U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

_________________

FORM 10-K

_________________

X . Annual Report under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011

. Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Commission file number 0-19620

[f10k123111_10k002.gif]

America West Resources, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


Nevada	84-1152135
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(IRS Employer Identification No.)

57 West 200 South, Suite 400, Salt Lake City, UT	84101
(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (801) 521-3292

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock

Check whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. .

Check whether the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. .

Check whether the registrant (1) has 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 .

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 (§232.405 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 . No X .

Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-B contained in this form, and no disclosure will be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.

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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):


Large accelerated filer	.	Accelerated filer	.
Non-accelerated filer	. (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company	X .

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

State registrant’s revenues for its most recent fiscal year: Revenues for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 total $13,896,603.

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based on the closing price of the common stock on the OTC Electronic Bulletin Board on May 11, 2012 was $8,361,723.

As of May 1, 2012, the registrant had 66,414,175 shares of common stock outstanding.

APPLICABLE ONLY TO REGISTRANTS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Section 12,13, or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. Yes X . No .

America West Resources, Inc.

Table of Contents


			Page No.
Part I	Item 1.	Description of Business	4

	Item 2.	Description of Property	10

	Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	21

Part II	Item 4.	Reserved	26

	Item 5.	Market for Common Equity and Related Shareholder Matters	27

	Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	28

	Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis and Results of Operations and Financial Condition	31

	Item7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	31

	Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	F-1

	Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	37

	Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	38

	Item 9B.	Other Information	39

Part III	Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	39

	Item 11.	Executive Compensation	42

	Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management	44

	Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independent	47

	Item 14.	Principal Accountant’s Fees and Services	49

Part IV	Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	50

PART I

Industry and Market Data

The industry and market data presented in this Annual Report are estimates and are based upon third-party data and our own internal estimates. While we believe this data is reasonable, in some cases our data is based on our or others’ estimates and cannot be verified by us. Accordingly, prospective investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the industry and market data included in this Annual Report.

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. These statements relate to future events or future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company’s or its industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These statements are only predictions. Actual events or results may differ materially.

Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, the Company cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Moreover, neither the Company nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of these forward-looking statements. The Company is under no duty to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this report to conform its prior statements to actual results.

ITEM 1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, America West Resources is a domestic coal producer focused on the mining of compliant (low-sulfur) coal and its sale primarily to U.S. utility companies for use in heating water and creating steam used to turn turbine engines, and to ultimately produce electricity from coal fired power plants.

Since 2003, the Company has owned and operated Horizon Coal Mine, located 12 miles outside of Helper, Utah – about 120 miles southeast of Salt Lake City in Carbon County. The mine property abuts a county road known as Consumers Road which allows vehicular access to the mine and allows transportation of coal from the mine.

The Horizon Mine is currently one of only nine active coal mines in Utah, and one of two mines that currently uses the room and pillar extraction method. There are approximately 16 million tons of proven reserves of recoverable coal remaining under lease at the Horizon Mine which is anticipated to take more than 30 years to mine at the current production rate. In 2009, America West initiated an aggressive expansion program at Horizon with a goal of increasing coal production from 22,000+/- tons to 90,000+ tons per month. During the second half of 2010, after signing customer contracts that required additional production, our average monthly coal production approximated 26,000 tons. In 2011, our average coal production was approximately 32,000 tons per month. America West deployed an additional continuous miner during 2011, which has been used to increase production during part of the year and is currently being used in exploration. The Company has purchased additional mining and safety equipment and invested in mine infrastructure during late 2010 and 2011. The Company plans to deploy a third continuous miner during 2012, subject to obtaining sufficient financing , which is expected to escalate production to an estimated 90,000+ tons per month. The Company plans to deploy a longwall unit during 2013 or 2014 subject to obtaining sufficient financing. Longwall operations generally produce on average 3 million to 6 million tons of coal per year. The Company is also pursuing growth through acquisition of additional coal reserves and coal mining operations in the Western region of the United States.

During 2011, we had contracts with four customers to deliver a certain quantity of coal at fixed prices on a “take or pay” basis, subject to other terms and conditions that are standard in the industry. Such terms include, but are not limited to, our customers’ right to reject a shipment of coal we deliver if the coal shipped does not meet the quality requirements of the contract. During 2011, the four customers accounted for essentially all our revenues. We anticipate that two of these customers will account for a majority of our revenues in 2012 as well. With respect to customers not subject to long-term contracts, we have short-term or market delivery, sometimes referred to as “spot price” contracts that we negotiate and fulfill on a continuous basis. Our strategy is to have a combination of long-term and short-term delivery contracts. However, we have sold the majority of our base (pre-longwall) production for the next three years. With our current contract pricing of our base production we expect to recognize a profit from our coal sales once we have completely deployed the second unit of production equipment. Various existing and prospective customers have expressed interest in accepting larger volumes of coal should significantly expand production with a longwall operation.

Coal mined from the Horizon Mine is loaded into trucks which haul the coal either directly to end users of the coal or to distribution facilities known as loadouts where the coal is loaded into rail cars and transported via rail to customers. The Horizon Mine is located approximately eight miles from the nearest loadout facility (which we acquired during the 3^rd quarter of 2011) and approximately sixteen miles from the loadout facility previously most commonly used to ship our coal to end users. Hidden Splendor sells the coal mined at the Horizon Mine on a “FOB the mine” or “FOB the railcar” basis. For the “FOB the mine” basis, Hidden Splendor earns payment for the coal mined from the Horizon Mine as that coal is loaded into trucks at the mine site. Once the coal is loaded into those trucks, the coal belongs to our customers. For the “FOB the railcar” basis, Hidden Splendor earns payment for the coal mined from the Horizon Mine as that coal is loaded into the railcar at the railroad loadout facility. Once the coal is loaded into those railcars, the coal belongs to our customers.

Because it is broadly recognized that coal mining, in general, is a dangerous business and subject to strict regulatory oversight, America West Resources has endeavored to implement and maintain best industry practices to protect the health and safety of its miners.

Although Hidden Splendor has never had any mining fatalities and has had only one injury since 2005 that required hospitalization, in 2007, our S&S (significant and substantial) violation rate stood at 8.7 incidents per 200,000 hours worked in our mine. By comparison, the industry average at that time was 4.74 incidents per 200,000 hours. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) safety citations that Hidden Splendor incurred that year were largely attributable to cited roof falls in dormant former excavation areas of our mine, where we had no active mining activity underway. Nonetheless, in late 2007, we took immediate action, modifying our roof support plan; implementing advanced safety and emergency rescue training for our miners; and designing and executing improvements to our general mine development strategy. As a result, in 2008, we saw our injury rate drop 73% to 2.33 incidents per 200,000 hours worked in our mine. In 2009, we achieved even better safety performance, reducing our injury per 200,000 hours worked rate to 1.22 incidents per 200,000 hours worked. Moreover, the Horizon Mine operated without incurring a single loss-of-work incident for over two years.

In 2010 we continued with an incident rate below the national average. Though the company’s incident rate increased to 1.97, the national average was 5.42. In that year we had 2 reportable injuries and three roof falls and still had no lost-time accidents.

In 2011, we increased the size of our workforce. As a result, we had 6 reportable accidents and two roof falls. We had two lost-time accidents and our incident rate increased to 6.26, which was above the national rate of 4.94. Accordingly, we continue to address the root causes of the increase in our accident rate in order to reduce that rate.

We believe that there is already a shortage of Utah coal supply, given the prevailing demand. Our management anticipates that the demand for clean, compliant Utah coal will remain strong, resulting in higher spot prices in the future. Our Company’s strategy is to expand operations and our production capabilities by (i.) operating two two additional continuous miner sections; (ii) opening a third section of the mine to meet prevailing domestic demand and (iii.) inserting an 800 foot longwall system during 2013 or 2014 to meet an anticipated increase in global demand for compliant coal. Longwall operations typically result in production volumes 300% to 500% more than continuous mining operations, while lowering production costs by as much as half.

Management has significant experience in the coal mining industry, and believes that our Company is positioned well to grow its market share. We believe that rapid economic expansion in developing nations, particularly China and India, has and will continue to increase the global demand for coal, generally speaking. Moreover, we expect industry-wide coal exports from the United States to rise in response to growing global coal demand, particularly as some of the traditional coal export nations experience mine, port, rail and labor challenges. We estimate that higher domestic demand for coal and higher U.S. coal exports will positively influence coal demand for the Price, Utah market. As a consequence of continuing growth in demand and weaker coal supplies, we expect to see upward pressure on coal pricing in the future.

Organizational History

We were incorporated in Nevada on July 13, 1990, as Franklin Capital, Inc. On October 17, 1991, the Company changed its name to Wesco Auto Parts Corporation and again effected a name change on April 21, 1994, to Reddi Brake Supply Corporation.

In August 2007, we acquired all of the outstanding stock of Hidden Splendor in exchange for the issuance of an aggregate of 4,412,100 shares of our Common Stock, representing 90% of the issued and outstanding Company Common Stock after the acquisition. Prior to the acquisition of Hidden Splendor, we had no business activities. From an accounting standpoint, Hidden Splendor was deemed the acquirer in a reverse merger whereby the parent is deemed the survivor of the reorganization. As such, our financial statements are those of Hidden Splendor.

On January 16, 2008, the Board of Directors and a majority of our shareholders increased our authorized stock from 100,000,000 to 200,000,000 shares.

On March 17, 2008, we changed our name from Reddi Brake Supply Corporation to America West Resources, Inc.

Effective January 2009, we amended our Company’s Articles of Incorporation to (i) increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock from 200,000,000 shares to 300,000,000 shares, and (ii) provide that the provisions of NRS 78.378 to 78.3793, inclusive (acquisition of controlling interest), are not applicable to the Company.

In April 2010, the Company’s shareholders approved a proposal to effect one or a series of reverse stock splits of the Company’s Common Stock at a ratio of not less than 1-for-2 and not greater than 1-for-12, with the exact ratio to be set within such range in the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors without further approval or authorization of the Company’s shareholders, provided the Company’s Board of Directors determines to effect the reverse splits and files the necessary amendments to its Articles of Incorporation on or before December 31, 2010. The Board of Directors later approved a one-for-twelve reverse stock split, which became effective in October 2010. All share and per share amounts herein have been retroactively restated to reflect the split.

Hidden Splendor Bankruptcy & Plan of Reorganization

On October 15, 2007, Hidden Splendor filed a Chapter 11 Petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada as a debtor in possession. On December 8, 2008, Hidden Splendor’s Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) in that matter was formally confirmed by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The Plan became effective on December 19, 2008, at which time Hidden Splendor officially emerged from bankruptcy. In connection with the Plan, the Company paid an initial $500,000 “administrative earmark contribution” payment and an initial $2,250,000 “Plan Funding Contribution” payment, which were allocated to the payment of professional fees, taxes, and initial settlement payments to various creditors. Additionally, the Plan provides for payments to creditors over time in an aggregate principal amount of not less than approximately $10,000,000 and up to approximately $10,700,000 over a period not exceeding seven years from the effective date of the Plan. Thereafter, Hidden Splendor made payments under the terms of the Plan. As of this filing, the following Plan obligations remain:

Zions Bank, the secured creditor receives in equal monthly installments of $94,879 with a balance of approximately $3,312,652 still owed:

The Internal Revenue Service and certain State of Utah tax authorities are owed $878,964. Hidden Splendor is delinquent on the $162,156 quarterly payments due March 31, 2010, June 30, 2010, September 30, 2010, December 31, 2010, March 31, 2011, June 30, 2011, September 30, 2011, December 31, 2011 and March 31, 2012 to the Internal Revenue Service and

The Howard Kent, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan is owed $232,569 and receives monthly payments. Hidden Splendor is current on the payment to the Howard Kent, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan as of the date of this Report.

The delinquency on payments of other loans to third parties and as outlined herein result in Hidden Splendor being in default on its secured creditor loan, the Company has received no notice of default in this regard. The Company is currently working to remedy the aforementioned defaults. As of the date of this Report, no parties had provided the Company an uncured notice default, nor has any party to the Plan filed a notice of default under the Plan with the bankruptcy court.

As of September 30, 2011, the balance owed to the general unsecured creditors under the Plan was paid in full.

Company Obligations under the Plan Under the Plan, America West must pay all of Hidden Splendor’s post-petition liabilities that Hidden Splendor cannot pay, in the ordinary course of business, in an amount not to exceed $1,560,000. Additionally, America West must make capital expenditures in connection with the operations of the Horizon Mine by making available at least $2,000,000 in new equipment within 180 days of the effective date of the Plan. In the event the Company borrows money or otherwise incurs a liability to fund capital expenditures, Hidden Splendor may make payments to service such debt up to $13,500 for every $1,000,000 dollars borrowed and made available to Hidden Splendor. Hidden Splendor may make additional payments to the Company provided certain Plan repayment benchmarks are achieved. Since the Plan was initiated and through the date of this Report, Hidden Splendor has been in compliance with the capital expenditure and associated debt service requirements set forth herein.

Default under the Plan. In the event Hidden Splendor (i) fails to pay fully any payments when due, or (ii) fails to comply with any provision of the Plan, and its creditors file a default under the Plan with the bankruptcy court, then (A) 100% (reduced only by the amounts actually paid and received by creditors) of all allowed claims of general unsecured creditors shall be immediately due and accelerated and (B) Hidden Splendor must immediately list its assets for sale. As stated above, Hidden Splendor is in default in payments to various creditors under the Plan. The Company is working to remedy the aforementioned defaults.

Competition

The coal mining business is highly competitive. We face substantial competition in connection with the marketing and sale of our coal. Most of our competitors are well established, have greater financial, marketing, personnel and other resources, and have been in business for longer periods of time. Indeed, in the State of Utah, Hidden Splendor is likely the smallest producer of coal in terms of production, reserves and available capital resources. There is no assurance that we can maintain or expand our market share. The greater financial resources of such competitors will permit them to implement extensive marketing and production programs. Hidden Splendor's place in the market for coal currently is limited to providing a supplemental supply of coal to customers who buy the majority of the coal they need from the other coal mining operations in the area. Hidden Splendor competes in this market not so much as a direct competitor with the other larger, well established coal operations, but as a supplemental source for coal.

There are numerous large and small producers in all coal producing regions of the United States and we compete with many of these producers in our primary area of operation, the Western United States. Our main competitors include Canyon Fuel Company, LLC, CONSOL Energy Inc., Energy West Mining Company, Hiawatha Coal Company, Rhino Resource Partners, LP and Utah America Energy, Inc.

The most important factors on which we compete are coal price, coal quality and characteristics, transportation costs and the reliability of supply. Demand for coal and the prices that we will be able to obtain for our coal are closely linked to coal consumption patterns of the domestic electric generation industry and international consumers. These coal consumption patterns are influenced by factors beyond our control, including demand for electricity, which is significantly dependent upon economic activity and summer and winter temperatures in the United States, government regulation, technological developments and the location, availability, quality and price of competing sources of fuel such as natural gas, oil and nuclear, and alternative energy sources such as hydroelectric power.

According to the Utah Geological Survey of the Utah Division of Natural Resources, there were nine active coal mines in the State of Utah during 2011, of which the Horizon Mine was one. The same source indicates that those active coal mines produced a total of approximately 19,820,000 short tons of coal in 2011. During 2011, Hidden Splendor's operations at the Horizon Mine yielded approximately 370,000 tons of coal, which is less than two percent of the total tons mined in Utah during that year.

Our Customers

During fiscal 2011, we derived approximately 99% of our total coal revenues from sales to our four largest customers — The Amalgamated Sugar Company, PacifiCorp Energy, Enserco Energy, Inc. and Intermountain Power Agency. We expect two of these customers to collectively account for the majority of our revenues during 2012 as well. We have entered into contracts with two of these customers to deliver a certain quantity of coal at fixed prices, subject to other terms and conditions that are standard in the industry. With respect to customers not subject to long-term contracts, we have short-term or market delivery and price contracts that we negotiate and perform on a continuous basis. Our strategy is to have a combination of long-term and short-term delivery contracts.

Governmental Approvals

We pay a royalty to the federal government on coal sales from the Horizon Mine. This royalty currently is equal to 8% of all coal sales and is payable on a monthly basis. We plan to apply for a reduction in the royalty rate which applies to our coal sales, but as of the date of this Report, our Company has not received an approval of a reduction in the royalty we are obligated to pay.

The Horizon Mine is under the authority of an operating permit granted by the State of Utah Natural Resources Department, Division of Oil Gas and Mining (“DOGM”). Also, Hidden Splendor’s mining operations are subject to approval from the BLM. In this regard, Hidden Splendor has filed a Resource Recovery and Protection Plan (known as a “R2P2”) with the BLM and DOGM. The R2P2 details the Company’s mining plan in connection with various requirements imposed by both the state and federal governmental entities.

Government Regulation

Our operations, like operations of other coal companies, are subject to regulation, primarily by federal and state authorities, on matters such as: air quality standards; reclamation and restoration activities involving our mining properties; mine permits and other licensing requirements; water pollution; employee health and safety; the discharge of materials into the environment; management of materials generated by mining operations; storage of petroleum products; protection of wetlands and endangered plant and wildlife protection. Many of these regulations require registration, permitting, compliance, monitoring and self-reporting and may impose civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance.

Additionally, the electric generation industry is subject to extensive regulation regarding the environmental impact of its power generation activities, which could affect demand for our coal over time. The possibility exists that new legislation or regulations may be adopted or that the enforcement of existing laws could become more stringent, causing coal to become a less attractive fuel source and reducing the percentage of electricity generated from coal. Future legislation or regulation or more stringent enforcement of existing laws may have a significant impact on our mining operations or our customers’ ability to use coal.

While it is not possible to accurately quantify the expenditures we incur to maintain compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, those costs have been and are expected to continue to be significant. Federal and state mining laws and regulations require us to obtain surety bonds to guarantee performance or payment of certain long-term obligations, including mine closure and reclamation costs, federal and state workers’ compensation benefits, coal leases and other miscellaneous obligations. Compliance with these laws has substantially increased the cost of coal mining for domestic coal producers.

The following is a summary of the various federal and state environmental and similar regulations that have a material impact on our business:

Clean Air Act. The federal Clean Air Act and similar state and local laws that regulate air emissions affect coal mining directly and indirectly. Direct impacts on coal mining and processing operations include Clean Air Act permitting requirements and/or emissions control requirements relating to particulate matter which may include controlling fugitive dust. The Clean Air Act also indirectly affects coal mining operations by extensively regulating the emissions of fine particulate matter measuring 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury and other compounds emitted by coal-fueled power plants and industrial boilers, which are the largest end-users of our coal. Continued tightening of the already stringent regulation of emissions and regulation of additional emissions such as carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases from coal-fueled power plants and industrial boilers could eventually reduce the demand for coal.

Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, which we refer to as SMCRA, establishes mining, environmental protection, reclamation and closure standards for all aspects of surface mining as well as many aspects of underground mining. Mining operators must obtain SMCRA permits and permit renewals from the Office of Surface Mining, which we refer to as OSM, or from the applicable state agency if the state agency has obtained primacy. A state agency may achieve primacy if the state regulatory agency develops a mining regulatory program that is no less stringent than the federal mining regulatory program under SMCRA.

SMCRA permit provisions include a complex set of requirements which include, among other things, coal prospecting; mine plan development; topsoil or growth medium removal and replacement; selective handling of overburden materials; mine pit backfilling and grading; disposal of excess spoil; protection of the hydrologic balance; subsidence control for underground mines; surface runoff and drainage control; establishment of suitable post mining land uses; and revegetation.

Once a permit application is prepared and submitted to the regulatory agency, it goes through an administrative completeness review and a thorough technical review. Also, before a SMCRA permit is issued, a mine operator must submit a bond or otherwise secure the performance of all reclamation obligations. After the application is submitted, a public notice or advertisement of the proposed permit is required to be given, which begins a notice period that is followed by a public comment period before a permit can be issued. It is not uncommon for a SMCRA mine permit application to take over a year to prepare, depending on the size and complexity of the mine, and anywhere from six months to two years or even longer for the permit to be issued. The variability in time frame required to prepare the application and issue the permit can be attributed primarily to the various regulatory authorities’ discretion in the handling of comments and objections relating to the project received from the general public and other agencies. Also, it is not uncommon for a permit to be delayed as a result of litigation related to the specific permit or another related company’s permit.

Mining Permits and Approvals. Numerous governmental permits or approvals are required for mining operations. When we apply for these permits and approvals, we may be required to prepare and present data to federal, state or local authorities data pertaining to the effect or impact that any proposed production or processing of coal may have upon the environment. The authorization, permitting and implementation requirements imposed by any of these authorities may be costly and time consuming and may delay commencement or continuation of mining operations. Regulations also provide that a mining permit or modification can be delayed, refused or revoked if an officer, director or a shareholder with a 10% or greater interest in the entity is affiliated with another entity that has outstanding permit violations. Thus, past or ongoing violations of federal and state mining laws could provide a basis to revoke existing permits and to deny the issuance of additional permits.

In order to obtain mining permits and approvals from state regulatory authorities, mine operators must submit a reclamation plan for restoring, upon the completion of mining operations, the mined property to its prior condition, productive use or other permitted condition.

Under some circumstances, substantial fines and penalties, including revocation or suspension of mining permits, may be imposed under the laws described above. Monetary sanctions and, in severe circumstances, criminal sanctions may be imposed for failure to comply with these laws.

Surety Bonds. Mine operators are often required by federal and/or state laws to assure, usually through the use of surety bonds, payment of certain long-term obligations including mine closure or reclamation costs, federal and state workers’ compensation costs, coal leases and other miscellaneous obligations. Although surety bonds are usually noncancellable during their term, many of these bonds are renewable on an annual basis. The costs of these bonds have fluctuated in recent years while the market terms of surety bonds have generally become more unfavorable to mine operators. These changes in the terms of the bonds have been accompanied at times by a decrease in the number of companies willing to issue surety bonds.

Clean Water Act . The Clean Water Act of 1972 and comparable state laws that regulate waters of the United States can affect our mining operations directly and indirectly. One of the direct impacts on coal mining and processing operations is the Clean Water Act permitting requirements relating to the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States. Indirect impacts of the Clean Water Act include discharge limits placed on coal-fueled power plant ash handling facilities’ discharges. Continued litigation of Clean Water Act issues could eventually reduce the demand for coal.

Under the Clean Water Act, states must conduct an anti-degradation review before approving permits for the discharge of pollutants to waters that have been designated as high quality. A state’s anti-degradation regulations would prohibit the diminution of water quality in these streams. In general, waters discharged from coal mines to high quality streams may be required to meet new “high quality” standards. This could cause increases in the costs, time and difficulty associated with obtaining and complying with permits, and could adversely affect our coal production.

Mine Health and Safety Laws. Stringent safety and health standards have been imposed by federal legislation since Congress adopted the Mine Safety and Health Act of 1969. The Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 significantly expanded the enforcement of safety and health standards and imposed further comprehensive safety and health standards on all aspects of mining operations. In addition to federal regulatory programs, the State of Utah also has programs for mine safety and health regulation and enforcement. In reaction to several mine accidents in recent years, federal and state legislatures and regulatory authorities have increased scrutiny of mine safety matters and passed more stringent laws governing mining. Regulations promulgated by the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration continue to expand, as does the oversight and inspection of MSHA of mine operations.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, which we refer to as CERCLA, and similar state laws affect coal mining operations by, among other things, imposing cleanup requirements for threatened or actual releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or welfare or the environment. Under CERCLA and similar state laws, joint and several liability may be imposed on waste generators, site owners and lessees and others regardless of fault or the legality of the original disposal activity. Although the EPA excludes most wastes generated by coal mining and processing operations from the hazardous waste laws, such wastes can, in certain circumstances, constitute hazardous substances for the purposes of CERCLA. In addition, the disposal, release or spilling of some products used by coal companies in operations, such as chemicals, could trigger the liability provisions of the statute. Thus, coal mines that we currently own or have previously owned or operated, and sites to which we sent waste materials, may be subject to liability under CERCLA and similar state laws. In particular, we may be liable under CERCLA or similar state laws for the cleanup of hazardous substance contamination at sites where we own surface rights.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which we refer to as RCRA, may affect coal mining operations by establishing requirements for the proper management, handling, transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes. Currently, certain coal mine wastes, such as overburden and coal cleaning wastes, are exempted from hazardous waste management. However, the EPA has determined that national non-hazardous waste regulations under RCRA Subtitle D are needed for coal combustion products disposed in surface impoundments and landfills and used as mine-fill. Most state hazardous waste laws also exempt coal combustion products, and instead treat it as either a solid waste or a special waste. Any costs associated with handling or disposal of hazardous wastes would increase our customers’ operating costs and potentially reduce their ability to purchase coal. In addition, contamination caused by the past disposal of ash can lead to material liability.

Climate Change. One by-product of burning coal is carbon dioxide, which is considered a greenhouse gas and is a major source of concern with respect to global warming. In November 2004, Russia ratified the Kyoto Protocol to the 1992 Framework Convention on Global Climate Change, which establishes a binding set of emission targets for greenhouse gases. With Russia’s accidence, the Kyoto Protocol became binding on all those countries that had ratified it in February 2005. To date, the United States has refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Although the targets vary from country to country, if the United States were to ratify the Kyoto Protocol our nation would be required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 93% of 1990 levels from 2008 to 2012. Future regulation of greenhouse gases in the United States could occur pursuant to future U.S. treaty obligations, statutory or regulatory changes under the Clean Air Act, federal or state adoption of a greenhouse gas regulatory scheme, or otherwise.

Endangered Species. The Endangered Species Act and other related federal and state statutes protect species threatened or endangered with possible extinction. Protection of threatened, endangered and other special status species may have the effect of prohibiting or delaying us from obtaining mining permits and may include restrictions on timber harvesting, road building and other mining or agricultural activities in areas containing the affected species.

Other Environmental Laws. We are required to comply with numerous other federal, state and local environmental laws in addition to those previously discussed. These additional laws include, for example, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Toxic Substance Control Act and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. We incur regular compliance costs associated with environmental laws. These costs include the costs associated with water monitoring, maintaining a reclamation bond, and the payment of reclamation fees.

Employees

As of April 14, 2012, Hidden Splendor had approximately 100 employees, all of which are full-time employees.

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors

You should consider carefully the following risks and other information in this Annual Report, including the financial statements. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and operating results could be adversely affected.

RISKS RELATING TO OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION

We currently have revenues, but we are not profitable.

