UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20549 FORM 10-K  (X)
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934  For the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 ( )
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934 (NO FEE REQUIRED) For the
transition period from _________ to _______  Commission File Number 333-119742  TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY (Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)  Nevada
                                                                         87-0448400 (State
or other jurisdiction of
                                              (I.R.S.
Employer ID No.) Incorporation)  Securities registered under Section 12(b) of
the Exchange Act:  None.  Securities registered under Section 12(g) of
the Exchange Act:  Common Capital Voting Stock, $0.001
par value per share (Title of Class)  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
issuer (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 [X] No [ ]  Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be
contained, to the best of the registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K
or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  [X] The issuer is not aware of any delinquent filers.     1    Indicate by check mark whether the
Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer or a smaller reporting company: Large accelerated
filer       [   ]
Accelerated filed
                              [ 
 ]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 [X] No [  ]   State the aggregate market value of the
voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference
to the price at which the common equity was sold, or the average bid and asked
price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrants
most recently completed second fiscal quarter. (See definition of affiliate in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.)  As of the last business day of our  most recently
completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of our voting stock
held by non-affiliates, an amount consisting of a total of 439,059 shares, was
determined to be $65,859 or $0.15 per share. This calculation is based on the
fact that while there is currently a thinly traded public market for our shares,
shares which trade on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) under the
symbol TMGG, we had no trades in our stock during our fourth quarter ended
December 31, 2008, even though the last trade was at $0.20 per share.
 Based on the recent lack of trading activity in our stock, we believe that
valuing these shares at $0.15 per share for the purpose of this annual report is
reasonable under the circumstances.  This is not to ignore that no common
equity stock was sold by the Company during the fiscal year from which an
alternative computation could be made under the above-formula.  APPLICABLE ONLY TO REGISTRANTS INVOLVED IN
BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS  Not applicable  (APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE
REGISTRANTS)  State the number of shares outstanding of each of the
issuer's classes of common equity, as of the last practicable date: As of the date of this document, the Issuer
had 2,109,643 shares issued and outstanding.  No new shares were issued
during the fiscal year.  DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE  See Item 15 of Part IV below.  NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER REGARDING
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS  Certain matters discussed herein may be forward-looking
statements that involve a variety of risks and uncertainties. Because we are a
Smaller Reporting Company, however, the new and modified Form 10-K does not
require us to list risk factors in this annual report.  Reference is made
to Item 1A below titled Risk Factors.  In light of the risks involved with or
facing us, actual results may differ materially or considerably from those
projected, implied or suggested. As a result, any forward-looking statements
expressed herein are deemed to represent our best judgment as of the date of
this filing. We do NOT express any intent or obligation to update any
forward-looking statement because we are unable to give any assurances regarding
the likelihood that, or extent to which, any event discussed in any such
forward-looking statement contained herein may or may not occur, or that any
effect from or outcome of any such forward-looking event may or may not bear
materially upon our future business, prospects, plans, financial condition or
our plan of operation.    TABLE OF CONTENTS   2    PART I 4 ITEM 1.
  BUSINESS. 4 ITEM 1A.  RISK
FACTORS. 10 ITEM 1B.  UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS. 10 ITEM 2.
PROPERTY. 10 ITEM 3.  LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS. 15 ITEM 4.  SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS. 16 PART
II 16 ITEM 5.  MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY,  RELATED
SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES.                                                                                                
16 ITEM 6.  SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA. 19 ITEM 7.    MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS.                                                                                                            
      19 ITEM 7A.  QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES
ABOUT MARKET RISK.        
     31 ITEM 8. FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTRY DATA. 31 ITEM 9.  CHANGES IN
AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.43 ITEM 9A AND 9A(T).
 CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES. 43 ITEM 9B. OTHER
INFORMATION. 43 PART III 44 ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE  44 ITEM 11.  EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION 45 ITEM 12.  SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS.46 ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED
TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE.                                                                                                                                  
  48 ITEM 14.  PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES 48 PART
IV 49 ITEM 15. EXHIBITS,
FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES. 49 SIGNATURES 50            3       PART I    ITEM
1.   BUSINESS.  Business Corporate History.  Tintic Gold Mining Company, a Nevada
corporation ("Tintic-Nevada", Company, "we" or "us"), was originally formed as
a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tintic Gold Mining Company, a Utah corporation
("Tintic-Utah"). We were organized and incorporated under the laws of the State
of Nevada on March 8, 2004, as required by the terms of a certain Distribution
Agreement between us and Tintic-Utah, our former parent corporation, dated March
12, 2004.  This agreement was entered into for the purpose of acquiring all
of Tintic-Utah's mineral claim properties and related assets, including its
remaining cash after payment of related expenses (Mineral Claims). As a
result, we are the owner of the subsurface mineral rights previously owned by
Tintic-Utah, on approximately 44 acres of land located in the Tintic Mining
District of Juab County, Utah, near the town of Mammoth, Utah, property that our
predecessor or parent corporation had owned since 1933 and which was conveyed to
us by Special Warranty Deed on March 18, 2004, a copy of which was attached as
Ex. "10.1" to our original Form SB-2 registration statement.  Our predecessor, Tintic-Utah, was
incorporated on June 14, 1933 as a Utah corporation, and was, until the
effective time of its 2004 merger discussed below, a mineral resource and
exploration company. Under Industry Guide No. 7, it was classified as an
exploration stage mining company. This is defined as a company engaged in the
search for mineral deposits (reserves), which is not in either the development
or production stage.  In spite of Tintic-Utahs inability to
attract investment capital or locate a mineral exploration program partner
during the time that it owned the mineral rights now owned by us, Tintic-Utah's
management, during the early 2000s, nonetheless continued to develop the
company's long-term business plan to re-establish itself as an active business
and to seek capital funds to operate and continue in business. As part of this
long-term business plan, and because mineral exploration in the Tintic Mining
District was an impractical if not impossible endeavor during the early 2000s,
Tintic-Utah's management was
authorized during 2004 to entertain and negotiate with potential merger
candidates who were not engaged in the business of mineral exploration and/or
mining. Pursuant to this authority, Tintic-Utah acquired Kiwa, in exchange for
its securities, as an operating company.  Tintic-Utah did so due to Kiwas
experienced management and its potential for profitable growth. In doing so,
Tintic-Utah acquired all of the cash and assets that were then owned and held by
Kiwa and thus, Tintic-Utah obtained the capital and business prospects necessary
to both operate and continue in existence in a profitable manner.  The shares of common stock of Tintic-Utah,
until the time of completion of the merger discussed below, traded on the OTC
Bulletin Board under the symbol "TTGM." These shares now trade under the
corporate name of Kiwa Bio-Tech Products and under the OTC Bulletin Board
symbol "KWBT.OB."  Following the merger, stockholders of Kiwa
became stockholders of Tintic-Utah. Selected executive officers and directors of
Kiwa then became executive officers and directors of Tintic-Utah. Because Kiwa
was in a totally different type of business and did not want to own or engage in
mineral exploration activities, Tintic-Nevada was formed for the purpose of
conveying Tintic-Utah's Mineral Claims into it and effectuating a spin-off of
shares, the very subject of our registration statement on Form SB-2/A, all as
further explained below.  The patented Mineral Claims that we
received on March 18, 2004, under the Distribution Agreement with Kiwa, are
located within the historic Tintic Mining District (organized on December 13,
1869) in Juab County, Utah. These Mineral Claims were part of a once-thriving
mining district with worldwide acclaim. In 1979, the Tintic Mining District was
listed in the National Register of Historic Places.  Our predecessor corporation, Tintic-Utah,
had been authorized to conduct business in Utah and had conducted business in
Utah since 1933. It owned our existing patented Mineral Claims since 1933,
