Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K/A

(Amendment No. 1)

x  ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014

o  TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                            to                           

Commission file number:  001-32986

GENERAL MOLY, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (303) 928-8599

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

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

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o  No x

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) is not contained 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 definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

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

As of June 30, 2014, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $70,113,669 based on the closing price as reported on the NYSE MKT.

As of April 17, 2015, 93,493,979 shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value of $0.001 per share, were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None.

Table of Contents

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Index to Amendment No. 1 of Annual Report on Form 10-K/A

Table of Contents

EXPLANATORY NOTE

We filed our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (“Form 10-K”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on March 11, 2015. We are filing this Amendment No. 1 to the Form 10-K (“Form 10-K/A”) solely for the purpose of including in Part III the information that was to be incorporated by reference from our definitive proxy statement for the 2015 annual meeting of shareholders, because our definitive proxy statement will not be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of our fiscal year ended December 31, 2014. This Form 10-K/A hereby amends and restates in its entirety the Form 10-K cover page and Items 10 through 14 of Part III.

Pursuant to Rule 12b-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Form 10-K/A also contains new certifications by the principal executive officer and the principal financial officer as required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Accordingly, Item 15(a)(3) of Part IV is amended to include the currently dated certifications as exhibits. Because no financial statements have been included in this Form 10-K/A and this Form 10-K/A does not contain or amend any disclosure with respect to Items 307 and 308 of Regulation S-K, paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the certifications have been omitted.

Except as expressly noted in this Form 10-K/A, this Form 10-K/A does not reflect events occurring after the original filing of our Form 10-K or modify or update in any way any of the other disclosures contained in our Form 10-K including, without limitation, the financial statements. Accordingly, this Form 10-K/A should be read in conjunction with our Form 10-K and our other filings with the SEC.

4

Table of Contents

PART III

ITEM 10.        DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Our Board currently consists of seven members.  Effective February 6, 2015, the Board approved a leave of absence, for personal reasons, for our Board Chairman Patrick M. James.  The approved leave of absence is not to exceed six (6) months, pursuant to our amended bylaws.  Also effective February 6th, the Board appointed Ricardo M. Campoy as Lead Director and Mr. Campoy will serve as interim Board Chairman during Mr. James’ leave of absence.

Pursuant to our bylaws, the members of our Board have been divided into three classes.  The term of office for the Class II members of our Board, consisting of one member, expires at our 2015 Annual Meeting.  The term of office for the Class III members of our Board, consisting currently of three members, expires at our 2016 Annual Meeting. The term of office for the Class I members of our Board, consisting of three members, expires at our 2017 Annual Meeting.  At each of our Annual Meetings of Stockholders, the number of directors equal to the number of directors in the class whose term is scheduled to expire on the day of such meeting will be elected for a term of three years and will hold office until expiration of the terms for which they were elected and qualified.  In each case, a director’s term will continue until the director’s successor is elected and has qualified.  Any director may be removed from office as a director at any time by our stockholders, but only for cause, and only by the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding voting power entitled to elect such director.

Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Guidelines adopted by our Board, if a director nominee does not receive a majority of the votes cast, the director is required to promptly tender his or her resignation to the Board.  For purposes of the policy, a majority of votes cast means that the number of shares voted “for” a director’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “against” that director’s election.  The Governance and Nominating Committee will consider the resignation and make a recommendation to the Board as to whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation, or whether other action should be taken.  The Board will act on the tendered resignation, taking into account the recommendation of the Governance and Nominating Committee, within 90 days from the date of the certification of the election results, and publicly disclose its decision promptly thereafter.  The Governance and Nominating Committee, in making its recommendation, and the Board in making its decision, may each consider any factors or other information that it considers appropriate and relevant.  A director who tenders his or her resignation will not participate in the recommendation of the Governance and Nominating Committee or the decision of the Board with respect to his or her resignation.  If no director receives a majority of shares cast in an uncontested election, then the incumbent directors will nominate a new slate of directors and hold a special meeting of stockholders for the purpose of electing those nominees within 180 days after certification of the stockholder vote.

DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS

The following table provides the names, positions, ages and principal occupations of our current directors, our executive officers, and our Secretary:

5

Table of Contents

(1)         Term of office as Director expires at the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

(2)         Term of office as Director expires at the 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

(3)         Term of office as Director expires at the 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

(4)         Member of Audit Committee.  Mr. Lettes is chair of this committee.

(5)         Member of Governance and Nominating Committee.  Mr. Raih is chair of this committee.

(6)         Member of Compensation Committee.  Mr. Campoy is chair of this committee.

We have provided information below about each of the individuals who currently serve on our Board, including their names, years of service as directors, business experience and service on other boards of directors, including any other directorships held during the past five years.  In addition, we have included information about each director’s specific experience, qualifications, attributes or skills that led the Board to conclude that the director should serve as a director of the Company at the time we are filing this report, in light of our business and corporate structure.  Mr. Chen was initially appointed pursuant to the Stockholder Agreement between the Company and Hanlong USA, and subsequently elected by the stockholders at the 2013 annual meeting of the stockholders.  See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” for more information about this agreement.

Also set forth below is information about each of our executive officers and our Secretary.  Officers are appointed annually by the Board and serve at the pleasure of the Board.

Ricardo M. Campoy has been a member of our Board of Directors since August 2006.  Mr. Campoy is currently Managing Director of the minerals capital and advisory practice of Headwaters Merchant Bank. Mr. Campoy also serves on the Board of Directors of Endeavour Silver, listed on the TSX Exchange.  Mr. Campoy has worked as an international natural resources banker for more than 30 years, having served in executive finance positions at various firms, including as Head of Mining & Metals of WestLB AG, Member/Senior Advisor of McFarland Dewey & Co., Managing Director Mining & Metals of ING Capital and Swiss Bank Corp, respectively, and President of Elders Resources Finance Inc.  Prior to Mr. Campoy’s work in finance, he was employed as a mining engineer at Inspiration Copper, Dravo Corporation, and AMAX Inc.

Mr. Campoy has extensive mining and international business experience, as well as engineering experience.  In addition, Mr. Campoy served as chair of the compensation committee and as a member of the audit and governance committees of Forsys Metals.  He currently serves on the audit committee and chairs the compensation committee of Endeavour Silver.  He brings an international perspective to the Board, which is relevant to our business given the global market for molybdenum.  Mr. Campoy also has 34 years of experience in the banking industry, where he focused on financings of natural resource projects, as well as significant leadership experience in a variety of roles at different companies, all of which makes Mr. Campoy well-suited to serve as an effective Chair of our Compensation Committee.