For the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company had coal sales of approximately $13.9 million and a net loss of approximately $23.5 million. There can be no assurance that the Company will have a gain from operations or net income in fiscal 2012 or thereafter.

We have a significant amount of debt which we must repay.

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had approximately $21 million in short-term debt and a working capital deficit of approximately $28 million. Details regarding our debit are in the notes to our financial statements included in Item 8 hereunder and are important to an understanding of the risk we face in connection with repaying our debt. In particular, such debt is detailed in Note 5 to financial statements included in Item 8 hereunder. The short-term is listed as such because it either is due on demand, is currently due but has not yet been paid or because it matures during the current year.

As of the date of this Report, the Company owed approximately $3 million to Zions Bank (which may be in technical default, though we have received no notice of default in this regard), its primary secured creditor and approximately $2 million to general and priority unsecured creditors pursuant to the Plan. The Company is in actual or technical default with respect to this $7 million of debt owed to its creditors. In addition, the Company has approximately $15.6 million in debt to shareholders and approximately $100 thousand in unsecured bridge loans from third parties. If any of these loans go into default and/or are accelerated, the Company would not have adequate funds to repay the loans, and the Company’s business may be adversely affected.

In the event that any of the loans listed in our financial statements are accelerated or a loan holder claims a loan due and payable immediately, we currently would be unable to pay the amounts due in full and our ability to continue business would be adversely effected.

We need additional capital in 2012 to implement our business plan and meet our financial obligations.

Due to delinquency of payments to certain creditors by our Company in late 2009 and through the date of this Report, certain debts to both related and third parties are in default. As a result, a total of approximately $5.2 million associated with Hidden Splendor's Bankruptcy Plan of Reorganization (as defined in and discussed in the Section titled “Business - Hidden Splendor Bankruptcy & Plan of Reorganization”) is in default and due upon demand, of which approximately $4.7 million was previously scheduled to mature subsequent to 2011. The Company is working to remedy these defaults and, as of the date of this Report, no creditors have filed a default under the Plan with the bankruptcy court. The Company has not received a notice of default of any of the aforementioned debt as of the date hereof.

We also have accrued unpaid federal and state taxes and royalties of approximately $1 million related to 2009 and 2010. Should the Company receive a notice of default and demand for immediate payment on any of the aforementioned debts, we will likely be required to raise up to a total of approximately $25 million. Assuming that our debt that is in default is not accelerated, and that other debt doesn’t go into default and become accelerated, we believe that we will need to raise a minimum amount of $3 million equity capital to fund operations and our plan to expand operations for the balance of calendar 2012. As the Company has no debt or equity funding commitments, we will need to rely upon best efforts financings. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in raising the required capital. The failure to raise sufficient capital through future debt or equity financings or otherwise will likely cause the Company to curtail operations, sell assets, or result in the failure of our business.

If our debt obligations are accelerated for default or if we do not raise sufficient capital to cover our debt obligations, we will need to raise additional capital.

Assuming our creditors do not accelerate the payment of our debt obligations currently in default and we are able to get current on our debt payments, we believe raising at least $34 million in equity financing, together with projected revenues based on assumption of the rampup of our second continuous miner, will be sufficient to fund working capital requirements and the company’s expansion plans to acquire and deploy a third continuous miner and the supporting equipment necessary to achieve positive cashflow operations going forward. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in raising the necessary capital or production will escalate as planned. The failure to raise needed funds could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects, could cause us to curtail operations.

Long-Term Financial Obligations of Plan of Reorganization.

Due to the defaults on loans as mentioned above, the amounts due under the Plan may be accelerated. Additionally, the Company is required to make capital expenditures and make timely monthly and quarterly payments. The failure to comply with the terms of the Plan could result in the liquidation of the Horizon Mine, the only revenue generating asset of America West, likely resulting in the Company ceasing operations.

We will not establish a reserve or sinking fund for the payment of creditors under Hidden Splendor's Plan.

The Company is relying on cash flow from operations and efforts to obtain financing to fund Hidden Splendor's payment obligations under the Plan. As of the date of this Report, the outstanding balance is approximately $4.2 million. We have not established a reserve or sinking fund in the event we cannot generate sufficient cash flow to make such payments. Our secured creditors will maintain a lien on the Horizon Mine until payment in full. Moreover, if we fail to make payments to our creditors under the Plan, then (i) 100% of all allowed claims of general unsecured creditors shall be immediately due and accelerated and (ii) the assets of Hidden Splendor, including the Horizon Mine, which is the Company's primary asset, as of the date of this Report must be listed for sale. This would likely result in the Company ceasing operations. As stated above, the Company is currently in default with certain creditors under the Plan. The Company is working to remedy these defaults. As of the date of this Report, no creditors have filed notices of default under the Plan with the bankruptcy court.

Our business requires substantial capital investment and maintenance expenditures, which we may be unable to provide.

Our business strategy will require additional substantial capital investment in future periods. We require capital in 2012 through best efforts financings for, among other purposes, reducing debt, acquiring new supplies and equipment, acquiring additional reserves maintaining the condition of our existing equipment and maintaining compliance with environmental laws and regulations. However, best efforts financings may not be available or, if available, may not be available on satisfactory terms. Future debt financing, if available, may result in increased interest and amortization expense and increased leverage. In addition, future debt financing may limit our ability to withstand competitive pressures and render us more vulnerable to economic downturns. If we fail to obtain required capital in 2012, we could be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets, and/or restructure or refinance our indebtedness, or our business may fail.

The Company's financial statements have been prepared assuming that it will continue as a going concern.

The Company incurred a net loss of approximately $23.5 million, of which approximately $15 million was attributed to non-cash charges, and had a working capital deficit of $28 million for the year ended and as of December 31, 2011. These conditions raise substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern. Our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if we are unable to continue as a going concern.

The Company has based certain financial assumptions on projected coal prices and volume of production.

The Company believes that it will be able to fund any remaining Plan payments and nominal working capital needs based upon cash flow from operations, assuming the necessary capital can be raised to achieve cash positive operations. This assumption is based upon (i) increased coal production from deploying second and third mining units, and (ii) estimated sales prices in the future will approximate current sales prices. Increased coal production is contingent upon (i) the continued ramp up of our second continuous miner, and (ii) the Company successfully closing a financing to acquire a third continuous miner and the supporting equipment. Regarding sales prices, we have signed multi-year coal sales agreements with customers to partially mitigate risk on future coal prices. However, while the coal sales agreements will account for most of our production over the next several years, there still may be some production that will be sold at future market sales prices. Market sales prices of are out of our control and cannot be assured. The failure of either of these assumptions to materialize may cause us to require more capital in the future to fund obligations. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in raising additional capital. The failure to raise additional capital may cause the Company to curtail operations, sell assets, or result in the failure of our business.

We have granted certain lenders a security interest in substantially all of our assets and our subsidiaries’ assets, and if we default under the applicable loan documents, the lenders may foreclose on our assets and the assets of our subsidiaries.

We have secured amounts owing to certain lenders with substantially all of our and our subsidiaries’ assets. If we default under the terms of the applicable loan documents, the lenders have the right to accelerate the indebtedness and foreclose upon and sell substantially all of our and our subsidiaries’ assets to repay the indebtedness, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and likely resulting in the curtailment of our business.

Our debt instruments may adversely affect our ability to run our business.

Our substantial amount of debt and the debt of our subsidiaries, as well as the guarantees of our subsidiaries and the grant of security interests in our assets and those of our subsidiaries, could impair our ability to operate our business effectively and may limit our ability to take advantage of business opportunities. For example, our indebtedness may:

limit our ability to borrow additional funds or to obtain other financing in the future for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, investments and general corporate purposes;

limit our ability to dispose of our assets, create liens on our assets or to extend credit;

make us more vulnerable to economic downturns and reduce our flexibility in responding to changing business and economic conditions;

limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business or industry;

place us at a competitive disadvantage to our competitors with less debt; and

restrict our ability to merge or consolidate with another entity.

If compliance with our debt obligations materially hinders our ability to operate our business and adapt to changing industry conditions, our operating results may suffer.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

Significant competition from entities with greater resources could result in our failure.

We operate in a highly competitive industry with national and international energy resources companies. We face substantial competition in connection with the marketing and sale of our coal. Most of our competitors are well established, have greater financial and marketing, personnel, other resources, and have been in business for longer periods of time than we have. Indeed, in the State of Utah, we are likely currently the smallest producer of coal in terms of production, reserves and available capital resources. Though the Company believes its plan of deploying additional equipment will change this, there is no assurance that we can maintain or expand our market share. The greater financial resources of such competitors will permit them to implement extensive marketing and production programs. Our competitors' use of their substantially greater resources could overwhelm our efforts to operate successfully and could cause our failure.

There is no assurance that our limited revenues will be sufficient to operate profitably, or that we will generate greater revenues in the future.

Hidden Splendor acquired the Horizon Mine in March 2003. While our management team is seasoned and we have very strong industry experience, the Company is a relatively new entrant in the coal industry in the western United States. We began mining operations in 2003. We have not been profitable and have a limited operating history. We have spent the majority of that time developing the mine for greater future production. We should be regarded as a risky venture with all of the unforeseen costs, expenses, problems, risks and difficulties to which such ventures are subject. Our coal sales for the year ended December 31, 2011 were approximately $13.9 million, and for the year ended December 31, 2010 were approximately $10.0 million. Though we have secured several multi-year take or pay coal sales contracts, there is no assurance that we can achieve greater sales or generate profitable sales. We expect that many coal producers can and will produce and sell coal at cheaper prices per ton than our production cost rates. Their production and sales could adversely affect our revenues and profits, if any. There is no assurance that we will ever operate profitably. There is no assurance that we will generate continued revenues or ever be profitable.

Our future success depends upon our ability to acquire and develop coal reserves that are economically recoverable.

Our recoverable reserves will decline as we produce coal. Our future success depends upon our conducting successful exploration and development activities and acquiring properties containing economically recoverable coal deposits. Our current strategy includes increasing our coal deposits base through acquisitions of other mineral rights, leases or producing properties, and continuing to use our existing property and the adjacent unleased reserves. Our planned development and exploration projects and acquisition activities may not result in the acquisition of additional coal deposits and we may not have continuing success developing additional mines. In order to develop coal deposits, we must obtain various governmental leases and permits. We cannot predict whether we will obtain the leases and permits necessary for us to operate profitably in the future when the existing coal reserves are depleted. Furthermore, we may not be able to mine all of our coal deposits at our current operations.

Our operations could be adversely affected if we fail to maintain required bonds.

Federal and state laws require bonds or cash deposits to secure our obligations to reclaim lands used for mining, to secure coal lease obligations and to satisfy other miscellaneous obligations. During 2010 and 2011, our reclamation bond obligation with the State of Utah totaled $445,000 and was met by transfer of the trust deed to real property owned by certain affiliates of the Company and pledged to secure the Company's obligation. The trust deed is in favor of the State of Utah and secures Hidden Splendor's reclamation obligation in the event the Company is unable to pay the costs associated with reclaiming the Horizon Mine site when it is closed. At the end of 2010, our coal lease bond obligation to the Bureau of Land Management in connection with our federal coal lease totaled $136,000 and was covered by a bond purchased by the Company which is secured by an irrevocable bank letter of credit, which in turn is secured by personal assets pledged by an officer of the Company. On March 2, 2011, the BLM increased our coal lease bond obligation by $264,000, making the total obligation on that bond $400,000 which we secured by depositing sufficient cash with the BLM.

Our bonds are typically renewable on a yearly basis if they are not posted with cash. Our failure to maintain, or inability to acquire, bonds that are required by state and federal law would have a material adverse effect on us. That failure could result from a variety of factors including: the lack of availability, higher expense or unfavorable market terms of new bonds; restrictions on the availability of collateral for current and future bonds issuers under the terms of our indenture or new credit facility; and the exercise by third-party bond issuers of their right to refuse to renew the bonds.

There may be delays in our production, resulting in poor profitability and cash flow, thus preventing us from meeting our financial obligations.

The Horizon Mine has experienced delays in production off and on in previous years and during 2010 and 2011 due to:

occasionally encountering rock faults, water, varying geological conditions of the coal seam, and other challenging mining conditions;

the breakdown of older mining equipment;

the need to address safety regulations and/or safety-related citations issued by governmental agencies; and

idling the mine due to expiration of previous short term sales contracts

Many of the aforementioned challenges are beyond our control and/or are unpredictable. If we encounter any or a combination of the aforementioned challenges for a prolonged period of time, our revenues and cash flow will likely decrease, resulting in the inability to meet some or all of our financial obligations and could cause us to curtail operations.

A significant extended decline in the prices we receive for our coal could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows.

Our results of operations are highly dependent upon the prices we receive for our coal, which are closely linked to consumption patterns of electric generation. We have attempted to mitigate risk associated with uncertainty of coal prices by signing multi-year, take or pay sales contracts, extending out as far as five years. Nevertheless, extended or substantial price declines for coal would adversely affect our operating results for future periods and our ability to generate cash flows necessary to improve productivity and expand operations. Prices of coal may fluctuate due to factors beyond our control such as overall domestic and global economic conditions; the consumption pattern of industrial consumers, electricity generators and residential users; technological advances affecting energy consumption; domestic and foreign government regulations; price and availability of alternative fuels; price of foreign imports and weather conditions. Any adverse change in these factors could result in weaker demand and possibly lower prices for our production, which would reduce our revenues and adversely affect our financial condition.

We have limited resources, and there is no assurance we can comply with the terms of our new coal sales agreements.

During 2010, we entered into four coal sales contracts, under which we are obligated to deliver coal from our Horizon Mine over the next one to five years. These agreements include specific delivery and quantity requirements. Due to our limited resources, and in the event we are unable to raise sufficient capital to purchase additional equipment, we may be unable to fulfill the requirements under these new agreements. If any of our new customers do not engage in take or pay sales contracts and reduce the quantities of coal it purchases from us or otherwise terminates the coal sales agreements for cause, and if we are unable to sell our coal to our other customers on terms substantially similar to the terms, our business and our results of operations could be adversely affected.

We have a concentration of sales to four customers.

During 2011, we sold the majority of our coal to four customers. During 2012, we expect to continue to sell our coal to a limited number of customers. If the customers who are not committed to take or pay contracts were to significantly reduce their purchase of coal from us, or if we were unable to continue to sell coal to them on terms as favorable to us as the terms under our current agreements, our financial condition and results of operations could suffer materially. Also, under some of our contracts our customers have the right to reject coal we deliver, and some cases even terminate the contract, if the coal we deliver does not meet quality specifications set forth the contract.

There is no assurance that we will find purchasers for our product at profitable prices.

If we are unable to find buyers willing to purchase our coal at profitable prices for the excess coal expected from longwall production or when the current sales contracts end, our revenues would suffer.

Our inability to diversify our operations may subject us to economic fluctuations within our industry.

Our limited financial resources reduce the likelihood that we will be able to diversify our operations. Our inability to diversify our activities into the operation of more than one coal mine will subject our single-mine operation to economic fluctuations within the coal industry and, therefore, increase the risks associated with our operations.

Disruption of rail, trucking, or other systems that deliver our coal or an increase in transportation costs could make our coal less competitive.

Coal producers depend upon rail, trucking, or other systems to provide access to markets. Disruption of transportation services due to weather-related problems, strikes, lock-outs, break-downs of locks and dams or other events could temporarily impair our ability to supply coal to customers and adversely affect our profitability. Transportation costs represent a significant portion of the delivered cost of coal and, as a result, the cost of delivery is a critical factor in a customer's purchasing decision. Increases in transportation costs could make our coal less competitive.

Terrorist attacks and threat escalation of military activity in response to such attacks or acts of war may negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Terrorist attacks and threats, escalation of military activity in response to such attacks or acts of war may negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our business is affected by general economic conditions, fluctuations in consumer confidence and spending, and market liquidity, which can decline as a result of numerous factors outside of our control, such as terrorist attacks and acts of war. Future terrorist attacks against U.S. targets, rumors or threats of war, actual conflicts involving the United States or its allies, or military or trade disruptions affecting our customers may materially adversely affect our operations. As a result, there could be delays or losses in transportation and deliveries of coal to our customers, decreased sales of our coal and extension of time for payment of accounts receivable from our customers. Strategic targets such as energy-related assets may be at greater risk of future terrorist attacks than other targets in the United States. In addition, disruption or significant increases in energy prices could result in government-imposed price controls. It is possible that any, or a combination, of these occurrences could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Competition within the coal industry may adversely affect our ability to sell our coal and overcapacity in the coal industry could adversely affect pricing, either of which could impair our profitability.

We compete with coal producers in various regions of the United States for domestic sales primarily to power generators. This domestic competition is often times under the influence of logistical costs. Demand for our coal by our principal customers is affected by the delivered price of competing coals, other fuel supplies and alternative generating sources, including nuclear, natural gas, oil and renewable energy sources, such as hydroelectric power. Increases in coal prices could encourage the development of expanded capacity by new or existing coal producers. Any resulting overcapacity could affect our ability to sell coal or reduce coal prices, either of which would likely reduce our revenues.

We require a skilled workforce to run our business. If we cannot hire qualified people to meet replacement or expansion needs, we may not be able to achieve planned results.

Most of our workforce is comprised of people with technical skills related to coal mining. Some of our workforce is 50 years of age or older. We expect that some of our employees may retire between now and the next five to seven years. This will require us to conduct an expanded and sustained effort to recruit new employees to replace those who retire and to fill new jobs as we grow our business. A lack of qualified people may adversely impact our operations and profitability.

The characteristics of coal may make it difficult for coal users to comply with various environmental standards, which are continually under review by international federal and state agencies, related to coal combustion. As a result, they may switch to other fuels, which would adversely affect our sales.

Coal contains impurities, including sulfur, mercury, chlorine and other elements or compounds, many of which are released into the air when coal is burned. Stricter environmental regulations of emissions from coal-fired electric generating plants could increase the costs of using coal thereby reducing demand for coal as a fuel source, the volume of our coal sales and price. Stricter regulations could make coal a less attractive fuel alternative in the planning and building of utility power plants in the future.

For example, in order to meet the federal Clean Air Act limits for sulfur dioxide emissions from electric power plants, coal users will need to install scrubbers, use sulfur dioxide emission allowances (some of which they may purchase), or switch to other fuels. Each option has limitations. Lower sulfur coal may be more costly to purchase on an energy basis than higher sulfur coal depending on mining and transportation costs. The cost of installing scrubbers is significant and emission allowances may become more expensive as their availability declines. Switching to other fuels may require expensive modification of existing plants. Though our coal generally is lower in sulfur content, it is possible that higher regulatory compliance costs could make alternative fuel sources, such as natural gas, more cost effective for our customers.

Proposed reductions in emissions of mercury, sulfur dioxides, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter or greenhouse gases may require the installation of additional costly control technology or the implementation of other measures, including trading of emission allowances and switching to other fuels. For example, in 2005 the Environmental Protection Agency proposed separate regulations to establish mercury emission limits nationwide and to reduce the interstate transport of fine particulate matter and ozone through reductions in sulfur dioxides and nitrogen oxides throughout the eastern United States. The Environmental Protection Agency continues to require reduction of nitrogen oxide emissions in a number of eastern states and the District of Columbia and will require reduction of particulate matter emissions over the next several years for areas that do not meet air quality standards for fine particulates. In addition, Congress and several states may consider legislation to further control air emissions of multiple pollutants from electric generating facilities and other large emitters. Any new or proposed reductions will make it more costly to operate coal-fired plants and could make coal a less attractive fuel alternative to the planning and building of utility power plants in the future. To the extent that any new or proposed requirements affect our customers, this could adversely affect our operations and results.

We may not be able to produce sufficient amounts of coal to fulfill our customers' requirements, which could harm our relationships with customers.

We may not be able to produce sufficient amounts of coal to meet customer demand, including amounts that we are required to deliver under take or pay contracts. In such case, our inability to satisfy contractual obligations could result in our customers initiating claims against us.

Our mining operations consume significant quantities of commodities, the price of which is determined by international markets. If commodity prices increase significantly or rapidly, it could impact our cost of production.

Coal mines consume large quantities of commodities such as steel, copper, rubber products, and liquid fuels. Some commodities, such as steel, are needed to comply with roof control plans required by regulation. The prices we pay for these products are strongly impacted by the global commodities market. A rapid or significant increase in the cost of some commodities could impact our mining costs because we have a limited ability to negotiate lower prices, and, in some cases, do not have a ready substitute for these commodities.

Proposals to regulate greenhouse gas emissions could impact the market for our fossil fuels, increase our costs, and reduce the value of our coal assets.

Numerous proposals have been made at the international, national, regional, and state levels of government that are intended to limit emissions of greenhouse gas ("GHGs"), such as carbon dioxide and methane. Combustion of fossil fuels, such as the coal we produce, results in the creation of carbon dioxide that is currently emitted into the atmosphere by coal end users. Several states have already adopted measures requiring reduction of GHGs within state boundaries. If comprehensive regulations focusing on GHGs emission reductions were to be enacted by the United States or additional individual states, it may adversely affect the use of and demand for fossil fuels, particularly coal. Further regulation of GHGs could occur in the United States pursuant to treaty obligations, regulation under the Clean Air Act, or regulation under state law. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency, that the Environmental Protection Agency had authority to regulate GHGs under the Clean Air Act, reversing the Environmental Protection Agency's interpretation of the Clean Air Act. This decision could lead to federal regulation of GHGs under the existing Clean Air Act of coal-fired electric generation stations, which could adversely affect demand for our coal.

Government laws, regulations and other legal requirements relating to protection of the environment, health and safety matters and others that govern our business increase our costs of doing business, and may restrict our operations

We are subject to laws, regulations and other legal requirements enacted or adopted by federal, state and local, as well as foreign authorities relating to protection of the environment and health and safety matters, including those legal requirements that govern discharges of substances into the air and water, the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the cleanup of contaminated sites, groundwater quality and availability, plant and wildlife protection, reclamation and restoration of mining or drilling properties after mining or drilling is completed, the installation of various safety equipment in our mines, control of surface subsidence from underground mining and work practices related to employee health and safety. Complying with these requirements, including the terms of our permits, has had, and will continue to have, a significant effect on our costs of operations and competitive position. In addition, we could incur substantial costs, including clean up costs, fines and civil or criminal sanctions and third party damage claims for personal injury, property damage, wrongful death, or exposure to hazardous substances, as a result of violations of or liabilities under environmental and health and safety laws. Such laws, rules and regulations continue to expand in their scope and their impact on the company’s operations increases year to year.

Our mines are subject to stringent federal and state safety regulations that increase our cost of doing business at active operations, and may place restrictions on our methods of operation. In addition, government inspectors under certain circumstances, have the ability to order our operation to be shut down based on safety considerations.

Stringent health and safety standards were imposed by federal legislation when the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 was adopted. The Federal Coal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 expanded the enforcement of safety and health standards of the Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 and imposed safety and health standards on all (non-coal as well as coal) mining operations. Regulations are comprehensive and affect numerous aspects of mining operations, including training of mine personnel, mining procedures, the equipment used in mine emergency procedures, mine plans and other matters. The various requirements mandated by law or regulation can have a significant effect on operating costs and place restrictions on our methods of operations. In addition, government inspectors under certain circumstances, have the ability to order our operation to be shut down based on safety considerations.

Occasionally, Hidden Splendor is issued citations and orders by the Mine Safety and Health Administration in connection with inspections of the Horizon Mine. At times, Hidden Splendor challenges citations and orders, resulting in having citations vacated by the agency, reductions to proposed penalties or administrative adjudications. As of December 31, 2011, Hidden Splendor had challenges pending in a number of administrative actions. Such actions cover a total of approximately $1,287,431 proposed, assessed penalties.

The operations of the Horizon Mine, like the operations of all coal mines in the United States, remain subject to extensive inspection and evaluation by MSHA. Failure to comply with government regulations or pay fines that are assessed could cause us to curtail operations.

There are uncertainties in estimating our economically recoverable coal reserves, and inaccuracies in our estimates could result in lower than expected revenues, higher than expected costs and decreased profitability.

There are uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities and values of economically recoverable coal reserves, including many factors beyond our control. As a result, estimates of economically recoverable coal reserves are by their nature uncertain. Information about our reserves consists of estimates based on engineering, economic and geological data assembled and analyzed by our staff. Some of the factors and assumptions which impact economically recoverable reserve estimates include:

geological conditions;

historical production from the area compared with production from other producing areas;

the assumed effects of regulations and taxes by governmental agencies;

assumptions governing future prices; and

future operating costs, including cost of materials.

Each of these factors may in fact vary considerably from the assumptions used in estimating reserves. For these reasons, estimates of the economically recoverable quantities of coal attributable to a particular group of properties, and classifications of those reserves based on risk of recovery and estimates of future net cash flows, may vary substantially. Actual production, revenues and expenditures with respect to our reserves will likely vary from estimates, and these variances may be material. As a result, our estimates may not accurately reflect our actual reserves.

Coal Mining is a dangerous industry.

Coal mining, especially underground coal mining, is dangerous. Great care must be taken to assure safe, continued operations. Past experiences of others in the industry indicate that lapses in safety practices can result in catastrophic events in coal mining operations. Even when best mining practices are strictly observed, natural disasters such as an earthquake could possibly destroy a coal mine's operations. Any catastrophic event at our coal mine which would close our mine for an extended period of time likely would cause the failure of our operations.

We do not insure against all potential operating risks. We may incur losses and be subject to liability claims as a result of our operations.

We maintain insurance for some, but not all, of the potential risks and liabilities associated with our business. For some risks, we may not obtain insurance if we believe the cost of available insurance is excessive relative to the risks presented. As a result of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain insurance policies can increase substantially, and in some instances, certain insurance may become unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of coverage. As a result, we may not be able to renew our existing insurance policies or procure other desirable insurance on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Although we maintain insurance at levels we believe are appropriate and consistent with industry practice, we are not fully insured against all risks. In addition, pollution and environmental risks generally are not fully insurable. Losses and liabilities from uninsured and underinsured events and delay in the payment of insurance proceeds could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We are dependent upon the services of Messrs. Baker, Davies, and Walker

The success of the Company is dependent upon, among other things, the services of Dan R. Baker, our chief executive officer; Brent Davies, our chief financial officer; and Alexander H. Walker III, our chairman and secretary. The Company does not currently have employment agreements with Messrs. Baker, Davies and Walker, and does not maintain any key man insurance on the lives of any of these individuals. The loss of any of these executives, for any reason, would have a material adverse effect on the Company.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR COMMON STOCK

Future sales of our Common Stock could lower our stock price.

