Mr. Jeffrey Pontius reports

INTERNATIONAL TOWER HILL MINES LTD. REPORTS POSITIVE PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT RESULTS-COMBINED MILLING AND HEAP LEACH PROCESSING, LIVENGOOD GOLD PROJECT, ALASKA

International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. has released results of an independently prepared preliminary economic assessment (PEA) for the Livengood gold project, Alaska.

The combined milling/heap leach PEA is based the company's June, 2010, resource estimate and produced a positive economic analysis for the conceptual project. Significantly, the PEA demonstrated a life-of-project average annual production of 504,000 recovered ounces of gold for 21 years, at a 1:1.07 strip ratio (ore to waste), indicating a pretax net present value NPV (5 per cent) of $813-million (U.S.), and an internal rate of return (IRR) of 15.4 per cent using a $950-(U.S.)-per-ounce gold price (see attached table). The study also shows the deposit has a considerable leverage to gold price, with a pretax NPV (5 per cent) of $2.3-billion (U.S.) and an IRR of 32.5 per cent at a $1,200 (U.S.) per ounce gold price (see attached table).

International Tower's management will hold a conference call on Tuesday, Aug. 3, 2010, at 2 p.m. ET/11 a.m. PT to discuss the results. All participants will be asked to register with the conference call operator. Contact numbers for the call are 1-416-641-6151/1-866-358-0067.

Livengood project highlights:

• Thirteen-million-six-hundred-thousand-ounce in-pit resource deposit with potential for over 500,000 ounces per year of production;
• Good infrastructure and favourable jurisdiction positively impacting development costs;
• Excellent potential to expand the existing deposit, upgrade in-pit resource and make new discoveries within the district;
• Favourable mining geometry and a low strip ratio;
• Potential to increase production rates substantially in future mining design with larger throughput facilities and mining fleet to maximize economies of scale;
• High recovery of gold to gravity and flotation concentrates reducing processing costs and tailings infrastructure capital costs;
• Existing highly competent and experienced labour force available in the local area.

Jeffrey Pontius, president and chief executive officer of International Tower, stated: "These initial results from the integration of the updated resource estimate and the inclusion of milling into the production plan have highlighted the project's key drivers: high annual gold production, low-ore-to-waste-strip ratio and high leverage to gold price with an early heap leach start-up component prior to mill construction. In addition, the study identified a number of opportunities to significantly add value, which include assessing increased ore production rates to reduce the current long mine life, adding certainty to reduce the current 25-per-cent contingency on capital cost and improving the mining sequencing to reduce operational cost. In addition, our ongoing exploration has good potential to both expand the deposit and discover new deposits within the district."

        LIVENGOOD PROJECT -- MILL/HEAP LEACH PEA SUMMARY
  (all values in 2010 U.S. dollars based on an $850 pit shell, mining recoverable
            in-pit resources above 0.3-gram-per-tonne-gold cut off)

In-pit resource -- indicated:             600 million tonnes at 0.65 gram per tonne gold for
                                          12.6 million contained ounces gold, 9.8 million
                                          recoverable ounces gold
In-pit resource -- inferred:               48 million tonnes at 0.64 gram per tonne gold for
                                          1.0 million contained ounces gold, 800,000
                                          recoverable ounces gold
NPV(5%) and IRR at $950 (U.S.) per ounce: $813-million (U.S.); 15.4 per cent
Over all strip ratio:                     1 to 1.07 (ore to waste)
Average annual gold production:           504,000 ounces over a 21-year mine life
Average gold recovery:                    78 per cent (76 per cent heap and 81 per cent mill)
LOM mining rate:                          81,000 ore tonnes per day, 167,000
                                          total tonnes per day
Mining cost per/tonne:                    $1.45
Mill processing cost/tonne:               $7.69
Heap leach processing cost/tonne          $2.95
G&A cost per processed tonne:             81 cents
Operating cost per ounce:                 $560
Initial capital cost:                     $635-million
Mill deferred capital cost                $750-million
Life of mine sustaining capital costs:    $450-million
Capital contingency:                      25 per cent

The company will file the final version of an NI 43-101 technical report which will include the results of this PEA on SEDAR within 45 days, and investors are urged to review the report in its entirety.

     BASE CASE GOLD PRICE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
     (all values in constant 2010 U.S. dollars)

Gold price    NPV(5%) ($M)  NPV(7.5%) ($M)      IRR (%)

$950            $813            $495              15.4%
$1,100        $1,708          $1,200              25.8%
$1,200        $2,305          $1,669              32.5%
$1,500        $4,096          $3,079              52.3%

This PEA utilized preliminary estimates of heap leach and mill recovery, assuming a nominal 76-per-cent and 81-per-cent process recovery, respectively. This estimated mill recovery is consistent with the high average recovery (89 per cent) of gold to concentrate demonstrated in the existing metallurgical testing data and the subsequent total gold recovery by CIL treatment in some of the ore types. Extensive metallurgical testing will be conducted as part of a prefeasibility 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 of International Tower, stated: "The positive results from this economic assessment will form the conceptual foundation of the Livengood project design, which is projected to consist of a large open-pit mine supplying ore to both a large mill using gravity and flotation concentration and a heap leach pad with associated gold recovery circuit. The authors of this most recent PEA will continue on as key external members of the company's owner team, providing continuity in the transition to the prefeasibility study. The prefeasibility study will address a number of optimization and enhancement opportunities to continue to improve and grow the project."