Patrick M. James has been a member of our Board of Directors since December 2010.  Mr. James is currently on a leave of absence not to exceed six (6) months, approved by the Board on February 6, 2015.  Mr. James has over 45 years of experience in the mining industry including a variety of operating and executive positions. Mr. James retired as President, Chairman, Director and CEO of the Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corporation when it was acquired by Newmont Mining in 1997 and served as a Director of Newmont for one year thereafter. After leaving Santa Fe Pacific Gold, Mr. James served as Director, President and Chief Executive Officer of Rio Algom Limited from 1997 to 2001. Since then, Mr. James has served as a director of four other publicly listed mining companies including Dynatec, Inc., Constellation Copper Corp., Stillwater Mining Company (Lead Independent Director), and Centerra Gold Inc.  (Chairman of the Board).  He was Chairman, and later President, Chief Executive Officer and director of Constellation Copper Corp.,

6

Table of Contents

a Canadian base metal mining company from June 2002 until December 2008, when the company filed for bankruptcy protection.  In addition, Mr. James was a member of the Board of Directors of Rare Element Resources Ltd. from June 2014 until his resignation in February 2015 for personal reasons.

Mr. James has significant experience in the mining industry, starting as an underground miner, through various roles in operations and development of a broad range of mineral commodities; and serving in executive roles of operating and developing companies. Mr. James has an Engineer of Mines degree from Colorado School of Mines, a Master of Management from the University of New Mexico, Anderson School of Business, and is a Registered Professional Engineer in Colorado.

Gary A. Loving has been a member of our Board since February 2008.  Previously, Mr. Loving served as President, CEO and Director of Frontera Copper Corporation and Senior Vice President South American Operations for Phelps Dodge Mining Company and was a member of the Board of Directors of Twin Metals Minnesota, LLC.

Mr. Loving has significant mining operations and project development experience in several world class mining projects including the Candelaria project in Chile, the Sossego Project in Brazil and the Piedras Verdes Project in Mexico.  Mr. Loving’s technical and operational expertise gives him the background to contribute to our Board as an effective Chair of our Technical Committee and to assist the Company in developing its mining properties.

Gregory P. Raih has been a member of our Board since September 2010.  In 2015, Mr. Raih was selected to serve as the Governance & Nominating Committee Chair.  Mr. Raih has an extensive accounting background and served as a Partner at KPMG LLP from 2002 to 2008 and previous to that held a variety of positions at Arthur Andersen LLP, including Partner from 1981 to 2002.  While at Arthur Andersen, Mr. Raih served as the global director of the firm’s mining industry practice and has significant experience with mining accounting and reporting issues.  He served as engagement partner on a number of mining clients, including Newmont Mining Corporation and BHP Billiton Base Metals.  Mr. Raih is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Colorado Society of Certified Public Accountants.  He currently serves as a director of Bonanza Creek Energy, Inc., where he serves as Chairman of the Audit Committee and is also a member of the Board of Managers of Jonah Energy Holdings, LLC, where he serves as Chairman of Audit Committee.

Mr. Raih has extensive accounting experience as a certified public accountant, including providing service to a number of public mining companies.  His qualifications as an audit committee financial expert provide an essential skill set relevant to his service on our Board and as a member of the Audit Committee.

Mark A. Lettes has been a member of our Board since April 2007.  He served as Chief Financial Officer of Apex Silver Mines from June 1998 to June 2006, and was responsible for the financing of Apex Silver Mines’ large-scale San Cristobal silver and zinc mine in Bolivia.  Prior to joining Apex Silver Mines, Mr. Lettes held senior financial positions with Cyprus Amax, Amax, Inc., and Amax Gold.  Mr. Lettes served as a director of Yukon Zinc Corporation from October 2006 to June 2008, Century Mining Corporation from March 2008 to October 2008 and Selwyn Resources from September 2012 to May 2013, where he served on the audit, governance and technical committees.

Mr. Lettes has extensive mining and financial experience gained in his eight years as a chief financial officer at a mining company where he was also responsible for a major financing.  In this role, Mr. Lettes was involved in all aspects of financial reporting and compliance.  In addition, Mr. Lettes served on the audit, governance and compensation committees of Yukon Zinc Corporation and on the audit, governance and compensation committees of Century Mining Corporation.  Mr. Lettes’ experiences in these roles are directly relevant and important to Mr. Lettes’ current roles as our Audit Committee Chair and our audit committee financial expert.  Mr. Lettes’ mining and financial experience, as well as his significant past board experience, enhances the knowledge of the Board as the Company works toward completing financing of the Mt. Hope Project and commencing operations.  Mr. Lettes is also our Finance Committee Chair.

Nelson F. Chen has been a member of our board of directors since September 2011. Mr. Chen is Managing Director of Hanlong Resources Ltd (HK) and has served as a director of various Hanlong Group entities since June 2010. He has served on the board of Moly Mines Limited as an alternate director to the principal of Hanlong Group since April 2010 and then as a non-executive director since August 2013. Mr. Chen was appointed to be a non-executive director of Marenica Energy Limited on 4 October 2011.  Prior to joining Hanlong, Mr. Chen was an Associate Director at the Sydney, Australia office of PricewaterhouseCoopers (“PwC”). Mr. Chen is bilingual and is a licensed Chinese-English translator in Australia.

Mr. Chen has 11 years of audit and M&A transaction advisory experience with PwC. He was involved in a large number of financial due diligence and acquisition advisory transactions with a focus on leading engagements servicing Chinese clients. He has extensive experience in many industries including mining, manufacturing, consumer products, financial services and real estate.

Bruce D. Hansen has been our Chief Executive Officer and a member of our Board since January 2007.  Mr. Hansen served as our interim Chair of the Board from October 2007 through December 2010 when Patrick James was appointed as independent Chairman.  From September 2005 through November 2006, Mr. Hansen served as Senior Vice President, Operations Services and Development at Newmont Mining Corporation.  From July 1999 to September 2005, Mr. Hansen served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer at Newmont Mining Corporation.  Mr. Hansen also served as the Vice President of Project Development for

7

Table of Contents

Newmont and previously was the Senior Vice President of Corporate Development for Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corporation.  Mr. Hansen is a director and member of the audit committee of Energy Fuels, Inc. and is also a director of ASA Gold and Precious Metals, Ltd., where he serves as Chairman of the Audit and Ethics Committee.

As our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Hansen has detailed knowledge of the Company’s development, strategy and projects.  Mr. Hansen also has extensive mining industry background, having worked in the mining industry for more than 30 years in a variety of financial, technical and leadership roles.  Mr. Hansen has demonstrated success in these various industry roles over the years.  Mr. Hansen’s knowledge of the Company’s development efforts as well as his industry experience at both large and small mining companies and his demonstrated past successes give him the necessary background, experience and leadership to be an effective director.

David A. Chaput has been our Chief Financial Officer since April 2007.  Mr. Chaput has more than 30 years of financial and operational experience in the metals and mining industries.  Mr. Chaput was with The Doe Run Resources Corporation until September 2006, where he served as Chief Financial Officer from May 2004 to September 2006, as Vice President, Finance from September 2001 to September 2006, and as Treasurer from February 1993 to September 2001.

