UNITED STATES

 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

x	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014
OR
o	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from              to

Commission file number: 000-53482

TEXAS RARE EARTH RESOURCES CORP.

 (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Delaware	87-0294969
(State of other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
539 El Paso Street
Sierra Blanca, Texas	79851
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)	(Zip Code)

(915) 369-2133

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code)

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:  None

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT:  Common Stock, par value $0.01

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes o No x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d)

of the Act.  Yes o  No  x

Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant (1)  filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes  x  No  o

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 229.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).   Yes x  No  o

Indicate by checkmark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to the Form 10-K.  o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company.  See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (Check one):

Large Accelerated Filer o         Accelerated Filer o              Non-Accelerated Filer o Smaller Reporting Company x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).  Yes o No x

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter:    As of October 29, 2014 the aggregate market value of the registrant’s voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $3,627,347 based upon the closing sale price of the common stock as reported by the OTCQX.US. For purposes of this calculation, shares of common stock held by executive officers, directors and holders of greater than 10% of the registrant's outstanding common stock are assumed to be affiliates of the registrant. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes

The number of shares of the Registrant’s common stock outstanding as of November 5, 2014 was 37,036,916.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of our Definitive Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the 2015 Annual General Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference to Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRELIMINARY NOTES	1
GLOSSARY OF TERMS	1
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS	3
PART I	4
ITEM 1.  BUSINESS	4
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS	10
ITEM 1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS	20
ITEM 2.  PROPERTIES	20
ITEM 3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	30
ITEM 4.  MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES	30
PART II	31
ITEM 5.  MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.	31
ITEM 6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA	32
ITEM 7.  MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.	32
ITEM 7A.  QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.	36
ITEM 8.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA	36
ITEM 9.  CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE	51
ITEM 9A.  CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES	51
ITEM 9B.  OTHER INFORMATION	51
PART III	52
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE	52
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION	52
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS	52
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE	52
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES	52
PART IV	53
ITEM 15.  EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES	53
SIGNATURES	55

PRELIMINARY NOTES

As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Annual Report”), references to “Texas Rare Earth”, “the Company,” “we,” “our,” “us” or “TRER” mean Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp. and its predecessors, as the context requires.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Alteration	Any physical or chemical change in a rock or mineral subsequent to its formation.
Breccia	A rock in which angular fragments are surrounded by a mass of fine-grained minerals.
Concession	A grant of a tract of land made by a government or other controlling authority in return for stipulated services or a promise that the land will be used for a specific purpose.
Core	The long cylindrical piece of a rock, about an inch in diameter, brought to the surface by diamond drilling.
Diamond drilling	A drilling method in which the cutting is done by abrasion using diamonds embedded in a matrix rather than by percussion.  The drill cuts a core of rock, which is recovered in long cylindrical sections.
Drift	A horizontal underground opening that follows along the length of a vein or rock formation as opposed to a cross-cut which crosses the rock formation.
Exploration	Work involved in searching for ore, usually by drilling or driving a drift.
Exploration expenditures	Costs incurred in identifying areas that may warrant examination and in examining specific areas that are considered to have prospects that may contain mineral deposit reserves.
Grade	The average assay of a ton of ore, reflecting metal content.
Host rock	The rock surrounding an ore deposit.
Intrusive	A body of igneous rock formed by the consolidation of magma intruded into other rocks, in contrast to lavas, which are extruded upon the surface.
Lode	A mineral deposit in solid rock.
Ore	The naturally occurring material from which a mineral or minerals of economic value can be extracted profitably or to satisfy social or political objectives. The term is generally but not always used to refer to metalliferous material, and is often modified by the names of the valuable constituent; e.g., iron ore.
Ore body	A continuous, well-defined mass of material of sufficient ore content to make extraction economically feasible.
Mine development	The work carried out for the purpose of opening up a mineral deposit and making the actual ore extraction possible.
Mineral	A naturally occurring homogeneous substance having definite physical properties and chemical composition, and if formed under favorable conditions, a definite crystal forms.
Mineralization	The presence of minerals in a specific area or geological formation.
Mineral Reserve	That part of a mineral deposit which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserve determination.  Reserves are customarily stated in terms of “Ore” when dealing with metalliferous minerals.
Probable (Indicated) Reserves	Reserves for which quantity and grade and/or quality are computed from information similar to that used for proven (measured) reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling, and measurement are farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced.  The degree of assurance, although lower than that for proven (measured) reserves, is high enough to assume continuity between points of observation.

1

Prospect	A mining property, the value of which has not been determined by exploration.
Proven (Measured) Reserves	Reserves for which (a) quantity is computed from dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade and/or quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling and (b) the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely and the geologic character is so well defined that size, shape, depth and mineral content of reserves are well-established.
Tonne	A metric ton which is equivalent to 2,200 pounds.
Trend	A general term for the direction or bearing of the outcrop of a geological feature of any dimension, such as a layer, vein, ore body, or fold.
Unpatented mining claim	A parcel of property located on federal lands pursuant to the General Mining Law and the requirements of the state in which the unpatented claim is located, the paramount title of which remains with the federal government. The holder of a valid, unpatented lode-mining claim is granted certain rights including the right to explore and mine such claim.
Vein	A mineralized zone having a more or less regular development in length, width, and depth, which clearly separates it from neighboring rock.

2

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (collectively, “forward-looking statements”). Such forward-looking statements concern the Company’s anticipated results and developments in the Company’s operations in future periods, planned exploration and development of its properties, plans related to its business and other matters that may occur in the future.  These statements relate to analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determinable and assumptions of management.

Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, “plans”, “estimates” or “intends”, or stating that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking statements.  Forward-looking statements in this Annual Report include, but are not limited to:

· the progress, potential and uncertainties of our 2014-2015 rare-earth exploration program at our Round Top Project, located near Sierra Blanca, Texas (the “Round Top Project”);

· timing for an updated Preliminary Economic Assessment for our Round Top Project

· the success of getting the necessary permits for future drill programs and future project exploration;

· expectations regarding the ability to raise capital and to continue our exploration plans on its properties; and

· plans regarding anticipated expenditures at the Round Top Project.

Forward-looking statements are subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, without limitation:

· risks associated with our ability to continue as a going concern;

· risks associated with our history of losses and need for additional financing;

· risks associated with our limited operating history;

· risks associated with our properties all being in the exploration stage;

· risks associated with our lack of history in producing metals from our properties;

· risks associated with a shortage of equipment and supplies;

· risks associated with our need for additional financing to develop a producing mine, if warranted;

· risks associated with our exploration activities not being commercially successful;

· risks associated with ownership of surface rights at our Round Top Project;

· risks associated with increased costs affecting our financial condition;

· risks associated with a shortage of equipment and supplies adversely affecting our ability to operate;

· risks associated with mining and mineral exploration being inherently dangerous;

· risks associated with mineralization estimates;

· risks associated with changes in mineralization estimates affecting the economic viability of our properties;

· risks associated with uninsured risks;

· risks associated with mineral operations being subject to market forces beyond our control;

· risks associated with fluctuations in commodity prices;

· risks associated with permitting, licenses and approval processes;

· risks associated with the governmental and environmental regulations;

· risks associated with future legislation regarding the mining industry and climate change;

· risks associated with potential environmental lawsuits;

· risks associated with our land reclamation requirements;

· risks associated with rare earth and beryllium mining presenting potential health risks;

· risks related to title in our properties

· risks related to competition in the mining and rare earth elements industries;

· risks related to economic conditions;

· risks related to our ability to manage growth;

· risks related to the potential difficulty of attracting and retaining qualified personnel;

· risks related to our dependence on key personnel;

· risks related to our United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) filing history; and

· risks related to our securities.

This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect the Company’s forward-looking statements. Some of the important risks and uncertainties that could affect forward-looking statements are described further under the section headings “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of this Annual Report. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, believed, estimated or expected. The Company cautions readers not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. Except as required by law, the Company disclaims any obligation subsequently to revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events. We qualify all the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report by the foregoing cautionary statements.

3

PART I

 ITEM 1.  BUSINESS

Corporate Organization and History

We were incorporated in the State of Nevada in 1970 as Standard Silver Corporation.  In July 2004, our Articles of Incorporation were amended and restated to increase the number of shares of common stock to 25,000,000, and in March 2007, we affected a 1 for 2 reverse stock split.  In September 2008, we amended and restated our Articles of Incorporation to:  (i) increase of the number of shares of common stock from 25,000,000 to 100,000,000; and to (ii) authorize an additional 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, to be issued at management’s discretion.  In September 2010, we amended our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to change our name from Standard Silver Corporation to Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp.

On August 24, 2012, we changed our state of incorporation from the State of Nevada to the State of Delaware (the “Reincorporation”) pursuant to a plan of conversion dated August 24, 2012.   The Reincorporation was previously submitted to a vote of, and approved by, our stockholders at a special meeting of the stockholders held on April 25, 2012.

Our common stock is traded on the OTCQX U.S. operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. under the symbol “TRER.”  The market for our common stock on the OTCQX U.S. is extremely limited, sporadic and highly volatile. 

Our fiscal year-end is August 31.

Narrative Description of Business

We are a mining company engaged in the business of the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties.  We currently hold two nineteen year leases, executed in September 2011 and November 2011 respectively, to explore and develop a 950 acre rare earths project located in Hudspeth County, Texas known as the Round Top Project.  We also have prospecting permits covering 9,345 acres adjacent to the Round Top Project.  Our principal focus is on developing a metallurgical process to concentrate or otherwise extract the metals from the Round Top Project’s rhyolite, although we will continue to examine other opportunities in the region as they develop. We currently have limited operations and have not established that any of our projects or properties contain any Proven or Probable Reserves under SEC Industry Guide 7 (“Guide 7”).

On November 8, 2011, we announced that our supplementary operating plan to expand exploration activities at our Round Top Project had been approved by the Texas General Land Office (GLO); the expanded development and exploration drill plan called for an additional 40 drill holes and 4 diamond core holes for an estimated planned drilled footage of 20,000 feet. The program included 4,000 feet of Core drilling to establish a high level of confidence in the mineralization, provide physical engineering data and additional metallurgical sample. During 2011-2012 the permits were amended and there were 41,765 feet of reverse circulation drilling and 1,294.5 feet of core drilling done on Round Top.

On March 20, 2012, we submitted for approval an updated plan of operations.  The updated plan of operations consisted of the reclassification of the drilling program through to a feasibility study into three phases.  Phase 1 consists of 25 drill locations, phase 2 consists of 41 drill locations and phase 3 consists of 27 drill locations all located on the Round Top Project.   The plan of operations also included two locations for 100 ton bulk sample collection for additional metallurgical tests. We have suspended this phase of physical exploration and development at the Round Top Project pending development of a metallurgical process to extract the potentially marketable metals.

On June 22, 2012, we published our Preliminary Economic Assessment for our Round Top Project, entitled “NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment Round Top Project, Sierra Blanca, Texas,” dated June 22, 2012, effective as of May 15, 2012 (the “PEA”).

On October 3, 2012, our management released updated economic projections related to various revisions to the proposed mine plan presented in the PEA.

On March 6, 2013, we purchased the surface lease at the Round Top Project, known as the West Lease, from the Southwest Wildlife and Range Foundation (the “Foundation”) for $500,000 cash and 1,063,830 shares of our common stock. We also agreed to support the Foundation through an annual payment of $45,000 for ten years to support conservation efforts within the Rio Grande Basin and in particular engaging in stewardship of Lake Amistad, a large and well-known fishing lake near Del Rio, Texas. The West Lease comprises approximately 54,990 acres and is fully paid until 2028, thereby having a lease value of approximately $1,364,852. Most importantly, purchase of the surface lease gave us unrestricted surface access for the potential development and mining of our Round Top Project.

On May 8, 2013, we released testing results by an independent laboratory of the leaching characteristic of the rhyolite at our Round Top Project, which demonstrates characteristics that may be favorable to heap leach mining at the Round Top Project.  These leaching characteristics are described in greater detail below under the section heading “Item 2. Properties – Round Top Project – Metallurgy”.

4

On September 30, 2013 we released the results on column leach testing by an independent laboratory and announced our intention to issue a revised PEA based on a heap leach operation designed to produce approximately 2,500 tons per year of heavy rare earth elements plus yttrium.  The column leach testing results are described in greater detail below under the section heading “Item 2. Properties – Round Top Project – Metallurgy”.

On December 23, 2013, we published a revised version of the June 2012 Preliminary Economic Assessment (the “Revised PEA”) based on a 20,000 tonne per day heap leach operation using a conventional element separation plant. The mineralized material estimate was recalculated to include uranium, niobium, tantalum and tin. The Revised PEA assesses the potential economic viability of the simplified and "scaled down” operation which we believe is a much better fit with the present rare earth market.

On September 8, 2014, we announced that we had completed an internal analysis suggesting that there is a reasonable possibility to adapt a lower volume staged growth approach to development of our Round Top project.  The analysis indicated that an operation designed to produce a selected group of separated REE products in the range of 350-450 tonnes per year range, could potentially yield favorable mine economics.  The goal of the proposed staged approach would be to increase mining rates if and when our products gained acceptability.  The analysis suggested that capital needs in the Revised PEA could be proportionally reduced in relation to the lower volume initial stage. We are currently conducting a more detailed analysis of the relative capital expenses and operating expenses requirements of a scaled down processing plant with both solvent extraction and ion exchange processes under evaluation. We believe the lower capital requirements of a staged startup could offset any marginal increase in unit operating costs.

On October 29, 2014, we announced that we had executed agreements with the Texas General Land Office securing the option to purchase the surface rights covering the potential Round Top project mine and plant areas and, separately, a lease to develop the water necessary for the potential Round Top project mine operations.

The option to purchase the surface rights covers approximately 5,670 acres over the mining lease and the additional acreage adequate to site all potential heap leaching and processing operations as currently anticipated by the Company. We may exercise the option for all or part of the option acreage at any time during the sixteen year primary term of the mineral lease. The option can be kept current by an annual payment of $10,000. The purchase price will be the appraised value of the surface at the time of exercising the option.

The ground water lease secures our right to develop the ground water within a 13,120 acre lease area located approximately 4 miles from the Round Top deposit. The lease area contains five existing water wells. It is anticipated that all potential water needs for the Round Top project mine operations would be satisfied by the existing wells covered by this water lease. This lease has an annual minimum production payment of $5,000 prior to production of water for the operation. After initiation of production we will pay $0.95 per thousand gallons or $20,000 annually, whichever is greater. This lease remains effective as long as the mineral lease is in effect.

Cautionary Note to Investors: The PEA and Revised PEA have been prepared in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 — Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”) and the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (the “CIM”) — CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves, adopted by the CIM Council, as amended. The Company has voluntarily had the PEA and Revised PEA prepared in accordance with NI 43-101 but the Company is not subject to regulation by Canadian regulatory authorities and no Canadian regulatory authority has reviewed the PEA or Revised PEA or passed upon its accuracy or compliance with NI 43-101. The terms “mineral reserve”, “proven mineral reserve” and “probable mineral reserve” are Canadian mining terms as defined in accordance with NI 43-101. These definitions differ from the definitions in SEC Industry Guide 7 under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Under SEC Industry Guide 7 standards, a “final” or “bankable” feasibility study is required to report reserves, the three-year historical average price is used in any reserve or cash flow analysis to designate reserves and the primary environmental analysis or report must be filed with the appropriate governmental authority. In addition, the terms “mineral resource”, “measured mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource” are defined in NI 43-101; however, these terms are not defined terms under SEC Industry Guide 7 and are normally not permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the SEC. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists or is economically or legally mineable. Disclosure of “contained ounces” in a resource is permitted disclosure under Canadian regulations; however, the SEC normally only permits issuers to report mineralization that does not constitute “reserves” by SEC Industry Guide 7 standards as in place tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures. Accordingly, information in the PEA and Revised PEA contains descriptions of our mineral deposits that may not be comparable to similar information made public by United States companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements under the United States federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Our project as described in the PEA and Revised PEA currently does not contain any known proven or probable ore reserves under SEC Industry Guide 7 reporting standards. U.S. investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in the Registrant’s latest reports and registration statements filed with the SEC. U.S. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any defined resources in these categories will ever be converted into SEC Guide 7 compliant reserves.

5

Current and Planned Exploration Activities

We are currently evaluating the possibility of a “phased startup of the Round Top Operation. Capital requirements, operation parameters and market penetration for an approximately 3,500 tonnes per day operation producing approximately 400 tonnes per year of finished and separated rare earth oxide products is being analyzed.

Regardless of the ultimate size of the operation we are carrying the project forward in three stages:

Stage 1

Stage 1 is referred to as the purification step and will be implemented in two parts:

(1) Bench scale evaluation of the solvent extraction process.

(2) Bench scale evaluation of the ion exchange process.

Stage 2

Stage 2 will consist of the pilot plant scale testing of the process proven most effective by Stage 1, and will consist of the work required to bring the processing plant into full feasibility with capital and operating costs estimated to an accuracy range of 10 -15%. Stage 2 will also develop the heap leach procedure to pre-feasibility level with capital and operating estimated to an accuracy of 25 - 35%. Environmental base line studies and initial co-ordination with the Texas regulatory agencies will be included in this stage.

Stage 3

Stage 3 will bring the Round Top Project to full feasibility level with all electrical power and water needs developed, final engineering of heap leach systems, mine design and engineering, geotechnical drilling and construction planning, and permitting in place. Additional drilling to bring all of the rock included in the 20 year pit to a measured or indicated resourced category.

Trends – Rare-Earth Market

Rare earth elements (or “REEs”) are a group of chemically similar elements that usually are found together in nature; they are referred to as the “lanthanide series.” These individual elements have a variety of characteristics that are important in a wide range of technologies, products, and applications and are critical inputs in existing and emerging applications including: computer hard drives, cell phones, clean energy technologies, such as hybrid and electric vehicles and wind power turbines; multiple high-tech uses, including fiber optics, lasers and hard disk drives; numerous defense applications, such as guidance and control systems and global positioning systems; and advanced water treatment technology for use in industrial, military and outdoor recreation applications. As a result, global demand for REE is projected to steadily increase due to continuing growth in existing applications and increased innovation and development of new end uses.  Interest in developing resources domestically has become a strategic necessity as there is limited production of these elements outside of China.  Our ability to raise additional funds in order to complete our plan of exploration and, if warranted, development at the Round Top Project may be impacted by future prices for REEs.

Pricing for REEs has experienced significant volatility over the past several years, but current prices for all REEs remain significantly higher than pre-2010 levels, although they have fallen from the peak levels seen in 2011. According to www.metal-pages.com (“Metal-Pages”) REE prices increased from mid-2010 to mid-2011 approximately 2,000 to 3,000 percent, depending on the element, and then REE prices began decreasing through the end of 2011. REO prices of individual oxides increased considerably during the first two quarters of 2011 but declined thereafter through to the end of the year.  Beginning in the second quarter of 2012, REE prices have decreased significantly for all REEs.

Pricing is affected by a number of factors, including the general health of the global economy, efforts to institute greater environmental reforms in China, industry consolidation, stockpile build-ups in China and by consumers and governments, lack of certainty regarding future REE production, development and continued use of REE technologies, potential oversupply, potential substitution of other metals, and potential for recycling REEs.

