Update on Technical Disclosure Review

1:18 PM ET, January 14, 2010

Jan 14, 2010 (TheNewswire.ca via COMTEX) -- (via Thenewswire.ca)

Vancouver, B.C.: The Company would like to clarify its November 16, 2009 news release, and state that the technical disclosure review with the British Columbia Securities Commission ("BCSC") is ongoing, and that the Company still needs to address several changes to its corporate disclosure at this time to meet securities laws requirements. The Company has submitted a draft technical report under National Instrument NI 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101") to the BCSC, and is now working to address BCSC comments and bring the technical report into compliance with NI 43-101.

The Company did not file a technical report in support of subsequent disclosure of new and updated mineral resource and reserve estimates, and is therefore not in compliance with NI 43-101. The draft technical report submitted to the BCSC is an attempt to clarify the Company's technical information on its continuous disclosure record, and after the Company addresses all BCSC comments on the draft technical report, it will be filed on SEDAR.

In addition, the Company would like to clarify that its webpage had a Fact Sheet that contained in-situ value statements that are non-compliant NI 43-101 disclosure. Gross in-situ mineral value omits the potential cost of extraction, recovery, economic viability, and potential environmental and social risks associated with developing a property. Furthermore, the Company requests all previous Fact Sheets be destroyed and a new Fact Sheet will be made available upon acceptance of the Company's draft NI 43-101 technical report with the BCSC. In addition, the Company has revised its webpage to remove any potentially misleading disclosure, and to avoid any confusion in the future.

Non-compliant Historical Estimates

As stated in its September 10, 2009 news release, resources disclosed by the Company on various occasions for the Silver Hart project are not NI 43-101 compliant. They are only historical resources, and these are not reliable because of problems with polygon areas and unsupported grade assumptions. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves. Furthermore, the Company should not have treated the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves as defined in sections 1.2 and 1.3 of NI 43-101, and these historical estimates should not be relied upon.

In addition, the Company's existing technical report "Technical Report on the CMC Silver Property" dated February 9, 2005 (the "2005 Technical Report") available on SEDAR does not support the Company's previous disclosure of historical resources and reserves on the Silver Hart property, such as

72,345 tonnes of proven and probable reserves, 33,225 tonnes of inferred resources, and resource estimates for the S and KL zones. The Company would like to specifically retract its disclosure of these estimates.

Non-Compliant Preliminary Assessment

The Company has removed from its website previous disclosure of the results of a preliminary assessment for its Silver Hart property. The Company would like to clarify that it has not done sufficient work to demonstrate the economic viability of the historical estimates contained in the preliminary assessment. Further, the Company would like to specifically retract its disclosure of the results of the preliminary assessment. Readers are cautioned that preliminary assessments based on historical estimates are not permitted under NI 43-101.

Non-Compliant Exploration Target

The Company's website previously contained historical estimates of a potential mineral deposit for the Logjam property, expressed as "numerous hundreds of thousands of tons of reserves" and "thought to be in the million ton range." The Company would like to specifically retract this disclosure.

July 29, 2009 News Release

The Company would like to clarify conclusions in its July 29, 2009 news release regarding the significance of the high grade field XRF trench values. At the time, the XRF results were unverified and only indicative of the potential assay grade. The two reported high-grade intersections are on the surface, very narrow, and appear insufficient to draw any meaningful conclusions about the continuity of high-grade material to depth. In addition, the historical estimates contain a questionable grade adjustment factor to account for suspected grade loss. The Company would like to clarify that that the resource grade is not understated, and instead the 2005 Technical Report suggests that the grade may be overstated.

Comparative Assay Results

The Company has previously disclosed analytical results using the handheld Niton XRF unit without disclosing comparative standard assay results. As a follow-up to such disclosure, the following laboratory assays and the comparisons to the XRF results are provided for the sampled TM pit veins A and B. The following are the assays at each 2 meter station over the vein strike length:

