International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. (TSX: ITH)(NYSE Amex:
THM)(FRANKFURT: IW9) -
Low Capex Accelerated Heap Option: NPV(5%) $579M, IRR 26.9%,
Producing 513,000 ounces of gold/year
Upscale Milling-Heap Option: NPV(5%) $1.11B, IRR 18.5%,
Producing 833,000 ounces of gold/year
International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. ("ITH" or the "Company")
(TSX: ITH)(NYSE Amex: THM)(FRANKFURT: IW9) is pleased to announce
results from the next phase of its Project Enhancement Options
within its independently prepared Preliminary Economic Assessment
(PEA) for the Livengood Gold Project, Alaska. Management
anticipates continuing to refine and improve project economics as
additional information becomes available. The results from this
phase of the Company's PEA report highlight two important
alternatives under consideration for the potential development of
the Livengood gold deposit. All references to monies in this news
release are to US dollars unless otherwise indicated.
The first alternative outlines an initial low capex, accelerated
heap leach only option which could provide cash flow to support the
development of a large mill phase for the project (Tables 1 &
2). The second alternative looks at expanding the projected milling
circuit which benefits the project through economies of scale,
increased production and compressed mine life (Tables 3 & 4).
These alternatives offer significant enhancement to the base case
plan presented in ITH's August 3, 2010 news release and point to
the significant potential that the large Livengood deposit has for
further optimization.
The heap leach only option is emerging as a highly attractive
initial stage for ITH because it is a simpler project from the
permitting, process, construction and operational standpoints, all
of which can be accelerated. This alternative also has much lower
capex and operating costs, which produces a compelling internal
rate of return, NPV and annual gold production. The large mill-heap
option reflects overall project value and has significant leverage
to gold price.
Jeffrey Pontius, President and CEO, stated, "The option analysis
has highlighted not only a strategic path forward for ITH's
development of the Livengood project but also the value potential
of this new world class gold discovery. As the Company focuses on
optimizing the development of Livengood with the reduced capex,
accelerated plan for heap leaching, we will also be continuing to
examine other options, such as a simple, heap compatible mill, to
address the deposit's emerging contiguous higher grade zones. The
analysis of this and other options are currently in full swing as
the project begins the optimization phase."
Table 1
Livengood Project - Heap Leach Only Option - PEA Summary
(all values in 2010 USD based on an $775 pit shell, mining recoverable
in-pit resources above 0.3 g/t gold cut off)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
251Mt @ 0.62 g/t gold for 5.03M
contained ounces gold, 3.54M recoverable
In-pit resource - Indicated ounces gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 Mt @ 0.54 g/t gold for 0.15M contained
ounces gold, 0.11M recoverable ounces
In-pit resource - Inferred gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPV(5%) and IRR at USD 950 per Oz USD 579M; 26.9%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 to 1.1 (mined mineral resource to
Over all strip ratio of: waste)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Annual gold production: 513,000 ounces over a 7.1 year mine life
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average gold recovery: 71%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
100,000 mined mineral resource tonnes
Average LOM Mining rate: per day, 210,000 total tonnes per day
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining cost per/tonne: $1.45
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heap Leach Processing cost/tonne $3.11
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G&A cost per processed tonne: $0.81
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Cost per ounce: $486
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial capital cost(i): $ 638 M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life of mine sustaining capital
costs: $154 M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capital Contingency: 20%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) excludes working capital and initial fills/spare parts inventory
The Company will file the final version of an update of the NI
43-101 technical report which will include the results of this
Preliminary Economic Analysis (the "Report") on SEDAR by September
17, 2010, and investors are urged to review the Report in its
entirety.