properties that had been acquired from the Emerald Mining Company. These
properties are now owned by us free and clear of any lien or encumbrance other
than the fact that a prior director from some-25 years ago, Mr. C. Chase
Hoffman, owns the surface rights. Mr. Hoffman also retains a 3% net  4    smelter return
interest on any mineral production, if any ever occurs.  Considering that we were incorporated in
March 2004 to receive Tintic-Utah/Kiwa's mineral claim assets and implement the
terms of the Distribution Agreement with Kiwa, there has been no material
reclassification, consolidation, merger, or purchase or sale of any significant
amount of assets.   Since the merger with Kiwa mentioned herein
was consummated in March 2004, our business plan and plan of operation has been
to seek out and obtain a joint venture mining partner.  See Item 7 below
titled MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS.  On October 18, 2006, our Form SB-2/A registration statement
with the Commission went effective, and we were allowed to distribute our
shares to the shareholders of our former parent corporation, Tintic-Utah, on a
pro rata basis.  This distribution or spin-off occurred in November 2006.
 In early 2007, we became quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol
TMGG.OB.  See the subheading or subsection below titled Effect of the
Merger.  The March 12, 2004 Merger or
Reorganization with Kiwa.  On March 12, 2004, pursuant to an Agreement
and Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") dated as of March 11, 2004, by and
among Tintic Gold Mining Company, a Utah corporation ("Tintic-Utah"), TTGM
Acquisition Corporation, a Utah corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of
Tintic-Utah ("Merger Sub"), and Kiwa Bio-Tech Products Group, Ltd., a
privately-held British Virgin Islands ("BVI") corporation ("Kiwa-BVI"), Merger
Sub merged with and into Kiwa-BVI with Kiwa-BVI surviving as a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Tintic-Utah (the "Merger"). Each share of Kiwa-BVI common stock
was converted into 1.5445839 shares of Tintic-Utah's common stock, resulting in
Tintic-Utah issuing an aggregate of 7,722,919 shares of its common stock to the
former shareholders of Kiwa-BVI. Tintic-Utah also assumed Kiwa-BVI's outstanding
stock options. The Merger resulted in a change of control of Tintic-Utah, with
former Kiwa-BVI shareholders and optionees owning approximately 89% of
Tintic-Utah's common stock on a fully diluted basis immediately following the
closing of the Merger. A copy of the Merger Agreement is attached to our third
amended registration statement on Form SB-2/A as Exhibit 10.2 and is available
for review on the Commission's Edgar database. The Merger Agreement sets forth
the terms and conditions of the merger transaction between the two companies
that closed on March 12, 2004.   No agreements existed among present or
former controlling stockholders of Tintic-Utah or present or former members of
Kiwa-BVI with respect to the election of the members of Tintic-Utah or Kiwa's
board of directors, and to our knowledge, no other agreements existed which
might have resulted in a change of control of Tintic-Utah.  On March 15, 2004, Tintic-Utah changed its
corporate name from "Tintic Gold Mining Company," a Utah corporation, to "Kiwa
Bio-tech Products Group Corporation" ("Kiwa"). During the later part of 2004,
Kiwa changed its domicile from Utah to that of Delaware.  For more information in this regard,
interested persons should look up and review Kiwa's public filings on the
Securities and Exchange Commission's database known as EDGAR.  Effect of the Merger  As a condition of the Merger, we, that is,
Tintic-Nevada, were formed for the purpose of conveying Tintic-Utah's mineral
claim rights and interests to us, its Nevada subsidiary (an act which occurred
on March 18, 2004). This conveyance was done in exchange for the issuance of a
total of 1,009,643 shares of our stock.  This stock was physically issued
or registered in certificate form in the name of Tintic-Utah as of March 5,
2004.  This stock certificate was signed over by Tintic-Utah and signature
guaranteed and was held by our then-stock transfer agent, Cottonwood Stock
Transfer located in Salt Lake City, Utah, for the benefit of Tintic-Utahs
shareholders. Through the Distribution Agreement we had entered into with our
former parent corporation, Tintic-Utah, it was our intention to physically
effectuate the distribution of those shares to the shareholders of Tintic-Utah
immediately following the effective time of a registration statement registering
the shares covered  thereby (the "Spin-Off").
The purpose of, or rationale for, the Spin-Off is based on Tintic-Utah, now
Kiwa, taking a different business direction and no longer either needing or
wanting our Mineral Claims, not to mention any environmental liability that
might have been associated with them. This Spin-Off transaction was registered
with the Commission on Form SB-2/A under provisions of, and in compliance with,
the Securities Act of 1933. The Distribution Agreement dated on or about March
12,  5    2004, by and
among Tintic-Utah (Kiwa's predecessor in name), Tintic-Nevada, and their
directors and officers provided that no shareholder of either Tintic-Utah and/or
Kiwa, who acquired their shares in either entity AFTER March 5, 2004, could
participate in the Spin-Off. In other words, only shareholders of record of Kiwa
(Tintic-Utah) as of the record date of March 5, 2004 would be (and were)
entitled to receive shares in the Spin-Off.  OUR CURRENT STATUS.  Since our registration on Form SB-2/A went
effective on October 18, 2006, nearly 21⁄2 years ago, our principal business
plan and plan of operation has been to seek out and locate a joint venture
business partner willing to finance the exploration of our Mineral Claims.
 We are therefore defined in Industry Guide No. 7 as a mineral exploration
company,  For a summary of our business plan and plan of operation,
reference is made to our Part II, ITEM 7 below titled MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION
AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.  On December 21, 2006, after our Form SB-2/A
registration statement had gone effective, we filed a 34 Act registration
statement with the Commission on Form 8-A.  Such filing registered our
securities under Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  As
a result, we are required to comply with the proxy rules as set forth in
Regulation 14A.  For example, if we call a special or annual meeting of our
stockholders, we are required by law to provide our stockholders with the
information set forth in Schedules 14A or 14C of Regulation 14.
 Preliminary versions this information must be filed with the Commission at
least 10 days prior to the date that final or definitive copies of these
materials are forwarded on to our stockholders.  We have not been involved in any
bankruptcy, receivership or similar proceeding; and, other than in the ordinary
course of business, there has been no material reclassification, consolidation,
merger, or purchase or sale of any significant amount of assets. None of our
officers and directors or majority shareholders has been involved, directly or
indirectly, in any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding and none is involved in
any litigation that would have any direct or indirect impact or bearing on us or
our business.  Our common stock currently trades on the OTC Bulletin
Board under the symbol TMGG.OB.  For more information in this regard,
reference is made to Item 5 of Part II below titled MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY, RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITYSECURITIES.  Since we were formed in March 2004 and
acquired our Mineral Claims, we have had serious difficulty attracting any
interest in our mining claims.  We believe that this has been due to the
fact that the land ownership in the Tintic Mining District is very fragmented,
meaning that ownership is held in the names of numerous, numerous corporations
and individuals, many possibly having conflicting ownership rights and
interests.  At the same time, we believe that a serious mining company or
joint venture mining partner would want to be able to tie up an extended or
large area or block of land.  Fragmented land ownership therefore means
that a mining company or joint venture partner would have to spend a lot of time
and energy on land and title work and, when all is said and done, may not be
able to lock up or amass a large block of land.  Accordingly, extensive
land and title work in the overall area of our mineral claims would likely be a
significant expense and cost that a prospective joint venture mining partner is
not willing to assume.  We also believe that the significant EPA
presence in the Eureka, Utah, area, while it completes its Superfund clean up
operations, may also have a negative effect or impact on a potential mining
company or a joint venture mining partner. We say this because we have reason to
believe that a potential joint venture mining partner may genuinely fear that,
as a condition to doing mineral exploration, the EPA might require them to do
remediation or clean-up of other, prior operators contaminations, etc.,
something that they wouldnt otherwise be required to do if the EPA were not
highly visible and active in the area.  We also believe that the economic downturn and current
recession which began at the very end of 2007 and which has gotten worse during
the latter part of 2008 and early 2009, has had a serious negative impact on our
ability to attract a joint venture mining partner.  Such inauspicious
economic conditions have also had a negative impact on the entire mining
industry as a whole, not to mention other industries.  This is evidenced by
the substantial drop in the market prices of major mining companies stocks.  The foregoing factors make us highly doubtful at the
present time as to whether or not we will be able to carry out our current  6    business plan in the near
future.  As we have previously disclosed in our Edgar filings, we may have
to revise our business plan considerably in the very near future and otherwise
take the Company in another direction, the form of which we cannot predict at
this time.  For more information on the current state
of our business and affairs, reference is made to ITEM 7below titled MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.  Smaller Reporting Company Designation/Sarbanes-Oxley
Act/ 34 Act Reporting Requirements.  In addition to being defined in Industry Guide No. 7 as a
mineral exploration company, we are also defined under Commission rules and