REE supply markets continue to be dominated by China, which produced an estimated 86% of the global REE production in 2012. IMCOA forecasts that global rare earth supply will increase to 180,000 mt in 2016, with China producing approximately 65% of that total. In relation to global REE demand, based on the IMCOA Report, REE total demand is forecasted to increase from 115,000 tonnes in 2012 to 162,500 tonnes in 2016.  It is forecasted that the demand for REE will increase at a rate of eight to 10 percent per year for the next five to 10 years, but this is dependent on continued development and use of REEs in new technologies.

6

We plan on focusing primarily on so-called “heavy” rare earth elements (HREE). The supply market for HREEs is dominated by the Chinese who control approximately 99% of the market.  In addition to the pricing influences mentioned above applicable to all REEs, pricing of HREEs in the future is expected to be highly influenced by China policies of HREE supply and China stockpile buildups.

Sources and Availability of Raw Materials

We are currently in the exploration stage and as such we do not require any significant raw materials in order to carry out our primary operating activities. Our primary operating objective is to explore and develop the Round Top Project. For at least the next year, we expect to continue to require the use of contract drilling services in order to obtain additional geological information. In the past year we have been able to secure contract drilling services without excessive delay and costs. We except the contract drilling services will continue to be available over the next year.

The raw materials that our current operations rely on are gasoline and diesel fuel for the exploration vehicles and for the heavy equipment required to build roads and conduct drilling operations. Water is provided per service contract by Eagle Mountain Gang which is used for the drilling operations.

Seasonality

Seasonality in the State of Texas is not a material factor to our operations for our project.

Competition

The mining industry is highly competitive.  We compete with numerous companies, substantially all with greater financial resources available to them.  We therefore are operating at a significant disadvantage in the course of acquiring mining properties and obtaining materials, supplies, labor, and equipment.  Additionally, we are and will continue to be an insignificant participant in the business of exploration and mineral property development.  A large number of established and well-financed companies are active in the mining industry and will have an advantage over us if they are competing for the same properties.  Nearly all such entities have greater financial resources, technical expertise and managerial capabilities than ourselves and, consequently, we will be at a competitive disadvantage in identifying possible mining properties and procuring the same.

China accounts for the vast majority of rare earth element production.  While rare earth element projects exist outside of China, very few are in actual production. Further, given the timeline for current exploration projects to come into production, if at all, it is likely that the Chinese will be able to dominate the market for rare earth elements into the future.  This gives the Chinese a competitive advantage in controlling the supply of rare earth elements and engaging in competitive price reductions to discourage competition.  Any increase in the amount of rare earth elements exported from other nations, and increased competition, may result in price reductions, reduced margins and loss of potential market share, any of which could materially adversely affect our profitability. As a result of these factors, we may not be able to compete effectively against current and future competitors.

Government Approvals

The exploration, drilling and mining industries operate in a legal environment that requires permits to conduct virtually all operations.  Thus permits are required by local, state and federal government agencies.   Local authorities, usually counties, also have control over mining activity.  The various permits address such issues as prospecting, development, production, labor standards, taxes, occupational health and safety, toxic substances, air quality, water use, water discharge, water quality, noise, dust, wildlife impacts, as well as other environmental and socioeconomic issues.

Prior to receiving the necessary permits to explore or mine, the operator must comply with all regulatory requirements imposed by all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the project area.  Very often, in order to obtain the requisite permits, the operator must have its land reclamation, restoration or replacement plans pre-approved. Specifically, the operator must present its plan as to how it intends to restore or replace the affected area. Often all or any of these requirements can cause delays or involve costly studies or alterations of the proposed activity or time frame of operations, in order to mitigate impacts.  All of these factors make it more difficult and costly to operate and have a negative and sometimes fatal impact on the viability of the exploration or mining operation. Finally, it is possible that future changes in these laws or regulations could have a significant impact on our business, causing those activities to be economically reevaluated at that time.

Effect of Existing or Probable Government and Environmental Regulations

Mineral exploration, including mining operations are subject to governmental regulation. Our operations may be affected in varying degrees by government regulation such as restrictions on production, price controls, tax increases, expropriation of property, environmental and pollution controls or changes in conditions under which minerals may be marketed. An excess supply of certain minerals may exist from time to time due to lack of markets, restrictions on exports, and numerous factors beyond our control. These factors include market fluctuations and government regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties, allowable production and importing and exporting minerals. The effect of these factors cannot be accurately determined, and we are not aware of any probable government regulations that would impact the Company.  This section is intended as a brief overview of the laws and regulations described herein and is not intended to be a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter.

7

Overview.  Like all other mining companies doing business in the United States, we are subject to a variety of federal, state and local statutes, rules and regulations designed to protect the quality of the air and water, and threatened or endangered species, in the vicinity of its operations. These include “permitting” or pre-operating approval requirements designed to ensure the environmental integrity of a proposed mining facility, operating requirements designed to mitigate the effects of discharges into the environment during exploration, mining operations, and reclamation or post-operation requirements designed to remediate the lands affected by a mining facility once commercial mining operations have ceased.

Federal legislation in the United States and implementing regulations adopted and administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies—in particular, legislation such as the federal Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Forest Management Act, the Wilderness Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act—have a direct bearing on domestic mining operations. These federal initiatives are often administered and enforced through state agencies operating under parallel state statutes and regulations.

The Clean Water Act.  The federal Clean Water Act is the principal federal environmental protection law regulating mining operations in the United States as it pertains to water quality.

At the state level, water quality is regulated by the Environment Department, Water and Waste Management Division under the Water Quality Act (state). If our exploration or any future development activities might affect a ground water aquifer, it will have to apply for a Ground Water Discharge Permit from the Ground Water Quality Bureau in compliance with the Groundwater Regulations. If exploration affects surface water, then compliance with the Surface Water Regulations is required.

The Clean Air Act.  The federal Clean Air Act establishes ambient air quality standards, limits the discharges of new sources and hazardous air pollutants and establishes a federal air quality permitting program for such discharges. Hazardous materials are defined in the federal Clean Air Act and enabling regulations adopted under the federal Clean Air Act to include various metals. The federal Clean Air Act also imposes limitations on the level of particulate matter generated from mining operations.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  NEPA requires all governmental agencies to consider the impact on the human environment of major federal actions as therein defined.

Endangered Species Act (ESA).  The ESA requires federal agencies to ensure that any action authorized, funded or carried out by such agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. In order to facilitate the conservation of imperiled species, the ESA establishes an interagency consultation process. When a federal agency proposes an action that “may affect” a listed species, it must consult with the USFWS and must prepare a “biological assessment” of the effects of a major construction activity if the USFWS advises that a threatened species may be present in the area of the activity.

National Forest Management Act.  The National Forest Management Act, as implemented through title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, provides a planning framework for lands and resource management of the National Forests. The planning framework seeks to manage the National Forest System resources in a combination that best serves the public interest without impairment of the productivity of the land, consistent with the Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960.

Wilderness Act.  The Wilderness Act of 1964 created a National Wilderness Preservation System composed of federally owned areas designated by Congress as “wilderness areas” to be preserved for future use and enjoyment.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).  CERCLA imposes clean-up and reclamation responsibilities with respect to discharges into the environment, and establishes significant criminal and civil penalties against those persons who are primarily responsible for such discharges.

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).  RCRA was designed and implemented to regulate the disposal of solid and hazardous wastes. It restricts solid waste disposal practices and the management, reuse or recovery of solid wastes and imposes substantial additional requirements on the subcategory of solid wastes that are determined to be hazardous. Like the Clean Water Act, RCRA provides for citizens’ suits to enforce the provisions of the law.

National Historic Preservation Act.  The National Historic Preservation Act was designed and implemented to protect historic and cultural properties. Compliance with the Act is necessary where federal properties or federal actions are undertaken, such as mineral exploration on federal land, which may impact historic or traditional cultural properties, including native or Indian cultural sites.

In the fiscal year ended August 31, 2013, we incurred minimal costs in complying with environmental laws and regulations in relation to our operating activities.  Costs in the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014 will be substantially similar, but slightly lower due to our anticipated decreased drilling activities at our Round Top Project.

8

Employees

Including our executive officers, we currently have three fulltime employees.  We also retain qualified technical contractors through a third party administrator and utilize the services of qualified consultants with geological and mineralogical expertise.

Available Information

We make available, free of charge, on or through our Internet website, at www.trer.com our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and our current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Our Internet website and the information contained therein or connected thereto are not intended to be, and are not incorporated into this Annual Report.

Our filings can also be viewed at our corporate offices, located at 539 El Paso Street, Sierra Blanca, Texas 79851. Our reports, registration statements and other information can be inspected on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and such information can also be inspected and copies ordered at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC at the following location: Judiciary Plaza, 100 F Street NE, Washington, D.C. 20549.

Executive Officers of the Company

The following table sets forth certain information regarding our executive officers as of October 29, 2014.

Name	Age	Position
Daniel E. Gorski	77	Chief Executive Officer and Director
G.W. “Mike” McDonald	79	Chief Financial Officer
Laura Lynch	56	Vice President of External Affairs

Daniel E. Gorski - Mr. Gorski has severed as a director of the Company since January 2006 and as the Company’s chief operating officer since May 2011. Prior thereto, Mr. Gorski served as the Company’s president and chief executive officer from January 2007 to May 2011. From July 2004 to January 2006, Mr. Gorski was the co-founder and vice president of operations for High Plains Uranium Inc., a uranium exploration and development company that went public on the Toronto Stock Exchange in December 2005. Between June 1996 to May 2004, Mr. Gorski served as an officer and director of Metalline Mining Co., a publicly traded mining and development company with holdings in the Sierra Mojada Mining District, Coahuila, Mexico. From January 1992 to June 1996, Mr. Gorski was the exploration geologist under contract to USMX Inc. and worked exclusively in Latin America. Mr. Gorski earned a BS in 1960 from Sul Ross State College, in Alpine, Texas and an MA in 1970 from the University of Texas in Austin, Texas. Mr. Gorski has over forty-three years of experience in the mining industry.

G.W. “Mike” McDonald – Mr. McDonald received a BS in geology from Sul Ross State College in 1959. He has over 40 years of experience in all phases of oil and gas exploration, development, and production. Mr. McDonald worked for Shell Oil Company in their East Texas, Rocky Mountain and West Coast Divisions from 1960 until 1975. Mr. McDonald handled public relations and governmental affairs for Shell. He was also responsible for Shell’s field operations, including pipeline rights-of-way, well locations, Indian affairs, lease and production purchases. From 1975 until 1980, Mr. McDonald worked for Exxon Corporation in their East Texas Division where, among other duties, he negotiated lease and production purchases. In 1980, Mr. McDonald founded Roseland Oil & Gas Inc., a publicly traded oil and gas exploration and production company, with operations in Texas, Wyoming, Utah and Washington. In 1987, Mr. McDonald sold his interest in Roseland and since has been engaged in exploration and production of oil and gas for his own account and through joint ventures. In addition to Mr. McDonald’s oil and gas business, in 1991, he was President of Ferex Corporation, a publicly traded company, engaged in the business of recycling scrap metals, both ferrous and non-ferrous.  Mr. McDonald previously served as the Chief Financial Officer and Vice President of the TRER from January 2004 to December 1, 2010, and on the board of directors from January 2004 to March 2011.

Laura Lynch - Ms. Lynch is a graduate of the University of Texas at Austin. Ms. Lynch is currently a Partner at the CL Ranch, a ranching/farming/mining operation in Hudspeth County. CL ranch is active in the mining and distribution of gypsum. Ms. Lynch has deep ties to the El Paso, Ft. Worth and Austin business communities and currently works as a consultant to the Registrant pursuant to a consulting agreement in which Ms. Lynch assists the Registrant in community relations and land acquisition.

9

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

The following sets forth certain risks and uncertainties that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and/or results of operations, and the trading price of our common stock which may decline and investors may lose all or part of their investment. These risk factors should be considered along with the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K because these factors could cause our actual results or financial condition to differ materially from those projected in forward-looking statements.  Additional risks and uncertainties that we do not presently know or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations. We cannot assure you that we will successfully address these risks or that other unknown risks exist that may affect our business.

Risk Related to Our Business

Our ability to operate as a going concern is in doubt.

The audit opinion and notes that accompany our consolidated financial statements for the year ended August 31, 2014, disclose a ‘going concern’ qualification to our ability to continue in business. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. We are an exploration stage company and we have incurred losses since our inception. We do not have sufficient cash to fund normal operations and meet debt obligations for the next 12 months without deferring payment on certain current liabilities and raising additional funds.

We currently have no historical recurring source of revenue and our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on our ability to raise capital to fund our future exploration and working capital requirements or our ability to profitably execute our business plan. Our plans for the long-term return to and continuation as a going concern include financing our future operations through sales of our common stock and/or debt and the eventual profitable exploitation of our mining properties. Additionally, the current capital markets and general economic conditions in the United States are significant obstacles to raising the required funds. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern. If the going concern basis were not appropriate for these financial statements, adjustments would be necessary in the carrying value of assets and liabilities, the reported expenses and the balance sheet classifications used.

We have a history of losses and will require additional financing to fund exploration and, if warranted, development and production of our properties.  Failure to obtain additional financing could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operation and could cast uncertainty on our ability to continue as a going concern.

We had no revenues during the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014.  For the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014, our net loss was approximately $2,800,000. Our accumulated deficit at August 31, 2014 was approximately $29,299,000. At August 31, 2014, our cash position was approximately $388,000 and our working capital was approximately $239,000.  We have not commenced commercial production on any of our mineral properties. We have no revenues from operations and anticipate we will have no operating revenues until we place one or more of our properties into production. All of our properties are in the exploration stage.

We will need to raise additional funding to implement our business strategy.  Our management believes that based on our current working capital, we will only be able to continue operations through the end of calendar year 2014 without raising additional capital.  

During the current fiscal year ending August 31, 2015, we plan to initiate Stage 1of our metallurgical activities as discussed in the section heading “ITEM 2. PROPERTIES” of this Annual Report.  Our budget for this stage of activity is approximately $508,000.  We anticipate that our financing efforts will raise sufficient capital to finish Stage 1 but there is no guarantee that we will be able to raise the working capital necessary for Stage 1 activities. After completion of Stage 1, we will use any remaining available capital to begin work on Stage 2 of our metallurgical activities.  Currently, we anticipate that general and administrative expenses in the fiscal year ending August 31, 2015 will be approximately $700,000.

We currently do not have sufficient funds to fully complete exploration and development work on any of our properties, which means that we will be required to raise additional capital, enter into joint venture relationships or find alternative means to finance placing one or more of our properties into commercial production, if warranted. Failure to obtain sufficient financing may result in the delay or indefinite postponement of exploration and development or production on one or more of our properties and any properties we may acquire in the future or even a loss of property interests. This includes our leases over claims covering the principal deposits on our properties, which may expire unless we expend minimum levels of expenditures over the terms of such leases. We cannot be certain that additional capital or other types of financing will be available if needed or that, if available, the terms of such financing will be favorable or acceptable to us. Our ability to arrange additional financing in the future will depend, in part, on the prevailing capital market conditions as well as our business performance.

The most likely source of future financing presently available to us is through the sale of our securities. Any sale of our shares of common stock will result in dilution of equity ownership to existing stockholders. This means that if we sell shares of common stock, more shares will be outstanding and each existing stockholder will own a smaller percentage of the shares then outstanding.  Alternatively, we may rely on debt financing and assume debt obligations that require us to make substantial interest and capital payments.  Also, we may issue or grant warrants or options in the future pursuant to which additional shares of common stock may be issued. Exercise of such warrants or options will result in dilution of equity ownership to our existing stockholders.

10

We have a limited operating history on which to base an evaluation of our business and properties.

Any investment in the Company should be considered a high-risk investment because investors will be placing funds at risk in an early stage business with unforeseen costs, expenses, competition, a history of operating losses and other problems to which start-up ventures are often subject. Investors should not invest in the Company unless they can afford to lose their entire investment.  Your investment must be considered in light of the risks, expenses, and difficulties encountered in establishing a new business in a highly competitive and mature industry.  Our operating history has been restricted to the acquisition and sampling of our Round Top Project and this does not provide a meaningful basis for an evaluation of our Round Top Project.  Other than through conventional and typical exploration methods and procedures, we have no additional way to evaluate the likelihood of whether our Round Top Project or our other mineral properties contain commercial quantities of mineral reserves or, if they do, that they will be operated successfully.  We anticipate that we will continue to incur operating costs without realizing any revenues during the period when we are exploring our properties.

All of our properties are in the exploration stage. There is no assurance that we can establish the existence of any mineral reserve on any of our properties in commercially exploitable quantities. Until we can do so, we cannot earn any revenues from these properties, and our business could fail.

We have not established that any of our properties contain any mineral reserve, nor can there be any assurance that we will be able to do so.  The probability of an individual prospect ever having a mineral reserve that meets the requirements of the SEC is extremely remote. Even if we do eventually discover a mineral reserve on one or more of our properties, there can be no assurance that they can be developed into producing mines and extract those minerals. Both mineral exploration and development involve a high degree of risk and few properties, which are explored, are ultimately developed into producing mines.

The commercial viability of an established mineral deposit will depend on a number of factors including, by way of example, the size, grade and other attributes of the mineral deposit, the proximity of the deposit to infrastructure such as a smelter, roads and a point for shipping, government regulation and market prices. Most of these factors will be beyond our control, and any of them could increase costs and make extraction of any identified mineral deposit unprofitable.

Even if commercial viability of a mineral deposit is established, it may take several years in the initial phases of drilling until production is possible, during which time the economic feasibility of production may change. Substantial expenditures are required to establish proven and probable reserves through drilling and bulk sampling, to determine the optimal metallurgical process to extract the metals from the ore and, in the case of new properties, to construct mining and processing facilities. Because of these uncertainties, no assurance can be given that our exploration programs will result in the establishment or expansion of a mineral deposit or reserves.

We have no history of producing metals from our mineral properties.

We have no history of producing metals from any of our properties. Our properties are all exploration stage properties in various stages of exploration and evaluation. Our Round Top Project is an early exploration stage project. Advancing properties from exploration into the development stage requires significant capital and time, and successful commercial production from a property, if any, will be subject to completing feasibility studies, permitting and construction of the mine, processing plants, roads, and other related works and infrastructure. As a result, we are subject to all of the risks associated with developing and establishing new mining operations and business enterprises including:

· completion of feasibility studies to verify reserves and commercial viability, including the ability to find sufficient REE or gold reserves to support a commercial mining operation;

· the timing and cost, which can be considerable, of further exploration, preparing feasibility studies, permitting and construction of infrastructure, mining and processing facilities;

· the availability and costs of drill equipment, exploration personnel, skilled labor and mining and processing equipment, if required;

· the availability and cost of appropriate smelting and/or refining arrangements, if required, and securing a commercially viable sales outlet for our products;

· compliance with environmental and other governmental approval and permit requirements;

· the availability of funds to finance exploration, development and construction activities, as warranted;

· potential opposition from non-governmental organizations, environmental groups, local groups or local inhabitants which may delay or prevent development activities;

· potential increases in exploration, construction and operating costs due to changes in the cost of fuel, power, materials and supplies; and

· potential shortages of mineral processing, construction and other facilities related supplies.

11

The costs, timing and complexities of exploration, development and construction activities may be increased by the location of our properties and demand by other mineral exploration and mining companies. It is common in exploration programs to experience unexpected problems and delays during drill programs and, if warranted, development, construction and mine start-up. Accordingly, our activities may not result in profitable mining operations and we may not succeed in establishing mining operations or profitably producing metals at any of our properties.

If we establish the existence of a mineral reserve on any of our properties in a commercially exploitable quantity, we will require additional capital in order to develop the property into a producing mine. If we cannot raise this additional capital, we will not be able to exploit the reserve, and our business could fail.