Table 2
Heap Leach Only Option Gold Price Sensitivity Analysis
(all values in constant 2010 US$)
Gold Price NPV(5%)($M) NPV(7.5%)($M) IRR (%)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$950 $579 $456 26.9%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,100 $988 $813 40.0%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,200 $1,260 $1,051 47.4%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,500 $2,077 $1,764 68.4%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3
Livengood Project - Large Mill - Heap Leach PEA Summary
(all values in 2010 USD based on an $850 pit shell, mining recoverable
in-pit resources above 0.3 g/t gold cut off)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
600 Mt @ 0.65 g/t gold for 12.6M
contained ounces gold, 9.8M recoverable
In-pit resource - Indicated ounces gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
48 Mt @ 0.64 g/t gold for 1.0M contained
ounces gold, 0.8M recoverable ounces
In-pit resource - Inferred gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPV(5%) and IRR at USD 950 per Oz USD 1.11B; 18.5%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 to 1.07 (mined mineral resource to
Over all strip ratio of: waste)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
833,000 ounces over a 12.6 year mine
Average Annual gold production: life
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average gold recovery: 78% (73% Heap & 81% Mill)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
135,000 mined mineral resource tonnes
Average LOM Mining rate: per day, 280,000 total tonnes per day
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining cost per/tonne: $1.41
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mill Processing cost/tonne: $7.46
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heap Leach Processing cost/tonne $2.84
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G&A cost per processed tonne: $0.59
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Cost per ounce: $534
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial capital cost(i): $ 625 M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mill & Heap expansion capital cost $1,027 M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life of mine sustaining capital
costs: $579 M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capital Contingency: 25%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) excludes working capital and initial fills/spare parts inventory
Table 4
Large Mill-Heap Option Gold Price Sensitivity Analysis
(all values in constant 2010 US$)
Gold Price NPV(5%)($M) NPV(7.5%)($M) IRR (%)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$950 $1,113 $760 18.5%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,100 $2,147 $1,611 29.3%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,200 $2,837 $2,178 35.9%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,500 $4,906 $3,879 54.4%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This PEA utilized preliminary estimates of heap leach and mill
recovery, assuming a nominal 73% and 81% process recovery,
respectively, for the large milling-heap leach option and an
average of 71% for the heap leach only option (includes some minor
lower recovery sulphide material in the pit design which would have
gone to the mill in the combined study). The estimated mill
recovery is consistent with the high average recovery (89%) of gold
to concentrate demonstrated in the existing metallurgical testing
data and the subsequent total gold recovery by CIL treatment in
some of the mined mineral resource types. Metallurgical testing
will be conducted as part of a Pre-feasibility Study to verify the
total gold recovery assumptions and to support design of the
required mill and heap leach processes.
Carl Brechtel, Chief Operating Officer, stated, "The very
attractive early stage oxide heap leach project provides a strong
base for our Company to begin enhancing the operational planning
and economics. This work will focus on advancing both production
and grade in the plan while looking for the most economically
favourable development strategy that can minimize and mitigate the
project's environmental impacts. The size and character of the
Livengood deposit will enable the Company to look at a variety of
project enhancement options as we progress toward a final
design."
The Company cautions that this PEA is preliminary in nature, and
is based on technical and economic assumptions which will be
evaluated in the Pre-feasibility Study. The PEA is based on the
Livengood in-situ resource model (June, 2010) which consists of
material in both the indicated and inferred classification.
Inferred mineral resources are considered too speculative
geologically to have technical and economic considerations applied
to them. The current basis of project information is not sufficient
to convert the in-situ mineral resources to mineral reserves, and
mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have
demonstrated economic viability. Accordingly, there can be no
certainty that the results estimated in this PEA will be realized.
The PEA results are only intended as an initial, first-pass review
of the potential project economics based on preliminary
information.
This Livengood PEA utilizes the June 2010 in-situ resource
estimate, which includes all assays completed through May, 2010
(434 diamond and reverse circulation holes). The mine production
estimate was developed by incremental revenue optimization to
produce a series of pit shells defined at varying gold prices
between $300 and $1500 per ounce, for the gold recovery and
processing cost assumptions. A long term gold price of $950 per
gold ounce has been assumed in this PEA, and the pit shells,
defined at $775 and $850 per gold ounce, were selected for the
analysis to assure a minimum margin on process cost of greater than
$100 per gold ounce. The resulting pit design for the combined heap
leach and mill option at projected full extraction is shown in
Figure 1, and a series of 5 push-backs were chosen within the shell
as the basis of a production schedule that would deliver a nominal
135,000 tonnes/day mined mineral resource output. Individual
in-situ resource blocks within the pit shell were assigned an
economic value based on recovery and contained gold above the 0.3
g/t cut-off grade, and the blocks were assigned to one of the heap
leach, mill or waste dump destinations based on the economic value.