regulations as a Small Business Issuer.  This is an issuer that has
revenues of less than $25 million, is a U.S. or Canadian issuer and is not an
investment company.  We are also subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 This Act was enacted to curb auditor abuses and strengthen auditor
independence.  It also institutes certain steps to make senior members of
management more directly responsible for the content and accuracy of a companys
financial reporting and for the quality of financial disclosures made by public
companies.  It also establishes clear statutory rules to limit, and to
expose to public view, possible conflicts of interest affecting securities
analysts; creates guidelines for audit committee members appointment,
compensation and oversight; management assessment of internal controls; auditor
attestation as to managements conclusions about internal controls (anticipated
to commence by December 31, 2009); prohibits certain insider trading during
pension fund blackout periods; requires companies and auditors to evaluate
internal controls and procedures; and establishes a federal crime of securities
fraud, among other provisions.  Compliance with the requirements of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act will increase, and has substantially increased, our legal and
accounting costs and fees.  As a smaller reporting company, we are relieved of some
of the informational obligations otherwise required under Regulation S-K,
including some of the disclosure otherwise required under Form 10-K.  Because our securities are registered pursuant to Section
12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, we are required to comply with
"the proxy rules" as set forth in Regulation 14A. For example, if we call a
special or annual meeting of our stockholders, we are required by law to provide
our stockholders with the information set forth in Schedules 14A or 14C of
Regulation 14. Preliminary versions of this information must be filed with the
Commission at least 10 days prior to the date that final or definitive copies of
these materials are forwarded on to our stockholders.  As a reporting company, we are required to regularly
file, with the Commission, annual reports on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q. In the event certain material events occur, the law requires us to
timely report any such events on a Form 8-K.  Executive Offices.  Our executive or principal offices remain
located at 3131 Teton Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah 84109.  No Subsidiaries or Related
Companies.  As of December 31, 2008, we did NOT have
any subsidiaries or related companies or entities. None of our officers or
directors currently serves on the board or otherwise act as officers of any
other company, partnership or limited liability company engaged in mining or
involved in the mining business.  No Joint Venture Arrangements at the
Present Time.  We have neither entered into, nor
participate in, any joint venture arrangements, nor do we have any plans, at the
current time, to engage in any joint venture with any particular person or
party.  No Patents, Trademarks, Licenses or
Franchises.  We do NOT own any patents, trademarks,
licenses, franchises, or concessions, except for patented mining claims granted
by the government to private landowners.  7      No Royalties.  We do not currently receive royalties from
mining activities or any other activities.  Long-Term Goals and Objectives.  Our long-term business goal and objective
has been to seek our and locate a joint venture business partner willing to
finance the exploration of our Mineral Claims.  Business Plan.  For a detailed discussion of our progress
in the pursuit of a joint venture mining partner interested in undertaking a
bona fide exploration program on our Mineral Claims, reference is made to our
Part II, ITEM 7 below titled MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF
OPERATION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.  Seasonability.  Our business is not seasonal in nature
except to the extent that weather conditions at certain times of the year may
affect access to our Mineral Claims.  No Customers or Suppliers.  We do not provide any goods or services at
this time. As such, we do not have any customers or suppliers.  Governmental Regulation and
Environmental Concerns.  Though we are currently NOT operating any
mining assets and currently lack the capital to operate any mining assets in the
immediate future, management believes it is important for us to be familiar with
mining rules and regulations as they would affect or pertain to our Mineral
Claims. The mining industry is subject to extensive and developing federal,
state and local laws, rules and regulations relating to the exploration for,
development, mining and production of precious metals, as well as other
environmental and safety concerns. Legislation affecting the mining industry is
under constant review for amendment and expansion, frequently increasing the
regulatory burden. This is particularly true in the Tintic Mining District where
lead, a substance highly toxic to humans, is found. Numerous agencies, federal,
state and local, have issued rules and regulations applicable to the mining
industry, some of which carry substantial penalties for failure to comply.
Various laws, rules and regulations require permits for exploratory drilling and
the maintenance of bonding requirements in order to conduct mining activity on a
variety of scales. Such rules and regulations also regulate the spacing and
location of mine shafts and provide requirements for surface use and restoration
of land on which drilling activity is undertaken, the plugging and abandoning of
shafts or holes, the prevention of waste and water pollution and the prevention
and cleanup of pollutants. These departments and agencies often require periodic
reports on exploration, development and production and
other matters. Such laws and regulations have generally become more stringent in
recent years, often imposing greater liability on an ever-larger number of
potentially responsible parties. We are also subject to laws, rules and
regulations covering occupational safety and health matters. Because the
requirements imposed by such laws and regulations frequently change, we are
unable to predict the ultimate cost of compliance with these various
requirements. The regulatory burden on the mining industry increases its costs
of doing business and, consequently, affects not only its profitability but its
ability to obtain financing or raise equity. Reference is made to the subsection
in Item 2 below titled Government Regulation/Obtaining Necessary Permits to
Conduct Exploration Activities, which briefly outlines the exploration and
mining permitting process in Utah. In the interests of not avoiding repetition,
we do not repeat this disclosure here.  Some risk of costs and liabilities related
to environmental, health and safety matters is inherent in the mining industry
as a whole. In the event that we undertake exploration of our Mineral Claims, we
put ourselves at risk to incur significant and substantial costs and
liabilities.  To the extent we ever commence actual
exploratory operations, we will be subject to regulation by numerous federal and
state  8    governmental
authorities. The most significant will be the federal Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA), and comparable or corollary state agencies. If we
do not comply, meet or satisfy the various rules and regulations promulgated by
these regulatory authorities, we would be exposed to fines, bars or other
significant penalties. To date, we have not been ordered or required to spend
anything on compliance with environmental laws because we are not currently
operating any mining assets. Our Mineral Claims were leased to other mining
companies in the 1980's and 1990's but, other than assay work, no exploratory
mining activity was undertaken. At the same time, however, there are no
significant mineral tailings on our mineral claims to the knowledge of
management and therefore, to the extent that either the EPA or a corollary Utah
state agency adopts or implements a program in the Mammoth area requiring the
clean-up of any left-over environmental hazards, we would not expect such to
materially affect us or our affairs.  This is also because, having only
been in existence since 2004, we are not the same entity that may have
contributed to, or caused, any environmental hazards between the 1930s and the
1940s.  This gives us a legal argument to rely on as a defense to any
clean-up action against us, though we can make no assurance that we would
prevail with such an argument.  Competitive Position.  We have no competitive economic position in
the mining industry as no mineral production has ever been realized. To date,
there has been no mining activity on these properties other than the exploratory
holes drilled in the past and mentioned in further detail below, all with
inconclusive results. Furthermore, we have not received revenue from our mineral
rights for the last several years since the lease we once had with Centurion
Mines Corporation and its successor-in-interest was terminated.  Mining companies of all calibers compete to
obtain favorable mineral claim properties and to evaluate prospects for
drilling, exploration, development, and mining. Naturally, we face competition
from other similarly situated junior mining companies similarly interested in
acquiring mineral claims worthy of exploration for favorable or prospective
gold, zinc, silver, copper and other mineralization, companies that have
substantially more capital or access to the capital markets than we do. This
includes other mining companies either operating, or considering operating, in
the Tintic Mining District or who own or control properties within the Tintic
Mining District of Juab County, Utah, where our Mineral Claims are located.  We are unable to ascertain the exact number of competitor
companies, or whether or when such competitors' competitive positions could
improve.  Having said this, we have recently learned that sometime in the
fall of 2008, Chief Consolidated Mining Company, a former operator in the Tintic
Mining District, entered into a joint venture of some kind with a large mining
company known as Anglo-American.  We believe this joint venture involves
properties owned by Chief near the Burgin Mill, an area that one comes across
before one enters the town of Eureka from the east.  This is an area that
is not near our claims and there is no geological similarity, to our knowledge,
between this area and the area of Mammoth, Utah, where our Mineral Claims are
located.   9    Business