Station LineVein B Sample Number Width meters Silver gptLab=XRF Palladium gptLab=XRF Lead percentLab=XRF Zinc percent Lab=XRF Copper percent Lab=XRF Gold gpt Lab
79.00 09-1619 0.22 54,660=60,900 0.01=166.50 1.50=1.68 2.29=1.31 3.00=2.19 5.32
77.00 09-1623 0.24 31,461=34,000 BDL=87.06 2.73=2.12 1.36=0.53 1.09=0.61 2.32
75.00 09-1629 0.20 14,238=5,791 BDL=27.54 7.01=2.30 2.11=0.65 1.10/0.89 1.30
73.00 09-1634 0.22 18,995=30,400 BDL=72.95 1.90=2.63 0.87=0.64 0.54=0.95 1.21
71.00 09-1641 0.18 12,136=15,500 BDL=80.94 0.67=0.70 0.52=0.43 0.44=0.61 2.37
63.00 09-1706 0.30 21,764=9,016 BDL=BDL 1.65=0.90 0.56=0.40 0.91=0.84 0.40
61.00 09-1711 0.27 31,330=11,000 BDL=26.00 4.75=1.65 1.59=0.68 3.95=1.72 1.71
Second Vein A
75.00 09-1649 0.18 8,057=6,263 BDL=BDL 22.98=6.72 0.42=0.45 0.97=0.88 1.15
73.00 09-1659 0.30 3,811=1,739 BDL=BDL 13.06=6.80 0.33=0.40 0.50=0.64 1.47
71.00 09-1668 0.24 6,497=4,710 BDL=BDL 12.59=7.04 0.56=0.59 0.81=0.98 1.00
69.00 09-1677 0.18 3,057=2,733 BDL=BDL 10.79=6.35 0.14=0.18 0.17=0.26 0.86
67.00 09-1684 0.19 4,702=1,427 BDL=BDL 18.82=5.37 0.37=0.39 0.45=0.43 0.72
65.00 09-1695 0.23 3,929=2,139 BDL=BDL 23.28=6.49 0.25=0.36 0.55=0.74 0.65
63.00 09-1700 0.19 8,405=3,458 BDL=BDL 18.85=7.31 0.63=0.62 1.04=1.07 1.11

BDL-Below Detection Limit gpt- Grams per Tonne

Potential differences between the XRF results reported and the laboratory assays are instrumentation error, moisture content, number of readings per intersection and the comparison between in-situ readings versus a homogenized composite laboratory sample assay.

ACME Analytical Laboratories Ltd. ("Acme") in Vancouver conducted sample preparation and analysis. Sample analysis was by 7AR digest, and analyzed by ICP-ES method. Silver, Palladium and gold results are by fire assay and gravimetric finish. Standard samples, blanks, and duplicate sample assays were used for quality assurance and quality control for sample analysis.

Additional analysis is being conducted to determine the discrepancy on the Palladium between in-situ versus laboratory prepared assays. The Company would like to retract any statements in reference to the occurrence of Palladium at the Silver Hart until it has evaluated the discrepancy between the two source results.

The Company notes that the assay results in the table above are significantly higher grade than those in the historical estimates. As the Company discovered this showing in 2009, there is insufficient geological data at this time to define the continuation of the showing at depth. Additional exploration will be required in order to determine why this occurrence is substantially higher than other occurrences in the TM zone. Readers are cautioned that these grades are not representative of the average grade of the deposit.

Due to the discrepancies between the Niton XRF in-situ assays and the laboratory assays, the Company has undertaken not to disclose any XRF results in the future. It is difficult to conduct repeatability assays with an XRF instrument on an in-situ sample. Although a systematic approach was used to determine the location and number of samples to average over the sample width, the analysis area and depth for an insitu sample can only provide an assay for indicative purposes only. Moisture content, and the degree of homogeneity of the mineral matrix will bias the assay results from an XRF instrument.

Non Compliant Disclosure of Exploration Information

The Company would like to clarify and expand on disclosure of exploration information in its recent news releases:

a) in its October 19, 2009 news release, the Company only reported horizontal or drill-intercept widths. For past drilling and observed surface rock dips, the TM zone dips between 40 to 80 degrees and the M zone has displayed dips between 30 to 80 degrees. Based on a dip of 55 degrees for the TM zone and 70 degrees for the M zone, the Company would also like to disclose an estimate of true width as follows:

Drillhole/Zone From Meters To Meters Width Meters Estimated True Width Meters Pb % Zn % Ag grams/tonne
DH08-01/M 12.80 14.80 2.00 0.68 0.40 1.91 166
26.95 27.35 0.40 0.14 4.54 6.61 179
37.20 38.55 1.35 0.46 7.80 1.66 261