For blocks assigned to the heap leach or mill destination, the
individual block grade-tonnage data developed in the Multiple
Indicator Kriging in-situ resource model was used to calculate the
mining recoverable tonnage above the 0.3 g/t cut-off grade. The
mining recoverable resource was scheduled to the appropriate
process circuit (mill or heap leach) and the remaining material
below the 0.3 g/t cut-off was scheduled to the waste rock storage
facility.
The Livengood mineralization remains open in a number of
directions particularly to the west, southeast and at depth. The
Company is continuing its resource expansion drilling campaign
which is focused on expanding the higher grade Southwest Zone of
the deposit, confirming the inferred resource extrapolation at
depth, and infilling the drill pattern to increase the drill
density in the core of the Sunshine Zone and Main Zone
mineralization.
To view the map accompanying this press release please visit the
following link: http://media3.marketwire.com/docs/ithmap913.pdf
Cash Flow Model Inputs and Assumptions
Resources - The analysis included both indicated and inferred
resources in the mining and economic study. Indicated resources
make up more than 90% of the defined in-pit mineral resource
tonnage.
Mining Method - A standard open pit drill, blast, load and haul
mining plan was used for the study, assuming a 45 degree pit slope.
Designs for pit roads and ramps have been developed, and the
schedule includes the additional waste tonnage required. The
assumed nominal mining rate was 210,000 and 280,000 total tonnes
per day for the heap leach only and mill heap leach combination,
respectively (365 operating days per year).
Heap Leach Processing Method - A valley fill heap leach design,
initially operated at 100,000 tonnes of mined mineral resource a
day, was assumed for the PEA heap leach only option. The mined
mineral resource to be heap leached would be crushed to 1.2 cm and
truck stacked on the pad.
Combined Heap Leach - Mill Processing Method - A valley fill
heap leach design, initially operated at 100,000 tonnes of mined
mineral resource a day and declining to nominal 89,000 tonnes of
mined mineral resource per day for the first 6 years after the mill
start-up in year 4, was assumed for the PEA. The mined mineral
resource to be heap leached would be crushed to 1.2 cm and truck
stacked on the pad. A process plant using SAG milling, gravity and
flotation circuits for concentration and CIL recovery of gold was
assumed in the PEA. The process plant was assumed to have a nominal
throughput of 100,000 tonnes per day, beginning operation in year
4, after 3 years of heap leach processing.
Gold Recovery Model - Process recoveries were estimated for each
of 21 different mineralization types (7 rock types, 3 oxidations
states) in the deposit based on metallurgical test results
published in the June 2010 update of the Livengood technical data.
The quantity of mineralization types are then projected into the
in-situ resource block model using a 3D geological model of the
deposit, and a process recovery factor is calculated for each model
block. The calculated process recovery factor is used to determine
produced gold ounces for the portion of mine recoverable material
above the 0.3 g/t cut-off grade for each block according to its
processing destination (heap leach or mill).
Operating and Capital Cost Estimates - Preliminary capital and
operating costs were prepared using information available on other
Alaskan gold mines, an independent mining and development cost
research report commissioned by the Company, all available project
technical data and metallurgical/process related test work, as well
as project site reviews by the independent consultants and the
Qualified Persons authoring the Report. Preliminary site
infrastructure alternatives (heap leach, waste dump, tailing
storage facilities, and mill) have been evaluated by independent
study and an arrangement defined as the basis of capital cost
estimates. Capital costs for the combined heap leach - mill option
were estimated from a review of recent gold projects developed in
the region. Capital costs were developed based on a nominal mining
rate of 135,000 tonnes of mined mineral resource per day (nominal
total tonnes mined per day of 280,000), processing a total of 650
Mt, and includes sustaining capital and all facilities and
equipment needed for all phases of the project over its projected
12.6 year life. Capital costs for the heap leach only option were
estimated from a review of recent gold projects developed in the
region. Capital costs were developed based on a nominal mining rate
of 100,000 tonnes of mined mineral resource per day (nominal total
tonnes mined per day of 210,000), processing a total of 259 Mt, and
includes sustaining capital and all facilities and equipment needed
for all phases of the project over its projected 7.1 year life. All
costs are in constant USD from Q3 2010. No escalation was applied
in the financial models.