Offices and Administrative Support.  Mr. George Christopulos provides office
space and the necessary administrative and clerical support for our corporate
affairs without any cost to us.   Employees.  We have no employees and our current
officers and directors serve without established compensation. Should we succeed
in obtaining sufficient working capital, we may contract for the services of 1
or 2 part-time employees, and we may also enter into contractual arrangements
with 1 or more consultants. We may contract with consultants from time to time,
depending upon the circumstances and whether such a course of conduct is
warranted. Any consultants retained by us shall be considered independent
contractors who it is not anticipated will be able to bind the Company in any
way as an agent of the Company.  No Present Agreements with any
Consultant.  We currently have no agreement with any
consultant. This does not mean that we will not explore the possibility of
hiring or retaining a consultant(s) or other expert or professional in the
future to assist us in our search for a mineral exploration partner, acquisition
or funding candidate. As of the date of this document, we have also been in no
discussion with any such individual or company for such purpose.  Costs and Effects of Compliance with Environmental
Laws.  At the current time, none; not applicable.  In the
absence of undertaking any mineral exploration activity on our mineral
claimssomething we have NOT as yet donewe are not subject to any environmental
laws, rules or regulations that would have an adverse material effect or impact
on us, our current business operations, our financial condition or which might
otherwise result in a material compliance cost.  This does not mean that if
we engaged in an exploration plan or program of some kind on our claims that we
would not be subject to substantial EPA and Utah environmental rules and
regulations.  In this regard, reference is made to the subheading above
titled Government Regulation.  Transfer Agent.  During the year, Standard Registrar &
Transfer located at 12528 South 1840 East, Draper, Utah 84020, phone no.
801-571-8844, fax no. 801-571-2551, acted as our stock transfer agent.  We currently have approximately 353 shareholders of
record.   ITEM
1A.  RISK FACTORS.  This item is not applicable to smaller reporting
companies.  Having said this, we have, in the past, listed numerous risk
factors in previous Form 10-K filings and in our Form 10-SB/As on file on
Edgar.  Persons interested in this item should refer to those
documents.   ITEM
1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.  None; not
applicable.      ITEM
2. PROPERTY.  Description of Our Mineral Assets and Property
Acquired as a Result of the 2004 Merger.  As contemplated in Industry Guide 7(b), our
mineral claim property consists of three (3) patented mining claims located in
the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah, between a quarter and a half a
mile from the city limits of Mammoth, Utah, approximately 90 miles south of Salt
Lake City. The Mineral Claims can be accessed through the town of Mammoth, Utah.  10    There is an
unpaved, dirt road that goes up to the property from the town of Mammoth.  There are no conditions to our ability to
retain title to the property other than our annual obligation to pay minimal
property taxes to the Juab County Treasurer.  The rock formation and mineralization of
existing or potential economic significance is described in detail in the
section below titled "Type of Property/ Exploration, Development and Production
History."  The work completed on our Mineral Claims,
including the current state of exploration of the property and its present, is
set forth in detail in the PLAN OF OPERATION section below.  We have no equipment or other
infrastructure facilities, including power than can be utilized on the property,
other than what is indicated in the Plan of Operation section below. This
section also details our planned future exploration costs.  Our mineral assets and property are without
known reserves and our proposed program is exploratory in nature.  For a view of our property, we have
attached, in two PDF files, an Index Map and a Property Location Map as exhibits
to this document.  These two maps show the actual location of our Mineral
Claim properties.  Form of Ownership   Tintic-Nevada does not hold "unpatented"
mining claims. (An unpatented mining claim is a parcel of property located on
federal lands that the U.S. government continues to own, though it has granted
the private party claimholder the right to explore and mine the claim.) Instead,
we own patented mining claims. (A "patented" mining claim is land originally
held as unpatented, to which the private-party claimholder has been conveyed fee
 simple title by the U.S.
government, after meeting the federal patenting requirements.) The important
distinction or difference in the type of mineral interest it represents is that
the patent gives the claimholder full and complete ownership, outright, of the
land on which the claim is located. In this case, however, a former officer and
director named C. Chase Hoffman owns the surface rights. Such rights were
conveyed to Mr. Hoffman in 1980 in consideration for as much as $30,000 that Mr.
Hoffman had advanced the Company over the years. Mr. Hoffman also retains a 3%
net smelter return royalty interest in the event of any mineral production on
the property.  The Effect of Regulatory Changes on
Holding Unpatented Mining Claims  The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
promulgated new regulations in 1997 regarding hard rock unpatented mining claims
(see 43 CFR 3809). Compliance with the 1997 regulations is both time-consuming
and costly. Therefore, we do NOT intend to purchase or locate any unpatented
claims, but instead, to concentrate its exploration activities on its own
privately-held land and perhaps on land that, at some point in the future, it
may decide to acquire, including but not limited to a possible Utah state
mineral leasehold of some kind. Management believes that these BLM regulations
will have little or no effect on our activities.  Type of Property/ Exploration,
Development and Production History  Our three (3) patented mineral claims are
lode claims. (Such claims contain deposits of minerals, in this case, gold and
zinc in solid rock. A placer claim, on the other hand, is a deposit of sand and
gravel containing valuable minerals.)  Our mineral claim property, which our
predecessor, Tintic-Utah owned since 1933, lies within the Central portion of
the Main Tintic Mining District, Juab County, Utah, approximately 90 miles south
of Salt Lake City. The property is bounded on the north and east by the
Centennial Eureka, the Grand Central, and Mammoth mines, and on the south and
west by the Empire Mines property. The property consists of three (3) patented
lode mining or mineral claims known as the Emerald, Ruby and Diamond Lode Mining
Claims. These claims embrace a portion of Sections 19 and 30, Township 10 South,
Range 2 West and Sections 24 and 25, Township 10 South, Range 3 West, Salt Lake
Base and Meridian, bearing Mineral Survey Number 188, and together designated as
Lot No. 224, more particularly described in the patent recorded at Book 60, Page
406, of the records of Juab County, Utah. These properties comprise an area of
approximately 44.43 acres. These claims cover an area 3,000 feet north-south and
550 to 900 feet east-west.  11     Structurally, these properties lie along
the west flank of the northward plunging asymmetric trough of the Tintic
syncline. Beds strike approximately due north and dip steeply to the east.
Surface exposures show the predominant rock type to be Ajax Dolomite of Cambrian
Age. The central portion of the property is cut by the trace of the northeast
striking Emerald-Grand Central fault. The east-west striking Sioux-Ajax fault
zone is inferred to cut through the property and could intersect the northeast
structure within the boundaries of the property. Due to soil cover, their exact
position cannot be readily determined.  The property is located on the outcrop of
the Ajax limestone. This has been one of the most favorable ore-bearing
formations of the Main Tintic Mining District.  Because of general geological conditions,
our property has three favorable prospects. One is in deeper development in the
northern part of the property; two, in a mineralized vein near the main shaft on
the 1,000 level; and three, above the 600 level on the southern end of the
property.  There are several prominent fissures in our
property. Fissures north of the shaft show calcite and oxidized iron. This
suggests possibilities for improved mineralization at depth. Close to the shaft
an east-west cross fissure reportedly carries substantial values in lead from
the 200 to 1,000 levels in workings presently
inaccessible. This fissure should be prospected for intersections and at greater
depth. South of the shaft are two main north-south fissures. One known as the
Diamond fissure shows jasperoid quartz.  A spur line of the Union Pacific Railroad
with loading ramps lies less than two miles to the northeast.  The property has been explored by numerous
shallow shafts, surface workings, and a one and one-half compartment shaft sunk
one thousand feet deep, with levels driven at the 400, 500, 600, 700 and 1,000
foot levels. This shaft is known as the Emerald Mine or Shaft. The Emerald Mine
is the largest historic mine working on the Tintic Gold Mining Company's claims
group. The shaft is located on the south end of the Emerald patented lode claim
near the crest of a small ridge. The mine lies between the Grand Central and the
Mammoth Mines. The 1100 foot level is developed from a winze on the 1000 foot
mine level. Only a small amount of ore -- approximately 1,800 tons -- was
historically removed from the Emerald Mine. The grade of this ore is not
known.  The Emerald Shaft is about 1,900 feet
south-southwest from the Grand Central Mine shaft and approximately 2,000 feet
west of the Mammoth Mine glory hole. The Emerald Shaft is collared in the highly
productive Ajax Formation which hosts the bulk of copper-gold mineralization in
the district and lies on strike from the Grand Central mineralizations in the
same unit. The Emerald Mine is presently inaccessible and the shaft collar is
partially blocked with debris and mine timbers. Several additional small shafts,
declines, and pits on the claim group explore surface exposures of
silicification and weak mineralization. These workings are also in the highly
productive Ajax Formation and may represent "leakage" of mineralization along
faults from unexploited deposits developed at depth adjacent to the existing
