Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

[X]	Annual Report under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.
[   ]	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:000-53632

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.
(Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

825 Great Northern Boulevard, Expedition Block , Suite 304 Helena, MT 59601
(Address of principal executive offices and zip code)

(406) 442-9444
(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, $.001 par value

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES [   ] NO [X]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. YES [   ] NO [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has 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 [   ] NO [ X ]

1

---

Table of Contents

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

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

Large accelerated filer [   ]

Accelerated filer [   ]

Non-accelerated filer [   ]

Smaller reporting company [X]

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, as of June 30, 2015 was $2,021,688 based on the average closing price of the Registrant’s common stock on the OTC Bulletin Board exchange. Shares of Common Stock held by each officer and director and by each person who is known by the registrant to own 10% or more of the outstanding Common Stock, if any, have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates of the registrant. The determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for any other purpose. The shares of our company are currently listed on the OTC Bulletin Board exchange, symbol “BKKN.”

The number of shares outstanding of the issuer’s common stock as of June 30, 2016 is 56,735,350 shares.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None.

2

---

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I
	Item 1.		Business	5
	Item 1A.		Risk Factors	13
	Item 2.		Properties	25
	Item 3.		Legal Proceedings	28
	Item 4.		Mine Safety Disclosures	29
PART II
	Item 5.		Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	29
	Item 6.		Selected Financial Data	30
	Item 7.		Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	30
	Item 7A.		Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	34
	Item 8.		Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	35
	Item 9.		Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	50
	Item 9A.		Controls and Procedures	50
	Item 9B.		Other Information	51
PART III
	Item 10.		Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	51
	Item 11.		Executive Compensation	54
	Item 12.		Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	55
	Item 13.		Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	55
	Item 14.		Principal Accountant Fees and Services	56
PART IV
	Item 15.		Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	56
SIGNATURES				59

3

---

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY STATEMENTS REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

We, Bakken Resources, Inc. (the “Company,” “BRI,” “we,” “us,” or “our”) are including the following discussion to inform our existing and potential security holders generally of some of the risks and uncertainties that can affect our company and to take advantage of the “safe harbor” protection for forward-looking statements that applicable federal securities law affords.

From time to time, our management or persons acting on our behalf may make forward-looking statements to inform existing and potential security holders about our company. All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this report regarding our financial position, business strategy, plans and objectives of management for future operations, industry conditions, and indebtedness covenant compliance are forward-looking statements. When used in this report, forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “target,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes. Items contemplating or making assumptions about actual or potential future sales, market size, collaborations, and trends, or operating results also constitute such forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, and important factors (many of which are beyond our control) that could cause actual results to differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements, include but not limited to the following: general economic or industry conditions, economic conditions nationally or in the communities in which our company conducts business, changes in the interest rate, legislation or regulatory requirements, conditions of the securities markets, our ability to raise capital, changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines, financial or political instability, acts of war or terrorism, as well as other economic, competitive, governmental, regulatory or technical factors affecting our company's operations, products, services, and prices.

We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and assumptions about future events. While our management considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory, and other risks, contingencies, and uncertainties. Most of these things are difficult to predict and are beyond our control. Accordingly, results actually achieved may differ materially from expected results in forward-looking statements. Such statements speak only as of the date they are made. You should consider carefully the statements in “Item 1A. (Risk Factors)” and other sections of this report, which describe factors that could cause our actual results to differ from those set forth in our forward-looking statements. We do not undertake, and specifically disclaim, any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements, other than required by law or applicable regulation.

Readers are urged to carefully review and consider our various disclosures in our reports filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), which attempt to advise of the risks and factors that may affect our business, financial condition, results of operation, and cash flows. If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materializes, or if our underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results may vary materially from those expected or projected.

4

---

Table of Contents

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.
ANNUAL REPORT OF FORM 10-K
FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015
PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS.

Overview

Bakken Resources, Inc. is an independent energy company focused on holding non-working interests in oil and natural gas properties in North America. Bakken’s primary focus since inception in 2010 has been the Williston Basin in western North Dakota. The Company owns mineral rights to approximately 7,200 gross acres and 1,600 net mineral acres of land located about eight miles southeast of Williston, North Dakota. The Company’s land assets consist generally of net mineral acres spanning from the sub-surface to the base of the so-called “rock unit” in an area commonly referred to as the Bakken formation.

A non-working interest generally means that the Company doesn’t bear either the risk or the financial burden attributable to exploration and production of oil and natural gas wells. The Company simply invests in wells or projects that have demonstrated a high degree of success. The Company partners with strong operators to explore and develop oil and natural gas from company leases.

The Company voluntarily provides the following table in order to provide an overview of third-party production in which the Company holds royalty interests, noting however, that such disclosures are not required for non-producing oil and gas companies such as BKKN.

During 2015, the Company received royalty and overriding royalty payments on seventy-five (75) producing oil wells seventy-two (72) of which also produce natural gas. This production and proved reserves are as follows:

	Producing	Average	Proved	Percent	2015
	Wells	Daily	Reserves	Proved	Average
		Production		Developed	Price
Oil	75	10,039 bbls	53,624,580 bbls.	27%	43.01
Natural Gas	72	10,173 mcf	80,603,008 MCF	21%	2.31
Bbls = Barrels   MCF = thousand cubic feet

Leases comprising the Company’s mineral rights provide an average 17% lease interest in production-based revenue before accounting for overriding royalties held by third parties. We acquired our mineral rights from a related Nevada company named Holms Energy LLC. (“Holms Energy”), which retained a 5% overriding royalty. Holms Energy’s overriding royalty is set to expire in November of 2020. Therefore, we expect to hold our current average 12% royalty (viz. 17% less 5%) from the oil and gas produced until November 2020. Upon expiration of Holms Energy’s overriding royalty, the 5% will revert back to the Company. The Company’s effective net royalty interest is a product of three factors: stated lease percentage, net mineral acres, and spacing unit. The lease rate multiplied by the net mineral acres, divided by the spacing unit yields the net royalty interest for each well. The average effective net royalty interest in 2015 was .73%. For illustrative purposes, for every $100 in oil and gas production value, the Company receives $0.73 in net royalty revenue.

We currently have leases with three contracted oil drilling operators (collectively, the “Lessees”) on various parcels of land on which we have mineral rights royalty interests: (1) Oasis Petroleum, (2) Continental Resources, Inc., and (3) Statoil ASA. We have no rights to influence our Lessees’ activities, but if the Lessees do not accomplish the agreed upon drilling programs within the timeline, Lessees can lose their leases.

Background

The predecessor to our company was incorporated on June 6, 2008, under the laws of the State of Nevada, under the name Multisys Language Solutions, Inc. (“MLS”). Holms Energy contributed the primary assets that formed the basis of our current business operations. In connection with the closing of the transactions resulting in the contribution of the mineral rights held by Holms Energy in November 2010, Holms Energy received forty million (40,000,000) shares of common stock of the Company. Holms Energy retained a 5% overriding royalty on all gross revenue generated from the Company's gas and oil production royalty revenues. The mineral rights from Holms Energy transferred the Company only those rights from the surface to the base of the Bakken formation.

5

---

Table of Contents

Also in connection with the November 2010 transactions, the Company purchased approximately 800 net mineral acres from the Revocable Living Trust of Rocky G. Greenfield and Evenette G. Greenfield. These mineral rights included all mineral rights from the surface to the basement. The Company sold these 800 net mineral acres to a third party in February of 2014 and retained a two percent (2%) overriding royalty on the sale of the mineral rights.

Description of Oil Leases

BRI currently derives its primary source of revenue from royalties generated from leasing its mineral acreage. BRI’s mineral acreage consists of approximately 1,600 net mineral acres located primarily in McKenzie County, North Dakota. Such 1,600 net mineral acres are currently spread across 17 spacing units. Operators covering BRI’s minerals have been approved for up to 15 wells per spacing unit (typically 1,280 acres per spacing unit), but generally petition for permits prior to the commencement of drilling in a particular spacing unit. If this holds for all spacing units under which BRI has mineral acres, BRI would have a royalty interest in up to 187 wells. Note, however, that the royalties due to BRI under any particular well vary based on the number of acres BRI has under any particular spacing unit with a producing well.

Description of Oil Production Relevant to the Company

With respect to drilling operations, pursuant to the North Dakota Oil and Gas Commission, long lateral deep horizontal multistage fracking wells in the Bakken Formation must be permitted in spacing unit of not less than 640 acres, up to 2,900 acres, with some exceptions. The spacing units have to be approved and permitted in advance of drilling by the North Dakota Oil and Gas Commission. Recently, the North Dakota Industrial Commission (“NDIC”) has approved multi-well permits for wells drilled in the Three Forks formation along several of the defined “benches” typically associated with separate geologic benchmarks contained in the Three Forks formation. Since approximately one-third of the Company’s current net mineral acres include acreage in the Three Forks formation, any increase in the drilling operations on the Company’s net mineral acres which are permitted for Three Forks wells may result an increased number of total wells from which the Company may derive royalty income.

When operators drill a horizontal well in the area where the subject property is located, they typically drill down about 10,800 vertical feet and then utilize a down-hole directional drilling tool to flatten the hole to 90 degrees and drill horizontally to the oil and gas producing formation. Horizontal directional drilling provides more contact area to the oil bearing formation than a typical vertical well. This method of drilling together with fracking is referred to as an enhanced oil recovery method, and is the primary source of recovery from the Bakken Formation. BRI does, however, have interests in certain wells not drilled into the Bakken Formation.

The Company maintains a table on its website with information about wells in which it has mineral interests. That table is available at http://www.BakkenResourcesInc.com/WellActivity.php

The information provided in our website’s table is categorized by well name, the operator, field and pool, the NDIC identification number, and the well status and location description. Well status is defined by several categories: Producing; Confidential; Drilling; and Permitted Location to Drill. The table is updated as new information becomes available on the NDIC website at https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/. Included on the table are NDIC file numbers which can be used when searching for information for each well listed on the BRI webpage. Individuals may subscribe to the NDIC website following the prompts on the homepage. A premium service subscription is also available for a fee.

Currently, most of the leases covering the Company’s mineral acres contain what is commonly referred to as “continuous drilling clauses.” Generally, a continuous drilling clause requires an operator to maintain active drilling operations in order to hold or extend an oil and gas lease past its natural expiration date. All the Company’s current leases have active drilling operations and are likely to have active operations in the foreseeable future.

2015 Highlights

●	Despite low oil and natural gas prices, both oil and natural gas production volumes increased in 2015.
●	After bottoming in early 2015, oil and natural gas prices have generally increased throughout 2015.
●	The significant oil and natural gas price decline has also driven mineral asset prices down. The Company has been engaged in substantial efforts to identify and secure long-term producing assets.
●	The Company had more than twenty new wells in some state of development at year end.
●	The Company has made significant strides to resolve outstanding litigation.
●	The Company has filed two lawsuits during 2015 seeking millions of dollars in damages.
●	An oil pipeline was approved by the federal government, as well as the states through which the pipeline is planned to pass. This key infrastructure would greatly reduce the cost associated with oil transportation from the Bakken area and enhance well development.

6

---

Table of Contents

Our long-term plan is simple: Grow the company through mineral asset acquisition. We focus on royalties and overriding royalties. These particular asset categories offer risk and return characteristics that are consistent with our initial promise to the shareholders and our skill set. We plan to build a portfolio of royalty and overriding royalty assets that offer differing production cycles, geographic dispersion, and drilling methods. In addition to the capital we have acquired through the sale of the Greenfield assets earlier this year, the Company is seeking additional external capital to support our asset acquisition initiative.

Pursuant to our business plan and strategy, we have sought out relationships to gather information on future potential oil and gas drilling projects and explored and contemplated possible joint partnerships in other drilling programs. The Company remains in discussion with various groups for strategic partnerships and plans to announce the completion of such arrangements if and when they are consummated.

Geology of the Bakken Formation

The U.S. Geological Survey (“USGS”) describes the Bakken Formation as “a thin but widespread unit within the central and deeper portions of the Williston Basin in Montana, North Dakota, and the Canadian Provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The formation consists of three members: (1) lower shale member, (2) middle sandstone member, (3) upper shale member, and (4) Pronghorn Member. Each succeeding member is of greater geographic extent than the underlying member. Both the upper and lower shale members are organic-rich marine shale of fairly consistent lithology; they are the petroleum source rocks and part of the continuous reservoir for hydrocarbons produced from the Bakken Formation. The middle sandstone member varies in thickness, lithology, and petro-physical properties, and local development of matrix porosity enhances oil production in both continuous and conventional Bakken reservoirs.” (source: USGS Fact Sheet, April 2013).

According to the NDIC’s Oil and Gas Division, the Bakken Shale in the Williston Basin is over 11,000 ft. deep at the center of the formation and rises to 3,100 ft. on the edges of the basin. The Bakken Formation is composed of three distinct members. The first layer averages twenty three feet in depth and consists of blackish marine shale. The second member runs from 30 ft. to 80 ft. and composed of intermeddled limestone, siltstone, sandstone and dolomite. The bottom member is a dark black marine shale that averages 10 ft. to 30 ft. in thickness. All three formations that make up the Bakken are rich in an organic material called Kerogen. When Kerogen is heated (thermogenic processes) or broken down by organic means (biogenic processes), natural gas and oil are created. The Bakken Formation is capped by a very thick limestone formation called the Lodgepole. It is because of this limestone cap that there is so much gas and oil trapped in the shale horizon. The Bakken Formation is what is considered a thermally mature deposit and the oil from the Bakken has a 41 specific gravity and is deemed to be commercially high grade crude oil. Generally, the source rock commonly referred to as the “Three Forks Formation” is located geologically below the Bakken formation.

The geological formation, as well as many other criteria, determines the production level of any commercial wells, which impact the potential future royalty revenue, if any. The following profile of the Williston Basin gives an idea as to the value of our mineral assets. Our leases are in a geographic area known as the Williston Basin, which is a large intracratonic sedimentary basin in eastern Montana, western North and South Dakota and southern Saskatchewan known for its rich deposits of petroleum and potash. The basin is a geologic structural basin but not a topographic depression; it is transected by the Missouri River. The oval-shaped depression extends approximately 475 miles (764 km) north-south and 300 miles (480 km) east-west. The map below shows the general location of the Bakken Formation and the Alberta Bakken (not intended to show or represent the location of any oil fields). (Source: http://seekingalpha.com/article/284628-the-alberta-bakken-the-smaller-sibling-offers-compelling-prospects ).

7

---

Table of Contents

The smaller area shown in the northwest portion of Montana shows generally the location of mineral acreage BRI purchased in Fall 2011 (referred to as the “Duck Lake Property”). Drilling has not begun on the Duck Lake Property.

The Bakken Formation has received considerable recognition for its oil production capabilities. Oil was discovered in this formation in 1951 but production was difficult to achieve at that time. Technological developments and improvements since then have given operators the capabilities in recent years to develop the formation. In April 2013, the USGS released a report estimating the amount of oil recoverable with current technology at 7.4 billion barrels. At the same time, the State of North Dakota also released a report estimating recoverable oil at 2.1 billion barrels. Other industry estimates place the total oil available, which includes oil that cannot be recovered with current technology, at 18 billion barrels.

Geology of the Three Forks Formation

There are several formations below the subsurface of the Bakken formation known commonly as the Three Forks. Evaluative wells have already been drilled to these “benches” of the Three Forks. Operators have recently begun exploratory drilling into these benches. Several operators have announced plans to evaluate high density drilling possibilities to these benches. The graphic below shows a development pilot program Continental has announced as part of its Three Forks drilling program. (http://themilliondollarway.blogspot.com/2013/10/folks-have-been-requesting-graphics-of.html.

(Source: Seeking Alpha (http://seekingalpha.com/article/1248431-bakken-the-downspacing-bounty-and-birth-of-array-fracking)

8

---

Table of Contents

The drilling pattern in this graphic is known as array drilling. The offset pattern of drilling is expected to allow high density drilling for a spacing unit (1,280 acres). The goal is to increase the number of wells without impacting the number of barrels produced from each well.

BRI receives overriding royalty payments from wells producing from the Three Forks formation through the retained overriding royalty from the sale of the Greenfield assets in 2014.

Horizontal Drilling

Horizontal or directional drilling has revolutionized the way the oil and gas wells are being drilled in the Williston Basin. The reason that horizontal drilling is changing the oil and gas business is that a well drilled horizontally through a formation that contains oil and gas should produce many more times that of a vertical well. A vertical well will only penetrate a limited area of the productive zone, whereas a well drilled horizontally may penetrate up to 10,000’ of the zone. This also means that previously tight shale formations such as the Bakken Formation can result in prolific production.

The Bakken Formation has poor porosity which reduces the ability of the gas and oil to flow out of this horizon. Recently, horizontal drilling of lateral holes combined with hydraulic fracturing (commonly referred to as “fracking”) has resulted in substantial production from thick formations that have poor porosity. It should be noted, however, that porosity and the permeability of the oil shale rock can vary widely and unpredictably over short distances, thus dry wells can be found next to prolific wells with little explanation geologically.

Fracking is a procedure whereby packers (plugs) are set every 250’ to 300’ and up to ten 2,000 horsepower hydraulic pumps deliver high pressure fluids that contain a high percentage of round ceramic beads and sand are utilized as proppants and keep the fissures and fractures open along the bedding-planes that are created by the high pressure fluids. The fissures and channels created by the high pressure fluid and held open by the ceramic beads that are left behind; provide a pathway to allow the gas and oil to flow into the drill hole.

Two technologies are currently being used to enhance horizontal drilling: (1) log while drilling (“LWD”), and (2) drill string radar. LWD uses long sensors which read gamma radiation given off by the formation, which provides real time information to the drillers and this information is gathered and assists drillers to drill in the optimum sections of the formation. Drill string radar provides information to the driller on the surface as to what direction, angle and depth the well is being drilled. The combination of the two technologies greatly assists keeping the drill bit in the optimum location within the Bakken formation. Below is a diagram example of horizontal drilling.

9

---

Table of Contents

Governmental Regulations

We are not directly subject to various rules, regulations and limitations impacting the oil and natural gas exploration and production industry as whole, however, operators who operate on our properties may be impacted by such rules and regulations.

Regulation of Oil and Natural Gas Production.

Oil and natural gas exploration, production and related operations, when developed, are subject to extensive rules and regulations promulgated by federal, state and local authorities and agencies. For example, the state of North Dakota and Montana requires permits for exploration drilling, operation of commercial wells, submission of several reports concerning operations of wells and imposes other requirements relating to the production of oil and natural gas. Such states may also have statutes and regulations addressing conservation matters, including provisions for the unitization or pooling of oil and natural gas properties, the establishment of maximum rates of production from wells, and the regulation of spacing, plugging and abandonment of such wells.