We will likely sell additional shares of Common Stock in future financings. We may also issue additional shares of Common Stock to finance future acquisitions. We cannot predict the size of future issuances of our Common Stock or the effect, if any, that future issuances and sales of shares of our Common Stock will have on the market price of our Common Stock. Sales of substantial amounts of our Common Stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices for our Common Stock. Moreover, sales of our Common Stock by existing shareholders could also depress the price of our Common Stock.

We presently do not intend to pay cash dividends on our Common Stock.

We currently anticipate that no cash dividends will be paid on our Common Stock in the foreseeable future. Therefore, prospective investors who anticipate the need for immediate income by way of cash dividends from their investment should not purchase our Common Stock.

Control by current shareholders.

The current shareholders have elected the directors and the directors have appointed current executive officers to serve America West. The current shareholders will continue to have the ability to elect the directors for the foreseeable future. The voting power of these shareholders 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.

There is not now, and there may not ever be, an active market for the Company’s common or preferred stock.

There currently is a limited public market for the Company’s common or preferred stock. Even though the Company intends to eventually list on the NYSE AMEX Equities or NASDAQ exchange, there can be no assurance those prospective listing efforts will be successful. Further, although the Common Stock is currently quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, trading of its Common Stock may be extremely sporadic. For example, several days may pass before any shares may be traded. As a result, an investor may find it difficult to dispose of, or to obtain accurate quotations of the price of, the Common Stock. Accordingly, investors must assume they may have to bear the economic risk of an investment in the Common Stock for an indefinite period of time. This severely limits the liquidity of the Common Stock, and would likely have a material adverse effect on the market price of the Common Stock and on the Company’s ability to raise additional capital.

The Company cannot assure that the Common Stock will become liquid or that the Common Stock will be listed on a securities exchange.

Until the Common Stock is listed on an exchange, the Company expects its Common Stock to remain eligible for quotation on the OTC Bulletin Board, or on another over-the-counter quotation system, or in the “pink sheets.”

In those venues, however, an investor may find it difficult to obtain accurate quotations as to the market value of the Common Stock. In addition, if the Company fails to meet the criteria set forth in SEC regulations, various requirements would be imposed by law on broker-dealers who sell the Company’s securities to persons other than established customers and accredited investors. Consequently, such regulations may deter broker-dealers from recommending or selling the Common Stock, which may further affect the liquidity of the Common Stock. This would also make it more difficult for the Company to raise additional capital.

Applicable SEC rules governing the trading of “penny stocks” limits the trading and liquidity of the shares, which may affect the trading price of the Common Stock.

The Common Stock is currently quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, and trades below $5.00 per share; therefore, the Common Stock is considered a “penny stock” and subject to SEC rules and regulations which impose limitations upon the manner in which such shares may be publicly traded. These regulations require the delivery, prior to any transaction involving a penny stock, of a disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock market and the associated risks. Under these regulations, certain brokers who recommend such securities to persons other than established customers or certain accredited investors must make a special written suitability determination regarding such purchaser and receive such purchaser’s written agreement to a transaction prior to sale. These regulations have the effect of limiting the trading activity of the Common Stock and reducing the liquidity of an investment in the Common Stock.

The price of the Company’s Common Stock may become volatile, which could lead to losses by investors and costly securities litigation.

The trading price of the Common Stock is likely to be highly volatile and could fluctuate in response to factors such as:

actual or anticipated variations in the Company’s operating results;

announcements of developments by the Company or its competitors;

announcements by the Company or its competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments;

adoption of new accounting standards affecting the Company’s industry;

additions or departures of key personnel;

adoption of new or revised regulation in the industry;

sales of the Company’s Common Stock or other securities in the open market; and

other events or factors, many of which are beyond the Company’s control.

The stock market is subject to significant price and volume fluctuations. Price fluctuations could result in litigation being initiated against the Company, which litigation, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and diversion of its management’s attention and resources, which could harm the Company’s business and financial condition.

Cost of continued compliance with SEC rules and regulations is expensive.

The Company will incur ongoing costs and expenses in complying with Exchange Act rules and regulations as a result of being a reporting company. The Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting. In order to maintain and improve the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting, significant resources and management oversight will be required. This may divert management’s attention from other business concerns. While the Company believes that it has adequate internal controls, it may determine that such controls are insufficient, requiring the Company to hire additional personnel to implement such controls.

Our quarter-to-quarter performance may vary substantially, and this variance, as well as general market conditions, may cause our stock price to fluctuate greatly and potentially expose us to litigation.

Our future expense estimates are based, in large part, on estimates of future revenue, which are difficult to predict despite the existing long-term contracts. We expect to continue to make significant expenditures in order to expand production, sales, marketing and administrative systems and processes. We may be unable to, or may elect not to, adjust spending quickly enough to offset any unexpected revenue shortfall. If our increased expenses are not accompanied by increased revenue in the same quarter, our quarterly operating results would be harmed.

In one or more future quarters, our results of operations may fall below the expectations of investors and the trading price of our securities may decline as a consequence. We believe that quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our operating results may not be a good indication of our future performance and should not be relied upon to predict the future performance of our stock price. In the past, companies that have experienced volatility in the market price of their stock have often been subject to securities class action litigation. We may be the target of this type of litigation in the future. Securities litigation against us could result in substantial costs and divert our management's attention from other business concerns, which could seriously harm our business.

We may issue Preferred Stock.

We are authorized to issue 2,500,000 shares of preferred stock in one or more series. Our board of directors may determine the preferences, voting powers, qualifications and special or relative rights or privileges of any series before the issuance of any shares of that series without any further vote or action by the stockholders. Our board, without shareholder approval, can issue preferred stock with voting and conversion rights which could adversely affect the voting power of the holders of Common Stock. The issuance of preferred stock may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change of control of our Company. Our board of directors shall determine the number of shares constituting each series of preferred stock and each series shall have a distinguishing designation. Although we have no present intention to issue any shares of preferred stock, there can be no assurance that the Company will not do so in the future.

We have outstanding options & warrants, which may be dilutive to shareholders.

As of the date of this Reports, the Company has warrants and options outstanding to purchase an aggregate of 3,164,402 shares of Common Stock, at prices ranging from $0.01 to $5.40, expiring the later of January 21, 2016 (with approximately 172,083 shares of Common Stock underlying currently exercisable options and warrants having an exercise price of $0.01 per share). If any of these warrants or options are exercised, it will result in dilution to our shareholders.

ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

The Horizon Mine

The Company’s only currently operating coal mining operation is the Horizon Mine. The Company maintains office space at 3266 South 125 West, Price, Utah for general administrative purposes. The Company maintains its corporate offices at 57 West 200 South, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Consumers Road Property

In January 2009, we acquired real and personal property in Carbon County, Utah, as follows:

Three (3) buildings and fixtures used for record storage, mine support facilities, an equipment maintenance shop, training center, etc., collectively called the “Consumers Road Property,” located on approximately 35 acres of land owned by the United States for which we hold possession under Right-of-Way UTU-49754 granted by the Bureau of Land Management.

An interest in the following described parcel of land: “NW¼SW¼ of Section 26, T15S, R8E, SLM, containing 40.00 acres more or less”, a parcel which we refer to as the “South 40 Parcel.”

We intend to use the Consumers Road Property for office and shop support for our coal mine operations at the Horizon Mine. We are exploring alternative uses for the South 40 Parcel.

The Wildcat Loadout

On June 13, 2011, the company entered into a lease for the facility known as the Wildcat Coal Loadout located in Carbon County, Utah. The Wildcat Loadout is a facility used to load mined coal into railroad train cars for delivery to coal consumers. The Wildcat facility sits on approximately 100 acres and located approximately 8 miles from the Horizon Mine along the same county road as the mine.

The location and means of access to the Horizon Mine.

The Horizon Mine is located approximately 11 miles West of Helper, Carbon County, Utah. The mine property abuts a county road known as Consumers Road which allows vehicular access to the mine and allows transportation of coal from the mine.

The Company’s right to operate the Horizon Mine.

Hidden Splendor operates the Horizon Mine pursuant to an operating permit issued by the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. Hidden Splendor’s permit number in this regard is C/007/0020. The permit allows Hidden Splendor to mine within the entire area subject to a federal coal lease Hidden Splendor owns. That federal coal lease, lease no. U-74804, covers coal in an area of approximately 2,640 acres located in Township 13 South, Range 8 East, Salt Lake Base Meridian. Hidden Splendor owns fee title to approximately 80 acres of that acreage and the coal beneath the land Hidden Splendor owns is fee coal which Hidden Splendor owns and upon which Hidden Splendor pays no royalties. Thus, Hidden Splendor mines the coal within the area of its operating permit either by right of outright ownership of that coal or by right of the federal coal lease which Hidden Splendor owns.

In order to maintain its federal lease the Company must meet certain diligence requirements. In this regard, the Company must mine approximately 60,000 tons of coal each year over a 10 year period and the Company has the entire 10 year period to meet that total amount. Accordingly, our operations to date have been more than sufficient to meet this obligation.

Previous operations of the Horizon Mine

According to the operating history for the Horizon Mine compiled by the Mine Safety and Health Administration of the United States Department of Labor, the Horizon mine had four operators prior to Hidden Splendor. From April 1, 1992 to April 19, 1995, the mine was operated by an entity known as Blue Blaze Coal Company. From April 20, 1995 to August 28, 1997, it was operated by Horizon Coal Corp. From August 29, 1997 to July 14, 1999, it was operated by Horizon Mining, LLC. From July 15, 1999 to March 23, 2003, it was operated by Lodestar Energy, Inc. Hidden Splendor purchased the operations of the Horizon Mine out of the bankruptcy of Lodestar in March of 2003 and has been operating the Horizon Mine since that time.

According to the mine overview data compiled by MSHA in connection with the Horizon Mine, the following number of tons have been mined from the Horizon Mine in the years shown:


Year	Tons Produced	Tons Purchased from 3 ^rd Parties	Average Sales Price Per Ton
1997	8,860	-	*
1998	97,219	-	*
1999	41,332	-	*
2000	-	-	-
2001	23,197	-	*
2002	110,202	-	*
2003	80,777	-	*
2004	286,493	-	*
2005	284,481	-	*
2006	256,025	-	$21
2007	233,105	-	$22
2008	228,759	-	$33
2009	193,666	50,905	$46
2010	270,414	-	$36
2011	370,149	-	$37

*Average sales price per ton is not disclosed, as the revenues for the period are unaudited.

The modernization and physical condition of the plant and equipment.

In July 2009, the Company rebuilt and deployed a continuous miner, resulting in more efficient, consistent production. The Company purchased and deployed a second continuous miner in the first quarter of 2011. The Company intends to purchase a third miner during 2012, pending the successful raise of capital.

The Company’s proposed program for development of the property

The Company’s proposed plan for the continued development of the Horizon Mine involves continued operation of a room and pillar mining operation. A room-and-pillar operation involves creating a network of interconnected tunnels in the coal seam. These tunnels result from the excavation of a series of “rooms” into the coal bed, leaving “pillars” or columns of coal to help support the mine roof. The rooms and pillars create what on a map looks like a series of city streets and blocks, with the streets being the open rooms and the blocks being the pillars of coal.

Considerable time and materials are utilized in what is known as “development” mining in order to assure that the roof in the open areas of the mine is secure and supported. Development mining simply refers to the mining phase in which the series of rooms and pillars is created, or developed. Room-and-pillar mining also involves the removal of the pillars of coal from areas of the mine which have been fully developed. We refer to this kind of mining as “pillaring” or “MRS extraction of pillar coal.” Pillaring involves the use of mechanized roof support equipment known as mobile roof supports, or “MRSs,” to support the roof of the mine while some of the pillars of coal are removed. MRSs are large track-driven, hydraulic canopies which are remotely operated. The use of MRSs in pillaring replaced an older method of retreat mining which involved supporting the roof of a mine with wooden posts only as pillars were removed. That method did not afford the same level of safety which MRS pillar extraction affords.

Pillaring involves backing out of a section of the mine as the pillars in that section are removed. Because the pillars are being removed from the section, time and materials are not utilized to maintain the roof in that area of the mine to the same extent they are used in development mining. The roof is maintained by the MRSs which monitor the stress pushing down from the roof. The roof of the area in which pillaring takes place is not maintained because as pillars are removed that roof falls in the area after the MRS units are remotely removed and that area of the mine is sealed off and abandoned. Once the panel is fully created, pillaring takes place and the pillars are removed from the panel. Once pillaring in a panel is completed, another panel is developed.

Since August 2003, we primarily have operated the Horizon Mine as what is known as a “one-section” mine. That is, we mine in one area of the mine at any one time using one continuous miner, two shuttle cars and attendant equipment. Thus, all of our production comes from operating one set of mining equipment in one area of the mine. As a one-section mine, any problem we have encountered has had a significantly adverse effect on production. For example, when we have encountered a fault in the coal seam which has displaced the seam either up or down by several feet, we have had to spend time mining through the faulted area to reach the seam past the fault. We have spent just as much time and used just as much material mining through the fault, but we have mined no coal.

We acquired and deployed a second continuous miner during first quarter 2011 to enable the mine to begin operating in two sections with the goal to expand to three sections during 2012, subject to obtaining sufficient financing.

Current operations of the Horizon Mine.

The federal coal lease the Company has obtained covers coal which lies under approximately 1,640 acres of land in Carbon County, Utah. The surface rights to most all of the land in which the leased coal lies are owned by private landowners. The Horizon Mine is an underground, slope mine. At present, adequate surface facilities are in place at the mine site to support underground mining operations which take place at the mine. The surface facilities of the Horizon Mine operation are located on property owned by the Company.

Those surface facilities include a mine office and bathhouse facility, a storage trailer, the portals which lead to the underground operations of the mine, a conveyer belt structure which moves coal from the underground operations to the surface, a crushing unit which sizes the coal mined and a stacking tube around which the coal mined is stacked on the surface. All structures on the surface are in good operating condition. The surface operations cover approximately 8.9 acres of land.

Underground operations currently extend a total of more than two miles underground when measured traveling from the surface entrance of the mine to the farthest working area in the mine. Underground operations at the Horizon Mine are “room and pillar” operations. The Company’s operations at the Horizon Mine are in the Production Stage, as that term is defined by Industry Guide No. 7 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with Item 102 Disclosure under Regulation S-B. That is, the Company is engaged in the exploitation of a mineral deposit, or more simply, we actually are mining coal.

The Horizon Mine is currently operational, producing “compliant” thermal coal. Coal mined at the Horizon Mine is located in what is known as the Hiawatha Coal Seam located in the Wasatch Plateau Coal Field. The average height of the seam as it runs through the mine is approximately seven feet. Typical raw coal quality (including dilution) has the following general characteristics:


Moisture	7.56%
Ash	9.87%
Volatile Mater	41.75%
Fixed Carbon	65.31%
Sulfur	0.55%
Btu/pound	11,946
Hardgrove Index	42
Free Swelling Index	2.5

A continuous miner cuts the coal from the seam and places it in shuttle cars, which take the coal from the continuous miner to the conveyor belts. The conveyor belts then move the coal out of the mine where the coal is crushed to size and piled for loading into trucks. Coal mined from the Horizon Mine is loaded into trucks which haul the coal either directly to end users of the coal or to distribution facilities known as “loadouts” where the coal is loaded into rail cars and transported via rail to customers. The Horizon Mine is located approximately 8 miles from the nearest loadout facility (which we now operate) and approximately 16 miles from the next closest loadout facility we have used in the past to ship our coal to end users.

The Horizon Mine coal was sold at an average price of approximately $37 per ton and $36 per ton during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The lower cost sales price per ton during 2010 is due to the Company having to sell a portion of its coal production at lower spot prices during the first and second quarter of 2010, as the Company did not have long-term sales contracts until the summer of 2010. Spot prices for coal in the western United States were lower in early 2010 due to lower demand in accordance with market conditions. The Company’s average sales price per ton under existing sales contracts is approximately $38 per ton.

The Company's average production cost per ton sold, excluding mine development costs, of coal for the year ended December 31, 2011 was approximately $35 per ton. Production costs per ton were extraordinarily high during the year due to the Company having to intermittently idle the mine during part of 2011 due to lower demand of coal in the western United States and a force majeaur implemented by one of our larger customers. As a result, the fixed costs of maintaining the Horizon Mine in the idle state at various times during 2011, combined with the lower production during that period, resulted in an escalated production cost per ton. Since that time, the Company believes it has mitigated this risk by reducing the work force and implementing cost controls, and thus, does not anticipate similar extraordinary circumstances in 2012. As production escalates, we believe that the production cost per ton should significantly decrease as a result of economies of scale.

Management's plan is to continue to escalate production to an average of 60,000 tons per month during 2012 by operating its second continuous miner. The Company estimates it will achieve cash positive operations at an average of 60,000 tons of production per month. In addition, the Company plans to lease or acquire and deploy a third continuous miner, a shuttle car, and other key equipment to enable the Horizon Mine to operate as a three-section mine during 2012. With these equipment additions/upgrades and logistical adjustments, we expect monthly production to increase. Our ability to raise additional capital will determine whether we can purchase this additional equipment, the failure of which will adversely affect our financial condition.

The current state of development of the property

Currently the Company has mined approximately 2.5 million tons of coal from the leased and permitted area in which our reserves are located. We have obtained an estimate from a third party engineering firm which indicates that there were approximately 16.2 million tons of proven reserves of recoverable coal in that leased and permitted area as of December 31, 2011. This tonnage meets SEC definition of “proven” reserves as set forth by SEC Guide 7. Per SEC Guide 7, proven reserves are defined as “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 under SEC Guide 7”. Our company has relied upon, among other data points, drill hole data with spacing of ¼ mile in estimating the recoverable reserves under lease. Such estimates are revised as actual mining reveals more accurate information about the coal seams, thickness, quality of coal and locations of obstacles to mining such as faults or rock intrusions into the seam.

Management estimates there are in excess of 100 million tons of additional recoverable coal reserves adjacent to the Horizon Mine that are controlled by Carbon County and the BLM. In March 2009, the BLM granted the Company a lease modification to access and lease approximately 6.8 million tons of proven reserves of recoverable coal from the adjacent reserves. The Company intends to pursue the acquisition of additional adjacent reserves.

Description of the rock formations and mineralization of existing or potential economic significance on the property.

Coal mined at the Horizon Mine is located in what is known as the Hiawatha Coal Seam located in the Wasatch Plateau Coal Field. The average height of the seam as it runs through the mine is approximately seven feet. The coal we extract at the Horizon Mine generally has a BTU value of between 11,500 and 11,800 BTUs/lb. Analysis of the coal produced at the Horizon Mine in August of 2006 has shown BTU levels as high as 12,600. Ash levels in coal substantially affect the value of coal. As it sits in place in the Hiawatha Seam, coal at the Horizon Mine contains ash at levels from 8% to 9%. Mining of the coal can increase ash levels if the rock above or below the coal seam is mined and mixed with the coal taken from the seam, and our ash levels generally test out at 8% to 15%, though conditions in the mine over the last couple of years have seen higher ash levels. As stated above, reports provided to us indicate that there are at least 16.2 million tons of proven reserves of recoverable coal remaining in our leased and permitted operations. We believe this estimate is conservative. Additional tonnage, though not leased by us at this time, is in reserves adjacent to our operation.

Glossary of Terms.

Certain terms used in this Report are specific to the coal mining industry and may be technical in nature. The following is a list of selected mining terms and the definitions generally attributed to them when we use them throughout this document. In most cases, but not all, the following definitions generally are those used by the Energy Information Administration. The definitions of some terms, especially those associated with “reserves,” are taken from Industry Guide No. 7 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with Item 102 Disclosure under Regulation S-B.

Ash : Impurities consisting of silica, iron, alumina, and other incombustible matter that are contained in coal. Ash increases the weight of coal, adds to the cost of handling, and can affect the burning characteristics. Ash content is measured as a percent by weight of coal on an "as received" or a "dry" (moisture-free) basis.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM ): An agency within the United States Department of the Interior which administers U.S. public lands, including subsurface mineral estate underlying federal, state and private lands.

BTU (British thermal unit) : The amount of heat needed to raise the temperature of 1 pound of water by 1 degree Fahrenheit. The BTU is a convenient measure by which to compare the energy content of various fuels.

Coal : A readily combustible black or brownish-black rock whose composition, including inherent moisture, consists of more than 50 percent by weight and more than 70 percent by volume of carbonaceous material. It is formed from plant remains that have been compacted, hardened, chemically altered, and metamorphosed by heat and pressure over geologic time.

Coalbed : A bed or stratum of coal. Also called a coal seam.

Coke : A solid carbonaceous residue derived from low-ash, low-sulfur bituminous coal from which the volatile constituents are driven off by baking in an oven at temperatures as high as 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit so that the fixed carbon and residual ash are fused together. Coke is used as a fuel and as a reducing agent in smelting iron ore in a blast furnace. Coke from coal is grey, hard, and porous and has a heating value of 24.8 million BTU per short ton.

Compliance Coal : A coal or a blend of coals that meets sulfur dioxide emission standards for air quality without the need for flue gas desulphurization.

Continuous Mining : A form of room-and-pillar mining in which a continuous mining machine extracts and removes coal from the working face in one operation; no blasting is required.

Continuous Miner : A machine used in underground mining to cut coal from the seam and load it onto conveyors or into shuttle cars in a continuous operation.

Conventional Mining : The oldest form of room-and-pillar mining which consists of a series of operations that involve cutting the coal bed so it breaks easily when blasted with explosives or high-pressure air, and then loading the broken coal.

EIA : The Energy Information Administration. An independent agency within the U.S. Department of Energy that develops surveys, collects energy data, and analyzes and models energy issues. The Agency must meet the requests of Congress, other elements within the Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Executive Branch, its own independent needs, and assist the general public, or other interest groups, without taking a policy position.

Federal Coal Lease : A lease granted to a mining company to produce coal from land owned and administered by the Federal Government in exchange for royalties and other revenues.

F.O.B. Mine Price : The free on board mine price. This is the price paid for coal at the mining operation site. It excludes freight or shipping and insurance costs.

Loadout : A central facility used in loading coal for transportation by rail.

Longwall Mining : An automated form of underground coal mining characterized by high recovery and extraction rates, feasible only in relatively flat-lying, thick, and uniform coal beds. A high-powered cutting machine is passed across the exposed face of coal, shearing away broken coal, which is continuously hauled away by a floor-level conveyor system. Longwall mining extracts all machine-mineable coal between the floor and ceiling within a contiguous block of coal, known as a panel, leaving no support pillars within the panel area. Longwall mining is done under movable roof supports that are advanced as the bed is cut. The roof in the mined-out area is allowed to fall as the mining advances.

Low-sulfur Coal : Coal which, when burned, emits 1.6 pounds or less of sulfur dioxide per million Btus.

Mineable : Capable of being mined under current mining technology and environmental and legal restrictions, rules, and regulations.

Probable reserves: Reserves for which quantity and grade and/or quality are computed from information similar to that used for proven reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced.

Proven 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.

Reclamation : The restoration of land and environmental values to a mining site after the coal is extracted. The process commonly includes “recontouring” or shaping the land to its approximate original appearance, restoring topsoil and planting native grass and ground covers.

Recoverable Coal : Coal that is, or can be, extracted from a coal bed during mining.

Recoverable Reserves of Coal : An estimate of the amount of coal that can be recovered (mined) from the accessible reserves of the demonstrated reserve base.

Reserve : That part of a mineral deposit which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserve determination.

Room-and-Pillar Mining : The traditional method of underground mining in which the mine roof is supported mainly by coal pillars left at regular intervals. Rooms are places where the coal is mined; pillars are areas of coal left between the rooms. Room-and-pillar mining is done either by conventional or continuous mining.

Seam : A bed of coal lying between a roof and floor. Equivalent term to bed, commonly used by industry.

Slope Mine : An underground mine in which the entry is driven at an angle to reach the coal deposit.

Steam Coal : All non-metallurgical coal.

Underground Mine : A mine where coal is produced by tunneling into the earth to the coal bed, which is then mined with underground mining equipment such as cutting machines and continuous, longwall, and shortwall mining machines. Underground mines are classified according to the type of opening used to reach the coal, i.e., drift (level tunnel), slope (inclined tunnel), or shaft (vertical tunnel).

Underground Mining : The extraction of coal or its products from between enclosing rock strata by underground mining methods, such as room and pillar, longwall, and shortwall, or through in-situ gasification.

Investment Policies.

Hidden Splendor’s operations are focused on the production of coal and participation in the coal industry. Accordingly, the Company has no particular policy regarding each of the following types of investments:

(1) Investments in real estate or interests in real estate;

(2) Investments in real estate mortgages; or

(3) Securities of or interests in persons primarily engaged in real estate activities.

Description of Real Estate and Operating Data.

Hidden Splendor has no real estate in which the book value amounts to 10% or more of the Company’s total assets.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

On October 15, 2007, Hidden Splendor filed a Chapter 11 Petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada. Hidden Splendor’s petition in this regard was a Chapter 11 Petition and Hidden Splendor continued to operate its business as a Debtor in Possession. On December 8, 2008, the Plan was formally confirmed by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The Plan became effective on December 19, 2008, at which time the subsidiary officially emerged from bankruptcy. Discussed in item 1.

Occasionally, Hidden Splendor is issued citations by the Mine Safety and Health Administration in connection with regular inspections of the Horizon Mine. At times, Hidden Splendor challenges citations, resulting in reductions to proposed penalties, which in some instances is 50% or more or administrative adjudications with no penalties. As of December 31, 2011, Hidden Splendor had challenges pending in several administrative actions. Such actions cover a total of approximately $1.2 million proposed, assessed penalties. We are unable to predict the outcome of these pending administrative actions. If the Company is not successful in eliminating or significantly reducing such proposed penalties, such result could adversely affect our financial condition and operations.

In September 2010, Kenneth Rushton, the Chapter 7 Trustee for C.W. Mining Company dba Co-Op Mining Company in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy action on file in the United States District Bankruptcy Court in the District of Utah, bankruptcy case number 08-20105, brought an adversarial proceeding naming Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. as a defendant. Hidden Splendor is a wholly-owned subsidiary of America West Resources, Inc. In this action, the trustee alleges that a $40,000 payment the debtor made to Hidden Splendor in 2007 is avoidable under 11 U .S.C. Section 548 and alleges that the Trustee may recover from Hidden Splendor the value of that payment. Hidden Splendor denies that the trustee is entitled to the relief he seeks and will file an answer to the complaint. America West believes the probability of incurring any losses associated with this claim to be minimal. As such, no expenses have been accrued.

