10KSB: Optional form for annual and transition reports of small business issuers [Section 13 or 15(d), not S-B Item 405]
Published on March 20, 2007
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-KSB
| x |
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF
1934:
For
the fiscal year ended: December 31,
2006
|
| o |
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF
1934:
For
the transition period from __________ to
____________
|
Commission
File Number: 000-28543
THORIUM
POWER, LTD.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Nevada
|
|
91-1975651
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification Number)
|
|
8300
Greensboro Drive, Suite 800
McLean,
Virginia 22102
|
|
|
(Address
of principal executive office and zip code)
|
|
|
703.918.4904
|
|
|
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
|
|
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common
Stock, par value $.001
|
Check
whether the issuer is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. o
Check
whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13
or
15(d)of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject
to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x
No
o
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-KSB or any
amendment to this Form 10-KSB. o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes
o
No
x
State
issuer's revenues for its most recent fiscal year: $0
The
aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by
non-affiliates of the registrant as of March 2, 2007 was $57,097,275.
The
number of shares of the registrant's common stock outstanding as of March 2,
2007: 297,221,116 shares.
Documents
Incorporated by Reference: Part III (Items 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14) incorporates
by
reference portions of the Registrant’s Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of
Stockholders, which will be filed not later than 120 days after December 31,
2006.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
PART
I
|
3
|
|||
|
Item
1.
|
DESCRIPTION
OF BUSINESS.
|
3
|
||
|
Item
2.
|
DESCRIPTION
OF PROPERTY.
|
13
|
||
|
Item
3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS.
|
13
|
||
|
Item
4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
|
13
|
||
|
PART
II
|
13
|
|||
|
Item
5.
|
MARKET
FOR COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND SMALL BUSINESS
ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
|
13
|
||
|
Item
6.
|
MANAGEMENT'S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS.
|
14
|
||
|
Item
7.
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
19
|
||
|
Item
8.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE.
|
19
|
||
|
Item
8A.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES.
|
19
|
||
|
Item
8B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION.
|
20
|
||
|
PART
III
|
20
|
|||
|
Item
13.
|
EXHIBITS.
|
20
|
2
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
Certain
statements contained in this report under “Item 1—Business,” “Item
6—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations,” “Item 9—Directors and Officers of the Registrant” and “Item
10—Executive Compensation” including, without limitation, those concerning our
liquidity and capital resources, contain forward-looking statements within
the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 concerning
our
operations; financial condition; management forecasts; liquidity; anticipated
growth; the economy; future economic performance; future acquisitions and
dispositions; potential and contingent liabilities; management’s plans; taxes;
and the development and utilization of our intellectual property. Because such
statements involve risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially
from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These
statements may be preceded by, followed by or include the words “believes,”
“expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “estimates” or similar
expressions.
Forward-looking
statements are not guarantees of performance and by their nature are subject
to
inherent risks and uncertainties. We caution you therefore that you should
not
rely on these forward-looking statements. You should understand the risks and
uncertainties discussed in the section on “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this
report, could affect our future results and could cause those results or other
outcomes to differ materially from those expressed or implied in our
forward-looking statements.
Any
forward-looking information contained in this report speaks only as of the
date
of the report. Factors or events may emerge from time to time and it is not
possible for us to predict all of them. We undertake no obligation to update
or
revise any forward-looking statements to reflect new information, changed
circumstances or unanticipated events.
When
used
in this report, the terms “Thorium Power,” “Company,” “we,” “our,” and “us”
refer to Thorium Power, Ltd. and its wholly-owned subsidiary Thorium Power,
Inc.
(“Thorium Power, Inc.”).
PART
I
Item
1. DESCRIPTION
OF BUSINESS.
General
Overview
On
October 6, 2006, we acquired Thorium Power, Inc. through a merger transaction.
Thorium Power, Inc. was incorporated on January 8, 1992. Thorium Power, Inc.
has
patented proprietary nuclear fuel designs for use in existing commercial nuclear
power plants. The merger was accounted for as a reverse merger and Thorium
Power, Inc. is being treated as the accounting acquiror.
As
discussed in more detail below, in connection with the merger, we changed our
line of business. This new line of business, which is now our only business
line, is research and development of proprietary nuclear fuel designs for use
in
nuclear power plants. We began to shift our focus to this business in
anticipation of the merger with Thorium Power, Inc. and, upon completion of
the
merger, this business is conducted through both Thorium Power, Inc. and the
Company. Our historical business preceding the merger was mineral exploration
which has been phased out completely and all operations of the Company now
revolve around Thorium Power, Inc.’s proprietary
nuclear fuel designs, although the Company maintains ownership of mineral
rights.
We
are
primarily engaged in the development of proprietary nuclear fuel designs which
we intend ultimately to introduce for sale into three markets: (1) nuclear
fuel
designs for use in commercial nuclear power plants, (2) nuclear fuel designs
for
reactor-grade plutonium disposition, and (3) nuclear fuel designs for
weapons-grade plutonium disposition. These fuel designs are primarily for use
in
existing or future VVER-1000 light water reactors. We have also been conducting
research and development relating to a variant of these nuclear fuel designs
for
use in existing pressurized water reactors (PWR).
Our
future customers may include nuclear fuel fabricators and/or nuclear power
plants, and/or the U.S. or foreign governments.
To
date,
our operations have been devoted primarily to the development and demonstration
of our nuclear fuel designs, developing strategic relationships within and
outside of the nuclear power industry, securing political and financial support
from the U.S. and Russian governments, the filing of patent applications and
related administrative functions. We do not currently have any revenues from
our
activities in this area and expect that we will not generate licensing revenues
from this business for several years, until our fuel designs can be fully tested
and demonstrated and we obtain the proper approvals to use our nuclear fuel
designs in nuclear reactors. Future revenues could be generated through the
licensing of our technology and also by providing other services in the nuclear
power industry. Accordingly, we prepare our financial statements as a
development stage company in accordance with FASB Statement No. 7, “Accounting
and Reporting by Development Stage Enterprises.”
Corporate
History
We
were
incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada on February 2, 1999. During
the period from inception until October 6, 2006 we were engaged in businesses
other than our current business. On October 6, 2006, we acquired Thorium Power,
Inc. in a merger transaction and changed our name to Thorium Power, Ltd. At
that
time, our operations became the operations of Thorium Power Inc.
3
The
Nuclear Fuel Design Business Story
Before
World War II, a then young professor Dr. Edward Teller taught a student named
Alvin Radkowsky. Dr. Teller later became one of the most prominent nuclear
weapons designers, at the Manhattan Project, and then a lead developer of the
hydrogen bomb. Dr. Radkowsky, who never worked on bombs, was the scientific
leader of the teams that developed the nuclear reactors that propel submarines
and other ships, as well as the first commercial nuclear power
plant.
In
1948,
H.G. Rickover, who would later be known as Admiral Rickover, proposed the
creation of a U.S. nuclear-powered naval fleet. Admiral Rickover believed that
the advantages of using nuclear power to propel naval vessels would include
the
ability of submarines to stay under water for longer periods of time making
detection more difficult. Submarines and surface ships, including aircraft
carriers, powered by nuclear generators, could also enter combat areas without
any need to refuel, obviating the need for refueling tankers to be sent into
war
zones. Admiral Rickover’s dream had many disbelievers. The idea, which at the
time seemed grandiose, would require the design of a nuclear reactor that could
fit into a relatively small space within a naval vessel.
By
this
time, Dr. Teller was one of the most prominent names in physics. When asked
by
Dr. Teller for a recommendation for Admiral Rickover’s project, Teller referred
Dr. Radkowsky, his former student. In 1948 Admiral Rickover hired Dr. Radkowsky
as the first Chief Scientist of the Naval Reactors programs. Dr. Radkowsky
held
that position from the program’s founding in 1948 until he retired from the
program in 1972.
In
July
1951, the United States Congress authorized the construction of the world’s
first nuclear powered submarine. Two and a half years later, on January 21,
1954, First Lady Mamie Eisenhower broke the traditional bottle of champagne
across the bow of the ship, that had been named the Nautilus, as it slid into
the Thames River in Groton, Connecticut, as the world’s first nuclear powered
ship. Dr. Radkowsky was the Chief Scientist for the Naval Reactors project
that
designed the nuclear power plant of that ship, and all other nuclear powered
naval vessels produced during his tenure. The Nautilus shattered all submerged
speed and distance records for naval vessels.
In
1953,
President Eisenhower asked Admiral Rickover to work on a project that later
became known as Atoms for Peace. The project involved the design of the first
commercial nuclear power plant on land that could generate electricity. Dr.
Radkowsky was asked to be the lead to design the reactor. The reactor was built
just outside Pittsburgh, in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, and it began operating
on December 2, 1957. It was in operation until October 1982. The groundbreaking
for the plant was held in May 1954, with President Eisenhower in attendance,
and
on May 26, 1958, President Eisenhower opened the plant as the cornerstone of
his
Atoms for Peace program and marked the beginning of the commercial nuclear
power
industry. The Shippingport reactor was a light water breeder reactor, and in
many ways would be the prototype of all commercial nuclear power plants to
follow. Dr. Radkowsky’s name was on key patents as the inventor of the reactor,
including the invention of key technologies, without which commercial nuclear
power or nuclear propulsion of ships would not be practical. Dr. Radkowsky
also
designed a thorium-based fuel, in a novel seed-and-blanket configuration, as
the
original fuel for this first nuclear power plant.
In
1983,
Dr. Edward Teller contacted Alvin Radkowsky to encourage Dr. Radkowsky to
develop a nuclear fuel that could work in the world’s existing commercial
nuclear power plants, but that would not produce nuclear weapons-usable
plutonium. Dr. Teller encouraged Dr. Radkowsky to further develop the
thorium-based fuels that had been used at the Shippingport reactor, but in
an
effort to optimize the non-proliferation benefits of thorium-based fuels. Dr.
Teller was concerned that plutonium taken from spent fuels could be used to
create nuclear weapons. Thereafter, Dr. Radkowsky immediately began working
on
nuclear fuel designs using thorium.
In
1991,
Dr. Radkowsky contacted Seth Grae, our Chief Executive Officer, and asked Mr.
Grae to assist him in the development of a company that could create and exploit
these fuel designs. At the time, Mr. Grae was a business attorney and Dr.
Radkowsky had heard of Mr. Grae’s work with emerging companies and asked Mr.
Grae to assist in the establishment of a new company that would later become
Thorium Power, Inc. In the 1980s, while in law school, Mr. Grae had represented
Soviet refuseniks, who had been scientists at nuclear institutes in Russia,
on a
pro bono basis. Mr. Grae was interested in high technology development and
international cooperation in technology development. Mr. Grae’s father, Joel
Grae, met Dr. Radkowsky soon thereafter in New York, and Joel Grae and Dr.
Radkowsky founded Radkowsky Thorium Power on January 8, 1992 to develop Dr.
Radkowsky’s technology.
In
1993,
Thorium Power, Inc., became one of the first Western companies to have
discussions with the Russian Kurchatov Institute, where the Soviet Union’s first
atomic bomb had been developed, and much of its nuclear reactor technology
had
been developed. In 1995, Thorium Power’s project at the Kurchatov Institute
became one of the first recipients of a grant from the US Department of Energy
for nuclear work in Russia. Since its founding in 1992 until its acquisition
by
us in October 2006, Thorium Power, Inc. has been a privately held company
developing the nuclear fuel designs originally invented by Dr. Alvin
Radkowsky.
4
The
Nuclear Power Industry
Presently,
nuclear power provides approximately 7% of the world’s energy, including 17% of
the world’s electricity. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency,
there are over 440 nuclear power plants in operation today, mostly light water
reactors, with the most dominant types being pressurized water reactors (PWRs),
boiling water reactors (BWRs) and VVER reactors (a Russian equivalent of
PWRs).
Nuclear
power generators, which convert nuclear energy into electricity, are the largest
consumers of products and services within the nuclear power industry. The
product and service providers that service these customers include both large
vertically-integrated nuclear companies that provide a complete array of reactor
services and niche providers. These services include reactor design,
construction, servicing, and decommissioning; front-end nuclear fuel services
(nuclear fuel materials procurement and processing; nuclear fuel design (our
market of interest) and fuel fabrication); back-end nuclear fuel services (spent
fuel management and reprocessing), transportation, and various other services.
Today
the
vast majority of commercial nuclear power plants around the world use uranium
oxide fuel. This uranium oxide fuel is comprised of uranium enriched up to
5% by
uranium-235, with the remaining 95% or more being uranium-238. During
irradiation inside a reactor core, some of the uranium-238 isotopes capture
a
neutron and become plutonium-239, a long-lived fissionable element that can
be
used to make nuclear weapons. Each year, an average 1,000-megawatt PWR produces
over 200 kilograms of reactor-grade plutonium in its spent fuel. The
plutonium-bearing spent fuel may be buried in a repository such as the facility
being constructed by the US Department of Energy facility at Yucca Mountain,
Nevada, recycled so the plutonium is “burned” as nuclear fuel, or used to make
nuclear weapons.
All
of
the above-mentioned options for the disposition of plutonium-bearing spent
fuel
raise environment, safety, or non-proliferation issues. One recycling
technology, used by a small number of nuclear power plants, is mixed oxide
(MOX)
fuel, a mixture of uranium oxide and recovered plutonium oxide. MOX fuel has
never been used in Russian VVER reactors and, due to its higher cost, MOX fuel
has never caught on among most nuclear power generators, which prefer the ‘once
through” fuel cycle, with spent fuel being stored at a high-level waste
repository. MOX fuel, in general occupies only a portion of the reactor core,
with the remaining portion containing conventional uranium fuel assemblies
which
generate weapons-usable plutonium in spent fuel.
Competition
Our
market of interest is the supply of thorium-based nuclear fuel designs. The
world's nuclear fuel fabrication market is controlled by a handful of large
nuclear fuel fabricators which develop proprietary uranium-based fuel designs.
The key world nuclear fuel market players are, in order of magnitude of fuel
fabrication: (1) Areva of France, owned predominantly by the French government,
(2) Westinghouse, predominantly owned by Toshiba, (3) Global Nuclear Fuel,
a
joint venture of three companies, General Electric, Hitachi and Toshiba, and
(4)
Russian fuel companies supplying fuel primarily to Russian-type
reactors.
Each
of
these companies has its own fuel design capabilities and also has the ability
to
fabricate nuclear fuels. Thorium Power, on the other hand, only intends to
provide fuel design services. We do not intend to fabricate fuels. Accordingly,
these companies will be our competitors in that they may design alternatives
to
our fuel designs, however, they will also be potential licensees of our fuel
designs and may fabricate nuclear fuels using our fuel design technology.
We
face
different competition for each of our three markets for our proprietary nuclear
fuel designs:
Thorium/uranium
fuel
Management
believes that our thorium/uranium nuclear fuel will offer significant advantages
over conventional uranium fuel, including: (1) enhanced proliferation resistance
of spent fuel, (2) improved reactor safety, (3) significantly reduced volume,
weight and long-term radio-toxicity of spent fuel, and (4) cost savings in
the
back-end operations (spent fuel management) of the nuclear fuel cycle. We expect
the front-end costs (cost of fresh thorium/uranium fuel) to be cost competitive
with conventional uranium fuel. At the same time, the back-end (waste handling)
costs are expected to be less than that for conventional uranium fuel due to
significantly reduced volume and weight of spent thorium/uranium
fuel.
The
primary barrier to industry adoption of our fuel designs is that the entire
industry infrastructure is based on uranium fuel with enrichments of 3-5%.
Our
designs require plutonium or more highly enriched uranium (up to 20%). Although
the designs can be accommodated by most existing reactors, there are no existing
fuel fabrication facilities licensed and capable of fabricating commercial
lots
of fuel containing the more highly enriched uranium and plutonium. There are
also transportation and logistics issues with the fuel that must be addressed.
The
primary marketing strategy that we intend to pursue with respect to our
thorium/uranium fuel product is to form an alliance or alliances with existing
nuclear fuel fabricators, to which we would license our intellectual property
rights to our thorium/uranium nuclear fuel. An alternative marketing strategy
that we may pursue is to form an international consortium that may involve
government and/or private sector entities to build “green field” nuclear fuel
fabrication facilities. In that case, we would license our intellectual property
rights to the thorium/uranium fuel to the consortium that would own and/or
operate the new nuclear fuel fabrication facilities.
5
Thorium/reactor-grade
plutonium disposing fuel
This
fuel
technology is designed to provide an effective means to dispose of separated
reactor-grade plutonium. As of 2004, there were 274 metric tons of separated
reactor-grade plutonium (equivalent of 15,000-20,000 nuclear weapons) stored
at
various locations around the world. According to No
Future Plutonium?
by Spiez
Laboratory, The Swiss NBC Defense Establishment, dated November 2002, another
1,400 metric tons of this potentially weapons useable material are embedded
in
spent fuel and stored at hundreds of commercial reactor sites around the
globe.
Management
believes that our thorium/reactor-grade plutonium disposing fuel technology
may
offer a more economically viable way to dispose of separated reactor-grade
plutonium than the mixed oxide (MOX) fuel or long-term storage alternatives.
Currently, some nuclear reactor operators, primarily in the European Union
and
Japan, have their spent fuel reprocessed and re-used in nuclear reactors as
MOX
fuel. We expect that our thorium/reactor grade plutonium disposing fuel will
be
less expensive compared to MOX or conventional uranium fuel, assuming that
the
separated reactor-grade plutonium is available to us at no cost.
The
long-term storage alternative faces substantial opposition from the communities
chosen as sites, such as Yucca Mountain in Nevada, on grounds of environmental
and safety risks. Also, the long life of plutonium means that the stored spent
fuel will be a proliferation risk for centuries. The United States and many
countries have been committed to the long-term storage alternative for a number
of years. In early 2006, in announcing its Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
(GNEP), the United States announced that it would work with other countries
to
develop proliferation-resistant environmentally compatible technologies and
processes to promote recycling and reduce the need for storage in long term
repositories.
Management
believes that benefits offered by thorium/reactor-grade plutonium fuel designs
include enhanced proliferation resistance, improved reactor safety, and
significantly reduced volume, weight and long-term radio-toxicity of spent
fuel.
Our
marketing strategy with respect to thorium/reactor-grade plutonium disposing
fuel is to educate reactor operators, who presently own stockpiles of separated
reactor-grade plutonium and are forced to pay ongoing plutonium storage fees,
about the benefits offered by this fuel technology to convince them to recycle
these plutonium stockpiles in their reactors using thorium/reactor-grade
plutonium disposing fuel. This strategy is attuned with GNEP and the strategies
of countries that wish to recycle but are not committed to MOX
technology.
Thorium/weapons-grade
plutonium disposing fuel
This
fuel
design (the Radkowsky Thorium Plutonium Incinerator, or RTPI) was developed
to
meet the needs of the U.S.-Russia plutonium disposition program. It is the
policy of those countries to eliminate their extensive stockpiles of surplus
weapons grade plutonium. In 2000, the U.S. and Russia signed a bi-lateral
agreement, committing each country to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus
weapons-grade plutonium. Originally, a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel technology,
promoted by Areva, was selected by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for
both
the United States and Russia to accomplish this mission. However, over the
past several years, the implementation of the 2000 plutonium disposition
agreement has been delayed due to political, financial, and technical issues
experienced by the MOX program. During the fiscal years from 1999-2005,
Congress appropriated a total of over $3 billion for the MOX program. Despite
such significant funding levels, the MOX program has experienced substantial
schedule slippage and has made little progress since 1999 toward accomplishing
the goal of plutonium disposition. In the consideration of FY07 appropriations,
several members of Congress and Committees have publicly expressed doubts the
MOX program should continue.