Robert I. Pennington was named our Chief Operating Officer in January 2012, and was previously our Vice President of Engineering and Construction since October 2007.  From May 2006 to October 2007, Mr. Pennington owned his own consulting firm.  From April 2002 to May 2006, Mr. Pennington served as Chief Operating Officer of M3 Engineering & Technology.  Mr. Pennington has more than 30 years of metal mine operations and project management experience, including 23 years in management of mine and plant operations.  He previously served as President at the Phelps Dodge Tyrone operations and General Manager, at Phelps Dodge Morenci.  Mr. Pennington has extensive experience in concentrator design with an education in environmental engineering and metallurgy.

R. Scott Roswell has been our Vice President of Human Resources and Corporate Counsel since September 2010.  From June 2004 to December 2009, Mr. Roswell served as Counsel and Executive Vice President of Law and Human Resources and as a consultant to, Flatiron Financial Services Inc. /Centrix Financial, LLC, Denver-based loan servicing firms.  From December 1994 to June 2004, Mr. Roswell served as Senior Attorney/Senior Director to Qwest/US West, in the Risk Management group.  Prior to that, from August 1991 to December 1994, Mr. Roswell was an associate for the Denver, Colorado law firm of Hall & Evans, LLC.

Lee M. Shumway became our Controller in May 2009 and was appointed as our Controller and Treasurer in June 2009.  Prior to serving as Controller and Treasurer, Mr. Shumway served as our Director of Business Process/Information Technology starting in November 2007.  From 2002 to November 2007, Mr. Shumway served as Director of Supply Chain — Nevada Operations for Newmont Mining Corporation following assignments as Controller — Nevada Operations and Business Process Manager from 1997 to 2002.  Prior to joining Newmont in 1997, Mr. Shumway had 10 years of experience with Santa Fe Pacific Gold and Price Waterhouse.

Michael K. Branstetter has been our Secretary and General Counsel since November 1992.  Mr. Branstetter is the principal of Hull & Branstetter Chartered, a law firm in Idaho and has more than thirty years of experience providing legal representation to the mining industry.  Mr. Branstetter’s practice focuses on mining, environmental, natural resources and related business transactions.

THE BOARD, BOARD COMMITTEES AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

During the year ended December 31, 2014, our Board held five meetings.  Each of the incumbent directors who were on our Board during 2014 attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings of the Board and the committees of the Board on which such director served for the full year.  In 2008, we adopted a policy requiring members of our Board to attend each annual meeting of stockholders.  All of our directors attended our Annual Meeting held on June 19, 2014.

Mr. James served as the independent non-executive Chair of the Board throughout 2014 and we anticipate that the Chair of the Board will continue to be an independent director.  As discussed above, Mr. James currently is on an approved leave of absence and Mr. Campoy, an independent Lead Director is serving as interim Chair of the Board.  As an independent non-executive Chair of the Board, Mr. James was, and Mr. Campoy currently is responsible for coordinating the activities of the other independent directors, presiding over all meetings of the Board, including executive sessions; approving information sent to the Board; approving meeting agendas for the Board; and approving meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items.  The Chair of the Board has the authority to call meetings of the independent directors; and, if requested by major stockholders, ensure that he/she is available for consultation and direct communication.

Our Board has a standing Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Governance and Nominating Committee, and Technical Committee.  In 2013, the Finance Committee was re-established and continued throughout 2014 to provide assistance to the Board with respect to any transactions that occur outside of the ordinary course of business including “financing transactions” as that term is defined in the committee charter, mergers or acquisitions.  Our Finance Committee members are:  Mark A. Lettes (Chair), Ricardo M. Campoy, Gregory P. Raih and Patrick M. James.  The Technical Committee provides assistance to the Board with respect to technical studies and evaluations of the Company’s projects, environmental and permitting compliance programs, and safety, health

8

Table of Contents

and environmental programs.  Our Technical Committee members are:  Gary A. Loving (Chair), Bruce D. Hansen, Patrick M. James, and Nelson F. Chen.

Our Board has approved written charters that govern each of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Governance and Nominating Committee, Technical Committee, and Finance Committee which are described in more detail below.  Copies of the

charters of these five committees are available on our corporate website at www.generalmoly.com under the “Governance — Board of Directors” tab under the “Investors” tab.  Our Board has determined that Ricardo M. Campoy, Patrick M. James, Mark A. Lettes, Gary A. Loving, and Gregory P. Raih are independent directors in accordance with the listing standards of the NYSE MKT.  There are no family relationships among any of our current directors and officers.

Stockholders may communicate with our Board or our non-management directors by sending written correspondence to General Moly, Inc. Board, c/o Corporate Secretary, 1726 Cole Blvd., Suite 115 Lakewood, Colorado  80401, or by sending an email to info@generalmoly.com.  Our Corporate Secretary will receive the correspondence and forward it to the Chair of the applicable Board committee or to any individual director or directors to whom the communication is directed.

Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee members are: Mark A. Lettes (Chair), Ricardo M. Campoy, and Gregory P. Raih, all being independent directors in accordance with the listing standards of the NYSE MKT and the additional criteria for independence of audit committee members set forth in Rule 10A-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).  In addition, our Board has determined that each of Mark A. Lettes and Gregory P. Raih is an “audit committee financial expert” as defined by SEC rules.  The Audit Committee held four meetings in 2014.  The primary purposes of the Audit Committee, as set forth in its charter, are to:  (1) provide independent review and oversight of the Company’s accounting and financial reporting process, the system of internal control and management of financial risks; (2) manage the audit process, including the selection, oversight and compensation of the Company’s independent auditors; (3) assist the Board in monitoring compliance with laws and regulations and its code of business conduct; and (4) establish procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints received by the Company regarding its accounting, internal controls or auditing matters.

Compensation Committee

In 2014, our Compensation Committee members were: Ricardo M. Campoy (Chair), Patrick M. James, Mark A. Lettes, and Gary A. Loving all being independent directors in accordance with the listing standards of the NYSE MKT.    The Compensation Committee held two meetings in 2014.  The primary purposes of the Compensation Committee, as set forth in its charter, are to:  (1) establish, administer and evaluate the compensation philosophy, policies and plans for non-employee directors and executive officers; (2) make recommendations to the Board regarding director and executive officer compensation; (3) review the performance and determine the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer, based on criteria including the Company’s performance and accomplishment of long-term strategic objectives; (4) prepare an annual report on executive compensation for inclusion in the Company’s proxy statement; and (5) assist management and the Board with respect to the analysis as to whether the Company’s compensation policies and practices create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Compensation Committee also reviews and, if appropriate, either as a committee or together with other independent directors of the Board (as directed by the Board), approves any employment agreements, severance arrangements, retirement arrangements, change in control agreements and provisions, and any special or supplemental benefits for each executive officer of the Company.  The committee also oversees the administration of the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan.

In fulfilling its responsibilities, the Compensation Committee may form and delegate any or all of its responsibilities to subcommittees, when appropriate, provided, however, that any such subcommittees shall meet all applicable independence requirements and that the Compensation Committee shall not delegate to persons other than independent directors any functions that are required under applicable NYSE MKT rules and federal securities laws, to be performed by independent directors. The Compensation Committee’s evaluation is based on criteria designed to help ensure that our Chief Executive Officer’s interests are aligned with the long-term interests of our stockholders, including the performance of our business, accomplishment of long-term strategic objectives, the handling of extraordinary events, and the development of management.