In September 2010, Kenneth Rushton, the Chapter 7 Trustee for C.W. Mining Company dba Co-Op Mining Company in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy action on file in the United States District Bankruptcy Court in the District of Utah, bankruptcy case number 08-20105, brought an adversarial proceeding naming America West Marketing, Inc. as a defendant. America West Marketing, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of America West Resources, Inc. In this action, the trustee alleges that during 2009, America West Marketing purchased 5,795 tons of coal that was either: (1) mined by a third party under the authority of the debtor's operating permit and in violation of the automatic stay in the pending bankruptcy action; (2) mined by the debtor; or (3) purchased by a third party with coal sale proceeds generated by coal previously mined by the Debtor, and claims trustee is entitled to a judgment against America West Marketing in the amount of $204,077 in connection with the transfer of that coal. America West Marketing denies that the trustee is entitled to the relief he seeks and will file an answer to the complaint. America West believes the probability of incurring any losses associated with this claim to be minimal. As such, no expenses have been accrued.

PART II

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

The company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. owns and operates a coal mine known as the Horizon Mine. The operations of the Horizon Mine are subject to various state and federal regulations, including federal regulations administered by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”). From time to time MSHA inspects the operations of the Horizon and issues citations and orders for conditions which MSHA believes are violations of the regulations it administers and enforces. The following information is a summary of the citations, orders and enforcement actions MSHA issued or pursued in 2011:

a. Citations and Orders.

1. In 2011 Hidden Splendor received a total of 82 citations for alleged violations of mandatory health or safety standards which MSHA contends could significantly and substantially contribute to the cause and effect of a coal or other mine safety or health hazard under section 104 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 814). Hidden Splendor has contested may of these citations.

2. In 2011 Hidden Splendor received a total of 2 orders issued under section 104(b) of such Act (30 U.S.C. 814(b)). Hidden Splendor has contested many of these orders.

3. In 2011 Hidden Splendor received a total of 25 citations and orders for alleged unwarrantable failure of the mine operator to comply with mandatory health or safety standards under section 104(d) of such Act (30 U.S.C. 814(d)).

4. In 2011 Hidden Splendor received a total of 0 alleged flagrant violations under section 110(b)(2) of such Act (30 U.S.C. 820(b)(2)).

5. In 2011 Hidden Splendor received a total of 0 alleged imminent danger orders issued under section 107(a) of such Act (30 U.S.C. 817(a)).

6. The total dollar value of proposed assessments from MSHA in 2011, regardless of whether Hidden Splendor has challenged or appealed the assessment was $854,875.

7. Since Hidden Splendor began operating the Horizon Mine in 2003, there have there have been no mine-related fatalities.

b. Patterns of Violation

During 2011 Hidden Splendor did not receive a written notice from the Mine Safety and Health Administration of:

(i) A pattern of violations of mandatory health or safety standards that are of such nature as could have significantly and substantially contributed to the cause and effect of coal or other mine health or safety hazards under section 104(e) of such Act (30 U.S.C. 814(e)); or

(ii) The potential to have such a pattern.

c. Pending Legal Action Before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission.

The following is summary of the total number of legal actions that were pending before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission as of the last day of 2012, as well as the aggregate number of legal actions instituted and the aggregate number of legal actions resolved during 2011. With respect to the total number of legal actions that were pending before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission as of the last day of 2011:

1. There were 37 pending docketed cases involving 218 citations and/or orders issued to Hidden Splendor by MSHA pending as of December 31, 2011;

2. As of December 31, 2011, there were 37 pending docketed cases involving 218 citations and/or orders in which Hidden Splendor contested pending of proposed penalties assessed against Hidden Splendor by MSHA;

3. As of December 31, 2011, there were no complaints pending for compensation against Hidden Splendor brought by MSHA;

4. As of December 31, 2011, there were no pending complaints of discharge, discrimination or interference brought by MSHA against Hidden Splendor;

5. As of December 31, 2011, there were no pending applications for temporary relief brought by MSHA against Hidden Splendor; and

6. As of December 31, 2011, there were no pending appeals of judges' decisions or orders to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission involving Hidden Splendor.

General Market Information

Our common stock trades on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol “AWSR.” The market for our common stock on the OTC Bulletin Board is limited, sporadic and highly volatile. The following table sets forth the approximate high and low closing sales prices per share as reported on the OTC Bulletin Board for our common stock for the last two fiscal years. The quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail markups, markdowns, or commissions and may not represent actual transactions.


Year 2011
Quarter ended December 31	$0.25	$0.21
Quarter ended September 30	$0.75	$0.53
Quarter ended June 30	$1.15	$1.11
Quarter ended March 31	$1.50	$1.35

Year 2010
Quarter ended December 31	$2.86	$0.25
Quarter ended September 30	$1.68	$0.42
Quarter ended June 30	$3.00	$1.02
Quarter ended March 31	$2.40	$0.66

(1) Source: http://quotes.nasdaq.com . These quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not represent actual transactions.

Holders

As of April 15, 2011, there were approximately 836 shareholders of record of the Company's common stock and 66,414,175 shares outstanding.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table sets forth certain information, as of December 31, 2011, concerning securities authorized for issuance under the 2008 Stock Option Plan and other outstanding options, warrants and rights:


	Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants & Rights (a)	Weighted Averaged Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants & Rights (b)	Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a) (c)

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders:	--	--	--

Equity compensations plans not approved by security holders (1) (2) :	462,292	4.32	754,375

Total	462,292	4.32	754,375

(1)

On July 3, 2008, we granted employees and officers options to purchase an aggregate 4,237,500 common shares at exercise prices ranging from $0.40 to $0.45. One-third of such options vested upon issuance of the options, one third vested on the first anniversary of the issuance, and the remaining third vested on the second anniversary of the issuance. Vested options will expire five years from the date the option vested.

(2)

On September 22, 2009, we granted certain employees options to purchase an aggregate 1,310,000 common shares at an exercise price of $0.10. The options vested 100% on September 22, 2010.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

Set forth below is certain information concerning issuances of common stock that were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) that occurred, but were not reported, during the fourth quarter of 2011:

During January 2011, we entered into loan agreements with third parties pursuant to which we borrowed an aggregate principal amount of $285,000. In connection with the loans, we issued the third party lenders 237,500 shares of the Company’s Common Stock as additional consideration for these loans. JTF was paid a cash commission of $37,050 associated with these loans.

In January 2011, we issued Uptick Capital LLC 7,500 shares of the Company’s Common Stock pursuant to the aforementioned consulting agreement. Such shares were valued at $12,375.

In January 2011, we entered into a loan agreement with John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund II LP, an affiliate of George Jarkesy, a director of the Company, pursuant to which we borrowed an aggregate principal amount of $75,000. In connection with the loans, we issued the related party lender 66,667 shares of the Company’s Common Stock as additional consideration for the loan. In January 2011, for the third party loans received in October 2010 through January 2011 as set forth herein, we issued JTF and certain affiliates of JTF a 5-year warrant to purchase 548,708 shares of the Company’s Common Stock at an exercise price of $1.20 per share.

In February 2011, we entered into a consulting agreement with MEC Promotions LLC under the terms of which we issued MEC Promotions LLC 150,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock. Such shares were valued at $89,734.

During February 2011, we entered into loan agreements with third parties pursuant to which we borrowed an aggregate principal amount of $210,500. In connection with the loans, we issued the third party lenders 175,417 shares of the Company’s Common Stock as additional consideration for these loans. JTF was paid a cash commission of $27,365 associated with these loans.

In March 2011, we issued Uptick Capital LLC 15,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock representing February and March compensation pursuant to the aforementioned consulting agreement. Such shares were valued at $24,375.

During March 2011, we issued a total of 3,310,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock for cash consideration aggregating $3,310,000. A commission of $430,300 was paid to John Thomas Financial Inc. in connection with the sales of these shares.

In April 2011, we issued Riverstone Wealth Management 200,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock pursuant to the settlement of a finder’s fee agreement associated with funds invested in the Company by Denly Utah Coal LLC. Such shares were valued at $350,000.

During April 2011, we issued a total of 1,190,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock for cash consideration aggregating $1,190,000. A commission of $154,700 was paid to John Thomas Financial Inc. in connection with the sales of these shares.

In June of 2011, we issued Uptick Capital LLC 12,500 shares of the Company’s Common Stock representing payments on pursuant to the aforementioned consulting agreement.

In June of 2011, we issued Howard Kent 25,000 share of the company’s common stock in exchange for his agreement to postpone payments due the Howard Kent Profit Sharing Plan.

In June of 2011, we issued Brian Rodriguez 100,000 shares of the company’s common stock in exchange for deferred compensation.

In July 2011, we issued at total of 12,963,423 shares of the company’s common stock to various holders of promissory notes the company had executed. Such shares were issued as part of a conversion of the $12,808,302 of debt the company owed such noteholders. Such debt thereby was converted in equity in the company represented by these shares. The company paid John Thomas Financial, Inc. a commission in connection with this debt conversion.

In August of 2011, we issued Uptick Capital LLC 25,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock representing a payment on the consulting agreement between the company and Uptick.

In September of 2011, we issued Park Avenue Consulting 75,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock representing a final payment on the consulting agreement between the company and Park Avenue Consulting.

In October of 2011, we issued Uptick Capital LLC 25,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock representing the final payment on the consulting agreement between the company and Uptick.

From September through the end of 2011, the company issued to Denly Utah Coal, LLC a total of 5,190,000 of its common stock for loans totaling $5,190,000.

The issuance of these equity securities were consummated pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder on the basis that such transactions did not involve a public offering and the offerees were sophisticated, accredited investors with access to the kind of information that registration would provide. The recipient of these securities represented its intention to acquire the securities for investment only and not with a view to or for sale in connection with any distribution thereof and appropriate legends were affixed to the share certificates and other instruments issued in such transactions. Unless otherwise noted, no sales commissions were paid.

Purchases of Equity Securities by Company

None.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Not required.

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

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements of the Company and notes thereto set forth herein. Our auditor's report on our financial statements expresses an opinion that substantial doubt exists as to whether we can continue as an ongoing business. This means that there is substantial doubt that we can continue as an on-going business for the next twelve months unless we obtain additional capital. The financial statements of the Company do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if we are unable to continue as a going concern.

Overview

The Company is an established domestic coal producer engaged in the mining of clean and compliant (low-sulfur) coal. The majority of our coal is sold to utility companies for use in the generation of electricity. During fiscal 2010, we derived approximately 99% of our total coal revenues from sales to our four largest customers . We expect these customers to collectively account for the majority of our revenues during 2012 as well. We have entered into contracts with these customers to deliver a certain quantity of coal at fixed prices, subject to other terms and conditions that are standard in the industry. With respect to customers not subject to long-term contracts, we have short-term or market delivery and price contracts that we negotiate and perform on a continuous basis. Our strategy is to have a combination of long-term and short-term delivery contracts. We operate the Horizon Mine located in Carbon County, Utah, and we plan to expand mining operations in this mine, and acquire additional mining properties.

The Horizon Mine is operated through our wholly-owned subsidiary Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. Hidden Splendor’s only business is the coal mining operation at the Horizon Mine located approximately eleven miles west of Helper, Utah in Carbon County. This mine produces what is commonly known as “steam coal,” that is, coal used to heat water to create steam which, in turn, is used to turn turbine engines to produce electricity. While steam coal primarily is sold to power companies for use in coal-fired power plants, steam coal also can be used in the production process for concrete and often is sold in the western United States for this purpose. Since 2003, the market for the coal mined from the Horizon Mine has been sold to local utilities, other coal mining operations, a concrete producer and a coal broker.

Results of Operations for the Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to December 31, 2010

Material changes in financial statement line items

The following table presents combined statement of operations data for each of the periods indicated and presents the percentage of change in each line item from one period to the next.


	Years Ended				Percentage
	December 31,				Increase
	2011		2010		(Decrease)
Coal sales	$	13,864,287	$	10,027,949		38%
Machine repair services		32,316		42,183		(23%)
Total revenue		13,896,603		10,070,132		38%

Coal production costs		13,363,767		6,118,987		118%
Depreciation, depletion and accretion		2,160,012		1,927,391		12%
Machine repair costs		8,645		16,635		(48%)
Total cost of revenue		15,532,424		8,063,013		182%
Gross profit (loss)		(1,635,821)		2,007,119		(81%)

Operating expenses:
General and administrative expenses		6,677,761		8,729,612		(24%)
Loss on write off of mineral rights
and fixed assets		9,565		552,482		(98%)
Loss from operations		(8,323,147)		(7,274,975)		14%

Other income (expenses):
Change in derivative fair value		1,484,659		294,402		(404%)
Interest income		18		179		(90%)
Interest expense		(13,336,147)		(5,451,152)		145%
Gain on forgiveness of royalty liability		440,919		-		-
Loss on extinguishment of debt		(3,726,602)		(3,714,797)		-
Total other income (expenses)		(15,137,153)		(8,871,368)		71%
Net Loss	$	(23,460,300)	$	(16,146,343)		45%

Revenue

We generated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2011 of $13.9 million, a 38% increase from revenues of $10.0 million for 2010. The increase in revenues was primarily attributable to a 142% increase in tons of coal produced and sold due to market conditions during 2011 compared to 2010. All coal sales revenue during 2011 and 2010 was related to coal produced from our Horizon coal mine operations by our wholly-owned subsidiary, Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc.

Historically, we have operated the mine as a one-section mine, meaning we have mined coal in only one area of the mine. We began operating the mine as a two-section mine during the first quarter of 2011. That is, we mine coal in two areas of the mine at the same time. Optimally, Section I will be pillaring a developed panel, while in Section II, a panel is being developed. Because development mining involves significant roof support efforts and often discovers problem areas in the mine, such as faults in the coal seam or inflows of water, development mining is more capital intensive than pillaring. By operating two sections, the Company can blend the two types of mining and will have the flexibility to deal with adverse conditions which may affect mining in any one section. By operating two sections, the Company plans to increase production. Management’s plan is to escalate production to an average of 60,000 tons per month during 2012 by completing the ramp up of its second continuous miner which was deployed during the first quarter of 2011. In addition, the Company plans to acquire and deploy a third continuous miner, a shuttle car, and other key equipment to enable the Horizon Mine to operate as a three-section mine during 2012, pending the successful completion of a financing. With these equipment additions/upgrades and logistical adjustments, we expect monthly production to increase. However, there is no guarantee that production will increase in the future as planned.

Coal Production Costs

Our production costs during the year ended December 31, 2011 were $15.5 million, compared to $8.1 million for 2010. The total coal tonnage produced by the Horizon Mine during 2011 was approximately 142% higher than the coal tonnage produced in 2010. Production costs increased by approximately 93% despite higher tonnage production from the Horizon Mine as compared to 2010 primarily due to the capitalization of an additional $6.8 million more in mine development costs in 2011. The increase in capitalized mine development costs was associated with a change in the mine plan and development of new sections for mining operations in the future.

Gross Profit

Gross profit decreased from $2.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 to a loss of $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in gross profit was due to (i) higher maintenance and repair costs of approximately $1.5 million compared to 2010, and (ii) an increase in supplies for roof support of $1.9 million in 2011 as compared to 2010.

General and Administrative Expense

General and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2011 totaled $6.7 million, a decrease of $2 million, or 24%, over general and administrative expenses of $8.7 million in the prior year. The decrease is primarily attributed to approximately $2.1 million less stock-based compensation expense associated with common stock and stock options issued to management and employees, as well as common stock and warrants issued to third parties for services, an increase in legal fees of $1.2 million and an overall decrease in general and administrative expenses.

Loss from Operations

Loss from operations increased 14% from $7.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 to $8.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. The increase in loss from operations is due to the approximate $3.6 million decrease in gross profit partially offset by the approximate $2 million decrease in general and administrative expenses as previously described.

Other Income (Expenses)

For the year ended December 31, 2011, we incurred net other expenses of $15.1 million, compared to net other expenses of $8.9 million for the prior year. The negative variance between periods of approximately $6.2 million was primarily due to the following:

An approximate $1.2 million increase in the gain on change in derivative fair value in 2011 compared to 2010. As of December 31, 2011, America West has an aggregate of 911,564 outstanding warrants containing exercise price reset provisions that are classified as derivative liabilities. These items result in a derivative liability which is marked to market at each reporting period with the corresponding changes in fair value charged to derivative gain or loss. See further details and description of the derivative liability and fair value in the footnotes to our consolidated financial statements.

An approximate $7.9 million increase in interest expense primarily attributed to (i) an approximate $6.5 million higher charge in 2011 associated with the amortization of debt discount (the expensing of common shares issued to lenders as consideration for loans) due to various related party and third party loans maturing during the 2011 period, and (ii) higher interest expense associated with a higher level of debt.

A $1.0 million lower one-time charge on extinguishment of debt in 2011 as compared to 2010. The one-time charge in 2011 was associated with the extension of the term of third party loans made to our company, as well as the settlement of debt with the issuance of the Company’s common stock. In May 2010, the payment terms on various loans from November 2009 through April 2010 totaling $2,150,000 were modified whereby these thirteen loans were consolidated into one loan. In connection with this modification, 1,953,407 common shares were issued to the lender with a fair value of $3,047,314. In addition, in December 2010, the Company issued 590,188 shares of common stock to settle approximately $0.7 million in third party debt and interest resulting in a loss on extinguishment of $0.7 million.

Net Loss

For the reasons noted above, our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2011, increased 45% to $23.5 million, compared to $16.1 million in 2010. The negative variance between the periods of $7.4 million is primarily attributed to the $6.2 million change in net other expenses as described in detail above. Of the $23.5 million net loss, approximately $15 million is associated with expenses that are one-time charges and/or non-cash items, composed of the following:

$2.6 million - one-time non-cash charges related to extinguishment of debt associated with (i) extension of third party loans, and (ii) the settlement of approximately $16.5 million in third party and related party debt and interest with the Company’s common stock

$2.1 million – non-cash depreciation of fixed assets and depletion of mine development costs

$9.6 million - one-time non-cash charge associated with amortization of debt discounts related to stock issued with debt

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had approximately $20.8 million in short-term debt and a working capital deficit of approximately $28 million. Details regarding our debt are contained in the notes to our financial statements included in Item 8 hereunder and are important to an understanding of the risk we face in connection with repaying our debt. In particular, such debt is detailed in Note 5 to financial statements included in Item 8 hereunder. The short-term is listed as such because it is either due on demand, is currently due but has not yet been paid or because it matures during the current year.

As of the date of this Report, the Company owed approximately $3 million to Zions Bank (which may be in technical default, though we have received no notice of default in this regard), its primary secured creditor and approximately $1 million to general and priority unsecured creditors pursuant to the Plan. The Company is in actual or technical default with respect to this $4 million of debt owed to its Plan creditors. In addition, the Company has approximately $15.6 million in debt to shareholders and approximately $100 Thousand in unsecured bridge loans from third parties. If any of these loans go into default and/or are accelerated, the Company would not have adequate funds to repay the loans, and the Company’s business may be adversely affected.

In the event that any of the loans listed in our financial statements are accelerated or a loan holder claims a loan due a payable immediately, we currently would be unable to pay the amounts due in full and our ability to continue business would be adversely effected.

Our current liquidity position has allowed us to meet our ongoing Plan payment obligations and nominal working capital requirements to date. Due to delinquency of payments to certain creditors by our Company in late 2010 and through the date of this Report, certain debts to both related and third parties are in default. As a result, a total of approximately $4.5 million associated with Hidden Splendor’s Bankruptcy Plan of Reorganization is in default and due upon demand, of which approximately $0.2 million was previously scheduled to mature subsequent to 2012. The Company is working to remedy these defaults and, as of the date of this Report, no creditors have filed a default under the Plan with the bankruptcy court. In addition, due to the aforementioned defaults, approximately $6.5 million in other third party and related party debt is now due on demand and is default. The Company has not received a notice of default of any of the aforementioned debt as of the date of this Report. In addition, we have accrued unpaid federal taxes of approximately $2 million related to 2009 and 2010, which is subject to a payment plan of $50,000 per month over the next approximate three years.

Our cash flows from operations during 2011 and through the date of this report has not been sufficient to meet all our obligations. Historically, we have funded the Company’s cash shortfalls with ad hoc loans from related parties and third parties. However, these loans have not been enough to fund our expansion plans nor refinance our debt. As a result, we will likely be required to raise at least $3 million in capital to meet the aforementioned obligations and fund expected working capital to expand our mining operation in 2012. Management’s plan is to complete a financing to deploy additional equipment, which we expect to escalate our rate of production and, as a result, our cash flows from operations. Should the Company receive a notice of default and demand for immediate payment on any of the aforementioned debts, we will likely be required to raise up to a total of approximately $19 million. Our inability to obtain immediate financing from third parties will negatively impact our ability to fund operations and execute our business plan. Any failure to obtain such financing could force us to abandon or curtail our operations. There is no assurance that we can raise additional capital from external sources, the failure of which could cause us to sell assets or curtail operations. We have no credit facilities in place, and as the Company has no debt or equity funding commitments, we will need to rely upon best efforts financings. Accordingly, we cannot identify or predict what external sources may provide financing, nor what terms any prospective financing may have. Our auditors have issued a going concern opinion for our consolidated financial statements due to the substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Trends, events or uncertainties which could impact either liquidity or revenues

Several of the matters discussed in this report contain forward-looking statements that involve risks, trends and uncertainties. Factors associated with the forward-looking statements that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or forecast are included in the statements below. In addition to other information contained in this report, readers should carefully consider the cautionary statements contained in Item 1 of Part I above.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had no off-balance sheet arrangements.

Critical Accounting Policies

Use of Estimates - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.

Property and Equipment - Property and equipment are carried at cost and include expenditures for new facilities and those expenditures that substantially increase the productive lives of existing equipment. Maintenance and repair costs are expensed as incurred. Mine development costs are capitalized and depleted by the units of production method over estimated total recoverable proven and probable reserves.

Property and equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the assets’ estimated useful lives. Fully depreciated property and equipment still in use are not eliminated from the accounts.

The Company assesses the carrying value of its property and equipment for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability is measured by comparing estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated from such assets to their net book value. If net book value exceeds estimated cash flows, the asset is written down to its fair value. When an asset is retired or sold, its cost and related accumulated depreciation and amortization are removed from the accounts. The difference between the net book value of the asset and proceeds on disposition is recorded as a gain or loss.

Asset Retirement Obligations - FASB ASC 410-20 addresses financial accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement costs. The Company’s asset retirement obligation (“ARO”) liabilities primarily consist of estimated costs related to reclaiming mines and related facilities in accordance with federal and state reclamation laws as defined by each mining permit.

The Company estimates its ARO liabilities for final reclamation and mine closure based upon detailed engineering calculations of the amount and timing of the future costs for a third party to perform the required work. Cost estimates are escalated for inflation, and then discounted at the credit-adjusted risk-free rate. The Company records an ARO asset associated with the initial recorded liability. When the liability is initially recorded, the offset is capitalized by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is accreted to its present value each period, and the capitalized cost is amortized based on the units of production method over the estimated proved and probable reserves at the related mine. Accretion expense is included in coal production costs. To the extent there is a difference between the liability recorded and the cost incurred, a gain or loss upon settlement is recognized.

The reclamation plan calls for a bonding and insurance requirement. The bond is the deed to residential property owned personally by the shareholders.

Revenue Recognition - Hidden Splendor’s revenues are generated under a long-term sales contract with a single coal brokerage company. The terms of the contract are “FOB the mine” or “FOB the railcar”. Revenues from coal sales are recognized when the coal is loaded onto the delivery truck at the mine or the railcar at the railroad loadout facility, both of which are contracted by the customer. At the end of each month, the amount of coal delivered to the coal brokerage is estimated. In addition, the customer may apply a penalty against invoices relating to deviations in delivered coal quality per the contract terms. Variances between estimated revenue and actual payment are recorded in the month the payment is received; however, differences have been minimal.

Share-Based Payments - The Company accounts for share-based payments in accordance with the authoritative guidance issued by the FASB on stock compensation, which establishes the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services. Under the provisions of the authoritative guidance, share-based compensation expense is measured at the grant date, based on the fair value of the award, and is recognized as an expense over the requisite employee service period (generally the vesting period). The Company estimates the fair value of share-based payments using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Additionally, share-based awards to non-employees are expensed over the period in which the related services are rendered at their fair value.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISKS

Not required.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of

America West Resources, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Salt Lake City, Utah

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of America West Resources, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company") as of December 31, 2010, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders' deficit and cash flows for the year then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with 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 audit included 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 includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2010, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming the Company will continue as a going concern, which contemplates continuity of business, realization of assets, and liquidation of liabilities in the ordinary course of business. As discussed in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has a working capital deficit and has incurred significant losses. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans regarding those matters are also described in Note 3. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ MaloneBailey, LLP

MaloneBailey, LLP

www.malonebailey.com

Houston, Texas

April 15, 2011

F-1

[f10k123111_10k003.jpg]

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and the Shareholders

America West Resources, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of America West Resources, Inc. and subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) as of December 31, 2011 and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity (deficit), and cash flows for the year then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States of America). 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 audit included 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 audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of America West Resources, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has a working capital deficit and has incurred significant losses. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans with respect to these matters are also described in Note 3. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ HANSEN, BARNETT & MAXWELL, P.C.

HANSEN, BARNETT & MAXWELL, P.C.