Failure to comply with any such rules and regulations by our operators can result in substantial penalties, which in turn, may impact the amount of royalty revenue we derive from our leased properties. Although we believe that we are currently in substantial compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, to the extent they apply to us, because such rules and regulations are frequently amended or reinterpreted, we are unable to predict the future cost or impact of complying with such laws. Significant expenditures may be required to comply with governmental laws and regulations and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Environmental Matters

The following environmental discussion may be applicable directly to our operators; however, we could be indirectly impacted, since environmental laws and regulations could significantly impact production of the wells on our properties. Our operators and properties are impacted by extensive and changing federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection, including the generation, storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of materials into the environment, and relating to safety and health, as such regulations relate to our operators. The recent trend in environmental legislation and regulation generally is toward stricter standards, and this trend will likely continue. These laws and regulations may:

●	require the acquisition of a permit or other authorization before construction or drilling commences and for certain other activities;
●	limit or prohibit construction, drilling and other activities on certain lands lying within wilderness and other protected areas; and
●	impose substantial liabilities for pollution resulting from its operations.

The permits required by our operators may be subject to revocation, modification and renewal by issuing authorities. Governmental authorities have the power to enforce their regulations, and violations are subject to fines or injunctions, or both. In the opinion of management, we are in substantial compliance with current applicable environmental laws and regulations, and have no material commitments for capital expenditures to comply with existing environmental requirements. Nevertheless, changes in existing environmental laws and regulations or in interpretations thereof could have a significant impact on BRI, as well as the oil and natural gas industry in general.

The Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and comparable state statutes impose strict, joint and several liabilities on owners and operators of sites and on persons who disposed of or arranged for the disposal of “hazardous substances” found at such sites. It is not uncommon for the neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by the hazardous substances released into the environment. The Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) and comparable state statutes govern the disposal of “solid waste” and “hazardous waste” and authorize the imposition of substantial fines and penalties for noncompliance. Although CERCLA excludes petroleum from its definition of “hazardous substance,” state laws affecting our operators may impose clean-up liability relating to petroleum and petroleum related products. In addition, although RCRA classifies certain oil field wastes as “non-hazardous,” such exploration and production wastes could be reclassified as hazardous wastes thereby making such wastes subject to more stringent handling and disposal requirements.

10

---

Table of Contents

Our operations are also subject to the federal Clean Water Act and analogous state laws. The Clean Water Act and similar state acts regulate other discharges of wastewater, oil, and other pollutants to surface water bodies, such as lakes, rivers, wetlands, and streams. Failure to obtain permits for such discharges could result in civil and criminal penalties, orders to cease such discharges, and costs to remediate and pay natural resources damages. Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has adopted regulations concerning discharges of storm water runoff. This program requires covered facilities to obtain individual permits, or seek coverage under a general permit. Some of our properties may require permits for discharges of storm water runoff and our operators may apply for storm water discharge permit coverage and updating storm water discharge management practices at some of our facilities. These laws also require the preparation and implementation of Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plans in connection with on-site storage of significant quantities of oil.

The Federal Clean Air Act and comparable state laws regulate emissions of various air pollutants through air emissions permitting programs and the imposition of other requirements. In addition, the EPA has developed and continues to develop stringent regulations governing emissions of toxic air pollutants at specified sources. Federal and state regulatory agencies can impose administrative, civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance with air permits or other requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and associated state laws and regulations. The operations provided by our operators, may be, in certain circumstances and locations, subject to permits and restrictions under these statutes for emissions of air pollutants.

The Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) seeks to ensure that activities do not jeopardize endangered or threatened animal, fish and plant species, nor destroy or modify the critical habitat of such species. Under ESA, exploration and production operations, as well as actions by federal agencies, may not significantly impair or jeopardize the species or its habitat. ESA provides for criminal penalties for willful violations of the Act. Other statutes that provide protection to animal and plant species and that may apply to our operations include, but are not necessarily limited to, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. Although we believe that our operations will be in substantial compliance with such statutes, any change in these statutes or any reclassification of a species as endangered could subject BRI to significant expenses to modify our operations or could force BRI to discontinue certain operations altogether.

Competition

The oil and natural gas industry is intensely competitive, and we compete with numerous other oil and gas exploration and production companies who may also be seeking oil well operators for leasehold interests. Many of these companies have substantially greater resources than we have. Not only do they explore for and produce oil and natural gas, but many also carry on midstream and refining operations and market petroleum and other products on a regional, national or worldwide basis. The operations of other companies may be able to pay more for exploratory prospects and productive oil and natural gas properties. They may also have more resources to define, evaluate, bid for, and purchase more properties and prospects than our financial or human resources permit.

Our larger or integrated competitors may have the resources to be better able to absorb the burden of existing, and any changes to federal, state, and local laws and regulations more easily than we can, which would adversely affect our competitive position. Our ability to determine reserves and acquire additional properties in the future will be dependent upon our ability and resources to evaluate and select suitable properties and to consummate transactions in this highly competitive environment. In addition, we may be at a disadvantage in producing oil and natural gas properties and bidding for exploratory prospects, because we have fewer financial and human resources than many other companies in our industry. Should a larger and better financed company decide to directly compete with us, and be successful in its efforts, our business could be adversely affected.

Marketing and Customers

The market for oil and natural gas that we will produce depends on factors beyond our control, including the extent of domestic production and imports of oil and natural gas, the proximity and capacity of natural gas pipelines and other transportation facilities, demand for oil and natural gas, the marketing of competitive fuels and the effects of state and federal regulation. The oil and gas industry also competes with other industries in supplying the energy and fuel requirements of industrial, commercial and individual consumers.

Our production royalties derived from oil and gas production from our properties are expected to be sold by the Lessees at prices tied to the spot oil markets. We derive certain royalty revenues from gas produced from wells drilled on our property, but currently this amount is small relative to the royalties we receive from oil production. We will be required to rely on the Lessees to market and sell any future gas production.

Employees/Consultants

We currently have one full-time employee: Karen Midtlyng, Secretary and Director. As of December 31, 2015, Val M. Holms, our President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman, was on leave of absence from the Company. Dan Anderson, Chief Financial Officer, is an independent contractor. All of our appointed executives have entered into written employments agreements. As drilling production activities continue to increase by our Lessees, and if additional revenue from production royalties develops as anticipated and continues to increase, we may hire additional technical, operational or administrative personnel as appropriate. We are using and will continue to use the services of independent consultants and contractors to perform various professional services. We believe that this use of third-party service providers may enhance our ability to contain general and administrative expenses.

11

---

Table of Contents

Office Location

Our offices are located at 825 Great Northern Boulevard, Expedition Block, Suite 304, Helena, MT 59601.

Available Information—Reports to Security Holders

Our website address is www.bakkenresourcesinc.com. We make available on this website under “Company SEC Filings” free of charge, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, Section 16 reports for officers and directors, and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file those materials with, or furnish those materials to, the SEC. These filings are also available to the public at the SEC's Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Room 1580, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. Electronic filings with the SEC are also available on the SEC internet website at www.sec.gov.

In addition, BRI regularly monitors and maintains information relating to drilling activity on wells which it has a mineral interest. Such information can also be found on our website.

12

---

Table of Contents

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the risks, uncertainties and other factors described below. The statements contained or incorporated herein that are not historic facts are forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those set forth in or implied by forward-looking statements. Any of the factors could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects and could negatively impact the market price of our common stock. Also, you should be aware that the risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties, of which we are not yet aware, or that we currently consider to be immaterial may also impair our business operations.

Risks Related to Our Company

We are an early stage company that may never attain profitability.

The business of acquiring, exploring for, developing and producing hydrocarbon reserves is inherently risky. We have a limited operating history for you to consider in evaluating our business and prospects. Our operations are therefore subject to all of the risks inherent in acquiring, exploring for, developing and producing hydrocarbon reserves, particularly in light of our limited experience in undertaking such activities. We may never overcome these obstacles.

Our business is speculative and dependent upon the implementation of our business plan and our ability to enter into agreements with third parties for the rights to exploit potential oil and natural gas reserves on terms that will be commercially viable for us.

Our current business model relies exclusively on uncertain future royalty payments as a source of future revenue. We have no influence on the activities conducted by the Lessees with regards to the exploitation of mineral rights owned by the Company.

Our current business model relates to the potential generation of revenue from royalties tied to certain leases. These leases have been granted to experienced exploration and operating companies, all of whom have prior experience in drilling deep lateral multi-fracture horizontal wells. Until such time as wells are drilled on property where the Company owns mineral rights; any future income will be uncertain. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the leases, we have no influence with regard to when the drilling will be undertaken, no decision making ability as to the location of any future wells and no influence as to the rate the wells are produced, if the operators are successful, of which there is no assurance. In the event the Lessees fail to meet their drilling commitment, the company has only three options: 1) it can agree to grant an extension; 2) it can renegotiate the terms of the existing leases; or 3) it can legally terminate the leases.

We may be unable to obtain additional capital or generate significant production royalty income that we will require to implement our business plan, which could restrict our ability to grow.

We expect that our current capital and our other existing resources will be sufficient only to provide a limited amount of working capital, and the potential of production royalty revenues generated from our oil and gas mineral rights properties, of which there is no assurance, may not be sufficient to fund both our continuing operations and our planned growth. We may require additional capital to continue to operate our business beyond the initial phase of development and to further expand our exploration and development programs to additional properties. We may be unable to obtain additional capital, and if we are able to secure additional capital, it may not be pursuant to terms deemed to be favorable to BRI and its shareholders.

Future acquisitions and future exploration, development, production and marketing activities, as well as our administrative requirements (such as salaries, insurance expenses and general overhead expenses, as well as legal compliance costs and accounting expenses) may require a substantial amount of additional capital and cash flow.

We may pursue sources of additional capital through various financing transactions or arrangements, including joint venturing of projects, debt financing, equity financing or other means. We may not be successful in locating suitable financing transactions in the time period required or at all, and we may not obtain the capital we require by other means. If we do not succeed in raising additional capital, our resources may not be sufficient to fund our planned operations going forward beyond twelve months from now.

Any additional capital raised through the sale of equity may dilute the ownership percentage of our stockholders. This could also result in a decrease in the fair market value of our equity securities because our assets would be owned by a larger pool of outstanding equity. The terms of securities we issue in future capital transactions may be more favorable to our new investors, and may include preferences, superior voting rights and the issuance of other derivative securities, and issuances of incentive awards under equity employee incentive plans, which may have a further dilutive effect.

13

---

Table of Contents

Our ability to obtain financing may be impaired by such factors as the capital markets (both generally and in the oil and gas industry in particular), our status as a new enterprise without a significant demonstrated operating history, production royalty revenue from our mineral rights property, currently our only oil and natural gas property and prices of oil and natural gas on the commodities markets (which will impact the amount of asset-based financing available to us) and/or the loss of key management. Further, if oil and/or natural gas prices on the commodities markets decline, our revenues from the anticipated royalties will decrease and such decreased revenues may increase our requirements for capital. If the amount of capital we are able to raise from financing activities, together with our revenues from operations, is not sufficient to satisfy our capital needs (even to the extent that we reduce our operations), we may be required to cease our operations.

We may incur substantial costs in pursuing future capital financing, including investment banking fees, legal fees, accounting fees, securities law compliance fees, printing and distribution expenses and other costs. We may also be required to recognize non-cash expenses in connection with certain securities we may issue, such as convertible notes, which may adversely impact our financial condition.

Under the terms of the lease agreements with our Lessees, we have very little control over how many wells our Lessees drill on our properties or how much they produce.

Our current business model relates to the potential generation of revenue from royalties tied to certain leases on property covered in part by mineral rights owned by us. These leases have been granted to Lessees who are experienced exploration and operating oil companies, who have prior experience in drilling deep lateral multi-fracture horizontal wells. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the leases, we have no influence with regard to when the drilling will be undertaken, no decision making ability as to the location of any future wells and no influence as to the rate the wells are produced, if the operators are successful, of which there is no assurance

The success and timing of development activities by Lessees will depend on a number of factors that will largely be out of our control, including:

●	the timing and amount of capital expenditures
●	their expertise and financial resources
●	approval of other participants in drilling wells
●	selection of technology
●	the rate of production of reserves, if any

We have no control over the operational effectiveness or financial wherewithal of our operators.

Our current business model relies heavily upon our operators and their operational effectiveness and financial wherewithal. Therefore, our operating revenue and cash flow may be heavily impacted if our operators are not effective or accurate when determining our net royalty revenue.

Similarly, our business model is heavily predicated upon out operators’ ability to pay royalty when due and to have sufficient capital to maintain existing wells and to drill new wells.

We have limited previous operating history in the oil and gas industry, which may raise substantial doubt as to our ability to successfully develop profitable business operations.

We have a limited operating history. Our business operations must be considered in light of the risks, expenses, and difficulties frequently encountered in establishing a business in the oil and natural gas industries. There is nothing at this time on which to base an assumption that our business operations will prove to be successful in the long-term. Our future operating results will depend on many factors, such as

●	our ability to raise adequate working capital;
●	success of our Lessees;
●	demand for natural gas and oil;
●	competition levels;
●	our ability to attract and maintain key management and employees; and
●	Lessees efficiently exploring, developing, and producing sufficient quantities of marketable natural gas or oil in a highly competitive and speculative environment while maintaining quality and controlling costs.

To achieve profitable operations in the future, we are primarily dependent upon the oil company Lessees to successfully execute on the factors stated above, along with continuing to develop strategies and relationships to enhance our revenue by financially participating and investing in various drilling programs with third parties. Despite their best efforts, our Lessees may not be successful in their exploration or development efforts or obtain required regulatory approvals on the property where BRI is entitled to a production royalty. There is a possibility that some, or most, of the wells to be drilled on our mineral rights properties may never produce natural gas or oil.

14

---

Table of Contents

Part of our future strategy may involve actual operations in drilling in existing or emerging oil or gas plays using some of the latest available drilling and completion techniques. The results of our potential exploratory drilling in these plays are subject to drilling and completion technique risks and drilling results may not meet our expectations for reserves or production. As a result, we may incur material write-downs and the value of our undeveloped acreage could decline if drilling results are unsuccessful.

Risks that we may face while drilling include, but are not limited to, landing our well bore in the desired drilling zone, running casing the entire length of the well bore and being able to run tools and other equipment consistently through the well bore. Risks that we may face while completing our wells include, but are not limited to, being able to run tools the entire length of the well bore during completion and being able to fracture the formation sufficiently to generate commercially viable oil or gas production.

Our experience with horizontal drilling utilizing the latest drilling and completion techniques is limited. Ultimately, the success of these drilling and completion techniques can only be evaluated over time as more wells are drilled and production profiles are established over a sufficiently long time period. If our drilling results are less than anticipated or we are unable to execute our drilling program because of capital constraints, lease expirations, access to gathering systems and limited takeaway capacity or otherwise, and/or natural gas and oil prices decline, the return on our investment in these areas may not be as attractive as we anticipate and we could incur material write-downs of unevaluated properties and the value of our undeveloped acreage could decline in the future.

Drilling locations that we decide to drill may not yield oil or gas in commercially viable quantities.

There is no way to predict in advance of drilling and testing whether any particular location will yield oil or natural gas in sufficient quantities to recover drilling or completion costs or to be economically viable. Despite advancements in technology, there is no way to determinate whether oil or natural gas will be present or, if present, whether oil or natural gas will be present in sufficient quantities to be economically viable. Even if sufficient amounts of oil or natural gas exist, we may damage the potentially productive hydrocarbon bearing formation or experience mechanical difficulties while drilling or completing the well, resulting in a reduction in production from the well or abandonment of the well. If we drill additional wells that we identify as dry holes in our current and future drilling locations, our drilling success rate may decline and materially harm our business. We cannot assure you that the analogies we draw from available data from other wells, more fully explored locations or producing fields will be applicable to our drilling locations.

Our management team does not have extensive experience in public company matters, which could impair our ability to comply with legal and regulatory requirements.

Our management team has had limited public company management experience or responsibilities, which could impair our ability to comply with legal and regulatory requirements such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and other federal securities laws applicable to reporting companies, including filing required reports and other information required on a timely basis. It may be expensive to implement programs and policies in an effective and timely manner that adequately respond to increased legal, regulatory compliance and reporting requirements imposed by such laws and regulations, and we may not have the resources to do so. Our failure to comply with such laws and regulations could lead to the imposition of fines and penalties and further result in the deterioration of our business and decreased value of our stock.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud.

Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our reputation and operating results could be harmed. We cannot be certain that our efforts to maintain our internal controls will be successful, that we will be able to maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future or that we will be able to continue to comply with our obligations under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Any failure to maintain effective internal controls, or difficulties encountered in implementing or improving our internal controls, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet certain reporting obligations.

15

---

Table of Contents

Our lack of diversification will increase the risk of an investment in BRI, and our financial condition and results of operations may deteriorate if we fail to diversify.

Our business focus predominately is on the oil and gas industry on our oil and gas mineral rights property, located in McKenzie County, North Dakota. Larger companies have the ability to manage their risk by diversification. However, we currently lack diversification, in terms of both the nature and geographic scope of our business. As a result, we will likely be impacted more acutely by factors affecting our industry or the regions in which we operate than we would if our business were more diversified, enhancing our risk profile. If we cannot diversify or expand our operations, our financial condition and results of operations could deteriorate. We have been solely dependent on the expertise of our Lessees as the operator of our property.

Uncertain future royalty payments and limited influence on future drilling and exploration.

Our current business model relates to the potential generation of revenue from royalties tied to certain leases owned by us. These leases have been granted to experienced exploration and operating companies, both of whom have prior experience in drilling deep lateral multi-fracture horizontal wells. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the leases, we have no influence with regard to when the drilling will be undertaken, no decision making ability as to the location of any future wells and no influence as to the rate the wells are produced, there are no assurances as to the success of the operators.

Strategic relationships upon which we rely may change, which could diminish our ability to conduct our operations.

Our ability to successfully acquire additional mineral rights properties, to participate in drilling opportunities, and to identify and enter into commercial arrangements with other third party companies will depend on developing and maintaining close working relationships with industry participants and on our ability to select and evaluate suitable properties and to consummate transactions in a highly competitive environment. These realities are subject to change and may impair our ability to grow.

To continue to develop our business, we will endeavor to use the business relationships of our management to identify, screen, and enter into strategic relationships, which may take the form of joint ventures with other private parties and contractual arrangements with other operating oil and gas exploration companies. We may not be able to establish these strategic relationships, or if established, we may not be able to maintain them. Even if we are able to engage in joint venture and enter into strategic investment relationships with existing operators, they may not be pursuant to terms and conditions that are favorable to us. In addition, the dynamics of our relationships with strategic partners may require us to incur expenses or undertake activities we would not otherwise be inclined to in order to fulfill our obligations to these partners or maintain our relationships. If our strategic relationships are not established or maintained, our business prospects may be limited, which could diminish our ability to conduct our operations.

Our property acquisition strategy subjects us to the risks and inherent uncertainties associated with evaluating properties for which limited information is available.