The company cautions that this PEA is preliminary in nature, and is based on technical and economic assumptions which will be evaluated in the prefeasibility 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 initial stage mill and heap leach 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 L-G optimization to produce a series of pit shells defined at varying gold prices between $300 and $1,500 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 shell defined at $850 per gold ounce was selected for the analysis to assure a minimum margin on process cost of $100 per gold ounce. The resulting pit shell at projected full extraction is shown in a figure available on-line and a series of five push backs were chosen within the shell as the basis of a production schedule that would deliver a nominal 81,000-tonne-per-day ore 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-gram-per-tonne 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-gram-per-tonne 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-gram-per-tonne mining recovery cut-off was scheduled to the waste dump.

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 currently included in the in-pit resource, and infilling the drill pattern to increase the drill density in core of the Sunshine zone and Main zone mineralization.

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 per cent of the defined in-pit ore 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. Preliminary pit designs have been developed and include pit roads and ramps for all stages of the open-pit schedule. The assumed nominal mining rate was 167,000 total tonnes per day, with 365 operating days per year.

Processing method

A valley fill heap leach design, operated initially at 100,000 tonnes of ore a day and declining to nominally 35,000 tonnes ore per day after the mill start-up in year four, was assumed for the PEA. Heap leach ore would be crushed to 1.2 centimetres 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 53,400 tonnes per day, beginning operation in year four, after three years of heap leach processing.

Gold recovery model

Process recoveries were estimated for each of 21 different mineralization types (seven rock types, three 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 3-D 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-gram-per-tonne 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 testwork. 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 were estimated from a review of recent gold projects developed in the region. Capital costs were developed based on a nominal mining rate of 81,000 tonnes of ore per day (nominal total tonnes mined per day of 167,000), processing a total of 650 million tonnes, and includes sustaining capital and all facilities and equipment needed for all phases of the project over its projected 21-year life. All costs are in constant U.S. dollars from third-quarter 2010. No escalation was applied in the financial model.

Taxes and royalties

Taxes and royalty charges were excluded from this preliminary analysis of the project. Net smelter return royalty rates vary from nil to 5 per cent across the project and average approximately 2.5 per cent, assuming exercise by the company of all available royalty buyout rights.

Revenue

Revenue was determined in the base case financial model assuming a constant, long-term gold price of $950 per 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 an attached table. This in situ resource estimate was used as the basis for the mill and heap leach PEA.

                             RESOURCE ESTIMATES

                  Gold cut-off        Tonnes        Gold             Gold
Classification            (g/t)    (millions)       (g/t)       (million ounces)

June, 2010 Livengood in situ resources (at 0.30-gram-per-tonne-gold cut-off)

Indicated                 0.30           789        0.62               15.7
Inferred                  0.30           229        0.55                4.0

June, 2010, Livengood in situ resources (at 0.50-gram-per-tonne-gold cut-off)

Indicated                 0.50           409        0.83               10.9
Inferred                  0.50            94        0.79                2.4

June, 2010, Livengood in situ resources (at 0.70-gram-per-tonne-gold cut-off)

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-gram-per-tonne gold cut-off (see attached table). 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 modelling 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 cut-offs. 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 by 15 by 10 metres, was estimated using nine indicator thresholds. A change-of-support correction was imposed on the model assuming five-by-five-by-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 prefeasibility study with the initiation of hydrological studies, surface mine facility location analysis, phase 2 metallurgical studies, deposit-scale geotechnical studies and the continuing collection of environmental baseline data.
• Continuing metallurgical studies continue to focus on gravity and flotation concentration, which has returned initial average recoveries to concentrate of 89 per cent and offers a significant potential for operational and capital cost savings. Optimization work is continuing 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 evaluate mining and processing production rates greater than analyzed in this current mill-heap leach PEA.
• 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.
• International Tower controls 100 per cent 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 ore 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 ore 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 postthrusting relaxation; and (2) steep northwest-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 six kilometres long by two kilometres wide, of which approximately half has been explored by drilling to date. Surface exploration is continuing as new targets are being developed to the northeast and west of the known deposit.

Qualified persons and quality control/quality assurance

Tim Carew, PGeo, of Reserva International LLC, a mining geo-scientist, is a professional geoscientist in the province of British Columbia (No. 18453) and, as such, is acting as the qualified person, as defined in NI 43-101, for the June, 2010, resource modelling for the Livengood deposit. Mr. Carew has a BSc degree in geology, an MSc 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 are independent of the company under NI 43-101.

Dr. Paul D. Klipfel, PhD, 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 are independent of the company under NI 43-101.

William J. Pennstrom 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 master's 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 member of the Mining and Metallurgical Society of America. Both Mr. Pennstrom and Pennstrom Consulting are independent of the company under NI 43-101.

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.

John Bell, senior project manager at MTB Project Management Professionals Inc. of Denver, Colo., 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, as 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 (No. 172814). Both Mr. Bell and MTB Project Management Professionals are independent of the company under NI 43-101.

Mr. 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 International Tower as he is the president and chief executive officer, and holds common shares and incentive stock options.

Development work at the Livengood project is directed by Mr. 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, Colo., and 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 International Tower as he is the chief operating officer 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, Nev., 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.