Salt Lake City, Utah

May 16, 2012

[f10k123111_10k004.jpg]

F-2


America West Resources, Inc. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

		December 31,
		2011		2010
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	97,533	$	65,003
Restricted cash		-		4,010
Accounts receivable		9,958		466,871
Inventory		-		136,037
Deferred financing costs		1,897		543,291
Prepaid expenses		473,222		115,115
Total current assets		582,610		1,330,327

Deposits		807,272		804,148
Long-term restricted cash		204,024		-

Property and equipment:
Property and equipment		15,075,804		11,150,980
Land and mineral properties		26,424,721		19,627,847
Total property and equipment		41,500,525		30,778,827
Less: accumulated depreciation and depletion		(11,504,505)		(9,439,156)
Net property and equipment		29,996,020		21,339,671

Total assets	$	31,589,926	$	23,474,146

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit)
Current liabilities:
Bank overdraft	$	-	$	180,733
Accounts payable		3,347,028		3,077,428
Accounts payable - related party		398,386		521,506
Accrued expenses		3,616,678		4,567,572
Deferred revenue		500,000		500,000
Short-term debt – related party, net of unamortized discounts of
$0 and $194,365, respectively		15,633,771		11,535,219
Current maturities of long-term debt, net of unamortized discount of
$17,857 and $2,061,783, respectively		5,192,956		9,357,728
Derivative liabilities		109,711		1,594,370
Total current liabilities		28,798,530		31,334,566

Long-term debt - related party		-		-
Long-term debt, net of unamortized discount of $2,512 and $0, respectively		164,541		1,114,450
Asset retirement obligation		213,220		134,969
Total liabilities		29,176,291		32,583,985

Stockholders’ equity (deficit):
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value; 2,500,000 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding		-		-
Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 300,000,000 shares authorized; 66,414,175 and 33,459,440 shares issued and outstanding, respectively		6,641		3,346
Additional paid-in capital		64,974,535		29,994,056
Accumulated deficit		(62,567,541)		(39,107,241)
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)		2,413,635		(9,109,839)
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity (deficit)	$	31,589,926	$	23,474,146

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-3


America West Resources, Inc. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

		Years Ended
		December 31,
		2011		2010

Coal sales	$	13,864,287	$	10,027,949
Machine repair services		32,316		42,183
Total revenue		13,896,603		10,070,132

Cost of revenue:
Coal production costs		13,363,767		6,118,987
Depreciation, depletion and accretion		2,160,012		1,927,391
Machine repair costs		8,645		16,635
Total cost of revenue		15,532,424		8,063,013

Gross profit (loss)		(1,635,821)		2,007,119

Operating expenses:
General and administrative		6,677,761		8,729,612
Loss on write off of mineral rights and mining equipment		9,565		552,482

Loss from operations		(8,323,147)		(7,274,975)

Other income (expenses):
Gain on derivative liabilities		1,484,659		294,402
Interest income		18		179
Interest expense		(13,336,147)		(5,451,152)
Gain on forgiveness of royalty liability		440,919		-
Loss on extinguishment of debt		(3,726,602)		(3,714,797)
Other expenses, net		(15,137,153)		(8,871,368)

Net Loss		(23,460,300)	$	(16,146,343)

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share	$	(0.46)	$	(0.62)
Weighted Average Shares Outstanding
Basic and Diluted		50,780,660		25,972,848

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-4


America West Resources, Inc. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)
Years Ended December 31, 2010 and 2011

					Additional
	Common Stock				Paid-in		Accumulated
	Shares		Amount		Capital		Deficit		Total

Balances, December 31, 2009	21,020,363	$	2,102	$	15,438,329	$	(22,960,898)	$	(7,520,467)
Shares issued for services	425,342		43		658,110		-		658,153
Cancellation of shares issued for services	(29,167)		(3)		(34,997)		-		(35,000)
Shares issued for loan costs	54,500		5		104,635				104,640
Shares issued for interest upon loan default	333,333		33		279,978		-		280,011
Shares issued with debt	9,414,153		941		7,688,618		-		7,689,559
Warrants converted to common shares and
resolution of associated derivative liability	1,177,811		118		1,390,482		-		1,390,600
Debt converted to common shares, net of commissions	590,188		59		1,242,007		-		1,242,066
Shares issued for equipment	15,000		2		18,448		-		18,450
Warrants exercised	457,917		46		4,531		-		4,577
Option expense	-		-		1,084,681		-		1,084,681
Warrant expense	-		-		2,202,736		-		2,202,736
Initial recording of derivative liability	-		-		(827,528)		-		(827,528)
Resolution of derivative liability	-		-		744,026		-		744,026
Net loss	-		-		-		(16,146,343)		(16,146,343)
Balances, December 31, 2010	33,459,440		3,346		29,994,056		(39,107,241)		(9,109,839)
Shares issued for cash, net of issuance costs	6,798,078		680		5,864,624		-		5,865,304
Shares issued for services	473,000		47		454,641		-		454,688
Shares issued with debt	8,168,745		817		3,443,051		-		3,443,868
Debt converted to common shares, net of							-		-
commissions	17,298,245		1,730		17,898,050		-		-
Warrants exercised	16,667		1		167		-		168
Shares issued for liabilities	200,000		20		349,980		-		350,000
Share-based compensation	-		-		270,087		-		270,087
Warrant expense	-		-		520,000		-		520,000
Warrants issued for debt issuance costs	-		-		1,123,979		-		1,123,979
Beneficial conversion feature	-		-		5,055,900		-		5,055,900
Net loss	-		-		-		(23,460,300)		(23,460,300)
Balances, December 31, 2011	66,414,175	$	6,641	$	64,974,535	$	(62,567,541)	$	2,413,635

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-5


America West Resources, Inc. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
		Years Ended December 31,
		2011		2010
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:
Net Loss	$	(23,460,300)	$	(16,146,343)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation, depletion and accretion		2,160,012		1,927,391
Amortization of debt discounts		9,571,643		2,386,098
Amortization of deferred financing costs		1,690,478		540,259
Loss on write off of mineral rights and mining equipment		9,565		552,482
Common stock issued for services		454,688		623,153
Common stock issued for loan costs		-		104,640
Common stock issued for interest expense		-		280,011
Warrant expense		130,000		2,202,736
Share-based compensation		270,087		1,084,681
Loss on extinguishment of debt		3,726,602		3,714,797
Gain on derivative liabilities		(1,484,659)		(294,402)
Gain on forgiveness of royalty liability		(440,919)		-
Changes in current assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		456,913		334,990
Inventory		136,037		(91,596)
Prepaid expenses		(76,697)		(18,293)
Accounts payable		269,600		351,190
Accounts payable - related parties		(123,120)		189,550
Deferred revenue		-		500,000
Accrued liabilities		967,459		3,270,780
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities		(5,742,611)		1,512,124
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:
Restricted cash placed in escrow account		(200,014)		611,773
Purchase of property and equipment		(3,567,099)		(345,203)
Capital expenditures for land and mineral properties		(6,796,874)		(7,570,925)
Deposits		(3,124)		(727,531)
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities		(10,567,111)		(8,031,886)
Cash Flows from Financing Activities:
Bank overdraft		(180,733)		(426,288)
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs		5,865,304		-
Proceeds from the exercise of warrants		168		4,577
Payments on revolving credit		-		(34,500)
Proceeds from related party debt		13,699,510		1,607,496
Payments on related party debt		(150,495)		(35,000)
Proceeds from debt		285,000		7,900,986
Payments on debt		(2,757,515)		(1,645,759)
Principal payments on capital lease		(374,137)		-
Cash paid for deferred financing costs		(44,850)		-
Cash paid for debt conversion commissions		-		(85,857)
Cash paid for debt issuance costs		-		(745,550)
Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities		16,342,252		6,540,105
Net Increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents		32,530		20,343
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period		65,003		44,660
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period	$	97,533	$	65,003
Supplemental Information
Cash paid for interest	$	255,962	$	391,940
Cash paid for income taxes		-		-
Noncash Investing and Financing Activities
Equipment acquired through capital lease		374,137		-
Debt discount due to common stock issued with debt		3,443,868		7,689,559
Accrued interest converted to debt		-		94,088
Accrued interest converted to convertible debt		1,640,751		-
Derivative liability		-		827,528
Common stock issued for repayment of debt and interest		17,143,154		660,439
Revision of asset retirement obligation estimate		-		37,784
Accrued taxes converted to debt		-		1,419,450
Warrants issued for debt issuance costs		1,123,979		-
Warrants cancelled for common stock and resolution of associated derivative		-		1,390,600
Debt issuance costs accrued		257,500		338,000
Common stock issued for property and equipment		-		18,450
Resolution of derivative liability		-		744,026
Common shares issued for liabilities		299,000		-
Financed insurance premiums		281,410		-
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-6

America West Resources, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

NOTE 1 - ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

America West Resources, Inc., through its wholly-owned subsidiary Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. (“Hidden Splendor”), operates a coal mining company located in Helper, Utah that covers approximately 1,288 acres. Daily coal production is delivered to a coal loadout facility operated by a subsidiary of America West Services Inc.

During 2009, America West launched America West Services and America West Marketing, wholly-owned subsidiaries of America West Resources. America West Services provides machine repair services to third parties and to Hidden Splendor Resources. America West Marketing purchases coal from third parties and sells coal to Hidden Splendor Resources and third party customers.

During 2011, America West launched America West Services Wildcat, a wholly-owned subsidiary of America West Services. America West Services is a wholly-owned subsidiary of America West Resources. America West Services Wildcat is a loadout facility for the loading of coal onto trains for shipment to customers.

NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Use of Estimates - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash and Cash Equivalents - For purposes of reporting cash flows, America West considers all investments purchased with a maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. America West maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts which, at times, have exceeded federally insured limits.

Restricted Cash – In accordance with certain borrowing requirements, certain funds have been placed in an escrow account for the purpose of purchasing mining equipment in the future and are restricted from use in operations. Those funds have been classified as long-term restricted cash.

Accounts Receivable - The Company's receivables are mainly from the Company's coal broker and are collected within a few weeks of production and shipment. As such no allowance for doubtful accounts is considered necessary.

Inventory – Inventory is stated at lower of cost or market, determined by the first-in, first-out method.

Property and Equipment - Property and equipment are carried at cost and include expenditures for new facilities and those expenditures that substantially increase the productive lives of existing equipment. Maintenance and repair costs are expensed as incurred. Mine development costs are capitalized and depleted by the units of production method over estimated total recoverable proven and probable reserves. Property and equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the assets’ estimated useful lives. Fully depreciated property and equipment still in use are not eliminated from the accounts.

The Company assesses the carrying value of its property and equipment for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability is measured by comparing estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated from such assets to their net book value. If net book value exceeds estimated cash flows, the asset is written down to its fair value, determined by the estimated discounted cash flows from such asset. When an asset is retired or sold, its cost and related accumulated depreciation and amortization are removed from the accounts. The difference between the net book value of the asset and proceeds on disposition is recorded as a gain or loss.

Bank Overdraft – Under the Company’s cash management system, a bank overdraft balance existed at December 31, 2010 for its primary disbursement account. This overdraft represents uncleared checks in excess of cash balances in the related bank account. The Company’s funds are transferred on an as-needed basis to pay for clearing checks.

Asset Retirement Obligations – Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) ASC 410-20 addresses financial accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement costs. The Company’s asset retirement obligation (“ARO”) liabilities primarily consist of estimated costs related to reclaiming mines and related facilities in accordance with federal and state reclamation laws as defined by each mining permit.

F-7

The reclamation plan calls for a bonding and insurance requirement. The bond is the deed to residential property owned personally by the shareholders.

Deferred Revenue – Deferred revenue represents cash deposited for future delivery of coal to a third party for eventual shipment overseas. The specific terms of delivery have not yet been negotiated.

Income Taxes - Income taxes are provided for the tax effects of transactions reported in the financial statements and consist of taxes currently due plus deferred taxes. Deferred taxes are recognized for differences between the basis of assets and liabilities for financial statement and income tax purposes. The deferred tax assets and liabilities represent the future tax return consequences of those differences, which will either be taxable or deductible when the assets and liabilities are recovered or settled. Deferred taxes also are recognized for operating losses and tax credits that are available to offset future taxable income and income taxes.

America West accounts for uncertain tax positions in accordance with the authoritative guidance issued by the FASB on income taxes which addresses how we should recognize, measure and present in our financial statements uncertain tax positions that have been taken or are expected to be taken in a tax return. Pursuant to this guidance, the Company can recognize a tax benefit only if it is “more likely than not” that a particular tax position will be sustained upon examination or audit. To the extent the “more likely than not” standard has been satisfied, the benefit associated with a tax position is measured as the largest amount that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon settlement. No liability for unrecognized tax benefits was recorded as of December 31, 2011 and 2010.

Revenue Recognition - Hidden Splendor’s revenues are generated under a long-term sales contract with a single coal brokerage company. The terms of the contract are “FOB the mine” or “FOB the railcar”. Revenues from coal sales are recognized when the coal is loaded onto the delivery truck at the mine or the railcar at the railroad loadout facility, both of which are contracted by the customer. At the end of each month, the amount of coal delivered to the coal brokerage is estimated. In addition, the customer may apply a penalty against invoices relating to deviations in delivered coal quality per the contract terms. Variances between estimated revenue and actual payment are recorded in the month the payment is received; however, differences have been minimal.

Share-Based Payments - The Company accounts for share-based payments in accordance with the authoritative guidance issued by the FASB on stock compensation, which establishes the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services. Under the provisions of the authoritative guidance, share-based compensation expense is measured at the grant date, based on the fair value of the award, and is recognized as an expense over the requisite employee service period (generally the vesting period). The Company estimates the fair value of share-based payments using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Additionally, share-based awards to non-employees are expensed over the period in which the related services are rendered at their fair value.

Basic and Diluted Loss per Share – Basic loss per share is calculated on the basis of weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the year. Diluted loss per share is computed using the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the year, adjusted for the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents consisting of shares that would be issued upon exercise of common stock options and warrants.

Common stock equivalents pertaining to stock options and warrants were not included in the calculation of diluted loss per share because the effect would have been anti-dilutive due to the net losses for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments - The carrying value of short-term financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, inventories, accounts payable and accrued expenses and short-term borrowings approximate fair value due to the relatively short period to maturity for these instruments. The long-term borrowings approximate fair value since the related rates of interest approximates current market rates. See Note 9 – Derivatives for additional information.

Principles of Consolidation - The consolidated financial statements include the financial information of America West Resources, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc., America West Services, Inc., America West Services Wildcat, Inc. and America West Marketing, Inc. All significant inter-company accounts and transactions have been eliminated.

F-8

Reclassifications - Certain amounts for 2010 have been reclassified to conform to the 2011 presentation. The reclassifications had no effect on net loss.

Newly Issued Accounting Pronouncements –In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, “Testing Goodwill for Impairment” (“ASU 2011-08”), which amends the guidance in ASC 350-20, “Intangibles — Goodwill and Other – Goodwill”. Under ASU 2011-08, entities have the option of performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of the reporting unit when testing goodwill for impairment. If the fair value of the reporting unit is determined, based on qualitative factors, to be more likely than not less than the carrying amount of the reporting unit, then entities are required to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test. ASU 2011-08 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, with early adoption permitted. Since the Company has no goodwill at December 31, 2011, the Company feels the adoption of this pronouncement will have no material impact on its financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

NOTE 3 - GOING CONCERN

As shown in the accompanying financial statements, America West incurred net losses of $23,460,300 and $16,146,343 for the years ended December 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively and had a working capital deficit of $28,215,920 as of December 31, 2011. These conditions raise substantial doubt as to America West’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management is attempting to enhance the operations of Hidden Splendor to achieve cash-positive operations. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if America West is unable to continue as a going concern.

NOTE 4 – PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT

Property and equipment consist of the following as of December 31, 2011 and 2010:


		December 31,
		2011		2010

Mining equipment	$	14,758,753	$	10,855,899
Vehicles		52,265		52,265
Office equipment		47,470		25,500
Buildings		207,316		207,316
Land		10,000		10,000
Asset retirement costs		41,414		41,414
Capitalized mine development costs		26,383,307		19,586,433

Total		41,500,525		30,778,827
Less: accumulated depreciation and depletion		(11,504,505)		(9,439,156)

Net property and equipment	$	29,996,020	$	21,339,671

The capitalized mine development costs and asset retirement costs are depleted based on the units of production method over the estimated reserves at the related mine, as discussed in Note 2. Depreciation is computed on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which were as follows:


	Life
Mining equipment	3-20 years
Office equipment	3-10 years
Vehicles	7 years
Buildings	30 years

During the year ended December 31, 2010, America West revised its estimate of the useful lives of its mining equipment. The useful lives of the equipment were changed from 5 to 7 years to 3 to 20 years.

Depreciation and depletion expense totaled $2,081,761 and $1,911,686 for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, America West had deposits for acquisition of mining equipment amounting to $503,272 and $732,148.

F-9

During the year ended December 31, 2010, America West lost its claim to a gold mine and as a result, wrote off the value of the related asset amounting to $222,000. Also during the year ended December 31, 2010, America West wrote-off certain mining equipment with a net book value of $330,482.

NOTE 5 – SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM DEBT

Debt Associated with Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

On December 5, 2008 the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Plan of Reorganization became effective. The following changes and additions to debt took place that day.

Hidden Splendor assumed a loan originally in the name of Mid-States Services, Inc. for $346,041. The bank loan bears interest at 7% per annum and has an aggregate monthly principal and interest payment of $6,090. The loan matures in November 2014. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $184,517 and $242,260, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company defaulted on this loan. Consequently, the loan is due on demand and the outstanding principal balance is reflected as part of current liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

Hidden Splendor obtained new terms on existing bank loan of $1,541,176. The loan bears interest at 7% per annum fixed, per the Plan, a decrease from the original rate of 11.25%. This loan has an aggregate monthly principal and interest payment of $27,125 and matures in November 2014. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $821,783 and $1,078,962, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company defaulted on this loan. Consequently, the loan is due on demand and the outstanding principal balance is reflected as part of current liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

Hidden Splendor obtained new terms on its existing bank loan of $1,499,187. The loan bears interest at 7% per annum. This loan has an aggregate monthly principal and interest payment of $23,961 and matures in August 2015. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $896,196 and $1,111,846, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company defaulted on this loan. Consequently, the loan is due on demand and the outstanding principal balance is reflected as part of current liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

Hidden Splendor obtained an arrearage bank loan of $2,358,952. The loan bears interest at 7% per annum and matures in August 2015. The loan has an aggregate monthly principal and interest payment of $37,703. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $1,410,156 and $1,749,476, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company defaulted on this loan. Consequently, the loan is due on demand and the outstanding principal balance is reflected as part of current liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

America West reclassified pre-petition trade accounts payable amounts owed to general unsecured creditors to a long-term debt owed to the general unsecured creditors. The loan was payable in quarterly installments of $190,000 through September 2011 and was secured by Hidden Splendor’s assets. Interest was imputed on this loan using America West’s standard borrowing rate of 7% per annum. A discount of $180,452 was recorded on the loan and was amortized using the effective interest method over the life of the loan. The effective interest rate on the note was 6.82%. During the year ended December 31, 2009, the balance of the discount of $177,450 was fully amortized and recorded as interest expense. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $0 and $825,374, respectively. America West defaulted on this loan in the first quarter of 2010. Consequently, the loan was due on demand and the outstanding principal balance was reflected as part of current liabilities in the consolidated balance at December 31, 2010.

Hidden Splendor obtained new payment terms on unpaid payroll and coal excise taxes. The loan is secured by Hidden Splendor’s assets and is payable in quarterly payments of $162,156. The loan bears interest at 7% per annum and matured in September 2011. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $878,964. The Company defaulted on this loan in the first quarter of 2010. Consequently, the loan is due on demand and the outstanding principal balance is reflected as part of current liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

Hidden Splendor obtained new payment terms on a 2007 $800,000 loan from an unrelated profit sharing plan. The loans bear interest at 8.1% per annum and is due October 2012. The loan terms call for monthly interest-only payments the first 24 months, then monthly principal and interest payments the following 24 months. The outstanding principal balance on the loan was $358,357 and $475,000 as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

F-10

On May 24, 2011, debt owed to an unrelated profit sharing plan was modified. The original debt terms required monthly payments of $21,360 from February 5, 2011 through January 5, 2013. The monthly payments under the note were modified to be payable as follows:


May 2011		$10,000
June 2011		$10,000
September 2011 – January 2013		$21,360 per month
February 2013		$108,163

In connection with this loan modification, America West issued the note holder 25,000 shares of common stock. America West evaluated the modification under FASB ASC 470-50 and determined that the modification was not substantial and therefore did not constitute a debt extinguishment. The fair value of the common shares issued was determined to be $31,250 and was recorded as a debt discount. The discount will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $10,881 and the unamortized discount on this note was $20,369 as of December 31, 2011.

Debt Incurred Subsequent to Bankruptcy

In January 2009, America West entered into a non-interest bearing promissory note to purchase land for $134,520. The note required monthly installments of $22,420 and matured on August 1, 2009. On September 18, 2010, the Company entered into an agreement to modify the terms. The modified note bore interest at 8% per annum on the unpaid balance and matured on January 18, 2011. America West evaluated the modification under FASB ASC 470-50 and determined that the modification was not substantial and therefore did not constitute a debt extinguishment. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $0 and $84,112, respectively.

In September 2010, America West and its subsidiaries signed various notes to borrow a total of $1,000,000. The notes bear interest of 10% per annum and mature in September 2011. A total of 833,333 common shares were issued in connection with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was $411,764 and was recorded as a debt discount. The debt discount is being amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization of these discounts for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $246,496. On July 14, 2011, these loans and $85,274 of accrued interest were converted into 1,100,000 shares of common stock valued at $1.01 per share, although this debt was not originally issued as convertible. The fair value of the common stock issued was determined to be $1,111,000. The $51,705 unamortized discount and $25,726 excess fair value of the common stock were recorded as loss on extinguishment of debt. This transaction is also included in the July 14, 2011 conversion totaling $4,465,000 discussed below.

In September 2010, the Company entered into an installment plan with the Internal Revenue Service to repay past due payroll and excise taxes of $1,419,450. The required payment is $50,000 per month. Total payments made during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 amounted to $600,000 and $180,000, respectively. This agreement bears zero interest rate and matures March 2013 if all payments are made on a timely basis. Interest and penalties continue to accrue on the unpaid taxes. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $639,450 and $1,239,450.

Between October and December 2010, America West entered into multiple notes to borrow an aggregate of $3,780,000. The notes bear interest at 10% per annum and matured one year after they were signed, which is between October 5, 2011 and December 21, 2011. A total of 3,149,999 common shares were issued in connection with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was $1,953,537 and was recorded as a debt discount. The debt discount was amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization of these discounts for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $885,109. During July 2011, $3,180,000 of these loans and $219,418 of accrued interest were converted to common stock. These loans were not originally issued as convertible notes but were converted into 3,498,000 shares of common stock valued at $1.01 per share. The fair value of the common stock issued was determined to be $3,532,980. The $727,247 unamortized discount and $133,562 excess fair value of the common stock were recorded as loss on extinguishment of debt. This transaction is also included in the July 14, 2011 conversion totaling $4,465,000 discussed below.

F-11

On April 20, 2011, $500,000 of the $3,780,000 debt that was not originally issued as a convertible promissory note and $21,875 of accrued interest was converted into 550,000 shares of common stock valued at $1.10 per share. The fair value of the common stock issued was determined to be $605,000. As a result, $151,226 of unamortized debt discount and the $83,125 excess fair value of the common stock were recorded as loss on extinguishment of debt. Of the $3,780,000 debt issued between October and December 2010, a $100,000 note remains at December 31, 2011 after the April and July conversions. The $100,000 note matured on December 7, 2011 and is in default at December 31, 2011. America West confessed judgement in a court ruling relating to the default of this loan. America West has agreed to make $5,000 payments on or before January 17, 2012 and February 15, 2012; $10,000 payments on or before March 15, 2012, April 16, 2012and May 15, 2012: and a $79,253 payment on or before June 15, 2012 as full payment of the principal and accrued interest on this loan.

During June and October 2011, America West and its subsidiaries borrowed an aggregate of $281,410. The loan proceeds were used to pay for business insurance. The notes bear interest between 3.25% and 4.95% per annum and mature on March 4, 2012 and April 20, 2012. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2011 was $88,443.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West borrowed an aggregate of $285,000 from third parties. The notes bear interest at 10% per annum and mature between March 15, 2011 and January 9, 2012. A total of 237,499 common shares were issued in connection with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was $177,016 and was recorded as a debt discount. The debt discount is amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization of these discounts for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $69,708. Although these loans were not originally issued as convertible notes, these loans and $14,842 of accrued interest were converted to 313,500 shares of common stock valued at $1.01 per share during July 2011. The fair value of the common stock issued was determined to be $316,635. The $107,308 unamortized discount and $16,793 excess fair value of the common stock were recorded as loss on extinguishment of debt. This transaction is also included in the July 14, 2011 conversion totaling $4,465,000 discussed below.

Debt Conversion

On July 14, 2011, $4,465,000 of debt that was not originally issued as convertible promissory notes and $319,534 of accrued interest were converted into 4,911,500 shares of common stock valued at $1.01 per share. This includes the $1,000,000, $3,180,000, and $285,000 conversions discussed above. The original debt was issued between September 2010 and January 2011. The fair value of the common stock issued was determined to be $4,960,615. As a result, $886,260 of unamortized debt discount and the $176,081 excess fair value of the common stock were recorded as loss on extinguishment of debt.

In connection with the third party and related party loans issued during the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, America West incurred an aggregate of $302,300 and $1,083,550 of commissions, respectively. These commissions were recorded as deferred financing costs and are being amortized over the lives of the related loans using the effective interest rate method. Amortization expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 amounted to $568,396 and $540,259. The total unamortized deferred financing costs were $0 and $543,291 as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

A summary of the outstanding third party debt at December 31, 2011 and 2010 is as follows:


	Interest		December 31,
	Rate		2011		2010
Mid State bank loan assumed	7%		$184,517		$242,260
Third party profit sharing plan loan	8.1%		358,357		475,000
Bank loan	7%		821,783		1,078,962
Bank loan	7%		1,410,156		1,749,476
Bank loan	7%		896,196		1,111,846
General unsecured creditors loan	-		-		825,374
Accrued payroll and coal excise tax loan	7%		878,964		878,964
Property loan	8%		-		84,112
Insurance loans	3.25% to 4.95%		88,443		68,527
Operating loans	10%		100,000		4,780,000
IRS – payroll and coal excise tax	-		639,450		1,239,450
Unamortized discounts	-		(20,369)		(2,061,783)
Total debt			5,357,497		10,472,188

Current portion of debt, net of unamortized discounts			5,192,956		9,357,738

Long-term portion of debt		$	164,541	$	1,114,450

F-12

Minimum principal payments on the above loans for each of the five years subsequent to December 31, 2011 are as follows:


2012	$	5,192,956
2013		164,541
2014		-
2015		-
2016		-
Thereafter		-
	$	5,357,497

NOTE 6 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Related Party Debt

On May 27, 2009, America West and its subsidiaries borrowed a total of $2,300,000, consisting of $1,495,000 from a related party and $805,000 from an affiliate of a director of America West (another related party). The notes bore interest at the rate of 16% compounded annually, with interest payable monthly commencing in August 2009, and the principal amount was due at maturity on May 27, 2011. The notes were secured by substantially all of the assets of America West Services, primarily consisting of mining equipment and a coal purchase agreement with a third party. America West has guaranteed the notes. These notes were modified in March 2011 as described below.