Emerald Mine underground workings.  It is not anticipated that the opening up
or rehabilitation of the old workings will be attempted at the present time or
at any future time. Any possible exploration will be in the nature of surface
assay sampling or testing and, if sufficient evidence is obtained, exploratory
drilling may be considered. In such event, we will be subject to regulation by
the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM). It should be again noted that
the potential for pursuing an extensive permitting process in order to further
drill the property is dependent on the prices of gold and zinc.  The mineralization of interest is believed
to be of the siliceous copper-gold-silver category. However, the possibility of
this property attaining the status of a gold, zinc or silver producer will
depend upon the results of any future exploration testing and drilling program
engaged in by us. At the present time, this property has no known ore reserves.
Accordingly, we cannot be considered a "development mining company." The
objective of the proposed geological mapping and other work would be to
determine what exploration program, if any, to pursue.  It should be noted that although smelting
facilities have historically been located within at least seventy (70) miles of
the property, management believes that it would be premature and perhaps
misleading to discuss milling and smelting contracts with ore purchasers
inasmuch as we not only need to conduct exploratory work but no ore has been
discovered and thus, no development plan or program exists. There is no
assurance that ores, if they exist and if developed, could ever be sold, let
alone sold for a
profit.  12     As to our Claims' exploration, development
or production history, if any, the extent of exploration or even development on
our mineral claim properties is unknown. Management believes and is informed
that approximately 1,800 tons of ore were once removed from our property. Our
lack of precise knowledge as to what production or extraction occurred, when it
occurred, what it sold for, what it was exactly, or was worth at the time it was
extracted is understandable in that precious metals were first discovered in the
Tintic Mining District area in 1870, over 135 years ago. Nonetheless, our
property does contain the Emerald Shaft or Mine which existing data and other
information suggests is at least 1,000 feet deep. There are also two other
significant holes, shafts or "prospecting pits" on the property. As discussed
further below in the PLAN OF OPERATION section and in order to devise and
implement an exploration plan or program of some kind on our properties, we have
commissioned and obtained a comprehensive geology report on our property.  Exploration and Rehabilitation
Work   There has been no exploration or other
mining-related activity of any kind on our properties since the 1930's and
1940's, except perhaps briefly before World War II. Only a limited amount of
exploration or development work has been conducted on our properties since World
War II. ("Exploration" is the work involved in searching for ore. "Development"
is the construction and other work necessary to be carried out for the purpose
of extracting ore from the deposit or mine.) In 1987, Centurion Mines
Corporation ("Centurion"), later to be known and now known as Grand Central
Mining Company, negotiated a five-year lease with Tintic-Utah to explore its
patented mineral claims.  Centurion carried out mapping and limited
assay and sampling work on our properties starting in 1987 and its successor,
Grand Central Mining, terminated its lease with Tintic-Utah in 1997. The assay
and sampling results it provided to us has been, in turn, provided to our
consulting expert and geologist, Mr. Bruce Yeomans, who has incorporated that
information into his reports to us. To the best knowledge, information and
belief of current management, no more than 1,800 tons of ore production has ever
come from our properties and we know little more than this. Prior to that time,
our properties were inactive from World War II until 1987, when Centurion
carried out limited exploration consisting mainly of geologic mapping and
sampling. Centurion also performed some maintenance and rehabilitation work on
our properties though it is not believed that Centurion did any maintenance or
rehabilitation on the underground workings of the Emerald Mine. Centurion
continued its activities through its successor until 1997. No additional work
has been done on the properties since that time. Under Tintic-Utah's prior lease
agreement with Centurion, Centurion was obligated to do a certain amount of
assessment work every five (5) years. This was done and we possess limited
copies of the assessment and sampling work carried out by Centurion and its
successor.  Future Plans for Exploration.  To date, management has NOT applied for
exploration permits for work on any of its patented mineral claims. However, it
is possible, depending upon market conditions, that we may consider conducting
geological mapping, geochemical sampling, and geophysical surveys, but only if
sufficient funds are available for such purpose, and if all goes well and we
have sufficient capital, to possibly file applications for permits that would
permit exploratory sampling or drilling to be carried out. We currently lack the
investment or working capital to carry out any type of drilling exploratory
operations at this time. This will depend on sources of and the availability of
a joint venture partner who would contribute funds for this purpose.  It
would also depend upon the prices of gold, zinc and silver. Accordingly, no
assurance can be given that exploration will in fact be either undertaken or
carried out.  As of the date of this document, none of
our officers, directors, or major shareholders has had any preliminary contact
or discussions with any specific business or financial opportunity, directly or
indirectly, nor are there any present plans, proposals, arrangements or
understandings regarding the possibility of an acquisition, exchange or other
financing arrangement with any specific business opportunity, potential partner
or other person. There are also no mineral claim properties, other than those we
currently own and hold, that we are currently evaluating.  In order to be able to present a realistic
exploration plan or program to a potential mineral exploration partner or
venture capital partner or investor, we commissioned and obtained a
comprehensive evaluation report in 2005. Among other things, this report
identifies a work sequence to be undertaken in order to carry out a mineral
exploration program. This report specifically identifies exploration targets on
our Claims, a task that we believe will work as a positive inducement to
prospective mineral  13    exploration
partners interested in our claims inasmuch as this is something they will not be
required to spend money on themselves.  Research and Exploration
Activities.  Other than a comprehensive evaluation
report we commissioned and obtained from our consulting geologist, a report
which provides us with an exploration work sequence on our Claims, we have not
incurred any material costs for research or exploration activities since our
inception. We have only been in existence since March 8, 2004, and therefore our
research and exploration costs to date have been minimal.   Compliance with Environmental
Laws.  We do not believe that we will incur any
material costs relating to efforts to comply with environmental laws or other
governmental regulations. This is because, at this time, we do NOT have a
specific exploration program that we intend to implement. In the event that we
undertake a mining exploration program, we must comply with various federal,
state and local provisions that regulate the discharge of materials into the
environment and which further govern the conduct of mining activities for the
protection of the environment. To our knowledge, we have been in full compliance
with all applicable environmental regulations since our inception and we intend
to continue to fully comply in 2009 and beyond.  To management's best knowledge, information
and belief, we are neither listed on any known environmental cleanup roster, nor
is our property listed on or within any "Superfund" site.  In the summer of
2002, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed the Eureka, Utah,
area (an area within the Tintic Mining District) as a Superfund site because it
was concerned about possible lead contamination of Eureka, Utah, inhabitants.
 Nonetheless, our properties are located near another town, Mammoth, Utah.
While we understand that a state agency has, within the few years, taken soil
samples on or near the town of Mammoth, we have received no notice that the EPA
or any corollary state agency intends to do any environmental clean-up or other
work to or with any property located in or near the town of Mammoth, let alone
our own properties. See the section below titled "Legal Proceedings."  In the event that we undertake a mining
exploration program on our properties and, in order to fulfill environmental
compliance obligations, we must be aware of and attend to the complex
requirements of both state and federal laws encompassing matters affecting land,
mineral rights and/or the surface under which mining exploration activities are
proposed. Such compliance would likely materially affect our capital
expenditures, earnings and competitive position in the following general
areas:  1) surface impact, 2) water acquisition, 3)
site access, 4) reclamation, 5) wildlife preservation, and 6) permit and license
qualification. To date, compliance has not had a material financial effect or
other impact on us because our activities have not had a material and
significant impact on the environment.  In the event that we become active in
exploring our properties, compliance with environmental regulations could
substantially impact or drain whatever capital resources we would have. Such
future compliance could include performing feasibility studies on the surface
impact of our proposed operations; minimizing surface impact, water treatment
and protection; reclamation activities including rehabilitation of various
sites; and on-going efforts at alleviating the exploration impact on wildlife.
Moreover, governmental agencies may require permits or bonds from year to year
to ensure our compliance with applicable regulations.  During fiscal 2008, we did not engage in
any activity that would have required us to obtain any permits or bonds; nor did
any governmental agency cause us to expend any funds to comply with any material