Taxes and Royalties - Taxes and royalty charges were excluded
from this preliminary analysis of the project. Net smelter return
royalty rates vary from 0-5% across the project and average
approximately 2.5%, assuming exercise by the Company of all
available royalty buy-out rights.
Revenue - Revenue was determined in the base case financial
model assuming a constant, long term gold price of $950 per Au
ounce. All sensitivities to gold price assumptions were assessed
using a constant price.
June 2010 Resource Update
Reserva International, LLC. produced an updated in-situ mineral
resource estimate, the results of which were included in the June
2010 update of the Livengood NI 43-101 (June 2010 Summary Report on
the Livengood Project, Tolovana District, Alaska). Summary results
at different cut-off grades are listed in Tables 5, 6 and 7. This
in-situ resource estimate was used as the basis for the Mill and
Heap Leach PEA.
Table 5
June 2010 Livengood Resources (at 0.30 g/t gold cutoff)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Cutoff Tonnes Million Ounces
Classification (g/t) (millions) Gold (g/t) Gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated 0.30 789 0.62 15.7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred 0.30 229 0.55 4.0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6
June 2010 Livengood Resources (at 0.50 g/t gold cutoff)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Cutoff Tonnes Million Ounces
Classification (g/t) (millions) Gold (g/t) Gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated 0.50 409 0.83 10.9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred 0.50 94 0.79 2.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7
June 2010 Livengood Resources (at 0.70 g/t gold cutoff)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Cutoff Tonnes Million Ounces
Classification (g/t) (millions) Gold (g/t) Gold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated 0.70 202 1.07 6.9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred 0.70 40 1.06 1.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scale of the Livengood gold system is demonstrated by the
size of the estimated resource using a 0.3 g/t gold cutoff (Table
5). This resource forms a coherent body covering a lateral extent
of three square kilometres and remains open in several
directions.
The resource model for the deposit was developed using Multiple
Indicator Kriging techniques. Indicator variogram modeling was done
on 10 metre composites. The resource model was constrained by the
lithological model developed by the Company. Spatial statistics
indicate that the mineralization shows very reasonable continuity
within the range of anticipated operational cutoffs. Bulk density
was estimated on the basis of individual density measurements made
on core samples and reverse circulation drill chips from each
stratigraphic unit. In total, 98 measurements were used. Block
density was assigned on the basis of the lithological model. The
resource model, with blocks 15 x 15 by 10 metres, was estimated
using nine indicator thresholds. A change-of-support correction was
imposed on the model assuming 5 x 5 x 10 metre selectable mining
units. Classification of indicated and inferred was based on
estimation variance.
Livengood Project Highlights
-- Drilling at the project continues to expand the deposit in several
directions; at depth, to the west in the Lillian area and to the
southeast in the Sunshine Zone.
-- The Company has begun the Money Knob pre-feasibility study with the
initiation of hydrological studies, surface mine facility location
analysis, phase 2 metallurgical studies, deposit scale geotechnical
studies, condemnation drilling and the continuing collection of
environmental baseline data.
-- Ongoing metallurgical studies continue to focus on column leach testing
for heap leaching process design, and on gravity and flotation
concentration, which has returned initial average recoveries to
concentrate of 89% and offers a significant potential for operational
and capital cost savings. Optimization work is ongoing for these
processing alternatives, as they have potential to make significant
positive impacts on project economics.
-- The geometry of the currently defined shallowly dipping, outcropping
deposit has a low strip ratio amenable to low cost open pit mining which
could support a high production rate and economies of scale. Future
mining studies will continue to evaluate mining and processing
production rates as well as the possible introduction of a smaller mill
into the heap leach only option which recombines mill tails with heap
material for additional extraction during the heap leach process on the
leach pad.
-- The Livengood project has a very favourable logistical location, being
situated 110 road kilometres north of Fairbanks, Alaska along the paved,
all-weather Elliott Highway, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Corridor, and the
proposed Alaska natural gas pipeline route. The terminus of the Alaska
State power grid lies approximately 80 kilometres to the south.
-- ITH controls 100% of its approximately 145 square kilometre Livengood
land package, which is made up of fee land leased from the Alaska Mental
Health Trust, a number of smaller private mineral leases and 115 Alaska
state mining claims.