Our decision to acquire a property will depend in part on the evaluation of data obtained from production reports and engineering studies, geophysical and geological analyses and seismic and other information, the results of which are often inconclusive and subject to various interpretations. Also, our reviews of acquired properties are inherently incomplete because it generally is not feasible to perform an in-depth review of the individual properties involved in each acquisition. Even a detailed review of records and properties may not necessarily reveal existing or potential problems, nor will it permit us to become sufficiently familiar with the properties to assess fully their deficiencies and potential. Inspections may not always be performed on every well, and environmental problems, such as ground water contamination, are not necessarily observable even when an inspection is undertaken.

Any acquisition involves other potential risks, including, among other things:

●	The validity of our assumptions about reserves, future production, revenues and costs
●	A decrease in our liquidity by using a significant portion of our cash from operations or borrowing capacity to finance acquisitions
●	A significant increase in our interest expense or financial leverage if we incur additional debt to finance acquisitions
●	The assumption of unknown liabilities, losses or costs for which we are not indemnified or for which our indemnity is inadequate
●	An inability to hire, train or retain qualified personnel to manage and operate our growing business and assets
●	An increase in our costs or a decrease in our revenues associated with any potential royalty owner or landowner claims or disputes

Fierce market competition may impair our business.

The oil and gas industry is highly competitive. Holding valuable land interests is our primary means of income, and competition for acquiring such properties in the Bakken and Three Forks regions is highly competitive. Even once we acquire valuable properties, our Lessees face an additional layer of competition related to generating revenue from production. We have no control over our Lessees’ ability to succeed in a highly competitive market. Nonetheless, our sole source of revenue (i.e. royalties stemming from successful operation by our Lessees) relies entirely on our Lessees’ success. Competition has become increasingly intense as prices of oil and natural gas on the commodities markets have increased in recent years.

16

---

Table of Contents

Additionally, other companies engaged in our line of business may compete with us from time to time in obtaining capital from investors. Competitors include larger companies, who may have a significant competitive advantage due to their access to greater resources, greater ability to recruit and retain qualified employees, and even conduct their own refining and petroleum marketing operations. In addition, actual or potential competitors may be strengthened through the acquisition of additional assets and interests. If we are unable to compete effectively or adequately respond to competitive pressures, this inability may materially adversely affect our results of operation and financial condition.

Seasonal weather conditions adversely affect operators’ ability to conduct drilling activities in the areas where our properties are located.

Seasonal weather conditions can limit drilling and producing activities and other operations in our operating areas and as a result, a majority of the drilling on our properties is generally performed during the summer and fall months. These seasonal constraints can pose challenges for meeting well drilling objectives and increase competition for equipment, supplies and personnel during the summer and fall months, which could lead to shortages and increase costs or delay operations. Additionally, many municipalities impose weight restrictions on the paved roads that lead to jobsites due to the muddy conditions caused by spring thaws. This could limit access to jobsites and operators’ ability to service wells in these areas.

Reliance on Consultants

Since Bakken uses a number of consultants, such consultants may not be subject to the standard internal controls that the Company has for its employees. Therefore, certain risks may be difficult for the Company to detect with respect to its consultants, such as direct, day-to-day oversight of consultant activities.

Net Royalty Interest Volatility

The Company’s cumulative net royalty interest is a result of (a) the product of net mineral acreage for each well and (b) the royalty percentage divided by (c) the spacing unit acreage declared by the state of North Dakota. The Company’s cumulative net royalty interest is subject to volatility for the following reasons:

1) Split Mineral Estate: When the minerals were transferred into the Company from Holms Energy LLC., only the mineral rights from the surface to the base of the Bakken formation were transferred. Therefore, the Company does not accrue royalty revenue from gross production from the any formation below the Bakken formation relating to the mineral rights that were purchased from Holms Energy LLC.

However, the Company also purchased mineral rights in 2010, which the Company refers to as the “Greenfield minerals.” The Greenfield minerals included all mineral rights from the surface to the basement, including the Three Forks formation. These mineral rights were sold to Athene Insurance Company in 2014 (the “Athene Transaction”). The Company reserved a 2% retained royalty (override) from that sale. Therefore, the company receives a 2% retained royalty on gross production emanating from the Three Forks formation.

Following the Athene Transaction, as new wells begin producing, those producing from the Three Forks formation are subject only to a 2% retained royalty. Therefore, Three Forks formation producing wells reduce the company’s overall net royalty interest and revenue.

2) Varying Lease Royalty Percentages: The Company has sixteen different leases, each with stated royalty percentages that vary from 16% to 20%. Each lease can support many wells. Therefore, the Company’s cumulative net royalty interest is affected by the number of wells producing from each lease. If more wells are producing from leases with lower stated royalty percentages, this will reduce the Company’s net royalty interests and reduce revenue as well.

17

---

Table of Contents

Risks Related to the Ownership of Bakken Resources, Inc. Common Stock

Our stock has a low trading volume and price.

Although our common stock is approved for trading on the OTC Bulletin Board, there has been little, if any, trading activity in the stock. Accordingly, there is no history on which to estimate the future trading price range of the common stock. If the common stock trades below $5.00 per share, trading in the common stock will be subject to the requirements of certain rules promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), which require additional disclosure by broker-dealers in connection with any trades involving a stock defined as a penny stock (generally, any non-FINRA equity security that has a market price share of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions). Such rules require the delivery, prior to any penny stock transaction, of a disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock market and the risks associated therewith and impose various sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell penny stocks to persons other than established customers and accredited investors (generally defined as an investor with a net worth, not including the primary residence, in excess of $1,000,000 or annual income exceeding $200,000 individually or $300,000 together with a spouse). For these types of transactions, the broker-dealer must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and have received the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to the sale. The broker-dealer also must disclose the commissions payable to the broker-dealer, current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock and, if the broker-dealer is the sole market-maker, the broker-dealer must disclose this fact and the broker-dealer’s presumed control over the market. Such information must be provided to the customer orally or in writing before or with the written confirmation of trade sent to the customer. Monthly statements must be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks. The additional burdens imposed upon broker-dealers by such requirements could discourage broker-dealers from effecting transactions in the common stock which could severely limit the market liquidity of the common stock and the ability of holders of the common stock to sell it.

Our Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws may require us to indemnify our officers or directors.

Our Articles of Incorporation includes provisions to eliminate, to the fullest extent permitted by Nevada General Corporation Law, the personal liability of directors and officers of BRI for monetary damages arising from a breach of their fiduciary duties as directors. The Articles of Incorporation also includes provisions to the effect that we shall, to the maximum extent permitted from time to time under the laws of the State of Nevada, indemnify any director or officer. In addition, our bylaws require us to indemnify, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any director, officer, employee or agent of BRI for acts which such person reasonably believes are not in violation of our corporate purposes as set forth in the Articles of Incorporation.

Potential future issuances of additional common or preferred stock would dilute our current stockholders.

We are authorized to issue up to 100,000,000 shares of common stock. To the extent of such authorization, the board of directors of BRI will have the ability, without seeking stockholder approval, to issue additional shares of common stock in the future for such consideration as the board of directors may consider sufficient. The issuance of additional common stock in the future will reduce the proportionate ownership and voting power of the common stock offered hereby. We are also authorized to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, the rights and preferences of which may be designated in series by the board of directors. To the extent of such authorization, such designations may be made without stockholder approval. The designation and issuance of series of preferred stock in the future would create additional securities which would have dividend and liquidation preferences over the currently outstanding common stock. In addition, the ability to issue any future class or series of preferred stock could impede a non-negotiated change in control and thereby prevent stockholders from obtaining a premium for their common stock.

There is no assurance that a liquid public market for our common stock will develop.

Although our common stock is eligible for quotation on the OTC Bulletin Board and Pink Sheets, there has been no established trend of significant trading. There has been no long term established public trading market for our common stock, and there can be no assurance that a regular and established market will be developed and maintained for the securities in the future. There can also be no assurance as to the depth or liquidity of any market for the common stock or the prices at which holders may be able to sell the shares.

The market price of our common stock is, and is likely to continue to be, highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations

In the event that a public market for our common stock is created, market prices for the common stock will be influenced by many factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:

●	Dilution caused by our issuance of additional shares of common stock and other forms of equity securities, which we expect to make in connection with future capital financings to fund our operations and growth, to attract and retain valuable personnel and in connection with future strategic partnerships with other companies
●	Announcements of new acquisitions, reserve discoveries or other business initiatives by our competitors
●	Our ability to take advantage of new acquisitions, reserve discoveries or other business initiatives

18

---

Table of Contents

●	Fluctuations in revenue from our oil and gas business as new reserves come to market
●	Changes in the market for oil and natural gas commodities and/or in the capital markets generally
●	Changes in the demand for oil and natural gas, including changes resulting from the introduction or expansion of alternative fuels
●	Quarterly variations in our revenues and operating expenses
●	Changes in the valuation of similarly situated companies, both in our industry and in other industries
●	Changes in analysts’ estimates affecting our company, our competitors and/or our industry
●	Changes in the accounting methods used in or otherwise affecting our industry
●	Additions and departures of key personnel
●	Announcements of technological innovations or new products available to the oil and gas industry
●	Announcements by relevant governments pertaining to incentives for alternative energy development programs
●	Fluctuations in interest rates and the availability of capital in the capital markets
●	Significant sales of our common stock, including sales by selling stockholders following the registration of shares under a prospectus

These and other factors are largely beyond our control, and the impact of these risks, singly or in the aggregate, may result in material adverse changes to the market price of our common stock and/or our results of operations and financial condition.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which cause the price of our common stock to decline.

Our operating results will likely vary in the future primarily as the result of fluctuations in our production royalty, assuming commercial oil and gas is discovered on our mineral rights property. Our revenues and operating expenses, expenses that we incur regarding investments in drilling programs with other partners, the prices of oil and natural gas in the commodities markets and other factors, may all cause significant fluctuations in our operating results. If our results of operations do not meet the expectations of current or potential investors, the price of our common stock may decline.

We do not expect to pay dividends in the foreseeable future.

We do not intend to declare dividends for the foreseeable future, as we anticipate that we will reinvest any future earnings in the development and growth of our business. Therefore, investors will not receive any funds unless they sell their common stock, and stockholders may be unable to sell their shares on favorable terms or at all. Investors cannot be assured of a positive return on investment or that they will not lose the entire amount of their investment in our common stock and warrants.

Risks Related To the Oil and Gas Industry

Our cash flows, results of operations, and general financial condition depend to a great extent on the prevailing prices for crude oil and natural gas.

The extent to which we collect royalties from our operators – currently our sole source of income – relies upon our Lessees’ ability to earn revenue from producing oil and gas on our land. That in turn depends on prevailing oil and gas prices, and oil and natural gas are commodities with a history of price volatility that will likely continue. Profitably exploring and producing oil and gas depends to a large extent on exploration and production costs. When oil prices are sufficiently low, we or our operators may obtain less in revenue than is spent on production, which could result in a loss if not offset by our derivative investment activity. Price fluctuations of oil and gas have resulted from a wide variety often unpredictable events or conditions that lie entirely outside of our control. Although it may be impossible to list everything that could potentially affect the price of oil and natural gas, the following list is meant to illustrate the great scope and breadth of factors that may impact oil and gas prices:

19

---

Table of Contents

A significant or prolonged decline in crude oil or natural gas price could materially and negatively affect our liquidity. It could also reduce the cash flow we have in capital expenditures and other operating expenses. Such declines in price could limit our ability to access credit and capital markets, which would negatively impact our results of operations. Oil and gas price reductions also decrease the value of our properties, which could require us to write down the value of our property assets. Any of these things could materially and adversely affect our results of operations, as well as the price and trading volume of our common stock.

Drilling for and producing oil and natural gas are high risk activities with many uncertainties that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Initially, our future success will depend on the success of our development, exploitation, production, and exploration activities conducted by our Lessees as our operators on our mineral rights property. Oil and natural gas exploration and production activities are subject to numerous risks beyond our control; including the risk that drilling will not result in commercially viable oil or natural gas production. Our decisions to participate in drilling projects, purchase mineral rights, explore, develop or otherwise exploit prospects or properties will depend in part on the evaluation of data obtained through geophysical and geological analyses, production data and engineering studies, the results of which are often inconclusive or subject to varying interpretations. The cost of drilling, completing, and operating wells is often uncertain before drilling commences. Overruns in budgeted expenditures are common risks that can make a particular project uneconomical. Furthermore, many factors may curtail, delay or cancel drilling, including the following:

●	Delays imposed by or resulting from compliance with regulatory requirements
●	Pressure or irregularities in geological formations
●	Shortages of or delays in obtaining qualified personnel or equipment, including drilling rigs and CO2
●	Equipment failures or accidents
●	Adverse weather conditions, such as freezing temperatures, hurricanes and storms
●	Unexpected operational events, including accidents
●	Reductions in oil and natural gas prices
●	Proximity to and capacity of transportation facilities
●	Title problems
●	Limitations in the market for oil and natural gas

Exploration for oil and gas is risky and may not be commercially successful. Advanced technologies used by our Lessees cannot eliminate exploration risk, and Lessees falling short of commercial success could impair our ability to generate revenues.

20

---

Table of Contents

Our future success will depend on the success of exploratory drilling conducted by the Lessees on our mineral rights property. Oil and gas exploration involves a high degree of risk. These risks are more acute in the early stages of exploration. Our ability to produce revenue and our resulting financial performance are significantly affected by the prices we receive for oil and natural gas produced from wells on our acreage, if any. Especially in recent years, the prices at which oil and natural gas trade in the open market have experienced significant volatility, and will likely continue to fluctuate in the foreseeable future due to a variety of influences including, but not limited to, the following:

●	Domestic and foreign demand for oil and natural gas by both refineries and end users
●	The introduction of alternative forms of fuel to replace or compete with oil and natural gas
●	Domestic and foreign reserves and supply of oil and natural gas
●	Competitive measures implemented by our competitors and domestic and foreign governmental bodies
●	Political climates in nations that traditionally produce and export significant quantities of oil and natural gas (including military and other conflicts in the Middle East and surrounding geographic region) and regulations and tariffs imposed by exporting and importing nations
●	Weather conditions
●	Domestic and foreign economic volatility and stability

Expenditures on exploration on our mineral rights property may not result in new discoveries of oil or natural gas in commercially viable quantities. It is difficult to project the costs of implementing exploratory horizontal drilling programs on our acreage due to the inherent uncertainties of drilling in unknown formations, the costs associated with encountering various drilling conditions, such as over-pressured zones and tools lost in the hole, and changes in drilling plans and locations as a result of prior exploratory wells or additional seismic data and interpretations thereof.

Even when used and properly interpreted, three-dimensional (3-D) seismic data and visualization techniques only assist geoscientists in identifying subsurface structures and hydrocarbon indicators. They do not allow the interpreter to know conclusively if hydrocarbons are present or economically producible. In addition, the use of three-dimensional (3-D) seismic data becomes less reliable when used at increasing depths. Our Lessees could incur losses as a result of expenditures on unsuccessful wells on our acreage. If exploration costs exceed estimates, or if exploration efforts do not produce results which meet expectations of our Lessees, exploration efforts may not be commercially successful, which could adversely impact our Lessees’ ability to generate revenues from operations on our acreage.

Estimates of proved oil and natural gas reserves are uncertain and any material inaccuracies in these reserve estimates will materially affect the quantities and the value of our reserves.

The process of estimating oil and natural gas reserves is complex. This process requires significant decisions and assumptions in the evaluation of available geological, geophysical, engineering and economic data for such reservoir. Therefore, these estimates are inherently imprecise. Actual future production, oil and natural gas prices, revenues, taxes, development expenditures, operating expenses and quantities of recoverable oil and natural gas reserves will vary from those estimated. Any significant variance could materially affect the estimated quantities and the value of our reserves.

Our oil company Lessees may not be able to develop oil and gas reserves on an economically viable basis on our mineral rights property.

If our oil company lessees succeed in discovering oil and/or natural gas reserves, we cannot be assured that these reserves will be capable of long-term sustainable production levels or in sufficient quantities to be commercially viable. On a long-term basis, our viability depends on our Lessees’ ability to find or acquire, develop and commercially produce additional oil and natural gas reserves on our acreage. Our future revenue will depend not only on the Lessees ability to develop our acreage, but also on our ability to identify and acquire additional suitable producing properties or prospects, to find markets for the oil and natural gas if we can develop a prospect and to effectively distribute any production into our markets.

Future oil and gas exploration may involve unprofitable efforts, not only from dry wells, but from holes that are productive but do not produce sufficient net revenues to return a profit after drilling, operating and other costs. Completion of a well does not assure a profit on the investment or recovery of drilling, completion, and operating costs. In addition, drilling hazards or environmental damage could greatly increase the cost of operations, and various field operating conditions may adversely affect the production from successful wells. These conditions include delays in obtaining governmental approvals or consents, shut-downs of connected wells resulting from extreme weather conditions, problems in storage and distribution and adverse geological and mechanical conditions. While our Lessees will endeavor to effectively manage these conditions, they cannot be assured of doing so optimally, and they will not be able to eliminate them completely in any case. Therefore, these conditions could diminish our royalty revenue and cash flow levels and result in the impairment of our oil and natural gas interests.

Environmental regulations may adversely affect our business.

All phases of the oil and gas business present environmental risks and hazards and are subject to environmental regulation pursuant to a variety of federal, state and municipal laws and regulations. Environmental legislation provides for, among other things, restrictions and prohibitions on spills, releases or emissions of various substances produced in association with oil and gas operations. The legislation also requires that wells and facility sites be operated, maintained, abandoned and reclaimed to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities. Compliance with such legislation can require significant expenditures and a breach may result in the imposition of fines and penalties, some of which may be material. Environmental legislation is evolving in a manner we expect may result in stricter standards and enforcement, larger fines and liability and potentially increased capital expenditures and operating costs. The discharge of oil, natural gas, or other pollutants into the air, soil or water may give rise to liabilities to governments and third parties and may require us to incur costs to remedy such discharge.

21

---

Table of Contents

The application of environmental laws to our business may cause us to curtail our production or increase the costs of our production, development or exploration activities.

Federal or state hydraulic fracturing legislation could increase our Lessees’ costs or restrict their access to oil and natural gas reserves.

Hydraulic fracturing is an important and common practice that is used to stimulate production of natural gas and/or oil from dense subsurface rock formations. The process involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under pressure into the targeted subsurface formations to fracture the surrounding rock and stimulate production. Hydraulic fracturing using fluids other than diesel is currently exempt from regulation under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (the “SDWA”), but opponents of hydraulic fracturing have called for further study of the technique’s environmental effects and, in some cases, a moratorium on the use of the technique. Several proposals have been submitted to Congress that, if implemented, would subject all hydraulic fracturing to regulation under SDWA. Eliminating this exemption could establish an additional level of regulation and permitting at the federal level that could lead to Our Lessees’ operational delays or increased their operating costs and could result in additional regulatory burdens that could make it more difficult to perform hydraulic fracturing and increase our Lessees’ cost of compliance and doing business. In addition, the U.S. Environment Protection Agency’s (the “EPA’s”) Office of Research and Development is conducting a scientific study to investigate the possible relationships between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water. The results of that study, which are expected to be available in draft during 2014 for peer review and public comment, could advance the development of additional regulations.