environmental regulation. Moreover, we do not anticipate that any reclamation
bonding will be required of us during 2009, or in the reasonably foreseeable
future.  We do NOT anticipate any material capital
expenditures for environmental control facilities during fiscal 2009. The cost
of future compliance affecting our mineral properties will depend upon the
extent and type of exploration and testing that we decide to undertake or have
the financing to undertake.  There can be no assurance, however, that we
will be able to comply with all requirements imposed on any such future
development, or that we will be able to economically operate or pursue
exploration activities under existing or future regulatory requirements.  14     Government Regulation/Obtaining
Necessary Permits to Conduct Exploration Activities.  As we currently have no exploratory
operations, we do not believe we are subject to governmental regulations, which
may relate to our business.   At such time as we engage in exploration
activities on our Claims, if we do (and no assurance can be given that we will),
we must undergo an extensive state and federal permitting process. Operating and
environmental permits will be required to be obtained from applicable regulatory
bodies utilizing technical applications filed by us. Once we have obtained the
necessary funding and financing to do so, we will identify external mining and
geology consultants to assist us with preparing and filing permits with all
applicable state and federal regulatory authorities.  The rules and regulations of the Utah
Department of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM) are complex relative to obtaining a
permit for exploration or for conducting small mineral extraction operations
(defined as involving less than 5 acres of total disturbance). The process is
essentially as follows: The applicant first files a permit application with DOGM
and, pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) by and among the various
state and federal agencies having competing regulatory authority, the
application is reviewed on a coordinated basis by DOGM, the federal Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ). The applicant is notified of any deficiencies in
his application and is generally requested to submit additional information. If
all of these agencies pass off on the application, the applicant is given a
permit. If the applicant seeks to conduct a large scale mineral extraction
operation (defined as in excess of a 5 acre disturbance), the process is more
complex, detailed and extensive. For example, the regulatory review then
involves an assessment of technical adequacy of the applicant's plans and more
extensive environmental concerns are involved such as potential contamination of
ground water. Once DOGM gives tentative approval of a large scale mineral
extraction operation, notice must be provided to adjacent land owners, the
county zoning authority, the Resource Development Coordinating Council (RDCC),
and newspapers for publication. Public hearings are then called and held. Even
if approval is obtained, the applicant must then provide adequate reclamation
surety documents to ensure adequate reclamation upon completion of operations.
In addition to the foregoing, DOGM has recently been required to seek an
historical and archeological consultation/clearance from the Utah Division of
State History. DOGM notifies this agency that it has received a new exploration
or mining notice application and the Division of State History notifies DOGM
within 15 days (exploration or small mining notice) or 30 days (large mining
notice) if they believe a formal survey of the proposed area should be conducted
by the applicant. This process applies to both private and state-owned land. If
the area involved is federal ground, we are informed that the federal government
does its own archeological clearance during its own NEPA/EA review process.  The above permitting process is time
consuming and expensive and we currently lack the resources and capital to
initiate a permitting process relative to our Claims. At the same time, current
management lacks the qualifications and other expertise necessary to engage in
this process without the assistance of experts or mineral exploration company
partners.      ITEM
3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.  As of the date of this filing, we are NOT a
party to any legal proceeding, either as plaintiff or defendant. We are also not
aware of any pending legal proceeding contemplated by a governmental authority
concerning our business or properties. Our financial statements, as set forth
below, have therefore NOT been adjusted to reflect any material uncertainty
regarding exposure to liability in any legal proceeding.  To management's best knowledge, information
and belief, our property is neither listed on any known environmental cleanup
roster nor otherwise listed on or within any designated "Superfund" site. We are
aware, however, that in 2002, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
declared the town of Eureka, Utah, as a Superfund site for lead contamination,
an area approximately 3 miles from our properties. We have received no actual or
direct notice or knowledge of these events and management knows nothing further
in this regard as it may potentially relate to our Mineral Claims. During 2002,
the Utah Department of Air Quality undertook soil sampling in and around the
town of Mammoth, Utah, an area near our properties. We are informed that some of
these samples showed elevated levels of contaminants. We believe that, to a
large extent, this is a natural phenomenon in the area.  Nonetheless, we
have received no notice that these findings have any impact or other bearing on
our Mineral Claims and management does NOT believe that our properties can, or
will, be considered a source of any such alleged
contamination. 15       Measures Taken To Insulate Us Against Future Mineral
Claim Asset Liability  In 2001 and in an effort to insulate our
predecessor, Tintic-Utah, the prior owner of the property, from future
liability, our predecessor (which at that time owned our Mineral Claims) hired a
geologist and environmental engineer named Bruce Yeomans of B. Yeomans
Consulting, Inc., an expert, who constructed a six foot high chain link fence,
with four 30-foot runs, around the Emerald Shaft or Mine located on the
property. The fence was also stranded with barbed wire along the upper edge.
This was done to mark the shaft and otherwise prevent intruders and trespassers
from getting injured by possibly falling into the mine shaft, a shaft which
existing data suggests is at least 1,000 feet deep. The shaft had been partially
collapsed around the collar and campers appeared to have lit bonfires adjacent
to the open shaft on the flat topped dump around it. After this fence was built,
a "dangerous/no trespassing" sign was posted on it. In a further effort to
insulate us from and against future liability, this work was also photographed.
In addition, Mr. Yeomans further erected a 12 foot long, three stranded, 4-foot
high barbed wire fence across the access road to the Emerald shaft at the
approximate eastern boundary of the property. This was done to further
discourage intruders and trespassers, the large majority of whom are hikers and
campers in the summer and snowmobilers in the winter.  Based on a written Ingress/Egress and Right
of Entry Consent given by us to the Utah Department of Oil, Gas & Mining on
January 31, 2008, we have given the Utah Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program
permission to cover the Emerald Mine Shaft on our property with steel and/or
metal grates or mesh or some other protective mechanism to prevent trespassers
or others from falling down the hole.  We have not authorized them to
back-fill the hole and dont believe that they could in any event because it is
too deep and would require too much dirt and labor.  We have not visited
the Mineral Claims in a while and therefore, have not had the opportunity to
inspect the work of the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program, nor do we know for
certain if they have completed their work.  If not, we believe, based on
conversations with them, that they will finish up this summer or fall.  We
believe this will be a good thing in that it will further insulate us from
potential liability in addition to the fence that our consulting geologist built
around the mining shaft in the past.     ITEM
4.  SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.  We did not submit any report, proxy statement or
information statement to security holders during the fiscal year ended December
31, 2008.  We are subject to the information reporting
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), and,
in accordance therewith, we file reports and other information with the
Commission. Reports and other information filed by the issuer with the
Commission can be inspected and copied at the Commission's Public Reference
Library in the Commission's own building located at 100 F Street, N.E.,
Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such material can be obtained from the Public
Reference Section of the Commission at prescribed rates. An interested person
may also obtain information about the operation of the Public Reference Room by
calling the Commission at 1-800-SEC-0330.  Inasmuch as we are an electronic filer, and
the Commission maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and
information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file
electronically with the Commission, an interested person may access this
material electronically by means of the Commission's home page on the Internet
at www.sec.gov.com. To facilitate such access for an interested person, our CIK
number is 0001301839.  As of the date of this filing, we have not
established our own web address or web page nor do we have any plans, at
present, to do so.        PART II     ITEM
5.  MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY,  RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES
OF EQUITY SECURITIES.  Market Information.  Our common shares are quoted
on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) administered by the Financial
Regulatory Authority (FINRA), formerly the NASD, under the symbol TMGG.OB. The
following table sets forth the trading activity in our stock over the last two
fiscal years as reported by the OTC Bulletin Board, and represents prices
between dealers that do not include retail markups, markdowns or commissions,
and may not necessarily represent actual transactions at the indicated
prices:    16      TMGG - TINTIC GOLD MINING CO.