The Compensation Committee had formerly engaged Towers Watson as its compensation consultant from 2008 (excluding 2009) — 2013, and directed it to help develop and implement a sound executive compensation framework that will enable growth, reinforce consistency and support transparency.  Towers Watson was not engaged in 2009 and was not engaged in 2014 due to the status of developments of the Mt. Hope Project and our cash conservation measures.  The prior work product of Towers Watson remains in place and is available to assist the Compensation Committee in any future updating of our peer group concerning benchmark information.  The Compensation Committee will continue to evaluate our cash conservation measures and in the future utilize Towers Watson or another compensation consultant to provide information and recommendations to the committee regarding

9

Table of Contents

various compensation matters, including advising the committee on legislative and risk updates,  reviewing incentive/business risk;  executive turnover risk; and  other risk factors, including use of key performance indicators.

Our CFO and human resources department, including our Vice President of Human Resources and Corporate Counsel assist the Compensation Committee in its work.

Governance and Nominating Committee

In 2014, our Governance and Nominating Committee members were:  Patrick M. James (Chair), Ricardo M. Campoy, Mark A. Lettes, Gary A. Loving and Gregory P. Raih all being independent directors in accordance with the listing standards of the NYSE MKT.    The Governance and Nominating Committee held two meetings in 2014.  The primary purposes of the Governance and Nominating Committee, as set forth in its charter, are to:  (1) establish criteria for selection of directors to serve on the Board; (2) identify individuals qualified to become directors and recommend candidates for membership on the Board; (3) ensure that the Board, as a whole, is appropriately diverse and consists of individuals with various and relevant career experience, relevant technical skills, industry knowledge and experience, financial experience and community ties; (4) consider independence and any possible conflicts of interest for Board members and executive officers; (5) review and make recommendations regarding the composition, size and tenure policies of the Board; (6) conduct an annual (or more frequently as circumstances may dictate) evaluation of the performance and effectiveness of the Board; (7) recommend members of the Board to serve on Board committees and as committee chairs; (8) review, evaluate and recommend changes to the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines; (9) annually review and evaluate CEO performance; and (10) develop appropriate policies and principles for CEO succession planning.

While the selection of qualified directors is a complex, subjective process that requires consideration of many intangible factors, the Governance and Nominating Committee and our Board take into account the following criteria, among others, in considering directors and candidates for the Board:

·      judgment, experience, skills and personal character of the candidate;

·      diversity of the Board in its broadest sense; and

·      the needs of the Board.

The Governance and Nominating Committee conducts a preliminary assessment of each proposed nominee based upon the proposed nominee’s resume and biographical information, the individual’s willingness to serve as a director of the Company, and other background information.  This information is evaluated against the criteria set forth above and our specific needs at that time.  Based upon a preliminary assessment of the candidate(s), those who appear best suited to meet our needs may be invited to participate in a series of interviews, which are used as a further means of evaluating potential candidates.  On the basis of information learned during this process, the Governance and Nominating Committee determines which nominee(s) to recommend to the Board to submit for election at the next annual meeting.  The Governance and Nominating Committee uses the same process for evaluating all nominees, regardless of the original source of the nomination.

The Governance and Nominating Committee will consider nominees recommended by stockholders.  To date, we have not received any recommendations from our stockholders requesting that the Board, or any of its committees, consider a nominee for inclusion among the Board’s slate of nominees.  A stockholder wishing to submit a director nominee recommendation should comply with the provisions of our bylaws and the provisions set forth in the proxy statement for our most recent annual meeting of stockholders under the heading “Stockholder Proposals and Recommendations for Director Nominees for the 2015 Annual Meeting.”  Under the terms of our Governance and Nominating Committee Charter, we evaluate all nominees, including those recommended by stockholders, by conducting appropriate inquiries into their backgrounds and qualifications; however, the Governance and Nominating Committee may prefer nominees who are personally known to the existing directors and whose reputations are highly regarded.  The Governance and Nominating Committee will consider all relevant qualifications as well as the needs of the Company in terms of compliance with applicable SEC and stock exchange rules.

Diversity is considered in the nominating process as described above and in our Governance and Nominating Committee Charter, which provides that with regard to diversity, the committee will consider candidates for the Board regardless of gender, ethnicity or national origin and that any search firm retained to assist the committee should be instructed to seek to include diverse candidates from traditional and nontraditional candidate groups.  Although we do not have a separate Board diversity policy, the Governance and Nominating Committee Charter provides that the committee is responsible for reviewing and making recommendations to the Board, as it may deem appropriate, in order to ensure that the Board consists of persons with sufficiently diverse and independent background.

10

Table of Contents

Risk Oversight

Our senior management is responsible for managing the risks facing the Company under the oversight and supervision of the Board.  While the full Board is ultimately responsible for risk oversight at our Company, three of our Board committees assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight function in certain areas of risk.  The Audit Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to risk in the areas of financial reporting and internal controls.  The Compensation Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to risk in the area of compensation policies and practices.  The Technical Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to the management of risks related to operations and safety.  Other general business risks such as economic, regulatory and permitting are monitored by the full Board.  Senior management consults with the three Board committees with risk assessment responsibilities, and the Board to suggest risk management topics to be presented to the Board, and a different risk management topic is addressed at each of its meetings.  Risk management and assessment reports are regularly provided by management to these committees and the full Board.

Compensation Risk Assessment

Our Compensation Committee considered whether our compensation program encouraged excessive risk taking by employees.  Based upon its assessment, the committee does not believe that our compensation program encourages excessive or inappropriate risk-taking.  The committee believes that the design of our compensation program, which includes a mix of annual and long-term incentives, cash and equity awards and retention incentives, is balanced and does not motivate imprudent risk-taking.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our officers, directors, and any person who beneficially owns more than 10% of our common stock to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the SEC.  Executive officers, directors, and more than 10% stockholders are required by regulation to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) forms which they file.  During 2014, certain of our directors and executive officers who own our stock filed Forms 3 or Forms 4 with the SEC.  The information on these filings reflects the current ownership position of all such individuals.  To the best of our knowledge and based solely on a review of the forms submitted to the Company, during 2014, all such filings by our executive officers, directors and beneficial owners of more than ten percent of our common stock were timely made.

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

A copy of our Code of Conduct and Ethics is available on our website at www.generalmoly.com under the “Governance” tab under the “Investors” tab, and can also be obtained at no cost, by telephone at (303) 928-8599 or by mail at:  General Moly, Inc., 1726 Cole Blvd., Suite 115 Lakewood, Colorado  80401, attention: Investor Relations.  We will disclose any amendments to or waivers of the Code of Conduct and Ethics on our website.  We believe our Code of Conduct and Ethics is reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and promote honest and ethical conduct; provide full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in public reports; comply with applicable laws; ensure prompt internal reporting of code violations; and provide accountability for adherence to the code.