Management
believes that our thorium/weapons-grade plutonium disposing fuel could offer
a
faster, cheaper, and more effective means to dispose of excess quantities of
weapons-grade plutonium by “burning” it using the RTPI fuel design in existing
VVER nuclear power plants in Russia (a similar design may be usable in the
US
and other Western countries). We plan to educate government officials and key
decision-makers to convince them to use this technology for the plutonium
disposition mission.
Sources
and Availability of Raw Materials
We
are a
fuel designer that intends to license its technology to fuel fabricators.
Accordingly, we do not plan to utilize any raw materials in the conduct of
our
operations. However, the fuel fabricators which potentially will license our
fuel designs in the future will need thorium and uranium to fabricate
thorium-based fuels.
6
All
of
our nuclear fuel designs require both thorium and uranium in the oxide form
which are the main raw materials for blanket rods. The seed rods can contain
either enriched uranium or plutonium metals mixed with zirconium.
The
current demand for thorium is very low. Thorium is sometimes used in government
flares, camping lantern wicks and in other products in small quantities. If
thorium based fuels become commercially accepted in the nuclear power industry,
there would be a significant increase in the demand for thorium. According
to
the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, thorium is over three times
more naturally abundant than uranium and is found in large quantities in
monazite sands in many countries, including, Australia, India, the United States
of America, and China. Several companies that process monazite sands to extract
rare earth minerals for use in other markets have stockpiled thorium as a
byproduct with no significant current market. Currently, there is no large
supplier of thorium.
Uranium
and zirconium are available to the fuel fabricators from various suppliers
at
market driven prices. Weapons-grade plutonium, which would be used to fabricate
Thorium Power’s weapons grade plutonium disposing fuel, is generally
unavailable. However, governments that have developed nuclear weapons
capabilities could use our fuel designs to dispose of their excess weapons-grade
plutonium. Reactor-grade plutonium is available in Europe, Russia and Japan
from
reprocessed spent fuel. The transfer and use of reactor-grade plutonium is
highly regulated.
Dependence
Upon Government Support and Cooperation
Management
believes that deployment and commercialization of the thorium/uranium and
reactor-grade plutonium disposing fuel designs can be largely completed without
direct government support. These fuel designs are more dependent on interest
in
these fuels within the commercial nuclear power industry.
Successful
development and deployment of our thorium/weapons-grade plutonium disposing
fuel
technology, however, is dependent upon government support. This fuel design
is
being developed for application in the U.S.-Russia plutonium disposition mission
that is a government program run by the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its Russian government
counterparts pursuant to the plutonium disposition agreement the United States
and Russia entered into in 2000. The total cost to carry out the plutonium
disposition mission will be in the billions of dollars. To date, the plutonium
disposition program in the United States and Russia has been funded primarily
by
the U.S. government. The G-8 countries have made funding commitments for
approximately $800 million toward the Russian part of the plutonium disposition
program but have not yet provided the funds.
In
the
fiscal year 2004 federal budget cycle, the U.S. Congress appropriated $4 million
for testing and evaluation of our thorium/weapons-grade plutonium disposing
fuel
technology for the plutonium disposition mission in Russia. Additional funding
support is required from the U.S. and other governments to complete the
development, testing, demonstration and deployment of our thorium/weapons-grade
plutonium disposing fuel.
Intellectual
Property
Our
nuclear fuel technologies are protected by several U.S. and international
patents. Our current patent portfolio is comprised of the following
patents:
U.S.
patents:
l Patent
No. 6,026,136, a seed-blanket unit fuel assembly for a nuclear
reactor
l Patent
No. 5,949,837, a nuclear reactor having a core including a plurality of
seed-blanket units
l Patent
No. 5,864,593, a method for operating a nuclear reactor core comprised of
at
least first and second groups of seed-blanket units
l Patent
No. 5,737,375, a nuclear reactor having a core including a plurality of
seed-blanket units
The
U.S.
patents expire August 16, 2014.
International
patents:
l Russia
-
Patent No. 2,176,826
l Russia
-
Patent No. 2,222,837
l South
Korea - Patent No. 301,339
l South
Korea - Patent No. 336,214
7
l
China
-
Patent No. ZL 96196267.4
The
international patents expire August 16, 2014.
Presently,
we are executing a strategy aimed at expanding our intellectual property
portfolio.
Regulation
No
safety
regulatory approval is required to design thorium-based nuclear fuels, although
certain technology transfers may be subject to national and international export
controls. However, the testing, fabrication and use of nuclear fuels by our
future partners and licensees are heavily regulated. The Kurchatov Institute
and
other locations where our fuel designs may be initially tested require
governmental approvals from the host country’s nuclear regulatory authority to
test fuel in research reactors and other nuclear testing facilities. The
Kurchatov Institute has obtained such approvals from the Russian nuclear
regulatory authorities for the ongoing tests of our fuel designs that are taking
place at Russian facilities. Nuclear fuel fabricators, which will potentially
fabricate fuel using our technology under licenses from us, are similarly
regulated. Nuclear power plants that may utilize the fuel produced by these
fuel
fabricators require specific licenses relating to possession and use of nuclear
materials as well as numerous other governmental approvals for the ownership
and
operation of nuclear power plants.
Employees
As
of
December 31, 2006, we had 7 employees, 5 of
which
were full-time employees. We believe that our relationship with our employees
is
satisfactory.
We
use
consultants with specific skills to assist with various business functions
including evaluation, finance, due diligence, acquisition initiatives, corporate
governance, business development, research and development and government
relations.
Risk
Factors
Business
Risks
OUR
LIMITED OPERATING HISTORY MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO JUDGE OUR
PROSPECTS.
We
are a
development stage company. Our fuel design patents and technology have not
been
commercially used and we have not received any royalty or sales revenue. We
are
subject to the risks, expenses and problems frequently encountered by companies
in the early stages of development.
OUR
FUEL
DESIGNS HAVE NEVER BEEN TESTED IN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL REACTOR AND ACTUAL
FUEL
PERFORMANCE, AS WELL AS THE WILLINGNESS OF COMMERCIAL REACTOR
OPERATORS
AND FUEL
FABRICATORS
TO ADOPT
A NEW FUEL DESIGN, IS UNCERTAIN.
Nuclear
power research and development entails significant technological risk. New
designs must be fabricated, tested and licensed before market opportunities
will
exist. Our fuel designs are still in the research and development stage and
while irradiation testing in a test reactor in Russia (which mimics the
operating characteristics of an actual commercial reactor) and thermal-hydraulic
experiments have been ongoing for several years, the fuel technology is yet
to
be demonstrated in an existing commercial reactor. We will not be certain about
the ability of the fuel we design to perform in actual commercial reactors
until
we are able to demonstrate our fuel designs. We
will
also have to establish a relationship with a fuel fabricator to actually produce
fuel using our designs. If
our
fuel designs do not perform as anticipated in commercial use, we will
not
realize revenues from licensing or other use of our fuel designs.
In
addition, there are several technical challenges involved in commercializing
thorium based fuels. Some of the technical challenges with our technology
identified by the experts at Russian Research Centre Kurchatov Institute, an
independent contractor that is closely affiliated with the government of the
Russian Federation, Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, and the International
Atomic Energy Agency (“IAEA”), include:
|
l
|
Fuel
fabrication:
The relatively high melting point of thorium oxide will require fuel
pellet manufacturing techniques that are different from those currently
used for uranium pellets.
|
|
l
|
Fuel
fabrication:
Our metallic seed fuel rod designs are greater than 3 meters long
compared
to conventional Russian metallic icebreaker fuel rods that we understand
are approximately 1 meter long. The longer rods will require new
equipment
and experience making longer
extrusions.
|
|
l
|
Fuel
design:
Our “seed-and-blanket” fuel assembly design has a detachable central part
which is not in conventional fuel
designs.
|
8
|
l
|
Fuel
design:
Some of our fuel designs include plutonium-zirconium fuel rods which
will
operate in a soluble boron environment. Current reactor operating
experience is with uranium-zirconium fuel in a boron-free
environment.
|
|
l
|
Fuel
use:
Our fuel is expected to be capable of producing more gigawatt days
per ton
of fuel than is allowed by current reactor licenses, so to gain full
economic benefits, reactor operators will have to obtain regulatory
approval.
|
|
l
|
Fuel
use:
The thorium-uranium oxide blanket section in our fuels is expected
to
produce energy economically for up to 9 years in the reactor core.
Conventional uranium fuel demonstrates the cladding can remain
corrosion-free for up to 5 years. Testing is needed to prove corrosion
resistance for the longer residence time.
|
|
l
|
Fuel
reprocessing:
The IAEA has identified a number of ways that reprocessing spent
thorium
fuel will require technologies different from existing uranium fuel
reprocessing. Management’s current marketing plans do not assume or depend
on the ability to reprocess and recycle spent fuel. Management expects
spent thorium fuel will go into long term storage. This is current
U.S.
government policy for all spent commercial nuclear fuel.
|
OUR
FUEL
DESIGNS DIFFER FROM FUELS CURRENTLY LICENSED AND USED BY COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR
POWER PLANTS. AS A RESULT, THE LICENSING AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR OUR FUELS
MAY
BE DELAYED AND MADE MORE COSTLY, AND INDUSTRY ACCEPTANCE OF OUR FUELS MAY BE
HAMPERED.
Our
fuel
designs differ significantly in some aspects from the fuel licensed and used
today by commercial nuclear power plants. Some of the differences between our
fuels and those currently used include:
|
l
|
use
of thorium and uranium oxide mix instead of only uranium
oxide,
|
|
l
|
higher
uranium enrichment level,
|
|
l
|
seed-and
blanket fuel assembly design integrating thorium and
uranium,
|
|
l
|
high
burn-up levels of seed and blanket,
|
|
l
|
use
of metallic seed rods,
|
|
l
|
longer
residence time of the blanket in the reactor, and
|
|
l
|
the
ability of some of our fuels to dispose of reactor-grade plutonium
and/or
weapons-grade plutonium through the use of new fuel designs and in
reactors that have never used plutonium-bearing fresh
fuels.
|
These
differences will likely result in more prolonged and extensive review by the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other nuclear licensing authorities
and
customers. Also, the nuclear industry may be hesitant to switch to another
fuel
with little or no history of successful commercial use because of the need
for
additional engineering and testing with no guarantee of success as well as
investor reluctance to invest in a new technology when viable existing
technologies are available.
OUR
PLANS
TO DEVELOP OUR THORIUM/WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM DISPOSING FUEL ARE DEPENDENT
UPON
U.S. GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND SUPPORT. WITHOUT SUCH SUPPORT, WE ARE UNLIKELY
TO BE
ABLE TO SERVE THIS MARKET.
Our
thorium/weapons-grade plutonium disposing fuel design is highly dependent upon
U.S. and perhaps other government funding and acceptance as a technology
appropriate to eliminate U.S. and Russian stockpiles of surplus weapons-grade
plutonium. In the past, we have faced resistance from some offices within the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) that support other alternative plutonium
disposing technology, particularly mixed plutonium uranium oxide (MOX) fuel
designs. The Company has spent a significant amount of funds to gain commercial
and market acceptance for its fuel designs. Over the last two years we have
spent in excess of $500,000, in the aggregate, including both cash and the
fair
market value of equity compensation, on third party service providers in
connection with these government relations initiatives. We expect to continue
spending additional resources on these efforts to gain acceptance. These efforts
may not result in funding for our Company or government acceptance of our
technologies for plutonium disposition or other government-funded
projects.
WE
DO NOT
HAVE RIGHTS TO ALL OF THE DESIGNS, PROCESSES AND METHODOLOGIES THAT ARE USED
OR
MAY BE USED OR USEFUL IN OUR BUSINESS IN THE FUTURE. IF WE ARE UNABLE TO OBTAIN
SUCH RIGHTS ON REASONABLE TERMS IN THE FUTURE, OUR ABILITY TO EXPLOIT OUR
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MAY BE LIMITED.
9
Dr.
Alvin
Radkowsky invented the thorium fuel technology that we are developing. Upon
founding Thorium Power in 1992, Dr. Radkowsky assigned all of his rights in
the
intellectual property relating to such fuel designs to Thorium Power, Inc.
Thorium Power, Inc. then filed patent applications in the United States and
other countries and the patents were issued and are held solely by our Company.
We are currently conducting fuel assembly design work in Russia through Russian
Research Centre Kurchatov Institute, an independent contractor that is closely
affiliated with the government of the Russian Federation and other nuclear
institutes. We do not have any licensing or other rights to acquire or utilize
certain designs, methodologies or processes required for fuel assemblies. If
we
desire to utilize such processes or methodologies in the future, we must obtain
a license or other right to use such technologies from the Kurchatov Institute
and other Russian entities that performed work on our project. If we are unable
to obtain such a license or other right on terms that the Kurchatov Institute
or
other Russian entities deem to be reasonable, then we may not be able to fully
exploit our intellectual property and may be hindered in the sale of products
and services.
WE
RELY
UPON CERTAIN MEMBERS OF OUR SENIOR MANAGEMENT, INCLUDING SETH GRAE, AND THE
LOSS
OF MR. GRAE OR ANY OF OUR SENIOR MANAGEMENT WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON
THORIUM POWER.
Our
success depends upon certain members of our senior management, including Seth
Grae. Mr. Grae’s knowledge of the nuclear power industry, his network of key
contacts within that industry and in governments and, in particular, his
expertise in the potential markets for the company’s technologies, is critical
to the implementation of our business model. Mr. Grae is likely to be a
significant factor in our future growth and success. The loss of the service
of
Mr. Grae would have a material adverse effect on our Company. We do not have
key
man insurance policies relating to Seth Grae or any other key individuals and
do
not anticipate obtaining any such insurance.
THE
PRICE
OF FOSSIL FUELS OR URANIUM MAY FALL, WHICH WOULD REDUCE THE INTEREST IN THORIUM
FUEL BY REDUCING ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES OF UTILIZING THORIUM BASED FUELS AND
ADVERSELY AFFECT THE MARKET PROSPECTS FOR OUR FUEL DESIGNS.
Coal,
uranium and crude oil prices are currently at historically high levels.
Management believes the high cost of these energy sources has resulted in
increased interest in other sources of energy such as thorium. If prices of
traditional energy sources fall, then the demand that the company expects for
thorium based fuels may not materialize. A decrease in demand for thorium based
fuels would negatively affect our future operating results.
OUR
RESEARCH OPERATIONS ARE CONDUCTED PRIMARILY IN RUSSIA, MAKING THEM SUBJECT
TO
POLITICAL UNCERTAINTIES RELATING TO RUSSIA AND U.S.-RUSSIA
RELATIONS.
Substantially
all of our present research activities are in Russia. Our research operations
are subject to various political risks and uncertainties inherent in the country
of Russia. If U.S.-Russia relations deteriorate, the Russian government may
decide to scale back or even cease completely its cooperation with the United
States on various international projects, including in the plutonium disposition
program and nuclear power technology development programs. If this happened,
our
research and development program in Russia could be scaled back or shut down,
which could have a significant adverse impact on our ability to execute our
business model. Furthermore, the Russian institutes engaged in the Thorium
Power
project are highly regulated and, in many instances, are controlled by the
Russian government. The Russian government could decide that the nuclear
scientists engaged in our project in Russia or testing facilities employed
in
this project should be redirected to other high priority national projects
in
the nuclear sector which could lead to delays or have other significant adverse
impact on our project.
WE
SERVE
THE NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY, WHICH IS HIGHLY REGULATED.
The
nuclear power industry is a highly regulated industry. We intend to license
our
fuel designs to nuclear fuel fabricators, which would, in turn, sell the
thorium-based nuclear fuel that would be fabricated using our intellectual
property to nuclear generating companies. All nuclear companies are subject
to
the jurisdiction of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or its
foreign equivalents, with respect to the operation of nuclear reactors, fuel
cycle facilities and handling of nuclear materials and technologies. The U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and its foreign equivalents, subject nuclear
facilities to continuing review and regulation covering, among other things,
operations, maintenance, emergency planning, security and environmental and
radiological aspects of those facilities. These nuclear regulatory bodies may
modify, suspend or revoke operating licenses and impose civil penalties for
failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations such as the Atomic Energy
Act, the regulations under such Act or the terms of such licenses. Possession
and use of nuclear materials, including thorium-based nuclear fuel, would
require the approval of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission or
its
counterparts around the world and would be subject to monitoring by
international agencies.
PUBLIC
OPPOSITION TO NUCLEAR POWER COULD INCREASE.
Successful
execution of our business model is dependent upon public support for nuclear
power in the United States and other countries. Nuclear power faces strong
opposition from certain competitive energy sources, individuals and
organizations. The occurrence of another major, Chernobyl-like, nuclear accident
could have a significant adverse effect on public opinion about nuclear power
and the favorable regulatory climate needed to introduce new nuclear
technologies. Strong public opposition could hinder the construction of new
nuclear power plants and lead to early shut-down of the existing nuclear power
plants. Furthermore, nuclear fuel fabrication and the use of new nuclear fuels
in reactors must be licensed by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
and equivalent foreign governmental authorities. The licensing process includes
public hearings in which opponents of the use of nuclear power might be able
to
cause the issuance of required licenses to be delayed or denied. In fact, since
the Chernobyl nuclear accident, no new nuclear power plant has been built and
opened in the United States.
10
MODIFICATIONS
TO EXISTING NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE AS WELL AS REACTORS MAY PROVE
TOO
EXTENSIVE OR COSTLY.
The
existing nuclear fuel cycle infrastructure is predominantly based on
low-enrichment uranium oxide fuels. Introduction of thorium based fuel designs,
which require relatively higher enriched uranium or plutonium as a source of
reactivity, into the existing nuclear fuel cycle supply chain would necessitate
certain changes to procedures, processes and equipment used by existing nuclear
fuel fabrication facilities and nuclear fuel transportation companies. In
addition, our nuclear fuel designs rely on fabrication technologies that in
certain material ways are different from the fabrication techniques presently
utilized by existing commercial fuel fabricators. In particular, our metallic
seed rods must be produced using a co-extrusion fabrication process that was
developed in Russia. Presently, most commercial nuclear fuel is produced using
a
pellet fabrication technology, whereby uranium oxide is packed into small
pellets that are stacked and sealed inside metallic tubes. The co-extrusion
fabrication technology involves extrusion of a single-piece solid fuel rod
from
a metallic matrix containing uranium or plutonium seed fuel. While we understand
that the co-extrusion fabrication process has been successfully used in Russia
for decades to produce one-meter long metallic nuclear fuel rods used in nuclear
reactors that propel Russian icebreakers, it must be upgraded and tested to
demonstrate its ability to produce longer metallic rods (approximately
3.5-meters long for Russian VVER-1000 reactors) so that our seed fuel can be
consistent with the standard length of fuel rods used in existing commercial
reactors. Full-size metallic fuel rods have not yet been produced using this
fabrication process, and there are no guarantees that this new fabrication
technology will be successful.