Year Ending December 2007BID

ASK

PRICEEND DATE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

VOLUME12/29/2007

.25

0.2

0.25

0.5

0.45

0.5

-

-

-

-09/28/2007

0.20

0

0.20

0.50

0

0.50

0.50

0.20

0.50

5,27006/29/2007

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

003/30/2007

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0   TMGG - TINTIC GOLD MINING CO.





Year Ending December 2008BID

ASK

PRICEEND DATE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

HIGH

LOW

CLOSE

VOLUME12/31/2008

0.1

0

0

0.51

0

0

0

0

0

009/30/2008

0.15

0.07

0

0.51

0.2

0

0.2

0.2

0.2

1,20006/30/2008

0.25

0

0

0.51

0

0

0.2

0.2

0.2

15,00003/31/2008

0.25

0.25

0

0.51

0.5

0

-

-

-

0  We currently have no outstanding warrants, options,
incentive stock option or employee compensation plans of any kind or nature. At
the same time, and though there are currently no plans to do so, no assurance
can be given that such derivative securities will not be issued in the
future.   17    Shares Held
by Affiliates.  At present, none of our officers and
directors own or control any shares that are not "restricted" or which do NOT
bear a restrictive legend of some kind such as a control person legend.  Of the 2,109,643 shares currently issued and outstanding,
1,670,584 are held by affiliates and are therefore restricted in some fashion.
This means that there are 439,059 shares that are not "restricted" in any way.
 These 439,059 shares thus comprise what is called the float, that is,
the shares that can trade freely in interstate commerce.  Reference is made
to Item 12 of Part III below titled SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN
BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND  MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.  No Warrants or Stock Options Issued or
Outstanding.  We currently have no outstanding warrants,
options, incentive stock option or employee compensation plans of any kind or
nature. At the same time, and though there are currently no plans to do so, no
assurance can be given that such derivative securities will not be issued in the
future.  Holders  According to our stock transfer agent,
Standard Registrar & Transfer located in Draper, Utah, as of the date of
this Annual Report, we have 353 holders of record of our common capital
stock.  Description of Our Securities  Our authorized capital stock consists of
50,000,000 shares of common capital stock, $0.001 par value, of which 2,109,643
shares are considered issued and outstanding as of our fiscal year-end, December
31, 2008.  As of the date of this annual report, no additional shares have
been issued.  We have no preferred shares either issued
or authorized.   Voting Rights  Stockholders are entitled to one vote on
all matters to be voted upon for each share of common stock held. The shares do
not have the right to cumulative voting for directors, meaning that holders of
more than 50 percent of the shares voting for the election of directors can
elect all of the directors if they choose to do so.  Liquidation Rights  In the event of liquidation, dissolution or
a winding up of us or our affairs, holders of common stock would be entitled to
receive pro rata all of our remaining assets that are available and
distributable to the shareholders after first satisfying claims of creditors and
anyone else having rights that are superior to those of the common
stockholders.  Preemptive Rights  Stockholders do NOT have a preemptive right
to acquire our unissued shares of common stock.  Dividends and Dividend Policy  Our Board of Directors has NOT declared or
paid cash dividends or made distributions in the past and we do not anticipate
that we will pay cash dividends or make distributions to shareholders in the
foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain and invest future earnings, if
any, to finance our operations.  The holders of our common stock are
entitled to receive such lawful dividends as may be declared by the Board of
Directors. As of this date, no such dividends have been declared nor does
management believe it likely that dividends will be declared in  18    the near or
distant future. The payment of any future dividends will depend upon, among
other things, future earnings, capital requirements, our financial condition and
general business conditions. As a result, there can be no assurance that any
dividends on common stock will be paid in the future. We also have no redemption
or sinking fund provisions applicable to any shares of common stock.  Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity
Compensation Plans.  We have NOT authorized any securities for issuance under
any equity or other compensation plans of any type or nature, inasmuch as we
have NOT adopted any such incentive or compensation plans and have no intention,
at present, to do so.  Recent Sales of Unregistered
Securities.  None.  Use of Proceeds of Registered
Securities.  None; not applicable.  Purchases of Equity Securities by Us and Affiliated
Purchasers.  None; not applicable.     ITEM
6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.  Responding to this item is not required for smaller
reporting companies.     ITEM
7.    MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.  Our discussion hereunder is based on
certain reasonable expectations concerning mining exploration in general and, in
particular, our ability or inability to obtain the type of financial capital or
funding necessary to implement or engage in a mining
exploration program of some kind on our properties located in the Tintic Mining
District of Juab County, Utah.  These expectations involve "forward-looking
statements."  We do not intend to forecast what may or may not occur in the
future, nor can we predict that any particular event may or may not occur.
Management emphasizes that it can neither control nor predict many of the risks
and uncertainties applicable to, or involving, a mining exploration company that
currently lacks investment capital and funding.  During December 2007, right before the beginning of our
2008 fiscal year, we met with officials with the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) and talked to them about whether there would be any
special remediation efforts required of us or a joint venture partner if we
engaged in any exploratory activity on our mining claims.  We contacted
them because we were informed that the Canadian mining company mentioned in the
paragraph immediately below had also met with them.  During our meeting, we
learned that the DEQ really lacks jurisdiction over any mining operations or
clean up unless a particular and unique environmental hazard or problem arises
that DOGM cant handle.  The DEQ thus referred us to the EPA.  In January of 2008, we contacted the EPA in an effort to
learn whether or not we, or a joint venture mining partner, would be required to
finance or undertake any special clean up or remediation of possible
contamination undertaken by others in the past, if that contamination were on or
near any exploratory activity that we undertake.  We asked this question
because we were under the impression that this possible requirement or
obligation may have scared off a Canadian mining company that we learned had
been interested in the Mammoth, Utah, area in 2007, an area where our Mineral
Claims are located.  The following summarizes the EPAs response to our
inquiry, a response we received by email on or about March 6, 2008:  1.      The EPA isn't in the position of giving
legal advice to a company such as yours wanting to conduct
mining operations and the EPA does not provide "comfort letters".  19     2. 
   If your company intends to mine in an area already contaminated or
that is part of a Superfund site, you should refer to the provisions of CERCLA
including section 122.  Unless we were entering into a settlement, the EPA
is not in the position to define exactly what a company can or can not do in its
mining operations to avoid incurring liability - anything we said could be open
to interpretation and could be seen as limiting our enforcement discretion and
ability to enforce CERCLA.   3.    
If the company does not cause or contribute to the release or threat of
release 
                                             