ITEM 11.       EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis provides information about our executive compensation program.  It describes the philosophy and objectives of our executive compensation program and how we applied those objectives in compensating our executive officers during 2014.  For 2014, our “named executive officers,” or NEOs, include the following individuals:

·                  Bruce D. Hansen, Chief Executive Officer or CEO;

·                  David A. Chaput, Chief Financial Officer or CFO;

·                  Robert I. Pennington, Chief Operating Officer or COO;

·                  R. Scott Roswell, Vice President, Human Resources and Corporate Counsel; and

·                  Lee M. Shumway, Controller and Treasurer.

Our executive team is key to the Company’s achievement of its business strategy.  Our executives were carefully selected to lead the implementation of our business as a result of their significant experience in mine development, project financing, and operations.

11

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Our Business Strategy

We are in the business of the exploration, development and future mining of properties containing molybdenum.  Our business strategy is to acquire and develop highly profitable advanced stage mineral deposits.  Our primary asset is an 80% interest in the Mt. Hope Project, operated by Eureka Moly, LLC (“EMLLC”), a primary molybdenum property located in Eureka County, Nevada.  EMLLC is a joint venture of General Moly, through its wholly owned subsidiary Nevada Moly, LLC (80% membership interest) and POS-Minerals Corporation (“POS-Minerals”) (20% membership interest), a division of POSCO, a large Korean steel company. We also have a second significant molybdenum and copper project, the Liberty Property, located in Nye County, Nevada, which we wholly own.

In the near-term, our objective is to secure project financing to construct and operate the Mt. Hope Project and to continue our evaluation of the molybdenum and copper properties at the Liberty Project.

Developments During 2014

Financing Update.  After successfully receiving the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s (“BLM”) Record of Decision (“ROD”) approving our Plan of Operations (“PoO”) and Rights of Way for an electrical transmission line for the development and operation of the Mt. Hope Project in late 2012, we commenced pre-construction activities in first quarter 2013 at the Mt. Hope Project site, including early well field development, clearing and grubbing of terrain and cultural clearance activities.  In late March 2013, we stopped further construction activity after we were advised by China Development Bank (“CDB”)  that further work on the $665 million Chinese sourced project term loan was suspended.  Under our agreements with Hanlong, Hanlong or an affiliate was obligated to arrange and guarantee the CDB project loan, throughout its life.  On August 13, 2013, the Company and Hanlong terminated the Hanlong Securities Purchase Agreement and other transactional agreements as a result of Hanlong’s failure to procure project financing by the August 13th deadline.

In 2014, the Company continued efforts to source the full financing for the Mt. Hope Project through potential investing partners in China and a large Chinese bank.  Negotiations on investment agreement terms, sponsorship requirements, and indicative loan terms associated with a $700 debt and up to $60 million equity package, advanced in the fourth quarter of 2014.  Through the efforts of our NEOs and our financial advisors at Cutfield Freeman & Co. Ltd. the strong interest from a private Chinese industrial company and a large Chinese bank continues to advance for obtaining project financing for the fully permitted, construction-ready Mt. Hope Project.

Cash Conservation.

Our executives continue to work aggressively to manage expenses and preserve liquidity while actively pursuing financing options for the Mt. Hope Project.

The cost reduction and retention program implemented in September 2013 continued throughout 2014.  Specific provisions of the 2013/2014 cost reduction program included:

·                  25% reduction in base cash compensation for the CEO and members of the Board of Directors with other senior officer and employees receiving 10 to 20% salary reductions.

·                  In parallel with compensation reductions, implementation of a personnel stay incentive and equity award program for the NEOs and other senior managers that provided cash and equity incentives for employees who remained with General Moly through January 15, 2015 or earlier under certain circumstances.

·                  Maintenance of Board size throughout 2014, following the resignation of three Board members at the end of 2013;

·                  Prudent focus on reducing all other expenditures including engineering, administrative and procurement expenses; and

·                  Completion of a reduction in force affecting 40% of our employees and contractors in November 2014.

12

Table of Contents

The 2013/2014 cost reduction and retention program terminated on its terms, effective January 15, 2015.  Cash and equity incentives vested for all applicable employees and officers, with the exception of our CEO — Bruce Hansen’s payment of his cash stay incentive award.  On January 14, 2015, we amended the Stay Incentive Agreement for Mr. Hansen, providing a new RSU grant in consideration for the deferral of the payout of his cash stay incentive payment, and effective January 16, 2015, we entered into new Stay Incentive Agreements with our other NEOs.  Additionally, on January 15, 2015, the committee approved a new retention program for our other executives including equity incentives, and cash incentives for our non-executive managers.  The payout of the 2015 equity incentive grant to our officers and the deferred cash stay incentive payment to Mr. Hansen described above, as well as 2015 cash incentives award to non-executive managers, are paid out if the individual remains with the Company through the earlier to occur of a financing plan for the Mt. Hope Project approved by the Board of Directors, a Change of Control (as defined in the employment or change of control agreements between the Company and each of our named executive officers); involuntary termination (absent cause); or January 15, 2016.

The Company continues cash conservation efforts to reduce planned expenditures that maximize our financial flexibility and secures readiness for the restart of construction activities at the Mt. Hope Project. The implementation of the Company’s cash conservation program maintains current liquidity by reducing engineering, administrative and procurement expenses, and trimming our expenditures to approximately $1.3 million per month.

In third and fourth quarter of 2014, our executives were instrumental in working out an arrangement with the new leadership of POS Minerals, our 20% interest member in EMLLC to access the $36 million reserve account held at EMLLC for the benefit of the Mt. Hope Project.  Effective January 1, 2015, the Company and POS-Minerals agreed to use up to the $36 million reserve balance to fund the Mt. Hope Project’s financial requirements until exhausted, at least through the year 2020, or until the Company’s full financing for construction of the Mt. Hope Project is achieved. Any remaining balance of restricted cash at the time of financing will be returned to the Company.

The efforts of our executive officers have been instrumental in managing cost reduction opportunities to maintain continuity of employees and liquidity during efforts to secure project financing for the Mt. Hope Project.  The Company feels that the management of its liquidity, retention of critical personnel and cooperation from our vendor partners is critical to maintaining the Mt. Hope Project as one of the world’s best and largest undeveloped molybdenum projects, fully permitted and construction ready.

Permitting Update.  Following the BLM issuance of the ROD, Great Basin Resource Watch and the Western Shoshone Defense Project (“Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint against the U.S. Department of the Interior and the BLM in the U.S. District Court, District of Nevada, on February 15, 2013 seeking relief under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) and other federal laws challenging the BLM’s issuance of the ROD for the Mt. Hope Project.  The Court allowed EMLLC to intervene in the matter.  The parties and the Court  agreed to address the Plaintiffs’ claims under the  Complaint based on the administrative record and the parties’ motion for summary judgment briefing on the merits.  Briefing by the parties was completed in February 2014, and  on July 23, 2014, the U.S. District Court denied Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in its entirety and on August 1, 2014 the Court entered judgment in favor of the Defendants and EMLLC, and against Plaintiffs regarding all claims raised in the Complaint.