Deployment
of our nuclear fuel designs into existing commercial reactors may require
modifications to existing equipment, refueling and fuel handling procedures,
and
other processes utilized at existing nuclear power plants. The costs of such
modifications are difficult to ascertain. While one of our goals is to make
our
fuel designs as compatible as possible with the design of existing commercial
reactors in order to minimize the extent and cost of modifications that may
be
required, we may not be able to achieve compatibility sufficient to reduce
the
extent and costs of required modifications enough to make our fuel designs
economical for reactor operations.
OUR
NUCLEAR FUEL PROCESS IS DEPENDENT ON OUTSIDE SUPPLIERS OF NUCLEAR AND OTHER
MATERIALS.
Production
of fuel assemblies using our nuclear fuel designs is dependent on the ability
of
fuel fabricators to obtain supplies of thorium oxide for the “blanket” component
of our fuel assembly design. Fabricators will also need to obtain metal for
components, particularly zirconium. These materials are regulated and can be
difficult to obtain or may have unfavorable pricing terms. The inability of
fabricators to obtain these materials could have a material adverse effect
on
their ability to market fuel based on our technology.
WE
MAY BE
UNABLE TO PROTECT OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF RUSSIAN
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS.
Intellectual
property rights are evolving in Russia, trending towards international norms,
but are by no means fully developed. We work closely with the Kurchatov
Institute and other Russian institutes to develop some of our intellectual
property and so some of our intellectual property rights derive, or are affected
by, Russian intellectual property laws. If the application of these laws to
our
intellectual property rights proves inadequate, then the Company may not be
able
to fully avail itself of our intellectual property and our business model may
therefore be impeded.
Financial
Risks
WE
CONTINUE TO EXPERIENCE SIGNIFICANT OPERATING LOSSES.
We
have
never realized significant revenues or realized an operating profit from the
development of our proprietary nuclear fuel designs. Our acquisition of Thorium
Power, Inc. through the merger is being accounted for as a reverse merger and
Thorium Power, Inc. is being treated as the accounting acquirer. Since Thorium
Power, Inc.’s formation, its operating costs have exceeded its revenue in each
year. Thorium Power, Inc. incurred a net loss of approximately $11.7 million
for
the year ended December 31, 2006. Since Thorium Power, Inc.’s inception in 1992
to December 31, 2006 our operating costs have exceeded our revenues by
approximately $27 million, and we will continue to experience significant
operating losses in the future until we can demonstrate, deploy and
commercialize our proprietary nuclear fuel designs or pursue other growth
opportunities in the nuclear power industry. We may not be able to obtain or
maintain any level of revenues. If we are unsuccessful in these efforts, we
may
never achieve profitability.
11
OUR
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES ARE UNCERTAIN.
For
the
year ended December 31, 2006, we had a net loss of approximately $11.7 million.
At December 31, 2006, we had a working capital surplus of approximately $8.7
million. During the period from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006, we raised
gross proceeds of approximately $17,500,000 in private placement transactions.
While we expect these proceeds will meet our foreseeable needs in 2007, we
will
need to raise additional capital by way of an offering of equity securities,
an
offering of debt securities, or by obtaining financing through a bank or other
entity. If we need to obtain additional financing, that financing may not be
available or we may not be able to obtain that financing on terms acceptable
to
us. If additional funds are raised through the issuance of equity securities,
there may be a significant dilution in the value of our outstanding common
stock.
Risks
Relating to the Ownership of Our Securities
THERE
MAY BE VOLATILITY IN OUR STOCK PRICE, WHICH COULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT INVESTMENTS,
AND STOCKHOLDERS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RESELL THEIR SHARES AT OR ABOVE THE VALUE
THEY ORIGINALLY PURCHASED SUCH SHARES.
The
market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to
a
number of factors, some of which are beyond its control, including:
|
l
|
quarterly
variations in operating results;
|
|
|
|
|
l
|
changes
in financial estimates by securities analysts;
|
|
l
|
changes
in market valuations of other similar companies;
|
|
l
|
announcements
by us or its competitors of new products or of significant technical
innovations, contracts, receipt of (or failure to obtain) government
funding or support, acquisitions, strategic partnerships
or joint ventures;
|
|
l
|
additions
or departures of key personnel;
|
|
l
|
any
deviations in net sales or in losses from levels expected by securities
analysts or any reduction in political support from levels expected
by
securities analysts;
|
|
l
|
future
sales of common stock; and
|
|
l
|
results
of analyses of mining and resources
assets.
|
In
addition, the stock market has recently experienced extreme volatility that
has
often been unrelated to the performance of particular companies. These market
fluctuations may cause our stock price to fall regardless of its
performance.
BECAUSE
OUR SECURITIES TRADE ON THE OTC BULLETIN BOARD, THE ABILITY TO SELL SHARES
IN
THE SECONDARY MARKET MAY BE LIMITED.
The
shares of our common stock are quoted on the NASD OTC Bulletin Board. Because
our common stock currently trades on the OTC Bulletin Board, it is subject
to
the rules promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
which impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers that
sell
securities governed by these rules to persons other than established customers
and “accredited investors” (generally, individuals with a net worth in excess of
$1,000,000 or annual individual income exceeding $200,000 or $300,000 jointly
with their spouses). For such transactions, the broker-dealer must determine
whether persons that are not established customers or accredited investors
qualify under the rule for purchasing such securities and must receive that
person’s written consent to the transaction prior to sale. Consequently, these
rules may adversely effect the ability of purchasers to sell our securities
and
otherwise affect the trading market in our securities.
Because
our shares are deemed “penny stocks,” there may be difficulty selling them in
the secondary trading market. The Securities and Exchange Commission has adopted
regulations, which generally define a “penny stock” to be any equity security
that has a market price (as defined in the regulations) less than $5.00 per
share or with an exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain
exceptions. As our common stock falls within the definition of penny stock,
these regulations require the delivery, prior to any transaction involving
our
common stock, of a risk disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock market
and the risks associated with it. Disclosure is also required to be made about
compensation payable to both the broker-dealer and the registered representative
and current quotations for the securities. In addition, monthly statements
are
required to be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stocks.
The ability of broker/dealers to sell our common stock and the ability of
stockholders to sell our common stock in the secondary market would be limited.
As a result, the market liquidity for our common stock would be severely and
adversely affected.
12
Item
2. DESCRIPTION
OF PROPERTY.
We
are
obligated to pay approximately $10,000 per month for office rent and
approximately another $2,500 per month for other fees for the rented
office space located at 8300 Greensboro Drive, Suite 800, McLean, Virginia
22102. The space is used by our executives for administrative
purposes. The term of the lease expires for one office on April 30, 2007
and for the other offices in the summer of 2007.
Item
3. LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS.
From
time
to time, we may become involved in various lawsuits and legal proceedings which
arise in the ordinary course of business. However, litigation is subject to
inherent uncertainties, and an adverse result in these or other matters may
arise from time to time that may harm our business. We are currently not aware
of any such legal proceedings or claims that we believe will have a material
adverse affect on our business, financial condition or operating results.
Item
4.
SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
On
October 5, 2006, we held a Special Meeting of Stockholders at which a majority
of the stockholders of the Company approved certain amendments to the Company’s
Articles of Incorporation.
The
following table sets forth the matters voted upon at the meeting and the results
of the voting on each matter voted upon:
|
Matter
Voted Upon
|
Votes
For
|
Withheld
|
Votes
Against
|
Abstentions
|
Broker
Non-Votes
|
|||||||||||
|
(1)
To approve the Company’s Second Amended and Restated 2006 Stock
Plan
|
90,503,078
|
—
|
2,761,856
|
58,710
|
—
|
|||||||||||
|
(2)
To approve an amendment to the articles of incorporation of the Company
that increases the number of authorized common shares from 250,000,000
to
500,000,000
|
93,006,084
|
—
|
291,050
|
26,510
|
—
|
|||||||||||
|
(3)
To approve an amendment to the articles of incorporation of the Company
that changes the name of the Company to “Thorium Power,
Ltd.”
|
93,159,634
|
—
|
147,500
|
16,510
|
—
|
|||||||||||
|
(4)
To approve an amendment to the articles of incorporation of the Company
that increases the maximum number of directors that may be appointed
to
the Board of Directors from 5 to 15
|
91,883,014
|
—
|
253,160
|
1,187,470
|
—
|
|||||||||||
In
accordance with the terms set forth in the proxy statement related to the
solicitation of proxies for use at the Special Meeting, an abstention
from
voting was used for the purpose of establishing a quorum, and was considered
a
vote “against” a proposal. All of the above matters were approved by the
stockholders at the Special Meeting.
PART
II
Item
5. MARKET
FOR COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND SMALL BUSINESS ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
Market
Information
Our
common stock is listed and traded on the OTC Bulletin Board. The following
table
sets forth the high and low closing per share sales prices of our common stock
as reported on the OTC Bulletin Board for the quarterly fiscal periods presented
below. The quotations were obtained from the OTC Bulletin Board website and
reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission
and
may not represent actual transactions.
|
FISCAL
YEAR
|
QUARTER
ENDING
|
HIGH
|
LOW
|
||||
|
2006
|
December
31, 2006
|
$0.30
|
$0.30
|
||||
|
|
September
30, 2006
|
$0.49
|
$0.44
|
||||
|
June
30, 2006
|
$0.74
|
$0.43
|
|||||
|
March
31, 2006
|
$0.88
|
$0.19
|
|||||
|
2005
|
December
31, 2005
|
$0.28
|
$0.14
|
||||
|
|
September
30, 2005
|
$0.29
|
$0.13
|
||||
|
|
June
30, 2005
|
$0.22
|
$0.08
|
||||
|
March
31, 2005
|
$0.22
|
$0.09
|
13
Holders
As
of
March 2, 2007, our common stock was held by 305 stockholders of record.
Reports
to Stockholders
We
plan
to furnish our stockholders with an annual report for each fiscal year ending
December 31 containing financial statements audited by our independent certified
public accountants. Additionally, we may, in our sole discretion, issue
unaudited quarterly or other interim reports to our stockholders when we deem
appropriate. We intend to maintain compliance with the periodic reporting
requirements of the Exchange Act.
Dividends
We
have
never paid dividends. While any future dividends will be determined by our
directors after consideration of the earnings, financial condition and other
relevant factors, it is currently expected that available cash resources will
be
utilized in connection with our ongoing operations.
Section
15(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 - The Penny Stock
Rules
Our
shares are covered by Section 15(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as
amended that imposes additional sales practice requirements on broker/dealers
who sell such securities to persons other than established customers and
accredited investors (generally institutions with assets in excess of $5,000,000
or individuals with net worth in excess of $1,000,000 or annual income exceeding
$200,000 or $300,000 jointly with their spouses). For transactions covered
by
this Section 15(g), the broker/dealer must make a special suitability
determination for the purchase and have received the purchaser's written
agreement to the transaction prior to the sale. Consequently, Section 15(g)
may
affect the ability of broker/dealers to sell our securities and also may affect
your ability to sell your shares in the secondary market.
Section
15(g) also imposes additional sales practice requirements on broker/dealers
who
sell penny securities. These rules require a one page summary of certain
essential items. The items include the risk of investing in penny stocks in
both
public offerings and secondary marketing; terms important to an understanding
of
the function of the penny stock market, such as "bid" and "offer" quotes, a
dealers "spread" and broker/dealer compensation; the broker/dealer compensation,
the broker/dealers’ duties to its customers, including the disclosures required
by any other penny stock disclosure rules; the customers’ rights and remedies in
causes of fraud in penny stock transactions; and, the NASD's toll free telephone
number and the central number of the North American Administrators Association,
for information on the disciplinary history of broker/dealers and their
associated persons.
Transfer
Agent
Our
transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is Computershare Investor
Services, 350 Indiana Street, Suite 800, Golden, Colorado, 80401. Its telephone
number is 303.262.0600 and facsimile is 303.262.0632.
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities
Except
for sales previously disclosed in quarterly reports on form 10-QSB or in a
current report on Form 8-K filed by us with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, we have not sold any securities without registration under the
Securities Act of 1933. See Item 7
of Part
II “Financial Statements - Note 6
- Share
Capital” for unregistered stock issuances by us for the year ended December 31,
2006.
Item
6. MANAGEMENT'S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS.
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with our financial
statements, together with the notes to those statements, included elsewhere
in
this report. The following discussion contains forward-looking statements that
involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions such as statements of our plans,
objectives, expectations, and intentions. Our actual results may differ
materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements because
of
the risks and uncertainties inherent in future events.
General
Overview
On
October 6, 2006, we acquired Thorium Power, Inc. through a merger transaction.
Thorium Power, Inc. was incorporated on January 8, 1992. Thorium Power, Inc.
has
patented proprietary nuclear fuel designs for use in existing commercial nuclear
power plants. The merger was accounted for as a reverse merger and Thorium
Power, Inc. is being treated as the accounting acquiror.
14
As
discussed in more detail below, in connection with the merger, we changed our
line of business. This new line of business, which is now our only business
line, is research and development of proprietary nuclear fuel designs for use
in
nuclear power plants. We began to shift our focus to this business in
anticipation of the merger with Thorium Power, Inc. and, upon completion of
the
merger, this business is conducted through both Thorium Power, Inc. and the
Company. Our historical business preceding the merger was mineral exploration
which has been phased out completely and all operations of the Company now
revolve around Thorium Power, Inc.’s proprietary
nuclear fuel designs, although the Company maintains ownership of mineral
rights.
We
are
primarily engaged in the development of proprietary nuclear fuel designs which
we intend ultimately to introduce for sale into three markets: (1) nuclear
fuel
designs for use in commercial nuclear power plants, (2) nuclear fuel designs
for
reactor-grade plutonium disposition, and (3) nuclear fuel designs for
weapons-grade plutonium disposition. These fuel designs are primarily for use
in
existing or future VVER-1000 light water reactors. We have also been conducting
research and development relating to a variant of these nuclear fuel designs
for
use in existing pressurized water reactors (PWR).
Our
future customers may include nuclear fuel fabricators and/or nuclear power
plants, and/or the U.S. or foreign governments.
To
date,
our operations have been devoted primarily to the development and demonstration
of out nuclear fuel designs, developing strategic relationships within and
outside of the nuclear power industry, securing political and financial support
from the U.S. and Russian governments, the filing of patent applications and
related administrative functions. We do not currently have any revenues from
our
activities in this area and expect that we will not generate licensing revenues
from this business for several years, until our fuel designs can be fully tested
and demonstrated and we obtain the proper approvals to use our nuclear fuel
designs in nuclear reactors. Future revenues could be generated through the
licensing of our technology and also by providing other services in the nuclear
power industry. Accordingly, we prepare our financial statements as a
development stage company in accordance with FASB Statement No. 7, “Accounting
and Reporting by Development Stage Enterprises.”
Material
Opportunities and Challenges
We
believe that a major opportunity for us is the possibility that our fuel
designs, which are currently in the research and development stage, will be
used
in the manufacturing of nuclear fuel utilized in many existing light water
nuclear reactors in the future. Light water reactors are the dominant reactor
types currently in use in the world and fuels for such reactors constitute
the
majority of the commercial market for nuclear fuel. Our focus is on three
different types, or variants, of thorium fuel designs. The first is designed
to
provide reactor owner-operators with an economically viable alternative fuel
that will not generate weapons-usable plutonium in the spent fuel. The second
is
designed to dispose of reactor-grade plutonium that has been extracted from
spent fuel from commercial rectors and stockpiled in Russia, Western Europe,
the
U.S., Japan and other countries. The third is designed to dispose of
weapons-grade plutonium that is stockpiled in Russia and the United States.
All
three of these fuel variants are expected to have additional benefits, including
reduced volume and reduced long-term radio-toxicity of spent fuel for the same
amount of electricity generated, as compared with the uranium fuels that are
currently used in light water reactors and as compared with MOX
fuel.
Thorium
Power, Inc. has been developing relations with relevant entities within the
United States and Russian governments for over thirteen years. Thorium Power,
Inc., in cooperation with these governments, has been demonstrating its fuel
designs in a research reactor in Russia for over three years. Independent
analyses of the technology have been performed, including a May 2005 report
by
the IAEA and a Spring 2005 report by Westinghouse Electric Company LLC
(“Westinghouse”). The IAEA and Westinghouse analyses were positive and
management believes that they can help lead to the favorable reception of our
nuclear fuel designs in the future.
We
are
also working with Russian nuclear research institutes and Russian nuclear
regulatory authorities to have one or more of the fuel designs demonstrated
in a
Russian VVER-1000 reactor as soon as three years from now, if we are able to
obtain necessary support and an agreement with the Russian government.
Management believes that it will be necessary to enter into commercial
arrangements with one or more major nuclear fuel fabricators, which in many
cases are also nuclear fuel vendors, as a prerequisite to having our fuel
designs widely deployed in global markets.
Our
nuclear fuel designs have never been demonstrated in a full-size commercial
reactor. Our planned demonstration of the fuels in a VVER-1000 reactor in Russia
would provide operating experience that is critical to reactor owners and
regulatory authorities. We believe that once the fuels have been demonstrated
in
the VVER-1000 reactor, this can help convince other light water reactor
operators around the world to accept our thorium fuel designs.
We
believe that our greatest challenge will be acceptance of these fuel designs
by
nuclear power plant operators, which have in the past been hesitant to be the
first to use a new type of nuclear fuel. In addition, our fuel designs would
require regulatory approval by relevant nuclear regulatory authorities, such
as
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the United States or its equivalent
agencies in other countries, before they can be used in commercial reactors.
The
regulatory review process, which is outside of our control, may take longer
than
expected and may delay a rollout of the fuel designs into the market. Management
believes that demonstration of one of the Company’s fuel designs in a commercial
nuclear reactor would make deployment of the other designs easier due to the
many similarities that exist among all of our fuel designs.
15
Thorium
Power, Inc. has been building relationships with companies and organizations
in
the nuclear power industry for several years. We will attempt to cause some
or
all of these companies and organizations to work in a consortium or a joint
venture type arrangement with us in the future, however, we may not be able
to
develop any such consortium or arrangement in the near term or at all. The
companies that we have identified for potential relationships have existing
contracts with nuclear power plant owner-operators under which they supply
nuclear fuel branded with their name to such nuclear power plants. We will
attempt to cause these nuclear fuel vending companies to provide their nuclear
power plant operating customers with fuels that are designed with our
technology. To do so, we will need to enter into agreements with one or more
of
these companies. Without such arrangements it would be more difficult for us
to
license our fuel designs because, in addition to the reputations, guarantees,
services, and other benefits that these nuclear fuel vendors provide when
selling fuel to nuclear power plant operators, they also often have multi-year
fuel supply contracts with the reactor operators. These multi-year fuel supply
contracts act as a barrier to entry into the market, such that it can be almost
impossible to penetrate some markets for nuclear fuel without working with
a
nuclear fuel vendor that can support long term contracts. If we are successful
in demonstrating our fuel designs in Russia and in continuing to build
relationships with nuclear fuel vendors, we believe it may lead to one or more
of these major companies in the nuclear power industry working with us in
producing and selling our nuclear fuel designs to commercial reactor operators
and governments.