During the year ended December 31, 2009, certain officers, directors and affiliates advanced to America West an aggregate amount of $397,000 of which $345,000 and $35,000 was repaid during 2009 and 2010, respectively. These notes accrue interest at 12% per annum and originally matured on the earlier of (i) May 22, 2009 or (ii) the closing of a $10,000,000 debt or equity financing by America West. In an event of default, the unpaid principal and accrued interest due under the notes is convertible into common shares at a conversion price equal to $0.02 per share. The maturity date on the unpaid loans was extended twice in 2009, with the first extended maturity date being November 22, 2009 and then May 31, 2010. America West evaluated each modification under FASB ASC 470-50 and concluded that the revised terms constituted a debt modification rather than a debt extinguishment. The unpaid principal balance on the loans at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $16,000 and $17,000. The $1,000 decrease in the principal is a result of the March 2011 modification discussed below.

On October 9, 2009, a $2,800,000 loan that was originally issued in 2008 with an original maturity date of October 9, 2009 was modified whereby the maturity date was extended to April 9, 2011. The loan bears interest at 17% per annum. In addition, interest of $476,000 incurred from October 2008 to October 2009 was added to the original principal. One $500,000 payment was required on October 9, 2010, but the $500,000 payment was not made. In addition, $100,000 of the principal was paid at the time of the refinancing by issuing 416,667 shares of common stock, resulting in a new loan amount of $3,176,000. The balance of principal and interest on the new loan was due April 9, 2011.

Since the above loan was not repaid by October 9, 2010, its original due date, the creditor was awarded 166,667 warrants to purchase common stock at $0.24 per share. In addition, since certain mine mortgage requirements were not met by May 31, 2010, America West issued 83,333 warrants per month, up to 916,667 warrants, to purchase common stock at $0.24 per share. See Note 7 for valuation of warrants. The outstanding principal balance on the loan was $3,176,000 as of December 31, 2010. This loan was modified in March 2011 as described below.

On October 23, 2009, America West and its subsidiaries borrowed a total of $1,508,000, consisting of $983,000 from a related party and $525,000 from an affiliate of a director of America West. The notes bore interest at the rate of 16% compounded annually. The notes matured at the earliest of i) May 27, 2011 or ii) the closing of $10,000,000 debt or equity financing. The notes were secured by substantially all of the assets of America West Services, primarily consisting of mining equipment and a coal purchase agreement with a third party. America West guaranteed the notes.

America West repaid $8,000 of the above loans during 2010. On December 15, 2010, $225,000 of the loan was converted into 232,969 shares of America West common stock. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2010 was $1,275,000. The issuance of these 232,969 common shares and an additional 357,219 common shares on December 15, 2010 was to repay an aggregate of $570,000 of principal and $90,439 of interest. This resulted in a loss on the extinguishment of debt of $667,484 being recorded for the year ended December 31, 2010. In connection with the aggregate of 590,188 common shares issued for the conversion of debt, America West paid commissions of $85,857. These commissions were recorded against additional paid-in capital during the year ended December 31, 2010.

F-13

The October 23, 2009 loans discussed above were included in the March 2011 debt modification discussed below.

On November 11, 2009, America West and its subsidiaries issued a promissory note for $150,000. The note bore interest at the rate of 10% per annum and matured on November 11, 2010. On May 17, 2010, this loan was modified and consolidated as described below.

Between February and September 2010, America West and its subsidiaries signed various notes to borrow a total of $1,760,000. The notes bear interest between 10% and 15% per annum and mature between March 15, 2010 and December 31, 2010. A total of 1,066,667 common shares were issued in connection with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was $903,574 and was recorded as a debt discount. The debt discount is being amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization of these discounts for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $903,574. On May 17, 2010, $1,000,000 of these loans were modified and consolidated as described below. In March 2011, the remaining balance was modified as described below.

Between February and December 2010, two entities controlled by a director of America West loaned the Company an aggregate of $1,567,885. The loans are unsecured, bore interest at 10% per annum and matured between March 15, 2010 and March 31, 2011. In addition, an aggregate of 1,306,581 common shares were issued with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was determined to be $790,008 and was recorded as a debt discount. The discount was amortized over the term of the loan using the effective interest rate method. Amortization for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $731,111. The unamortized discount was $0 and $58,897 at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. These loans were modified in March 2011 as described below.

In April 2010, an entity controlled by a director of America West loaned the Company $5,000. The loan is unsecured, bears no interest, and is due on demand. This loan was repaid during 2011.

In April 2010, America West’s Chairman of the Board of Directors paid off a line of credit balance of $34,500 with personal funds. As a result, America West has a loan due to the Chairman of $34,611 that is unsecured, bears interest at 10% per annum and is due on demand. The balance due as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $34,611.

On May 17, 2010, loans previously issued between November 2009 and April 2010 totaling $2,150,000 were modified and consolidated into one loan. In addition, an additional $100,000 was borrowed under the modified loan and $94,088 of accrued interest was converted to principal bringing the principal amount of the modified loan to $2,344,088. The modified note bore interest at the rate of 15% per annum and matured on December 31, 2010. In connection with this modification, 1,953,407 shares of common stock were issued to the lender with a fair value of $3,047,313. America West evaluated the modification under FASB ASC 470-50 and determined that the modification was substantial and the revised terms constituted a debt extinguishment. As a result, a total loss on the extinguishment of $3,047,313 was recorded during the year ended December 31, 2010. The outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2010 was $2,344,088. During March 2011, this loan was modified as described below.

On various dates in October 2010 and on December 29, 2010, America West issued three promissory notes for a total amount of $370,000. The notes bore interest at the rate of 10% per annum and matured on February 15, 2011 and March 31, 2011. The Company issued 308,333 common shares to the creditors in connection with these notes. The relative fair value of these shares was $183,309 and was recorded as a discount to the debt. The debt discount was amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization of the discount for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $47,841. The unamortized discount was $135,468 at December 31, 2010. The outstanding principal balance of these notes at December 31, 2010 was $370,000. These notes were modified during March 2011, as described below.

Through multiple amendments between February 11, 2011 and March 31, 2011, $2,513,343 of debt and $486,657 of accrued interest owed to an affiliate of a director of America West was extinguished through conversion to common stock. The debt and accrued interest were converted to equity at $1.00 of debt per share of common stock, which was valued at $1.50 per share. The fair value of the 3,000,000 shares of common stock issued upon conversions was determined to be $4.5 million. A $1.5 million loss on extinguishment of debt was recorded upon converting the originally nonconvertible debt and accrued interest to equity. The principal balance of debt that remained outstanding after the conversion was modified and consolidated into two convertible loans amounting to $415,118 and $374,309. The modified notes bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum and mature on June 1, 2014. The modified notes require monthly principal and interest payments of $8,531 and $7,693 beginning on July 1, 2011 with a final payment upon maturity of the unpaid principal and interest. The notes are secured by essentially all of the assets of America West, subject to the Hidden Splendor bankruptcy security requirements. As part of the loan agreements, the Company must comply with certain covenants which, among other matters, include restrictions in the amounts of capital stock and stock options that can be issued for each of the years 2011, 2012 and 2013. America West is also not allowed to incur or assume any debt or contingent liabilities not provided for in the loan agreement. America West was not compliant with these covenants on December 31, 2011.

F-14

America West evaluated the modification under FASB ASC 470-50 and determined that the modification was substantial due to a substantive conversion option being added and the revised terms constituted a debt extinguishment. At any time prior to the full payment of the notes, the creditors have the option to convert all or any portion of the unpaid balance of the notes into shares of common stock. The first 50% of the remaining debt is convertible at $1.00 per share, the next 25% is convertible at $1.25 per share and the last 25% is convertible at $1.50 per share. If the entire principal balance was converted, 684,170 shares of America West’s common stock would be issued. America West evaluated the terms of the modified note under FASB ASC 815-15 and determined that the note did not require derivative treatment. America West then evaluated the note under FASB ASC 470-20 and determined that the note contained a beneficial conversion feature. The intrinsic value of the beneficial conversion feature was determined to be $236,828 and was recorded as a discount. The discount is amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. On July 14, 2011, $482,106 of the modified notes and $17,894 of accrued interest were converted into 500,000 common shares. The related discount of $218,415 was amortized to interest expense upon conversion of the debt to equity. As a result of America West’s noncompliance with debt covenants, the debt is due on demand. Therefore, the remaining discount of $18,413 was amortized to interest expense on December 31, 2011. The debt has all been classified as current debt. The remaining principal balance of the two convertible loans was $307,321 as of December 31, 2011.

Through multiple amendments between February 11, 2011 and March 31, 2011, all debt and interest owed to a related party was modified and consolidated into one convertible loan with a principal amount of $10,765,839. This loan includes $9,125,088 of principal and $1,640,751 of accrued interest converted to principal. The modified note bears interest at the rate of 8% per annum and matures on June 1, 2014. The modified note requires monthly principal and interest payments of $221,259 beginning on July 1, 2011 with a final payment upon maturity of the unpaid principal and interest. The note is secured by essentially all of the assets of America West, subject to the Hidden Splendor bankruptcy security requirements. As part of the loan agreement, the Company must comply with certain covenants which, among other matters, include restrictions in the amounts of capital stock and stock options that can be issued for each of the years 2011, 2012 and 2013. America West is also not allowed to incur or assume any debt or contingent liabilities not provided for in the loan agreement. America West was not compliant with these covenants on December 31, 2011.

America West evaluated the modification under FASB ASC 470-50 and determined that the modification was substantial due to a substantive conversion option being added and the revised terms constituted a debt extinguishment. At any time prior to the full payment of the note, the creditor has the option to convert all or any portion of the unpaid balance of the note into shares of common stock. The first 50% of the debt is convertible at $1.00 per share, the next 25% is convertible at $1.25 per share and the last 25% is convertible at $1.50 per share. If the entire principal balance was converted, 9,330,394 shares of America West’s common stock would be issued. America West evaluated the terms of the modified note under FASB ASC 815-15 and determined that the note did not require derivative treatment. America West then evaluated the note under FASB ASC 470-20 and determined that the note contained a beneficial conversion feature. The intrinsic value of the beneficial conversion feature was determined to be $3,229,752 and was recorded as a discount. The discount was amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. On July 14, 2011, $3,600,000 of the modified note was converted into 3,600,000 shares of common stock. The related discount of $1,800,000 was amortized to interest expense upon conversion of the debt to equity. As a result of America West’s noncompliance with debt covenants, the debt is due on demand. Therefore, the remaining discount of $1,429,752 was amortized to interest expense on December 31, 2011. The debt has all been classified as current debt. The remaining principal balance was $7,165,839 as of December 31, 2011.

In connection with this loan modification, the vesting of certain common stock warrants previously issued to this note holder was accelerated. A total of 250,000 common stock warrants that originally vested monthly through May 2011 were modified whereby they vested in full on February 11, 2011. The total fair value associated with these warrants of $390,000 was included in the loss on extinguishment of debt. The total loss on extinguishment of debt associated with this loan modification and extinguishment during the year ended December 31, 2011 was $2,016,418, consisting of the expense related to these modified warrants, the unamortized discounts on the modified debt, and the losses resulting from debt extinguishment.

On February 11, 2011 America West borrowed $2,000,000 through the issuance of a convertible promissory note. The note bears interest at 10% per annum and matured on March 15, 2011. At any time subsequent to fulfilling certain conditions, the creditor has the option to convert all or any portion of the unpaid balance of the note into shares of common stock at a conversion price equal to $1.00 per share. America West evaluated the terms of the note under FASB ASC 815-15 and determined that the note did not require derivative treatment. America West then evaluated the note under FASB ASC 470-20 and determined that the note contained a beneficial conversion feature. The intrinsic value of the beneficial conversion feature was determined to be $1,000,000 and was recorded as a discount on the debt. The discount was fully amortized to interest expense on March 31, 2011 when the entire note and related interest of $34,822 was converted into 2,034,822 common shares on March 31, 2011.

F-15

In June 2011, America West borrowed a total of $1,928,000 through the issuance of convertible promissory notes. The notes are secured by essentially all of the assets of America West, subject to the Hidden Splendor bankruptcy security requirements, bear interest at 8% per annum and mature on July 15, 2011. At any time prior to the full payment of the note, the creditor has the option to convert all or any portion of the unpaid balance of the note into shares of common stock at $1.00 per share. If the entire principal balance was converted, 1,928,000 shares of America West’s common stock would be issued. America West evaluated the terms of the notes under FASB ASC 815-15 and determined that the notes do not require derivative treatment. America West then evaluated the notes under FASB ASC 470-20 and determined that the notes contain beneficial conversion features. The intrinsic value of the beneficial conversion features was determined to be $547,000 and was recorded as a discount. The discount was amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $547,000 and the unamortized discount on these notes was $0 as of December 31, 2011. The entire balance of the notes was converted on July 14, 2011 to 1,928,000 shares of common stock.

In July 2011, America West borrowed a total of $800,000 from a major shareholder. The notes bear interest at 8% per annum and matured on December 31, 2011. The notes have no specific repayment schedule.

On July 8 and 14, 2011, America West borrowed a total of $762,130 through the issuance of convertible promissory notes. The notes are secured by essentially all of the assets of America West, subject to the Hidden Splendor bankruptcy security requirements, bear interest at 8% per annum and matured on July 15, 2011. At any time prior to the full payment of the note, the creditor has the option to convert all or any portion of the unpaid balance of the note into shares of common stock at $1.00 per share. If the entire principal balance was converted, 762,130 shares of America West’s common stock would be issued. America West evaluated the terms of the notes under FASB ASC 815-15 and determined that the notes do not require derivative treatment. America West then evaluated the notes under FASB ASC 470-20 and determined that the notes contain beneficial conversion features. The intrinsic value of the beneficial conversion features was determined to be $42,320 and was recorded as a discount. The discount was amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $42,320. The entire balance of the notes was converted on July 14, 2011 to 762,130 shares of common stock.

From August through December 2011, America West borrowed an aggregate of $7,310,000 from a major shareholder. The notes bear interest at 8% per annum and matured on December 31, 2011. A total of 7,310,000 common shares were issued in connection with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was $2,803,016 and was recorded as a debt discount. The debt discount was amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $2,803,016. The unamortized discount on these notes as of December 31, 2011 was $0. The balance of the debt at December 31, 2011 was $7,310,000.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West borrowed an aggregate of $184,380 from an entity controlled by a Director of America West. The notes bear interest at 10% per annum and mature between January 20, 2011 and July 31, 2011. A total of 117,079 common shares were issued in connection with the debt. The relative fair value of these shares was $87,428 and was recorded as a debt discount. The debt discount will be amortized and recorded as interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. Amortization for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $24,067 while $63,361 was recorded as a loss on the extinguishment of debt during the year ended December 31, 2011, due to the modification of various loans between February 11, 2011 and March 31, 2011 as discussed above. The unamortized discount on these notes was $0 as of December 31, 2011.

A summary of the related party debt and related party convertible debt activity for the year ended December 31, 2011 is as follows:


Balance, net at December 31, 2010	$	11,535,219
Borrowings		13,699,510
Principal payments		(150,495)
Interest converted to principal		1,640,751
Principal converted to common stock		(11,285,579)
Debt discounts		(8,291,503)
Debt discounts amortized and extinguished		8,485,868
Balance, net at December 31, 2011		15,633,771
Less: current maturities, net		(15,633,771)
Long term portion, net at December 31, 2011	$	-

F-16

Other Related Party Transactions

During 2010 and in previous years, a shareholder pledged personal assets as security for a performance bond related to the federal coal lease for Hidden Splendor.

During 2010 and in previous years, a shareholder pledged personal assets as security for a reclamation obligation to the State of Utah for Hidden Splendor.

America West leases office space from an entity owned by certain stockholders of America West. In addition, Hidden Splendor leases certain water rights from the entity. As of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the total accrued liability for these items was $345,600 and $243,600, respectively.

America West receives transfer agent services from an entity controlled by a director of America West. The payables to this entity totaled $0 and $35,971 as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Hidden Splendor ships a portion of its coal utilizing a trucking company owned by America West's Chief Executive Officer. For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, Hidden Splendor incurred trucking fees amounting to $1,962,329 and $1,361,594, respectively which is included in coal production costs in the consolidated statements of operations. The amount payable to this trucking company as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 totaled $0 and $241,935, respectively.

NOTE 7 – STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Common Stock

During September 2010, America West effected a 1 for 12 reverse stock split for stockholders on record as of September 28, 2010. All share and per share amounts herein have been retroactively restated to reflect the reverse stock split.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, America West issued 425,342 common shares for services rendered valued at $658,153.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, 54,500 common shares valued at $104,640 were issued to America West’s Chairman for pledging personal assets as collateral for certain debt obligations of the Company. These shares were accounted as loan costs and charged to interest expense.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, America West issued 15,000 common shares for equipment valued at $18,450.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, 29,167 previously issued common shares with a value of $35,000 were cancelled.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, America West issued 9,414,153 common shares with debt. The relative fair value of the shares was determined to be $7,689,559 and was recorded as a discount on the debt. See Notes 8 and 9 for details.

On August 8, 2010, 1,177,811 warrants were cancelled and replaced by 1,177,811 common shares. The warrants were previously accounted for as derivative liabilities. Upon their cancellation, the associated derivative liability of $1,390,600 was recorded to additional paid-in capital.

On August 23, 2010, 333,333 common shares, with a value of $280,011, were issued as a result of a default on the note, as provided in the loan agreement. The fair value of the shares was recorded as interest expense.

On December 15, 2010, $570,000 of debt and $90,439 of accrued interest was converted into 590,188 common shares valued at $1,327,923. In connection with the conversion, America West incurred commissions of $85,857 which were recorded against additional paid-in capital.

Between September and December 2010, America West issued 457,917 common shares for the exercise of 457,917 common stock warrants and received cash totaling $4,577.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West issued 200,000 common shares to repay an accrued liability of $299,000. The fair value of the shares was determined to be $350,000 resulting in a loss on the extinguishment of liabilities of $51,000.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West issued 473,000 common shares for services rendered valued at $454,688.

F-17

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West issued 6,798,078 common shares for $5,865,304 cash, net of $893,041 of cash issuance costs. In connection with the sale of these shares, America West granted 585,000 common stock warrants to an entity controlled by a Director of America West as additional stock issuance costs. The fair value of the warrants was determined to be $805,199 (see Warrants section below).

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West issued 8,168,745 common shares with debt. The relative fair value of the shares was determined to be $3,443,868 and was recorded as a discount on the debt. See Notes 5 and 6 for details.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West issued 17,298,245 common shares for the conversion of $16,250,579 of principal and $892,575 of accrued interest. The shares were valued at $17,889,780. See Notes 5 and 6 for details.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, America West issued 16,667 common shares for the exercise of warrants at $0.01 per share and received cash of $168.

Options

On July 3, 2008, America West granted employees and officers options to purchase an aggregate 353,125 common shares at exercise prices ranging from $4.80 to $5.40. The options vest one third per year through July 3, 2010 and have a term of five years. The fair value of the options was determined to be $1,438,973 using the Black-Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise prices noted above; the market value of America West’s common stock on July 3, 2008, $4.20; expected volatilities between 237.25% and 286.65%; risk free interest rate of 3.28%; and expected terms between 2.5 and 3.5 years. During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, $0 and $123,642 of this fair value was expensed, respectively.

On September 22, 2009, America West granted employees options to purchase an aggregate 109,167 common shares at an exercise price of $1.20. The options vest 100% on September 22, 2010 and have a term of the earlier of 1) 3 years from the vesting date, or 2) six months upon the employee’s termination. The fair value of the options was determined to be $123,129 using the Black-Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above; the market value of America West’s common stock on September 22, 2009, $1.19; expected volatility of 246.69%; risk free interest rate of 1.28%; and an expected term of 2.5 years. During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, $0 and $89,396 of this fair value was expensed.

On March 26, 2010, America West granted employees and officers options to purchase an aggregate 688,333 common shares at an exercise price of $2.40. The options vest 100% on March 24, 2011 and have a term of the earlier of 1) 3 years from the vesting date, or 2) six months upon the employee's termination. The fair value of the options was determined to be $1,141,730 using the Black-Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above; the market value of America West's common stock on March 26, 2010, $1.92; expected volatility of 194.60%; risk free interest rate of 1.34%; and an expected term of 2.5 years. During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, $270,087 and $871,643 of this fair value was expensed.

Stock option expense for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 amounted to $270,087 and $1,084,681, respectively. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, there was $270,087 of unrecognized option expense which was recorded as expense during the quarter ended March 31, 2011.

A summary of option transactions for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 is as follows:


			Wtd. Avg.
			Exercise
	Options		Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2009	562,292	$	3.57
Granted	688,333		2.40
Outstanding at December 31, 2010	1,250,625		2.93
Outstanding at December 31, 2011	1,250,625	$	2.93

F-18

At December 31, 2011, the range of exercise prices and the weighted average remaining contractual life of the options outstanding were $.12 to $5.40 and 1.97 years, respectively. The intrinsic value of the exercisable options outstanding at December 31, 2011 was $9,000. At December 31, 2010, the range of exercise prices and the weighted average remaining contractual life of the options outstanding were $0.12 to $5.40 and 2.97 years, respectively. The intrinsic value of the exercisable options outstanding at December 31, 2010 was $264,875. The weighted average grant date fair value of the options granted during 2010 was $1.66. There were no options issued during 2011.

Warrants

On October 9, 2009, America West awarded 166,667 warrants, with an exercise price of $0.24, in conjunction with the non payment of a loan. See Note 8 for full details. The fair value of the 166,667 warrants was determined to be $260,000 and was charged to warrant expense. In connection with the same loan, up to 916,667 warrants, with an exercise price of $0.12, were also issued to the same creditor since America West did not satisfy a certain mortgage requirement related to the Horizon Mine by May 31, 2010. The fair value of the 916,667 warrants was determined to be $1,429,999. All of the above warrants have a term of 10 years. The Black-Scholes stock option valuation model was used to determine the fair value of the warrants. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise prices noted above; the market value of America West’s common stock on October 9, 2009, $1.56; expected volatility of 292%; risk free interest rate of 3.4%; and expected terms of ten years. The fair value of these warrants was not recognized during 2009 as the warrants can only be exercised when the loan is not repaid at maturity date and when Horizon Mine is not able to meet the mortgage requirement provided in the loan agreement by May 31, 2010, as indicated above. As a result, 83,333 of the 916,667 warrants vest each full month subsequent to May 2010 for which the debt is not repaid. During the year ended December 31, 2010, 583,333 of the 916,667 warrants vested and the corresponding fair value of $909,999 was recorded as warrant expense. During the year ended December 31, 2011, $130,000 was recorded as warrants expense and $390,000 was included in the loss on extinguishment of debt due to the loan medication discussed in Note 3.

On March 1, 2010, America West entered into a six month consulting agreement with a third party whereby America West granted 8,333 warrants to purchase common shares. 4,167 of the warrants, with an exercise price of $2.76 per share are exercisable immediately. The remaining 4,166 warrants, with an exercise price of $3.24 per share are exercisable on June 1, 2010. The warrants have a term of three years. The fair value of the warrants was determined to be $15,328 using the Black-Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above; the market value of America West's common stock on March 1, 2010, $2.16; expected volatility of 240.90%; risk free interest rate of 1.34%; and an expected term of three years. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the entire fair value of $15,328 was expensed.

On March 26, 2010, America West granted the Chairman of America West warrants to purchase an aggregate 329,129 common shares at an exercise price of $2.40. The warrants vested immediately and have a term of 3 years. The fair value of the warrants was determined to be $603,843 using the Black-Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above; the market value of America West's common stock on March 26, 2010, $1.92; expected volatility of 236.24%; risk free interest rate of 1.64%; and an expected term of 3 years. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the fair value of $603,843 was expensed.

On August 8, 2010, 1,177,811 warrants were cancelled in exchange for the issuance of 1,177,811 common shares. The original exercise price was $0.12 per share. These warrants were previously accounted for as derivatives. Consequently, the derivative liability was marked to market on August 8, 2010 and the value of $1,390,600 was recorded to additional paid-in capital.

On September 14, 2010, America West granted a third party 577,500 warrants to purchase common shares at an exercise price of $0.01 for services. The warrants vest immediately and have a term of 5 years. The fair value of the warrants was determined to be $413,566 using the Black-Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above; the market value of America West's common stock on September 14, 2010, $0.72; expected volatility of 204.78%; risk free interest rate of .25%; and an expected term of 3 years. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the fair value of $413,566 was recorded as warrant expense. During 2010, 457,917 of these warrants were exercised. During 2011, 16,667 of these warrants were exercised.

F-19

On January 21, 2011, America West granted 548,708 common stock warrants to an entity controlled by a Director of America West with an exercise price of $1.20. The warrants vest immediately and have a term of five years. The fair value of the warrants was determined to be $1,123,979 using the Black Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above, the market value of America West’s common stock on January 21, 2011, $2.05, expected volatility of 291.71%, risk free interest rate of 3.4% and an expected term of five years. The warrants were issued as a commission for various debt raises and the fair value of the warrants was recorded as deferred financing costs. During the year ended December 31, 2011, $1,123,979 of these costs was amortized to interest expense. The unamortized deferred financing costs associated with these warrants totaled $0 as of December 31, 2011.

On June 10, 2011, America West granted 585,000 common stock warrants to an entity controlled by a Director of America West with an exercise price of $1.00. The warrants vest immediately and have a term of five years. The fair value of the warrants was determined to be $805,199 using the Black Scholes stock option valuation model. The significant assumptions used in the valuation were: the exercise price noted above, the market value of America West’s common stock on June 10, 2011, $1.39, expected volatility of 223.17%, risk free interest rate of 3.4% and an expected term of five years. The warrants were issued as a commission for various equity raises.