On September 22, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. District Court’s dismissal.  Plaintiffs filed their Opening Brief on January 23, 2015 and the Defendants and EMLLC filed their Response Briefs on March 27, 2015.  All Mt. Hope Project permits remain in effect and the Company is confident in the BLM’s process and will continue to vigorously defend this subsequent appeal of the ROD.

On June 17, 2014, Eureka Moly, LLC submitted an amendment to the BLM’s approved PoO for the Mt. Hope Project to accommodate minor increases in the disturbance footprint and various design changes.  The BLM required the completion of an Environmental Assessment (“EA”) to approve the amendment in compliance with NEPA.  During the amendment review and preparation of the EA, the approved PoO remains in effect and we are authorized to continue construction under that existing approval, upon obtaining project financing.  The changes proposed in the amendment are similar to approved activities, and we do not anticipate any additional baseline studies or mitigation will be required.  Ongoing changes to permits and the PoO during the life of mining operations are typical as design evolves and operations are optimized.

Water Rights Update.  The Nevada State Engineer (“State Engineer”) has issued all water permits for the Mt. Hope Project.  Eureka County, Nevada and two other parties comprised of three individual water rights holders in Diamond Valley and one in Kobeh Valley filed an appeal in July 2012 to the Nevada Supreme Court challenging the granting of water permits by the State Engineer.  On June 26, 2013, the appeal was consolidated with a similar appeal of the State Engineer’s approval of the Company’s Monitoring, Management and Mitigation Plan (“3M Plan”).  The Nevada Supreme Court heard oral argument on June 30, 2014.  We anticipate a ruling in the first half of 2015.

13

Table of Contents

We remain confident the Nevada Supreme Court will uphold the District Court’s Orders regarding the 3M Plan and the water permits.  Notwithstanding the ongoing appeals, the Company’s water permits have been granted and the water remains available to the Company for use at the Mt. Hope Project.

The Company has continued to maintain all of its permits in good standing and preserved the capacity to rapidly restart engineering, procurement and construction at Mt. Hope after completing full project financing.

Executive Compensation for 2014

The Compensation Committee formally reviews all aspects of the executive compensation program throughout the year and has the authority to make adjustments based on its collective judgment.  When considering adjustments to the executive compensation program, the Compensation Committee takes into account the following factors during its decision making process:

1.              Company performance,

2.              Executive compensation and governance best practices,

3.              NEOs achievement of the Company’s annual and long-term business milestones and individual performance objectives, and

4.              Shareholder feedback via “Say on Pay” voting results.

As a result of the support the 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 “Say on Pay” proposals received, the Company’s compensation policies and decisions remained consistent with our objectives to enhance stockholder value by aligning the financial interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders and to reward our executives when they have achieved our business objectives.  In large part, our executive compensation decisions for 2014 were driven by the suspension of project financing loan negotiations with CDB in 2013, which halted pre-construction activities at the Mt. Hope Project, the continued efforts to obtain replacement project financing in 2014 and the necessity to continue cost reductions, including a November 2014 reduction in force described above:

No 2014 Adjustments to Base Salary.  For 2012, our NEO salaries ranged from 90% to 95% of the median base salary for our peer group.  As a result, the Compensation Committee did not approve any base salary increases for 2013.  With the September 2013 implementation of the announced cost reduction program discussed above, our NEOs received 15% - 25% reductions in base cash salary compensation.  These reductions remained in place throughout 2014.

No 2014 Equity Retention Award Grants.  In addition to the salary reductions instituted in September 2013 and continuing throughout 2014, the Company did not grant any equity awards to our named executive officers or other officers and employees.

No Annual Cash Incentive Awards.  With the continuation of the Company’s cost reduction program, no cash incentive awards were made to our NEOs for 2014 results.

No Performance and Retention-Based and Other Equity Awards.  In December 2014, the Compensation Committee determined not to maintain the prior annual practice of granting equity based retention awards, as a result of continuing cost reductions.  During 2014, there was no annual equity component to our executive compensation program.

Executive Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

Because of our modest size and stage of development, we historically have not engaged an extensive executive compensation program.  Instead, we have used a fairly simple executive compensation program that was intended to provide appropriate incentives for our executive officers to help us achieve our business strategy.  In 2014 we made no changes to base compensation and did not grant any equity awards or cash incentives to our named executive officers.

Historically, our executive compensation program had three primary elements: base salary, annual cash incentives, and long-term equity incentives, which are divided between performance based and time/retention based equity incentives. The overall objective of our program is to enable us to obtain and retain the services of experienced executives.  When project financing is obtained to construct and operate the Mt. Hope Project, we anticipate that we will resurrect positive adjustments to the compensation packages for our executive officers.  In the interim, the committee continues to evaluate the need to balance cost reductions with a compensation program to continue to promote teamwork as well as individual initiative and achievement; to enhance stockholder value by aligning the financial interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders; and to motivate and reward executives whose knowledge, skills and performance are critical to our success.

Essential to our compensation philosophy is the omission of egregious or overly generous compensation, excessive perquisites or tax gross ups on perquisites, repricing or replacement of stock awards, and hedging of Company stock.  We have entered into Employment Agreements with our CEO, CFO, and COO, and Change of Control Severance, Confidentiality and Non-

14

Table of Contents

Solicitation Agreements with our two other NEOs.  Additionally, with the implementation of our cash reduction program, we entered into Salary Reduction and Stay Incentive Agreements in September 2013 that continued throughout 2014 with our CEO, CFO and COO, and Stay Incentive Agreements with our two other NEOs.  In January 2015, we amended our agreement with Mr. Hansen to extend the payout of the cash bonus due to him under the agreement to January 15, 2016, and in January 16, 2015, we entered into new Stay Incentive Agreements with our other NEOs.  A summary of each of these agreements is included following the executive compensation tables under the heading “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”  We believe that these agreements were necessary to retain our executives who are experienced in project financing, mine development, and operations to finance and develop the Mt. Hope Project, grow the Company and increase our stockholder value.  In establishing the agreement with each executive officer, our Compensation Committee took into account many factors, including the individual’s retention considerations, prior business experience, historical compensation levels, work performance, and our business need for the executive’s skills.  The committee also considered external market data, market trends, and drew upon the individual experience of the committee members.

Our Executive Compensation Process

Role of Compensation Committee and Executive Officers

Our Compensation Committee has overall responsibility for (1) establishing, overseeing and evaluating the compensation philosophy, policies and plans for non-employee directors and executive officers, (2) making recommendations to the Board regarding director compensation and (3) reviewing the performance and determining the compensation of our CEO and the other executive officers.  The committee oversees the administration of our equity incentive plans, reviews and approves any employment, severance or change in control agreements and performs other functions set forth in its charter.

In carrying out its responsibilities, the committee works with members of our management team, including our CEO, and consults with legal counsel and independent compensation consultants as it deems appropriate.  The management team assists the committee by providing information on Company and individual performance, market data and management’s perspective and recommendations on compensation matters.  Although the committee solicits and reviews management’s recommendations, the committee considers management’s recommendations as merely one factor in making compensation decisions for our executive officers.  The committee regularly reports to, and sometimes consults with, our Board on the results of its reviews and any actions it takes or proposes to take with respect to compensation policies and executive officer compensation decisions.