Plan
of Operation
At
December 31, 2006, our total assets were approximately $11.6
million.
Liabilities as of December 31, 2006 totaled approximately $2.6
million.
We had
working capital surplus of approximately $8.7
million at
December 31, 2006.
While
management presently expects that our present working capital will meet our
foreseeable working capital needs for the next 10-12 months from the date of
this filing. Our current average monthly projected working capital requirements
for the company, excluding the $5 million of research and development expenses
we expect to incur in Russia over the next 12-15 months, as mentioned below,
is
approximately $500,000 per month (including approximately $100,000 per month
for
payroll and payroll-related fringe benefits). We will need to raise additional
capital by way of an offering of equity securities, an offering of debt
securities, or by obtaining financing through a bank or other entity sometime
in
2007 in order to insure we have the necessary working capital available to
continue our operations in 2008. If we need to obtain additional financing,
that
financing may not be available or we may not be able to obtain that financing
on
terms acceptable to us. If additional funds are raised through the issuance
of
equity securities, there may be a significant dilution in the value of our
outstanding common stock.
Over
the
next 12 to 15 months we expect to incur approximately $5 million in research
and
development expenses related to the development of our proprietary nuclear
fuel
designs. Of the $5 million, the cost of seed and blanket fuel fabrication
equipment that would be purchased and used to fabricate trial seed and blanket
fuel rods is expected to be approximately $2 million and the cost of nuclear
materials used in fabrication of trial seed and blanket fuel rods is estimated
at about $850,000. We expect to incur these expenses after we have reached
a
formal agreement with Russian nuclear entities that will grant us licensing
and
other rights to use such technologies or intellectual property developed by
the
Russian entities. We expect this agreement to be signed within the next several
months and these research expenses to be in the range of approximately $2
million to $2.5 million for fiscal 2007, but it is possible that such expenses
could be less or more than those amounts. We spent approximately $35,000 for
research and development in 2006 and no significant additional amounts spent
in
2007, as of the date of this filing.
Over
the
next 3 years, we expect that our research and development activities will be
primarily focused on testing and demonstration of our thorium/uranium and
thorium/reactor-grade plutonium disposing fuel designs. The main objective
of
this research and development phase is to prepare for full-scale demonstration
of our nuclear fuel technology in an operating commercial VVER-1000 reactor
in
Russia. Key research and development activities will include: (1) Scaling up
the
fuel fabrication process to full length (10 feet) rods used in commercial
VVER-1000 reactors, (2) Validating thermal hydraulic performance of full size
(10 feet) seed and blanket fuel assembly, (3) Performing post-irradiation
examination of seed and blanket fuel samples that have been irradiated in a
research reactor to confirm fuel performance, and (4) Obtaining final regulatory
approvals for insertion of fuel in VVER-1000 commercial reactors. As this
research and development program relates to commercial applications of our
fuel
technology and retaining ownership or control over as much key intellectual
property as we possibly can is critical to the long-term success of our
licensing business model, our plan is to fully fund these research and
development activities ourselves. At the same time, we do not currently plan
to
fund research, testing and demonstration of our thorium/weapons-grade plutonium
disposing fuel, which can only be used in the U.S.-Russia
government-to-government weapons-grade plutonium disposition program and has
no
commercial applications. Hence, funding for any future research and development
activities on this fuel design would have to be provided by the U.S. government
or other stakeholders.
Additionally,
we anticipate increasing our payroll and related fringe benefits costs in our
fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, as we are looking to hire a permanent
Chief
Financial Officer in 2007 to add to our management team.
16
Results
of Operations
Fiscal
Year 2006
We
had no
revenues during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2006.
Our
total
operating expenses for fiscal year 2006 were $12.3 million consisting
of:
| · |
$9.1
million of stock based
compensation;
|
| · |
$1.5
million in professional fees and other general and administrative
expenses;
|
| · |
$0.8
million of payroll and severance
expenses;
|
| · |
$0.6
million in contributions to a nuclear reactor project in Texas;
and
|
| · |
$0.3
million in consulting expenses.
|
Other
income and expense was $0.6 million for fiscal year 2006. This consists of
| · |
$1.9
million gain on the fair value of derivative instruments;
and
|
| · |
$0.1
million of interest income, which was offset
by
|
| · |
$1.0
million of warrant expense;
|
| · |
$0.3
million of registration rights expense;
and
|
| · |
$0.1
million of stock settlement
expense.
|
Our
net
loss was approximately $11.7 million in fiscal year 2006.
Since
the
acquisition by Thorium Power, Ltd. of Thorium Power, Inc. was treated from
an
accounting perspective as a reverse acquisition, income and loss of Thorium
Power, Ltd prior to October 6, 2006 (the date of acquisition) is generally
not
included in the consolidated financial statements of Thorium Power, Ltd.
However, prior to the acquisition, approximately $7.5 million in expenses were
incurred by Thorium Power, Ltd. on behalf of Thorium Power, Inc. Consequently,
this $7.5 million was allocated to Thorium Power, Inc. This allocation is the
result of the application of SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB)
T.1B1.
Fiscal
Year 2005
We
had no
revenues in 2005.
Our
total
expenses for fiscal year 2005 were $0.8 million consisting of:
| · |
$0.3
million of stock based
compensation;
|
| · |
$0.3
million of payroll expenses; and
|
| · |
$0.2
million in other general and administrative
expenses.
|
Our
net
loss was approximately $0.8 million in fiscal year 2005.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
As
of
December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, we had cash and cash equivalents of
$10,927,775
and
$283,
respectively. At March 1, 2007 we had total cash and cash equivalents of $9.5
million. In 2007 we have set up a separate account (“R&D Account”) and have
designated $5 million of our total cash to be held in this R&D Account. The
following table provides detailed information about our net cash flow for all
financial statements periods presented in this Report.
Cash
Flow
|
Years
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(3,746,188
|
)
|
(287,597
|
)
|
|||
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(17,625
|
)
|
(25,957
|
)
|
|||
|
Net
cash provided financing activities
|
14,691,305
|
313,375
|
|||||
|
Net
cash Flow
|
10,927,492
|
(179
|
)
|
||||
Operating
Activities:
17
Net
cash
used for operating activities was $3,746,188
for the
year ended December 31, 2006 which is an increase of $3,458,591 from
the
$287,597 net
cash
used for operating activities for the same period in 2005. This increase was
mainly due to an increase in overhead expenses.
Investing
Activities:
Net
cash
used for investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2006 was $17,625,
which is a decrease of $8,332 from
net
cash used for investing activities of $25,957 in
the
same period of 2005 due to the company’s purchase of equipment.
Financing
Activities:
Net
cash
provided by financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2006 totaled
$14,691,305 as compared to $313,375 provided by financing activities in the
same
period of 2005. The increase of the cash provided by financing activities was
mainly attributable to $2,202,678
of cash acquired from the issuance of the company’s common stock ($650,000
received from Novastar Resources Ltd prior to the merger) and also $12,742,408
of cash acquired at the merger date (October 6, 2006) from Novastar Resources
Ltd.
We also
purchased 850,000 shares of treasury stock in the open market at a total cost
of
$255,850.
While
management expects these proceeds will meet our foreseeable needs for the next
10-12 months, we will need to raise additional capital by way of an offering
of
equity securities, an offering of debt securities, or by obtaining financing
through a bank or other entity. If we need to obtain additional financing,
that
financing may not be available or we may not be able to obtain that financing
on
terms acceptable to us. If additional funds are raised through the issuance
of
equity securities, there may be a significant dilution in the value of our
outstanding common stock.
Off
Balance Sheet Arrangements
We
do not
have any off balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely
to
have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial
condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity or capital
expenditures or capital resources that is material to an investor in our
securities.
Seasonality
Our
business has not been subject to any material seasonal variations in operations,
although this may change in the future.
Inflation
As
a
development stage company, our business, revenues and operating results have
not
been affected in any material way by inflation. If and when it begins marketing
thorium and other minerals, management expects its business will be affected
by
inflation and commodity price volatility.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The
SEC
issued Financial Reporting Release No. 60, "Cautionary Advice Regarding
Disclosure About Critical Accounting Policies" suggesting that companies provide
additional disclosure and commentary on their most critical accounting policies.
In Financial Reporting Release No. 60, the SEC has defined the most critical
accounting policies as the ones that are most important to the portrayal of
a
company's financial condition and operating results, and require management
to
make its most difficult and subjective judgments, often as a result of the
need
to make estimates of matters that are inherently uncertain. Based on this
definition, we have identified the following significant policies as critical
to
the understanding of our financial statements.
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles requires management to make a variety of estimates and
assumptions that affect (i) the reported amounts of assets and liabilities
and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial
statements and (ii) the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting periods covered by the financial statements.
Our
management expects to make judgments and estimates about the effect of matters
that are inherently uncertain. As the number of variables and assumptions
affecting the future resolution of the uncertainties increase, these judgments
become even more subjective and complex. Although we believe that our estimates
and assumptions are reasonable, actual results may differ significantly from
these estimates. Changes in estimates and assumptions based upon actual results
may have a material impact on our results of operation and/or financial
condition. We have identified certain accounting policies that we believe are
most important to the portrayal of our current financial condition and results
of operations. Our significant accounting policies are disclosed in Note 2
to
the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB.
Deferred
tax assets and liabilities
We
will
recognize the expected future tax benefit from deferred tax assets when the
tax
benefit is considered to be more likely than not of being realized. Assessing
the recoverability of deferred tax assets requires management to make
significant estimates related to expectations of future taxable income.
Estimates of future taxable income are based on forecasted cash flows and the
application of existing tax laws in each jurisdiction. To the extent that future
cash flows and taxable income differ significantly from estimates, our ability
to realize deferred tax assets could be impacted. Additionally, future changes
in tax laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate could limit our ability
to
obtain the future tax benefits.
18
Accounting
for Stock Based Compensation, Stock Options and Warrants Granted to Employees
and Nonemployees
We
adopted the provisions of SFAS 123R, which requires the use of the fair value
method of accounting for share-based compensation. Under the fair value based
method, compensation cost related to employee stock options or similar equity
instruments is measured at the grant date based on the value of the award and
is
recognized over the service period, which is usually the vesting period. SFAS
123R also requires measurement of cost of a liability-classified award based
on
its current fair value. The fair value of the liability-classified award
will be subsequently remeasured at each reporting date through the settlement
date. Change in fair value during the requisite service period will be
recognized as compensation cost over that period. We determine fair value
using the Black-Scholes model. Under this model, certain assumptions, including
the risk-free interest rate, the expected life of the options and the estimated
fair value of our ordinary shares and the expected volatility, are required
to
determine the fair value of the options. If different assumptions had been
used,
the fair value of the options would have been different from the amount we
computed and recorded, which would have resulted in either an increase or
decrease in the compensation expense.
The
options were valued using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The
assumptions used were as follows: volatility of 106% to 275%, a risk-free
interest rate of 3.86% to 4.45%, dividend yield of 0% and an exercise term
of
one to five years.
Allocation
of Expenses between Thorium Power Ltd. and Thorium Power Inc.
We
adopted Staff Accounting Bulletin SAB.T.1B1 whereby 2006 expenses incurred
by
Thorium Power Ltd on behalf of Thorium Power Inc. prior to the merger on October
6, 2006, were allocated to Thorium Power Inc. and included as expenses in the
accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. This allocation required
management to make some estimates on how to allocate certain general and
administrative expenses. A total of $7,477,700 of expenses was allocated for
the
period January 1, 2006 to October 6, 2006, which included $6,602,098 of stock
based compensation and $875,602 of general and administrative
expenses.
Registration
Rights Expense
We
incurred an estimated cost of approximately $354,000, captioned in the statement
of operations as registration rights expense, due to the late date of a
registration statement being declared effective that was filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, filed in connection with the May 4, 2006
private placement and the Registration Rights agreement. This amount was
estimated based on the responses we received from most of the investors. We
have
not yet settled with all the investors so our total expense could change in
future periods, once we resolve this issue with all of the
investors.
Item
7. FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
THORIUM
POWER, LTD
(A
Development Stage Company)
DECEMBER
31, 2006
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
|
Page
|
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
||
|
Consolidated
Statement of Stockholders’ Deficiency
|
F-6
- F-9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-10
|
F-1
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
The
Board of Directors
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
Washington,
DC
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Thorium Power,
Ltd. (a
development stage company) as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related
consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, changes
in
stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for the years then ended and for the
period from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2006. 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 audits. We did not audit the financial statements
from
January 8, 1992 (date of inception), to December 31, 2001. Those statements
were
audited by other auditors, whose report dated March 29, 2002, gave an
unqualified opinion thereon.
We
conducted our audits 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 consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement.
The
Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit
of its
internal control over financial reporting. Our audits 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 consolidated financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made
by
management, as well as evaluating the overall consolidated financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for
our
opinion.
In
our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of Thorium Power, Ltd.
(a
development state company) as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related
consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, changes
in
stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for the years then ended and for the
period from January 1, 2002 (Inception) to December 31, 2006, in conformity
with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/
Child, Van Wagoner & Bradshaw, PLLC
Child,
Van Wagoner & Bradshaw, PLLC
Salt
Lake
City, Utah
March
19,
2007
F-2
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
|
December
31
|
December
31
|
||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
|
ASSETS
|
|||||||
|
Current
Assets
|
|||||||
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
10,927,775
|
$
|
283
|
|||
|
Prepaid
expenses & other current assets
|
394,443
|
6,280
|
|||||
|
Total
Current Assets
|
11,322,218
|
6,563
|
|||||
|
Property
Plant and Equipment -net
|
21,290
|
21,215
|
|||||
|
Other
Assets
|
|||||||
|
Patent
costs - net
|
217,875
|
211,211
|
|||||
|
Security
deposits
|
2,049
|
7,567
|
|||||
|
Total
Other Assets
|
219,924
|
218,778
|
|||||
|
Total
Assets
|
$
|
11,563,432
|
$
|
246,556
|
|||
|
Liabilities
and Stockholders' Deficiency
|
|||||||
|
Current
Liabilities
|
|||||||
|
Current
portion long term debt
|
$
|
4,739
|
$
|
4,135
|
|||
|
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
1,121,083
|
938,776
|
|||||
|
Other
current liabilities
|
347,690
|
0
|
|||||
|
Warrant
liability
|
1,132,440
|
0
|
|||||
|
Note
payable
|
0
|
45,930
|
|||||
|
Total
Current Liabilities
|
2,605,952
|
988,841
|
|||||
|
Notes
Payable - long term
|
10,433
|
14,818
|
|||||
|
Total
Liabilities
|
2,616,385
|
1,003,659
|
|||||
|
Commitments
and contingencies - note 10
|
|||||||
|
Common
Stock with Registration Rights
|
|||||||
|
Common
Stock subject to continuing registration, $0.001 par value, 36,659,837
shares issued
|
|||||||
|
and
outstanding at December 31, 2006, 0 at December 31, 2005
|
12,041,373
|
0
|
|||||
|
Stockholders'
Deficiency
|
|||||||
|
Preferred
stock, $0.001 par value, 50,000,000 authorized shares, no shares
issued
and outstanding
|
0
|
0
|
|||||
|
Common
stock, $0.001par value, 500,000,000 authorized, 257,291,709 shares
issued
and 256,441,709 shares outstanding (December 31, 2005, equivalent
shares
outstanding 86,185,881)
|
257,292
|
168,149
|
|||||
|
Additional
paid in capital - stock and stock equivalents
|
23,148,560
|
14,544,410
|
|||||
|
Deficit
accumulated during the development stage
|
(27,177,989
|
)
|
(15,469,662
|
)
|
|||
|
Common
stock reserved for issuance, 4,000,000 shares
|
1,200,000
|
0
|
|||||
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
18,861
|
0
|
|||||
|
Deferred
stock compensation
|
(285,200
|
)
|
0
|
||||
|
Treasury
stock - 850,000 shares
|
(255,850
|
)
|
0
|
||||
|
Total
Stockholders' Deficiency
|
(3,094,326
|
)
|
(757,103
|
)
|
|||
|
Total
Liabilities and Stockholders' Deficiency
|
$
|
11,563,432
|
$
|
246,556
|
|||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements
F-3
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
|
Year
End
|
Cumulative
Period from January 8, 1992 (Inception) to
|
|||||||||
|
December
31,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
2006
|
||||||||
|
Revenue:
|
||||||||||
|
License
revenue
|
$ |
0
|
$ |
0
|
$ |
624,985
|
||||
|
Total
Revenue
|
|
|
624,985
|
|||||||
|
Operating
Expenses
|
||||||||||
|
General
and administrative
|
3,150,243
|
440,003
|
13,154,561
|
|||||||
|
Research
and development
|
34,400
|
17,500
|
3,926,558
|
|||||||
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
9,131,746
|
303,055
|
11,361,617
|
|||||||
|
Total
Operating Loss
|
12,316,389
|
760,558
|
27,817,751
|
|||||||
|
Other
Income and Expenses
|
||||||||||
|
Gain
on fair value of derivative instruments
|
1,902,286
|
0
|
1,902,286
|
|||||||
|
Other
income/expense
|
115,128
|
54
|
146,829
|
|||||||
|
Stock
settlement expense
|
(92,260
|
)
|
0
|
(92,260
|
)
|
|||||
|
Registration
right expense
|
(353,706
|
)
|
0
|
(353,706
|
)
|
|||||
|
Warrant
expense
|
(963,387
|
)
|
0
|
(963,387
|
)
|
|||||
|
Total
Other Income and [Expenses]
|
608,061
|
54
|
639,762
|
|||||||
|
Net
Loss
|
$
|
11,708,328
|
$
|
760,504
|
$
|
27,177,989
|
||||
| Other Comprehensive Income (loss) | ||||||||||
|
Unrealized
Gain - Marketable Securities
|
|
18,861 | 0 | |||||||
| Total Comprehensive Loss | $ | 11,689,467 | $ | 760,504 | ||||||
|
Net
Loss Per Common Share, Basic and diluted
|
$
|
(0.09
|
) |
$
|
(0.01
|
) | ||||
|
Weighted
Average Number of shares used to compute per share data
|
131,630,954
|
84,952,620
|
|
|||||||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements
F-4
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
|
Years
Ended
December
31,
|
Cumulative
Amounts
January
8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31,
|
|||||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
2006
|
||||||||
|
Operating
Activities
|
||||||||||
|
Loss
for the year
|
$
|
(11,708,328
|
)
|
$
|
(760,504
|
)
|
$
|
(27,177,989
|
)
|
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss from operations to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
||||||||||
|
Shares
issued for other than cash for payment of expenses
|
9,131,746
|
303,055
|
11,449,866
|
|||||||
|
Gain
on fair value of derivative instruments
|
(1,902,286
|
)
|
0
|
(1,902,286
|
)
|
|||||
|
Depreciation
and Amoritzation
|
10,886
|
22,704
|
357,211
|
|||||||
|
Gain
or loss on disposition of assets
|
0 |
3,710
|
86,855
|
|||||||
|
Capitalization
of Share Issue costs
|
(441,553
|
)
|
0
|
(441,553
|
)
|
|||||
|
Warrant
Expense
|
963,387
|
0
|
963,387
|
|||||||
|
Settlement
Expense
|
92,260
|
0
|
92,260
|
|||||||
|
Allocated
general and administrative expenses - contributed capital
|
290,769
|
0 |
290,769
|
|||||||
|
Changes
in non-cash operating working capital items:
|
||||||||||
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
(270,779
|
)
|
525
|
(277,059
|
)
|
|||||
|
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
(220,200
|
)
|
142,913
|
718,576
|
||||||
|
Other
assets
|
5,518
|
0
|
5,518
|
|||||||
|
Other
current liabilities
|
302,392
|
0
|
302,392
|
|||||||
|
Net
Cash (Used In) Operating Activities
|
(3,746,188
|
)
|
(287,597
|
)
|
(15,532,053
|
)
|
||||
|
Investing
Activities
|
||||||||||
|
Purchase
of equipment
|
(10,961
|
)
|
(22,217
|
)
|
(285,145
|
)
|
||||
|
Proceeds
from the sale of equipment
|
0
|
937
|
13,583
|
|||||||
|
Acquisition
of patents
|
(6,664
|
)
|
(4,523
|
)
|
(411,669
|
)
|
||||
|
Other
assets
|
0
|
(154
|
)
|
(7,567
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net
Cash (Used In) Investing Activities
|
(17,625
|
)
|
(25,957
|
)
|
(690,798
|
)
|
||||
|
Financing
Activities
|
||||||||||
|
Issue
of common shares
|
2,202,678
|
260,992
|
14,498,016
|
|||||||
|
Payments
on notes payable and other
|
(3,781
|
)
|
18,952
|
15,171
|
||||||
|
Proceeds
of loan - related party
|
0
|
85,227
|
384,690
|
|||||||
|
Repayment
of loan - related party
|
0
|
(51,796
|
)
|
(239,659
|
)
|
|||||
|
Purchase
of treasury stock
|
(255,850
|
)
|
0
|
(255,850
|
)
|
|||||
|
Other
|
5,850
|
0
|
5,850
|
|||||||
|
Cash
acquired in recapitalization of Thorium Power Inc.