-- No major permitting hurdles have been identified to date.
Geological Overview
The Livengood Deposit is hosted in a thrust-interleaved sequence
of Proterozoic to Paleozoic sedimentary and volcanic rocks.
Mineralization is related to a 90 million year old (Fort Knox age)
dike swarm that cuts through the thrust stack. Primary
mineralization controls are a combination of favourable lithologies
and crosscutting structural zones. In areas distal to the main
structural zones, the selective development of disseminated
mineralization in favourable host rocks is the main mineralization
control. Within the primary structural corridors, all lithologies
can be pervasively altered and mineralized. Devonian volcanic rocks
and Cretaceous dikes represent the most favourable host lithologies
and are pervasively altered and mineralized throughout the deposit.
Two dominant structural controls are present: 1) the major shallow
south-dipping faults which host dikes and mineralization which are
related to dilatant movement on structures of the original
fold-thrust architecture during post-thrusting relaxation, and 2)
steep NW trending linear zones which focus the higher-grade
mineralization which cuts across all lithologic boundaries. The net
result is broad flat-lying zones of stratabound mineralization
around more vertically continuous, higher grade core zones with a
resulting lower strip ratio for the overall deposit and higher
grade areas that could be amenable for starter pit production.
The surface gold geochemical anomaly at Livengood covers an area
6 kilometres long by 2 kilometres wide, of which approximately half
has been explored by drilling to date. Surface exploration is
ongoing as new targets are being developed to the northeast and
west of the known deposit.
Qualified Persons and Quality Control/Quality Assurance
Tim Carew, P.Geo., of Reserva International, LLC., a mining
geo-scientist, is a Professional Geoscientist in the province of
British Columbia (No. 18453) and, as such, has acted as the
Qualified Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the June 2010
resource modeling for the Livengood deposit. Mr. Carew has a B.Sc.
degree in Geology, an M.Sc in Mineral Production Management and
more than 34 years of relevant geological and mining engineering
experience in operating, corporate and consulting environments.
Both Mr. Carew and Reserva International, LLC. are independent of
the Company under NI 43-101.
Dr. Paul D. Klipfel, Ph.D., AIPG, a consulting economic
geologist employed by Mineral Resource Services Inc., has acted as
the Qualified Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the exploration
data and supervised the preparation of the technical exploration
information on which some of this news release is based. Dr.
Klipfel has a PhD in economic geology and more than 28 years of
relevant experience as a mineral exploration geologist. He is a
Certified Professional Geologist (CPG 10821) by the American
Institute of Professional Geologists. Both Dr. Klipfel and Mineral
Resource Services Inc. are independent of the Company under NI
43-101.
Mr. William J. Pennstrom, Jr., of Pennstrom Consulting Inc., a
consulting metallurgical engineer, is acting as the Qualified
Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the metallurgy and mineral
processing programs for the Livengood deposit, and development of
the PEA project financial analysis. Mr. Pennstrom has a BS degree
in Metallurgical Engineering and a Masters degree in Business
Management. He has more than 26 years of relevant experience as a
metallurgist, having functioned as an operator, engineer, and
process consultant over this time frame. Mr. Pennstrom is also a
Qualified Professional (QP) member of the Mining and Metallurgical
Society of America. Both Mr. Pennstrom and Pennstrom Consulting
Inc. are independent of the Company under NI 43-101.
Mr. Quinton de Klerk, Director of Mining Solutions at Cube
Consulting, Perth Australia, is a consulting mining engineer
specializing in open pit design, open pit optimization and
analysis, mine design, production scheduling, due diligence
evaluations and mineral reserves reporting. He is acting as
Qualified Person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the open pit
optimization and scheduling work for the Livengood Deposit. Mr. de
Klerk has over 15 years experience in open pit mining and is a
Corporate Member of AusIMM. He holds a Mine Manager's Certificate
in South Africa and a National Higher Diploma in Metalliferous
Mining. Both Mr. de Klerk and Cube Consulting are independent of
the Company under NI 43-101.