Role of Compensation Consultant

As a result of ongoing cost reduction efforts implemented in the third quarter of 2013 and continuing throughout 2014, the Committee did not retain or use an outside compensation consultant, as no changes were made to the named executives compensation throughout 2014.  At the expiration of cost reduction programs, the Compensation Committee will re-evaluate the retention of a compensation consultant, including our previous compensation consultant Towers Watson (2008, 2010 — 2013), for future engagement.

Our Peer Group

Historically, one of the purposes of the committee in hiring a compensation consultant, including the historical retention of Towers Watson, was to assist the committee in comparing our executive compensation program with executive compensation programs of peer companies.  In 2012, the committee, with the assistance of Towers Watson, selected designated peer group companies consisting of North American companies primarily engaged in the hard rock mining of metals and coal mining, as well as other general industry companies, to use for comparison.  With the implementation of the cost reduction program in September 2013 and continuing throughout 2014, the committee did not complete an analysis to update the 2012 peer group.  The committee will review the 2012 peer group analysis and update the benchmark analysis at the expiration of the cost reduction program, if applicable.  We believe that our executives’ 2013 compensation, which was maintained throughout 2014 remains well below the mid-point for the 2012 peer group.

The operational peer group adopted for 2012 and used again in 2013 included the following companies:

15

Table of Contents

Elements of Compensation and 2014 Compensation Decisions

Our compensation program has three primary elements:  base salary, annual cash incentive awards and long-term equity-based incentives.  Our executive officers also participate in employee benefits that are generally available to all of our employees.  Each of these primary elements is discussed in further detail below.

Base Salary

Base salary represents the fixed portion of our executive officers’ compensation and is an important element of compensation to attract, retain and motivate experienced executives.  We establish our executives’ salaries based on consideration of, among other things:

·                  Performance and experience,

·                  Scope of their responsibilities,

·                  Competitive market compensation data for similar positions provided by Towers Watson,

·                  Seniority of the individual, and

·                  Ability to replace the individual.

The committee reviews base salaries annually and makes adjustments from time to time.  An adjustment to an executive’s salary may be made, for example, to align that salary with the committee’s perception of market levels, taking into account the individual’s responsibilities, performance and experience.  From 2006 through 2012, the committee has made periodic adjustments to some executive salaries to bring the salaries closer to amounts the committee believes more closely reflect salaries paid to individuals in operating companies with similar positions and responsibilities.  In 2012, the committee did not recommend any salary increases for 2013.  In 2013 and continuing throughout 2014, as a result of implementation of cost reduction programs, the committee reduced NEOs’ salaries effective September 7, 2013, and approved cash and equity retention incentives for the named executive officers who remain with the Company through the earliest to occur of a financing plan for the Mt. Hope Project approved by the Board of Directors; a Change of Control (as defined in the employment or change of control agreements between the Company and each of our named executive officers); involuntary termination (absent cause); or January 15, 2015.  The cash Stay Incentive was equivalent to the executive’s targeted annual incentive award, and the RSU equity grant was equivalent to the value of the executive’s targeted annual incentive award at the closing share price of $1.68 on September 6, 2013 as set forth below:

(1)         The 2013/2014 Cash Stay Incentive and RSU Equity Stay Incentive did not become payable during 2014, and were paid out on January 15, 2015 following the expiration of the program.

*                 On January 14, 2015, we amended the Stay Incentive Agreement for Bruce Hansen, our CEO, providing a new RSU grant in consideration for the deferral of the payout of his cash Stay Incentive payment, discussed above.

In 2014, the committee maintained the NEOs’ reduced base salaries.

Annual Incentive Awards

Historically, our executive officers have had the opportunity to earn annual incentive awards in the form of a cash incentive award for achievement of corporate and individual goals and objectives.  Annual incentive awards have traditionally been paid to executive officers to recognize specific accomplishments and overall performance, as determined by the committee in its discretion.

16

Table of Contents

Although we target annual cash pay, the committee retains full discretion to adjust annual incentive awards based on its collective judgment of the CEO’s and executives’ achievement of business milestones and individual objectives.  For 2014, all potential grants of annual incentive awards for our named executive officers were determined by the committee in December 2013, in its discretion, based on achievement of the following business and individual objectives:

As a result of the ongoing efforts to obtain project financing for the Mt. Hope Project and continuing cash conservation efforts the committee reviewed the business goals listed above, and determined as a result of the implementation of the 2013 and continuing 2014 cost reduction programs to not grant any 2014 cash incentive awards.  For 2014, actual total annual cash compensation is as follows:

Long-Term Equity Incentives

As a company with limited financial resources, long-term equity awards are historically a significant element of our executive compensation program, and critical to the ongoing retention of our executives.  No equity awards were granted in 2014 as a result of ongoing cash conservation efforts.

Employee Benefits

Our executive officers generally participate in the same employee benefit programs (401(k) plan, health, dental, vision, life, accident and disability insurance) as other employees.  In 2012, the Company initiated an executive physical program with the University of Colorado Hospital.  The Company covers the cost of the executive officer to participate in the executive physical program every two (2) years.  Messrs. Chaput and Roswell participated in 2014.  Messrs. Hansen, Shumway and Pennington are anticipated to participate in 2015.

Employment, Change of Control Agreements

In order to attract and retain key executives, the Company previously entered into employment agreements with Mr. Hansen and Mr. Chaput that expired on December 31, 2011.  Effective January 1, 2012, the agreements for Mr. Hansen and Mr. Chaput were amended and restated to extend the term of the agreements to terminate automatically on the earlier of (1) the one-year anniversary of the date on which the Company achieves Commercial Production (as such term is defined in the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Agreement of Eureka Moly, LLC dated February 26, 2008) and (2) December 31, 2015; and to eliminate the single-trigger change of control arrangement.  Mr. Pennington entered into a similar Employment Agreement on December 12, 2012 which will terminate automatically, if not otherwise extended, on the earlier of (1) the one-year anniversary of the date on which the Company achieves Commercial Production (as such term is defined in the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Agreement of Eureka Moly, LLC dated February 26, 2008) and (2) December 31, 2016. Pursuant to described employment agreements, generally, if a change of control occurs and the Company (or its successor) terminates the employment of Messrs. Hansen, Chaput, or Pennington without cause during the one year period following the closing of the change of control event (a double-trigger arrangement) or the executive terminates employment for good reason, which includes a material diminution of the executive’s duties or compensation; geographic relocation; direction to the executive that would violate local, state, or federal law; or failure of the Company to pay base compensation in a timely manner, Messrs. Hansen, Chaput and Pennington are each entitled to: (a) a lump sum payment of (i) three times the executive’s annual base compensation (determined by applying his base salary immediately preceding the implementation of the September 7, 2013 salary reduction), (ii) 100% of the executive’s target annual incentive award for one year, and (iii) as to Mr. Hansen and Mr. Chaput each of their cash incentive award for major financing, if it has not previously been paid and (b) full vesting of all outstanding stock-based equity awards, if not otherwise accelerated under the provision of a change of control in the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan.  The severance payment is subject to execution of a binding termination release and

17

Table of Contents

confidentiality, non-competition, and non-solicitation covenants.  With the implementation of our cost reduction program, each of Messrs. Hansen, Chaput and Pennington entered into a First Amendment to their employment agreements.  The executive and the Company agreed that any severance payable under the employment agreement will be based on the executive’s base compensation prior to implementation of the September 7, 2013 salary reduction, and that the salary reduction will not be considered a material diminution of the executive’s base compensation, triggering a Good Reason termination event, as defined by the employment agreement.