|
12,742,408
|
0
|
12,742,408
|
|||||||
|
Net
Cash Provided By Financing Activities
|
$
|
14,691,305
|
$
|
313,375
|
$
|
27,150,626
|
||||
|
Net
Increase In Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
$
|
10,927,492
|
$
|
(179
|
)
|
$
|
10,927,775
|
|||
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents, Beginning Of Period
|
283
|
462
|
0
|
|||||||
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents, End Of Period
|
$
|
10,927,775
|
$
|
283
|
$
|
10,927,775
|
||||
|
Supplemental
Disclosure of Cash Flow Information
|
||||||||||
|
Cash
paid during the year:
|
||||||||||
|
Interest
paid
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
||||
|
Income
taxes paid
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
||||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements
F-5
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Deficiency
From
January 8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in
|
Accumulated
|
Stockholders’
|
|||||||||||||
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
(Deficit)
|
Equity
|
||||||||||||
|
Inception
- January 8, 1992
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Authorized
2,500,000 shares - $.05 par value
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
|||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for technology and service
|
1,200,000
|
60,000
|
-
|
-
|
60,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the period ended
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(60,000
|
)
|
(60,000
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1993
|
1,200,000
|
60,000
|
-
|
(60,000
|
)
|
-
|
||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
258,500
|
12,925
|
535,030
|
-
|
547,955
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of stock in exchange for services
|
47,000
|
2,350
|
20,000
|
-
|
22,350
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
10,000
|
500
|
99,500
|
100,000
|
||||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1993
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(81,526
|
)
|
(81,526
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1994
|
1,515,500
|
75,775
|
654,530
|
(141,526
|
)
|
588,779
|
||||||||||
|
Authorized
10,000,000 shares - $.05 par value
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
26,200
|
1,310
|
260,690
|
-
|
262,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of stock in exchange for services
|
10,000
|
500
|
9,500
|
-
|
10,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of options to non-employees for services
|
-
|
-
|
15,400
|
-
|
15,400
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1994
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(639,861
|
)
|
(639,861
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1995
|
1,551,700
|
77,585
|
940,120
|
(781,387
|
)
|
236,318
|
||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
41,500
|
2,075
|
412,925
|
-
|
415,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of stock in exchange for services
|
7,800
|
390
|
7,410
|
-
|
7,800
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
10,000
|
500
|
9,500
|
-
|
10,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1995
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,088,082
|
)
|
(1,088,082
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1996
|
1,611,000
|
80,550
|
1,369,955
|
(1,869,469
|
)
|
(418,964
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for cash
|
30,300
|
1,515
|
301,485
|
-
|
303,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for services
|
8,000
|
400
|
7,600
|
-
|
8,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
34,000
|
1,700
|
32,300
|
-
|
34,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of options to non-employees for services
|
-
|
-
|
7,950
|
-
|
7,950
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1996
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(763,179
|
)
|
(763,179
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
Forward
|
1,683,300
|
$
|
84,165
|
$
|
1,719,290
|
$
|
(2,632,648
|
)
|
$
|
(829,193
|
)
|
|||||
F-6
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Deficiency
(Continued)
From
January 8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in
|
Accumulated
|
Stockholders’
|
|||||||||||||
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
(Deficit)
|
Equity
|
||||||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1997
|
1,683,300
|
$
|
84,165
|
$
|
1,719,290
|
$
|
(2,632,648
|
)
|
$
|
(829,193
|
)
|
|||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
56,700
|
2,835
|
564,165
|
-
|
567,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
51,000
|
2,550
|
79,450
|
-
|
82,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of options to non-employees for services
|
-
|
-
|
15,960
|
-
|
15,960
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1997
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(598,718
|
)
|
(598,718
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1998
|
1,791,000
|
89,550
|
2,378,865
|
(3,231,366
|
)
|
(762,951
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
66,536
|
3,327
|
662,033
|
-
|
665,360
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
280,000
|
14,000
|
456,000
|
-
|
470,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of options to non-employees for services
|
1,325
|
1,325
|
||||||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1998
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(792,185
|
)
|
(792,185
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 1999
|
2,137,536
|
106,877
|
3,498,223
|
(4,023,551
|
)
|
(418,451
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for cash
|
35,675
|
1,784
|
354,966
|
-
|
356,750
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
35,250
|
1,762
|
180,738
|
-
|
182,500
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 1999
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(822,803
|
)
|
(822,803
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2000
|
2,208,461
|
110,423
|
4,033,927
|
(4,846,354
|
)
|
(702,004
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for cash
|
284,600
|
14,230
|
2,831,770
|
-
|
2,846,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for services
|
102,000
|
5,100
|
449,900
|
-
|
455,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,487,354
|
)
|
(1,487,354
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2001
|
2,595,061
|
129,753
|
7,315,597
|
(6,333,708
|
)
|
1,111,642
|
||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
350,000
|
17,500
|
3,468,031
|
-
|
3,485,531
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock for settlement
|
10,000
|
500
|
36,100
|
-
|
36,600
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
28,600
|
1,430
|
139,570
|
-
|
141,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Modification
of options
|
-
|
-
|
28,500
|
-
|
28,500
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2001
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(2,606,466
|
)
|
(2,606,466
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
Forward
|
2,983,661
|
$
|
149,183
|
$
|
10,987,798
|
$
|
(8,940,174
|
)
|
$
|
2,196,807
|
||||||
F-7
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Deficiency
(Continued)
From
January 8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in
|
Accumulated
|
Stockholders’
|
|||||||||||||
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
(Deficit)
|
Equity
|
||||||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2002
|
2,983,661
|
149,183
|
10,987,798
|
(8,940,174
|
)
|
2,196,807
|
||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
5,000
|
250
|
49,750
|
-
|
50,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
5,000
|
250
|
22,750
|
-
|
23,000
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock not previously recognized
|
1,000
|
50
|
(50
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2002
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(2,224,775
|
)
|
(2,224,775
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2003
|
2,994,661
|
149,733
|
11,060,248
|
(11,164,949
|
)
|
45,032
|
||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
115,000
|
5,750
|
604,250
|
610,000
|
||||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants
|
106,300
|
5,315
|
157,685
|
163,000
|
||||||||||||
|
Modifications
of options and warrants
|
-
|
-
|
1,506,427
|
1,506,427
|
||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock not previously recognized
|
5,000
|
250
|
(250
|
)
|
-
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2003
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(2,569,534
|
)
|
(2,569,534
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2004
|
3,220,961
|
$
|
161,048
|
$
|
13,328,360
|
$
|
(13,734,483
|
)
|
$
|
(245,075
|
)
|
|||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
63,500
|
3,175
|
254,576
|
257,751
|
||||||||||||
|
Loan
conversion into stock
|
1,750
|
87
|
6,913
|
7,000
|
||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of options to non-employees for services
|
-
|
-
|
351,252
|
-
|
351,252
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2004
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(974,674
|
)
|
(974,674
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2005
|
3,286,211
|
$
|
164,310
|
$
|
13,941,101
|
$
|
(14,709,157
|
)
|
$
|
(603,746
|
)
|
|||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
65,998
|
3,300
|
257,692
|
260,992
|
||||||||||||
|
Loan
conversion into stock
|
10,775
|
539
|
42,561
|
43,100
|
||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of options to non-employees for services
|
-
|
-
|
303,055
|
-
|
303,055
|
|||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2005
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(760,504
|
)
|
(760,504
|
)
|
|||||||||
|
Balance
Forward
|
3,362,984
|
$
|
168,149
|
$
|
14,544,409
|
$
|
(15,469,661
|
)
|
$
|
(757,103
|
)
|
|||||
F-8
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Deficiency
(Continued)
From
January 8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
|
Common
Stock
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in
|
(Deficit)
Accumulated During the Development
|
Stock
Committed for Future
|
Accumulated
Comprehensive
|
Deferred
Stock
|
Treasury
|
Stockholders’
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
Amount
|
|
Shares
|
|
Amount
|
|
Capital
|
|
Stage
|
|
Issuance
|
|
Income
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Stock
|
|
Equity
|
||||||||||||
|
Balance
- January 1, 2006
|
3,362,984
|
$
|
168,149
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
14,544,409
|
($15,469,661
|
)
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
($757,103
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of common stock and warrants for cash
|
488,510
|
24,426
|
2,165,248
|
2,189,674
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Loan
conversion into stock
|
1,025
|
51
|
4,049
|
4,100
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cashless
exercise of stock options and warrants
|
650,047
|
32,502
|
(32,502
|
)
|
0
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Exercise
of stock options and warrants for cash
|
13,000
|
650
|
12,350
|
13,000
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of stock for services
|
20,000
|
1,000
|
104,000
|
105,000
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Recapitalization
- 10/6/06 reverse merger*
|
(4,535,566
|
)
|
(226,778
|
)
|
259,739,491
|
259,739
|
(752,920
|
)
|
(306,000
|
)
|
(1,025,959
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Extension
of investor warrants terms - 6 months
|
963,387
|
963,387
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stock
Option Expense
|
1,055,648
|
1,055,648
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Issuance
of stock for services
|
204,341
|
205
|
226,284
|
226,489
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cashless
exercise of stock options and warrants
|
49,333
|
49
|
(49
|
)
|
0
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stock
issued - settlement expense
|
307,534
|
308
|
91,952
|
92,260
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Share
issue and merger costs
|
(441,553
|
)
|
(441,553
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shares
retired, redeemed for payroll taxes on stock-based
compensation
|
(3,008,990
|
)
|
(3,009
|
)
|
3,009
|
0
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Net
(loss) for the year ended December 31, 2006
|
(11,708,328
|
)
|
(11,708,328
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Unrealized
gains on marketable securities
|
18,861
|
18,861
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amortization
of deferred stock compensation costs
|
20,800
|
|
20,800
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Allocation
of expenses - Thorium Power, Ltd. 1/1/06 - 6/30/06
|
5,205,248
|
5,205,248
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Buyback
of stock - 850,000 shares to treasury stock
|
(850,000
|
)
|
(255,850
|
)
|
(255,850
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stock
based compensation - shares committed for future issuance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,200,000
|
|
|
|
1,200,000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Balance
- December 31, 2006
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
256,441,709
|
$
|
257,292
|
$
|
23,148,560
|
($27,177,989
|
)
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
$
|
18,861
|
($285,200
|
)
|
($255,850
|
)
|
($3,094,326
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
*
See
footnote 1 regarding the recapitalization of Thorium Power Inc.
Common
Stock subject to continuing registration rights (36,659,837 shares) is shown
on
the balance sheet as temporary equity, not shareholders deficiency
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements
F-9
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
1. NATURE
OF
OPERATIONS AND MERGER WITH THORIUM POWER INC.
Radkowsky
Thorium Power Corp., incorporated in the state of Delaware on January 8,
1992
(“Inception”), changed its name to Thorium Power, Inc. in Apri1 2001. Thorium
Power, Inc. is engaged in the development, promotion and marketing of its
three
patented nuclear fuel designs: (1) Thorium/uranium nuclear fuel, (2)
Thorium/reactor-grade plutonium disposing fuel, and (3) Thorium/weapons-grade
plutonium disposing fuel. These fuels are designed to be used in existing
light
water reactors. Presently, we are focusing most of our efforts on demonstrating
and testing our nuclear fuel technology for the Russian designed VVER-1000
reactors.
Once
our
reactor fuels are further developed and tested, we plan to license our
intellectual property rights to fuel fabricators, nuclear generators, and
governments for use in commercial light water nuclear reactors, or sell the
technology to a major nuclear company or government contractor or some
combination of the two. We anticipate having our technology fully developed
for
VVER-1000 reactors and our fuel tested in a VVER-1000 operating reactor in
the
next three years. Presently all our research, testing and demonstration
activities are being conducted in Russia. Our research operations are subject
to
various political, economic, and other risks and uncertainties inherent in
Russia.
Our
nuclear fuel process is dependent on the ability of suppliers of the mineral
thorium, to provide it to our future customers on a timely basis and also
on
favorable pricing terms. The loss of certain principal suppliers of thorium
or a
significant reduction in thorium availability from principal suppliers could
have a material adverse effect on the future operating results of the Company.
We
participate in a highly regulated industry that is characterized by governmental
regulation. Our results of operations are affected by a wide variety of factors
including general economic conditions, decreases in the use or public favor
of
nuclear power, the ability of our technology, the ability to safeguard the
production of nuclear power and safeguarding our patents and intellectual
property from competitors. Due to these factors, we may experience substantial
period-to-period fluctuations in our future operating results.
We
may in
the future be designated as a potentially responsible party (PRP) by federal
and
state agencies with respect to certain sites with which we may have direct
or
indirect future involvement. Such designations can be made regardless of
the
extent of our involvement.
Operations
to date have been devoted primarily to continued development of our fuel
designs
filing for certain patents relating to our technology, developing strategic
relationships within the nuclear industry, securing political and some financial
support from the United States and Russian governments, and administrative
functions. We, therefore, based on our current operations, prepare our
accompanying consolidated financial statements as a Development Stage
Enterprise.
Merger
Agreement
On
February 14, 2006 Novastar Resources Ltd. (“Novastar”), which subsequent to
the merger with Thorium Power, Inc., on October 6, 2006, changed its name
to
Thorium Power Ltd. (“Thorium Power, Ltd.”) entered into an Agreement and Plan of
Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with Thorium Power, Inc. and TP Acquisition
Corp., a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of Thorium Power, Ltd. which was
formed
in connection with the merger transaction contemplated by the Merger
Agreement. (Collectively after the merger, all entities are
referred to as the “Company"). Concurrently therewith, Thorium Ltd (1)
adopted its 2006 Stock Plan, (2) entered into an employment agreement with
Seth
Grae, President and Chief Executive Officer of Thorium Power, Inc. to also
become President and Chief Executive Officer of Thorium Power, Ltd., which
granted certain nonqualified stock options to Mr. Grae and (3) also entered
into
a subscription agreement with Thorium Power, Inc. for the purchase of 3,844,170
shares (equivalent to 150,000 shares of common stock of Thorium Power, Inc.)
for
$0.1561 per share (equivalent to $4.00 per Thorium Power Inc share price),
subsequently these 3,844,170 shares were cancelled after the Merger
Agreement.
The
Merger was consummated pursuant to the terms of an Agreement and Plan of
Merger
among the parties that was
entered into on February 14, 2006 and then subsequently the original merger
terms were amended on June 12, 2006 and August 8, 2006.
F-10
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
Under
the
Merger Agreement each common share of Thorium Power, Inc. was converted into
common stock securities of Thorium Power, Ltd. such that Thorium Power, Inc.’s
current stockholders owned approximately 54.5% of the combined company (prior
to
dilution from common stock and warrants issued in connection with the May
2006
private placement), and each share of Thorium Power, Ltd.’s common stock will
remain outstanding. In addition, Thorium Power, Ltd. appointed new directors
and
officers following the merger. The combined company is headquartered in McLean,
Virginia, where the Company’s operations are presently based.
In
accordance with the terms of the Merger Agreement, the following occurred
with
respect to the outstanding common shares, stock options and warrants of Thorium
Power, Inc. at the closing of the Merger:
i) all
of
the shares of common stock of Thorium Power, Inc. were cancelled and each
registered owner of outstanding shares of Thorium Power, Inc. common stock
automatically became the registered owner of 25.6278 shares of common stock
of
Thorium Power, Ltd., for each share of Thorium Power, Inc. common stock that
they previously owned. Each holder of non-compensatory options or warrants
of
Thorium Power, Inc. that had an exercise price of $5.00 or $1.00, received
from
Thorium Ltd 12.315 shares and 22.965 shares of Thorium Power, Ltd. respectively,
for each option or warrant owned. There were 135,637,854 total common shares
issued to the Thorium Power, Inc. stockholders in the aggregate. As a result
of
the merger, there were 296,399,328 common shares outstanding on October 6,
2006
(including 36,659,837 shares of common stock with registration
rights).
ii) all
of other outstanding warrants and options of Thorium Power, Inc. were assumed
by
Thorium Power, Ltd. and became exercisable for Thorium Power, Ltd. common
stock
in an amount and at an exercise price that is consistent with the exchange
ratio
described above for the conversion of Thorium Power, Inc. common stock. After
applying the applicable exchange ratios resulting from the merger or the
exchange of Thorium Power, Inc., stock to Thorium Power, Ltd. stock, there
were
an equivalent 22,539,083 Thorium Power, Ltd., stock purchase warrants and
an
equivalent 22,567,242 Thorium Power, Ltd., stock options assumed by Thorium
Power, Inc. as of the date of the merger.
For
financial reporting purposes, this merger transaction was recorded as a
recapitalization of Thorium Power, Inc. whereby Thorium Power, Inc. is deemed
to
be the continuing, surviving entity for accounting purposes, but through
reorganization, has deemed to have adopted the capital structure of Thorium
Power, Ltd.