Moreover, the EPA has announced that it will develop effluent limitations for the treatment and discharge of wastewater resulting from hydraulic fracturing activities in 2014. The U.S. Department of Energy has conducted an investigation into practices the agency could recommend to better protect the environment from drilling using hydraulic fracturing completion methods and issued a report in 2011 on immediate and longer-term actions that may be taken to reduce environmental and safety risks of shale gas development. Also, in May 2013, the federal Bureau of Land Management published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian oil and gas leases that would require public disclosure of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, confirmation that wells used in fracturing operations meet appropriate construction standards, and development of appropriate plans for managing flow-back water that returns to the surface. These ongoing or proposed studies, depending on their degree of pursuit and any meaningful results obtained, could spur initiatives to further regulate hydraulic fracturing under the federal SDWA or other regulatory mechanisms.

Although it is not possible at this time to predict the final outcome of these ongoing or proposed studies or the requirements of any additional federal or state legislation or regulation regarding hydraulic fracturing, any new federal, state, or local restrictions on hydraulic fracturing that may be imposed in areas where we conduct business, such as the Bakken and Three Forks areas, could significantly increase our Lessees’ operating, capital and compliance costs as well as delay or halt our ability to develop oil and natural gas reserves.

Possible regulation related to global warming and climate change could have an adverse effect on our operations and demand for oil and natural gas.

Based on findings by the EPA in December 2009 that emissions of GHGs present and endangerment to public health and the environment because emissions of such gases are contributing to warming of the Earth’s atmosphere and other climatic changes, the EPA adopted regulations under existing provisions of the CAA that establish PSD construction and Title V operating permit reviews for certain large stationary sources that are potential major sources of GHG emissions. Facilities required to obtain PSD permits for their GHG emissions also will be required to meet “best available control technology” standards that will be established by the states or the EPA. The EPA has also adopted rules requiring the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions from specified sources in the United States, including, among others, certain onshore oil and natural gas production facilities on an annual basis, which includes certain f our operations. While Congress has from time to time considered legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, there has not been significant activity in the form of adopted legislation to reduce GHG emissions at the federal level in recent years. In the absence of such federal climate legislation, a number of state and regional efforts have emerged that are aimed at tracking and/or reducing GHG emissions by means of cap and trade programs that typically require major sources of GHG emissions, such as electric power plants, to acquire and surrender emission allowances in return for emitting those GHGs. If Congress undertakes comprehensive tax reform in the coming year, it is possible that such reform may include a carbon tax, which could impose additional direct costs on our operations and reduce demand for refined products. Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, floods and other climatic events; if any such effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our Lessees’ exploration and production operations.

22

---

Table of Contents

Our business will suffer if we cannot obtain or maintain necessary licenses.

Our oil company Lessees’ proposed exploration and drilling operations on our mineral rights property will require licenses, permits, bonds, and in some cases renewals of licenses and permits from various governmental authorities. Our Lessees’ ability to obtain, sustain, or renew such licenses and permits on acceptable terms is subject to change in regulations and policies and to the discretion of the applicable governments, among other factors. Our Lessees’ inability to obtain, or our loss of or denial of extension of, any of these licenses or permits could hamper our ability to produce revenues from our operations.

Lessees may have difficulty distributing oil or natural gas production, which could harm our financial condition.

In order to sell the oil and natural gas that our Lessees may be able to produce, they will have to make arrangements for storage and distribution to the market. They will rely on local infrastructure and the availability of transportation for storage and shipment of our products, but infrastructure development and storage and transportation facilities may be insufficient for their needs at commercially acceptable terms in the immediate area of our leases. This could be particularly problematic to the extent that our operations are conducted in remote areas that are difficult to access, such as areas that are distant from shipping and/or pipeline facilities. These factors may affect our Lessees’ ability to explore and develop our property and to store and transport oil and natural gas production and may increase expenses.

Furthermore, weather conditions or natural disasters, actions by companies doing business in one or more of the areas where our property is located. Labor disputes may impair the distribution of oil and/or natural gas and in turn diminish our financial condition or ability to generate royalty income, if commercial wells are drilled and completed on our property, of which there is no assurance.

Challenges to our property rights may impact our financial condition.

Title to oil and gas interests is often not capable of conclusive determination without incurring substantial expense. While we intend to make appropriate inquiries into the title of properties and other development rights we acquire, title defects may exist. In addition, we may be unable to obtain adequate insurance for title defects, on a commercially reasonable basis or at all. If title defects do exist, if a legal dispute concerning such property occurs, it is possible that we may lose all or a portion of our right, title and interests in and to the properties to which the title defects relate.

If our property rights are reduced, our Lessees’ ability to conduct our exploration, development and production activities may be impaired.

Certain U.S. federal income tax deductions currently available with respect to oil and gas exploration and development may be eliminated as a result of proposed legislation.

President Obama’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2014 recommended the elimination of certain key United States federal income tax preferences currently available to oil and natural gas exploration and production companies. These changes include, but are not limited to, (i) the repeal of the percentage depletion allowance for oil and gas properties, (ii) the elimination of current deductions for intangible drilling and development costs, (iii) the elimination of the deduction for United States production activities for oil and gas production, and (iv) the extension of the amortization period for certain geological and geophysical expenditures. It is unclear whether any such changes or similar changes will be enacted or, if enacted, how soon any such changes could become effective. The passage of this legislation or any other similar changes in U.S. federal income tax law could affect certain tax deductions that are currently available with respect to oil and gas exploration and production. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows primarily because such changes may impact the operations of our operators from whom we currently derive substantially all of our revenues.

Risks Related to the Independent Internal Investigation of the Audit Committee, Our Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting and Our Failure to Timely File Periodic Reports with the SEC.

Our ongoing independent investigation by the Audit Committee may uncover corporate improprieties that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We created an Audit Committee in December 2014. Among the Audit Committee’s five stated purposes are: overseeing the integrity of the Company’s financial statement; overseeing the Company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; overseeing the registered public accounting firm’s qualifications and independence; overseeing the performance of the Company’s independent auditor and internal audit function; and overseeing the Company’s system of disclosure controls and procedures.

23

---

Table of Contents

The Audit Committee was formed as a result of allegations from multiple third parties of potential improprieties conducted by certain officers of the Company. The ongoing investigation may uncover certain harmful facts that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows such as improper accounting procedures and/or fraud.

Our Internal Investigation may prove insufficient to properly address the Company’s improprieties and may leave the Company subject to future litigation, investigation and regulation.

It is possible that the Audit Committee’s internal investigation may not be able to fully realize all improprieties conducted by the Company’s officers and/or the Company itself. As such, the Company may be subject to future lawsuits or investigations that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Negative publicity may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

As a result of the restatement of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013 and related matters, the internal investigation conducted by the Audit Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors, and the securities class action lawsuit, we have been the subject of negative publicity. This negative publicity may adversely affect our stock price and may harm our reputation and our relationships with current and future investors, lenders, customers, suppliers and employees. As a result, our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows may be materially adversely affected.

We are subject to a shareholder derivative lawsuit, and this lawsuit and any future such lawsuits or investigations may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We and certain of our executive officers are defendants in a federal securities class action lawsuit, which is described in Item 3 Legal Proceedings, which is incorporated by reference. This lawsuit may divert our attention from our ordinary business operations, and we may incur significant expenses associated with it (including, without limitation, substantial attorneys’ fees and other fees of professional advisors and potential obligations to indemnify officers or directors who are or may become parties to or involved in such matters). We are unable at this time to predict the outcome of our potential liability in this matter, including what, if any, action the SEC might take in connection with this matter or the related internal investigation conducted by the Audit Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors. Depending on the outcome of the class action lawsuit, we may be required to pay material damages and fines, consent to injunctions on future conduct, and/or suffer other penalties, remedies or sanctions, some or all of which may not be covered by insurance. Accordingly, the ultimate resolution of this matter could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, liquidity and ability to meet our debt obligations and, consequently, could negatively impact the trading price of our common stock. In addition, there is the potential for additional shareholder litigation and/or governmental investigations and we could be similarly materially and adversely affected by such matters. Any existing or future shareholder lawsuits and governmental investigations and/or any future governmental enforcement actions could also adversely impact our reputation, our relationships with our customers, and our ability to generate revenue.

We have incurred and will continue to incur substantial expenses relating to the Internal Investigation and may continue to have increased exposure to contingent liabilities because of improper accounting practices and other potentially fraudulent activity identified by our Audit Committee Investigation.

As a result of the internal investigation we have incurred and will continue to incur substantial expenses relating to the internal investigation and related litigation.

Our expenses for legal counsel may increase due to recent litigation and as a result of our continued internal investigation. We are also in contact with the SEC regarding our continued investigation. We may be subject to enforcement actions as a result of such events, which may impact us adversely.

We may also be the subject of other regulatory or enforcement actions. No assurance can be given regarding the outcomes from any litigation, regulatory proceedings or government enforcement actions. The conduct of the investigation has been, and the resolution of any such matters may be time consuming, expensive, and may distract management from the conduct of our business. Furthermore, if we are subject to adverse findings in litigation, regulatory proceedings or government enforcement actions, we could be required to pay damages or penalties or have other remedies imposed, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in an individual quarter or annual period.

Management has identified a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting, and we may be unable to develop, implement and maintain appropriate controls in future periods.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and SEC rules require that management report annually on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and our disclosure controls and procedures. Among other things, management must conduct an assessment of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on, and our independent registered public accounting firm to audit, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Based on management’s assessment, our Board and officers concluded that our internal controls over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2015. The specific material weakness is described in Part II - Item 9A. “Controls and Procedures” of this 2015 Form 10-K in “Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.” A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim consolidated financial statements would not be prevented or detected. We cannot assure you that additional material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting will not be identified in the future. Any failure to maintain or implement required new or improved controls, or any difficulties we encounter in their implementation, could result in additional material weaknesses, or could result in material misstatements in our financial statements. These misstatements could result in a further restatement of financial statements, cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations or cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, leading to a decline in our stock price.

24

---

Table of Contents

We have work remaining to remedy the material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. We are in the process of developing and implementing our remediation plan for the identified material weakness, and we expect that this work will continue during the year ending December 31, 2015 and thereafter. There can be no assurance as to when the remediation plan will be fully developed, when it will be fully implemented and the aggregate cost of implementation. Until our remediation plan is fully implemented, we will continue to devote significant time and attention to these efforts. If we do not complete our remediation in a timely fashion, or at all, or if our remediation plan is inadequate, there will continue to be an increased risk that we will be unable to timely file future periodic reports with the SEC and that our future financial statements could contain errors that will be undetected. Until the remediation plan is complete and implemented, we will rely upon additional interim control procedures prescribed by management, including the use of manual mitigating control procedures and the utilization of external consultants, to help ensure that we fairly state our financial statements in all material respects. However, the establishment of these interim controls does not provide the same degree of assurance as a fully remediated control environment. For more information relating to our internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures, and the remediation plan undertaken by us, see Part II - Item 9A. “Controls and Procedures” of this 2015 Form 10-K.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Description of Certain Property and Leases

General

Real Estate Lease

On December 1, 2010, BRI entered into a one-year office lease for its principal office in Helena, Montana, renewable for up to five years, for a 2,175 square foot executive office, for a monthly charge of $1,600 for the first year; $1,800 second year; $2,000 third year; $2,200 fourth year; and $2,500 fifth year.

Mineral Leases

As of December 31, 2015 BRI owns mineral rights for 7,200 (net 1,600) acres in the Bakken/Three Forks in North Dakota.

The BRI mineral rights are leased primarily to three well operators, Oasis Petroleum, Continental Resources and Statoil ASA (formerly, Brigham Oil). As of December 31, 2015, we have received division orders and/or royalty payments for seventy-five wells. Currently, North Dakota spacing rules authorize up to 190 wells on our acreage.

The following table presents information about the produced oil and gas volumes for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. The information comes from the North Dakota Industrial Commission website and royalty payments received from the well operators.

25

---

Table of Contents

Key Factors Affecting Revenue

The table in the previous section immediately above shows an increase in oil production from 2014 to 2015 amounting to 9%, as well as an increase in natural gas amounting to 12% for the same period. Three key factors drove revenue in 2015: (1) oil and natural gas production, (2) increased well capacity, and (3) market pricing.

Despite a soft price environment, both oil and natural gas production increased in 2015. During 2015, six (6) new wells began producing. The strong production from these new wells compensated for declining production from existing wells. The production decline curve on shale wells can be significant. After strong initial production, production volumes begin to fall off each year, often requiring re-fracking. Therefore, new production volume is necessary to ensure that production volume will grow. New production that occurred during the fourth quarter drove oil and natural gas production to the highest levels in company history. Production per well in the Bakken has gradually increased each year between 2007 and 2014. The trend shows that though new wells produce more, they decline a lot faster. See: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Bakken-Decline-Rates-Worrying-For-Drillers.html. Monthly decline rates are erratic and not exact. Well-level data suggest that output in later-producing months has actually increased in recent years, though there is still a decline in production past the first few months. See: EIA Drilling Productivity Report at http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/archive/2015/12/ . The estimated annual decline rate for the Bakken based on the EIA drilling productivity report is 47%, as of July 27, 2015. http://euanmearns.com/us-shale-oil-drilling-productivity-and-decline-rates/

The Company expects to see several new wells coming online each year for the next several years. Based on current well spacing rules promulgated by the NDIC, BRI’s existing leases can support a total of 190 wells. We currently have 110 wells in either the permitting, confidential, or producing status. Therefore, we have capacity for 80 more wells.

The precipitous decline in oil and natural gas prices during the last quarter of 2014, which continued into 2015, invariably had and will have an impact on production and the timing of new wells. This sharp price decline has also led to a softening of oil and natural gas asset values. The “buyers’ market” has emerged in the wake of low oil and gas prices, which has created opportunities for the Company to secure long-term assets at greatly reduced prices.

Flared gas has become a hot issue in North Dakota. Flared gas is not sold; therefore, it is not included in royalty payments. The State of North Dakota has implemented rigorous rules pertaining to flared gas. Consequently, flared gas declined significantly from 2013 to 2014, but increased sharply (157%) in 2015. Flared gas is natural gas produced from a well that is vented into the atmosphere rather than entering the gas pipeline. Flaring gas is an integral part of the exploration, production, and processing of products from shale formations. It is a necessary to test and control well pressure, is a safety mechanism, and is a process to manage gas during compression and processing.

The Company’s royalty payments from the production vary by well. Wells are drilled in spacing units which are typically 1,280 acres or two sections but can include up to four sections. The effective royalty percentage for each spacing unit is determined based on the amount of mineral interest acreage owned by BRI, the lease rate for that acreage, and the approved spacing unit. Since the mineral interest owned by BRI varies by well, the royalty percentage also varies. Our average royalty is approximately 0.73%. Using the numbers shown above, the reported oil production was sold at an average sales price of $43.01 per barrel and natural gas was sold at an average price per mcf of $2.31, gross revenue would be $164 million. Actual royalty revenue accrued by BRI in 2015 total $868,042 or 0.73% of gross production revenue.

The actual effective percentage is a product of the strength of production emanating from spacing units with higher net royalty percentages. The Company’s effective royalty percentage has steadily declined since 2013. The average royalty percentage, 0.73%, is down from 1.35% in 2013. This decline reflects an increase in production from Three Forks formation wells which only have a small (2%) retained royalty, thus reducing the overall percentage and a production increase in spacing units with lower net royalty percentages. We expect to see this percentage to continue to decrease further.

Description of Oil Leases and Oil Production

As of December 31, 2015, our properties in North Dakota are leased primarily to three operators: (1) Oasis Petroleum, (2) Continental Resources, and (3) Statoil, ASA. The executed oil leases cover various parcels of land in the same general region, primarily in McKenzie County, North Dakota. The leases have lease periods of between 3 and 8 years with starting dates from March 2003 to December 2009. Currently, most of the leases covering the Company’s mineral acres contain what is commonly referred to as “continuous drilling clauses.” Generally, a continuous drilling clause requires an operator to maintain active drilling operations in order to hold or extend an oil and gas lease past the natural expiration date of the lease. A majority of the Company’s current leases currently have active drilling operations and are likely to have active operations in the foreseeable future.

26

---

Table of Contents

The following table describes in general a representative sample of the Company’s leases. From time to time, leases may be divided or consolidated among various lessees without prior consent or notification to the Company, and so the table below is intended for illustrative purposes only.

Total

Landowner

Legal

Lease

Gross

Net

Original

Current

Royalty

Description

Period

Acres

Acres

Lessee

lessee

Percentage

151N, R100W, Section 6: Lots 2(40.00),3(40.00),

Oasis

SE4NW4, SW4NE4

7/29/08-7/29/13

1,203

413

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, R100W, Sec 8: NW4NW4, S2NW4, SW4,

Oasis

S2SE4, NE4NE4

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, R100W, Sec 9: Lots 1(21.20), 2(26.60), 3(42.10),

Oasis

4(43.00), SW4NW4, SW4, S2SE4

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, R100W, Sec 10: Lots 2(18.80),3(17.20),4(34.20),

Oasis

S2SW4

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 15: NE4NW4

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R101W, Sec 1: SE4SE4

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 5: SWSW

7/14/08-7/14/13

193

64

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 6: Lot 14(33.38) S2SE, SESW

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, R100W, Sec 7: Lot 1(33.53), Lot 2(33.55),

Oasis

E2NW4, NE4

3/1/05-3/1/12

307

101

Sundance

Petroleum

17.50%

152N, R100W, Sec 17: All plus all accretions and

Oasis

riparian rights thereto

9/9/03-9/9/11

2,227

533

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, R100W, Sec:7: Lots 3(33.63), 4(33.59), E2SW,

Oasis

SE Plus all accretions and riparian rights thereto

“

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 20 All

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 21 All

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 18: Lot 1(33.63), NENW, N2NE

5/21/09-5/21/12

394

103

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R101W, Sec 13: N2NE, NW

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 22: W2, SE4

1/19/05-1/19/12

480

103

Armstrong

Petroleum

17.50%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 23: W2SW

7/14/08-7/14/11

80

13

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 29: NE, N2NW

11/24/04-11/24/11

1,029

95

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, 100W, Sec 30: Lot 3 (34.31), Lot 4 (34.37),

E1/2SW1/4, W1/2SE1/4

152N, 101W, Sec 24 SW1/4

152N, R101W, Sec 25: NWNE, S2NE, N2NW, SENW,

Oasis

NESW, N2SE, SESE

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

152N, R100W, Sec 31: Lot 1(34.43), 2(34.49), 3(34.55),

Oasis

4(34.61), E2W2, E2

7/14/08-6/10/12

858

133

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Oasis

152N, R100W, Sec 32: W2W2, SENW, NESW

"

Empire Oil

Petroleum

17%

Diamond

152N, R101W, Sec 26: SE, except 6.32 acres

4/8/08-4/8/11

154

5

Resources

17%

152N, R101W, Sec 35: E 1/2 NE 1/4, SW 1/4 NE 1/4,

Diamond

Oasis

SE 1/4 NW ¼

9/13/02-9/13/05

160

5

Resources

Petroleum

15%

Total

7,085

1,570

Note:

The gross and net amounts are slightly lower than amounts that appear elsewhere in this document. There are 160 gross mineral acres and 78 net mineral acres not covered by lease.