If we do discover mineral reserves in commercially exploitable quantities on any of our properties, we will be required to expend substantial sums of money to establish the extent of the reserve, develop processes to extract it and develop extraction and processing facilities and infrastructure. We do not have adequate capital to develop necessary facilities and infrastructure and will need to raise additional funds.  Although we may derive substantial benefits from the discovery of a major mineral deposit, there can be no assurance that such a deposit will be large enough to justify commercial operations, nor can there be any assurance that we will be able to raise the funds required for development on a timely basis. If we cannot raise the necessary capital or complete the necessary facilities and infrastructure, our business may fail.

Our exploration activities may not be commercially successful. 

Our long-term success depends on our ability to identify mineral deposits on our existing properties and other properties we may acquire, if any, that we can then develop into commercially viable mining operations.  Our belief that our properties contain commercially exploitable minerals has been based solely on preliminary tests that we have conducted and data provided by third parties, including the data published in various third party reports, including but not limited to the GSA, Geological Society of America, Special Paper 246, 1990.  There can be no assurance that the tests and data upon which we have relied is correct or accurate.  Moreover, mineral exploration is highly speculative in nature, involves many risks and is frequently non-productive.  Unusual or unexpected geologic formations and the inability to obtain suitable or adequate machinery, equipment or labor are risks involved in the conduct of exploration programs.  The success of mineral exploration and development is determined in part by the following factors:

· the identification of potential mineralization based on analysis;

· the availability of exploration permits;

· the quality of our management and our geological and technical expertise; and

· the capital available for exploration.

Substantial expenditures and time are required to establish existing proven and probable reserves through drilling and analysis, to develop metallurgical processes to extract metal, and to develop the mining and processing facilities and infrastructure at any site chosen for mining.  Whether a mineral deposit will be commercially viable depends on a number of factors, which include, without limitation, the particular attributes of the deposit, such as size, grade and proximity to infrastructure; metal prices, which fluctuate widely; and government regulations, including, without limitation, regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties, land tenure, land use, allowable production, importing and exporting of minerals and environmental protection.  Any one or a combination of these factors may result in us not receiving an adequate return on our investment capital.  The decision to abandon a project may have an adverse effect on the market value of our securities and our ability to raise future financing.

Increased costs could affect our financial condition.

We anticipate that costs at our projects that we may explore or develop, will frequently be subject to variation from one year to the next due to a number of factors, such as changing ore grade, metallurgy and revisions to mine plans, if any, in response to the physical shape and location of the ore body. In addition, costs are affected by the price of commodities such as fuel, rubber, and electricity. Such commodities are at times subject to volatile price movements, including increases that could make production at certain operations less profitable. A material increase in costs at any significant location could have a significant effect on our profitability.

A shortage of equipment and supplies could adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

We are dependent on various supplies and equipment to carry out our mining exploration and, if warranted, development operations. The shortage of such supplies, equipment and parts could have a material adverse effect on our ability to carry out our operations and therefore limit or increase the cost of production.

12

Mining and mineral exploration is inherently dangerous and subject to conditions or events beyond our control, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and plans.

Mining and mineral exploration involves various types of risks and hazards, including:

· environmental hazards;

· power outages;

· metallurgical and other processing problems;

· unusual or unexpected geological formations;

· personal injury, flooding, fire, explosions, cave-ins, landslides and rock-bursts;

· inability to obtain suitable or adequate machinery, equipment, or labor;

· metals losses;

· fluctuations in exploration, development and production costs;

· labor disputes;

· unanticipated variations in grade;

· mechanical equipment failure; and

· periodic interruptions due to inclement or hazardous weather conditions.

These risks could result in damage to, or destruction of, mineral properties, production facilities or other properties, personal injury, environmental damage, delays in mining, increased production costs, monetary losses and possible legal liability. We may not be able to obtain insurance to cover these risks at economically feasible premiums. Insurance against certain environmental risks, including potential liability for pollution or other hazards as a result of the disposal of waste products occurring from production, may be prohibitively expensive. We may suffer a material adverse effect on our business if we incur losses related to any significant events that are not covered by our insurance policies.

The figures for our mineralization are estimates based on interpretation and assumptions and may yield less mineral production under actual conditions than is currently estimated.

Unless otherwise indicated, mineralization figures presented in this prospectus and in our filings with securities regulatory authorities, press releases and other public statements that may be made from time to time are based upon estimates made by independent geologists and our internal geologists.  When making determinations about whether to advance any of our projects to development, we must rely upon such estimated calculations as to the mineral reserves and grades of mineralization on our properties.  Until ore is actually mined and processed, mineral reserves and grades of mineralization must be considered as estimates only.

Estimates can be imprecise and depend upon geological interpretation and statistical inferences drawn from drilling and sampling analysis, which may prove to be unreliable. We cannot assure you that:

· these interpretations and inferences will be accurate;

· mineralization estimates will be accurate; or

· this mineralization can be mined or processed profitably.

Any material changes in mineralization estimates and grades of mineralization will affect the economic viability of placing a property into production and a property's return on capital.

Because we have not completed feasibility studies on any of our properties and have not commenced actual production, mineralization estimates for our properties may require adjustments or downward revisions. In addition, the grade of ore ultimately mined, if any, may differ from that indicated by our feasibility studies and drill results. Minerals recovered in small scale tests may not be duplicated in large scale tests under on-site conditions or in production scale.

The mineralization estimates contained in this Annual Report have been determined and valued based on assumed future prices, cut-off grades and operating costs that may prove to be inaccurate. Extended declines in market prices for rare earth minerals may render portions of our mineralization estimates uneconomic and result in reduced reported mineralization or adversely affect the commercial viability determinations we reach. Any material reductions in estimates of mineralization, or of our ability to extract this mineralization, could have a material adverse effect on our share price and the value of our properties.

Our operations contain significant uninsured risks which could negatively impact future profitability as we maintain no insurance against our operations.

Our exploration of our mineral properties contains certain risks, including unexpected or unusual operating conditions including rock bursts, cave-ins, flooding, fire and earthquakes.  It is not always possible to insure against these risks. Should events such as these arise, they could reduce or eliminate our assets and shareholder equity as well as result in increased costs and a decline in the value of our securities.  We expect to maintain only general liability and director and officer insurance but no insurance against our properties or operations.  We may decide to take out this insurance in the future if it is available at economically viable rates.

13

Mineral operations are subject to market forces outside of our control which could negatively impact our operations.

The marketability of minerals is affected by numerous factors beyond our control including market fluctuations, government regulations relating to prices, taxes, royalties, allowable production, imports, exports and supply and demand.  One or more of these risk elements could have an impact on the costs of our operations and if significant enough, reduce the profitability of our operations.

We may be adversely affected by fluctuations in demand for, and prices of, rare earth products.

We expect to derive revenues, if any, from sale of rare earth and related minerals.  Changes in demand for, and the market price of, these minerals could significantly affect our profitability. The value and price of our common stock and our financial results may be significantly adversely affected by declines in the prices of rare earth minerals and products. Rare earth minerals and product prices may fluctuate and are affected by numerous factors beyond our control such as interest rates, exchange rates, inflation or deflation, fluctuation in the relative value of the U.S. dollar against foreign currencies on the world market, global and regional supply and demand for rare earth minerals and products, and the political and economic conditions of countries that produce rare earth minerals and products.

A prolonged or significant economic contraction in the United States or worldwide could put further downward pressure on market prices of rare earth minerals and products. Protracted periods of low prices for rare earth minerals and products could significantly reduce revenues and the availability of required development funds in the future. This could cause substantial reductions to, or a suspension of, REO production operations, impair asset values and if reserves are established on our prospects, reduce our proven and probable rare earth ore reserves.

In contrast, extended periods of high commodity prices may create economic dislocations that may be destabilizing to rare earth minerals supply and demand and ultimately to the broader markets. Periods of high rare earth mineral market prices generally are beneficial to our financial performance. However, strong rare earth mineral prices also create economic pressure to identify or create alternate technologies that ultimately could depress future long-term demand for rare earth minerals and products, and at the same time may incentivize development of otherwise marginal mining properties.

Conditions in the rare earth industry have been, and may continue to be, extremely volatile, which could have a material impact on our company.

Conditions in our industry have been extremely volatile.  Prices and supply and demand for REEs, have been impacted by numerous factors, including changes in economic conditions and demand for REEs and changes, or perceived changes, in Chinese quotas for export of REEs. According to www.metal-pages.com (“Metal-Pages”) REE prices increased from mid-2010 to mid-2011 approximately 2,000 to 3,000 percent, depending on the element, and then REE prices began decreasing through the end of 2011. REO prices of individual oxides increased considerably during the first two quarters of 2011 but declined thereafter through to the end of the year.  Beginning in the second quarter of 2012, REE prices have decreased significantly for all REEs. If conditions in our industry remain volatile, our share price may continue to exhibit volatility as well. In particular, if prices or demand for REEs were to decline, our share price would likely decline.

Permitting, licensing and approval processes are required for our operations and obtaining and maintaining these permits and licenses is subject to conditions which we may be unable to achieve.

Both mineral exploration and extraction require permits from various federal, state, provincial and local governmental authorities and are governed by laws and regulations, including those with respect to prospecting, mine development, mineral production, transport, export, taxation, labor standards, occupational health, waste disposal, toxic substances, land use, environmental protection, mine safety and other matters. Permits known to be required are (i) an operating plan for the conduct of exploration and development approved by the Texas General Land Office, (ii) an operating plan for production approved by the Texas General Land Office, (iii) various reporting to and approval by the Texas Railroad Commission regarding drilling and plugging of drill holes, and (v) reporting to and compliance with regulations of the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality.  If we recover uranium from our mineral prospects, we will be required to obtain a source material license from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.  We may also be subject to the reporting requirements and regulations of the Texas Department of Health.

Such licenses and permits are subject to changes in regulations and changes in various operating circumstances.  Companies such as ours that engage in exploration activities often experience increased costs and delays in production and other schedules as a result of the need to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permits. Issuance of permits for our activities is subject to the discretion of government authorities, and we may be unable to obtain or maintain such permits.  Permits required for future exploration or development may not be obtainable on reasonable terms or on a timely basis.  There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain any of the permits required for the continued exploration or development of our mineral properties or for the construction and operation of a mine on our properties at economically viable costs. If we cannot accomplish these objectives, our business could face difficulty and/or fail.

14

We are subject to significant governmental regulations, which affect our operations and costs of conducting our business.

Our current and future operations are and will be governed by laws and regulations, including:

· laws and regulations governing mineral concession acquisition, prospecting, development, mining and production;

· laws and regulations related to exports, taxes and fees;

· labor standards and regulations related to occupational health and mine safety;

· environmental standards and regulations related to waste disposal, toxic substances, land use and environmental protection; and

· other matters.

Companies engaged in exploration activities often experience increased costs and delays in production and other schedules as a result of the need to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permits. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations and permits may result in enforcement actions, including the forfeiture of claims, orders issued by regulatory or judicial authorities requiring operations to cease or be curtailed, and may include corrective measures requiring capital expenditures, installation of additional equipment or costly remedial actions. We may be required to compensate those suffering loss or damage by reason of our mineral exploration activities and may have civil or criminal fines or penalties imposed for violations of such laws, regulations and permits.

Existing and possible future laws, regulations and permits governing operations and activities of exploration companies, or more stringent implementation, could have a material adverse impact on our business and cause increases in capital expenditures or require abandonment or delays in exploration.

Legislation has been proposed that would significantly affect the mining industry.

Members of the U.S. Congress have repeatedly introduced bills which would supplant or alter the provisions of the Mining Law of 1872. If enacted, such legislation could change the cost of holding unpatented mining claims and could significantly impact our ability to develop mineralized material on unpatented mining claims. Such bills have proposed, among other things, to either eliminate or greatly limit the right to a mineral patent and to impose a federal royalty on production from unpatented mining claims. Although we cannot predict what legislated royalties might be, the enactment of these proposed bills could adversely affect the potential for development of unpatented mining claims and the economics of existing operating mines on federal unpatented mining claims. Passage of such legislation could adversely affect our financial performance.

Regulations and pending legislation governing issues involving climate change could result in increased operating costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

A number of governments or governmental bodies have introduced or are contemplating regulatory changes in response to various climate change interest groups and the potential impact of climate change. Legislation and increased regulation regarding climate change could impose significant costs on us, our venture partners and our suppliers, including costs related to increased energy requirements, capital equipment, environmental monitoring and reporting and other costs to comply with such regulations. Any adopted future climate change regulations could also negatively impact our ability to compete with companies situated in areas not subject to such limitations. Given the emotion, political significance and uncertainty around the impact of climate change and how it should be dealt with, we cannot predict how legislation and regulation will affect our financial condition, operating performance and ability to compete. Furthermore, even without such regulation, increased awareness and any adverse publicity in the global marketplace about potential impacts on climate change by us or other companies in our industry could harm our reputation. The potential physical impacts of climate change on our operations are highly uncertain, and would be particular to the geographic circumstances in areas in which we operate. These may include changes in rainfall and storm patterns and intensities, water shortages, changing sea levels and changing temperatures. These impacts may adversely impact the cost, production and financial performance of our operations.

Our exploration and development activities are subject to environmental risks, which could expose us to significant liability and delay, suspension or termination of our operations.

The exploration, possible future development and production phases of our business will be subject to federal, state and local environmental regulation. These regulations mandate, among other things, the maintenance of air and water quality standards and land reclamation. They also set out limitations on the generation, transportation, storage and disposal of solid and hazardous waste. Environmental legislation is evolving in a manner which will require stricter standards and enforcement, increased fines and penalties for non-compliance, more stringent environmental assessments, and a heightened degree of responsibility for companies and their officers, directors and employees. Future changes in environmental regulations, if any, may adversely affect our operations. If we fail to comply with any of the applicable environmental laws, regulations or permit requirements, we could face regulatory or judicial sanctions. Penalties imposed by either the courts or administrative bodies could delay or stop our operations or require a considerable capital expenditure. Although we intend to comply with all environmental laws and permitting obligations in conducting our business, there is a possibility that those opposed to exploration and mining will attempt to interfere with our operations, whether by legal process, regulatory process or otherwise.

15

Environmental hazards unknown to us, which have been caused by previous or existing owners or operators of the properties, may exist on the properties in which we hold an interest.  It is possible that our properties could be located on or near the site of a Federal Superfund cleanup project. Although we will endeavor to avoid such sites, it is possible that environmental cleanup or other environmental restoration procedures could remain to be completed or mandated by law, causing unpredictable and unexpected liabilities to arise.

U.S. Federal Laws

The Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and comparable state statutes, impose strict, joint and several liability on current and former owners and operators of sites and on persons who disposed of or arranged for the disposal of hazardous substances found at such sites. It is not uncommon for the government to file claims requiring cleanup actions, demands for reimbursement for government-incurred cleanup costs, or natural resource damages, or for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by hazardous substances released into the environment. The Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and comparable state statutes, govern the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste and authorize the imposition of substantial fines and penalties for noncompliance, as well as requirements for corrective actions. CERCLA, RCRA and comparable state statutes can impose liability for clean-up of sites and disposal of substances found on exploration, mining and processing sites long after activities on such sites have been completed.

The Clean Air Act, as amended, restricts the emission of air pollutants from many sources, including mining and processing activities. Our mining operations may produce air emissions, including fugitive dust and other air pollutants from stationary equipment, storage facilities and the use of mobile sources such as trucks and heavy construction equipment, which are subject to review, monitoring and/or control requirements under the Clean Air Act and state air quality laws. New facilities may be required to obtain permits before work can begin, and existing facilities may be required to incur capital costs in order to remain in compliance. In addition, permitting rules may impose limitations on our production levels or result in additional capital expenditures in order to comply with the rules.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to integrate environmental considerations into their decision-making processes by evaluating the environmental impacts of their proposed actions, including issuance of permits to mining facilities, and assessing alternatives to those actions. If a proposed action could significantly affect the environment, the agency must prepare a detailed statement known as an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, other federal agencies, and any interested third parties will review and comment on the scoping of the EIS and the adequacy of and findings set forth in the draft and final EIS. This process can cause delays in issuance of required permits or result in changes to a project to mitigate its potential environmental impacts, which can in turn impact the economic feasibility of a proposed project.

The Clean Water Act (CWA), and comparable state statutes, imposes restrictions and controls on the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States. The discharge of pollutants into regulated waters is prohibited, except in accordance with the terms of a permit issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or an analogous state agency. The CWA regulates storm water mining facilities and requires a storm water discharge permit for certain activities. Such a permit requires the regulated facility to monitor and sample storm water run-off from its operations. The CWA and regulations implemented thereunder also prohibit discharges of dredged and fill material in wetlands and other waters of the United States unless authorized by an appropriately issued permit. The CWA and comparable state statutes provide for civil, criminal and administrative penalties for unauthorized discharges of pollutants and impose liability on parties responsible for those discharges for the costs of cleaning up any environmental damage caused by the release and for natural resource damages resulting from the release.

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program promulgated thereunder, regulate the drilling and operation of subsurface injection wells. EPA directly administers the UIC program in some states and in others the responsibility for the program has been delegated to the state. The program requires that a permit be obtained before drilling a disposal or injection well. Violation of these regulations and/or contamination of groundwater by mining related activities may result in fines, penalties, and remediation costs, among other sanctions and liabilities under the SWDA and state laws. In addition, third party claims may be filed by landowners and other parties claiming damages for alternative water supplies, property damages, and bodily injury.

We could be subject to environmental lawsuits.

Neighboring landowners and other third parties could file claims based on environmental statutes and common law for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by the release of hazardous substances or other waste material into the environment on or around our properties.  There can be no assurance that our defense of such claims will be successful.  A successful claim against us could have an adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operation.

16

Land reclamation requirements for our properties may be burdensome and expensive.

Although variable depending on location and the governing authority, land reclamation requirements are generally imposed on mineral exploration companies (as well as companies with mining operations) in order to minimize long term effects of land disturbance.

Reclamation may include requirements to:

· control dispersion of potentially deleterious effluents;

· treat ground and surface water to drinking water standards; and

· reasonably re-establish pre-disturbance land forms and vegetation.

In order to carry out reclamation obligations imposed on us in connection with our potential development activities, we must allocate financial resources that might otherwise be spent on further exploration and development programs. We plan to set up a provision for our reclamation obligations on our properties, as appropriate, but this provision may not be adequate. If we are required to carry out unanticipated reclamation work, our financial position could be adversely affected.  In accordance with our GLO lease/prospecting permits all the areas impacted by the surface operations shall be reclaimed upon completion of the activity such that: (a) Remove all trash, debris, plastic and contaminated soil by off-site disposal; and (b) Upon completion of surface grading, the soil surface shall be left in a roughened condition to negate wind and enhance water infiltration.

Rare earth and beryllium mining presents potential health risks.  Payment of any liabilities that arise from these health risks may adversely impact our Company.

Complying with health and safety standards will require additional expenditure on testing and the installation of safety equipment. Moreover, inhalation of certain minerals, such as beryllium can result in specific potential health risks ranging from acute pneumonitis, tracheobronchitis, and chronic beryllium disease to an increased risk of cancer.  Symptoms of these diseases may take years to manifest.  Failure to comply with health and safety standards could result in statutory penalties and civil liability.  We do not currently maintain any insurance coverage against these health risks. The payment of any liabilities that arise from any such occurrences would have a material, adverse impact on our Company.

There may be challenges to the title of our mineral properties.