A
summary
of assets and liabilities that, for accounting purposes, were deemed to have
been acquired by Thorium Power, Inc. from Thorium Power Ltd, book value as
of
the date of acquisition (October 6, 2006) were as follows:
|
Total
assets - consisting of cash of $12,742,408, net inter-company receivable
and investment in Thorium Power, Inc. of $3,116,629 and prepaid
expenses
of $117,384.
|
$
|
15,976,421
|
||
|
Total
Liabilities-consisting of warrant liabilities of $3,080,024 and
other
payables of $446,780
|
$
|
3,526,804
|
||
|
Book
Value of Thorium Power, Ltd.
|
$
|
12,449,617
|
For
the
purpose of disclosing the non-cash transactions for the statement of cash
flows
for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, these assets acquired at
book
value represent the non-cash transactions. Also the company acquired $12,742,408
of cash at the merger date (October 6, 2006). Due to this merger being recorded
as a recapitalization of Thorium Power, Inc., this cash received was recorded
as
a financing activity on the Statement of Cash Flows.
Accordingly,
all references to common shares of Thorium Power, Inc.’s common stock have been
restated to reflect the equivalent number of Thorium Power, Ltd.’s common
shares. In other words, the 4,535,566 Thorium Power, Inc. shares outstanding
at
the date of the merger are restated as 296,399,328 common shares, as of October
6, 2006.
F-11
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
The
pro
forma unaudited results of operations assuming the recapitalization of Thorium
Power, Inc. occurred as of the beginning of Thorium Power Inc.’s fiscal years,
starting January 1, 2005 and 2006, are as follows:
|
Pro-Forma
Jan
1 -
Dec
31, 2005
|
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(Novastar)
Jan
1 -
October
6,
2006
|
Thorium
Power, Inc.
Jan
1 -
Dec
31, 2006*
|
2006
Pro-Forma
Total
|
||||||||||
|
Revenues
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||
|
Net
loss
|
9,256,703
|
2,280,949
|
11,708,328
|
13,989,277
|
|||||||||
|
Net
loss per share - basic and diluted
|
$
|
0.11
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
0.09
|
$
|
0.11
|
|||||
|
Shares
used for computing net loss per share
|
84,952,620
|
98,818,395
|
131,630,954
|
131,630,954
|
|||||||||
*
This
represents the operating results of Thorium Power Inc. from January 1, 2006
to
October 6, 2006 and the operating results of Thorium Power Inc. and Thorium
Power Ltd consolidated, from October 6, 2006 (merger date) to December 31,
2006.
These
pro
forma results are not necessarily indicative of the actual results of operations
had this recapitalization of Thorium Power, Inc. had taken place as of January
1, 2005 or January 1, 2006 or the results of future operations of the Company.
The above schedule consists of the actual historical operations of Novastar
and
Thorium Power, Inc., with the addition of Thorium Power, Ltd. pre-merger
costs
to effect the merger with Thorium Power, Inc. and some of the operating expenses
of Thorium Power Inc. In accordance with the Security and Exchange Commissions
Staff Accounting Bulletin SAB.T.1B1, an allocation of expenses attributable
to
Thorium Power, Inc., was made to Thorium Power, Inc. from Thorium Power,
Ltd.
for periods prior to the merger date of October 6, 2006. The total expenses
allocated to Thorium Power, Inc. up to October 6, 2006 (merger date) were
$7,477,700, which consisted of $875,602 of general and administrative expenses
and $6,602,098 of stock based compensation from Thorium Power, Ltd. Thorium
Power Inc.’s “stand-alone” loss for the year ended December 31, 2006, without
this allocation of expenses from Thorium Power Ltd. and the results of
operations from Thorium Power Ltd. (October 6, 2006 to December 31, 2006)
was
approximately 1.4 million.
2. SUMMARY
OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
a)
Consolidation
These
financial statements include the accounts of Thorium Ltd (a Nevada corporation)
and our wholly-owned subsidiaries, Thorium Power, Inc. (a Delaware corporation)
and TP Acquisition Corp., (a Delaware corporation). Due to the accounting
treatment of the reverse merger mentioned above, the
operating results reported are those of Thorium Power Inc. from January 1,
2006
to October 6, 2006 and the operating results of Thorium Power Inc., Thorium
Power Ltd and TP Acquisition Corp consolidated, from October 6, 2006 (merger
date) to December 31, 2006.
All
significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in
consolidation.
b)
Use of
Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America, requires management to
make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date
of
the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses
during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
F-12
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
These
consolidated financial statements include some amounts that are based on
management’s best estimates and judgments. The most significant estimates relate
to valuation of stock grants, stock options and stock purchase warrants,
allocation of certain expenses incurred by Thorium Power, Ltd. that were
attributable to Thorium Power, Inc., accrued liquidation damages pursuant
to the
Registration Right Agreement for the May 4, 2006 private placement, and various
contingent liabilities. These above-mentioned estimates and others may be
adjusted as more current information becomes available, and any adjustment
could
be significant in future reporting periods.
c)
Prior
Year Reclassifications
Certain
reclassifications have been made to our prior years’ financial statements in
order to conform to the current year presentation. On our Statement of
Operations, certain general and administrative expenses were combined into
the
one expense caption called general and administrative expenses. These
reclassifications had no effect on previously reported results of operations
or
accumulated deficit of Thorium Power, Inc.
d
) Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash
and
cash equivalents consists of cash on deposit, money market accounts, and
investment grade commercial paper that are readily convertible into cash
and
purchased with original maturities of three months or less.
As
part
of its cash management program, the Company from time to time maintains a
portfolio of marketable investment securities. The securities are investment
grade and include tax and tax exempt securities and have a term to earliest
maturity of less than 3 months. These marketable securities, classified as
either available for sale, or trading securities are recorded at market
value.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
Cash
in
bank accounts is at risk to the extent that it exceeds Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation insured amounts. To minimize risk, the Company places its cash
with
high credit quality institutions. Substantially all cash is deposited in
two
prominent U.S. financial institutions.
Investment
Securities
Trading
and available-for-sale securities are recorded at fair value. Unrealized
holding
gains and losses on trading securities are included in the net income.
Unrealized holding gains and losses, net of the related tax effect, on available
for sale securities are excluded from net income and are reported as a separate
component of other comprehensive income until realized. Realized gains and
losses from the sale of available-for-sale securities are determined on a
specific-identification basis.
A
decline
in the market value of any available-for-sale security below cost that is
deemed
to be other-than-temporary results in a reduction in carrying amount to fair
value. The impairment is charged as an expense to the statement of income
and
comprehensive income and a new cost basis for the security is established.
To
determine whether an impairment is other-than-temporary, the Company considers
whether it has the ability and intent to hold the investment until a market
price recovery and considers whether evidence indicating the cost of the
investment is recoverable outweighs evidence to the contrary. Evidence
considered in this assessment includes the reasons for the impairment, the
severity and duration of the impairment, changes in value subsequent to year
end, and forecasted performance of the investee.
e)
Property and Equipment
Property,
Plant and Equipment is comprised of an automobile, computer and office equipment
and is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation of furniture,
computer and office equipment is computed over the estimated useful life
of the
asset, generally five and seven years respectively, utilizing the double
declining balance methodology. Depreciation for the leasehold improvements
is
computed using the straight-line method over the 5 year term of the lease.
Upon
disposition of assets, the related cost and accumulated depreciation are
eliminated and any gain or loss is included in the statement of income.
Expenditures for major improvements are capitalized. Maintenance and repairs
are
expensed as incurred.
F-13
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
f)
Income
Taxes
Income
taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method in accordance
with
SFAS No. 109 "Accounting for Income Taxes." Deferred tax assets and liabilities
are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences
between the financial carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities
and
their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carry forwards.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates
expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary
differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred
tax
assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in
the
period that includes the enactment date. Deferred tax assets are reduced
by a
valuation allowance to the extent that the recoverability of the asset is
unlikely to be recognized. The Company did not provide any current or deferred
income tax provision or benefit for any periods presented to date because
the
Company has continued to experience a net operating loss since
inception.
g)
Stock-Based Compensation
In
December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement
of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R (FAS-123R), Share-Based Payment,
which
is a revision of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (FAS-123),
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. In addition to requiring supplemental
disclosures, FAS-123R addresses the accounting for share-based payment
transactions in which a company receives goods or services in exchange for
(a)
equity instruments of the company or (b) liabilities that are based on the
fair
value of the company’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance
of such equity instruments. FAS-123R focuses primarily on accounting for
transactions in which a company obtains employee services in share-based
payment
transactions. The Statement eliminates the ability to account for share-based
compensation transactions using Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25
(APB-25), Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and generally requires
that
such transactions be accounted for using a fair value based method. Accordingly,
pro-forma disclosure is no longer an alternative.
Under
FAS-123R, the Company is required to recognize compensation cost for the
portion
of outstanding awards previously accounted for under the provisions of APB-25
for which the requisite service had not been rendered as of the adoption
date
for this Statement. The Statement also requires companies to estimate
forfeitures of stock compensation awards as of the grant date of the
award.
A
“modified prospective” method is used in which compensation cost is recognized
beginning with the effective date (a) based on the requirements of FAS-123R
for
all share-based payments granted after the effective date and (b) based on
the
requirements of FAS-123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the
effective date of FAS-123R that remain unvested on the effective date; or
The
Company adopted FAS-123R on January 1, 2006, using the modified prospective
method. The valuation of the stock issued to consultants for consulting services
are valued as of the date of the agreements with the various consultants,
which
in all cases is earlier than the dates when the services are committed to
be
performed by the various consultants.
References
to the issuances of restricted stock is stock issued to individuals whom
are
eligible to sell all or some of their shares of restricted common stock by
means
of ordinary brokerage transactions in the open market pursuant to Rule 144,
promulgated under the Securities Act ("Rule 144"), subject to certain
limitations. In general, pursuant to Rule 144, a stockholder (or stockholders
whose shares are aggregated) who has satisfied a one-year holding period
may,
under certain circumstances, sell within any three-month period a number
of
securities which does not exceed the greater of 1% of the then outstanding
shares of common stock or the average weekly trading volume of the class
during
the four calendar weeks prior to such sale. Rule 144 also permits, under
certain
circumstances, the sale of securities, without any limitations, by a
non-affiliate of our company that has satisfied a two-year holding
period.
F-14
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
h)
Warrants
Warrants
issued in conjunction with equity financing were accounted for under the
Emerging Issues Task Force FSP (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-19, ‘Accounting for
Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to and Potentially Settled in a
Company’s Own Stock’. In December 2006, the FASB approved FSP EITF 00-19-2
Accounting for Registration Payment Arrangements, which establishes the standard
that contingent obligations to make future payments under a registration
rights
arrangement shall be recognized and measured separately in accordance with
Statement 5 and FASB Interpretation No. 14, Reasonable Estimation of the
Amount of a Loss. The Company has currently evaluating the effect of how
FSP
EITF 00-19-2 and FSP EITF Topic D-98 will affect future financial statements.
The adoption of this pronouncement on January 1, 2007 will change the
classification of the warrant liability, $1,132,440 at December 31, 2006,
to
equity (additional paid in capital).
i)
Basic
and Diluted Loss per Share
In
accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 128 (“SFAS 128”), “Earnings Per Share”, the
basic loss per common share is computed by dividing net loss available to
common
stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding.
Diluted loss per common share is computed similar to basic loss per common
share
except that the denominator is increased to include the number of additional
common shares that would have been outstanding if the potential common shares
had been issued and if the additional common shares were dilutive. At December
31, 2006 and 2005, the Company stock equivalents were anti-dilutive and excluded
in the loss per share computation.
j)
Impairment Charges
Unlike
goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets, the accounting rules do
not
provide for an annual impairment test in determining whether property, plant,
and equipment and finite-lived intangible assets (e.g., patents) are impaired.
Instead, they require that a triggering event occur before testing an asset
for
impairment. Examples of such triggering events include a significant disposal
of
a portion of such assets, an adverse change in the market involving the business
employing the related asset, a significant decrease in the benefits realized
from an acquired business, difficulties or delays in integrating the business
and a significant change in the operations of an acquired business.
Once
a
triggering event has occurred, the impairment test employed is based on whether
the intent is to hold the asset for continued use or to hold the asset for
sale.
If the intent is to hold the asset for continued use, the impairment test
involves a comparison of undiscounted cash flows against the carrying value
of
the asset as an initial test. If the carrying value of such asset exceeds
the
undiscounted cash flow, the asset would be deemed to be impaired. Impairment
would then be measured as the difference between the fair value of the fixed
or
amortizing intangible asset and the carrying value to determine the amount
of
the impairment. The Company generally determines fair value by using the
discounted cash flow method. If the intent is to hold the asset for sale
and
certain other criteria are met (i.e., the asset can be disposed of currently,
appropriate levels of authority have approved sale, and there is an actively
pursuing buyer), the impairment test is a comparison of the asset’s carrying
value to its fair value less costs to sell. To the extent that the carrying
value is greater than the asset’s fair value less costs to sell, an impairment
loss is recognized for the difference. Assets held for sale are separately
presented on the balance sheet and are no longer depreciated.
In
November 2005, FASB issued FSP FAS 115-1 and FAS 124-1, The
Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain
Investments (“FSP 115-1 and 124-1”), which clarifies when an investment is
considered impaired, whether the impairment is other than temporary, and
the
measurement of an impairment loss. It also includes accounting considerations
subsequent to the recognition of an other-than-temporary impairment and requires
certain disclosures about unrealized losses that have not been recognized
as
other-than-temporary impairments. FSP 115-1 and 124-1 are effective for all
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2005. Implementation of
these statements is not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s
consolidated financial position or results of operations.
F-15
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
k)
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive
income consists of net income and other gains and losses affecting shareholders’
equity that, under generally accepted accounting principles are excluded
from
net income. For the Company, such items consist primarily of unrealized gains
and losses on marketable debt securities, which the Company has classified
as
cash equivalents, as their maturities are three months or less.
l)
Development Stage Enterprise
The
Company’s consolidated financial statements are prepared using the accrual
method of accounting and according to the provisions of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 7 (“SFAS 7”), “Accounting and Reporting for Development
Stage Enterprises,” as we are devoting substantially all of our efforts to
developing our nuclear fuel designs. Until such designs are developed and
significant revenue is derived from these nuclear fuel designs or other revenue
sources, we will continue to prepare our consolidated financial statements
and
related disclosures in accordance with entities in the development
stage.
m)
Revenue Recognition
All
of
the Company’s revenue to date from January 8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31,
2006 had been derived from licensing fees from nuclear industry commercial
partners.
Once
the
company’s Thorium nuclear fuel designs has advanced to a commercially usable
stage the company will seek to license its technology to major government
contractors or nuclear companies, working for the US and other governments.
We
expect that our revenue from license fees will be recognized on a straight-line
basis over the expected period of the related license term.
Total
subsidies and grants from the US government totaled approximately $5.45 million,
cumulative from January 8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31, 2006. These amounts
were not paid to us but paid directly from the US government to third party
research and development companies that worked on our nuclear project, as
well
as other projects.
n)
Government Grants
Receipts
of government grants to encourage research and development activities which
are
non-refundable will be credited to deferred income upon receipt. Government
grants are used either for purchases of assets or to subsidize the research
and
development expenses incurred.
For
purchases of assets, government grants are deducted from the carrying amount
of
the assets. For the research and development expenses, the Company matches
and
offsets the government grants with the expenses of the research and development
activities as specified in the grant approval document in the corresponding
period when such expenses incurred.
o)
Segment Reporting
The
Company uses the “management approach” in determining reportable operating
segments. The management approach considers the internal organization and
reporting used by the Company’s chief operating decision maker for making
operating decisions and assessing performance as the source for determining
the
Company’s reportable segments. The Company has determined that the Company has
one operating segment as defined by SFAS 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information”.
F-16
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
p)
Commitments and Contingencies
Liabilities
for loss contingencies arising from various claims, assessments, litigation,
fines and penalties and other sources are recorded when it is probable that
a
liability has been incurred and the amount of the assessment can be reasonably
estimated.
q)
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
FASB
Interpretation No. (“FIN”) 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes—an
Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109. In July 2006, the FASB issued FIN
48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes—an Interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109, which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in tax positions.
This
Interpretation requires the Company recognizes in its consolidated financial
statements the impact of a tax position if that position is more likely than
not
of being sustained on audit, based on the technical merits of the position.
The
provisions of FIN 48 are effective for the Company on January 1, 2007, with
the
cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle, if any, recorded
as an
adjustment to opening retained earnings. The Company does not believe FIN
48
will have an impact on its consolidated financial statements.
SFAS
157,
Fair Value Measurements. In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, Fair
Value
Measurements, which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring
fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures
about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 applies under other accounting
pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements, where fair
value
is the relevant measurement attribute. The standard does not require any
new
fair value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective for financial statements issued
for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within
those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting
SFAS 157 on its consolidated financial statements.
Staff
Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 108
In
September 2006, the SEC issued SAB No. 108, which provides guidance on the
process of quantifying financial statement misstatements. In SAB No. 108,
the
SEC staff establishes an approach that requires quantification of financial
statement errors, under both the iron-curtain and the roll-over methods,
based
on the effects of the error on each of the Company’s financial statements and
the related financial statement disclosures. SAB No.108 is generally effective
for annual financial statements in the first fiscal year ending after November
15, 2006. The transition provisions of SAB No. 108 permits existing public
companies to record the cumulative effect in the first year ending after
November 15, 2006 by recording correcting adjustments to the carrying values
of
assets and liabilities as of the beginning of that year with the offsetting
adjustment recorded to the opening balance of retained earnings. Management
does
not expect that the adoption of SAB No.108 would have a material effect on
the
Company’s consolidated financial statements.
The
Company is currently evaluating the effect of other new accounting
pronouncements on its future statements of financial position and results
of
operations.
r)
Intangible Assets - Patents
Patents
are stated in the balance sheet at cost less accumulated amortization. The
costs
of the patents are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated
useful lives. The amortization period for our patents range between 17-20
years.
s)
Retirement 401K Plan
We
have a
401(k) savings plan that was set up in 2006 covering substantially all of
our
employees. Eligible employees may contribute through payroll deductions.
There
were no Company matching contributions made to the 401(k) savings plan in
2006.
3. Financial
Status of the Company - December 31, 2006
Management
anticipates, based on its current projected working capital requirements,
that
it will have enough working capital funds to sustain its current operations
at
its current operating level, until sometime during the first quarter of 2008.
The Company will have future issuances of its stock or incur debt, in order
to
provide funds to continue its operations into 2008 and beyond.
F-17
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
4. Research and
Development Costs
Research
and development costs, included under the caption “general and administrative
expenses” in the statement of operations amounted to $34,400 and $17,500 for the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively and $3,926,558 from
January
8, 1992 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
5. Property
Plant and Equipment
The
following represents the detail of the Company’s property, plant and equipment
at December 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
|
Furniture,
computer and office equipment
|
$
|
24,840
|
$
|
13,879
|
|||
|
Automobile
|
22,217
|
22,217
|
|||||
|
Total
Cost
|
47,057
|
36,096
|
|||||
|
Accumulated
Depreciation
|
25,767
|
14,881
|
|||||
|
Net
Book Value
|
$
|
21,290
|
$
|
21,215
|
|||
Depreciation
expense for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 were $10,886, and
$5,434,
respectively.