The landowner royalty percentage determines the revenue royalty paid by the contracted oil drilling company (e.g. Oasis Petroleum) on whatever oil and gas revenue it generates from the particular lease. To illustrate, if Oasis Petroleum generates $100,000 in oil and gas revenue from acreage subject to the BRI landowner royalty of 17%, BRI would receive in royalty payments of $17,000 (assuming that we have 100% of the acreage under the applicable spacing unit). Assuming revenue generated stemmed from property subject to Holms Energy’s 5% overriding royalty interest on all oil and gas revenue received by BRI from the assets purchased from Holms Energy (for ten years, measured from the date of purchase), Holms Energy would receive a 5% overriding royalty payment of $5,000 from BRI. This would result in a net payment of $12,000 to BRI. Royalties paid to BRI are adjusted where appropriate in order to reflect the number of net mineral acres underlying the spacing under which the producing well is drilled.

27

---

Table of Contents

Our leases with Oasis Petroleum do not specify which geological formation must be drilled, but they are specific to oil and gas hydrocarbon drilling. The leases do not impose any performance criteria on the Lessees except the date that well must be drilled. We have no control over any operating decisions made by Oasis Petroleum as it relates to (1) which formation it will drill, (2) levels at which the well will be produced, (3) who Oasis Petroleum uses as contractor for drilling and completing wells, (4) who Oasis Petroleum sells the oil and gas to, or (5) any influence on any aspect of recovery.

If a well is drilled and production established, the lease becomes considered “held by production,” meaning the lease continues as long as oil is being produced. As of December 31, 2015, drilling activity on the Company’s mineral acreage is likely to hold by production most if not all of the Company’s leases Several of our leases, however, require the operator to have “continuous” drilling operations which would require the operator to continue drilling activities in order to qualify the lease to be held by production. Other locations within the drilling unit created for a well may also be drilled at any time with no time limit as long as the lease is held by production. The Company is currently conducting an internal audit of its leases and mineral acreage holdings.

Given the recent drilling activity on our properties as well as the relatively recent development of horizontal drilling techniques in general, a proven reserve estimate is not obtainable at this time. Operators have estimated that the range of recoverable barrels of oil from a particular producing well can vary from 200,000 to as high as 1,000,000 barrels during its viable lifetime. (Source: http://themilliondollarway.blogspot.com/p/faq.html )

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

Allan Holms Litigation

On April 2, 2012, BRI was served with a summons relating to a complaint filed by Allan Holms, both individually and derivatively through Roil Energy, LLC. Allan Holms is the half-brother of BRI’s CEO, Val Holms. The complaint (filed in the Superior Court of the State of Washington located in Spokane County) names, among others, Joseph Edington, Val and Mari Holms, Holms Energy, LLC and BRI as defendants. The Complaint primarily alleges breach of contract, tortious interference with prospective business opportunity and fraud. The complaint focuses on events allegedly occurring around February and March 2010 whereby Allan Holms alleged an oral agreement took place whereby he was to receive up to 40% of the originally issued equity of Roil Energy, LLC. Allan Holms alleges Roil Energy was originally intended to be the predecessor entity to BRI. Both Mr. Val Holms, our CEO, and BRI dispute such allegations in their entirety and intend to and have vigorously defended against such claims. This case went to trial in November 2013. Following trial, the Court issued conclusions that the evidence presented in this case did not support Allan Holms’ claims that an oral agreement existed. Post-trial motions are currently being heard in this case and final judgment is expected to be issued following the conclusion of such post-trial motions.

IWJ Litigation

On June 6, 2012, the Company filed a Temporary Restraining Order (the “TRO”) and Verified Complaint for Injunctive Relief against McKinley Romero, Peter Swan Investment Consulting Ltd and IWJ Consulting Group, LLC (collectively, the “Defendants”), in connection with the Defendants’ request to the transfer agent to remove restrictive legends from an aggregate of 4.7 million shares, which the Company believes were improperly obtained by the Defendants. The Company obtained the TRO from the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Washoe on June 6, 2012 enjoining the Defendants from seeking removal of the restrictive legends. On a scheduled hearing on June 26, 2012 the judge in this matter ruled in favor of the Company’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The order granting such preliminary injunction was issued from this court on August 14, 2012. The Company obtained a default judgment against the Defendants on June 12, 2014.

Gillis Litigation

In March 2013, the Company received notice of a complaint titled Gillis v. Bakken Resources, Inc., Case No. A-13-675280-B, filed in the District Court of the State of Nevada for Clark County. Mr. Gillis, the plaintiff in this matter (the “Gillis Case”), is the trustee of the Bruce and Marilyn Gillis 1987 Trust. Mr. Gillis is alleging that Company breached certain registration rights obligations pursuant to an equity investment made at or around November 2010. The Court in this matter granted class certification and class notice in March 2014. The Company settled this matter in September 2014.

Derivative Litigation

In March 2014, the Company received notice of a complaint titled Manuel Graiwer and TJ Jesky v. Val Holms, Herman Landeis, Karen Midtlyng, David Deffinbaugh, Bill Baber, W. Edward Nichols and Wesley Paul, Case No. CV14 00544, filed in the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada for Washoe County. Mssrs. Graiwer and Jesky, the plaintiffs in this matter (the “Graiwer Case”), bring action on behalf of the Company derivatively, and the Company is also named as a nominal defendant. Mssrs. Graiwer and Jesky are shareholders of the Company and allege breach of fiduciary duty, gross negligence, corporate waste, unjust enrichment and civil conspiracy against one or more of the named defendants. The Company and is also informed that each of the other named defendants denies the validity of the claims made in the Graiwer Case and each intends to vigorously defend against such claims, as applicable. The plaintiffs in the Graiwer case have agreed to dismiss all claims against all defendants except Val Holms, and such dismissal is pending approval by the court. 

Edington Litigation

On November 14, 2015, the Company filed a complaint in the Southern District of New York in federal court against Joseph R. Edington and other related or affiliated parties (Case No. 15-CV-8686) (the “Edington Case”). The Company alleges, among other things, that the defendants in the Edington Case have engaged in a systematic and concerted plan to defraud and harm the Company and its principals since 2010. The Company's claims include violations of the Civil Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) Act (18 U.S.C. § 1964(c)), violations of anti-fraud provisions under federal securities laws, including Rule 10b-5, fraud, tortuous interference, civil conspiracy, conversion, and malicious prosecution. Val M. Holms was a co-plaintiff in the Edington Case but was later removed.

Val Holms Complaint

On December 10, 2015, the Company filed a complaint against Val M. Holms in Montana First Judicial District, Lewis & Clark County (Cause No. CDV 2015-954) (the "Val Holms Case"). The Company alleges that Val M. Holms breached his leave of absence agreement by, among other things, improperly interfering with the Company's internal investigation and attempting to negotiate a settlement agreement in the Derivative Litigation without knowledge or authorization from the Company. The Val Holms Complaint has not been served pending resolution of certain matters in the Derivative Litigation.

28

---

Table of Contents

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

PART II

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

Market Information

BRI’s common stock was originally approved for quotation on the OTC Bulletin Board of the National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”) on July 29, 2009, under the symbol “MLTX”, and that symbol was changed to “BKKN” on December 17, 2010. A limited public market for our common stock has developed on the OTC Bulletin Board. For purposes of this Item the existence of limited or sporadic quotations should not of itself be deemed to constitute an “established public trading market”.

For any market that develops for our common stock, the sale of “restricted securities” (common stock) pursuant to Rule 144 of the Securities and Exchange Commission by members of management or any other person to whom any such securities were issued or may be issued in the future may have a substantial adverse impact on any such public market. Present members of management and shareholders at December 2, 2010 when BRI ceased to be a “shell” company, satisfied the one year holding period of Rule 144 for public sales of their respective holdings in accordance with Rule 144 on December 2, 2011. See the caption “Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities”, of this Item, below. A minimum holding period of one year is required for resales under Rule 144 for shareholders of former shell companies, along with other pertinent provisions, including publicly available information concerning BRI, limitations on the volume of restricted securities which can be sold in any ninety (90) day period, the requirement of unsolicited broker’s transactions and the filing of a Notice of Sale on Form 144.

The quoted bid or asked price for the shares of common stock of BRI for the quarterly periods from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 ranged from $0.05 to $0.11 per share.

Holders

The number of record holders of BRI’s common stock as of the date of this Report is approximately 149.

Dividends

The payment of dividends is subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend, among other things, upon our earnings, our capital requirements, our financial condition, and other relevant factors. We have not paid or declared any dividends upon our common stock since our inception and, by reason of our present financial status and our contemplated financial requirements, we do not anticipate paying any dividends upon our common stock in the foreseeable future.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends. We currently do not intend to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future on the shares of common stock. We intend to reinvest any earnings or proceeds we may receive in the development and/or expansion of our business. Any cash dividends in the future to common stockholders will be payable when, as and if declared by our Board of Directors, based upon the Board’s assessment of:

●	Our financial condition
●	Earnings
●	Need for funds
●	Capital requirements
●	Prior claims of preferred stock to the extent issued and outstanding
●	Other factors, including any applicable laws

Therefore, there can be no assurance that any dividends on the common stock will ever be paid.

29

---

Table of Contents

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

Stock Option Plan

The Board of Directors of our predecessor approved the Stock Option Plan on November 3, 2008 and then on June 16, 2010, authorized an increase in the total common stock, $.001 par value, available in the Company's 2008 Non-Qualified Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan from one million (1,000,000) shares to five million (5,000,000) shares, to be granted to officers, directors, consultants, advisors, and other key employees of BRI and its subsidiaries. This was ratified by the shareholders on November 12, 2010. The total number of options that can be granted under the plan will not exceed 5,000,000 shares. Non-qualified stock options will be granted by the Board of Directors with an option price not less than the fair market value of the shares of common stock to which the non-qualified stock option relates on the date of grant. In no event may the option price with respect to an incentive stock option granted under the stock option plan be less than the fair market value of such common stock.

Each option granted under the stock option plan will be assigned a time period for exercising not to exceed ten years after the date of the grant. Certain other restrictions will apply in connection with this plan when some awards may be exercised. This plan is intended to encourage directors, officers, employees and consultants to acquire ownership of common stock. The opportunity so provided is intended to foster in participants a strong incentive to put forth maximum effort for BRI’s continued success and growth, to aid in retaining individuals who put forth such effort, and to assist in attracting the best available individuals to BRI in the future.

The following table sets forth information about the common stock available for issuance under compensatory plans and arrangements as of December 31, 2015. There are no equity compensation plans not approved by security holders.

Plan Category	Number of securities to be issued	Weighted-average exercise	Number of securities remaining
	upon exercise of outstanding	price of outstanding options,	available for future issuance under
	options, warrants, and rights.	warrants, and rights	equity compensation plans (excluding
			securities reflected in column (a))
	(a)	(b)	(c)
Equity compensation plan
approved by security holders	0	$0.10	0
Total	0	$0.10	0

The transfer agent of BRI is Nevada Agency and Transfer Company, located at 50 W Liberty St, Ste 880, Reno, NV, 89501.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities; Use of Proceeds from Unregistered Securities

Since December 31, 2012, the Company has not entered in any sales of unregistered securities.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Not applicable for smaller reporting companies.

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

Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information

All statements contained in this Form 10-K, other than statements of historical facts, that address future activities, events or developments are forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, statements containing the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intends,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “project,” and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements may include any statements of the plans, strategies and objectives of management for future operations; any statements concerning proposed new acquisitions, products, services, developments or industry rankings; any statements regarding future economic conditions or performance; any statements of belief; and any statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. These statements are based on certain assumptions and analyses made by us in light of our experience and our assessment of historical trends, current conditions and expected future developments as well as other factors we believe are appropriate under the circumstances. However, whether actual results will conform to the expectations and predictions of management is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties described under “Risk Factors” under Item 1A above that may cause actual results to differ materially.

Consequently, all of the forward-looking statements made in this Form 10-K are qualified by these cautionary statements and there can be no assurance that the actual results anticipated by management will be realized or, even if substantially realized, that they will have the expected consequences to or effects on our business operations. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements as they speak only of the Company's views as of the date the statement was made. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise

30

---

Table of Contents

Overview

As of December 31, 2015, the Company owns mineral rights to approximately 7,200 gross acres and 1,600 net mineral acres of land located about 8 miles southeast of Williston, North Dakota. Our current and proposed operations consist of holding certain mineral rights which presently entitle the Company to royalty rights on average of a net 12% from the oil and gas produced on such lands. In addition, we own a 2% retained royalty interest (or its equivalent) based on approximately 767 net mineral acres which overlap our existing mineral interest. We have no rights to influence the activities conducted by the Lessees of our mineral rights. We will primarily focus on evolving the Company into a growth-orientated independent energy company engaged in the acquisition and development of oil and natural gas properties; focusing our activities mainly in the Williston Basin, a large sedimentary basin in eastern Montana, Western North and South Dakota, and Southern Saskatchewan known for its rich deposits of petroleum and potash.

BRI has continued to evaluate projects potentially complementary to its core business operations, including projects located in Idaho, Colorado and Texas.

In February 2014, we announced the sale of approximately 767 net mineral acres for approximately $7.9 million and retained 2% royalty on the sold assets.

Results of Operations

Net comprehensive loss in 2015 was $666,418. BRI’s operating results are driven primarily by overall production, oil and natural gas production unit values, and professional fee expenses. The operating loss was driven by lower revenue as a result of lower unit prices and extraordinarily high professional fees.

Overall oil production volume increased more than 9% and natural gas by 23% Average oil and natural gas prices increased from 2014 lows. However, as has been noted previously, the Company is realizing production growth in spacing units with lower net royalty percentages. Therefore, increased production yields less gross revenue to the company.

For the year ended December 31, 2015, professional fees were a significant portion of our operating expense. Professional fees break into the following four categories: (i) consultant fees totaled $116,724; (ii) legal costs totaled $882,899; (iii) and (iii) other professional fees (accounting, auditing, and transfer agent services) totaled $282,200. The consulting and technical fees include due diligence costs for asset acquisition due diligence. Legal fees include defense costs for current litigation as well as legal costs for the internal investigation. The Company anticipates these fees will be fall in subsequent years as legal costs attributed to frivolous lawsuits end and the investigation related costs subside. The Company has filed lawsuits in Montana and New York to recoup many of the costs attributed to the frivolous lawsuits and the investigation.

The following table provide selected financial data about our company as of December 31, 2015, and December 31, 2014.

31

---

Table of Contents

Net cash used by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2015, was $2,195,485 compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $2,189,938 for the year ended December 31, 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2014, our total operating expenses were $1,740,721 as compared to $(4,292,680) for the year ended December 31, 2014. The decrease in operating expenses is primarily attributable to decreased depreciation and depletion. We expect our use of cash for operating expenses to continue at approximately $128,000 per month over the next twelve months compared to $150,000 per month for the year ended December 31, 2015. This reduction reflects substantially lower consulting fees, the insurance reimbursement for legal fees attributed to the on-going lawsuit, and management effort to reduce costs. Our material financial obligations include legal fees, public reporting expenses, transfer agent fees, bank fees, and other recurring fees. Although we expect these costs to fall in 2016, they are still much higher because of costs related to litigation and the investigation. Once these extraordinary situations are resolved, we expect operating expenses to fall to $65,000 per month.

There were no unusual or infrequent events or transactions or any significant economic changes that materially affected the amount of reported income from continuing operations.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2015 we had cash and investments of $4,234,729. The 2014 sale of the Greenfield mineral rights contributed significant cash reserves. These cash reserves are necessary to fund our defense against frivolous lawsuits and to ensure adequate funds exist to indemnify directors and officers as required by Company bylaws. Given our recent rate of use of cash in our operations we believe we have sufficient capital to carry on operations for the next year. Our long term capital requirements and the adequacy of our available funds will depend on many factors, including the reporting company costs, public relations fees, and operating expenses, among others.

Liquidity is a measure of a company’s ability to meet potential cash requirements. We have historically met our capital requirements through the issuance of stock and by borrowings. In the future, we anticipate we will be able to provide the necessary liquidity we need by the revenues generated from the royalties paid to us from oil and gas operations on our existing properties, however, if we do not generate sufficient sales revenues we will continue to finance our operations through equity and/or debt financings.

The following table summarizes total current assets, total current liabilities and working capital at December 31, 2015.

Current Assets include cash, accounts receivable, accrued royalty receivable and prepaid expenses. A significant portion of our current assets comes from accrued royalty receivable. The Company accrues royalty revenue based on reported production of the wells. New wells sometimes report production up to 150 days before beginning payments to royalty owners. This can result in a substantial receivable balance. Based on past history, BRI expects to receive accrued royalty revenue in full.

32

---

Table of Contents

Current Liabilities include accounts payable, accrued expenses and the current portion of long term debt. The most significant portion of current liabilities comes from accrued expenses and production tax passed to the Company as part of the royalty payments. Accrued royalty payable is paid only upon receipt of revenue. Accrued production tax is withheld by the operators from the royalty payments.

Satisfaction of our cash obligations for the next 12 months

Based on an analysis of our current cash position and cash flow the Company expects to fund our current operating plans internally. The use of outside funding or joint ventures is an essential element of current operations as we acquire long –term assets. Such outside funding may be needed if BRI determines a need to increase operations, or if any of our current expenses increase significantly or if long-term assets are acquired.

Since inception, we have primarily financed cash flow requirements through debt financing and issuance of common stock for cash and services. As and if we expand operational activities, we may continue to experience net negative cash flows from operations, pending receipt of sales or development fees, and may be required to obtain additional financing to fund operations through common stock offerings and debt borrowings to the extent necessary to provide working capital.

Over the next twelve months we believe that existing capital and anticipated funds from operations will be sufficient to sustain current operations. We may seek additional capital in the future to fund growth and expansion through additional equity or debt financing or credit facilities. No assurance can be made that such financing would be available, and if available it may take either the form of debt or equity. In either case, the financing could have a negative impact on our financial condition and our Stockholders.

We anticipate the next six months will continue to show net operating losses. This is due to the combination of low, but rebounding unit prices, and continuing costs attributed to frivolous litigation and investigation costs. We have information that an additional eighteen (18) wells are either in production or are in confidential status. Although we believe that income from our wells will likely reduce or eliminate operating losses in the near future, we have no control over the timing of when we will receive such royalty payments. In addition, there can give no assurance that we will be successful in addressing operational risks as previously identified under the "Risk Factors" section, and the failure to do so can have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The tables below show well production listed by formation, wells listed by status, and total well capacity within current spacing unit rules and regulations:

 

Producing Wells by Formation

The charts illustrate several important points:

1.