We will acquire most of its properties by unpatented claims or by lease from those owning the property.  The lease of our Round Top property was issued by the State of Texas.  The validity of title to many types of natural resource property depends upon numerous circumstances and factual matters (many of which are not discoverable of record or by other readily available means) and is subject to many uncertainties of existing law and its application.  We cannot assure you that the validity of our titles to our properties will be upheld or that third parties will not otherwise invalidate those rights. In the event the validity of our titles are not upheld, such an event would have a material adverse effect on us.

Increased competition could adversely affect our ability to attract necessary capital funding or acquire suitable producing properties or prospects for mineral exploration in the future.

The mining industry is intensely competitive. Significant competition exists for the acquisition of properties producing or capable of producing, REE, gold or other metals. We may be at a competitive disadvantage in acquiring additional mining properties because we must compete with other individuals and companies, many of which have greater financial resources, operational experience and technical capabilities than us. We may also encounter increasing competition from other mining companies in our efforts to hire experienced mining professionals. Competition for exploration resources at all levels is currently very intense, particularly affecting the availability of manpower, drill rigs, mining equipment and production equipment. Increased competition could adversely affect our ability to attract necessary capital funding or acquire suitable producing properties or prospects for mineral exploration in the future.

We compete with larger, better capitalized competitors in the mining industry.

The mining industry is competitive in all of its phases, including financing, technical resources, personnel and property acquisition. We will require significant capital, technical resources, personnel and operational experience to effectively compete in the mining industry. Because of the high costs associated with exploration, the expertise required to analyze a project's potential and the capital required to develop a mine, larger companies with significant resources may have a competitive advantage over us. We face strong competition from other mining companies, some with greater financial resources, operational experience and technical capabilities than us. As a result of this competition, we may be unable to maintain or acquire financing, personnel, technical resources or attractive mining properties on terms we consider acceptable or at all.

17

Current economic conditions and capital markets are in a period of disruption and instability which could adversely affect our ability to access the capital markets, and thus adversely affect our business and liquidity.

The current economic conditions and financial crisis have had, and will continue to have, a negative impact on our ability to access the capital markets, and thus have a negative impact on our business and liquidity. The shortage of liquidity and credit combined with substantial losses in worldwide equity markets could lead to an extended worldwide recession. We may face significant challenges if conditions in the capital markets do not improve. Our ability to access the capital markets has been and continues to be severely restricted at a time when we need to access such markets, which could have a negative impact on our business plans. Even if we are able to raise capital, it may not be at a price or on terms that are favorable to us. We cannot predict the occurrence of future financial disruptions or how long the current market conditions may continue.

Our resources may not be sufficient to manage our expected growth; failure to properly manage our potential growth would be detrimental to our business.

We may fail to adequately manage our anticipated future growth. Any growth in our operations will place a significant strain on our administrative, financial and operational resources, and increase demands on our management and on our operational and administrative systems, controls and other resources. We cannot assure you that our existing personnel, systems, procedures or controls will be adequate to support our operations in the future or that we will be able to successfully implement appropriate measures consistent with our growth strategy. As part of this growth, we may have to implement new operational and financial systems, procedures and controls to expand, train and manage our employee base, and maintain close coordination among our staff. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so, or that if we are able to do so, we will be able to effectively integrate them into our existing staff and systems.

If we are unable to manage growth effectively, our business, operating results and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. As with all expanding businesses, the potential exists that growth will occur rapidly. If we are unable to effectively manage this growth, our business and operating results could suffer. Anticipated growth in future operations may place a significant strain on management systems and resources. In addition, the integration of new personnel will continue to result in some disruption to ongoing operations. The ability to effectively manage growth in a rapidly evolving market requires effective planning and management processes. We will need to continue to improve operational, financial and managerial controls, reporting systems and procedures, and will need to continue to expand, train and manage our work force.

We may experience difficulty attracting and retaining qualified management to meet the needs of our anticipated growth, and the failure to manage our growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Competition for additional qualified management is intense, and we may be unable to attract and retain additional key personnel, or to attract and retain personnel on terms acceptable to us.  Management personnel are currently limited and they may be unable to manage our expansion successfully and the failure to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.  We have not entered into non-competition agreements.  As our business is substantially dependent upon the directors, executive officers and consultants, the lack of non-competition agreements poses a significant risk to us in the event such persons were to resign or be terminated from such positions.  Under such circumstances, such persons may provide confidential information and key contacts to our competitors and we may have difficulties in preventing the disclosure of such information.  Such disclosure would have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

Our operations are dependent upon key personnel, the loss of which would be detrimental to our business.

The nature of our business, including our ability to continue our exploration and development activities, depends, in large part, on the efforts of key personnel such as Daniel Gorski, our Chief Executive Officer.  The loss of Mr. Gorski could have a material adverse effect on our business.  We do not maintain “key man” life insurance policies on any of our officers or employees.

There are risks and uncertainties regarding the outcome of the matters which we self-reported to the SEC on June 8, 2012.

On June 12, 2012, we announced that since March of 2012, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee (the “Committee”) of our Board, which is composed entirely of independent directors, with the assistance of independent special counsel to the Committee, has been conducting an internal review and investigation of certain matters of corporate governance and compliance with federal securities laws (the “Internal Review”). As a result of the recent report of the independent counsel on such counsel’s findings of the Internal Review and a further review of the recommendations of independent counsel by the Committee and our Board, at the direction of the Board, we contacted the SEC on June 8, 2012, to report our findings.  It is uncertain what actions, if any, the SEC will take in relation to the matters self-reported to the SEC and there is risk as to whether such actions, if any, would include reprimanding, fining or otherwise sanctioning us, which could negatively affect us.

18

Risks Relating to Our Securities

Our stock price is highly volatile.

The market price of our common stock has fluctuated and may continue to fluctuate.  These fluctuations may be exaggerated since the trading volume of its common stock is volatile, limited, and sporadic.  These fluctuations may or may not be based upon any business or operating results.  Our common stock may experience similar or even more dramatic price and volume fluctuations in the future.

The market for the common stock is limited, sporadic and volatile.  Any failure to develop or maintain an active trading market could negatively affect the value of our shares and make it difficult or impossible for you to sell your shares.

Our common stock is currently traded on the OTCQX U.S., a centralized quotation service maintained by OTC Markets Group Inc. that collects and publishes market maker quotes for over-the-counter securities. Although our common stock is traded on the OTCQX U.S., a regular trading market for our securities may not be sustained in the future. Quotes for stocks traded on the OTCQX U.S. generally are not listed in the financial sections of newspapers and newspapers often devote very little coverage to stocks quoted solely on the OTCQX U.S. Accordingly, prices for, and coverage of, securities quoted solely on the OTCQX U.S. may be difficult to obtain. In addition, stocks quoted solely on the OTCQX U.S. tend to have a limited number of market makers and a larger spread between the bid and ask prices than those listed on an exchange. All of these factors may cause holders of our common stock to be unable to resell their securities at any price. This limited trading also could decrease or eliminate our ability to raise additional funds through issuances of our securities.  There is no market for the Warrants.

Failure to develop or maintain an active trading market could negatively affect the value of our shares and make it difficult for you to sell your shares or recover any part of your investment in us.  Even if an active market for our common stock does develop, the market price of our common stock may be highly volatile.  In addition to the uncertainties relating to our future operating performance and the profitability of our operations, factors such as variations in our interim financial results, or various, as yet unpredictable factors, many of which are beyond our control, may have a negative effect on the market price of our common stock.  Accordingly, there can be no assurance as to the liquidity of any active markets that may develop for our common stock, the ability of holders of our common stock to sell our common stock, or the prices at which holders may be able to sell our common stock.

The sale of substantial shares of our common stock or the issuance of shares upon exercise of our warrants will cause immediate and substantial dilution to our existing stockholders and may depress the market price of our common stock.

In order to provide capital for the operation of our business, we may enter into additional financing arrangements.  These arrangements may involve the issuance of new common stock, preferred stock that is convertible into common stock, debt securities that are convertible into common stock or warrants for the purchase of common stock.  Any of these items could result in a material increase in the number of shares of common stock outstanding which would in turn result in a dilution of the ownership interest of existing common stockholders.  In addition, these new securities could contain provisions, such as priorities on distributions and voting rights, which could affect the value of our existing common stock.

As of August 31, 2014, we have approximately 37 million shares of common stock outstanding.  In addition to our common stock, we have (i) warrants that may be exercised into 7,840,000 shares of common stock exercisable at $2.50 per share, (ii) warrants that may be exercised into 1,497,000 shares of common stock at $2.50 per share, (iii) warrants that may be exercised into 250,000 shares of common stock at $5.00 per share, and (iv) options that may be exercised into 4,965,000 shares of common stock at $0.30 to $1.00 issued to directors, officers and consultants.  The issuance of shares upon exercise of these options and warrants may result in substantial dilution to the interests of other stockholders and may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

A low market price may severely limit the potential market for our common stock.

An equity security that trades below a certain price per share is subject to SEC rules requiring additional disclosures by broker-dealers.  These rules generally apply to any non-Nasdaq equity security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions (a “penny stock”).  Such rules require the delivery, prior to any penny stock transaction, of a disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock market and the risks associated therewith and impose various sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell penny stocks to persons other than established customers and institutional or wealthy investors.  For these types of transactions, the broker-dealer must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and have received the purchaser's written consent to the transaction prior to the sale.  The broker-dealer also must disclose the commissions payable to the broker-dealer, current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock and, if the broker-dealer is the sole market maker, the broker-dealer must disclose this fact and the broker-dealer's presumed control over the market.  Such information must be provided to the customer orally or in writing before or with the written confirmation of trade sent to the customer.

Monthly statements must be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.  Since our common stock trades at a price of less than $5.00 per share, the additional burdens imposed upon broker-dealers by such requirements could discourage broker-dealers from effecting transactions in our common stock.

19

We do not currently intend to pay cash dividends.

We have not declared any dividends since incorporation and do not anticipate that we will do so in the foreseeable future.  Our present policy is to retain all available funds for use in our operations and the expansion of our business.  Payment of future cash dividends, if any, will be at the discretion of our Board and will depend on our financial condition, results of operations, contractual restrictions, capital requirements, business prospects and other factors that our Board considers relevant. Accordingly, investors will only see a return on their investment if the value of our securities appreciates.

Control by current stockholders.

The current stockholders have elected the directors and the directors have appointed current executive officers to serve our Company.  The voting power of these stockholders could also discourage others from seeking to acquire control of us through the purchase of our common stock which might depress the price of our common stock.

Investment in our Company has a high degree of risk. Before you invest you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, operating results and financial condition could be harmed and the value of our stock could go down.

ITEM 1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2.  PROPERTIES

Executive and Field Offices

Our headquarters are located at 539 El Paso Street, Sierra Blanca, Texas 79851. The El Paso warehouse located at 11459 Pellicano Dr., El Paso, Texas was terminated in June 2013. We have moved our accounting functions to our former office in Tyler, Texas under the supervision of our largest current stockholder and former CFO, G. W. McDonald.

Overview of the Round Top Rare Earth-Uranium-Beryllium Project

We are currently in the exploration stage and have not established that our Round Top Project contains Proven or Probable Reserves as defined under SEC Guide 7.

Description and Access

Round Top is a small mountain, one of a group of five that comprises the Sierra Blanca, located in Hudspeth County approximately eight miles northwest of the town of Sierra Blanca. The property is reached by truck on a private dirt road that turns north off Interstate 10 access road approximately one mile west of the town of Sierra Blanca.  A railroad line is located approximately one to three miles from the Round Top Project and a spur line stops at a stone quarry within three miles of the Round Top Project.

On March 6, 2013, we purchased the surface lease at the Round Top Project, known as the West Lease, from the Foundation for $500,000 cash and 1,063,830 shares of our common stock. We also agreed to support the Foundation through an annual payment of $45,000 for ten years to support conservation efforts within the Rio Grande Basin and in particular engaging in stewardship of Lake Amistad, a large and well-known fishing lake near Del Rio, Texas. The West Lease comprises approximately 54,990 acres and is fully paid until 2028, thereby having a lease value of approximately $1,364,852. Most importantly, purchase of the surface lease gave us unrestricted surface access for the potential development and mining of our Round Top Project.

20

Figure 1 - Round Top Location Map

Acquisition and Ownership

Prospecting Permits

TRER currently holds prospecting permits covering land in Hudspeth County. The prospecting permits allow for exploration activities on approximately 7,110 acres. Currently, TRER has yet to complete drilling on lands identified within the permits due to the requirement of completing archeological studies. TRER intends to complete archeological studies in all areas for future exploration. To date, all exploration work has occurred on areas with approved archeological assessments. A summary of the prospecting permits is listed in Table 1 below:

Table 1 TRER Permit Numbers and Associated Acres

Permit #	Acres
M-114639	640
M-114640	640
M- 114641	250
M-114642	640
M-114643	400
M-114644	360
M-114645	340
M-115990	640
M-115991	640
M-115992	640
M-115993	640
M-115994	640
M-115995	640

21

TRER has approximately 7,110 acres under annual prospecting permits with the State of Texas. TRER entered into the prospecting permits on October 31, 2014 and all are renewable on or before the anniversary date at a cost $1.00 per acre

September 2011 Lease

On September 2, 2011, we entered into a new mining lease with the Texas General Land Office covering Sections 7 and 18 of Township 7, Block 71 and Section 12 of Block 72, covering approximately 860 acres at Round Top Mountain in Hudspeth County, Texas.  The mining lease issued by the Texas General Land Office gives us the right to explore, produce, develop, mine, extract, mill, remove, and market beryllium, uranium, rare earth elements, all other base and precious metals, industrial minerals and construction materials and all other minerals excluding oil, gas, coal, lignite, sulfur, salt, and potash.  The term of the lease is nineteen years so long as minerals are produced in paying quantities.

Under the lease, we will pay the State of Texas a lease bonus of $142,518; $44,718 of which was paid upon the execution of the lease, and $97,800 which will be due when we submit a supplemental plan of operations to conduct mining.  Upon the sale of minerals removed from Round Top, we will pay the State of Texas a $500,000 minimum advance royalty.

Thereafter, we will pay the State of Texas a production royalty equal to eight percent (8%) of the market value of uranium and other fissionable materials removed and sold from Round Top and six and one quarter percent (61/4%) of the market value of all other minerals removed and sold from Round Top.

 Thereafter, assuming production of paying quantities has not been obtained, we may pay additional delay rental fees to extend the term of the lease for successive one (1) year periods pursuant to the following schedule:

	Per Acre Amount		Total Amount
September 2, 2013 – 2014	$	50	$	44,718
September 2, 2015 – 2019	$	75	$	67,077
September 2, 2020 – 2024	$	150	$	134,155
September 2, 2025 – 2029	$	200	$	178,873

In August 2014 we paid the State of Texas a delay rental of $44,718. 

October 2014 Surface Option

In October 2014, we executed an agreement with the Texas General Land Office securing the option to purchase the surface rights covering the potential Round Top project mine and plant areas.

The option to purchase the surface rights covers approximately 5,670 acres over the mining lease and the additional acreage adequate to site all potential heap leaching and processing operations as currently anticipated by the Company. We may exercise the option for all or part of the option acreage at any time during the sixteen year primary term of the mineral lease. The option can be kept current by an annual payment of $10,000. The purchase price will be the appraised value of the surface at the time of exercising the option.

November 2011 Lease

On November 1, 2011, we entered into a mining lease with the State of Texas covering 90 acres, more or less, of land that we purchased in September 2011 near our Round Top site.  The deed was recorded with Hudspeth County on September 16, 2011. Under the lease, we paid the State of Texas a lease bonus of $20,700 which was paid upon the execution of the lease.  Upon the sale of minerals removed from Round Top, we will pay the State of Texas a $50,000 minimum advance royalty.  Thereafter, we will pay the State of Texas a production royalty equal to eight percent (8%) of the market value of uranium and other fissionable materials removed and sold from Round Top and six and one quarter percent (61/4%) of the market value of all other minerals sold from Round Top.

Thereafter, assuming production of paying quantities has not been obtained, we may pay additional delay rental fees to extend the term of the lease for successive one (1) year periods pursuant to the following schedule:

	Per Acre Amount		Total Amount
November 1, 2013-2014	$	50	$	4,500
November 1, 2015 – 2019	$	75	$	6,750
November 1, 2020 – 2024	$	150	$	13,500
November 1, 2025 – 2029	$	200	$	18,000

In August 2014 we paid the State of Texas a delay rental to extend the term of the lease in an amount equal to $4,500.  

22

Geology

The Round Top Project area lies within the Texas Lineament Zone or Trans-Pecos Trend.  The lineament is a northwest trending structural zone where Laramide thrust faulting followed by basin and range normal faulting were active.  Tertiary igneous activity is also associated with the lineament zone, both intrusive and extrusive.

Locally the project area is characterized by five Tertiary microgranite bodies that intruded Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. The microgranites occur as laccoliths, mushroom-shaped bodies emplaced at relatively shallow depths.  At the current erosional levels, laccoliths form resistant peaks with relief up to 2,000 feet.  The microgranites, which are called rhyolites in the literature, are enriched with various metals which may or not be economical to recover.  The rare earth elements are located with-in the intrusive rhyolite body.

Tertiary Diorite which predate the microgranites are intruded the cretaceous section.  The diorites occur as sills, five to 100 feet thick and less frequently as dikes and plugs.  Sedimentary rocks exposed in the area are middle to upper Cretaceous limestones shales and sandstones.  The limestone, where it is in contact with the microgranites, is the host for Beryllium and uranium mineralization.

The Round Top Project was initially developed in the late 1980's as a beryllium resource. During the course of the beryllium exploration, approximately 200 drill holes penetrated varying thicknesses of the rhyolite volcanic rock that makes up the mass of Round Top Mountain and caps the beryllium-uranium deposits which occur in the underlying limestone; some 50 more holes were drilled on Little Round Top, Sierra Blanca and Little Blanca Mountains.

The Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, working with the project geologists, conducted an investigation of the rhyolite to better understand its rare metal content. This research shows that the rhyolite laccoliths at Sierra Blanca are enriched in a variety of REEs and other rare elements such as tantalum, niobium, thorium and lithium. They analyzed a series of samples from outcrop and drill holes and studied the geochemistry and mineralogy of the rhyolite. The results of their research were published in the GSA, Geological Society of America, Special Paper 246, 1990.  

Mineralization

Round Top rhyolite is enriched in Heavy Rare Earth Elements (HREEs). Statistical review of the current data shows that an estimated 70% of the total REE’s grade being HREEs. REE mineralization occurs primarily as disseminated microcrystals of varieties of fluorite (such as yttrium-rich yttrofluorite) where HREEs have substituted for calcium, and as other REE-bearing accessory minerals. REE minerals occur mainly in vugs and as crystal coatings, suggesting late-stage crystallization from an incompatible element-rich fluid.

The Round Top rhyolite was divided into five different alteration phases based on the intensity of hematitic and hydrothermal alteration: red rhyolite, pink rhyolite, tan rhyolite; brown rhyolite and gray rhyolite. Hematitic alteration is a replacement of the magnetite by hematite and gives the rhyolite a red to pink color. Hydrothermal alteration was late and gives the rhyolite a tan to brown color. Mostly unaltered, gray rhyolite was also documented.

Initial geochemical testwork, presented in Section 13, suggests that the gray and pink rhyolite units have the highest REE content, averaging between 554 and 615 parts per million (ppm) total REE + Yttrium (Y). Red and tan rhyolites, which may be strongly vapor-phase altered, contain about 8% lower abundance of REE and the brown rhyolite, which may be altered hydrothermally or by groundwater, contains about 23% less REE than the gray and pink varieties.