Mr. John Bell, Sr. Project Manager at MTB Project Management
Professionals, Inc. of Denver, Colorado, is a graduate civil
engineer, with an MBA, specializing in project management, cost
estimation, project controls, construction management and contract
administration. Mr. Bell is acting as Qualified Person, defined in
NI 43-101, for capex and opex cost review for the Livengood
Project. Mr. Bell has over 46 years experience working in the
engineering and construction industry in North and South America,
Europe, Australia and Asia. He is a Life Member of the American
Society of Civil Engineers, a member of the Association for
Advancement of Cost Engineering, a member of the Institution of
Engineers, Australia and a Chartered Professional Engineer in
Australia (#172814). Both Mr. Bell and MTB Project Management
Professionals, Inc. are independent of the Company under NI
43-101.
Jeffrey A. Pontius (CPG 11044), a qualified person as defined by
National Instrument 43-101, has supervised the preparation of the
scientific and technical information that forms the basis for this
news release and has approved the disclosure herein. Mr. Pontius is
not independent of ITH, as he is the President and CEO and holds
common shares and incentive stock options.
Development work at the Livengood Project is directed by Carl E.
Brechtel (Colorado PE 23212, Nevada PE 8744), who is a qualified
person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. He is a graduate
geological engineer with an MS degree in mining engineering. He is
a member of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration
located in Denver CO, AusIMM (Australia) and SAIMM (South Africa).
Mr. Brechtel has supervised the preparation of the technical and
economic information that forms the basis for this news release and
has approved the disclosure herein. Mr. Brechtel is not independent
of ITH, as he is the COO and holds incentive stock options.
The work program at Livengood was designed and is supervised by
Chris Puchner, Chief Geologist (CPG 07048), of the Company, who is
responsible for all aspects of the work, including the quality
control/quality assurance program. On-site personnel at the project
photograph the core from each individual borehole prior to
preparing the split core. Duplicate reverse circulation drill
samples are collected with one split sent for analysis.
Representative chips are retained for geological logging. On-site
personnel at the project log and track all samples prior to sealing
and shipping. All sample shipments are sealed and shipped to ALS
Chemex in Fairbanks, Alaska for preparation and then on to ALS
Chemex in Reno, Nevada or Vancouver, B.C. for assay. ALS Chemex's
quality system complies with the requirements for the International
Standards ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 17025:1999. Analytical accuracy and
precision are monitored by the analysis of reagent blanks,
reference material and replicate samples. Quality control is
further assured by the use of international and in-house standards.
Finally, representative blind duplicate samples are forwarded to
ALS Chemex and an ISO compliant third party laboratory for
additional quality control.
About International Tower Hill Mines Ltd.
International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. is a resource exploration
company focused on the ongoing development of the advanced,
multimillion-ounce gold discovery at Livengood in Alaska. ITH is
committed to the aggressive development of the Livengood Project,
thereby giving its shareholders the maximum value for their
investment.
On behalf of International Tower Hill Mines Ltd.
Jeffrey A. Pontius, President and Chief Executive Officer
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements and
forward-looking information (collectively, "forward-looking
statements") within the meaning of applicable Canadian and US
securities legislation. All statements, other than statements of
historical fact, included herein including, without limitation,
statements regarding the anticipated content, commencement and cost
of exploration programs, anticipated exploration program results,
the discovery and delineation of mineral
deposits/resources/reserves, the potential for the expansion of the
estimated resources at Livengood, the potential for any production
at the Livengood project, the potential for higher grade
mineralization to form the basis for a starter pit component in any
production scenario, the potential low strip ratio of the Livengood
deposit being amenable for low cost open pit mining that could
support a high production rate and economies of scale, the
potential for cost savings due to the high gravity concentration
component of some of the Livengood mineralization, the completion
of a pre-feasibility study at Livengood, the potential for a
production decision to be made regarding Livengood, the potential
commencement of any development of a mine at Livengood following a
production decision, business and financing plans and business
trends, are forward-looking statements.
Information concerning mineral resource estimates and the
preliminary economic analysis thereof also may be deemed to be
forward-looking statements in that it reflects a prediction of the
mineralization that would be encountered, and the results of mining
it, if a mineral deposit were developed and mined. Although the
Company believes that such statements are reasonable, it can give
no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct.
Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words such
as: believe, expect, anticipate, intend, estimate, postulate and
similar expressions, or are those, which, by their nature, refer to
future events. The Company cautions investors that any
forward-looking statements by the Company are not guarantees of
future results or performance, and that actual results may differ
materially from those in forward looking statements as a result of
various factors, including, but not limited to, variations in the
nature, quality and quantity of any mineral deposits that may be
located, variations in the market price of any mineral products the
Company may produce or plan to produce, the Company's inability to
obtain any necessary permits, consents or authorizations required
for its activities, the Company's inability to produce minerals
from its properties successfully or profitably, to continue its
projected growth, to raise the necessary capital or to be fully
able to implement its business strategies, and other risks and
uncertainties disclosed in the Company's Annual Information Form
filed with certain securities commissions in Canada and the
Company's annual report on Form 20-F filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), and other
information released by the Company and filed with the appropriate
regulatory agencies. All of the Company's Canadian public
disclosure filings may be accessed via www.sedar.com and its United
States public disclosure filings may be accessed via www.sec.gov,
and readers are urged to review these materials, including the
technical reports filed with respect to the Company's mineral
properties.
Cautionary Note Regarding References to Resources and
Reserves
National Instrument 43 101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral
Projects ("NI 43-101") is a rule developed by the Canadian
Securities Administrators which establishes standards for all
public disclosure an issuer makes of scientific and technical
information concerning mineral projects. Unless otherwise
indicated, all resource estimates contained in or incorporated by
reference in this press release have been prepared in accordance
with NI 43-101 and the guidelines set out in the Canadian Institute
of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (the "CIM") Standards on
Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserves, adopted by the CIM Council
on November 14, 2004 (the "CIM Standards") as they may be amended
from time to time by the CIM.
United States shareholders are cautioned that the requirements
and terminology of NI 43-101 and the CIM Standards differ
significantly from the requirements and terminology of the SEC set
forth in the SEC's Industry Guide 7 ("SEC Industry Guide 7").
Accordingly, the Company's disclosures regarding mineralization may
not be comparable to similar information disclosed by companies
subject to SEC Industry Guide 7. Without limiting the foregoing,
while the terms "mineral resources", "inferred mineral resources",
"indicated mineral resources" and "measured mineral resources" are
recognized and required by NI 43-101 and the CIM Standards, they
are not recognized by the SEC and are not permitted to be used in
documents filed with the SEC by companies subject to SEC Industry
Guide 7. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not
have demonstrated economic viability, and US investors are
cautioned not to assume that all or any part of a mineral resource
will ever be converted into reserves. Further, inferred resources
have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and as to
whether they can be mined legally or economically. It cannot be
assumed that all or any part of the inferred resources will ever be
upgraded to a higher resource category. Under Canadian rules,
estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of a
feasibility study or prefeasibility study, except in rare cases.
The SEC normally only permits issuers to report mineralization that
does not constitute SEC Industry Guide 7 compliant "reserves" as
in-place tonnage and grade without reference to unit amounts. The
term "contained ounces" is not permitted under the rules of SEC
Industry Guide 7. In addition, the NI 43-101 and CIM Standards
definition of a "reserve" differs from the definition in SEC
Industry Guide 7. In SEC Industry Guide 7, a mineral reserve is
defined as a part of a mineral deposit which could be economically
and legally extracted or produced at the time the mineral reserve
determination is made, and a "final" or "bankable" feasibility
study is required to report reserves, the three-year historical
price is used in any reserve or cash flow analysis of designated
reserves and the primary environmental analysis or report must be
filed with the appropriate governmental authority.
This press release is not, and is not to be construed in any way
as, an offer to buy or sell securities in the United States.
NR10-32
Contacts: International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. Quentin Mai
Vice-President - Corporate Communications 1-888-770-7488 (toll
free) or (604) 683-6332 (604) 408-7499 (FAX)
qmai@internationaltowerhill.com International Tower Hill Mines Ltd.
Shirley Zhou Manager - Corporate Communications 1-888-770-7488
(toll free) or (604) 638-3246 (604) 408-7499 (FAX)
szhou@internationaltowerhill.com www.internationaltowerhill.com
International Tower Hill... (TSX:ITH)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jun 2024 to Jul 2024
International Tower Hill... (TSX:ITH)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jul 2023 to Jul 2024