A summary of warrant transactions for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 is as follows:


			Wtd. Avg.
			Exercise
	Warrants		Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2009	3,221,667	$	1.09
Granted	914,962		0.90
Exercised	(457,917)		(0.01)
Expired	(15,625)		(3.60)
Forfeited	(1,177,811)		(0.12)
Outstanding at December 31 ,2010	2,485,276		1.66
Granted	1,133,708		1.10
Exercised	(16,667)		(0.01)
Expired	(33,332)		(4.11)
Outstanding at December 31 ,2011	3,568,985		1.47
Exercisable at end of year	3,568,985	$	1.47

At December 31, 2011, the range of exercise prices and the weighted average remaining contractual life of the warrants outstanding were $0.12 to $5.04 and 4.44 years, respectively. The intrinsic value of the exercisable warrants outstanding at December 31, 2011, was $109,581. At December 31, 2010, the range of exercise prices and the weighted average remaining contractual life of the warrants outstanding were $0.01 to $5.04 and 5.46 years, respectively. The intrinsic value of the exercisable warrants outstanding at December 31, 2010, was $1,716,597. The weighted average grant date fair value of the warrants granted during 2011 and 2010 was $1.70 and $1.13, respectively.

NOTE 8 – DERIVATIVES

Warrant Derivatives Due to Reset Provisions

As of December 31, 2011, America West had an aggregate of 911,564 outstanding warrants containing exercise price reset provisions that are classified as derivative liabilities.

On January 1, 2009 America West adopted FASB ASC 815-15, and as a result an aggregate 2,324,572 outstanding warrants containing exercise price reset provisions that were previously classified in equity were reclassified to derivative liabilities. In addition, the 53,125 warrants granted on January 9, 2009 contain the same reset provision and were recorded as derivative liabilities. As of January 1, 2009, these warrants were no longer deemed to be indexed to America West’s own stock.

On August 8, 2010, 1,177,811 of these warrants were cancelled in exchange for common shares. These warrants were fair valued on the date of their cancellation and the related fair value of $1,390,600 was recorded to additional paid-in capital. The Black Scholes stock option valuation model was used to determine the fair value as of the cancellation date using the following significant assumptions: the exercise price of the warrants of $0.12; the market value of America West’s common stock on August 8, 2010, $1.20; an expected volatility of 207.39%; a risk free interest rate of 0.78%; and an expected term of 3.23 years.

F-20

As of December 31, 2010, the outstanding warrants had a fair value of $1,594,370. The significant assumptions used in the December 31, 2010 valuation were: the exercise prices ranging from $0.12 to $3.60; the market value of America West’s common stock on December 31, 2010 of $1.95, expected volatilities between 197.07% and 199.90%; risk free interest rates of 1.02%; and remaining contract terms ranging from 2.84 to 3.03 years. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the total derivative gain resulting from the reset provision warrant derivatives was $294,402.

As of December 31, 2011, the outstanding warrants had a fair value of $109,711. The significant assumptions used in the December 31, 2011 valuation were: the exercise prices ranging from $0.12 to $3.60; the market value of America West’s common stock on December 31, 2011 of $0.21, expected volatilities between 203.75% and 208.95%; risk free interest rates of 0.25%; and remaining contract terms ranging from 1.84 to 2.03 years. During the year ended December 31, 2011, the total derivative gain resulting from the reset provision warrant derivatives was $1,484,659.

Warrant Derivatives due to the Authorized Shares being Exceeded

On March 26, 2010, America West issued more common shares and instruments potentially convertible into common shares than the number of authorized common shares. As a result, under ASC 815-15, between March 26, 2010 and September 28, 2010, a total of 884,792 warrants were reclassified to derivative liabilities. America West recorded a derivative liability for these warrants equivalent to their initial fair value of $827,528 and reduced additional paid-in capital by the same amount. The Black-Scholes stock option valuation model was used to determine the fair values of the warrant derivatives using the following significant assumptions: the exercise prices ranging from $0.01 to $5.04; the market value of America West’s common stock on the respective measurement dates ranging from $0.72 to $1.92; expected volatilities ranging from 183.08% to 292.60%; risk free interest rates from 0.25% to 2.97%; and remaining contract terms from 0.52 to 9.28 years.

On September 28, 2010, America West effected a 1 for 12 reverse stock split. As a result of the reverse stock split, America West had sufficient authorized shares to cover its outstanding common shares and instruments potentially convertible into common shares and as such, derivative accounting no longer applied to these warrants. America West calculated the fair value of the 884,792 warrants on September 28, 2010 and determined it to be $744,026. The fair value of the warrants was then recorded back to additional paid-in capital. The significant assumptions used in the September 28, 2010 valuation were: the exercise prices ranging from $0.01 to $5.04; the market value of America West’s common stock on September 28, 2010 of $0.88; expected volatilities ranging from 199.36% to 294.27%; risk free interest rates between 0.27% and 2.53%; and remaining contract terms ranging from 0.01 to 9.04 years.

The total derivative gain resulting from the above warrant derivatives amounted to $0 and $83,502 for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Fair value measurement

America West values its warrant instruments under FASB ASC 820 which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.

As defined in ASC 820, fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price). America West utilizes market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. America West classifies fair value balances based on the observability of those inputs. ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (level 3 measurement).

The three levels of the fair value hierarchy defined by ASC 820 are as follows:

Level 1 – Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. Level 1 primarily consists of financial instruments such as exchange-traded derivatives, marketable securities and listed equities.

Level 2 – Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date.

Level 3 – Pricing inputs include significant inputs that are generally less observable from objective sources. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value.

F-21

America West uses Level 3 to value its derivative financial instruments.

The following table sets forth by level with the fair value hierarchy the Company’s financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on December 31, 2011 and 2010.


December 31, 2011:	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Assets
No None	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

L Liabilities
Derivative financial instruments	$	—	$	—	$	109,711	$	109,711


December 31, 2010:	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Assets
None	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

L Liabilities
Derivative financial instruments	$	—	$	—	$	1,594,370	$	1,594,370

The following table provides a summary of the changes in fair value, including net transfers in and/or out, of the derivative financial instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs:


		Warrants

Balance at January 1, 2010	$	3,195,870
Derivative liability reclassed from additional paid in capital		827,528
Unrealized gain included in other income (expense)		(294,402)
Settlement of derivative liability		(2,134,626)
Balance at December 31, 2010		1,594,370
Derivative liability reclassed from additional paid in capital		-
Unrealized gain included in other income (expense)		(1,484,659)
Settlement of derivative liability		-
Balance at December 31, 2011	$	109,711

NOTE 9 – COMMITMENTS & CONTINGENCIES

The Company has an existing coal lease agreement with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”). Rental payments of $3,867 are payable to the BLM by the first of September each year. In addition, a royalty payment of eight percent of gross sales for production up to 900,000 tons is due to the BLM each month. The Company is also required to make payments each quarter to the Bureau of Land Reclamation. The payment is equal to $0.15 per ton of coal mined.

Mining operations are subject to conditions that can impact the safety of our workforce or delay coal deliveries or increase the cost of mining for varying lengths of time. These conditions include mine collapses; fires and explosions from methane gas or coal dust; accidental mine water discharges; weather, flooding and natural disasters; unexpected maintenance problems; key equipment failures; variations in coal seam thickness; variations in the amount of rock and soil overlying the coal deposit; variations in rock and other natural materials and variations in geologic conditions.

Coal mining, especially underground coal mining, is inherently dangerous and great care must be taken to assure safe, continued operations. Past experiences of others in the industry indicate that lapses in safety practices can result in catastrophic collapse of a coal mining operation. Even when best mining practices are strictly observed, natural disasters such as an earthquake could possibly destroy a coal mine’s operations. Any catastrophic event at the coal mine which would close the mine for an extended period of time likely would cause the failure of operations. The Company maintains insurance policies that provide limited coverage for some of these risks, although there can be no assurance that these risks would be fully covered by these insurance policies. Despite the Company’s efforts, significant mine accidents could occur and have a substantial impact. Such impact resulting from accidents could take the form of increased premiums on insurance policies, litigation, fines and penalties imposed by regulating agencies.

F-22

In connection with the Hidden Splendor Plan of Reorganization, which became effective on December 19, 2008, Hidden Splendor is obligated to make payments to creditors over time in an aggregate principal amount of not less than approximately $10,000,000 and up to approximately $10,700,000 over a period not exceeding seven years from the effective date of the Plan. Under the Plan, America West must pay all of Hidden Splendor’s post-petition liabilities that Hidden Splendor cannot pay, in the ordinary course of business, in an amount not to exceed $1,560,000.

On October 9, 2009, America West entered into a loan that requires royalty payments on each ton of coal produced. The rate per ton was $0.25 between August 20, 2009 and November 19, 2009 and $0.50 between November 20, 2009 and May 19, 2010. From May 20, 2010 through August 19, 2016, the rate per ton is $2.00. Royalty expense for the year ended December 31, 2010, amounted to $413,579, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2011, the royalty agreements were amended which resulted in the Company recognizing a gain on forgiveness of royalty liabilities of $440,919 for the accrued royalties that were no longer payable under the amended agreements.

In September 2010, Kenneth Rushton, the Chapter 7 Trustee for C.W. Mining Company dba Co-Op Mining Company in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy action on file in the United States District Bankruptcy Court in the District of Utah, brought an adversarial proceeding naming Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. as a defendant. In this action, the trustee alleges that a $40,000 payment the debtor made to Hidden Splendor in 2007 is avoidable under 11 U .S.C. Section 548 and alleges that the Trustee may recover from Hidden Splendor the value of that payment. Hidden Splendor denies that the trustee is entitled to the relief he seeks and will file an answer to the complaint. America West believes the probability of incurring any losses associated with this claim to be minimal. As such, no expenses have been accrued.

In September 2010, Kenneth Rushton, the Chapter 7 Trustee for C.W. Mining Company dba Co-Op Mining Company in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy action on file in the United States District Bankruptcy Court in the District of Utah, brought an adversarial proceeding naming America West Marketing, Inc. as a defendant. In this action, the trustee alleges that during 2009, America West Marketing purchased 5,795 tons of coal that was either: (1) mined by a third party under the authority of the debtor's operating permit and in violation of the automatic stay in the pending bankruptcy action; (2) mined by the debtor; or (3) purchased by a third party with coal sale proceeds generated by coal previously mined by the Debtor, and claims trustee is entitled to a judgment against America West Marketing in the amount of $204,077 in connection with the transfer of that coal. America West Marketing denies that the trustee is entitled to the relief he seeks and will file an answer to the complaint. America West believes the probability of incurring any losses associated with this claim to be minimal. As such, no expenses have been accrued.

Occasionally, Hidden Splendor is issued citations by the Mine Safety and Health Administration in connection with regular inspections of the Horizon Mine. At times, Hidden Splendor challenges citations, resulting in reductions to proposed penalties or administrative adjudications with no penalties. As of December 31, 2011, Hidden Splendor had challenges pending in several administrative actions. Such actions cover a total of approximately $1,287,431 of proposed, assessed penalties. Management has determined that of the total amount, the probable liability arising from these citations is approximately $771,800 which has been accrued at December 31, 2011.

In December 2010, the Company agreed to serve as guarantor on $250,000 of debt payments owed by Wild West Trucking, a trucking company owned by America West's Chief Executive Officer, to its secured creditor Zions Bank. Subsequently the debt has been paid and the Company has been released from guarantor.

Minimum payments on the commitments described above for each of the five years subsequent to December 31, 2011 are as follows:


2012	$	3,867
2013		3,867
2014		3,867
Thereafter		-
	$	11,592

NOTE 10 – MAJOR CUSTOMERS

During 2011 and 2010 three customers each accounted for more than 10% of America West’s coal sales.

F-23

NOTE 11 – ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATION

The following table summarizes the changes in America West’s asset retirement obligation for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.


		2011		2010
Asset retirement obligation, January 1	$	134,969	$	157,048
Accretion expense		78,251		15,705
Revisions in accounting estimate		-		(37,784)
Asset retirement obligation, December 31	$	213,220	$	134,969

NOTE 12 – INCOME TAX EXPENSE

At December 31, 2011, America West had unused federal and state net operating loss carryforwards available of approximately $49,950,000, which may be applied against future taxable income, if any, and which expire in various years through 2031. The Internal Revenue Code contains provisions which likely will reduce or limit the availability and utilization of these net operating loss carryforwards. For example, limitations are imposed on the utilization of net operating loss carryforwards if certain ownership changes have taken place or will take place. The Company has not performed an analysis to determine whether any such limitations have occurred.

The temporary differences and carryforwards which give rise to the deferred income tax assets as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:


		2011		2010

Depreciation	$	(378,000)	$	(931,000)
Stock based compensation		270,000		1,568,000
Federal and Utah net operating loss carryovers		12,500,000		13,812,000
Total deferred income tax assets		12,392,000		14,449,000
Valuation allowance		(12,392,000)		(14,449,000)
Net deferred income tax asset	$	-	$	-

A reconciliation of income taxes at the federal statutory rate to actual income tax expense is as follows:


		2011		2010

Federal benefit at statutory rate (34%)	$	(4,277,000)	$	(3,128,000)
State income taxes, net of federal tax		(755,000)		(552,000)
Valuation allowance		5,032,000		3,680,000
Net tax expense	$	-	$	-

NOTE 13 – DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PENSION PLAN

America West provides a defined contribution plan for its employees meeting minimum service requirements. Employees can contribute up to 100% of their current compensation to the plan subject to certain statutory limitations. The Company contributes up to a maximum of 3% of an employee’s compensation and plan participants are fully-vested in the Company’s contributions immediately. The Company made contributions to the plan of approximately $0 and $12,000 during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

NOTE 14 - SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

From January1, 2012 through the date of this report, America West borrowed an aggregate of $1,170,000 from a major shareholder. The notes bear interest at 8% per annum and mature on March 31, 2012. A total of 1,170,000 common shares were issued in connection with the debt.

F-24

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

Resignation of Former Accountant.

Effective October 31, 2011, our board of directors authorized our officers to change our independent accountants from MaloneBailey, LLP of Houston, Texas to Hansen, Barnett and Maxwell, P.C. of Salt Lake City, Utah. In this regard, we provide the following information:

Effective October 31, 2011 we dismissed the accounting firm of MaloneBailey, LLP of Houston, Texas.

The principal accountant's report on the financial statements issued by MaloneBailey, LLP in connection the financial statements dated December 31, 2010, and filed with our Form 10-K on April 15, 2011, contained a “going concern” qualification. It stated:

The decision to change our independent accountant as reported herein was approved by our board of directors. We have no audit committee, or similar committee, of our board of directors.

During our two most recent fiscal years and any subsequent interim period preceding the resignation of our former accountants there were no disagreements with the former accountant on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreement(s), if not resolved to the satisfaction of our former accountant, would have caused it to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreement(s) in connection with its reports.

None of the following events occurred within the registrant's two most recent fiscal years and any subsequent interim period preceding our former accountant's resignation:

Our accountant's having advised us that the internal controls necessary for us to develop reliable financial statements do not exist;

Our accountant's having advised us that information has come to the accountant's attention that has led it to no longer be able to rely on management's representations, or that has made it unwilling to be associated with the financial statements prepared by management;

Our accountant's having advised us of the need to expand significantly the scope of its audit, or that information has come to the accountant's attention that if further investigated may: ( i ) materially impact the fairness or reliability of either: a previously issued audit report or the underlying financial statements; or the financial statements issued or to be issued covering the fiscal period(s) subsequent to the date of the most recent financial statements covered by an audit report (including information that may prevent it from rendering an unqualified audit report on those financial statements), or ( ii ) cause it to be unwilling to rely on management's representations or be associated with the registrant's financial statements, and due to our accountant's resignation (due to audit scope limitations or otherwise) or dismissal, or for any other reason, the accountant did not so expand the scope of its audit or conduct such further investigation; or

Our accountant's having advised us that information has come to the accountant's attention that it has concluded materially impacts the fairness or reliability of either ( i ) a previously issued audit report or the underlying financial statements, or ( ii ) the financial statements issued or to be issued covering the fiscal period(s) subsequent to the date of the most recent financial statements covered by an audit report (including information that, unless resolved to the accountant's satisfaction, would prevent it from rendering an unqualified audit report on those financial statements), and due to our accountant's resignation, dismissal or declination to stand for re-election, or for any other reason, the issue has not been resolved to the accountant's satisfaction prior to its resignation, dismissal or declination to stand for re-election.

Appointment of New Independent Accountants

A. Effective October 31, 2011, our board of directors authorized our officers to engage Hansen, Barnett and Maxwell, P.C. of Salt Lake City, Utah as our independent accountants. We did not, nor did anyone on our behalf, consult the new accountant regarding:

1. The application of accounting principles to a specific completed or proposed transaction, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on our financial statements and neither written or oral advice was provided that was an important factor considered by us in reaching a decision as to the accounting, auditing or financial reporting issue; or

2. Any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement, as defined in paragraph 304(a)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-K, or a reportable event, as described in paragraph 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.

Letter from Former Accountant

We provided our former accountant with a copy of the disclosures in the report on Form 8-K we filed in October of 2011 and requested our former accountant furnish us with a letter addressed to the Commission stating whether it agrees with the statements made by us in this report and, if not, stating the respects in which it does not agree. They provided us with a letter that agreed with the statements in our October, 2011 Form 8-K on the matter.

ITEM 9A(T). CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports that we file or submit to the SEC under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified by the SEC’s rules and forms, and that information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our chief executive and chief financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

The chief executive officer and the chief financial officer have concluded, based on their evaluation as of December 31, 2011 that, as a result of the material weaknesses described below, disclosure controls and procedures were ineffective in providing reasonable assurance that material information is made known to them by others within the Company.

(b) Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

The Company’s management, with the participation of the chief executive officer and chief financial officer, carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company's internal controls over financial reporting, using the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework, (as defined in the Exchange Act) Rules 13a-15(3) and 15-d-15(3) as of the end of the period covered by this report (the “Evaluation Date”). The following material weaknesses were noted in the evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting:

There are inadequate controls over the creation and posting of journal entries to ensure they are authorized, accurate, and complete. In addition, there are no controls to ensure that all authorized journal entries have been posted and that the postings reflected the authorized journal entry.

The Company has not established an Audit Committee independent of management.

There are inadequate controls to ensure that subjective analyses (e.g. impairment analysis of assets) are prepared and reviewed by appropriate personnel.

The Company does not provide access to a technical accounting research database for personnel involved in financial reporting.

These material weaknesses have been disclosed to our Board of Directors and we are continuing our efforts to improve and strengthen our control processes and procedures. Our management and directors will continue to work with our auditors to ensure that our controls and procedures are adequate and effective.

As a result of the existence of these material weaknesses as of December 31, 2011, management has concluded that we did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, based on the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to the attestation by the Company’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the SEC that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

(c) Changes in Internal Controls.

There were no changes in the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting, known to the chief executive officer or to the chief financial officer that occurred during the period covered by this Report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

Not applicable.

PART III

ITEM 10.DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND CONTROL PERSONS; COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT

Executive Officers and Directors

The following table sets forth as of the date of this Annual Report, the name, age, and position of each executive officer and director and the term of office of each director of the Company.


Name	Age	Position

Dan R. Baker	62	Director, President, Chief Executive Officer
Brent M Davies	63	Chief Financial Officer
Alexander H. Walker III	51	Chairman, Director, Secretary
Amanda Cardinalli	48	Director

All Directors hold their positions for one year or until successors are duly elected and qualified. All officers hold their positions at the will of the Board of Directors.

Set forth below is certain biographical information regarding each of the Company's executive officers and directors:

Dan R. Baker has served as the chief executive officer since July 2008, chief operating officer since December 2007, and as a director since December 2007. Mr. Baker served as an executive officer since August 2007 and as an executive officer of Hidden Splendor since March 2003. Mr. Baker has been in the mining business approximately 40 years and from 1987 until 2002 in executive positions with PacifiCorp and at Consol Energy, Inc.

Alexander H. Walker III has served as director and secretary since August 2007 and as the president and chief executive officer of the Company from August 2007 to July 2008. Since March 2003, Mr. Walker has been an executive officer of Hidden Splendor. Mr. Walker is a member of the Utah State Bar Association and the Nevada Bar Association, and until 2003 practiced primarily in the areas of general business litigation and securities. He is also the chair of the Mining Committee of the Energy, Natural Resources and Environmental Law Section of the Utah State Bar, a member of the board of directors of the South East Utah Energy Producers Association and in the past has served as the co-chair of the board of the Western Energy Training Center.

Brian Rodriguez – former director and chief financial officer - served as a director of the Company from December 2007 to August 2011. From December 2007 through January 2009, Mr. Rodriguez served as the chief financial officer of America West and served as interim chief financial officer from October, 2009 to August 2011. Mr. Rodriguez is the president of Marathon Advisors LLC, a professional services firm providing accounting and business development services to micro-cap and small-cap public companies. Mr. Rodriguez began his career in 1993 in the Business Assurance practice of PricewaterhouseCoopers in Dallas, Texas. Mr. Rodriguez has been a Certified Public Accountant in the State of Texas since May, 1995. Mr. Rodriguez is a director of Radiant Oil & Gas, Inc.

George Jarkesy – former director - served as a director of the Company from December 2007 to February 2012. Mr. Jarkesy has served as the managing member of John Thomas Capital Management Group, LLC, which is the general partner for John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund, L.P. since June 2007. Mr. Jarkesy previously served as the chief operating officer and president of SH Celera Capital Corporation, an internally managed fund from March 2007 until March 2008. Mr. Jarkesy has founded and built companies engaged in financial consulting, real estate investments, real estate management, employee leasing, light steel manufacturing, livestock management, oil field services and biotechnology during the last ten years. He is the vice president of the board of directors for the Society of St. Vincent DePaul in the Galveston-Houston Archdiocese of the Catholic Church and is also on the board of the Jarkesy Foundation, Inc. Mr. Jarkesy is a director of Radiant Oil & Gas, Inc.

Amanda Cardinalli has served as a director of the Company since August 2007. Ms. Cardinalli has served as president of Nevada Agency and Transfer Company, a company which provides trust, stock transfer and resident agent services to its corporate clients for over five years.

Brent M. Davies has served as chief financial officer of the Company since August 2011. Mr. Davies previously served as the chief executive officer of Robison, Hill & Company, CPAs for over five years. During his career in public accounting he has been involved with various oil and gas, coal, gold, silver, phosphate, sand and gravel mining companies as a consultant, tax preparer, auditor and in financial statement preparation.

Family Relationships

Alexander H. Walker, III, and Amanda Cardinalli are brother and sister.

Independence of Directors & Board Committees

None of the Company’s directors are “independent directors” as that term is defined by the SEC or under independence standards used by any national securities exchange or an inter-dealer quotation system. The Board serves as the audit committee, and no committees have been formed by the Board of Directors.

Board of Directors and Nominating Procedures

The Company has not established any specific, minimum qualifications that must be met by director candidates or identified any specific qualities or skills that it believes our directors must possess. The Company may take a wide range of factors into account in evaluating the suitability of director candidates, including the nominee's judgment, skill, integrity, diversity and business or other experience. Although there is no specific policy on considering diversity, the Board of Directors takes various diversity-related considerations into account in the selection criteria for new directors.

During 2011 and as of the date of this Report, there were no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to our Board of Directors.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee of the Board currently consists of the entire Board of Directors, but it is expected that the Audit Committee will be constituted to consist of at least two non-employee directors. The Audit Committee selects an independent public accounting firm to be engaged to audit our financial statements, discusses with the independent auditors their independence, reviews and discusses the audited financial statements with the independent auditors and management and recommends to our Board of Directors whether the audited financials should be included in our Annual Reports to be filed with the SEC.

Upon the constitution of the Audit Committee, it is expected that all of the members of the Audit Committee will be non-employee directors who: (1) met the criteria for independence set forth in Rule 10A-3(b)(1) under the Exchange Act; (2) did not participate in the preparation of our financial statements or the financial statements of the Company; and (3) are able to read and understand fundamental financial statements, including a balance sheet, income statement and cash flow statement. The board has determined that none of its directors qualify as an audit committee financial expert as defined in Item 407(d) of Regulation S-B.

Board of Directors and Nominating Procedures

During 2011, there were no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to our Board of Directors.

Board Leadership Structure

The Board elects its Chairman and appoints the Company’s Chief Executive Officer according to its view of what is best for the Company at any given time. Although the offices are currently held by two separate people, which the Board has determined is in the best interests of stockholders at this time, the Board does not believe there should be a fixed rule as to whether the offices of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer should be vested in the same person or two different people, or whether the Chairman should be an employee of the Company or should be elected from among the non-employee directors. The needs of the Company and the individuals available to play these roles may dictate different outcomes at different times, and the Board believes that retaining flexibility in these decisions is in the best interest of the Company. Currently, the Board believes that Mr. Walker’s role as non-executive Chairman ensures a greater role for the non-management directors in the oversight of the Company and encourages more participation of the non-management directors in setting agendas and establishing priorities and procedures for the work of the Board.

Role of the Board in Risk Oversight

One of the Board’s key functions is informed oversight of the Company's risk management process. The Board administers this oversight function directly through the Board as a whole, although it is expected that any of the Board's standing committees will also address risks inherent in their respective areas of oversight. In particular, our Board is responsible for monitoring and assessing strategic risk exposure, including a determination of the nature and level of risk appropriate for the Company.

Limitation of Directors' Liability and Indemnification

As permitted by Nevada law, our Articles of Incorporation, as amended, provide that we will indemnify its directors and officers against expenses and liabilities as they are incurred to defend, settle, or satisfy any civil or criminal action brought against them on account of their being or having been Company directors or officers unless, in any such action, they are adjudged to have acted with gross negligence or willful misconduct. Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Act may be permitted to directors, officers or persons controlling the Company pursuant to the foregoing provisions, the Company has been informed that, in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in that Act and is, therefore, unenforceable.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the Company’s directors and executive officers, and persons who own beneficially more than ten percent of the common stock of the Company, to file reports of ownership and changes of ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Based solely on the reports received by the Company and on written representations from certain reporting persons, the Company believes that the directors, executive officers, and greater than ten percent beneficial owners have complied with all applicable filing requirements, except for: John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund subsequently filed a Form 4 in April 2011; George Jarkesy failed to timely file a Form 4 in October 2010, Mr. Jarkesy subsequently filed a Form 4 in April 2011; Brian Rodriguez failed to timely file a Form 4 in October 2010, Mr. Rodriguez subsequently filed a Form 4 in April 2011; John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund LP failed to timely file a Form 4 in February 2011, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund subsequently filed a Form 4 in April 2011; George Jarkesy failed to timely file a Form 4 in February 2011, Mr. Jarkesy subsequently filed a Form 4 in April 2011.

Code of Ethics

The Company maintains a Code of Ethics that applies to all of its directors and officers.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The following tables contain compensation data for our named executive officers as of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010. None of the stock or stock option awards set forth in the summary compensation table below were granted under the Company’s 2008 Stock Option Plan.