Metallurgy

The Round Top Project rhyolite requires further evaluation of its mineralogical makeup and economic modeling to determine the appropriate course for potential future commercial development.  However, the size of this rhyolite deposit, the high percentage (68-72%) of heavy rare earth elements to the total rare earth elements and the leaching characteristics of the host rock could make a heap leach mine a viable option at lower capital costs than the mine plan described in our current PEA released June 22 2012. The Preliminary Economic Assessment is mentioned here for informational purposes only and is not incorporated herein by reference.

On October 27, 2011, we announced that we had completed Phase I of its metallurgical testing and characterization.  This mineralogical study reconfirmed that the rare earth minerals are finely disseminated throughout the rhyolite host rock. Based on the initial ore characterization, this testing reconfirms the simplistic rare earth element mineral associations, which suggests favorable metallurgical processing options. Phase II was focused on pre-concentration evaluation and other diagnostic testing including acid leaching of the rare earth minerals.  The results of this testing is described in the PEA.

23

On May 8, 2013, we announced independent confirmation of potential favorable heap leach characteristics, based on coarse leach testing at an independent lab.  The results are summarized below:

	La	Ce	Pr	Nd	Sm	Eu	Gd	Tb	Dy	Ho
	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm
OreGrade	31	98	12.2	34.8	11.1	0.6	11.5	3.77	30.7	7.98
Recovery 1	21	65	8.4	25.3	8.6	<0.4	9.5	3.20	25.3	6.37
Recovery 2	16	55	7.7	22.8	8.3	0.4	9.3	3.11	24.7	6.20
Average Recovery	18.5	60	8.05	24.05	8.45		9.4	3.155	25.0	6.285
% Recovery	60%	61%	66%	69%	76%	67%	82%	84%	81%	79%

	Er	Tm	Lu	Yb	Y	Th	U	Be	Li
	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm	ppm
Ore Grade	33.8	7.37	9.12	57	218	183.5	40.7	32.2	410
Recovery 1	25.8	5.09	5.32	36.4	185	146.5	20.0	6.50	270
Recovery 2	25.1	5.04	5.33	36.5	184	143.9	21.5	4.80	270
Average Recovery	25.45	5.065	5.325	36.45	184.5	145.2	20.75	5.65	270
% Recovery	75%	69%	58%	64%	85%	79%	51%	18%	66%

*La=Lanthanum, Ce= Cerium, Pr= Praseodymium, Nd= Neodymium, Sm= Samarium, Eu= Europium, Gd= Gadolinium, Tb= Terbium, Dy=Dysprosium, Ho= Holmium, Er= Erbium, Tm= Thulium, Lu= Lutetium, Yb= Ytterbium, Y= Yttrium, Th=Thorium, U= Uranium, Be= Beryllium, Li= Lithium

A sieved 2 to 4 mm (~1/8th to 1/4 inch) fraction of the composite rhyolite sample being used for all metallurgical testing was submitted. This sample was leached in 14.7 gm/l (14.7% by wt) sulfuric acid at room temperature for two weeks.

On July 16, 2013, we announced the results of an independent heap leach scoping study static leach test which confirmed recoveries up to 79.9%.  The test results indicated the following:

1. Comparison of the calculated heads and the assayed heads for the elements of interest are similar. Hence, it is reasonable to conclude that the minerals are fairly uniformly distributed in the deposit.

2. Extractions for Yttrium varied from 20.8 to 61.1% for the different sizes with a combined extraction of 48.6%.  Extractions for Dysprosium varied from 23.8% to57.7% with a combined extraction of 44.5%.

3. The highest extractions for all minerals of interest were in the ½ in X ¼ in size fractions. The extractions dropped significantly in the minus ¼ in size fraction.

4. The acid consumption was reasonable for the coarse size fractions (>1/2 inch) and more than doubled for the minus ¼ inch material.

On September 30, 2013, we announced the results of preliminary column leach testing.  Preliminary column leach testing of Round Top rhyolite crushed to 1/2 inch has yielded the following recoveries of the heavy rare earth elements (terbium and heavier) plus yttrium. These tests were run for 60 days with 7.5 wt. percent sulfuric acid. Recoveries of the heavy rare earth elements plus Yttrium were as follows:

Yttrium (Y):	91%
Dysprosium (Dy):	87%
Lutetium (Lu):	67%
Holmium (Ho):	86%
Erbium (Er):	83%
Thulium (Tm):	77%
Ytterbium (Yb):	74%
Terbium (Tb):	87%

While concurrent work on the froth floatation and agitated leaching of the concentrates yielded acceptable recoveries, the whole rock column leach testing indicates better overall recoveries at potentially lower capital and operating costs. This rock also shows other very favorable heap leach characteristics with ore slump of 0.18%, ore wt. loss of 2.25% and retained moisture of 6.4%.

Work will continue to optimize the recoveries of the heavy rare earth elements (HREE) and yttrium as well as potentially valuable by-products such as uranium, beryllium and lithium and the light rare earth elements (LREE).

24

Project Exploration History

The Round Top rare earths and uranium-beryllium prospects were initially drilled in 1984 and 1985, during which time the ore body known as the "West End Ore Zone" was discovered by Cabot Corporation.  In subsequent years, Cyprus Minerals Corporation took over the exploration activities.  Cyprus drilled additional exploration holes and also put an adit into the ore zone where 1,115 feet of underground workings were driven.  Cyprus developed the underground workings in order to obtain bulk samples for pilot plant testing and beryllium oxide concentrate generation.  Cyprus ultimately put the project on hold as a result of poor beryllium market conditions.  Cyprus eventually allowed the lease with the state of Texas to lapse.

In March 2011, the Company completed an analysis of 1,103 drill samples from the 1984-88 drilling program initially conducted on the Round Top Project by third party operators. All or a portion of forty-six out of an estimated two hundred fifty existing drill holes have been re-logged and re-analyzed. The rare earth element and other metals are consistent with the original study by the Texas Bureau of Geology that was published in the Geological Society of America, Special Paper 246 in 1990. This study first described the rare metal content of the large mass of intrusive igneous rock that makes up the body of Round Top Mountain, and is the basis for our interest in this deposit. The nine drill holes cited below were selected because they are widely distributed and roughly define an area approximately six thousand feet by four thousand feet within the approximate seven thousand foot known diameter of the intrusive rhyolite body. They intersected the entire body of the rhyolite.

On October 27, 2011, we announced favorable results of our Phase I metallurgical testing and characterization that reconfirmed that the rare earth minerals are finely disseminated throughout the rhyolite host rock at our Round Top Project.

On November 8, 2011, we announced that our supplementary operating plan to expand exploration activities at our Round Top Project had been approved by the Texas General Land Office (GLO); the expanded development and exploration drill plan now calls for an additional 40 drill holes and 4 diamond core holes for an estimated planned drilled footage of 20,000 feet.

On November 10, 2011, we announced that Gustavson Associates, LLC, a subsidiary of Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers and its parent company, Ecology and Environment, Inc. (NASDAQ: EEI) had been contracted to perform the scoping study at the Round Top Project.  On June 15, 2012, we issued a press release regarding the results of our Preliminary Economic Assessment.

On June 22, 2012, we published our PEA for our Round Top Project, entitled “NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment Round Top Project, Sierra Blanca, Texas,” dated June 22, 2012, effective as of May 15, 2012.

On October 3, 2012, our management released updated economic projections related to various revisions to the proposed mine plan presented in the PEA.

Throughout 2013, management focused on developing metallurgical processes and refining the mine plan in anticipation of releasing an updated PEA.

On March 6, 2013, we purchased the surface lease at the Round Top Project, known as the West Lease, from the Southwest Wildlife and Range Foundation (the “Foundation”) for $500,000 cash and 1,063,830 shares of our common stock. We also agreed to support the Foundation through an annual payment of $45,000 for ten years to support conservation efforts within the Rio Grande Basin and in particular engaging in stewardship of Lake Amistad, a large and well-known fishing lake near Del Rio, Texas. The West Lease comprises approximately 54,990 acres and is fully paid until 2028, thereby having a lease value of approximately $1,364,852. Most importantly, purchase of the surface lease gave us unrestricted surface access for the potential development and mining of our Round Top Project.

On May 8, 2013, we released testing results by an independent laboratory of the leaching characteristic of the rhyolite at our Round Top Project, which demonstrates characteristics that may be favorable to heap leach mining at the Round Top Project. These leaching characteristics are described in greater detail below under the section heading “Properties – Round Top Project – Metallurgy”.

On September 30, 2013 we released the results on column leach testing by an independent laboratory and announced our intention to issue a revised PEA based on a heap leach operation designed to produce approximately 2,500 tons per year of heavy rare earth elements plus yttrium. The column leach testing results are described in greater detail below under the section heading “Properties – Round Top Project – Metallurgy”.

On December 23, 2013, we published a revised version of the June 2012 Preliminary Economic Assessment (the “Revised PEA”) based on a 20,000 tonne per day heap leach operation using a conventional element separation plant. The mineralized material estimate was recalculated to include uranium, niobium, tantalum and tin. The Revised PEA assesses the potential economic viability of the simplified and "scaled down” operation which we believe is a much better fit with the present rare earth market.

On September 8, 2014, we announced that we had completed an internal analysis suggesting that there is a reasonable possibility to adapt a lower volume staged growth approach to development of our Round Top project.  The analysis indicated that an operation designed to produce a selected group of separated REE products in the range of 350-450 tonnes per year range, could potentially yield favorable mine economics.  The goal of the proposed staged approach would be to increase mining rates if and when our products gained acceptability.  The analysis suggested that capital needs in the Revised PEA could be proportionally reduced in relation to the lower volume initial stage. We are currently conducting a more detailed analysis of the relative capital expenses and operating expenses requirements of a scaled down processing plant with both solvent extraction and ion exchange processes under evaluation. We believe the lower capital requirements of a staged startup could offset any marginal increase in unit operating costs.

25

Cautionary Note to Investors: The PEA and Revised PEA have been prepared in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 — Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”) and the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (the “CIM”) — CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves, adopted by the CIM Council, as amended. The Company has voluntarily had the PEA and Revised PEA prepared in accordance with NI 43-101 but the Company is not subject to regulation by Canadian regulatory authorities and no Canadian regulatory authority has reviewed the PEA or Revised PEA or passed upon its accuracy or compliance with NI 43-101. The terms “mineral reserve”, “proven mineral reserve” and “probable mineral reserve” are Canadian mining terms as defined in accordance with NI 43-101. These definitions differ from the definitions in SEC Industry Guide 7 under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Under SEC Industry Guide 7 standards, a “final” or “bankable” feasibility study is required to report reserves, the three-year historical average price is used in any reserve or cash flow analysis to designate reserves and the primary environmental analysis or report must be filed with the appropriate governmental authority. In addition, the terms “mineral resource”, “measured mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource” are defined in NI 43-101; however, these terms are not defined terms under SEC Industry Guide 7 and are normally not permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the SEC. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists or is economically or legally mineable. Disclosure of “contained ounces” in a resource is permitted disclosure under Canadian regulations; however, the SEC normally only permits issuers to report mineralization that does not constitute “reserves” by SEC Industry Guide 7 standards as in place tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures. Accordingly, information in the PEA and Revised PEA contains descriptions of our mineral deposits that may not be comparable to similar information made public by United States companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements under the United States federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Our project as described in the PEA and Revised PEA currently does not contain any known proven or probable ore reserves under SEC Industry Guide 7 reporting standards. U.S. investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in the Registrant’s latest reports and registration statements filed with the SEC. U.S. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any defined resources in these categories will ever be converted into SEC Guide 7 compliant reserves.

Exploration and Engineering Costs

To date we have incurred exploration costs at the Round Top Project of approximately $10.5 million.  In the fiscal year ending August 31, 2014 our total exploration costs were approximately $456,000.  We anticipate that our exploration costs for the fiscal year ending August 31, 2015 will be approximately $682,000, which will consist primarily of metallurgical expenses.  We expect that our current cash balance will not be enough to meet our exploration costs for the next fiscal year unless additional capital is raised.

Improvements, Equipment, Power and Water

The Round Top rare earth prospect was initially developed in the late 1980s as a beryllium resource.  As a result, several pieces of equipment were present at the property when we acquired the lease, some of which we have repaired as described below.  The previous operators had also built out several roads at the prospect site, which we believe are suitable for our current exploration plans.

There exists on the Round Top site a 1,115 foot, 10 foot by 10 foot decline from the surface into the Round Top prospect. There are steel sets every five feet, in some cases less, and the entire working is lagged with timber. There are “escape holes” at intervals to allow personnel to avoid equipment. The escape holes are all in good operating condition.  There is also a 36 foot steel ventilation line in place that runs for approximately 75 feet into the prospect. There is a 125 hp axial plane ventilation fan in place.  We have leveled the fan and rehabilitated the control panel, and have operated this ventilation system during the evaluation of the historic Cabot-Cyprus work. We intend to install a "soft start" motor starter switch for the vent fan in the future in order to be able to use a 100kw generator.

A bag house is also located on the property that will need its electronic controls rehabilitated and modernized and filters installed. There is a 6" Victaulic compressed air line extending from the compressor station outside to the faces. There are numerous valves at strategic locations underground. There is one 2' steel Victaulic water line for drill water and an additional partly plastic Victaulic water line for dust suppression sprayers, which also has sprayers in place.

There is electric cable from the portal to the face and a switch box underground. Some additional switching gear will need to be installed at the portal.  The mine portal has a sturdy locking steel door in place that we have  reconditioned.

There is a 500 barrel (23,000 gal) water tank below the mine dump for water to be hauled in and stored. This tank appears to be in good shape. The water line from the tank to the mine portal is missing and will have to be replaced. The water system will need a submersible pump, switching gear and approximately 1000 ft of 2” poly line to render the water system serviceable.

26

The nearest population center to the Round Top Project is Sierra Blanca, Texas. The town of Sierra Blanca is approximately six miles to the southeast of the Round Top Project site. The population was 533 in 2000 and 510 during the 2007 census. Skilled mining labor and support could be found in El Paso, approximately 85 miles to the northeast.

A major rail line parallels Interstate 10 approximately three to four miles west and south of the mine site. Approximately three miles from the Project site is a commercial rock quarry in operation which produces ballast for the railroad. The rock quarry operation has a rail road spur which is approximately two to three miles from the Project.

Power is currently supplied to Sierra Blanca through El Paso Electric Services. El Paso Electric Services has approximately 1,643 megawatts of generating capacity. As the greater power needs of a floatation operation have been eliminated by the proposed heap leach mine plan the existing 69 kV is thought to be adequate to supply the envisioned heap leach operation.

Water for the project may be obtained from a well field approximately 3 miles east of the mine site. In October of 2014, we executed a lease with the Texas General Land Office to develop the water necessary for the potential Round Top project mine operations. The ground water lease secures our right to develop the ground water within a 13,120 acre lease area located approximately 4 miles from the Round Top deposit. The lease area contains five existing water wells. It is anticipated that all potential water needs for the Round Top project mine operations would be satisfied by the existing wells covered by this water lease. This lease has an annual minimum production payment of $5,000 prior to production of water for the operation. After initiation of production we will pay $0.95 per thousand gallons or $20,000 annually, whichever is greater. This lease remains effective as long as the mineral lease is in effect.

This well field was originally developed to supply water for a proposed real estate project in the late 1970's. One of the existing wells is reported to have pump tested 950 gallons per minute and another 450 gallons per minute. This water is high enough in total dissolved solids to not meet drinking water standards, thus there is no competition for its use. The quality of the water is expected to be adequate for process water needs and the water will require treatment to be potable.

Current and Planned Metallurgical Activities

Metallurgical research done leading to the publication of our Revised PEA of December 2013 has shown the possibility of heap leaching at the Round Top Project. This first step of "dissolving" the REE bearing mineral is the critical factor in the determination to develop REE projects. The type of solvent, its strength and other conditioning necessary to render the elements soluble is, in our opinion, what most affects the ultimate feasibility of a project. TRER has been able to extract a high percentage of the REE and other elements from the mineralized rock at the Round Top Project, and test work to date also indicates it can be done easily and at projected low operating costs. We are now at the stage of solution concentration and purifying.

We propose to carry this project forward in three stages. Stage 1 will determine the most efficient process to remove the rare earth elements from the pregnant leach solution (pls). Stage 2 will be pilot plant scale testing to define the operating parameters, capital costs and operating cost of the removal of the rare earth from the pls and the process to produce the high purity separated rare earth products for sale. Stage 2 will also design the process to separate and purify such by-product and potential by-products as uranium, thorium, lithium and beryllium. Stage 3 will bring the project to full feasibility with completed engineering, design, tables of organization and equipment and the required permitting and regulatory approvals.

Stage 1

Stage 1 is referred to as the purification step and will be implemented in two parts:

(1) Bench scale evaluation of an ion exchange process.

(2)  Bench scale evaluation of a solvent extraction process tailored to the deposit’s mineralogy.

Test work to date shows that the Round Top pregnant leach solution (pls) obtained by extracting the elements in the deposit’s rare earth bearing minerals will present as a dilute sulfuric acid solution containing the REE's and several other potentially economic by-product elements such as beryllium, lithium, potassium and uranium. This solution will also contain relatively high concentrations of aluminum, calcium, fluorine, iron and sodium. The objective of Stage 1 is to establish the most efficient way to process the REE from the pls to a more concentrated solution that will then become the feed stock for the element separation plant.

We believe that accomplishing this step of directly transferring the REE from the pls by either method, without prior treatment or conditioning, will have the potential to both improve recoveries and to materially lower the capital and operating costs of the Round Top Project as presented in the Revised PEA. Once the purification step has been designed, the elemental separation process, mine and heap leach design and other feasibility related tasks should be relatively straightforward.

Flow rates from the production leach field are expected to be relatively high, within the 400 to 1,500 gallon per minute range. Rare earth processing plants in use today require input solutions to be at relatively low flow rates in the 10 to 20 gallons per minute range and fairly high concentration of the rare earth elements, with a solution grade of approximately 90,000 to 150,000 ppm (9 to 15%). We refer to this transfer as the purification step.

27

Work to be done in Stage 1 will be the bench test work and a comparative analysis of the results to determine the most effective method of separating the REEs and other potentially valuable elements from the less desirable elements such as iron and aluminum.  Both solvent extraction (SX) and ion exchange (IX) will be evaluated; the process that most efficiently affects this transfer will be selected for Stage 2 development. A variation could be to partially or completely precipitate the impurities prior to the SX/IX stage.

We believe that the development of an effective process to purify and concentrate the pls is the definitive step in assuring the viability of the Round Top Project. Once that has been done the elemental separation process is relatively straight forward, SX or IX can be utilized.

Stage 2

Stage 2 will build on the results of Stage 1 and will be the pilot plant scale testing of the process proven most effective by Stage 1. The objective of this Stage will be the work required to bring the processing plant into full feasibility with capital and operating costs estimated to an accuracy range of 10 -15%. Stage 2 will also develop the heap leach procedure and pls solution management to pre-feasibility level with capital and operating estimated to an accuracy of 25 - 35%. Environmental base line studies and initial co-ordination with the Texas regulatory agencies will be included in this stage.

Stage 3

Stage 3 will bring the Round Top Project to full feasibility level. Electrical power and water needs will be developed, final mine design and engineering and the heap leach system engineering will be completed. The geotechnical drilling,  construction planning will be done and permitting will be in progress. Additional drilling to bring all of the rock included in the 20 year pit to a measured or indicated resourced category will be done if necessary.