DH08-05/M 20.90 21.30 0.40 0.14 18.09 13.11 1099

DH08-08/M 26.60 26.90 0.30 0.27 0.39 11.70 212

DH0909-01/M 12.50 12.90 0.40 0.26 5.03 20.35 290
25.20 25.65 0.45 0.29 22.52 15.08 5150

DH09-02/M 22.80 23.50 0.70 0.45 12.64 5.79 696

DH09-03/M 26.50 27.00 0.50 0.17 5.03 1.73 169
35.50 36.00 0.50 0.17 3.64 4.53 224

DH09-05/M 23.30 24.10 0.80 0.27 3.25 11.89 493

DH09-06/M 40.30 40.80 0.50 0.32 0.04 15.34 571
44.00 44.90 0.90 0.58 1.01 5.60 195

DH09-08/M 30.90 32.30 1.40 0.90 0.07 40.63 472
DH09-11/TM 59.80 60.15 0.35 0.25 1.27 5.80 166

DH09-12/TM 40.10 40.60 0.50 0.41 3.10 21.45 2716
40.60 41.90 1.30 1.06 1.15 2.99 216

DH09-13/TM 48.20 48.80 0.60 0.34 0.05 20.39 224
49.90 50.60 0.70 0.40 0.07 24.29 665

DH09-15/TM 24.10 24.40 0.30 0.25 15.55 9.54 3985

DH09-16/TM 49.80 52.10 2.30 1.32 0.03 8.68 427

b) the Company would like provide a discussion of the procedures and the results of its Quality Assurance/Quality Control program as follows:

ACME, an accredited lab with ISO 9001 accreditation, conducted sample preparation and analysis. Sample analysis was by 7AR and 7AR.1 digest for over limit assays, and analyzed by ICP-ES method. Over limit assays on silver (>300 grams per tonne) results are by G6 fire assay and gravimetric finish. QA/QC included inserting standard samples (10 percent of samples), blanks (10 percent of samples), assay analysis reproduced (6 percent) and sample duplicates (3 percent of samples).

The 2008 and 2009 exploration programs were implemented and monitored by Don Wedman, P.Eng., President and CEO of the Company, a Qualified Person under NI 43-101 and a registered engineer with Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta ("APEGGA"). All handling, sampling and logging of the drill core was under the direction supervision of Jennifer Simper, a G.I.T. registered with APEGGA, and the program was undertaken in accordance with the Mineral Exploration Best Practice Guidelines published by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM). While Ms. Simper is not a Qualified Person under National Instrument 43-101, her work was conducted under the supervision of Don Wedman.

Regular drill site inspection of the drill core was conducted by the program geologist, Jennifer Simper to ensure proper core box labeling and meterage was recorded. All core boxes were transferred from the drill hole location to core sampling location by the drill crew and the core sampling crew. Individual core boxes were re-checked for proper labeling and photographed with a digital camera as a visual reference. Once the core has been logged and split, samples to be shipped were placed into poly-weave bags in groups that weighed less than 25 pounds to ensure they were not rejected by the carrier. The polyweave bags were labeled with the recipient's and sender's addresses on both the bag and on an attached tag, and kept locked in a secure location on the property until ready for shipping to Vancouver. Submittal notices were enclosed with each shipment noting the number of bags and number of samples. The samples were delivered by Ms. Simper to the Greyhound Canada Transportation Corp. representative at Swift River, Yukon from where they were shipped to Acme in Vancouver, BC. Acme confirmed receiving all samples as stated on the submittal notice. Acme internally monitors analytical precision and accuracy through the regular insertion of standards and duplicates into the sample stream. For further quality control, the Company included with the drill core samples, a blank or certified reference material (reference standard), inserted every fifth sample to give a total of 31 blanks and 31 standards submitted during the 2009 drill core sampling program. In addition 20 samples were repeated and 9 samples were assayed in duplicate under Acme's QA/QC program. Based on the QA/QC samples, only one duplicate sample visually seemed to be anomalous for the zinc value compared to the original assay. All other assays for the blanks didn't show carry over contamination, and all standards were within laboratory repeatability.

In accordance with the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange, trading in the common shares of the Company will remain halted from trading until after the Cease Trade Order has been lifted and the Exchange has completed its reinstatement review.

In compliance with NI 43-101, Don Wedman, P.Eng., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, is the Qualified Person who prepared or supervised the preparation of the technical information presented in this news release.

This news release was prepared on behalf of the Board of Directors, which accepts full responsibility for its contents.

On behalf of the Board:

"Don Wedman" Don Wedman, P.Eng.

CEO

CMC METALS LTD.

For further information on the Company, please contact Mr. Gord Zelko, VP Business Relations at StoxNetwork Corp. Telephone: 250-495-7123, or Email: gz@mineralstocks.com .

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Copyright (c) 2010 Thenewswire.ca - All rights reserved.