The number of producing wells continues to increase both in the Bakken formation and the Three Forks formation. However, we expect to see more wells operating in the Three Forks formation in the months ahead. This is significant since the company’s net royalty interest in Three Forks Formation producing wells is substantially lower than those in the Bakken Formation; seventeen percent (17%) versus two percent (2%).

33

---

Table of Contents

	2.		The company has substantial remaining well capacity within current North Dakota spacing unit rules and regulations. Current rules enable a total of one hundred ninety (190) wells to be drilled on our current acreage. We presently have one hundred ten (110) total wells, seventy-five (75) of which are producing. The company is currently at fifty eight percent (58%) of total well capacity. However, the Company has produced only 27% of proven reserves. Therefore, we expect new wells to continue to be drilled on existing acreage, thus continuing to grow and expand our revenue base without acquiring additional acreage.
	3.		Each well has a declination curve. That is, after initial production, each year well production declines until some years later the well runs dry and is shut-in. The new well production is necessary to offset the declination of existing well production. In 2015, oil production was down one percent (1%) from 2013 and natural gas production was up two percent (2%).

Future revenues will be driven by new well production offsetting declining production in existing wells. Fortunately, the company has considerable new well capacity to drive future revenue.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We currently do not have any off-balance sheet arrangement 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, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to investors.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

This discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our financial statements that have been prepared under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires our management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the 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 materially differ from those estimates. All significant accounting policies have been disclosed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 contained herewith. Our critical accounting policies are discussed below.

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 revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Revenue Recognition

The Company follows the guidance of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification for revenue recognition. The Company recognizes revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned. The Company considers revenue realized or realizable and earned when all of the following criteria are met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) the product has been shipped or the services have been rendered to the customer, (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured.

Under the royalty and lease agreements obtained as part of the exercised Option to Purchase Asset Agreement, the Company recognizes revenue when production occurs under our leased property as shown on the operator run tickets (to determine unit values)and information available through the North Dakota Industrial Commission’s website (production totals). The royalty income that is calculated monthly may be based upon estimated oil and natural gas unit values as is necessary.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Not applicable.

34

---

Table of Contents

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.
December 31, 2015 and 2014
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		36
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014		37
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the        Years Ended December 31, 2015 and 2014		38
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2015        and 2014		39
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2015 and 2014		40
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements		41 - 50

35

---

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Bakken Resources, Inc.
Helena, Montana

We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of Bakken Resources, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our 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 Bakken Resources, Inc. and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

/s/ Decoria, Maichel, & Teague

Decoria, Maichel, & Teague P.S.
Spokane, Washington

September 30, 2016

36

---

Table of Contents

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

		As of
		December 31, 2015			December 31, 2014
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents		$	228,952		$	6,334,092
Restricted cash			-			595,000
Accounts receivable - trade			683,146			681,158
Related party receivable			101,976			138,846
Prepaids			61,876			39,593
Investments available-for-sale			4,005,777			-
Income tax refunds receivable			354,951			95,899
Other receivables			390,524			159,772
Total current assets			5,827,202			8,044,360
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, net of accumulated
depreciation of $35,909 and $30,410			2,977			8,475
UNPROVED MINERAL RIGHTS AND LEASES			801,941			300,750
Total Assets		$	6,632,120		$	8,353,585
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Accounts payable		$	114,921		$	134,810
Accrued liabilities			74,324			165,108
Income tax payable			-			944,374
Total Current Liabilities			189,245			1,244,292
Total Liabilities			189,245			1,244,292
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (see Note 10)
STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY:
Preferred stock, $.001 par value, 10,000,000
shares authorized, none issued or outstanding			-			-
Common stock, $.001 par value, 100,000,000
shares authorized, 56,735,350 shares issued
and outstanding			56,735			56,735
Additional paid-in capital			3,510,759			3,510,759
Accumulated other comprehensive income			2,313			-
Retained earnings			2,873,068			3,541,799
Total stockholders' equity			6,442,875			7,109,293
Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity		$	6,632,120		$	8,353,585

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

37

---

Table of Contents

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

		Years Ended
		December 31,
		2015				2014
REVENUES:		$	868,042			$	1,635,854
OPERATING (INCOME) EXPENSE:
Depreciation and depletion			5,498				22,541
Payroll			312,677				341,229
Professional fees			1,281,913				1,642,733
Loss on impairment of asset			-				68,000
Lawsuit settlement expense			-				662,485
Gain on sale of mineral interest			-				(7,172,151	)
General and administrative expenses			140,633				142,483
Total operating expenses (income)			1,740,721				(4,292,680	)
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS			(872,679	)			5,928,534
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES):
Other income							5,000
Interest income			7,175				4,718
Total other income (expenses)			7,175				9,718
NET INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES			(865,504	)			5,938,252
Income tax benefit (provision)			196,773				(1,958,600	)
NET INCOME (LOSS)			(668,731	)			3,979,652
OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
Unrealized gains on investments			2,313				-
TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)		$	(666,418	)			-
NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE
– BASIC AND DILUTED		$	(0.01	)		$	0.07
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
– basic			56,735,350				56,735,350
– diluted			56,735,350				56,902,016

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

38

---

Table of Contents

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,

														Accumulated
		Common Stock												Other			Total
							Paid-in			Retained				Comprehensive			Stockholders'
		Shares		Amount			Capital			Earnings (Deficit)				Income			Equity
Balance - December 31, 2013		56,735,350		$	56,735		$	3,496,296		$	(437,853	)						3,115,178
Options Expense								14,463										14,463
Net Income											3,979,652							3,979,652
Balances - December 31, 2014		56,735,350			56,735			3,510,759			3,541,799							7,109,293
Unrealized gain on investments															2,313			2,313
Net (Loss)											(668,731	)						(668,731	)
Balances - December 31, 2015		56,735,350		$	56,735		$	3,510,759		$	2,873,068			$	2,313		$	6,442,875

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

39

---

Table of Contents

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

				Years Ended
				December 31,
				2015				2014
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net income (loss)				$	(668,731	)		$	3,979,654
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash used by operating activities:
		Depreciation and depletion expense			5,498				22,541
		Options expense			-				14,463
		Loss on Impairment of asset			-				68,000
		Gain on sale of mineral interest			-				(7,172,151	)
	Change in operating assets and liabilities:
		Accounts receivable - trade			(1,990	)			1,444,946
		Related party receivable			36,871
		Other receivables			(230,751	)			(394,518	)
		Income tax refunds receivable			(259,051	)
		Prepaids			(22,283	)			(18,641	)
		Accounts payable			(19,891	)			92,246
		Royalty payable to related party							(403,222	)
		Accrued liabilities			(90,782	)			(18,383	)
		Income tax liability			(944,374	)			430,627
		Related party payable							(235,500	)
NET CASH (USED) BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES					(2,195,485	)			(2,189,938	)
CASH FLOW FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
		Restricted cash (increase) decrease			595,000				(595,000	)
		Cash paid for acquisition of investments			(4,003,464	)
		Cash received from sale of mineral property							7,847,417
		Cash paid for acquisition of unproved mineral rights and leases			(501,191	)			(250,750	)
		Cash paid for acquisition of property and equipment							(1,238	)
NET CASH (USED) PROVIDED BY INVESTING ACTIVITIES					(3,909,655	)			7,000,429
NET CHANGE IN CASH					(6,105,140	)			4,810,491
Cash at beginning of year					6,334,092				1,523,601
Cash at end of year				$	228,952			$	6,334,092
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
	Income taxes paid			$	900,039			$	1,480,114

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

40

---

Table of Contents

BAKKEN RESOURCES, INC.

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1 - ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS

Multisys Language Solutions (“MLS”) was incorporated on June 6, 2008 in Nevada. On June 11, 2010, MLS entered into an Option to Purchase Assets Agreement with Holms Energy to purchase certain oil and gas production royalty rights on land in North Dakota. This option was exercised on November 26, 2010. On December 10, 2010, MLS changed its name to Bakken Resources, Inc. (“BRI”).

Formation of BR Metals, Inc.

On January 13, 2011, the Company formed BR Metals, Inc., in Nevada. BR Metals Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of the company. BR Metals, Inc. was designed to engage in the business of identifying, screening, evaluating, and acquiring precious metals properties in the Western United States. However, the Company has no activity and is not actively engaged in securing metal properties.

NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of presentation

The accompanying financial statements and related notes have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”).

Basis of consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include those of Bakken Resources, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Bakken Development Corp. and BR Metals, Inc. (collectively, the “Company”). All material intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Use of estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles 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 revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Management’s estimates include estimates in recognizing revenue, determining useful lives of assets and associated depreciation and depletion methods, stock based compensation, asset impairments and income taxes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. Money market funds with a weighted average monthly maturity of less than 90 days are classified as investments available for sale and not cash equivalents.

Investments

The Company’s investments are comprised of fixed income funds, corporate bonds, publicly traded equities, money market funds and other managed fund investments. These investments are held in the custody of a major financial institution. At December 31, 2015, the Company’s investments were classified as available-for-sale. These investments are recorded in the Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value with net unrealized gains or losses reported as a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax.

The Company recognizes an impairment charge when a decline in the fair value of its investments is considered to be other-than-temporary. An impairment is considered other-than-temporary if (i) the Company has the intent to sell the security, (ii) it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery of its entire amortized cost basis, or (iii) the Company does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost of the security. If an impairment is considered other-than-temporary the entire difference between the amortized cost and the fair value of the security is recognized in operations.

Allowance for doubtful accounts

The Company evaluates its accounts receivables for collectability and establishes an allowance for bad debts through a review of several factors including historical collection experience, current aging status of the customer accounts, and financial condition of  our customers. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, no allowance for doubtful accounts was recorded.

41

---

Table of Contents

Property and equipment

Property and equipment is recorded at cost. Expenditures for major additions and betterments are capitalized. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred. Depreciation of property, plant and equipment is computed by the straight-line method (after taking into account their respective estimated residual values) over the assets estimated useful life. Upon sale or retirement of equipment, the related cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any gain or loss is reflected in statements of operations. Depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was $5,498 and $8,034 respectively.

Oil and Gas Properties and Mineral Rights

The Company applies the successful efforts method of accounting for oil and gas properties. The Company owns royalty interests and one unproved oil and gas interest. The Company capitalizes asset acquisition costs of mineral rights and leases. Unproved oil and gas properties are periodically assessed to determine whether they have been impaired, and any impairment in value is charged to expense. The costs of proved properties are depleted on an equivalent unit-of-production basis. Total proved reserves is the reserve base used to calculate depletion.

Asset Retirement Obligations

The Company follows the FASB Accounting Standards Codification which requires entities to record the fair value of a liability for legal obligations associated with the retirement obligations of tangible long-lived assets in the period in which it is incurred. This standard requires the Company to record a liability for the fair value of the dismantlement and plugging and abandonment costs excluding salvage values. When the liability is initially recorded, the entity increases the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, accretion of the liability is recognized each period and the capitalized cost is amortized over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, an entity either settles the obligation for its recorded amount or incurs a gain or loss upon settlement. During 2015 and 2014, the Company has not recorded any asset retirement obligations.

Impairment of long-lived assets

The Company follows the FASB Accounting Standards Codification for its long-lived assets. The Company’s long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable.

The Company assesses the recoverability of its long-lived assets by comparing the projected undiscounted net cash flows associated with the related long-lived asset or group of long-lived assets over their remaining estimated useful lives against their respective carrying amounts. Impairment, if any, is based on the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of those assets. If long-lived assets are determined to be recoverable, but the newly determined remaining estimated useful lives are shorter than originally estimated, the net book values of the long-lived assets are depreciated over the newly determined remaining estimated useful lives.

The Company impaired the value of an asset referred to as “Duck Lake” during the year ended December 31, 2013. The Company also impaired the value of an asset, the Texas working interest, in the year ended December 31, 2014 (See Note 3).

Fair value of financial instruments

The Company follows the FASB Accounting Standards Codification for disclosures about fair value of its financial instruments and has adopted the FASB Accounting Standards Codification to measure the fair value of its financial instruments. the FASB Accounting Standards Codification establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. To increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the FASB Accounting Standards Codification establishes a fair value hierarchy which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three (3) broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. The three (3) levels of fair value hierarchy defined by the FASB Accounting Standards Codification are described below:

Level 1	Quoted market prices available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date.
Level 2	Pricing inputs other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reporting date.
Level 3	Pricing inputs that are generally observable inputs and not corroborated by market data.

42

---

Table of Contents

The carrying amounts of financial assets and liabilities, such as cash, approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments.

The Company has investment assets (see Note 3) that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company also had assets that, under certain conditions, are subject to measurement at fair value on a non-recurring basis like those associated with oil and gas producing properties, and mineral rights and leases, and other long-lived assets. For these assets, measurement at fair value in periods subsequent to their initial recognition is applicable if any of these assets are determined to be impaired. If recognition of these assets at their fair value becomes necessary, such measurements will be determined utilizing Level 3 inputs.

Revenue recognition

The Company follows the guidance of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification for revenue recognition. The Company recognizes revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned. The Company considers revenue realized or realizable and earned when all of the following criteria are met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) the product has been shipped or the services have been rendered to the customer, (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured.

Revenues reflected on the income statement are net of production taxes, royalty, expense, and other deductions.

Under the royalty and lease agreements obtained as part of the exercised Option to Purchase Asset Agreement, the Company recognizes revenue when production occurs under the 14 separate mineral leases granted or amended between September 9, 2009 and December 10, 2009, whereby: 1) Oasis Petroleum, Inc., 2) Statoil, ASA, and 3) Continental Resources Inc. purchased the rights to explore, drill and develop oil and gas on the Holms Property acquired pursuant to the Agreement. The royalty income is calculated monthly and the Company recognizes royalty income as production is reported by well on the North Dakota Industrial Commission website. When royalty revenues are accrued each month, the Company also accrues production taxes and royalty expense on this production.

When royalty revenues are accrued each month, the Company also accrues production taxes and royalty expense on this production based on the applicable production tax rates in the jurisdiction the production occurs and the contractual royalty agreements the Company has with certain mineral interest holders.

In certain instances, the Company may have to estimate unit values for oil and natural gas. In situations where production has occurred but payment on that production has not been made to the Company, the Company estimates the unit value of the product sold by reviewing wells in the area and using those unit values.

Concentrations

Currently, the Company’s revenue stream derives from three exploration and production companies (operators): Oasis Petroleum, Continental Resources Inc., and Statoil, ASA. Royalty revenue from Oasis Petroleum accounts for approximately 60% of our revenue; Continental Resources Inc. accounts for approximately 38%, with the small balance remaining derived from Statoil, ASA. Since almost all of our revenue is from two operators the loss of one or more of these critical relationships could have a serious and material impact on the Company’s results of operations and cash flow.

In addition, the Company’s producing acreage currently resides in a small contiguous geographic area (1,600 mineral acres). This production concentration represents a significant risk to the Company if this production is disrupted as a result of localized events. A disruption could have a serious and material impact on the Company’s results of operations and cash flow.

Reclassifications

Certain amounts in the prior period financial statements have been reclassified for comparative purposes to conform to the presentation in the current period financial statements. Reclassified amounts were not material to the financial statements.

Income tax

The Company accounts for income taxes under the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined based upon differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance to the extent management concludes it is more likely than not that the assets will not be realized. 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 the statements of operations in the period that includes the enactment date.

43

---

Table of Contents

Net income (loss) per common share

Net income (loss) per common share is computed pursuant to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. Basic net income or loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted net income or loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of shares of common stock and potentially outstanding shares of common stock during each period to reflect the potential dilution that could occur from common shares issuable through stock warrants and options. At December 31, 2014, 282,001 common stock warrants were excluded from the calculation of diluted loss per share for the years as their effect would have been anti-dilutive. Since all options and warrants have expired, there is no longer any potential dilutive effect as of December 31, 2015.

Commitments and contingencies

The Company follows the FASB Accounting Standards Codification to report accounting for contingencies. Liabilities for loss contingencies arising from 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.

Recently issued accounting pronouncements

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01 Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. The updates makes several modifications to Subtopic 825-10, including the elimination of the available-for-sale classification of equity investments, and it requires equity investments with readily determinable fair values to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 2017. We are currently evaluating the impact of the guidance on our consolidated financial statements.

NOTE 3 – INVESTMENTS

In December 2015, the Company invested cash into a diversified investment portfolio. The portfolio is composed of available-for- sale investments consisting of equities, fixed income, and money market securities as follows:

The fixed income portfolio includes one $100,000 bond maturing in 2-5 years and one $100,000 bond maturing 5-10 years. Tax amounts related to unrealized gains (losses) were immaterial and all unrealized gains and losses have resulted from changes in fair value during year ended December 31, 2015.

Money market funds, publicly traded equity securities, and other available for-sale investments are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices in active markets. Level 2 corporate bonds were priced by independent pricing services. These independent pricing services use market approach methodologies that model information generated by transactions involving identical or comparable assets.

44

---

Table of Contents

The table below set forth the Company’s investments measured at fair value on a recurring basis:

Included in investments available for-sale at December 31, 2015 are domestic securities of $3,753,595 and international securities of $252,183.

NOTE 4 – OTHER RECEIVABLE

Included in Other Receivable is an expected reimbursement from the Company’s Director and Officer Insurance policy carrier for lawsuit related costs. Specifically, the Company’s insurance carrier, Scottsdale Insurance Company, has agreed to reimburse for certain legal defense costs related to the Manuel Graiwer and TJ Jesky on behalf of Bakken Resources Inc. v. Val Holms, Herman Landeis, Karen Midtlyng, David Deffinbaugh, Bill Baber, W. Edward Nichols, and Wesley Paul. Insurance reimbursement is limited to the extent of the underlying policy and to only those expenditures deemed by the insurance company as essential to the litigation. The receivable balance is $390,524 as of December 31, 2015, and $144,913 as of December 31, 2014.

NOTE 5 – RESTRICTED CASH

At 2014 year end, the Company had an Escrow account that held the unexpended portion ($595,500) of the Greenfield asset sale proceeds. The Greenfield sale proceeds were subject to a section 1031 exchange to minimize the Company’s taxable capital gains tax. Accordingly, the cash was restricted, in accordance with the exchange regulations, and only available to pay for or reimburse for qualifying expenditures associated with the asset replacement property. The remaining restricted funds were fully utilized in early 2015.