Budget

Our estimated budget for these stages is as follows:

Project Stage 1, Purification  - 4 Months
				Action	Cost
	Purification Design
		Purification IX
			Phase I	Bench Scale Scoping Study	$  59,000
				Production of 10 gals pls	$  15,000
		Purification SX
			Phase I	Bench Scale Scoping Study	$  67,000
		Data Compilation & Evaluation		Evaluate Results and Plan Stage 2	$100,000
	Purification Total				$241,000
	Project G&A
			Employee Costs	Travel & Other	$  10,000
			Sampling & Handling	Temporary Help, Shipping Etc.	$    2,500
	Project G&A Total				$  12,500
	Project Subtotal				$253,500
			Contingency (25%)		$  63,375
	Project Total				$ 316,875
	Corporate G&A Total				$191,000
Stage 1 Total					$507,875

28

Stage 2 will cost approximately $4,747,000 to complete.  Currently, we estimate that Stage 3, a full feasibility study, will require, approximately, an additional $11,280,000.  We do not currently have the working capital to complete any of these stages.  We anticipate that this financing will raise sufficient capital to finish Stage 1.  Stage 2 and Stage 3 will require additional financing.  We anticipate raising additional funds through private offering of our equity or debt securities, entering into strategic arrangements or partnerships with industry peers to develop to Round Top Project or through selling non-core assets.

Metal Recovery Methods

There are two options for extracting the REE from the leach solution, solvent extraction (SX) and ion exchange (IX).

SX is widely used in the REE industry and is utilized by Rhodia (the France based REE processor) and the Chinese plants. SX is a process whereby the water/acid leach solution is mixed with a kerosene based solution containing the active organic agents (extractants) and then allowed to settle and separate into the water and oil phase. The extractants carried in the kerosene selectively remove the REE's and other sought after elements from the water/acid solution leaving the impurities in the original solution. The economic elements move from the aqueous sulfuric acid leach solution into the kerosene solution and are then transferred from the kerosene solution back into an aqueous solution, this time a hydrochloric acid solution at higher concentrations. This process is repeated over and over until all the individual REE's are separated into their purified individual oxides and then sold.

IX is a process whereby the leach solution is passed through a tank or column containing small beads of an ion exchange resin. The ion exchange resin has the active extracting agents embedded within the beads. The resin beads adsorb the metal ions of interest from the leach solution. When the beads are loaded to their maximum carrying capacity the loaded column is exchanged for a column containing fresh beads. The elements "loaded" on the resin are then stripped back into another aqueous solution, again hydrochloric acid, at high concentrations for further processing. The column with the "stripped" beads is then ready to be recycled back into the process. In the IX process the stripped beads are normally loaded with hydrogen ions which, when exchanged with the REEs in the PLS, does not affect the acidity of the solution, thus the acid is also recycled back into the process, further lowering the operational costs.

The aluminum, iron and other elements can be chemically precipitated and removed by raising the pH and adding other elements such as magnesium. The "cleaned" solution is then further refined by SX or IX methods. Precipitation has been successfully used to clean the Round Top solutions but it results in ~ a 20% loss of some of the REE via co-precipitation with the less desirable elements. TRER consultants are confident with additional work these losses will be reduced to 15% or lower. A disadvantage of this procedure is that most or all of the acid is neutralized and lost. Developing a procedure to use SX or IX to remove the REEs directly from the PLS will improve overall recoveries, simplify the process and significantly improve the operational economics.

SX has the advantage of being the process used in other REE operations, thus there is a considerable base of knowledge and experience to be relied on. It has some disadvantages, however. SX plants, while being simple in concept, consist of many repetitive stages which result in a relatively large operation with many steps which in turn require close control and supervision. They are both labor and capital intensive.

IX has the advantage of being simpler and the plants physically much smaller. IX also is more forgiving operationally because it is less sensitive to variations in flow rate and REE grade than SX. Both capital and operating costs are lower than equivalent SX plants. Its sole disadvantage is that it has not, to date, been applied to an REE operation.

29

ITEM 3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

On November 23, 2012, we announced that we had learned that the Texas General Land Office (the “GLO”) had filed a lawsuit (the “Lawsuit”) against the Southwest Range & Wildlife Foundation, Inc. (the “Foundation”) seeking a declaratory judgment that the restrictions on mining in Section 5.06(1) (no mining during hunting season), Section 5.06(2) (no mining after dark or before dawn), and Section 5.06(4) (no lights) of the grazing and agricultural lease (Surface Lease SL 20040002, known as the “West Lease”) are legally void and unenforceable in violation of the public policy of the State of Texas. State of Texas v. Southwest Range & Wildlife Foundation, Inc.; Cause No. 4273 in the 205th District Court of Hudspeth County, Texas.

One of our two mining leases with the GLO at our Round Top Project (Lease M-113117, the “Mining Lease”) covers land subject to the West Lease. By letter dated March 27, 2012, the GLO had previously advised the Foundation that, effective immediately, the State of Texas declared the restrictions on mining void and unenforceable. Immediately thereafter, the GLO had provided us with an amendment to the Mining Lease, signed by the GLO on March 29, 2012, which removed all mining restrictions which are the subject of the Lawsuit. The GLO is now seeking declaratory relief to enjoin the Foundation from challenging the removal of the mining restrictions from the Mining Lease.

On March 6, 2013, we entered into a lease assignment with the Foundation, pursuant to which the Foundation agreed to assign to us the West Lease.  In exchange for the West Lease, we agreed to:  (i) pay the Foundation $500,000 in cash; (ii) issue 1,063,830 of our common shares, par value $0.01; and (iii) make ten (10) payments to the Foundation of $45,000 each, with the first such payment due on or before June 1, 2013, and the nine (9) subsequent payments due on or before June 1 of each of the following years, such payments to be used by the Foundation to support conservation efforts within the Rio Grande Basin. Future payments due on the lease assignment have been recorded as a note payable with an imputed interest rate of 5%.

The lease assignment closed on March 8, 2013.  This lease assignment has rendered the lawsuit between the Foundation and the GLO moot.

ITEM 4.  MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Pursuant to Section 1503(a) of the recently enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (The “Dodd-Frank Act”), issuers that are operators, or that have a subsidiary that is an operator, of a coal or other mine in the United States are required to disclose in their periodic reports filed with the SEC information regarding specified health and safety violations, orders and citations, related assessments and legal actions, and mining-related fatalities. During the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014, our U.S. exploration properties were not subject to regulation by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the "Mine Act").

30

PART II

ITEM 5.  MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Our common stock is listed for quotation on the OTCQX U.S. operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. under the symbol “TRER.” The market for our common stock on the OTCQX U.S. is limited, sporadic and highly volatile.  The quotations reflect inter-dealer prices without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not represent actual transactions.  The following table sets forth the range of high and low bid prices during the periods indicated.

Fiscal Year 2014	High		Low
Quarter ended August 31, 2014	$	0.49	$	0.36
Quarter ended May 31, 2014	$	0.45	$	0.36
Quarter ended February 28, 2014	$	0.53	$	0.38
Quarter ended November 30, 2013	$	0.53	$	0.24

Fiscal Year 2013	High		Low
Quarter ended August 31, 2013	$	0.35	$	0.21
Quarter ended May 31, 2013	$	0.63	$	0.34
Quarter ended February 28, 2013	$	0.59	$	0.15
Quarter ended November 30, 2012	$	0.46	$	0.14
Fiscal Year 2012	High		Low
Quarter ended August 31, 2012	$	0.80	$	0.30
Quarter ended May 31, 2012	$	1.35	$	0.27
Quarter ended February 29,2012	$	2.00	$	1.11
Quarter ended November 30, 2011	$	2.55	$	1.50

The last bid price of our common stock on October 29, 2014 was $0.237 per share.

Holders

The approximate number of holders of record of our common stock as of September 26, 2014 was 503.

Dividends

We have not paid any cash dividends on our equity security and our Board has no present intention of declaring any cash dividends.  We are not prohibited from paying any dividends pursuant to any agreement or contract.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

In September 2008, the Board adopted our 2008 Stock Option Plan (the “2008 Plan”), which was also approved by our shareholders in September 2008.  In May 2011, the board of directors adopted an amendment to our 2008 Plan (the “Amended 2008 Plan”), which was also approved by our shareholders in August 2011. The Amended 2008 Plan increased the number of shares available for grant from 2,000,000 to up to 5,000,000 shares of our common stock for awards to our officers, directors, employees and consultants.  On February 15, 2012, our stockholders approved an increase of 2,000,000 of shares of common stock available for issuance under the amended 2008 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”).  As amended, the Plan provides for 7,000,000 shares of common stock for all awards.  Other provisions of the Amended 2008 Plan remain the same as under our 2008 Plan.  As of August 31, 2014, a total of 2,205,000 shares of our common stock remained available for future grants under the Amended 2008 Plan.  

31

The following table sets forth certain information as of August 31, 2014 concerning our common stock that may be issued upon the exercise of options or warrants or pursuant to purchases of stock under the Amended 2008 Plan:

Plan Category	(a) Number of Securities to be Issued Upon the Exercise of Outstanding Options	(b) Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options	(c) Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a))
Equity compensation plans approved by stockholders	4,795,000	$0.70	2,205,000
Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders	170,000	$0.33	--
Total	4,965,000	$0.69	2,205,000

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities During Fiscal 2014

All unregistered sales of equity securities during the period covered by the Annual Report were previously disclosed in our current reports on Form 8-K.

ITEM 6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Not applicable.

ITEM 7.  MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report.  This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions.  See “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”  Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of many factors, including, but not limited to, those set forth under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report

Overview

We are a mining company engaged in the business of the acquisition, exploration and, if warranted, development of mineral properties.  We currently hold two nineteen year leases, executed in September 2011 and November 2011, to explore and develop a 950 acre rare earths project located in Hudspeth County, Texas known as the Round Top Project and prospecting permits covering an adjacent 9,345 acres.  Our principal focus will be on developing a metallurgical process to concentrate or otherwise extract the metals from the Round Top rhyolite, although we will continue to examine other opportunities in the region as they develop. We currently have limited operations and have not established that any of our projects or properties contain any Proven or Probable Reserves under SEC Industry Guide 7.  Our operations are exploratory in nature.

We currently do not have any producing properties and consequently, we have no current operating income or cash flow and have not generated any revenues.  Further exploration will be required before a final evaluation as to the economic and practical feasibility of any of our properties is determined.  

On December 23, 2013, we published a revised version of the June 2012 Preliminary Economic Assessment (the “Revised PEA”) on the Round Top Project based on a 20,000 tonne per day heap leach operation using a conventional element separation plant. The mineralized material estimate was recalculated to include uranium, niobium, tantalum and tin. The revised PEA assesses the potential economic viability of the simplified and "scaled down” operation which we believe is a much better fit with the present rare earth market.

On September 8, 2014, we announced that we had completed an internal analysis suggesting that there is a reasonable possibility to adapt a lower volume staged growth approach to development of our Round Top project.  The analysis indicated that an operation designed to produce a selected group of separated REE products in the range of 350-450 tonnes per year range, could potentially yield favorable mine economics.  The goal of the proposed staged approach would be to increase mining rates if and when our products gained acceptability.  The analysis suggested that capital needs in the Revised PEA could be proportionally reduced in relation to the lower volume initial stage. We are currently conducting a more detailed analysis of the relative capital expenses and operating expenses requirements of a scaled down processing plant with both solvent extraction and ion exchange processes under evaluation. We believe the lower capital requirements of a staged startup could offset any marginal increase in unit operating costs.

32

Our current management and Board are stockholder-centric, and receive either no cash compensation or much less than previous management. We will require definitive scientific documentation, rigorous economic studies, consideration of a wide range of alternatives and meticulous oversight of any cash outlays of stockholder funds.

Current Plan of Operations

Continued Work Program on Round Top Project

See “Properties – Current and Planned Metallurgical Activities” for a description of our current work activities and budget for the Round Top Project.

Exploration Potential of the Round Top Property

Although we have no plans in the next 24 months to conduct more physical exploration, we do believe, as stated in our 2010 presentations, that there are untested exploration targets present. They are:

1. Uranium-beryllium mineralization at the lower contact of the rhyolite and the underlying sedimentary rock. This class of mineralization was the target of the successful exploration program conducted in the late 1980's by Cabot Corporation and Cyprus Exploration. It appears to be structurally controlled and associated with a later phase of hydrothermal or gas phase deposition that occurred sometime after the emplacement of the rhyolite. This fluorite-beryllium replacement mineralization in what is termed the West Side Fault under the north side of Round Top was the topic of a 1988 in-house feasibility study by Cyprus Minerals to historical standards (not NI 43-101 compliant under today’s Canadian regulations, not an SEC Industry Guide 7 compliant feasibility study) to produce beryllium. This zone is the location of the intact decline and lateral mine workings developed by Cyprus Minerals in 1988-89. Sampling and analysis by TRER indicates the presence of uranium mineralization occurring adjacent to and likely associated with these beryllium bearing structures. This "Contact Zone" mineralization is not restricted to Round Top and is present under the Sierra Blanca rhyolite and there is some evidence in drill holes on Little Blanca that this style of mineralization may also be present there.

2. Uranium-beryllium-rare earth and other rare metals hosted as structurally controlled fluorite replacements in the limestones at depth below the known deposits. Geologic and geochemical conditions are thought to be conducive for the emplacement of replacement type deposits within the same fault zones that hosted the known beryllium-uranium deposits at depth where favorable host limestones are present. We believe that careful compilation and analysis of existing surface geologic mapping and of the drill data may better define these targets.

We believe that using the existing data we can improve our understanding of the exploration potential of the area without resorting to such expensive techniques such as drilling.

Actively Seeking Project Partners

In addition to pursuing the exploration of our Round Top Project, we are actively seeking industry partners to assist the Company in financing the exploration and, if warranted, development of the Round Top Project.  While we do not currently have any agreements and do not anticipate any agreements in the near future, we are actively engaged in pursuing partners for the Round Top Project for a range of participation, including but not limited to, joint-venture arrangements, project sale, significant investment in the Company, back-end processing and product sales arrangements and other financing arrangements to assist in the Round Top Project.

Recent Corporate Developments

The following significant corporate developments occurred during the year ended August 31, 2014 and the subsequent period through the filing of this Annual Report:

Mr. Goodell’s Resignation

On December 20, 2013, Mr. Philip Goodell informed our Board that he would not be standing for re-election to our Board at the next annual meeting of stockholders. Mr. Goodell continued to serve as a director until the next annual meeting of stockholders, held on February 19, 2014. At that time Mr. Goodell was appointed to our advisory board. Mr. Goodell did not determine to not stand for re-election as a result of any disagreement with our Board regarding its operations, policies or practices.

33

Advisory Agreement - Hedrick

On January 10, 2014 our Board entered into an advisory services agreement (“Hedrick Advisory Agreement”) with James B. Hedrick. Pursuant to the terms of the Hedrick Advisory Agreement, Mr. Hedrick will provide services to assist us develop and promote our Round Top Project. Mr. Hedrick will be paid by the Company an annual cash fee of $5,000. The Hedrick Advisory Agreement can be terminated by either party upon 10-days’ notice.  Additionally, the Company granted the Mr. Hedrick 25,000 options to purchase shares of common stock under the Company’s Stock Option Plan, exercisable at a price of $0.42 per share of common stock for a period of five years from the date thereof.

Annual Meeting of Stockholders

On February 19, 2014, we held our annual general meeting of stockholders at the Wyndham El Paso Airport Hotel, 2027 Airway Boulevard, El Paso, Texas 79925 at 10:00 a.m. local time. Stockholders representing 23,104,145 shares or 62.38% of the shares of common stock authorized to vote (37,036,916) were present in person or by proxy, representing a quorum for the purposes of the annual general meeting. The complete results of our annual meeting were filed on a Current Report on Form 8-K on February 25, 2014 and are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.

Advisory Agreement - Wingo

On March 19, 2014 our Board entered into an advisory services agreement (“Wingo Advisory Services Agreement”) with Robert Vernon Wingo. Pursuant to the terms of the Wingo Advisory Services Agreement, Mr. Wingo will provide services to assist us develop and promote our Round Top Project. Mr. Wingo will be paid by the Company an annual cash fee of $5,000. The Wingo Advisory Services Agreement can be terminated by either party upon 10 days’ notice. Additionally, the Company granted Mr. Wingo 25,000 options to purchase shares of common stock under the Company’s Stock Option Plan, exercisable at a price of $0.41 per share of common stock for a period of five years from the date thereof.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of August 31, 2014, we had a working capital surplus of approximately $238,500. We will need to raise additional funding to implement our business strategy. Our management believes that based on our current working capital, we will be able to continue operations only through the end of calendar year 2014 without raising additional capital. During our fiscal year ending August 31, 2015, we plan to minimize spending for metallurgical testing and flow sheer development, additional geologic and resource modeling and compliance costs associated with state governmental agencies and appropriate staff and consulting expenses until such time we raise additional capital or secure a strategic partner. The timing of these expenditures is dependent upon a number of factors, including the availability of third party contractors.

During the current fiscal year ending August 31, 2015, we plan to initiate Stage 1of our metallurgical activities as discussed in the section heading “ITEM 2. PROPERTIES” of this Annual Report.  Our budget for this stage of activity is approximately $508,000.  We anticipate that our financing efforts will raise sufficient capital to finish Stage 1 but there is no guarantee that we will be able to raise the working capital necessary for Stage 1 activities. After completion of Stage 1, we will use any remaining available capital to begin work on Stage 2 of our metallurgical activities.  Currently, we anticipate that general and administrative expenses in the fiscal year ending August 31, 2015 will be approximately $700,000.

During the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014 we paid the second installment of our surface lease in the amount of $45,000 to the Southwest Wildlife Foundation

The audit opinion and notes that accompany our consolidated financial statements for the year ended August 31, 2014, disclose a ‘going concern’ qualification to our ability to continue in business. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. We are an exploration stage company and we have incurred losses since our inception. We do not have sufficient cash to fund normal operations and meet debt obligations for the next 12 months without deferring payment on certain current liabilities and raising additional funds. We believe that the going concern condition cannot be removed with confidence until the Company has entered into a business climate where funding of its activities is more assured.

We currently do not have sufficient funds to fully complete exploration and development work on any of our properties, which means that we will be required to raise additional capital, enter into joint venture relationships, or find alternative means to finance our properties in order to place them into commercial production, if warranted, or evaluate the possibility of selling one or more of our projects or the Company in its entirety. Failure to obtain sufficient financing may result in the delay or indefinite postponement of exploration and, if warranted, development or production on one or more of our properties and any properties we may acquire in the future or even a loss of property interests. This includes our leases over claims covering the principal deposits on our properties, which may expire unless we expend minimum levels of expenditures over the terms of such leases. We cannot be certain that additional capital or other types of financing will be available if needed or that, if available, the terms of such financing will be favorable or acceptable to us. Our ability to arrange additional financing in the future will depend, in part, on the prevailing capital market conditions as well as our business performance.

34

On August 28, 2014 we filed a registration statement on Form S-1, as amended October 1, 2014, relating to a potential rights offering to our stockholders of units of the Company to raise approximately $1.5 million. The registration statement is not effective and the Company is corresponding with the staff of the SEC to clear staff comments on the S-1. The Company cannot predict if or when the S-1 will be brought effective and the rights offering completed. Further, as the rights offering is not underwritten and there are no backstop guarantees the Company does not know how much if any of the $1.5 million units of the Company would be purchased under the proposed rights offering.