6. Intangible
Assets - Patents
Patents
represent legal fees and filing costs that are capitalized and amortized
over
their estimated useful lives of 17-20 years. There were no patents placed
in
service for the year ended December 31, 2006.
The
following table summarizes the lives and carrying values of the Company's
patents at December 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
|
Patents
|
$
|
411,669
|
$
|
405,005
|
|||
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
193,794
|
193,794
|
|||||
|
Net
Book Value
|
$
|
217,875
|
$
|
211,211
|
|||
Amortization
expense of patents was $- and $17,270 for the years ended December 31, 2006
and
2005 and $193,794 for the cumulative period from January 8, 1992 (Inception)
to
December 31, 2006.
7. Stockholders’
Equity
Total
Common stock outstanding at December 31, 2006 was 293,101,546 (including
36,659,837 shares of common stock with registration rights). There were also
850,000 shares that were held as Treasury stock at December 31, 2006, bringing
the total number of shares issued to 293,951,546. At December 31, 2006, there
were 25,282,745 stock purchase warrants and 34,578,993 stock options
outstanding, all totaling 352,963,284 of total stock and stock equivalents
outstanding at December 31, 2006.
F-18
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
a). Common
Stock
Issuances
STOCK
ISSUANCES PRIOR TO THE MERGER DATE (10/6/06)
During
the year ended December 31, 2006, Thorium Power Inc., sold 8,354,919 (equivalent
to 326,010 shares of Thorium Power Inc) shares of common stock to 22 investors
for $1,539,678. Thorium Power, Inc. also sold, pursuant to the Merger Agreement,
4,164,518 shares (equivalent to 162,500 shares of Thorium Power Inc.) of
common
stock to Novastar, at a stock price of $0.1561 per share (equivalent to $4.00
per Thorium Power Inc share price), total proceeds of $650,000. These shares
were subsequently cancelled after the merger. Thorium Power, Inc., also received
$13,000 from the exercise of 333,161 stock options (equivalent to 13,000
Thorium
Power Inc.stock options) at $0.0435 per share (equivalent to $1.00 price
per
Thorium Power Inc share). Total proceeds from the issuance of the above
12,852,598 shares (equivalent to 501,510 shares of Thorium Power Inc. was
$2,202,678. Thorium Power, Inc., also issued 26,268 shares (equivalent to
1,025
shares of Thorium Power Inc. common stock at $0.1561 per share (equivalent
to
$4.00 per stock price of Thorium Power Inc.) shares in repayment of a loan
from
a director, which totaled $4,100. Thorium Power, Inc. also issued 512,556
shares
(equivalent to 20,000 shares of Thorium Power Inc. common stock to directors,
for director service rendered at $0.2049 per share (equivalent to $5.25 per
Thorium Power Inc.) share price, total value of the services recorded was
$105,000. Thorium Power, Inc., was a private company, so the value of the
stock
issued for services was determined by the price paid by the investors mentioned
above, where 21 out of the 22 of these investors paid $0.2049 per share
(equivalent to Thorium Power Inc. price of $5.25 per share). There were also
16,659,275 (equivalent to 650,047 Thorium Power Inc.shares) of Thorium Power,
Inc. shares issued to stock option holders, who exercised their stock options
through the cashless exercise feature in accordance to their individual stock
option agreements. All of these option holders had an exercise price of $0.039
per share (equivalent to $1.00 per Thorium Power Inc. share price and the
numbers of shares issued in the cashless exercise were based on the market
price
of $0.2049 per share (equivalent to Thorium Power Inc. $5.25 per
share).
STOCK
ISSUANCES-PURSUANT TO THE MERGER AGREEMENT-MERGER DATE - 10/6/2006
On
October 6, 2006, the Company completed the merger, as more fully described
in
note 1, and issued 135,637,854 shares of Thorium Power, Ltd., stock to the
stockholders of Thorium Power, Inc. For accounting purposes, Thorium Power
Inc.
is the continuing accounting entity, therefore Thorium Power Inc. is deemed
to
have issued these shares to its stockholders pursuant to the Merger Agreement.
An additional 307,534 shares were issued pursuant to the Merger Agreement,
after
the merger date, for Thorium Power, Inc. shareholders that were not reflected
in
the Thorium Power, Inc. stockholders list, at the merger date.
This
stock issuance of 307,534 shares was recorded as a stock settlement expense
which totaled $92,260, valued at the stock price of $0.30 per share, valued
at
the date the Company was first made aware of these shares being outstanding,
that were not accounted for in their stock records. The Company reviewed
these
share certificates and determined that they were valid stock certificates
and
settled this matter, post merger, by issuing the equivalent Thorium Power
Ltd.
shares to these stockholders.
STOCK
ISSUANCES AFTER THE MERGER DATE-After October 6, 2006
The
Board
of Directors of the Thorium Power, Ltd. increased the size of the board to
five
members and appointed two Independent Directors: Jack D. Ladd and Daniel
B.
Magraw, Jr., as a members of the Board of Directors of the Company, effective
October 23, 2006. Pursuant to terms of the Independent Director’s Contracts,
dated October 23, 2006, between Mr. Ladd and the Company and Mr. Magraw and
the
Company Mr. Ladd and Mr. Magraw will each receive a fee of $20,000 per year
in
cash, as well as such number of restricted shares, issued quarterly, equal
to
$5,000 each quarter, to be paid to each Director for the respective quarter
based on the average closing price of the Company’s common stock, as quoted on
the trading market on which the Company’s securities are traded, over the thirty
day period prior to the first day of the applicable quarter. On December
27,
2006, a total of 22,050 shares were issued to the directors for their services.
Additionally, the Director Contracts grant to Messrs. Ladd and Magraw for
each
year of service on the Board of Directors non-qualified options to purchase
up
to 500,000 shares of the common stock of the Company (the “Director Options”),
which shall vest with respect to 13,889 shares on November 23, 2006 and the
remaining 486,111 shares will subsequently vest in equal monthly installments
of
13,889 shares on each one month anniversary of the grant until all shares
underlying the Director Options have vested. The third independent Director,
Victor Alessi, was appointed as a director in August, 2006 and received 500,000
stock options, term 5 years, vesting equally over 36 month period. On October
11, 2006, 182,291 shares were issued pursuant to a legal settlement. On November
6, 2006, 491,333 shares were issued, pursuant to a cashless stock option
exercise of 140,953 shares, strike price was $0.195 per share and market
value
of the stock was $0.30 per share.
F-19
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
In
November, 2006 the company redeemed 3,008,990 shares of common stock from
its
two executive officers and as a result of this stock redemption, paid the
payroll taxes owed on the stock based compensation.
b).
Common Stock Buyback Program - Treasury Stock
On
October 17, 2006, the Company announced that its Board of Directors authorized
a
share buyback program for an aggregate of $1,000,000 over the next 12 months,
with $250,000 of stock to be repurchased immediately. At the discretion of
the
CEO Seth Grae, the Company may effect further share repurchases over the
course
of the year depending on valuation of the Company reflected in the share
price.
As of the date of this report 850,000 shares had been repurchased pursuant
to
this program at the average approximate price of $0.30 per share. The Company
valued all shares issued in the twelve month period ended December 31, 2006
using the traded quoted market price of the Company’s common stock as of the
applicable agreement date. These shares are being held as Treasury Stock
as of
December 31, 2006.
c).
Common Stock
Issued
With Registration Rights - Temporary Equity
On
May 4,
2006, the Company completed a private placement with certain investors in
which
it sold an aggregate of 36,659,837 units, consisting of 36,659,837 shares
of its
restricted common stock and 18,329,98 common stock purchase warrants for
$15,580,431. Each unit consists of one share of common stock and one-half
of a
non-transferable share purchase warrant. Each whole warrant entitles the
holder
of the warrant to acquire one additional share of common stock at a price
of
$0.65 per share and expires twelve months from the closing date of the
subscription expiration date or term subsequently extended 6 months.
Under
the
terms of the sale, the investors were granted registration rights in which
the
Company agreed to timely file a registration statement to register the common
shares and the shares underlying the warrants, obtain effectiveness of the
registration statement by the SEC on or before September 1, 2006, and maintain
the effectiveness of this registration statement for a pre-set time thereafter.
In the event the Company failed to timely perform under the registration
rights
agreement, the Company agreed to pay the investors liquidated damages in
an
amount equal to 2% of the aggregate amount invested by the investors for
each
30-day period or pro rata for any portion thereof following the date by which
the registration statement should have been effective. The initial registration
statement was timely filed, however it was not declared effective by the
SEC
within the allowed time. Accordingly, the Company is liable to the investors
for
liquidated damages under the registration rights agreement. The Company
recognized in other income and expenses, in its statements of operatons under
the caption Registration Rights Expense, an amount of approximately $354,000
for
unpaid liquidated damages at December 31, 2006.
The
EITF
is currently reviewing the accounting for securities with liquidated damages
clauses as stated in EITF 05-04, The Effect of a Liquidated Damages Clause
on a
Freestanding Financial Instrument subject to EITF 00-19. There are currently
several views as to how to account for this type of transaction and the EITF
has
not yet reached a consensus. In accordance with EITF 00-19, Accounting for
Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed To, and Potentially Settled in the
Company's Own Stock, and EITF 05-04, because of the potential liquidated
damages
for failure to obtain and maintain an effective registration statement is
substantial, the value of the common stock subject to such registration rights
should be classified as temporary equity. Additionally, in accordance with
EITF
00-19 and the terms of the above warrants, the fair value of the warrants
should
be recorded as a liability, with an offsetting reduction to shareholders’
equity. The warrant liability is initially measured at fair value using the
Black Scholes option pricing model, and is then re-valued at each reporting
date, with changes in the fair value reported as non-cash charges or credits
to
earnings reported as gain/loss on fair value of warrant
derivatives.
F-20
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
The
SEC
concluded that under EITF 00-19, common stock and warrants subject to
registration rights where significant liquidated damages could be required
to be
paid to the holder of the instrument in the event the issuer fails to maintain
the effectiveness of a registration statement for a preset time period, the
common stock subject to such liquidated damages does not meet the tests required
for shareholders’ equity classification, and accordingly must be reflected
between liabilities and shareholders’ equity in the balance sheet until the
conditions are eliminated. In analyzing instruments under EITF 00-19, the
likelihood or probability related to the failure to maintain an effective
registration statement is not a factor.
Based
on
the above interpretation, as of May 4, 2006, the Company classified $12,041,373
for the value of common stock subject to registration rights as temporary
equity
instead of shareholders’ equity. In addition, the Company measured the initial
fair value of the warrants on May 4, 2006 at $3,539,058 and classified at
that
date the fair value of the warrants as warrant liability instead of
shareholders’ equity.
At
the
end of each reporting period, the value of these warrants is re-measured
based
on the fair value of the underlying shares, and changes to the warrant liability
and related “gain or loss in fair value of the warrants” is recorded as a
non-cash charge or credit to earnings. The warrant liability will be
reclassified to shareholders’ equity when the Company is no longer subject to
all of its performance obligations under the registration rights agreement,
or
under FSP 00-19-2 as equity in 2007.
At
December 31, 2006, the warrant liability decreased to $1,132,440 due to changes
in the fair value of the warrants. The fair value of the warrants was estimated
using the Black Scholes option-pricing model, with the following assumptions
for
the year ended December 31, 2006: risk-free interest rate of 3.86% dividend
yield of 0%, expected life of .9 year and volatility of 106% were used. We
expect to reclassify this warrant liability, in accordance with FSP 00-19-2
to
stockholders’ equity, additional paid in capital, at January 1,
2007.
For
the
period ended October 6, 2006 to December 31, 2006, the non-cash gain on fair
value of warrants, or deduction in warrant liability, was $1,902,286. The
gain
recorded on the change in the fair value
of derivative instruments was due principally to the decrease in
the volatility factor used in the Black Scholes valuation of the warrants.
The
date range used to calculate this volatility factor was from January 5, 2006,
date of announcement of Thorium Power, Ltd. and Thorium Power, Inc. merger,
to
December 31, 2006. The stock volatility factor for the fourth quarter of
2006
was low, as the stock trading price remained primarily at $0.30 per share
for
this period of time. The non-cash gain on fair value of warrants, recorded
as
gain on fair value of warrant derivatives, has no effect on the Company’s cash
flows or liquidity.
d)
Share-based Compensation
The
Company has in place a stock-based compensation plan to reward for services
rendered by officers, directors, employees and consultants. On July 17, 2006,
the Company amended this stock plan. The Company has reserved 75,000,000
shares
of common stock of its unissued share capital for the stock plan. Other
limitations are as follows:
| i). |
No
more than 37,500,000 options can be granted for the purchase of
restricted
common shares.
|
| ii). |
No
more than 8,000,000 options can be granted to any one
person.
|
| iii). |
No
more than 5,000,000 options can be granted to any one person for
the
purchase of restricted common
shares.
|
On
January 1, 2006, the Company adopted FAS-123R. In March 2005, the SEC staff
expressed their views with respect to FAS-123R in Staff Accounting Bulletin
No.
107, Share-Based Payment (“SAB 107”). SAB 107 provides guidance on valuing
options. The impact of adopting FAS-123R for the year ended December 31,
2006
was to record a non-cash compensation expense of $2,184,001, of which $937,619
was allocated prior to the merger from Thorium Power, Ltd. for services rendered
on behalf of Thorium Power, Inc. . Prior to January 1, 2006, the Company
accounted for share-based payments under the recognition and measurement
provisions of APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees
(“APB
25”), and related Interpretations, as permitted by FAS-123. In accordance with
APB 25, no compensation cost was required to be recognized for options granted
that had an exercise price equal to the market value of the underlying common
stock on the date of grant. The Company adopted FAS-123R using the
modified-prospective-transition method. Under that transition method,
compensation cost recognized in future interim and annual reporting periods
includes: a) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted prior
to,
but not yet vested as of January 1, 2006, based on the grant-date fair value
estimated in accordance with the original provisions of FAS-123, and b)
compensation cost for all share-based payments granted subsequent to January
1,
2006, based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the
provisions of FAS-123R.
F-21
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
The
adoption of FAS-123R had no effect on cash flow from operations or cash flow
from financing activities for the three months ended September 30, 2006.
FAS-123R requires the cash flows from tax benefits resulting from tax deductions
in excess of the compensation cost recognized for those options (“excess tax
benefits”) to be classified as financing cash flows. Prior to the adoptions of
FAS-123R, excess tax benefits would have been classified as operating cash
inflows. The Company has not recognized, and does not expect to recognize
in the near future, any tax benefit related to stock-based compensation costs
as
a result of the full valuation allowance on our net operating loss carry
forwards.
The
Company recognizes share-based compensation expense for all service-based
awards
with graded vesting schedules on a straight-line basis over the requisite
service period for the entire award. Initial accruals of compensation expense
are based on the estimated number of shares for which requisite service is
expected to be rendered. Estimates are revised if subsequent information
indicates that forfeitures will differ from previous estimates, and the
cumulative effect on compensation cost of a change in the estimated forfeitures
is recognized in the period of the change.
For
awards with service conditions and graded vesting that were granted prior
to the
adoption of FAS-123R, the Company estimates the requisite service period
and the
number of shares expected to vest and recognize compensation expense for
each
tranche on a straight-line basis over the estimated requisite service period
of
the award or over a period ending with an employee’s eligible retirement date,
if earlier. Adjustments to compensation expense as a result of revising the
estimated requisite service period are recognized prospectively.
Total
stock options outstanding at December 31, 2006 were 34,578,993 (22,567,242
were
assumed by Thorium Power Inc. in accordance with the Merger Agreement with
Thorium Power, Ltd. and remain outstanding) and 16,325,523 of these total
options were vested at December 31, 2006.
Stock
option transactions to the employees, directors, advisory board members and
consultants are summarized as follows:
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
|
Stock
Options Outstanding
|
|||||||
|
Assumed
by the Merger
|
22,567,242
|
-
|
|||||
|
Thorium
Power Inc. Options Outstanding
|
12,011,751
|
-
|
|||||
|
Expired
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
|
Forfeited
|
-
|
||||||
|
Outstanding
end of the year
|
34,578,993
|
-
|
|||||
|
Options
exercisable at the end of the year
|
16,325,523
|
-
|
|||||
The
above
table includes options issued as of December 31, 2006 as follows:
| i). |
A
total of 2,150,000 non-qualified 10 year options have been issued
by
Thorium Power, Ltd., to advisory board members at exercise prices
of $0.51
to $0.64 per share.
|
| ii). |
A
total of 5,500,000 non-qualified 5 year options have been issued
to
advisory board members at an exercise price of $0.445 per share
and a
weighted average of $0.445; and
|
F-22
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
| iii). |
A
total of 14,917,242 non-qualified 10 year options have been issued
to
directors and officers of the Company, at exercise prices of $0.30
to
$0.80 per share. From this total, 7,200,000 options were issued
to Chief
Executive Officer who is also a director, on February 14, 2006,
with a
remaining contractual life of 9.1 years. All other options issued
have a
remaining contractual life ranging from 4.75 years to 9.9
years.
|
The
following table provides certain information with respect to the
above-referenced stock options that are outstanding and exercisable at December
31, 2006:
|
Stock
Options Outstanding
|
Stock
Options Vested
|
||||||||||||
|
Exercise
Prices
|
Weighted
Average Remaining
Contractual
Life - Years
|
Number
of Awards
|
Number
of Awards
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|||||||||
|
$0.16
- $0.20
|
3.1
|
6,650,415
|
6,650,415
|
$
|
0.16
|
||||||||
|
$0.30-$0.39
|
1.2
|
6,853,578
|
4,478,277
|
$
|
0.37
|
||||||||
|
$0.45-$0.51
|
7.2
|
11,875,000
|
1,627,085
|
$
|
0.48
|
||||||||
|
$0.64-$0.80
|
9.2
|
9,200,000
|
2,083,334
|
$
|
0.77
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Total
|
5.9
|
34,578,993
|
16,325,523
|
$
|
0.48
|
||||||||
Assumptions
used in the Black Scholes option-pricing model are as follows:
The
aggregate intrinsic value of stock options outstanding at December 31, 2006
was
$931,058 of which $931,058 relates to vested awards. Intrinsic value is
calculated based on the difference between the exercise price of the underlying
awards and the quoted price of our common stock as of the reporting date
($0.30
per share as of December 31, 2006)
|
|
December
31, 2006
|
|
|
Average
risk-free interest rate
|
4.18%
- 4.45%
|
|
|
Average
expected life
|
5
years
|
|
|
Expected
volatility
|
108%
- 275%
|
|
|
Expected
dividends
|
0%
|
During
the year ended December 31, 2006, $9,131,746 was recorded as stock-based
compensation expense in the statement of operations. The result of all the
above
stock option grants that occurred after January 1, 2006 for Thorium Power
Inc
and stock option grants for Thorium Power Ltd that were recorded in the
statement of operations totaled $2,719,496 (non-deductible for tax purposes,
may
provide a tax deduction for the Company when exercised). Stock compensation
to
executive officers totaled $6,138,250, one bonus at year end recorded to
common
stock reserved for issuance totaled $1,200,000, and the other stock compensation
to officers in accordance with their employment agreements totaled $4,938,250.