NOTE 6 – ACQUISITION OF MINERAL RIGHTS

Acquisition of Royalty Interests

On June 11, 2010, the Company entered into an Option to Purchase Assets Agreement with Holms Energy, LLC, pursuant to which Holms Energy agreed to grant Multisys Acquisition an option to exercise an Asset Purchase Agreement to assign all right, title, and interest of specific Holms Energy owned assets to Multisys Acquisition, with Holms Energy members holding a controlling interest in Multisys as a result of the exercise of the option. The option was exercised on November 26, 2010 and the Asset Purchase Agreement was entered into on November 26, 2010 by paying the consideration to Holms Energy detailed in the Asset Purchase Agreement. Under the Asset Purchase Agreement, Multisys Acquisition paid Holms Energy $100,000, issued Holms Energy 40,000,000 shares of restricted common stock, and granted to Holms Energy a 5% overriding royalty on all revenue generated from the Holms Property for ten years from the date of the acquisition closing. The issuance of the 40,000,000 shares to the Holms Energy members resulted in a Change in Control as the Holms Energy members obtained a controlling interest in Multisys. With the Holms Energy members obtaining controlling interest in the Company, the mineral rights acquired from Holms were recorded at Holms Energy’s cost basis of zero. The $100,000 cash paid to Holms was recorded as a stockholder distribution.

The Asset Purchase Agreement related to the acquisition of: 1) certain Holms Energy mineral rights in oil and gas rights on approximately 7,200 gross acres and 1,600 net mineral acres of land located in McKenzie County, 8 miles southeast of Williston, North Dakota; 2) potential production royalty income from wells to be drilled on the property whose mineral rights are owned by Holms Energy; and 3) the transfer of all right, title and interest to an Option to Purchase the Greenfield mineral rights entered into between Holms Energy and Rocky and Evenette Greenfield dated June 18, 2010 related to purchasing additional mineral rights and production royalty income on the Holms Property for $1,649,000.

The Greenfield Option was subsequently exercised by Holms Energy on November 12, 2010, and those Greenfield mineral rights were acquired by Multisys Acquisition through the Asset Purchase Agreement with Holms Energy. Holms Energy exercised the Greenfield option and executed the Asset Purchase Agreement on the Greenfield mineral rights on November 12, 2010 using $385,000 of a $485,000 one month non-interest bearing loan from Multisys to complete the initial payment of $400,000, of which $15,000 was already paid by Holms Energy. The collateral for the loan was the Greenfield mineral rights.

45

---

Table of Contents

Under the terms of the loan from Multisys to Holms Energy, Holms Energy, in conjunction with the entry into the Asset Purchase Agreement on November 26, 2010, assigned the Greenfield mineral rights to Multisys Acquisition in exchange for forgiveness of $385,000 of the loan. The other $100,000 of the loan was to be applied to the Asset Purchase Agreement between Multisys and Holms Energy, and on November 26, 2010, that $100,000 was applied to the Asset Purchase Agreement and the loan was forgiven. After exercise of the option and executing the asset purchase agreement with Holms Energy, Multisys Acquisition purchased the gas and oil production royalty rights of Rocky and Evenette Greenfield for an aggregate of $1,249,000 plus interest as follows: installment payments in the amount of $120,000 per year, or $30,000 per quarter plus interest at 5% per annum for 8 years and a balloon payment in the amount of $289,000.

As of December 31, 2012, the aggregate unpaid balance under the installment note was $967,119. Under the terms of the agreement, in the event that a comprehensive mineral title search revealed that the net acres acquired by the Company were greater than or less than 824.5 net mineral acres, the purchase price and corresponding installment note would be reduced by $2,000 per acre. During July 2013, a comprehensive mineral title search was completed and it was determined that the Company acquired 57 less acres than originally stated in the mineral rights acquisition agreement. Accordingly, the carrying value of the proved mineral rights and the amount owed under the corresponding installment note were reduced by $2,000 per acre, or $114,000. In addition, the interest previously accrued and paid on this $114,000 of principal was forgiven resulting in a further reduction of principal in the amount of $11,108 and a reduction of accrued interest in the amount of $4,500. The Company recognized a gain on the settlement of interest of $15,608 and a reduction to the carrying value of the proved mineral rights of $114,000 during the year ended December 31, 2013. Upon completion of the comprehensive mineral title search and settlement of the installment note and interest, the Company paid in full the remaining principal balance of the installment note of $842,011. The outstanding balance was $0 as of December 31, 2013.

On September 21, 2011, the Company purchased an undivided 50% interest in minerals contained in approximately 2,200 acres located in Glacier County, Montana (also referred to as Duck Lake). The purchase price of these rights was $250,000. The value of this asset was impaired and written down to a value of $50,000 because of alleged fraud that may have occurred in this transaction.

Acquisition of Working Interest

On July 3, 2012, the Company purchased a 17% working interest in an oil well located in Archer County, Texas for $68,000 cash from Holms Energy Development Corporation, which is owned by an officer of the Company. The property was not yet producing as of December 31, 2014 and was deemed to be impaired at that date.

Big Willow Lease

On July 9, 2014, Val Holms entered into a two year lease agreement on 28,000 gross acres (approximately 9,300 net mineral acres) in southwest Idaho. The agreement, referred to as the Big Willow lease, included a two year primary term with the option to extend for an additional term. Certain proceeds from the Company’s sale of the Greenfield mineral rights in early 2014 were used for this acquisition. A portion of the proceeds were to an Internal Revenue Code Section 1031 like-kind exchange or 1031 exchange as it is known. The proceeds were held in escrow until qualifying expenditures occurred.

On July 9, 2016 the lease expired without extension due to unfavorable market conditions and the lack of infrastructure in the area, which made development uneconomical.

As of December 31, 2015, the Company has invested more than $751,000 on lease bonus payments, title work, and other development related costs.

NOTE 7 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Related Party Receivable

In connection with the acquisition of the Holms Property (see Note 4), the Company granted to Holms Energy, LLC, which is owned by a former officer of the Company, a 5% overriding royalty payable on all revenue generated from the Holms Property for ten years from the date of the acquisition’s closing. The royalty was over-paid in 2014 resulting in a related party receivable. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the royalty receivable was $101,976 and $138,846, respectively. The corresponding 2015 and 2014 royalty expense was $359,829 and $802,581, respectively.

NOTE 8 – GREENFIELD ASSET SALE

In early 2014, the Company negotiated the sale of certain mineral assets called The Greenfield Assets. The Greenfield assets were originally acquired in November 2010. The transaction resulted in a net capital gain to the Company. Details of the transaction are as follows:

46

---

Table of Contents

A portion of the sale proceeds were included in an Internal Revenue Code section 1031 exchange. A 1031 exchange, as it is commonly referred to, allows all or part of the sales proceeds from an asset sale to be excluded from capital gains tax if the proceeds are used to acquire a qualifying replacement asset within a certain time frame. In this case, the Company deferred capital gains tax on $170,484 in connection with the 1031 exchange.

NOTE 9 – STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Common Stock and Common Stock Warrants

The Company issued warrants to shareholders beginning in 2009. Warrants were issued through 2012. The summary of warrant activity is as follows:

Common Stock Options

During March 2012, the Company granted an aggregate of 500,000 common stock options to officers and Directors. The options are exercisable at $0.10 per share and vest one-third immediately and one-third each year over the next two years. The fair value of the options was determined to be $400,548 using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The key assumptions utilized in the model include the closing market price of the Company’s common stock of $0.90, expected terms between 1 and 2 years, volatility of 68.94%, risk-free interest rate of 0.41% and zero expected dividends. The fair value was expensed over the vesting period of the options. Option expense of $0 and $14,461, was recognized during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The table below summarizes the Company’s option activity:

47

---

Table of Contents

NOTE 10 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Office Lease Commitment

On December 1, 2010, BRI entered into a one-year office lease, renewable for up to five years, for a 2,175 square foot executive office at 1425 Birch Ave., Suite A, Helena, MT 59601, for a monthly charge of $1,600 for the first year; $1,800 second year; $2,000 third year; $2,200 fourth year; and $2,400 fifth year. BRI has leased an additional room at $100 per month. Therefore, total rent is $2,500 per month.

Litigation

On April 2, 2012, BRI was served with a summons relating to a complaint filed by Allan Holms, both individually and derivatively through Roil Energy, LLC. Allan Holms is the half-brother of BRI’s CEO, Val Holms. The Complaint (filed in the Superior Court of the State of Washington located in Spokane County) names, among others, Joseph Edington, Val and Mari Holms, Holms Energy, LLC and BRI as defendants. The Complaint primarily alleges breach of contract, tortious interference with prospective business opportunity and fraud. The complaint focuses on events allegedly occurring around February and March 2010 whereby Allan Holms alleged an oral agreement took place whereby he was to receive up to 40% of the originally issued equity of Roil Energy, LLC. Allan Holms alleges Roil Energy was originally intended to be the predecessor entity to BRI. After various court proceedings, the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s ruling against the plaintiff and reversed the trial court’s ruling against certain of the defendants. The Company believes the possibility of any future economic damages to BRI to be unlikely. When the Company filed the appeal with the Washington Court of appeals, the Company was required to post a bond of $462,485. This amount is identified on the income statement as Settlement Expense. Upon the successful appeal, the bond will be returned to the Company.

On June 6, 2012, the Company filed a Temporary Restraining Order (the “TRO”) and Verified Complaint for Injunctive Relief against McKinley Romero, Peter Swan Investment Consulting Ltd and IWJ Consulting Group, LLC (collectively, the “Defendants”), in connection with the Defendants’ request to the transfer agent to remove restrictive legends from an aggregate of 4.7 million shares, which the Company believes were improperly obtained by the Defendants. The Company obtained the TRO from the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Washoe on June 6, 2012 enjoining the Defendants from seeking removal of the restrictive legends. On a scheduled hearing on June 26, 2012 the judge in this matter ruled in favor of the Company’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The order granting such preliminary injunction was issued from this court on August 14, 2012. This matter is pending the Company’s motion for final judgment in favor of the Company.

In March 2013, the Company received notice of a complaint titled Gillis v. Bakken Resources, Inc., Case No. A-13-675280-B, filed in the District Court of the State of Nevada for Clark County. Mr. Gillis, the plaintiff in this matter (the “Gillis Case”), is the trustee of the Bruce and Marilyn Gillis 1987 Trust. Mr. Gillis is alleging that the Company breached certain registration rights obligations pursuant to an equity investment made at or around November 2010. The Court in this this matter granted class certification and class notice in March 2014. The Company settled this matter in September 2014 for $200,000. This expenditure has been identified on this income statement as Settlement Expense.

In March 2014, the Company received notice of a complaint titled Manuel Graiwer and TJ Jesky v. Val Holms, Herman Landeis, Karen Midtlyng, David Deffinbaugh, Bill Baber, W. Edward Nichols, and Wesley Paul, Case No. CV14 00544 (the “Graiwer Case”), filed in the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada for Washoe County. Messrs. Graiwer and Jesky, the plaintiffs in the Graiwer Case, bring action on behalf of the Company derivatively, and the Company is also named as a nominal defendant. Messrs. Graiwer and Jesky are shareholders of the company and allege breach of fiduciary duty, gross negligence, corporate waste, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy against one or more of the named defendants. The Company is also informed that each of the other named defendants denies the validity of the claims made in the Graiwer case, and each intends to vigorously defend against such claims, as applicable. The plaintiff in the Graiwer Case have agree to dismiss all claims against all defendants except Val M. Holms, and such dismissal is pending approval by the Court.

The Bakken Resources Inc. bylaws state that the Company will indemnify officers and directors for actual and reasonable amounts incurred while acting as an agent of the corporation. Val Holms’ attorneys have submitted invoices to Bakken through December 31, 2015 for direct payment totaling more than $282,000. These services include the Graiwer lawsuit and investigation related defense costs, as well as a litany of other services that don’t pertain to any litigation. The Company has reviewed all submitted charges. The Company paid all billings that appear to be indemnifiable under the Company’s bylaws and Val Holms’ Leave of Absence Agreement. Consequently, $169,000 in services billed have not been reimbursed nor accrued as legal fees expense.

The nature of these commitments and contingencies is such that management cannot accurately determine what impact, if any, they may have on results of operation, cash flows, and financial statements. Management believes, however, it is unlikely that any adverse impact will occur from these commitments and contingencies.

48

---

Table of Contents

NOTE 11 – INCOME TAXES

The Company uses the liability method, where deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial and income tax reporting purposes. During 2015 and 2014, the Company generated a taxable loss and income, respectively. Accordingly, the Company recognized a tax benefit of $196,773 and a tax provision of $1,958,600, for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. There was no available net operating loss carry forward as of December 31, 2015 or 2014. The net operating loss generated in 2015 was carried back to 2014 generating a tax refund receivable of $354,951.

The (benefit) provision for income taxes consists of the following for 2015 and 2014:

The income tax (benefit) provision differs from the amount of income tax determined by applying the Federal Income Tax Rate to pre-tax income from continuing operations due to the following items:

At December 31, 2015 and 2014 the Company’s deferred tax asset (liability) are as follows:

The Company has no unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2015 or 2014 and has no deferred tax provisions for either year. It is not anticipated that there will be any significant changes to unrecognized tax benefits within the next twelve months. If interest and penalties were to be assessed, we would charge interest to interest expense, and penalties to other operating expense. At December 31, 2015, fiscal years 2011 through 2015 remain subject to examination by federal and state tax authorities.

49

---

Table of Contents

NOTE 12 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Val Holms’ Termination: The Company’s founder and CEO, Val M Holms, was terminated in May 2016 on the basis of fraud and other allegations levied against him.

Eagle Private Equity Transaction: In May 2016, the Company entered into a financing agreement with Eagle Private Equity (“Eagle”). The Eagle transaction provides a non-revolving line of credit not to exceed $1,000,000 and intended for the acquisition of non-working interest assets. The Convertible Loan Credit Agreement is convertible into Series A preferred stock. Series A preferred stock generally holds common stock voting rights equivalent to 100 shares of common stock for each share of series A preferred stock.

The agreement includes conversion rights if certain triggering events occurred. On July 20, 2016, a triggering event occurred, which granted Eagle the right to put loans to the Company and convert debt ($600,000) into equity (600,000 preferred shares) having the voting equivalent of 60 million shares of the Company’s common stock.

Big Willow Lease Expiration: On July 9, 2014, the Val Holms entered into a two year lease agreement on 28,000 gross acres approximately 9,300 net mineral acres) in southwest Idaho. The agreement, referred to as the Big Willow lease, included a two year primary term with the option to extend for an additional term. On July 9, 2016 the lease expired. As of December 31, 2015, the Company has invested more than $751,000 on lease bonus payments, title work, and other development related costs. These costs have been written off on July 9, 2016.

Attempted Takeover: On July 20, 2016, Val Holms’ half-brother, Allan Holms, attempted a takeover of the Company. Allan Holms and an armed security force attempted to remove the existing Board of Directors, remove current management, remove all counsel and suspend litigation, and take control of the Company’s cash assets. Allan Holms purported to hold proxies from Val Holms and other shareholders representing a majority of the Company’s common stock. Law enforcement agencies intervened and ended the takeover. The Company has filed for and received temporary restraining orders in Montana and Nevada enjoining Allan Holms from taking such takeover actions, pending preliminary hearings. A hearing in Montana has taken place and is pending a decision. Hearings in Nevada are scheduled to be heard in late October 2016. The Company believes such proxies were improperly and illegally obtained and that Allan Holms’ actions on July 20 are invalid and without merit.

Roil Lawsuit Appeal: In August 2016, the Washington State Appellate Court ruled to affirm the lower court’s ruling that Allan Holms and Roil Energy, LLC did not have any claims to the Company’s assets and also to overturn the lower court’s ruling that found certain fraud and awarded Allan Holms certain attorney’s fees. The Company had posted a $462,000 appeal bond as part of the appeal process. The plaintiffs are petitioning the Washington State Supreme Court. When all legal remedies have been exhausted, the Company will recognize the appeal bond refund as a receivable on the balance sheet. As of December 31, 2015 the Company has not booked the receivable.

50

---

Table of Contents

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

None.

ITEM 9A CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) or 15d-15(f) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, a Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by a Company’s board of directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

●	Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;
●	Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and
●	Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015.

A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

We identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015 because certain elements of an effective control environment were not present including the financial reporting processes and procedures, and internal control procedures by our board of directors as we have yet to establish an audit committee and our full board has not been adequately performing those functions. The material weaknesses identified include the following:

●	There exists a significant overlap between management and our board of directors, with three of our seven directors being members of management (although during most of 2015, our CEO was on leave of absence). This does not allow for multiple levels of supervision and review.
●	Additionally, since we only have one full time and one part time employee, it has not been possible to ensure appropriate segregation of duties between incompatible functions, and formalized monitoring procedures have not, as of December 31, 2015, been established or implemented.

Based on this assessment and the material weaknesses described above, management has concluded that internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2015.

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

We intend to take the following steps as soon as practicable to remediate the material weaknesses we identified as follows:

●	We will segregate incompatible functions using existing personnel where possible or, given sufficient capital resources, we will hire additional personnel to perform those functions.
●	We will, and have, appointed additional outside directors, particularly those who may have experience with regard to financial reporting, financial reporting processes and procedures and internal control procedures.
●	To the extent we can attract outside directors, we plan to form an audit committee to review and assist the board with its oversight responsibilities and appoint a financial expert to be the chairperson of such audit committee.

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

As of the end of the period covered by this Report, there have been no changes in internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended December 31, 2015, that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

51

---

Table of Contents

ITEM 9B OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

A. Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters and Control Persons

The members of our board of directors serve for one year terms and are elected at the next annual meeting of stockholders, or until their successors have been elected. The officers serve at the pleasure of the board of directors.

Pursuant to the acquisition of Holms Energy’s assets, some members of Holms Energy became the officers and directors of BRI effective upon closing of the acquisition agreement.

The following table sets forth the directors and executive officers of BRI as of December 31, 2015. The previous directors of BRI appointed the nominees designated by Holms Energy as members of the board of directors of BRI. Subsequently, the current officers and directors of BRI resigned their positions at BRI, clearing the way for the appointment of new executive officers by the new board of directors of BRI. Directors are elected for a period of one year and thereafter serve until the next annual meeting at which their successors are duly elected by the stockholders. Officers and other employees serve at the will of the board of directors and hold office until their death, resignation or removal from office.

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships among our directors or officers

Business Experience

The following is a brief account of the education and business experience of each director and executive officer during at least the past five years, indicating each person’s business experience, principal occupation during the period, and the name and principal business of the organization by which they were employed of those directors and the key members of the management team who became the officers, directors, and key employees of BRI on or after December 1, 2010 after the Asset Acquisition:

Val M. Holms – 68, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director. After being honorably discharged from the United States Marine Corps, 4^th Force Reconnaissance Division in Vietnam in 1969, he was the founder, sole owner and operator of Holms Building Services, Inc., a licensed general contracting Company based in Missoula, Montana until 1984. Beginning in 1971 until the present, Mr. Holms has been a private investor, a part time independent land man, organized several oil and gas limited partnerships, purchased and sold mineral leases, and arranged various oil and gas joint ventures in Montana, Oklahoma, Texas, and North Dakota. From 1984 to 1988, he attended Rhema Bible Institute and received a degree in Theology. Mr. Holms and his wife Mari Holms are the managing members of Holms Energy, LLC.