If we cannot attract investment capital on favorable terms, we will evaluate other potential sources of financing that may include:

(1) Early exercise of warrants by stockholders;

(2) Joint Venture or sale of the “Contact Zone” enriched in beryllium and uranium that was the earlier subject of Cyprus Minerals 1988 historical definitive feasibility study; and

(3) Actively seeking joint-ventures, strategic partnerships, or off-takes regarding the Round Top Project or the outright sale of the Company. In that regard, we have engaged KLR Group, a New York City based investment banking firm to assist us in an advisory capacity. The Company continues to have discussions with outside interested parties who seek a strategic relationship with the Company.

Results of Operations

Fiscal Years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013

Revenue

We had no operating revenues during the fiscal years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013.  We are not currently profitable.  As a result of ongoing operating losses, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $29.3 million as of August 31, 2014.

Operating expenses and resulting losses from Operations.

We incurred exploration costs for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013, in the amount of approximately $456,000 and $1.3 million, respectively.  Expenditures during fiscal year 2014 and 2013 were primarily for metallurgical testing.  

Our general and administrative expenses for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014 were approximately $2.3 million.  This amount included approximately $767,000 in non-cash stock-based compensation to directors and compensation to outside consultants.  The remaining expenditures totaling approximately $1.56 million were primarily for payroll and related taxes and benefits, professional and investment banking fees and other general and administrative expenses necessary for our operations.  

Our general and administrative expenses for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2013 were approximately $2.4 million.  This amount included approximately $354,000 in non-cash stock-based compensation to directors, approximately $22,500 in non-cash compensation to outside consultants and a cash severance fee of approximately $240,000 paid to our ex-chief financial officer.  The remaining expenditures totaling approximately $1.77 million were primarily for payroll and related taxes and benefits, professional fees and other general and administrative expenses necessary for our operations.  

We had losses from operations for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 totaling approximately $2,789,000 and $3,685,000, respectively and net losses for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013 totaling approximately $2,791,000 and $3,690,000.  We earned interest and other income netting approximately $2,500 and $4,500 for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

For the fiscal years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

The Company does not expect the adoption of recently issued accounting pronouncements to have a significant impact on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flow.

35

Critical Accounting Estimates

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. Preparation of financial statements requires management to make assumptions, estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, costs and expenses, and the related disclosures of contingencies. Management bases its estimates on various assumptions and historical experience, which are believed to be reasonable; however, due to the inherent nature of estimates, actual results may differ significantly due to changed conditions or assumptions. On a regular basis, management reviews the accounting policies, assumptions, estimates and judgments to ensure that our financial statements are fairly presented in accordance with GAAP. However, because future events and their effects cannot be determined with certainty, actual results could differ from our assumptions and estimates, and such differences could be material. Management believes that the following critical accounting estimates and judgments have a significant impact on our financial statements; Valuation of options granted to Directors and Officers using the Black-Scholes model, and fair value of mineral properties. The accounting policies are described in greater detail in Note 2 to our audited annual financial statements for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014.

ITEM 7A.  QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.

Not applicable.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

36

LBB & ASSOCIATES LTD., LLP

10260 Westheimer Road, Suite 310

Houston, TX 77042

Phone: (713) 800-4343 Fax: (713) 456-2408

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of

Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp

Sierra Blanca, Texas

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp (the “Company”) as of August 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years then ended.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our audits include consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.  An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp as of August 31, 2014 and 2013, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

As discussed in Note 1 to the financial statements, the Company's absence of significant revenues, recurring losses from operations, and its need for additional financing in order to fund its projected loss in 2015 raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The 2014 financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.  

/S/ LBB & ASSOCIATES LTD., LLP

LBB & Associates Ltd., LLP

Houston, Texas

November 11, 2014

37

Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp
BALANCE SHEETS
	August 31, 2014			August 31, 2013
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents	$	387,841		$	2,374,017
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		44,641			61,828
Total current assets		432,482			2,435,845
Property and equipment, net		83,002			148,217
Mineral properties		1,718,286			1,718,286
Deposits		61,396			111,250
TOTAL ASSETS	$	2,295,166		$	4,413,598
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	155,123		$	228,834
Accounts payable - related party		8,390			-
Current portion of note payable		30,458			29,007
Total current liabilities		193,971			257,841
Note payable - net of current portion and discount		260,387			290,845
Total liabilities		454,358			548,686
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
Preferred stock, par value $0.001; 10,000,000 shares authorized, no
shares issued and outstanding as of August 31, 2014 and
August 31, 2013, respectively		-			-
Common stock, par value $0.01; 100,000,000 shares authorized,
37,036,916 shares issued and outstanding as of
August 31, 2014 and August 31, 2013, respectively		370,370			370,370
Additional paid-in capital		30,769,086			30,001,752
Accumulated deficit		(29,298,648	)		(26,507,210	)
Total shareholders' equity		1,840,808			3,864,912
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY	$	2,295,166		$	4,413,598
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

38

TEXAS RARE EARTH RESOURCES CORP
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
	Year Ended August 31,
	2014			2013
OPERATING EXPENSES
Exploration costs	$	455,903		$	1,281,998
General and administrative expenses		2,333,081			2,403,226
Total operating expenses		2,788,984			3,685,224
LOSS FROM OPERATIONS		(2,788,984	)		(3,685,224	)
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE)
Loss on asset disposal		-			(12,835	)
Interest and other income		5,289			24,388
Interest and other expense		(7,743	)		(16,191	)
Total other income (expense)		(2,454	)		(4,638	)
NET LOSS	$	(2,791,438	)	$	(3,689,862	)
Net loss per share:
Basic and diluted net loss per share	$	(0.08	)	$	(0.10	)
Weighted average shares outstanding:
Basic and diluted		37,036,916			36,670,297
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

39

TEXAS RARE EARTH RESOURCES CORP
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
For the years Ended August 31, 2014 and August 31, 2013
	Preferred Stock				Common Stock
	Shares		Amount		Shares			Amount			Additional Paid-in Capital			Accumulated Deficit			Total
Balance at August 31, 2012		-	$	-		36,550,009		$	365,501		$	29,262,684		$	(22,817,348	)	$	6,810,837
Options issued to Officers and Directors												376,629						376,629
Repurchase of common stock outstanding						(576,923	)		(5,769	)		(126,923	)					(132,692	)
Common Stock issued for assumption of West Lease						1,063,830			10,638			489,362						500,000
Net loss															(3,689,862	)		(3,689,862	)
Balance at August 31, 2013		-		-		37,036,916			370,370			30,001,752			(26,507,210	)		3,864,912
Options issued to Officers and Directors												654,111						654,111
Shares issued for services												113,223						113,223
Net loss															(2,791,438	)		(2,791,438	)
Balance at August 31, 2014		-	$	-		37,036,916		$	370,370		$	30,769,086		$	(29,298,648	)	$	1,840,808
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

40

TEXAS RARE EARTH RESOURCES CORP
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
	Year Ended August 31,
	2014			2013
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net loss	$	(2,791,438	)	$	(3,689,862	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash
used in operating activities:
Depreciation expense		65,855			86,272
Loss on disposition of fixed assets		-			12,835
Stock based compensation		767,334			376,629
Changes in current assets and liabilities:
Prepaid expenses and other assets		67,041			3,912
Accounts payable and accrued expenses		(73,711	)		(249,596	)
Accounts payable related party		8,390			-
Net cash used in operating activities		(1,956,529	)		(3,459,810	)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Investment in mineral properties		-			(510,000	)
Purchase of  fixed assets		(640	)		(696	)
Proceeds from sale of  fixed assets		-			4,280
Net cash used in investing activities		(640	)		(506,416	)
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Payment on note payable		(29,007	)		(45,000	)
Purchase of common stock		-			(132,692	)
Net cash used in financing activities		(29,007	)		(177,692	)
NET CHANGE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS		(1,986,176	)		(4,143,918	)
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD		2,374,017			6,517,935
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD	$	387,841		$	2,374,017
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
Interest paid	$	7,743		$	191
Taxes paid	$	-		$	-
Issuance of common stock for lease assignment	$	-		$	500,000
Note payable for lease assignment	$	-		$	364,852
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

41

TEXAS RARE EARTH RESOURCES CORP.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

AUGUST 31, 2014 AND 2013

NOTE 1 – ORGANIZATION AND NATURE OF BUSINESS

Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp (the “Company”) was incorporated in the State of Nevada in 1970.  In July 2004, our articles of incorporation were amended and restated to increase the authorized capital to 25,000,000 common shares and, in April 2007, we effected a 1 for 2 reverse stock split.  In September 2008, our articles of incorporation were further amended and restated to increase the authorized capital to 100,000,000 common shares with a par value of $0.01 per share and to authorize 10,000,000 preferred shares with a par value of $0.001 per share.  Our fiscal year-end is August 31.

Effective September 1, 2010, we changed our name from “Standard Silver Corporation” to “Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp.”  We are now a mining company engaged in the business of the acquisition and development of mineral properties.  As of the date of this filing, we hold two nineteen year leases, executed in September and November of 2011, to explore and develop a 950 acre rare earths project located in Hudspeth County, Texas known as the Round Top Project and prospecting permits covering an adjacent 9,345 acres.  We also own unpatented mining claims in New Mexico. We are currently not evaluating any additional prospects, and intend to focus primarily on the development of our Round Top rare earth prospect.

On August 24, 2012, we changed our state of incorporation from the State of Nevada to the State of Delaware (the “Reincorporation”) pursuant to a plan of conversion dated August 24, 2012.   The Reincorporation was previously submitted to a vote of, and approved by, our stockholders at a special meeting of the stockholders held on April 25, 2012.

The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis which assumes the Company will be able to realize its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business for the foreseeable future.  The Company has incurred losses since inception resulting in an accumulated deficit of $29,298,648 as of August 31, 2014 and further losses are anticipated in the development of its business raising substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.  The ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon the Company generating profitable operations in the future and/or to obtain the necessary financing to meet its obligations and repay its liabilities arising from normal business operations when they come due. Management intends to finance operating costs over the next twelve months with existing cash on hand and loans from directors and or private placement of common stock.

NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of Presentation

Our financial records are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting whereby revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recorded when incurred, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) – United States.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

We consider all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents.  Cash and cash equivalents consist of demand deposits at commercial banks.  We currently have cash deposits at financial institutions in excess of federally insured limits.

Property and Equipment

Our property and equipment consists primarily of vehicles, furniture and equipment, and are recorded at cost. Expenditures related to acquiring or extending the useful life of our property and equipment are capitalized. Expenditures for repair and maintenance are charged to operations as incurred. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over an estimated useful life of 3-20 years.

Lease Deposits

From time to time, the Company makes deposits in anticipation of executing leases.  The deposits are capitalized upon execution of the applicable agreements.

Long-lived Assets

The Company reviews the recoverability of long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable through operations.  To determine if these costs are in excess of their recoverable amount, periodic evaluation of carrying value of capitalized costs and any related property and equipment costs are based upon expected future cash flows and/or estimated salvage value in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC 360”),  Property, Plant and Equipment.   We have not incurred any impairment losses and, therefore, no impairment is reflected in these financial statements.

42

NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, services have been performed, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collectability is probable. We have yet to generate any revenue.  

Mineral Exploration and Development Costs

All exploration expenditures are expensed as incurred. Costs of acquisition and option costs of mineral rights are capitalized upon acquisition. Mine development costs incurred to develop new ore deposits, to expand the capacity of mines, or to develop mine areas substantially in advance of current production are also capitalized once proven and probable reserves exist and the property is determined to be a commercially mineable property. Costs incurred to maintain current production or to maintain assets on a standby basis are charged to operations. If the Company does not continue with exploration after the completion of the feasibility study, the mineral rights will be expensed at that time. Costs of abandoned projects are charged to mining costs including related property and equipment costs. To determine if these costs are in excess of their recoverable amount, periodic evaluation of carrying value of capitalized costs and any related property and equipment costs are based upon expected future cash flows and/or estimated salvage value in accordance with ASC 360-10-35-15,  Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. Exploration costs were approximately $456,000 and $1,282,000 for the years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Share-based Payments

The Company estimates the fair value of share-based compensation using the Black-Scholes valuation model, in accordance with the provisions of ASC 718,  Stock Compensation and ASC 505, Share-Based Payments .  Key inputs and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of stock options include the grant price of the award, the expected option term, volatility of our stock, the risk-free rate, and dividend yield. Estimates of fair value are not intended to predict actual future events or the value ultimately realized by the option holders, and subsequent events are not indicative of the reasonableness of the original estimates of fair value made by the Company.

Amended 2008 Stock Option Plan

In September 2008, the Board adopted our 2008 Stock Option Plan (the “2008 Plan”), which was also approved by our shareholders in September 2008.  In May 2011, the board of directors adopted an amendment to our 2008 Plan (the “Amended 2008 Plan”), which was also approved by our shareholders in August 2011. The Amended 2008 Plan increased the number of shares available for grant from 2,000,000 to up to 5,000,000 shares of our common stock for awards to our officers, directors, employees and consultants.  On February 15, 2012, our stockholders approved an increase of 2,000,000 of shares of common stock available for issuance under the amended 2008 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”).  As amended, the Plan provides for 7,000,000 shares of common stock for all awards.  Other provisions of the Amended 2008 Plan remain the same as under our 2008 Plan.  As of August 31, 2014, a total of 2,205,000 shares of our common stock remained available for future grants under the Amended 2008 Plan.  

Income Taxes

Income taxes are computed using the asset and liability method, in accordance with ASC 740, Income Taxes.  Under the asset and liability method, deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, and are measured using the currently enacted tax rates and laws.  A valuation allowance is provided for the amount of deferred tax assets that, based on available evidence, are not expected to be realized.

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share

The Company computes loss per share in accordance with ASC 260, Earnings Per Share, which requires presentation of both basic and diluted earnings per share on the face of the Statements of Operations.  Basic loss per share is computed by dividing net loss available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of outstanding common shares during the period.  Diluted loss per share gives effect to all dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the period, including stock options and warrants using the treasury method.  Dilutive loss per share excludes all potential common shares if their effect is anti-dilutive.

43

NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Actual results could differ from those estimates.  Management believes that these financial statements include all normal and recurring adjustments necessary for a fair presentation under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

Fair Value Measurements

We account for assets and liabilities measured at fair value in accordance with ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.  ASC 820 emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement.  Therefore, a fair value measurement should be determined based on the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.  As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified with Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within Level 3 of the hierarchy).The three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:

• Level 1: Observable inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities traded in active markets.

• Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly.

• Level 3: Inputs that are generally unobservable.  These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value.

Our financial instruments consist principally of cash, accounts payable and accrued liabilities and note payable.  The carrying amounts of such financial instruments in the accompanying financial statements approximate their fair values due to their relatively short-term nature.  It is management’s opinion that the Company is not exposed to any significant currency or credit risks arising from these financial instruments.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Pronouncements between August 31, 2014 and the date of this filing are not expected to have a significant impact on our operations, financial position, or cash flow, nor does the Company expect the adoption of recently issued, but not yet effective, accounting pronouncements to have a significant impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

NOTE 3 – PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET

Property and equipment consist of office furniture, equipment and vehicles.  The property and equipment are depreciated using the straight-line method over their estimated useful life of 3-20 years.  Our property and equipment, net consist of the following:

	August 31, 2014			August 31, 2013
Furniture &office equipment	$	85,889		$	85,889
Vehicles		105,299			105,299
Computers & software		48,711			48,071
Field equipment		71,396			71,396
Total cost basis		311,295			310,655
Less: Accumulated depreciation		(228,293	)		(162,438	)
Property & equipment, net	$	83,002		$	148,217

Depreciation expense for the years ending August 31, 2014 and 2013 was $65,855 and $86,272, respectively.

44

 NOTE 4 – MINERAL PROPERTIES

September 2011 Lease

On September 2, 2011, we entered into a new mining lease with the Texas General Land Office covering Sections 7 and 18 of Township 7, Block 71 and Section 12 of Block 72, covering approximately 860 acres at Round Top Mountain in Hudspeth County, Texas.  The mining lease issued by the Texas General Land Office gives us the right to explore, produce, develop, mine, extract, mill, remove, and market beryllium, uranium, rare earth elements, all other base and precious metals, industrial minerals and construction materials and all other minerals excluding oil, gas, coal, lignite, sulfur, salt, and potash.  The term of the lease is nineteen years so long as minerals are produced in paying quantities.

Under the lease, we will pay the State of Texas a lease bonus of $142,518; $44,718 of which was paid upon the execution of the lease, and $97,800 which will be due when we submit a supplemental plan of operations to conduct mining.  Upon the sale of minerals removed from Round Top, we will pay the State of Texas a $500,000 minimum advance royalty.

Thereafter, we will pay the State of Texas a production royalty equal to eight percent (8%) of the market value of uranium and other fissionable materials removed and sold from Round Top and six and one quarter percent (61/4%) of the market value of all other minerals removed and sold from Round Top.

Thereafter, assuming production of paying quantities has not been obtained, we may pay additional delay rental fees to extend the term of the lease for successive one (1) year periods pursuant to the following schedule:

	Per Acre Amount		Total Amount
September 2, 2013 – 2014	$	50	$	44,718
September 2, 2015 – 2019	$	75	$	67,077
September 2, 2020 – 2024	$	150	$	134,155
September 2, 2025 – 2029	$	200	$	178,873

 In August 2014, we paid a delay rental to the State of Texas in the amount of $44,718.  

November 2011 Lease

On November 1, 2011, we entered into a mining lease with the State of Texas covering 90 acres, more or less, of land that we purchased in September 2011 near our Round Top site.  The deed was recorded with Hudspeth County on September 16, 2011. Under the lease, we paid the State of Texas a lease bonus of $20,700 which was paid upon the execution of the lease.  Upon the sale of minerals removed from Round Top, we will pay the State of Texas a $50,000 minimum advance royalty.  Thereafter, we will pay the State of Texas a production royalty equal to eight percent (8%) of the market value of uranium and other fissionable materials removed and sold from Round Top and six and one quarter percent (6 1/4%) of the market value of all other minerals sold from Round Top.

If production of paying quantities of minerals has not been obtained on or before November 1, 2012, we may pay the State of Texas a delay rental to extend the term of the lease in an amount equal to $4,500.  Thereafter, assuming production of paying quantities has not been obtained, we may pay additional delay rental fees to extend the term of the lease for successive one (1) year periods pursuant to the following schedule:

	Per Acre Amount		Total Amount
November 1, 2013-2014	$	50	$	4,500
November 1, 2015 – 2019	$	75	$	6,750
November 1, 2020 – 2024	$	150	$	13,500
November 1, 2025 – 2029	$	200	$	18,000

In August 2014, we paid a delay rental to the State of Texas of $4,500.

On March 6, 2013, we entered into a lease assignment (the “Lease Assignment Agreement”) with Southwest Range & Wildlife Foundation, Inc., a Texas non-profit corporation  (the “Foundation”), pursuant to which the Foundation agreed to assign to us a surface lease identified with the State of Texas as Surface Lease SL20040002 (the “WestLease”), which covers 54,990.11 acres in Hudspeth County, Texas.  In exchange for the West Lease, we agreed to:  (i) pay the Foundation $500,000 in cash; (ii) issue 1,063,830 of our common shares, par value $0.01 (the “Common Shares”); and (iii) make ten (10) payments to the Foundation of $45,000 each.  The first payment was made in June 2013, and the nine (9) subsequent payments due on or before June 1 of each of the following years, such payments to be used by the Foundation to support conservation efforts within the Rio Grande Basin.  The Lease Assignment Agreement contains standard representations, warranties and covenants. The closing of the transaction contemplated by the Lease Assignment Agreement was completed on March 8, 2013.