*Summary Compensation Table*
Name and Principal Position	Year	Salary And Consulting Payments ($)	Bonus ($)	Stock Awards ($)	Stock Option Awards ($)	All Other Compensation ($)	Total ($)

Dan R. Baker (1)	2011	223,750					223,750
President and CEO	2010	426,665	-	-	552,896(2)	-	979,561

Brent M. Davies	2011	75,000	-	-	-	-	75,000
CFO	2010	-	-	-	-	-	-

Brian E. Rodriguez (3)	2011	101,500(5)	-	-	-	-	101,500
CFO	2010	202,000(4)	-	-	138,224 (6)	-	340,224

______________

(1) Includes amounts accrued in 2009 that were subsequently paid in 2010. As of December 31, 2009, Mr. Baker had accrued and unpaid salary of $83,341 and a $100,000 cash bonus, both of which were subsequently paid in the first quarter of 2010. As of December 31, 2010, Mr. Baker had accrued and unpaid salary of $41,672, of which $41,667 was subsequently paid in 2011.

(2) In March 2010, Mr. Baker received an option to purchase 333,333 shares of Common Stock, vesting 100% on March 24, 2011, at an exercise price of $2.40 per share.

(3) Mr. Rodriguez resigned as chief financial officer on January 15, 2009 and assumed the position of interim chief financial officer from October 2009 until August 2011.

(4) Includes amounts accrued in 2009 that were subsequently paid in 2010. As of December 31, 2009, Mr. Rodriguez had accrued and unpaid salary of $39,000, which was subsequently paid in 2010, and a $20,000 cash bonus, which remains unpaid as of the date of this Report. As of December 31, 2010, Mr. Rodriguez had accrued and unpaid salary of $73,000, of which $40,000 was subsequently paid in 2011.

(5) In July 2009, Mr. Rodriguez was awarded 45,833 shares of Common Stock as consideration for allowing payment of $55,000 compensation to be deferred. In September 2010, Mr. Rodriguez was awarded 12,000 shares of Common Stock as compensation for services.

(6) In March 2010, Mr. Rodriguez received an option to purchase 83,333 shares of Common Stock, vesting 100% on March 24, 2011, at an exercise price of $2.40 per share.

Grants of Options and Stock Awards in 2010



Name	Grant Date	Estimated Future Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards			Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards			All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Shares (#)	All Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Options (#)	Exercise or Base Price of Option Awards ($/Sh)	Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards
		Threshold ($)	Target ($)	Maximum ($)	Threshold ($)	Target ($)	Maximum ($)
Dan R. Baker, President & CEO	3/26/10	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	333,333	$2.40	$552,896
Brian E. Rodriguez, CFO	3/26/10	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	83,333	$2.40	$138,224

No stock options under the Company’s 2008 Stock Option Plan were granted in 2011 to any of the individuals named in the summary compensation table above.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End


	Option Awards
Name	Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable	Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable	Option Exercise Price ($)	Option Expiration Date
Dan R. Baker	70,833	333,333	$2.40 - $5.40	5 years after vesting
Brian E. Rodriguez, former CFO	70,833	83,333	$2.40 - $5.40	5 years after vesting

No other options or stock awards were issued to our employees, officers or directors in 2010 or 2011.

Employment and Consulting Agreements

The Company does not have any employee agreements with any executives or board members as of the date of this Report.

Director Compensation

The following table presents summary information for the year ended December 31, 2010 regarding the compensation of the members of our board of directors.


Name	Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)	Options Awards ($)	Total ($)
Dan R. Baker	-0-	-0-	-0-
Alexander H. Walker, III	195,667(1)	603,843(2)	799,510
Brian E. Rodriguez	-0-	-0-	-0-
George R. Jarkesy, Jr.	-0-	138,224	138,224
Amanda Cardinalli	-0-	138,224	138,224

(1)

Includes amounts accrued in 2009 that were subsequently paid in 2010. As of December 31, 2009, Mr. Walker had accrued and unpaid salary of $208,330 and a $20,000 cash bonus. Subsequent to December 31, 2009, $195,667 of the accrued salary was paid during 2010. The $20,000 cash bonus remains unpaid as of the date of this Report. As of December 31, 2010, Mr. Walker had accrued and unpaid salary of $241,827 and the aforementioned $20,000 cash bonus. Subsequent to December 31, 2010, $41,667 of the accrued salary has been paid as of the date of this Report.

(2)

In March 2010, per a prior employment agreement which expired in December 2010, Mr. Walker received an option to purchase 250,001 common shares, vested 100% immediately upon issuance, at an exercise price of $2.40.

No options were exercised during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

To our knowledge, except as indicated in the footnotes to this table and pursuant to applicable community property laws, the persons named in the table below have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock shown as beneficially owned by them as of April 14, 2012.

The following table sets forth the number and percentage of outstanding shares of Company common stock beneficially owned as of the date of this Report by: (a) each person who is known by us to be the owner of more than five percent of our outstanding shares of common stock; (b) each of our directors; (c) all of our executive officers; and (d) all current directors and executive officers, as a group. To our knowledge, except as indicated in the footnotes to this table and pursuant to applicable community property laws, the persons named in the table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock shown as beneficially owned by them.


Name of Beneficial Owner	Number of Shares Of Common Stock Beneficially Owned	Percentage (1)
Beneficial Owners of more than 5%:
Estate of Alexander H. Walker, Jr.(2) 50 West Liberty, Suite 880 Reno, Nevada 89501	2,501,292	3.6%
John Thomas Financial, Inc.(3) 14 Wall Street, 5th Floor New York, New York 10005	2,840,377	4.1%
John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, LP(4) 3 Riverway, Suite1800 Houston, Texas 77056	8,655,237	12.2%
Denly Utah Coal, LLC(5) 13809 Research Blvd., Suite 810 Austin, Texas 78750	26,917,489	38.6%
D. Mark von Waaden(5) 13809 Research Blvd., Suite 810 Austin, Texas 78750	26,917,489	38.6%
Matthew D. von Waaden(5) 13809 Research Blvd., Suite 810 Austin, Texas 78750	26,917,489	38.6%
Dennis C. von Waaden(5) 13809 Research Blvd., Suite 810 Austin, Texas 78750	26,917,489	38.6%
Sally A. von Waaden(5) 13809 Research Blvd., Suite 810 Austin, Texas 78750	26,917,489	38.6%
Named Executive Officers and Directors:
George R. Jarkesy, Jr.(6) 3 Riverway, Suite 1800 Houston, Texas77056	8,655,237	12.4%
Alexander H. Walker III(7) 57 West 200 South, Suite 400 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101	1,395,755	2.0%
Amanda Cardinalli (8) 50 West Liberty, Suite 880 Reno, Nevada 89501	789,269	1.1%
Dan R. Baker(9)	915,972	1.3%
Brian Rodriguez (10)	568,667	0.8%
All directors & executive officers as a group (5 persons) (11)	8,491,214	17.7%

___________________________

(1)

All percentage are based upon a combination of the 66,158,266 shares actually issued and outstanding as of the date of this report and the total number of shares which could be issued under the currently exercisable warrants and option reported in this Item but which as of this date have not been issued.

(2)

Alexander H. Walker, Jr. died on August 3, 2008, and the shares of Common Stock are owned by his estate. It is the Company's understanding that Alexander H. Walker, III, is the executor of the estate of Alexander H. Walker, Jr. Therefore, it is possible that Alexander H. Walker, III, will have voting control of such shares, though ownership of such shares shall pass pursuant to the directives of Alexander H. Walker, Jr., which directives have not yet been adjudicated. The Company understands that up to 750,000 of such shares secure obligations of Hidden Splendor. In addition, 416,667 of such shares are subject to an option granted to ATB Holding Company, LLC. Because Mr. Walker's estate has not been settled, any shares owned by him have not been distributed to Mr. Walker's heirs, and this table does not reflect that either Alexander Walker III, Amanda Cardinalli, or Timotha Kent (the heirs of Alexander Walker, Jr.) are deemed beneficial owners of any of these shares of Common Stock.

(3)

Of the shares reported as beneficially owned by John Thomas Financial, 1,245,899 shares are issuable upon currently exercisable warrants owned by John Thomas Financial and certain of its affiliates expiring in October 2016 with an exercise price of $1.20 per share and 416,667 subject to an option granted to ATB Holding Company, LLC. The remaining shares are registered in the name of John Thomas Financial or certain of its affiliates. Thomas Belesis is the President and sole shareholder of John Thomas Financial and the Managing Member of ATB Holding Company, LLC.

(4)

The John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund, LP (“JTBOF”) and the John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund II (“JTBOFII”) are limited partnerships, and the John Thomas Capital Management Group, LLC ("JTCMG") is the general partner of both. George R. Jarkesy, Jr., a former director of the company is the Managing Member of JTCMG. The Company is informed that JTBOF and JTBOFII underwent name changes and are now known as the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund, LP and the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund II, LP, respectively, and that JTCMG is now known as Patriot 28. Of the shares reported as beneficially owned by the JTBOF, 154,167 are issuable upon currently exercisable warrants owned by George Jarkesy, Jr. with an exercise price of ranging between $2.40 per share and $5.40 per share. And of the amount reported as beneficially owned by the JTBOF, 557,101 shares are owned by George Jarkesy, Jr. or his affiliates. The balance are owned in the name of either the JTBOF or the JTBOFII.

(5)

Denly Utah Coal, LLC, a Texas limited liability company ("Denly"). The two members of Denly are Denly ACI Partners, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, which holds a 66 2/3% membership interest in the Denly, and The von Waaden 2004 Revocable Trust, which owns a 33 1/3% membership interest in the Company. The general partner of Denly ACI Partners, Ltd. is Denly ACI Mgt., LLC, which is owned by Dennis C. von Waaden and Sally A. von Waaden. The co-trustees and co-beneficiaries of The von Waaden 2004 Revocable Trust are Dennis C. von Waaden and Sally A. von Waaden. Additionally, Dennis C. von Waaden, Sally A. von Waaden, D. Mark von Waaden and Matthew D. von Waaden are each an officer of and member of the board of managers of Denly. Each of these persons may have a pecuniary interest in only a portion of such securities and disclaims beneficial ownership except to the extent thereof. Of the shares reported as beneficially owned, 583,333 shares are issuable upon a currently exercisable warrants expiring in 2019 with a exercise price ranging from $0.12 per share to $0.24 per share. Of the shares reported as beneficially owned, 1,370,000 shares have not yet been issued, but the Company has an obligation to issue in connection with certain promissory notes issued in between January and May of 2012. The balance of the shares reported as beneficially owned are registered in the name of Denly or affiliates of Denly.

(6)

Mr. Jarkesy is a former director of the Company. The shares reported as beneficially owned by George R. Jarkesy, Jr., consist of (i) 416,667 shares registered in Mr. Jarkesy's name or in the names of his affiliates, (ii) 7,959,403 shares of Common Stock registered in the name of John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, LP (“JTBOF”) or the John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund II, LP (the “JTBOFII”), (iii) 125,000 shares registered in the name of Marathon Advisors, LLC, an affiliate of Mr. Jarkesy, and (iv) 154,167 shares underlying currently exercisable warrants or options owned by Mr. Jarkesy and/or his affiliates. JTBOF and JTBOF II are limited partnerships, and John Thomas Capital Management Group, LLC (“JTCMG”) is the general partner of JTBOF and JTBOF II. George R. Jarkesy, Jr., is the Managing Member of JTCMG. As mentioned in note (4) above, JTBOF and JTBOFII underwent name changes and are now known as the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund, LP and the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund II, LP, respectively, and JTCMG is now known as Patriot 28.

(7)

The shares reported as beneficially owned by Alexander H. Walker III consist of (i) 903,460 shares registered in the name of Mr. Walker, (ii) 5,000 shares registered in the name of Arlington Ventures, an affiliate of Mr. Walker, (iii) 483,295 shares underlying currently exercisable options which expire between 2013 and 2015 and have an exercise price ranging between $2.40 per share and $5.40 per share, and (iv) 4,000 shares purchased by Mr. Walker in the open market.

(8)

Of the shares reported as beneficially owned by Amanda Cardinalli, 83,333 shares are issuable upon currently exercisable warrants which expire in 2012 and bear an exercise price of $2.40 per share. The balance of the share reported as beneficially owned are registered in the name of The Nevada Agency and Transfer Company, our transfer agent and registrar, an entity of which Ms Cardinalli is the President.

(9)

The shares reported as beneficially owned by Dan R. Baker consist of (i) 511,805 shares registered in the name of Mr. Baker and (ii) 404,167 shares underlying currently exercisable options which expire between 2013 and 2015 and have an exercise price ranging between $2.40 per share and $5.40 per share.

(10)

Mr. Rodriguez is a former officer and director of the Company. The shares reported as beneficially owned by Brian Rodriguez consist of (i) 287,000 shares registered in Mr. Rodriguez’s name, (ii) 125,000 shares registered in the name of Marathon Advisors, LLC, an entity of which Mr. Rodriguez is the Managing Member, (iii) 154,167 shares underlying currently exercisable options which expire between 2013 and 2015 and have an exercise price ranging between $2.40 per share and $5.40 per share, and (iv) 2,500 shares purchased by Mr. Rodriguez in the open market.

(11)

Mr. Jarkesy and Mr. Rodriguez no longer are officers or directors. The total officer and director beneficial ownership for the current three directors, Mr. Baker, Mr. Walker and Ms. Cardinalli is 3,110,996 shares, or 4.5% of the number of shares referred to in Note (1) above. Brent Davies, the company’s CFO, owns no shares as of the date of this report.

George Jarkesy and his affiliates

During 2010, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, L.P. and its affiliate John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund II, L.P. advanced the Company on an unsecured basis an aggregate principal amount of $1,681,770, bearing interest at the rate of 10% per annum and maturing on various dates in 2010 and 2011. In connection with these loans, the Company issued to the John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, L.P. and its affiliate John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund II, L.P. an aggregate of 1,401,475 shares of Common Stock.

During 2011 through the date hereof, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, L.P. and its affiliate John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund II, L.P. advanced the Company on an unsecured basis an aggregate principal amount of $135,000, bearing interest at the rate of 10% per annum and maturing on various dates in 2011. In connection with these loans, the Company issued to the John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, L.P. and its affiliate John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund II, L.P. an aggregate of 112,500 shares of Common Stock.

On March 31, 2011, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, L.P. and its affiliate John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund II, L.P. collectively settled an aggregate of $3 million of debt in exchange for 3 million shares of the Company’s Common Stock. The remaining aggregate $789,427 debt was restructured to have an 8% interest rate and a maturity date of June 1, 2014.

Alexander H. Walker III

In December 2011, Mr. Walker paid the Internal Revenue service $29,516 from personal funds for a company tax obligation. As a result, America West has a loan due to Mr. Walker of $29,516 that is unsecured, bears interest at 10% per annum and is due on demand. In March of 2012, the Company issued 29,516 shares of Common Stock to Mr. Walker as partial consideration for the loan.

Amanda Cardinalli

Ms. Cardinalli is President of Nevada Agency and Transfer Company (“NATCO”), the Company’s transfer agent. We believe that the fees charged the Company for transfer agent services reflect market rates.

John Thomas Financial, Inc.

John Thomas Financial again provided investment banking services to the Company during 2011 and through the date hereof. During the fourth quarter of 2010 and during 2011 through the date of this Report, the Company paid John Thomas Financial cash sales commissions of $1,767,265. The Company also has issued to John Thomas Financial and certain affiliates of John Thomas Financial warrant to purchase a total of 1,245,899 shares of the Company’s Common Stock at prices ranging from $1.20 per share to $5.40 per share.

Prior to 2012, we have been advised by John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. that John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. and John Thomas Financial are not affiliates of one another. Prior to 2012, we further had been advised by John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund as follows, with respect to the relationship between John Thomas Financial and John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund:

(a)

Neither John Thomas Financial nor any of its affiliates has any direct or indirect ownership or management interest in John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P.

(b)

Neither John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. nor any of its affiliates has any direct or indirect ownership or management interest in John Thomas Financial.

(c)

From time to time John Thomas Financial has served as placement agent for John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. in connection with offers and sales of John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. securities.

(d)

Pursuant to a placement agent agreement, dated as of July 19, 2007, between John Thomas Financial and John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P., John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. has been granted a trademark license to use the name “John Thomas” and variants thereof in connection with, among other things, the operation of John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P.

(e)

John Thomas Financial from time to time receives compensation with respect to companies it introduces to John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P. and which obtain loans from John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund L.P.

In 2012, we have been informed that the John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund underwent a name change to the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund. In 2012 we also have been informed that certain affiliates of John Thomas Financial may have a direct or indirect ownership relationship in the John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund (now known as the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund, LP) or in the John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund II (now known as the Patriot Bridge and Opportunity Fund II). We have no information as to when such a relationship, if it exists, was created.

Arlington Ventures, LLC

Arlington Ventures, LLC (“Arlington Ventures”) owns an office building in Price, Utah, and leases that building to the Company. Arlington Ventures is owned by Alexander H. Walker, III, Amanda Cardinalli, and their sister, Timotha Kent. During 2010 and 2011, Arlington Ventures leased the Price building to the Company at a rate of $7,500 per month; an amount the Company believes is consistent with market lease rates. In addition, the Company leases certain water rights owned by Arlington Ventures at a rate of $1,000 per month in order to allow Hidden Splendor to utilize water in its mining operations. As of December 31, 2011, all amounts had been accrued and unpaid.

Denly Utah Coal LLC & its affiliates

During 2010, Denly advanced the Company on an unsecured basis an aggregate principal amount of $2,535,000, bearing interest at the rate of 10% per annum and maturing in various dates during 2010 and 2011. In connection with these loans, the Company issued Denly an aggregate of 4,124,240 shares of Common Stock as additional consideration.

During 2011 through the date hereof, Denly advanced the Company on an unsecured basis an aggregate principal amount of $575,000, bearing interest at the rate of 10% per annum and maturing in various dates during 2011. In connection with these loans, the Company issued Denly an aggregate of 479,167 shares of Common Stock as additional consideration for the loans.

In addition to the aforementioned 2011 loans, Denly advanced the Company a total of $2 million during February 2011. The loan was due on March 15, 2011. On March 31, 2011, Denly settled the $2 million loan and $34,822 accrued interest in exchange for 2,034,822 million shares of the Company’s Common Stock.

On March 31, 2011, Denly restructured $10,765,839 debt to have an 8% interest rate and a maturity date of June 1, 2014.

From September the end of 2011, the company issued Denly Utah Coal, LLC at total of 7,942,834 of its common stock in for loans totaling $7,942,824. Since January 2012, the Company has obtained loans from Denly totaling $1,370,000 and is obligated to issue to Denly 1,370,000 of its common in connection with such loans, however, as of the date of the filing of this report the Company has not yet issued such 1,370,000 shares.

Wild West Trucking

During 2010 and 2011, the Company engaged Wild West Trucking, a trucking company owned by the wife of its CEO Dan Baker, to haul coal from the Horizon Mine to the loadout facility. Wild West Trucking was previously named D&D Trucking. During 2010 and 2011, the Company incurred trucking expenses from Wild West and D&D Trucking totaling of $1,276,459 and $1,962,329 respectively. Wild West Trucking and D&D Trucking charged the Company fees which were below market rates. In December 2010, the Company agreed to serve as guarantor on $250,000 of debt payments owed by Wild West Trucking to its secured creditor Zions Bank. The notes have subsequently been paid in full.

Obligations Secured by Shareholders

Federal Lease Performance Bond. Under federal law, Hidden Splendor is required to maintain a performance bond in an amount determined by the BLM sufficient to secure Hidden Splendor’s performance under its federal coal lease. Prior to March of 2011, the BLM set Hidden Splendor’s bond amount in this regard at $136,000 and Hidden Splendor has made arrangements with a bonding company to post a bond sufficient to meet the BLM requirement. Alexander H. Walker III pledged personal assets as security for the bond posted by Hidden Splendor’s bonding agent. In March 2010, the Company issued 14,167 common shares to Mr. Walker as compensation for pledging personal assets as security for the bond.

In March 2011, the BLM increased the company’s bond obligation to a total of $400,000. The company

Reclamation Obligation. Under Utah law, Hidden Splendor is required to post cash or assets with a value sufficient to cover its reclamation obligation as determined by the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. Hidden Splendor’s reclamation obligation is estimated on an annual basis. Its current obligation is for $445,000. Prior to their deaths, Alexander H. Walker, Jr. and Cecil Ann Walker executed a deed of trust on certain real property they owned in favor of the State of Utah in order to secure Hidden Splendor’s reclamation obligation. In March 2010 the Company issued 40,333 common shares to the estate of Mr. and Mrs. Walker as compensation for providing assets as security for the bond.

Royalty Agreement

In 2009, Hidden Splendor Resources Inc. entered into a Royalty Assigment and Agreement, Grant of Security Interest and Financing Agreement with the John Thomas Bridge and Opportunity Fund, LP, Denly Utah Coal, LLC, Thomas Murch, James Moore and John Meeks under the terms of which Hidden Splendor agreed to pay an overriding royalty of $2.00 per ton on all coal mined from the Horizon Coal mine through 2016. On February 11, 2011, the parties to that agreement agreed to amend the term of the applicable royalty. Pursuant to that amendment, the term of the applicable royalty runs from January 2012 through December 2019.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

Professional services were rendered by MaloneBailey, LLP for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 and thru June 30, 2011. Hansen Barnett and Maxwell provided professional services for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. The aggregate fees for each of those years were as follows:


Description		2011		2010

Audit fee	$	177,863	$	160,181

Audit-related fees	$	--	$	--

Tax fees	$	--	$	--

All other fees	$	--	$	--

Audit fees for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011, and 2010 represent the aggregate fees billed for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements and review of financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or services that are normally provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements for those fiscal years.

Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The Board of Directors serves as the Audit Committee of the Company. The Board of Directors on an annual basis reviews audit and non-audit services performed by the independent auditor. All audit and non-audit services are pre-approved by the Board of Directors, which considers, among other things, the possible effect of the performance of such services on the auditors’ independence. The Board of Directors has considered the role of Hansen, Barnett and Maxwell in providing services to us for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 and MaloneBailey in providing services to us for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 and has concluded that such services are compatible with Hansen, Barnett and Maxwell’s and MaloneBailey’s independence as the Company’s auditors.

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

(a) The following exhibits are to be filed as part of this 10-K:


EXHIBIT NO.		IDENTIFICATION OF EXHIBIT

3.1		Articles of Incorporation (1)
3.2		Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation (7)
3.3		Articles of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation (1)
3.4		Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation (1)
3.5		Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation (1)
3.6		Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation (1)
3.7		Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation (1)
3.8		Amended and Restated Bylaws (5)
4.1		Form of Common Stock Certificate (5)
10.1		Exchange Agreement with Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. dated August 10, 2007 (2)
10.2		Loan Agreement by and among the Company and Denly ACI Partners, Ltd. And the Von Waaden 2004 Revocable Trust (“Loan Agreement”)(3)
10.3		Amendment no. 1 to Loan Agreement (4)
10.4		Amended and Restated Promissory Note (4)
10.5		Amendment no. 2 to Loan Agreement (5)
10.6		Amendment no. 4 to Loan Agreement (10)
10.7		Common Stock Purchase Agreement, dated October 9, 2009, by and between the Company and Denly Utah Coal , LLC (10)
10.8		Registration Rights Agreement, dated October 9, 2009, by and between the Company and Denly Utah Coal, LLC (10)
10.9		Royalty Agreement, dated October 9, 2009, by and between Hidden Splendor Resources, Inc. and Denly Utah Coal, LLC (10)
10.10		Form of Promissory Note dated October 9, 2009 (10)
10.11		Security Agreement, dated October 9, 2009, by and between the Company and Denly Utah Coal, LLC (10)
10.12		Loan Agreement, dated May 27, 2009, by and among the Company, Denly Utah Coal, LLC, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, LP, Thomas Murch, James Moore, and John Meeks (“May Loan Agreement”) (6)
10.13		Form of Promissory Note dated May 27, 2009 (6)

10.14		Registration Rights Agreement, dated May 27, 2009, by and among the Company, Denly Utah Coal, LLC, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, LP, Thomas Murch, James Moore, and John Meeks (6)
10.15		Royalty Agreement, May 27, 2009, by and among the Company, Denly Utah Coal, LLC, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, LP, Thomas Murch, James Moore, and John Meeks (“May Royalty Agreement”) (6)
10.16		Security Purchase Agreement, May 27, 2009, by and among the Company, Denly Utah Coal, LLC, John Thomas Bridge & Opportunity Fund, LP, Thomas Murch, James Moore, and John Meeks (6)
10.17		Amendment no. 1 to May Loan Agreement (10)
10.18		Amendment no. 1 to May Royalty Agreement (10)


10.19		Form of Amendment no. 1 to May 27, 2009 Promissory Note (10)
10.20		Form of Promissory Note, dated October 23, 2009 (10)
10.21		2008 Stock Option Plan (10)
10.22		Consulting Agreement with Newport Capital Consultants, Inc.(7)
10.23		Employment Agreement with Dan R. Baker (7)
10.24		Employment Agreement with Alexander H. Walker III (7)
14.1		Code of Ethics (8)
14.2		Whistleblower Policy (8)
21.1		Subsidiaries (8)
31.1		Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provided by Chief Executive Officer (9)
31.2		Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provided by Chief Financial Officer (9)
32.1		Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 provided by Chief Executive Officer (9)
32.2		Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 provided by Chief Financial Officer (9)

___________________________

(1)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1999 and filed March 22, 2000 and incorporated herein by reference.

(2)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 8-K on August 13, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference.

(3)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 8-K on September 16, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference.

(4)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 8-K on November 6, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference.

(5)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 8-K on December 9, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference.

(6)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 8-K on June 2, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference.

(7)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 8-K on December 28, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference.

(8)

Filed as an exhibit on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference.

(9)

Filed herewith.

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.



	AMERICA WEST RESOURCES, INC.



Date: May 16, 2012	By:	/s/ Dan R. Baker
		Dan R. Baker, Chief Executive Officer

Date: May 16, 2012	By:	/s/ Brent M. Davies
		Brent M. Davies, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.



Date: May 16, 2012	By:	/s/ Dan R. Baker
		Dan R. Baker, Director


Date: May 16, 2012	By:	/s/ Alexander H. Walker III
		Alexander H. Walker III, Director


Date: April 16, 2012	By:	/s/ Amanda Cardinalli
		Amanda Cardinalli, Director

AMERICA WEST RESOURCES, INC. 10-K