52

---

Table of Contents

Dan Anderson – 51, Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Anderson graduated from the Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology in 1986 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration, Finance and Accounting. After graduation, Mr. Anderson served as the chief financial officer of a health care Company and was a partner in a consulting firm. Mr. Anderson has subsequently received a Master’s Degree in Business Administration, a graduate degree in banking, is a certified business adviser, and is a certified human resources specialist. Mr. Anderson has owned a number of small businesses in southwest Montana for more than 20 years. On May 23, 2014, Mr. Anderson was appointed as the Company's Chief Financial Officer.

Karen S. Midtlyng – 57, Secretary and Director. Ms. Midtlyng has an associate degree from the University of Montana, Helena College of Technology (formerly Helena Vocational Technical Center). From 1978 to 2005, she was employed by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Science Center, Helena, MT. During her 27 years with the U.S.G.S. she was responsible for start to finish production of several U.S.G.S. scientific reports, fact sheets and electronic documents and co-authored several U.S.G.S. publications. From 2005 to 2010, she was an independent consultant, providing services for a small business in the Helena area, where she assisted in the establishment and implementation of certain business processes.

Herman R. Landeis – 83, Director. Mr. Landeis was the Western Region Tax Manager for Marathon Oil Corporation, based out of Casper, Wyoming, from 1972 until he retired in 1992. Previously, Mr. Landeis worked as a professional Draftsman for Marathon Oil Corporation from 1955 until 1972, except for a two year leave of absence to serve in the Military (Army), where he was honorably discharged. As a Tax Manager for Marathon Oil Corporation, he was responsible for and managed a variety of financial matters related to property tax negotiations, valuation of Company owned assets and property, and conducting various financial analysis on operations in the Western United States. These properties included the Interstate Pipeline running from Montana to Missouri, properties in Alaska, five off-shore platforms and numerous operating oil and gas properties in the Western United States. Since his retirement in 1992, he has acted as a consultant to the oil and gas industry related to special projects involving tax matters, appraisals and valuation of property. Mr. Landeis received a Certified License as a Professional Appraiser from the University of Nebraska in 1972.

Bill M. Baber – 64, Director. Mr. Baber has 37 years of experience in the field of drilling, completing, operating and maintenance of oil and gas wells. In addition, Mr. Baber also provides sources and arranges for the maintenance of oil/gas rigs and other heavy machinery used in drilling operations. Mr. Baber regularly consults with clients on drilling operations and regulatory requirements. For the past 15 years, Mr. Baber has conducted his business through his entity, Bill M. Baber Oil Field Equipment.

Douglas Williams – 58, Director. Mr. Williams is a Certified Public Accountant licensed in the State of Montana specializing in accounting, tax, internal controls, and regulatory compliance. Since graduating from University of Wyoming with a B.S. in accounting in 1985, Mr. Williams has overseen or performed such services for public companies, private companies, non-profits, and governments. Mr. Williams has owned and operated his own accounting practice in Helena, Montana since 2001. Before starting his own practice, he held related positions in Laramie, Wyoming. Mr. Williams was an administrative services director for the City of Laramie for six years, from 1994 to 2000. He was also a manager at Simonsen Mader Tschacher & Company, the second largest accounting firm in Wyoming, from 1991 to 1994. Before that, Mr. Williams was a senior staff accountant at McGladrey & Pullen from 1985 to 1991.

Dr. Solange Charas – 54, Director. Audit Committee Chair - Dr. Charas has more than 25 years of institutional experience with public and private companies both as an employee and a board member, particularly in the areas of corporate governance and human capital. Dr. Charas has served on various Board committees including audit and compensation committees. Dr. Charas has expertise in all areas of human capital management for national and global organizations, specifically in post-merger culture integration, aligning human capital performance to key economic performance indicators, human capital analytics, project management, and designing compensation plans. Dr. Charas serves as an adjunct professor for New York University’s School of Professional Studies, and she is currently CEO of Charas Consulting, Inc., a boutique human resources consulting firm in New York City, as well as the Chief Human Resources Officer and board member of Integral Board Group, LLC. Her past experiences include Chief Human Capital Officer for Praetorian Financial Group (now QBE), National Director of Arthur Andersen, Senior Manager at Ernst & Young, Manager of International Corporate Compensation for GE Capital Co. Dr. Charas holds a Ph.D. in Management from Case Western Reserve University, an MBA in Accounting and Finance from Cornell University, and a B.A. in Political Economy from UC Berkeley.

Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings

To our knowledge, during the past ten years, no present director or executive officer of our Company: (1) filed a petition under the federal bankruptcy laws or any state insolvency law, nor had a receiver, fiscal agent, or similar officer appointed by a court for the business or present of such a person, or any partnership in which he was a general partner at or within two years before the time of such filing, or any corporation or business association of which he was an executive officer within two years before the time of such filing; (2) was convicted in a criminal proceeding or named subject of a pending criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations and other minor offenses); (3) was the subject of any order, judgment or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any court of competent jurisdiction, permanently or temporarily enjoining him from or otherwise limiting the following activities: (i) acting as a futures commission merchant, introducing broker, commodity trading advisor, commodity pool operator, floor broker, leverage transaction merchant, associated person of any of the foregoing, or as an investment advisor, underwriter, broker or dealer in securities, or as an affiliated person, director of any investment Company, or engaging in or continuing any conduct or practice in connection with such activity; (ii) engaging in any type of business practice; (iii) engaging in any activity in connection with the purchase or sale of any security or commodity or in connection with any violation of federal or state securities laws or federal commodity laws; (4) was the subject of any order, judgment or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any federal or state authority barring, suspending or otherwise limiting for more than 60 days the right of such person to engage in any activity described above under this Item, or to be associated with persons engaged in any such activity; (5) was found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the Securities and Exchange Commission to have violated any federal or state securities law and the judgment was not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated; (6) was found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to have violated any federal commodities law, and the judgment in such civil action or finding by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has not been subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated. 

53

---

Table of Contents

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), requires the Company’s executive officers, directors and persons who own more than 10% of the Company’s outstanding common stock to file initial reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Based solely on our review of Forms 3, 4 and 5 furnished to us and on written representations from certain reporting persons, we believe that the directors, executive officers, and our greater than 10% beneficial owners have complied in a timely manner with all applicable filing requirements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Limitation of Liability of Directors

Pursuant to the Nevada General Corporation Law, our Articles of Incorporation exclude personal liability for our Directors for monetary damages based upon any violation of their fiduciary duties as Directors, except as to liability for any breach of the duty of loyalty, acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law, or any transaction from which a Director receives an improper personal benefit. This exclusion of liability does not limit any right which a Director may have to be indemnified and does not affect any Director’s liability under federal or applicable state securities laws. We have agreed to indemnify our directors against expenses, judgments, and amounts paid in settlement in connection with any claim against a Director if he acted in good faith and in a manner he believed to be in our best interests.

Election of Directors and Officers

Directors are elected to serve until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors have been elected and qualified. Officers are appointed to serve until the meeting of the Board of Directors following the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors have been elected and qualified.

No executive officer or director of the Company has been the subject of any Order, Judgment, or Decree of any Court of competent jurisdiction, or any regulatory agency permanently or temporarily enjoining, barring suspending or otherwise limiting him from acting as an investment advisor, underwriter, broker or dealer in the securities industry, or as an affiliated person, director or employee of an investment company, bank, savings and loan association, or insurance company or from engaging in or continuing any conduct or practice in connection with any such activity or in connection with the purchase or sale of any securities.

No executive officer or director of the Company has been convicted in any criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations) or is the subject of a criminal proceeding which is currently pending.

Except as set forth under Item 3 of this report, no executive officer or director of the Company is the subject of any pending legal proceedings.

Audit Committee and Financial Expert

We created an Audit Committee in December 2014. The Audit Committee charter identifies five key purposes: oversee the integrity of the company’s financial statement; overseeing the company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; overseeing the registered public accounting firm’s qualifications and independence; overseeing the performance of the company’s independent auditor and internal audit function; and overseeing the company’s system of disclosure controls and procedures. Solange Charas was named chair of the Audit Committee in 2015.

Solange Charas and Douglas Williams are deemed to be financial experts.

54

---

Table of Contents

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

A code of ethics relates to written standards that are reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote:

We have adopted a corporate code of ethics that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions.

Nominating Committee

We do not have a Nominating Committee or Nominating Committee Charter. Our board of directors perform some of the functions associated with a Nominating Committee.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation Table

The table below sets forth the aggregate annual and long-term compensation paid by us for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, to our Chief Executive Officer. Other than as set forth below, no executive officer’s salary and bonus exceeded $100,000 for the fiscal years 2015 or 2014.

							Change in
							Pension
							Value and
							Nonqualified
						Non-Equity	Deferred
Name and				Stock	Option	Incentive Plan	Compensation	All other
Principal		Salary	Bonus	Awards	Awards	Compensation	Earnings	Compensation	Total
Position	Year	($)	($)	($)	($)	($)	($)	($)	($)
(a)	(b)	(c)	(d)	(e)	(f)	(g)	(h)	(i)	(j)
Val M. Holms
Pres, CEO, & Dir.	2015	180,000	0	0	0	0	-	0	180,000
Val M. Holms
Pres, CEO, & Dir.	2014	185,000	0	0	0	0	-	0	185,000

Narrative Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table

Mr. Val M. Holms, President and CEO of the Company was appointed to his executive position on December 1, 2010. Mr. Holms' annual salary of $180,000 was agreed to be paid by the Company pursuant to his Employment Agreement entered into on February 1, 2011. In January 2013, the Board authorized the extension of Mr. Holms Employment Agreement.

55

---

Table of Contents

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End

There have been no options awards or equity awards given to any executive officers of BRI since inception on June 6, 2008, through the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

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

The following table presents information about the beneficial ownership of our common stock on September 30, 2016, held by our directors and executive officers and by those persons known to beneficially own more than 5% of our capital stock. The percentage of beneficial ownership for the following table is based on 56,735,350 shares of common stock outstanding as of September 30, 2016.

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and does not necessarily indicate beneficial ownership for any other purpose. Under these rules, beneficial ownership includes those shares of common stock over which the stockholder has sole or shared voting or investment power. It also includes (unless footnoted) shares of common stock that the stockholder has a right to acquire within 60 days after September 30, 2016, through the exercise of any option, warrant or other right. The percentage ownership of the outstanding common stock, however, is based on the assumption, expressly required by the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, that only the person or entity whose ownership is being reported has converted options or warrants into shares of our common stock.

Beneficial Ownership of Current Directors, Executive Officers and 5% Holders of the Company

				Percent of Outstanding Shares of
Name of Beneficial Owner (1)		Number of Shares		Common Stock (2)
Val M. Holms-		26,350,000 (3)		46.83%
CEO, President, and Director
Karen S. Midtlyng-		2,250,000 (4)		3.97%
Secretary, and Director
Herman R. Landeis - Director		250,000 (5)		*
				*
				*

Change in Control

We are unaware of any contract, or other arrangement or provision of our Articles or By-laws, the operation of which may at a subsequent date result in a change of control of BRI.

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

On July 3, 2012 the Company purchased a 17% working interest in an oil well located in Archer County, Texas for $68,000 cash from Holms Energy Development Corp. (“HEDC”). HEDC is owned by Val Holms, our former CEO. This transaction was reviewed by the Company’s independent directors and approved by our Board, with Mr. Holms recusing himself from such Board vote.

Transactions With Related Persons, Promoters, and Certain Control Persons

None.

56

---

Table of Contents

Promoters and Certain Control Persons

None.

Director Independence

Our Board of Directors has determined that three of our six directors are currently “independent directors” as that term is defined in Rule 5605(a)(2) of the Marketplace Rules of the National Association of Securities Dealers. We are not presently required to have independent directors. If we ever become a listed issuer whose securities are listed on a national securities exchange or on an automated inter-dealer quotation system of a national securities association, which has independent director requirements, we intend to comply with all applicable requirements relating to director independence.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES.

The aggregate fees billed by our principal accountant for services rendered during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, are set forth in the table below:

(1)	“Audit fees” consists of fees incurred for professional services rendered for the audit of annual financial statements, for reviews of interim financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and for services that are normally provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.
(2)	“Audit-related fees” consists of fees billed for professional services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our financial statements, but are not reported under “Audit fees.”
(3)	“Tax fees” consists of fees billed for professional services relating to tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning.
(4)	“All other fees” consists of fees billed for all other services, such as review of our registration statement on Form S-1.

Audit Committee’s Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The Company formed an audit committee in December 2014 to take over the responsibilities previously carried out the board as a whole. The committee will pre-approve the engagement of our principal independent accountants to provide audit and non-audit services. Section 10A(i) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 prohibits our auditors from performing audit services for us as well as any services not considered to be “audit services” unless such services are pre-approved by the audit committee or unless the services meet certain minimum standards.

PART IV

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

(a) (1) Financial Statements See Item 8 in Part II of this report.

     (2) All other financial statement schedules are omitted because the information required to be set forth therein is not applicable or because that information is in the financial statements or notes thereto.

(b) (3) Exhibits specified by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

57

---

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

The following exhibit index shows those exhibits filed with this report and those incorporated herein by reference:

			Incorporated Herein by Reference
Exhibits	Description of Document	Filed	Form	Exhibit	Filing Date
		Herewith
3.1	Articles of Incorporation		S-1	3.1	02-26-09
3.2	Certificate of Designation for preferred shares		8-K	3.1	05-10-16
3.3	Bylaws		8-K	3.1	02-16-16
4.1	Non-Qualified Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan adopted on June 10, 2008		S-1	10.3	02-26-09
4.2	Form of Registration Rights Agreement 2010		10-K	4.3	04-15-11
4.3	Form of Warrant 2010		10-K	4.4	04-15-11
4.4	Form of Warrant 2011 (Convertible Bridge Loan)		8-K	10.1	05-25-11
4.5	Form of Convertible Promissory Note 2011		8-K	10.2	05-25-11
10.1	Asset Purchase Agreement with Holms Energy, LLC entered into on November 26, 2010		8-K	10.1	10-21-10
10.2	Asset Purchase Agreement between Holms Energy, LLC and Evenette and Rocky Greenfield entered into on November 12, 2010		8-K	10.2	10-21-10
10.3	Promissory note with Holms Energy, LLC for $485,000 entered into on November 12, 2010		8-K	10.2	11-18-10
10.4	Office Lease beginning December 1, 2010		10-K	10.6	04-15-11
10.5	Form of Common Stock and Warrant Purchase Agreement 2010		10-K	10.7	04-15-11
10.6	Employment Agreement by and between Bakken Resources, Inc. and David Deffinbaugh, dated effective as of January 1, 2012		10-K	10.10	04-16-12
10.7	Employment Agreement by and between Bakken Resources, Inc. and Val M. Holms, dated March 12, 2013		8-K	10.1	03-18-13
10.8	Employment Agreement by and between Bakken Resources, Inc. and Karen Midtlyng, dated March 12, 2013		8-K	10.2	03-18-13
10.9	Form of Securities Purchase Agreement, entered into by Bakken Resources, Inc. on February 4, 2011		8-K	10.1	02-09-11
10.10	Form of Securities Purchase Agreement, entered into by Bakken Resources, Inc. on March 18, 2011		8-K	10.1	03-24-11
10.11	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield, Trustees of the Revocable Living Trust of Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield and Empire Oil Company dated July 29, 2008		10-K	10.12	04-15-11
10.12	Oil and Gas Lease No.1 by and between Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield, Trustees of the Revocable Living Trust of Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield and Empire Oil Company dated July 14, 2008		10-K	10.13	04-15-11
10.13	Amendment to Oil and Gas Lease by and between The Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield Revocable Living Trust, Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield, Trustees and Oasis Petroleum North America, LLC dated September 18, 2009		10-K	10.14	04-15-11
10.14	Extension, Amendment and Ratification of Oil and Gas Lease by and between Evenette Greenfield and Rocky Greenfield and The Armstrong Corporation dated September 9, 2003		10-K	10.15	04-15-11
10.15	Extension, Amendment and Ratification of Oil and Gas Lease by and between Evenette Greenfield and The Armstrong Corporation dated November 24, 2004		10-K	10.16	04-15-11
10.16	Oil and Gas Lease No.2 by and between Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield, Trustees of the Revocable Living Trust of Rocky Greenfield and Evenette Greenfield and Empire Oil Company dated July 14, 2008		10-K	10.17	04-15-11

58

---

Table of Contents

10.17	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Val Holms and Mari Holms, individually and as Trustees of the Val Holms and Mari Holms Revocable Living Trust and Empire Oil Company dated July 29, 2008		10-K	10.18	04-15-11
10.18	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Val Holms and Mari Holms, individually and as Trustees of the Val Holms and Mari Holms Revocable Living Trust and Empire Oil Company dated July 14, 2008		10-K	10.19	04-15-11
10.19	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Val Holms and Mari Holms, individually and as Trustees of the Val Holms and Mari Holms Revocable Living Trust and The Armstrong Corporation dated March 1, 2005		10-K	10.20	04-15-11
10.20	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Val Holms and Mari Holms Revocable Living Trust, Val Holms and Mari Holms Trustees and The Armstrong Corporation dated September 9, 2003		10-K	10.21	04-15-11
10.21	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Val Holms and Mari Holms, Trustees of the Val Holms and Mari Holms Revocable Living Trust and the Armstrong Corporation dated November 24, 2004		10-K	10.22	04-15-11
10.22	Oil and Gas Lease by and between Val Holms and Mari Holms, individually and as Trustees of the Val Holms and Mari Holms Revocable Living Trust and Empire Oil Company dated July 14, 2008		10-K	10.23	04-15-11
10.23	Form of Convertible Bridge Loan Agreement 2011		8-K	10.1	05-25-11
10.24	Mineral Property Sale and Purchase Agreement Between John L. Reely, Lincoln Green, Inc. and Bakken Resources, Inc. dated effective as of September 21, 2011		8-K	10.1	09-27-11
10.25*	Purchase and Sale Agreement dated February 4, 2014		8-K	10.1	02-10-14
10.26	Indemnification Agreement with Oasis Petroleum, Inc. dated January 23, 2014		10-Q	10.28	11-19-14
10.28	Mineral Property Lease Agreement with First Amendment Between Bakken Resources, Inc. and Big Willow, LLLP, effective as of July 2014		10-Q	10.28	11-19-14
31.1	Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Executive Officer	X
31.2	Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Financial Officer	X
32.1	Section 1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer and principal executive officer	X
99.1	Audit Committee Charter	X
EX-101.INS	XBRL Instance Document	X
EX-101.SCH	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema	X
EX-101.PRE	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase	X
EX-101.LAB	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase	X
EX-101.CAL	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase	X
EX-101.DEF	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase	X

*	Exhibit 10.25 is subject to SEC’s confidential treatment order dated March 24, 2014.

59

---

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the registrant caused this Annual Report on Form 10-K to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in Helena, MT on this 3rd day of October, 2016.

In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant in the capacities indicated below on this 3rd day of October, 2016.

60

---