From this total amount of stock-based compensation of $9,131,746, $6,602,098
was
recorded on Novastar Resources Ltd. books for the period January 1, 2006
to
October 6, 2006, but all of this compensation amount was incurred for Thorium
Power Inc.’s benefit, thus allocated to Thorium Power Inc. statement of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2006. The remaining stock-based
compensation expense was to directors of $105,000 and the amortization of
deferred stock compensation of $169,000. Some volatility factors used by
Novastar, for five option grants in its fiscal year ended June 30, 2006
calculated the volatility factor for Black Scholes using the term of the
option,
which is general practice, not from the announcement date of the merger,
January
5, 2006, which was later determined to be a more applicable date range due
to
the announcement date being the date the stock market reflected the merger
in
the valuation of the Company’s stock. This difference in these volatility
factors for these five option grants is not material to these financial
statements, therefore, no current adjustment to the volatility factors was
made
to these financial statements for these five option grants and we have decided
to continue to use these factors for future expense recognition of options
under
SFAS #123R.
F-23
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
e).
Warrants
During
the year ended December 31, 2006, there were 25,282,745 warrants outstanding
as
of December 31, 2006.
At
December 31, 2006 the range of warrant prices for shares under warrants and
the
weighted-average remaining contractual life are as follows:
|
Warrants
Outstanding and Exercisable
|
|||||||
|
Warrants
- Exercise Price
|
Number
of Warrants
|
Weighted
Average Remaining
Contractual
Life - Years
|
|||||
|
$0.30
(Assumed from Thorium Power Ltd.)
|
2,104,999
|
.4
|
|||||
|
$0.39
|
2,743,662
|
.6
|
|||||
|
$0.50
(Assumed from Thorium Power Ltd.)
|
2,104,166
|
.8
|
|||||
|
$0.65
(Assumed from Thorium Power Ltd.)
|
18,329,918
|
.9
|
|||||
|
Total
|
25,282,745
|
|
|||||
The
investors in the November 23, 2005, March 30, 2006 and May 4, 2006 private
placements received detachable warrants for the purchase of 2,104,999, 2,104,166
and 18,329,918 shares of common stock, respectively, which were valued at
$127,467, $281,117 and $3,539,058, respectively. For purposes of estimating
the
intrinsic fair value of each warrant as of dates of the private placements,
the
Company utilized the Black Scholes option-pricing model. The Company estimated
the fair value of the warrants assuming no expected dividends and the following
weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
December
31, 2006
|
|
|
Average
risk-free interest rate
|
2.86%
- 4.30%
|
|
|
Average
expected life
|
1
year
|
|
|
Expected
volatility
|
142%
- 153%
|
|
|
Expected
dividends
|
0%
|
On
November 17, 2006 the Board of Directors of Thorium Power, Ltd., authorized
the
extension of the expiration date of all common stock purchase warrants above
by
six months from the expiration date identified on the respective warrants.
This
extension of the warrant terms resulted in an expense of $963,387, recorded
under the caption warrant expense in the statement of operations in the category
other income and expenses.
f).
Common Stock and Warrants reserved for Future Issuance
Common
stock and warrants reserved for future issuance consists of:
|
|
Shares
of
|
Stock
|
|
|||||||
|
|
Common
|
Purchase
|
|
|||||||
|
|
Stock
|
Warrants
|
Amount
|
|||||||
|
Stock-based
Compensation
|
4,000,000
|
0
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
||||||
F-24
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
The
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors on December 18, 2006 had
unanimously voted to issue 4 million shares of restricted stock as a year
end
2006 bonus to its CEO and Executive VP of International Nuclear Operations
as
well as redeem 1,620,000 shares of this stock grant from the two executives,
at
a price of $0.20 per share (after applying a 50% discount off the closing
market
stock price on the date of issuance)., This redemption was effected by the
Company in order to pay for the payroll taxes owed on the stock based
compensation to the executives. The 50% discount factor was determined by
an
independent third party valuation company, for payroll tax reporting purposes,
and the lack of marketability discount was determined by this valuation company
to be 50%. The Company, in January 2007, paid a total of $347,690 for primarily
payroll tax withholdings (as a result of redeeming 1,620,000 shares of stock)
and payroll tax expense due on these stock compensation issuances.
8. Income
Taxes
Deferred
income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between
the
carrying amounts of assets and liabilities recognized for financial reporting
and the amounts recognized for income tax purposes. The significant components
of deferred tax assets (at a 40% effective tax rate) as of December 31, 2006
are
as follows:
|
Total
Amount
|
Deferred
Tax Asset Amount
|
||||||
|
Assets
|
|||||||
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
2,719,496
|
1,087,798
|
|||||
|
Approximate
net operating loss
|
24,458,493
|
9,783,397
|
|||||
|
Less:
valuation allowance
|
(27,177,989
|
)
|
(10,871,196
|
)
|
|||
| $ |
-
|
-
|
|||||
Management
believes that it is more likely than not that the forecasted taxable income
will
not be sufficient to utilize the tax carryforwards of approximately $24,458,493,
before its expiration in 2012 and 2026 to fully recover the asset. As a result,
the amount of the deferred tax assets considered realizable was reduced 100%
by
a valuation allowance. In the near term, if estimates of future taxable income
are increased, such an increase will change the valuation allowance. The
Company
has no other deferred tax assets or liabilities.
9. Research
Agreement
The
Company is party to an agreement whereby all of its current research is being
performed by the Russian Research Centre, known as the Kurchatov Institute
(“RRC”), on the Company’s fuel designs. All the funding under this agreement is
supplied by the Company. As of March 12, 2007, the Company fulfilled all
of its
financial obligations under that agreement.
The
Company is now in the final stage of negotiations over a new Cooperative
Research Agreement (CRA) with an entity closely affiliated with the Russian
Atomic Energy Agency (RosAtom) that will provide a necessary legal mechanism
for
the next phase of research and demonstration activities leading to lead test
assembly testing in an operating VVER-1000 reactor in Russia. The initial
scope
of work under the new CRA is expected to cost approximately $5,000,000 over
a 15
month period.
10. Commitments
and Contingencies
Firm
Price Commitments
The
Company entered into a firm price commitment agreement in connection with
its
participation in the pre-conceptual design phase for the construction of
a
high-temperature test and research reactor in Texas. The agreement has created
a
commitment by the Company for a minimum of $1.25 million financial contribution
toward the project. A minimum payment of $50,000 on the agreement was due
and
paid on February 22, 2006, with 10 additional payments totaling $1.2 million
due
by December 31, 2006. A total of $550,000 has been paid as of December 31,
2006.
Management has decided to prioritize research and demonstration activities
on
its nuclear fuel designs in Russia (see above) and currently has no intention
to
contribute additional funding toward the high-temperature test and research
reactor project in Texas. In Management’s opinion, based on the terms of this
agreement, it has no further obligations to fund this project.
F-25
Thorium
Power, Ltd.
(A
Development Stage Company)
Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements
December
31, 2006
Lease
Commitments
i) The
Company leases office space. Future estimated rental payments under these
operating leases are as follows:
|
Dollars
|
||||
|
Year
ending December 31, 2007
|
$
|
70,000
|
||
|
Year
ending December 31, 2008
|
$
|
35,000
|
||
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
The
Company has employment agreements with its executive officers, the terms
of
which expire at various times. Such agreements provide for minimum compensation
levels, as well as incentive bonuses that are payable if specified management
goals are attained. Under each of the agreements, in the event the officer’s
employment is terminated (other than voluntarily by the officer or by the
Company for cause or upon the death of the officer), the Company, if all
provisions of the employment agreements are met, is committed to pay certain
benefits, including specified monthly severance.
F-26
Item
8. CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE.
There
have been no disagreements regarding accounting and financial disclosure matters
with our independent certified public accountants.
Item
8A. CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES.
As
required by Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act, we carried out an evaluation
of
the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report on Form 10-KSB.
This evaluation was carried out under the supervision and with the participation
of our management, including our President and Chief Executive Officer, and
our
acting Chief Financial Officer. Based upon that evaluation, management concluded
that the our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in the reports that it files or submits
under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management (including
the chief executive officer and chief financial officer) to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure and that our disclosure controls and
procedures are effective to give reasonable assurance that the information
required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file under the Exchange Act
is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified
in the rules and forms of the SEC.
19
There
were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified
in
connection with the evaluation performed that occurred during the fiscal year
covered by this report that has materially affected or is reasonably likely
to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Disclosure
controls and procedures are controls and other procedures that are designed
to
ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or
submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported, within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms.
Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and
procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in
our
reports filed under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to
management, including the Company’s Chief Executive and acting Chief Financial
Officer as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Item
8B. OTHER
INFORMATION.
None.
PART
III
The
information required by Item 9 — Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters
and Control Persons and Corporate Governance; Compliance with Section 16(a)
of
the Exchange Act of the Registrant; Item 10 — Executive Compensation;
Item 11 — Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
and Related Stockholder Matters, Item 12 — Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions, and Director Independence and Item 14 — Principal
Accountant Fees and Services is incorporated into Part III of this Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB by reference to the Proxy Statement for our Annual Meeting
of Stockholders scheduled to be held on April 25, 2007.
Item
13. EXHIBITS.
The
following exhibits
are
filed with this report, except those indicated as having previously been filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission and are incorporated by reference
to
another report, registration statement or form. As to any shareholder of record
requesting a copy of this report, we will furnish any exhibit indicated in
the
list below as filed with this report upon payment to us of our expenses in
furnishing the information.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Description
|
||
|
3.1
|
Articles
of Incorporation (incorporated by reference from the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form 10-SB filed on December 17,
1999).
|
||
|
3.2
|
By-laws
(incorporated by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on September 18, 2006).
|
||
|
4.1
|
2005
Compensation Plan for Outside Consultants of Custom Brand Networks,
Inc.
dated March 1, 2005 (incorporated by reference from the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed on March 10,
2005).
|
||
|
4.2
|
2005
Augmented Compensation Plan for Outside Consultants of the Company
dated
August 15, 2005 (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on August 19, 2005).
|
||
|
4.3
|
2006
Stock Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current
report of the Company on Form 8-K filed February 21,
2006)
|
||
|
10.1
|
Consulting
Agreement dated October 15, 2004 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Walter Doyle (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on October 19, 2004).
|
||
|
10.2
|
Consulting
Agreement dated October 15, 2004 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Adam Harrison (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on October 19, 2004).
|
||
|
10.3
|
Consulting
Agreement dated October 15, 2004 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Tim Lelek (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on October 19,
2004).
|
||
|
10.4
|
Consulting
Agreement dated October 15, 2004 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Bruce Fearn (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on October 19, 2004).
|
|
|
10.5
|
Compensation
Agreement dated October 15, 2004 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Paul G. Carter (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on October 19, 2004).
|
|
|
10.6
|
Consulting
Agreement dated January 24, 2005 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Walter Doyle (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on January 27, 2005).
|
|
|
10.7
|
Consulting
Agreement dated January 24, 2005 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Sanjeev Pamnani (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on January 27, 2005).
|
|
|
10.8
|
Consulting
Agreement dated January 24, 2005 between Custom Branded Networks,
Inc. and
Seth Shaw (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 filed on January 27,
2005).
|
20
|
10.9
|
Assignment
of Specific Mineral Rights dated September 14, 2005 between American
Graphite Holdings and the Company (incorporated by reference from
the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 11,
2005).
|
|
|
10.10
|
Amendment
No. 1, dated March 5, 2006, to Assignment of Specific Mineral Rights
between American Graphite Holdings and the Company (incorporated
by
reference from Exhibit 10.10 of the initial filing of this Registration
Statement on Form S-4 filed June 14, 2006).
|
|
|
10.11
|
Mining
Acquisition Agreement dated September 30, 2005 between Walter Doyle
and
the Company (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Current Report
on Form 8-K filed on October 11, 2005).
|
|
|
10.12
|
Amendment
No. 1, dated March 5, 2006, to Mining Acquisition Agreement between
Walter
Doyle and the Company (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.12
of the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed June 14,
2006).
|
|
|
10.13
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger dated as of February 14, 2006, between Novastar
Resources Ltd., TP Acquisition Corp. and Thorium Power, Inc. (incorporated
by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June
13, 2006).
|
|
|
10.14
|
Amendment
No. 1, dated June 9, 2006, to Agreement and Plan of Merger between
Novastar Resources Ltd., TP Acquisition Corp. and Thorium Power,
Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current report
of the
Company on Form 8-K filed June 13, 2006).
|
|
|
10.15
|
Employment
Agreement, dated as of February 14, 2006, between the Company and
Seth
Grae (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the current report
of
the Company on Form 8-K filed February 21, 2006)
|
|
|
10.16
|
Stock
Option Agreement, dated as of February 14, 2006, between the Company
and
Seth Grae (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the current
report
of the Company on Form 8-K filed February 21, 2006)
|
|
|
10.17
|
Subscription
Agreement, dated as of February 14, 2006, between the Company and
Thorium
Power (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the current report
of
the Company on Form 8-K filed February 21, 2006)
|
|
|
10.18
|
Amended
and Restated Consulting Agreement, dated February 6, 2006, between
the
Company and Alan Gelband (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5
of the
current report of the Company on Form 8-K filed February 21,
2006)
|
|
|
10.19
|
Form
of Subscription Agreement between the Company and the investors in
the
private placement closed on February 14, 2006 (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.6 of the current report of the Company on Form 8-K
filed
February 21, 2006)
|
|
|
10.20
|
Assignment
of Minerals Lease, dated December 31, 2005, between CM Properties
and the
Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current
report
of the Company on Form 8-K filed January 10, 2006)
|
|
|
10.21
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Assignment of Minerals Lease, dated March 5, 2006 between
CM
Properties and the Company (incorporated by reference from Exhibit
10.21
of the initial filing of this Registration Statement on Form S-4
filed
June 14, 2006).
|
|
|
10.22
|
Office
Service Renewal Agreement, dated September 21, 2005, between Tysons
Business Center, LLC and Thorium Power (incorporated by reference
from
Exhibit 10.22 of the initial filing of this Registration Statement
on Form
S-4 filed June 14, 2006).
|
|
|
10.23
|
Sublease
Agreement, dated May 28, 2004, between Thorium Power and Carmen &
Muss, P.L.L.C. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23 of the
initial filing of this Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed June
14,
2006).
|
|
|
10.24
|
Office
Building Lease, dated August 14, 2001, between Washington Real Estate
Investment Trust and Thorium Power (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit
10.24 of the initial filing of this Registration Statement on Form
S-4
filed June 14, 2006).
|
|
|
10.25
|
Teaming
Agreement dated February 22, 2006 between The University of Texas
System,
The University of Texas of the Permian Basin, The University of Texas
at
Austin, The University of Texas at Arlington, The University of Texas
at
Dallas, The University of Texas at El Paso, The City of Andrews,
Texas,
Andrews County, Texas, the Midland Development Corporation, the Odessa
Development Corporation, Thorium Power and General Atomics (incorporated
by reference from Exhibit 10. the Company’s Registration Statement on Form
S-4 filed June 14, 2006).
|
|
|
10.26
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Amended and Restated Consulting Agreement, dated June 12,
2006,
among the Company, Alan Gelband and Alan Gelband Company, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current report
of the
Company on Form 8-K filed June 13, 2006).
|
|
|
10.27
|
Employment
Agreement, dated June 6, 2006, between the Company and Cornelius
J. Milmoe
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current report
of the
Company on Form 8-K filed June 13, 2006).
|
|
|
10.28
|
Stock
Option Agreement, dated June 6, 2006, between the Company and Cornelius
J.
Milmoe (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current
report of
the Company on Form 8-K filed June 13, 2006).
|
|
|
10.29
|
Consulting
Agreement, dated June 12, 2006, between the Company and Larry Goldman
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current report
of the
Company on Form 8-K filed June 13, 2006).
|
|
|
10.30
|
Stock
Option Agreement, dated June 12, 2006, between the Company and Larry
Goldman (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current
report
of the Company on Form 8-K filed June 13,
2006).
|
21
|
10.31
|
Office
Service Agreement, dated April 19, 2006, between Tysons Business
Center
LLC and the Company (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.31
the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed June 14,
2006).
|
|
|
10.32
|
Employment
Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, between the Company and Andrey Mushakov
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current report
of the
Company on Form 8-K filed August 4, 2006).
|
|
|
10.33
|
Stock
Option Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, between the Company and Andrey
Mushakov (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the current
report
of the Company on Form 8-K filed August 4, 2006).
|
|
|
10.34
|
Employment
Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, between the Company and Thomas Graham,
Jr.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the current report
of the
Company on Form 8-K filed August 4, 2006).
|
|
|
10.35
|
Stock
Option Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, between the Company and Thomas
Graham, Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the current
report of the Company on Form 8-K filed August 4,
2006).
|
|
|
10.36
|
Amendment
No. 2, dated August 8, 2006, to Agreement and Plan of Merger between
Novastar Resources Ltd., TP Acquisition Corp. and Thorium Power,
Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current report
of
Novastar on Form 8-K filed August 9, 2006).
|
|
|
10.37
|
Independent
Director Contract, dated August 21, 2006, between the Company and
Victor
Alessi (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the current
report of
the Company on Form 8-K filed August 25, 2006).
|
|
|
10.38
|
Stock
Option Agreement, dated August 21, 2006, between the Company and
Victor
Alessi (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the current
report of
the Company on Form 8-K filed August 25, 2006).
|
|
|
14.1
|
Code
of Ethics (incorporated by reference from the Company’s Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB filed on November 25, 2005).
|
|
|
16.1
|
Letter
from Morgan and Company dated September 14, 2005 regarding change
in
independent accountant (incorporated by reference from the Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 11, 2005).
|
|
|
31.1*
|
Rule
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification - Principal Executive
Officer
|
|
|
31.2*
|
Rule
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification - Principal Accounting
Officer
|
|
|
32*
|
Section
1350 Certifications
|
|
|
99.1*
|
Thorium
Power, Inc. interim financial statements for the nine month period
ended
September 30, 2006.
|
|
| 99.2* | Report of Pricewaterhouse Coopers dated March 29,2002. |
| * |
Filed
herewith
|
22
SIGNATURES
In
accordance with section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the
Registrant caused this Report on Form 10-KSB to be signed on its behalf by
the
undersigned, thereto duly authorized individual.
Date:
March 20, 2007
| THORIUM POWER, LTD. | ||
| |
|
|
| By: | /s/ Seth Grae | |
|
Seth
Grae
Chief
Executive Officer,
President
and Director
|
||
In
accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed
below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities
and on the dates indicated.
|
SIGNATURE
|
TITLE
|
|
|
/s/
Seth Grae
|
Chief
Executive Officer, President and Director
|
|
|
Seth
Grae
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
|
/s/
Larry Goldman
|
|
Acting
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
Larry
Goldman
|
(Principal
Financial Officer)
|
|
|
/s/
Thomas Graham, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
Thomas
Graham, Jr.
|
||
|
/s/
Victor Alessi
|
|
Director
|
|
Victor
Alessi
|
||
|
/s/
Jack Ladd
|
|
Director
|
|
Jack
Ladd
|
||
|
/s/
Dan Magraw
|
|
Director
|
|
Dan
Magraw
|
23