The terms of employment for Mr. Roswell and Mr. Shumway are covered by offer letter agreements and change of control severance agreements.  In January 2012, Change of Control Severance, Confidentiality and Non-Solicitation Agreements were entered into with Mr. Roswell and Mr. Shumway, and include the same definition of change of control as the agreements for Messrs. Hansen, Chaput and Pennington.  Generally, if (i) a change of control occurs on or before the date upon which the Company achieves Commercial Production (as such term is defined in the Amended and Restated Limited Liability Agreement of Eureka Moly, LLC dated February 26, 2008) and (ii) as a result of the closing of the change of control, or during the one-year period immediately following the closing of the change of control, the Company (or its successor) terminates the employment of the covered executive without cause (a double-trigger arrangement) or the executive terminates employment for good reason, which includes a material diminution of Mr. Roswell or Mr. Shumway’s duties or compensation; geographic relocation; direction to the executive that would violate local, state, or federal law; or, failure of the Company to pay base compensation in a timely manner, the executive will be entitled to a lump sum severance payment.  The severance payment is subject to execution of a binding termination release agreement and confidentiality and non-solicitation covenants.  The amount of the severance payment will be equal to two times the executive’s annual base salary (determined by applying his base salary immediately preceding the implementation of the September 7, 2013 salary reduction) plus 100% of his target annual incentive award for one year and vesting of all outstanding stock-based equity awards, if not otherwise accelerated under the provision of a change of control in the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan.  Mr. Roswell and Mr. Shumway also entered into a First Amendment to their Change of Control Severance, Confidentiality and Non-Solicitation Agreements.  The executive and the Company agreed that any severance payable under the agreement will be based on the executive’s base compensation prior to implementation of the September 7, 2013 salary reduction.

Individual Executive Officers and the CEO

Each of our executive officers is considered individually in the compensation setting process.  In setting cash compensation, the primary factors are the scope of the executive officer’s duties and responsibilities, the executive officer’s performance of those duties and responsibilities, the executive officer’s experience level and tenure with us, and a general evaluation of the competition in the market for key executives with the executive officer’s experience.  Long-term equity incentives are focused largely on retention of our executive officers and matching the financial interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders.

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

The following table lists the annual compensation information for the fiscal years 2014, 2013, and 2012 of our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer and our two other NEOs.

18

Table of Contents

(1)         One-third of the 2010 annual incentive awards was earned and was paid in 2011.  Seventeen percent of the 2010 annual incentive awards were earned and paid upon the release and publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Another seventeen percent of the 2010 annual incentive awards were earned and paid in 2012 upon the issuance of the Record of Decision by the BLM.  The remaining one-third of the 2010 annual incentive awards will become payable upon the completion of financing necessary to fund the Company’s portion of the development of the Mt. Hope Project.

One hundred percent of the 2012 awards were paid in 2013.

No incentive award was approved for 2013 or 2014, based on the Company’s cost reduction program.

See the table below for a breakout of amounts earned by year.

(2)         These amounts do not represent the actual amounts paid to or realized by these individuals.  These amounts represent the aggregate grant date fair value for grants during the fiscal year, computed in accordance with applicable accounting rules (FASB ASC Topic 718), excluding the amount of estimated forfeitures.  For information regarding the assumptions used to calculate the grant date fair value, see Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.  The grant date fair value for the performance-based stock appreciation rights granted on December 11, 2013, is $0.77 per share, and assumes an estimate of performance of 100% probability.  The grant date fair value for the performance-based restricted stock units granted on December 11, 2013, is $1.15 per share, and assumes an estimate of performance of 100% probability.

(3)        The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Hansen for 2014 represents $12,750 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $6,301 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Hansen for 2013 represents $12,750 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $6,301 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Hansen for 2012 represents $12,500 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan, $2,685 for the cost of a full physical exam and $4,947 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.

(4)         The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Chaput for 2014 represents $12,320 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,735 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Chaput for 2013 represents $12,750 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,735 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Chaput for 2012 represents $12,500 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan, $2,809 for the cost of a full physical exam and $2,558 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.

(5)         The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Pennington for 2014 represents $11,120 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $3,861 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Pennington for 2013 represents $11,600 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan, $2,685 for the cost of a full physical exam and $3,861 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for

19

Table of Contents

Mr. Pennington for 2012 represents $11,470 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,934 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.

(6)         The all other compensation amount for Mr. Roswell for 2014 represents $10,245 in company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,333 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the company.  The all other compensation amount for Mr. Roswell for 2013 represents $12,750 in company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,333 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the company.  The all other compensation amount for Mr. Roswell for 2012 represents $12,500 in company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan, $2,550 for the cost of a full physical exam and $2,271 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the company.

(7)         The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Shumway for 2014 represents $9,577 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,308 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Shumway for 2013 represents $12,750 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan and $2,308 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.  The All Other Compensation amount for Mr. Shumway for 2012 represents $12,422 in Company matching contributions to our 401(k) plan, $2,930 for the cost of a full physical exam and $2,280 in group term life insurance premiums paid by the Company.

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS

There were no grants made to each of our named executive officers during 2014. Historically, we have issued stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and restricted stock unit awards to our executive officers and key employees under our equity incentive plans.  See “Equity Compensation Plan Information.”  The purpose of the 2006 Plan is to provide us with a greater ability to attract, retain, and motivate our officers, directors and key employees.

Our 2006 Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, nonstatutory stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units and stock appreciation rights, which may be granted to our employees (including officers), directors and consultants.  Each award is subject to an agreement between the Company and the recipient of the grant reflecting the terms and conditions of the award.  Subject to the terms of the 2006 Plan, the Compensation Committee establishes grant dates, the numbers and types of stock awards to be granted and the terms and conditions of the stock awards, including the period of their exercisability and vesting.  The Compensation Committee, in accordance with the 2006 Plan, sets the option exercise price, and, if applicable, the strike price for stock appreciation rights, in each case based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant.

Compensation Arrangements and Employment Agreements

The material terms of our NEOs annual compensation, including base salaries, cash incentive awards, our equity granting practices and employment, change in control and stay bonus agreements are described in our “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and “Employment Agreements” sections of this report.

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT DECEMBER 31, 2014

The following table provides information with respect to outstanding stock options/SARs, restricted stock awards and restricted stock units held by our named executive officers as of December 31, 2014.

20

Table of Contents