45

NOTE 5 – NOTE PAYABLE

In relation to the Foundation lease discussed in Note 4 the Company recorded a note payable for an amount for the initial $45,000 due upon signing of lease and the nine (9) future payments due of $45,000 which has been recorded at its present value discounted with an imputed interest rate of 5% for a total note payable of $364,852. At August 31, 2014 the current portion due is $30,458 and long-term portion due is $260,387. The Company has also accrued interest expense of $7,750 as of year end which is included in accrued liabilities.

Future maturities
Year	Principle amount due
2015	30,458
2016	31,981
2017	33,580
2018	35,259
2019 thereafter	159,567
Total	$290,845

During the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014 we paid the second installment of our surface lease in the amount of $45,000 to the Southwest Wildlife Foundation.

NOTE 6 – INCOME TAXES

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the federal income tax for the years ended August 31, 2014 and 2013:

	2014			2013
Loss before provision for income taxes	$	(2,791,438	)	$	(3,689,862	)
Income tax benefit at 34% federal statutory rate	$	949,089		$	1,254,553
Permanent difference - non-deductible business meals and entertainment		(1,087	)		(1,379	)
Other					29,815
Increase in valuation allowance		(948,002	)		(1,282,989	)
	$	-		$	-

The tax effects of the temporary differences between reportable financial statement income and taxable income are recognized as a deferred tax asset and liability.  Significant components of the deferred tax assets are set out below along with a valuation allowance to reduce the net deferred tax asset to zero.

In order to comply with generally accepted accounting principles, management has decided to establish a valuation allowance because of the potential that the tax benefits underlying deferred tax asset may not be realized.  Significant components of our deferred tax asset at August 31, 2014 and 2013 are as follows:

	2014			2013
Net operating loss carryfowards	$	3,520,253		$	2,948,177
Stock compensation		1,486,689			1,264,291
Assets, exploration cost, depreciation and
amortization		3,452,684			3,299,156
Less:  valuation allowance		(8,459,626	)		(7,511,624	)
	$	-		$	-

46

NOTE 6 – INCOME TAXES (Continued)

As a result of a change in control effective in April 2007, our net operating losses prior to that date may be partially or entirely unavailable, by law, to offset future income and, accordingly, are excluded from the associated deferred tax asset.

The net operating loss carryforward in the approximate amount of $10,354,000 will begin to expire in 2022.  We file income tax returns in the United States and in one state jurisdiction.  With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to United States federal income tax examinations for fiscal years ending before 2010, and is no longer subject to state tax examinations for years before 2009.

NOTE 7– SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Our authorized capital stock consists of 100,000,000 shares of common stock, with a par value of $0.01 per share, and 10,000,000 preferred shares with a par value of $0.001 per share.

All shares of common stock have equal voting rights and, when validly issued and outstanding, are entitled to one non-cumulative vote per share in all matters to be voted upon by shareholders.  The shares of common stock have no pre-emptive, subscription, conversion or redemption rights and may be issued only as fully paid and non-assessable shares. Holders of the common stock are entitled to equal ratable rights to dividends and distributions with respect to the common stock, as may be declared by our Board of Directors (our “Board”) out of funds legally available.  In the event of a liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the affairs of the Corporation, the holders of common stock are entitled to share ratably in all assets remaining available for distribution  to them after payment or provision for all liabilities and any preferential liquidation rights of any preferred stock then outstanding.

During the year ended August 31, 2014, we expensed approximately $767,000 in non-cash stock-based compensation to directors and outside consultants.

On September 1, 2013, our Board approved and granted a total of 60,000 options to consultants. The options are exercisable at $0.30 per share for a period of five years. All options vest 1/6 at the end of each month of consulting services. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 60,000 options issued during the period to these consultants, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 1.62%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 303%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options are valued at approximately $16,000 and are being expensed over the vesting period of 6 months in the amount of approximately $2,700 per month and have been fully expensed at year end.

On October 1, 2013, we appointed Mr. Jack Lifton to serve as a member of our Board. In connection with the appointment of Mr. Jack Lifton to our Board on October 1, 2013, Mr. Lifton was granted 100,000 options to purchase shares of our common stock, vesting immediately with a term of 5 years and at an exercise price of $0.50. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 100,000 options issued during the period to this director, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 1.10%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 302%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were immediately expensed during the current period in the amount of approximately $47,000. In addition, Mr. Lifton, as a non-executive director, will receive $10,000 annually, $1,000 for in person board meetings, $500 for telephonic board meetings and $500 for committee meetings (both in person and telephonic) pursuant to our director compensation program.

On November 25, 2013, our Board approved and granted a total of 10,000 options to consultants. The options are exercisable at $0.50 per share for a period of five years. All options vest immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 10,000 options issued during the period to these consultants, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 1.37%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 298%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were expensed immediately in the amount of approximately $5,000.

On December 8, 2013, our Board approved and granted 240,000 options to Mr. Marchese, 160,000 options to Dr. Pingitore, and 60,000 options each to Mr. Gorski, Dr. Wolfe, Mr. Lifton, Dr. Goodell, Ms. Lynch and Mr. Wall. All options to these members are exercisable at $0.50 per share for a period of ten years, vesting immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 760,000 options issued during the period to these directors, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 2.88%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 297%, and an expected life of 10 years. These options were expensed during the quarter ending February 28, 2014. Total value expensed was approximately $380,000.

On January 10, 2014, our Board entered into an agreement with a consultant to provide advisory services to the Company’s Board. As a part of the agreement our Board approved to provide the consultant with annual cash compensation of $5,000 and a grant of 25,000 options. The options are exercisable at $0.42 per share for a period of five years. All options vest immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 25,000 options issued during the period to this advisor, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 2.88%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 293%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were expensed immediately in the amount of approximately $10,500.

47

NOTE 7– SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (Continued)

On February 19, 2014, our Board approved a grant of 50,000 options to a consultant to the Company. The options are exercisable at $0.41 per share for a period of five years. All options vest immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 50,000 options issued during the period to this advisor, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 2.88%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 291%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were expensed immediately in the amount of approximately $20,500.

On March 31, 2014, April 30, 2014, and May 31, 2014, the Board approved a total grant of 30,000 options to a consultant to the Company. The options are exercisable at $0.30 per share for a period of five years. All options vest immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 30,000 options issued during the period to this advisor, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 1.54% to 1.74%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 284% to 288%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were expensed immediately in the amount of approximately $12,000.

On March 3, 2014, our Board approved the repricing of all outstanding Board options for active directors to $0.45. A total of 3.185 million Directors’ options that was outstanding as of March 3, 2014. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 3.185 million options outstanding on March 3, 2014, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate from 0.39% to 2.6%, a dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 158%, to 883% and an expected life of 2 to 9.75 years. The options were expensed in full during the third quarter 2014 in the amount of approximately $43,000.

On March 19, 2014, our Board approved a grant of 25,000 options to a consultant to the Company. The options are exercisable at $0.41 per share for a period of five years. All options vest immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 25,000 options issued during the period to this advisor, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 1.56%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 289%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were expensed immediately in the amount of approximately $10,500.

On June 30, 2014, July 31, 2014, and August 31, 2014, the Board approved a total grant of 30,000 options to a consultant to the Company. The options are exercisable at $0.30 per share for a period of five years. All options vest immediately. With respect to these options, the Black-Scholes pricing model was used to estimate the fair value of the 30,000 options issued during the period to this advisor, using the assumptions of a risk free interest rate of 1.62% to 1.76%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 281% to 286%, and an expected life of 5 years. These options were expensed immediately in the amount of approximately $12,000.

During the year the Company recognized stock compensation expense of approximately $210,000 for 1,725,000 stock options issued to Board members in prior year for services vesting over one to three years. As of yearend there remains approximately $249,000 of stock compensation expense to be recognized.

We currently have 37,036,916 shares of our common stock outstanding.

As of August 31, 2014, the Company has 9,587,000 warrants issued in prior year, exercisable and outstanding with exercise prices of $2.50 to $5.00 per warrant, expiring 2015 and 2016.

As of August 31, 2014, the Company has 4,965,000 options issued and outstanding, of which 1,090,000 were issued during the twelve months ended August 31, 2014. The options have exercise prices of $0.30 to $1.00 and 3,971,022 are vested and exercisable, expiring in 2016 and 2024.

In September 2008, the Board adopted our 2008 Stock Option Plan (the “2008 Plan”), which was also approved by our shareholders in September 2008.  In May 2011, the board of directors adopted an amendment to our 2008 Plan (the “Amended 2008 Plan”), which was also approved by our shareholders in August 2011. The Amended 2008 Plan increased the number of shares available for grant from 2,000,000 to up to 5,000,000 shares of our common stock for awards to our officers, directors, employees and consultants.  On February 15, 2012, our stockholders approved an increase of 2,000,000 of shares of common stock available for issuance under the amended 2008 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”).  As amended, the Plan provides for 7,000,000 shares of common stock for all awards.  Other provisions of the Amended 2008 Plan remain the same as under our 2008 Plan.  As of August 31, 2014, a total of 2,205,000 shares of our common stock remained available for future grants under the Amended 2008 Plan.  

48

NOTE 7– SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (Continued)

The following table sets forth certain information as of August 31, 2014 concerning our common stock that may be issued upon the exercise of options or warrants or pursuant to purchases of stock under the Amended 2008 Plan:

Plan Category	(a) Number of Securities to be Issued Upon the Exercise of Outstanding Options	(b) Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options	(c) Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a))
Equity compensation plans approved by stockholders	4,795,000	$0.70	2,205,000
Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders	170,000	$0.33	--
Total	4,965,000	$0.69	2,205,000

Warrants

The fair value of the 1,905,000 warrants issued in January 2011 with our 2011 Private Placement was estimated at the date of issue using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The Company included the relative fair value of the warrants of $944,000 as APIC.

The fair value of the 7,432,000 Option Warrants issued in May and June with our 2011 Private Placement was estimated at the date of issue using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The Company recorded the relative fair value of the warrants of $2,236,000 as Additional Paid In Capital.

            The fair value of the 250,000 Option Warrants issued in November 2010 for public relations services was estimated at the date of issue using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The Company recorded the relative fair value of the warrants of $479,998 as Additional Paid In Capital.

Warrant activity for the year ended August 31, 2014, was as follows:

	Shares		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (In Years)		Grant Date Fair Value
Outstanding at August 31, 2013		9,587,000	$	2.57		1.54	$	3,659,998
Warrants granted		-		-		-		-
Warrants exercised		-		-		-		-
Warrants cancelled/forfeited/expired		-		-		-		-
Outstanding at August 31, 2014		9,587,000	$	2.57		1.54	$	3,659,998
Vested at August 31, 2014		9,587,000	$	2.57		1.54	$	3,659,998
Exercisable at August 31, 2014		9,587,000	$	2.57		1.54	$	3,659,998

49

NOTE 7– SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (Continued)

The assumptions used and the weighted average calculated value of warrants issued during prior years, were as follows:

Risk-free interest rate		1.1	%
Expected dividend yield		0.00	%
Expected volatility		380-425	%
Expected life	5 Years

NOTE 8 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

The Company had accounts payable to an officer in the amount of $8,390 at year end.

The Company rents office space on a month to month basis of $1,600 from a director.

NOTE 9 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

In October 2014, we executed an agreement with the Texas General Land Office securing the option to purchase the surface rights covering the potential Round Top project mine and plant areas.

The option to purchase the surface rights covers approximately 5,670 acres over the mining lease and the additional acreage adequate to site all potential heap leaching and processing operations as currently anticipated by the Company. We may exercise the option for all or part of the option acreage at any time during the sixteen year primary term of the mineral lease. The option can be kept current by an annual payment of $10,000. The purchase price will be the appraised value of the surface at the time of exercising the option.

50

ITEM 9.  CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None.

ITEM 9A.  CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

At the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014, an evaluation was carried out under the supervision of and with the participation of our management, including the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), of the effectiveness of the design and operations of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and Rule 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act). Based on that evaluation the CEO and the CFO have concluded that as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective in ensuring that: (i) information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit to the SEC under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in applicable rules and forms and (ii) material information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our CEO and CFO, as appropriate, to allow for accurate and timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and Rule 15d-15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by our Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Our internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:

· pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;

· provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and

· provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detections of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of August 31, 2014. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria set forth in the Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on our assessment, we have concluded that, as of August 31, 2014, our internal controls over financial reporting were effective based on those criteria.

Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm

This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of our independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by our independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to Section 404(c) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, which provides that issuers that are not an “accelerated filer” or “large accelerated filer” are exempt from the requirement to provide an auditor attestation report.

Changes to Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There have not been changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the year ended August 31, 2014 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B.  OTHER INFORMATION

None.

51

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The information required by this Item will be included under the section entitled “Information on the Board of Directors and Executive Officers” in our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the 2014 annual meeting of shareholders (the “Proxy Statement”), which information is incorporated by reference to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

For disclosure regarding our Executive Officers, see the section headed: “ITEM 1.  BUSINESS.  Executive Officers of the Company” above. 

Our Code of Business and Ethical Conduct can be found on our internet website located at www.trer.com under the heading "Corporate". Any stockholder may request a printed copy of such materials by submitting a written request to our Corporate Secretary. If the Company amends the Code of Business and Ethical Conduct or grants a waiver, including an implicit waiver, from the Code of Business and Ethical Conduct, the Company will disclose the information on its internet website. The waiver information will remain on the website for at least twelve months after the initial disclosure of such waiver.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The information required by this Item will be included under the section entitled “Executive Compensation” in the Proxy Statement to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A, which information is incorporated by reference to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The information required by this Item will be included under the section entitled “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A, which information is incorporated by reference to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information required by this Item will be included under the section entitled “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Corporate Governance Matters” in the Proxy Statement to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A, which information is incorporated by reference to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

The information required by this Item will be included under the section entitled “Principal Accountant Fees and Services” in the Proxy Statement to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A, which information is incorporated by reference to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

52

PART IV

ITEM 15.  EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES

Documents filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or incorporated by reference:

(1) The financial statements are listed on the “Index to Financial Statements” in Item 8.

(2) Financial Statement Schedules (omitted because the Company is a smaller reporting issuer).

The following exhibits are attached hereto or are incorporated by reference:

Exhibit No.	Description
2.1	Plan of Conversion, dated August 24, 2012, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 29, 2012.
3.1	Delaware Certificate of Conversion, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 29, 2012.
3.2	Delaware Certificate of Incorporation, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 29, 2012.
3.3	Delaware Bylaws, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 29, 2012.
4.1	Form of Common Stock Certificate, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.1	Amended and Restated 2008 Stock Option Plan, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of our Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2011 filed with the SEC on July 15, 2011.
10.2	Lease, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.3	Form of Class A Warrant, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.4	Form of Class B Warrant, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.5	Form of Registration Rights Agreement, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.6*	Director’s Agreement by and between the Company and Anthony Marchese, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.7	Form of Subscription Agreement for January 2011 Investment, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.8	Form of Warrant for January 2011 Investment, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.9	Form of Registration Rights Agreement for January 2011 Investment, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.10	Shareholders’ Agreement, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 of our Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 8, 2011.
10.11*	Director’s Agreement by and between the Company and General Gregory Martin, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 23, 2011.
10.12*	Director’s Agreement by and between the Company and Graham A. Karklin incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011.
10.13	Investment Banking Agreement by and between the Company and Sunrise Securities Corp. incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011.
10.14	Finders Agreement by and between the Company and Aspenwood Capital incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011
10.15	Institutional Public Relations Retainer Agreement by and between the Company and Sunrise Financial Group, Inc. incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011

53

10.16*	Summary of Dan Gorski Employment Arrangement incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011
10.17*	Summary of Wm. Chris Mathers Employment Arrangement incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011
10.18*	Summary of Stanley Korzeb Employment Arrangement incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011
10.19*	Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Marc LeVier, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 9, 2011.
10.20*	Director’s Agreement by and between the Company and Jim Graham, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 9, 2011.
10.21*	Option Agreement for Wm. Chris Mathers incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011.
10.22*	Form of Directors Option Agreement incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 of our Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (333-172116) filed with the SEC on May 25, 2011.
10.23	Form of Registration Rights Agreement for May/June option exercises, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 of our Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2011 filed with the SEC on July 15, 2011.
10.24	Denver Colorado Facilities Lease, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of our Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2011 filed with the SEC on July 15, 2011.
10.25*	Employment Agreement between the Company and Anthony Garcia dated August 11, 2011, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25 of the Company’s Form 10-K filed with the SEC on November 15, 2012
10.26*	Director Appointment Agreement dated February 2, 2012, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 6, 2012
10.27	Separation Agreement and Release between the Company and Marc LeVier incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 24, 2012
10.28	Severance, Waiver and Release Agreement between the Company and Anthony Garcia dated September 14, 2012, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 of the Company’s Form 10-K filed with the SEC on November 15, 2012
10.29	Supplemental Agreement between the Company and Christopher Mathers dated September 26, 2012, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 of the Company’s Form 10-K filed with the SEC on November 15, 2012
10.30	Consulting Agreement between the Company and Chemetals, Inc., dated January 22, 2013, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 28, 2013
10.31	Lease Agreement between the Company and Southwest Range & Wildlife Foundation, Inc., dated March 6, 2012, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2013

23.1(1)	Consent of LBB & Associates Ltd., LLP
31.1(1)	Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Exchange Act.
31.2(1)	Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Exchange Act.
32.1(1)	Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2(1)	Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS(2)	XBRL Instance Document
101.SCH(2)	XBRL Taxonomy Extension — Schema
101.CAL(2)	XBRL Taxonomy Extension — Calculations
101.DEF(2)	XBRL Taxonomy Extension — Definitions
101.LAB(2)	XBRL Taxonomy Extension — Labels
101.PRE(2)	XBRL Taxonomy Extension — Presentations

* Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

(1)

Filed herewith.

(2)

Submitted Electronically Herewith. Attached as Exhibit 101 to this report are the following formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Consolidated Statements of Income/(Loss) and Comprehensive Income/(Loss) for the year ended August 31, 2013 and 2012, (ii) Consolidated Balance Sheets at August 31, 2013 and 2012, (iii) Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the year ended August 31, 2013 and 2012, and (iv) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

54

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

TEXAS RARE EARTH RESOURCES CORP.

/s/ Daniel E Gorski

Daniel E Gorski, duly authorized officer

and Principal Executive Officer

DATED:  November 12, 2014

/s/Mike McDonald

Mike McDonald, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer

DATED:  November 12, 2014

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Signature	Capacity	Date
/s/ Daniel E Gorski Daniel E Gorski	Chief Executive Officer, Principal Executive Officer and Director	November 12, 2014
/s/ Mike McDonald Mike McDonald	Chief Financial Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer	November 12, 2014
/s/ Anthony Marchese Anthony Marchese	Chairman of the Board	November 12, 2014
/s/ Cecil C Wall Cecil C Wall	Director	November 12, 2014
/s/ Nicholas Pingitore Nicholas Pingitore	Director	November 12, 2014
/s/ James R Wolfe James R Wolfe	Director	November 12, 2014
/s/ Laura Lynch Laura Lynch	Director	November 12, 2014
/s/ Jack Lifton Jack Lifton	Director	November 12, 2014

55