5236).
P15/5216 and P15/5236 are owned by KalNorth Gold Mines
and are subject to the Spargoville JV in which Mithril is
earning up to an 80 % interest by completing expenditure of
$2M over 4 years.
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.
There are no existing impediments to the tenements.
Exploration
done by other
parties
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other
parties.
The area has been primarily explored for gold with a range of
activities undertaken, including geological mapping, surface
geochemical sampling (auger, soil, rock chip) and
reconnaissance drilling (diamond, RC and RAB). Nickel –
focussed activities including reconnaissance drilling was last
undertaken by INCO in 1970.
Geology Deposit type, geological setting and style of Geology over the area consists of Archaen mafic/ultramafic

mineralisation. units, felsic volcanics and sedimentary lithologies. The
tenements are prospective for vein and shear hosted gold
deposits and ultramafic – hosted nickel sulphide deposits.
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.
The results of the rock chip sampling has been displayed in
conjunction with historic drill hole locations in Figures 3, 4
and 5 of this Report.
The locations of the EM survey boundaries and EM
conductors identified from the Moving Loop Electromagnetic
(MLEM) geophysical surveying at the Hendrix and Floyd
Prospects are also shown in 2, 3 and 4 of this Report.
Technical specifications of the Moving Loop Electromagnetic
(MLEM) geophysical surveying is also given in Table 2 of this
Report.
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.
No information has been excluded.
Data
aggregation
methods
In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging
techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations
(e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually
Material and should be stated.
No weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or
minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and
cut-off grades have been applied when reporting Exploration
Results.
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.
Not applicable for the sampling method used.
The assumptions used for any reporting of metal
equivalent values should be clearly stated.
No metal equivalents reported.
Relationship
between
mineralisation
widths and
intercept
lengths
These relationships are particularly important in the
reporting of Exploration Results.
The rock chip sampling data in this Report provides
geochemical information on individual samples only and
cannot be used to demonstrate a relationship between
mineralisation widths and intercept lengths.
Information relating to the geometry of any mineralisation is
also unattainable based on these results.
If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the
drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.
Not applicable – see previous comment
If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are
reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect
(e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).
Not applicable – see previous comment. Also the results do
not relate to drilling.
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 Figures 3, 4, and 5 of this Report.
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 of Exploration Results.
All results are reported.
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;
No other exploration data is available.

potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
Further work
The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for
lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-
out drilling).
Drilling to determine the significance of the EM conductors
at Hendrix and Floyd prospects.
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible
extensions, including the main geological interpretations
and future drilling areas, provided this information is not
commercially sensitive.
Figures displaying areas of interest over the project area
have been included
ENDS
For Further Information Contact:
Mithril Resources Ltd
David Hutton, Managing Director
admin@mithrilresources.com.au
58 King William Road
Goodwood, South Australia 5034
ABN: 30 099 883 922
T: (61 8) 8378 8200
F: (61 8) 8378 8299
www.mithrilresources.com.au
Competent Persons Statement:
The information in this report that relates to Exploration Targets, Exploration Results,
Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves is based on information compiled by Mr David
Hutton, who is a Competent Person, and a Fellow of The Australasian Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy. Mr Hutton is Managing Director and a full-time employee of Mithril
Resources Ltd.
Mr Hutton has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and
type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken 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 Hutton consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his
information in the form and context in which it appears.
About Mithril Resources Ltd:
Mithril Resources Ltd is an Australian exploration company focused on the discovery and
development of base metal deposits primarily copper. Mithril is a frontier explorer with
a small but highly experienced team based in Adelaide. Combining advanced technology
with a proven field‐based approach ensures the bulk of the company’s expenses go
directly into the ground.

New EM conductors at West Kambalda nickel prospects

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to New EM conductors at West Kambalda nickel prospects

Similar to New EM conductors at West Kambalda nickel prospects (20)

More from David Hutton

More from David Hutton (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

New EM conductors at West Kambalda nickel prospects