of  hazardous substances, it should be able to avoid incurring
liability under CERCLA. 4. We believe that your property is
outside the Eureka Superfund Site boundary as it is currently defined.  We
don't believe that we have conducted much if any sampling on your property or in
the vicinity of your property so it would be difficult to say whether or not
your property is contaminated.  During our 2008 fiscal year, we had serious
difficulty attracting any interest in our mining claims.  We believe that
this has been due to the fact that the land ownership in the Tintic Mining
District is very fragmented, meaning that ownership is held in the names of
numerous, numerous corporations and individuals, many possibly having
conflicting ownership rights and interests. At the same time, we believe that a
serious mining company or joint venture mining partner would want to be able to
tie up an extended or large area or block of land.  Fragmented land
ownership therefore means that a mining company or joint venture partner would
have to spend a lot of time and energy on land and title work and, when all is
said and done, may not be able to lock up or amass a large block of land.
 Accordingly, extensive land and title work in the overall area of our
mineral claims would likely be a significant expense and cost that a prospective
joint venture mining partner is not willing to assume.  We also believe that the significant EPA
presence in the Eureka, Utah, area, while it completes its Superfund clean up
operations, may also have a negative effect or impact on a potential mining
company or a joint venture mining partner, simply because such a potential
partner may fear that the EPA would require them to do remediation, etc., that
they wouldnt otherwise be required to do if the EPA were not highly present and
active in the area.  We also believe that the economic downturn and current
recession which began at the very end of 2007 and which has become substantially
worse during the latter part of 2008 and early 2009, has had a serious negative
impact on our ability to attract a joint venture mining partner of some kind.
 Such inauspicious economic conditions have also had a negative impact on
the entire mining industry as a whole, not to mention other industries.
 This is evidenced by the drop in the current prices of major mining
companies stocks.  This situation makes us highly doubtful at the present
time as to whether or not we will be able to carry out our current business plan
in the near future.  As we have previously disclosed in our Edgar filings,
these factors may leave us little choice but to revise our business plan
considerably in the very near future and otherwise take the Company in another
direction, the form of which we cannot predict at this time.  Because of the difficulty we have had over
the last 4 years getting a major mining company interested in our properties,
let alone the overall Tintic Mining District, we have no way of predicting or
making any judgments, at the present time, about the viability of our business
plan and plan of operation.  We are surprised at the overall lack of
interest in our Mineral Claims by the mining community, particularly given the
enhanced prices of precious metals over the last few years.  If we are
unable to attract a joint venture mining partner within the next year and
perhaps less, we will be forced to look at other business opportunities for the
Company and we may be forced to do so sooner rather than later, the form of
which we cannot predict at this time.   20    Liquidity and Capital
Requirements.  At of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we
lack the necessary capital to implement a full-fledged mineral exploration
program. We currently have nominal cash in our checking account. Be this as it
may, the amount of cash in our checking account at any given time is largely
meaningless in that our officers and directors have advanced us money when
necessary to pay our debts and expenses. At present, there are no plans to
charge interest on such advances.  However, in the event we modify our
agreement in the future with our insiders to allow for the charging of interest,
we do not believe it would have any material impact on us or our liquidity
because we would likely not agree to such a modification unless we were
profitable.  We will be able to satisfy our cash requirements for as
long as the next 12 months in that our officers and directors have committed
themselves to advancing what funds are necessary to satisfy our cash
requirements and keep us current in our 1934 Exchange Act reporting obligations.
We believe that this time period is consistent with the disclosure in our PLAN
OF OPERATION described below in that we believe that by the end of this current
2009 fiscal year from now or less, we should be able to complete our business
plan. If not, we will know by then what it will take to complete it or, we will
know that it cannot practically be completed.  In this regard, the current
state of our economy and its effect or impact on the entire mining industry,
among other industries, leads us to believe at the current time that the
likelihood of our completing our business plan is highly doubtful.  In such
event, as we disclose elsewhere herein, we will need to take the Company in
another direction.  Management believes that the ability to locate and "sign
up" a joint venture partner or mining company partner of some kind has been
exceptionally difficult and has depended upon a variety of factors such as the
price of silver, lead and gold, the cost of mining exploration, the ability of a
joint venture partner to sign up other, adjoining property owners, major mining
companies access to capital, and possibly, interest rates, not to mention the
overall state of the economy.  These are factors and circumstances that are
beyond our control and which cannot be predicted with any certainty. We
currently have no specific sources of financing, including bank, private lending
sources, or equity capital sources. We also cannot assure anyone that we will be
able to develop any joint venture partner sources in the future. Further, we are
unable to guarantee that at the expiration of a year from now or less, that
individual members of management will continue to advance us sufficient money to
make us continue in our reporting obligations. We do not mean to imply, however,
that individual members of management will NOT continue to advance us funds
beyond the next year, particularly if there is likelihood that we will be able
to complete our business plan. On the other hand, it is also conceivable that we
can complete our business plan in less than1 year or, we might learn that it
cannot be completed within that time frame. If management does not desire to
loan or advance sufficient funds to continue beyond the next year for the simple
reason that the prospects of our business plan look bleak, we may be required to
look at other business opportunities, the form of which we cannot predict at
this time as to do so would be highly speculative on our part. **Contingency Planning.**   We have few assets and limited capital, with no
operations and no current sources of income.  It is anticipated that we will require only nominal
capital to maintain our corporate viability and necessary funds will be provided
by officers and directors for as long as at least the next year. However, unless
we are able to enter into a partnership or joint venture relationship with an
experienced entity willing to finance our intended exploration, we will likely
not be able to achieve our operational goals. In such event, management will be
forced to look at other business opportunities.  Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.  None; not applicable.  No Likelihood of Raising Exploration
Funding on Our Own.  We do not have the ability, at this time,
of directly raising, on a secondary offering or private placement basis, the
money to engage in a drilling exploration program of our own and on our own,
particularly when we lack the expertise ourselves to implement and oversee such
a project. See the paragraph below titled "The Phased Nature of Our Planned or
Proposed Exploration Program." We are not interested in doing so because we do
not know whether such efforts would be successful,  21    particularly
under the current economic recession. We also believe and are informed that such
an effort would be very expensive in terms of the legal and other costs
associated therewith and we would rather spend what limited resources we have on
pursuing a joint venture mining partner. We also have no idea what securities
brokerage firm, if any, would possibly be interested in underwriting such an
effort at all, let alone under current economic conditions. Since the increased
price of metals since early 2004 would appear to have made the overall
exploration environment more financing-friendly (gold, for example, having
recently attained a price of over $900 per ounce) and based on the overall
history of the Tintic Mining District, we believe that it makes far more sense
to do what is necessary to attract an experienced and well financed mineral
exploration partner or joint venturer, that is, if we can. This is our basic
plan of operation at the present time. Unfortunately, over the last 4 years, we
have been unable to attract any serious interest in our Mineral Claims.  Plan of Operation for the Next Twelve
Months  During the next twelve months, we will
continue to attempt to identify and contract with a mineral exploration company
that will agree to search for minerals that may underlie our Mineral Claims.
During the time our search is in progress, the small amounts of cash required to
maintain our operations, as well as the costs associated with the identification
of and contracting with a mineral exploration company partner, will be provided
by what cash is advanced by our officers and directors. Our officers and
directors have agreed to advance us that which is necessary for us to carry out
our business plan, provided that such plan remains viable. At the same time, our
officers and directors are NOT under any contractual obligation with the Company
to finance us; they are doing so because they want to. We do NOT have any
written agreement with them in this regard nor do we intend to enter into one.
Future funding provided by our officers and directors will be carried as a
payable on our financial statements. As a result, we do not believe there will
be the need to raise additional funds during at least the next twelve months,
other than through our officers and directors, if and when required. Since our
officers and directors have agreed to provide us with the funding necessary to
pursue our business plan, we consider this a legal obligation to such extent
simply because investors and shareholders may rely on this funding commitment or
arrangement.  If we come to the conclusion that we cannot
carry out our business plan, due to the current economy or other reasons,
including lack of interest in our Mineral Claims, we will be forced to look at
other business opportunities, the form of which we cannot now predict as to do
so would be premature on our part.  Having said this, we are admittedly
developing serious doubts about the viability of our current business plan.  In order to attract mineral exploration
company partners and pursue an exploration program of our Mineral Claims, we
have needed a specific and realistic business plan for this purpose, a plan that
includes specific drilling targets and the estimated cost thereof. Accordingly,
back in April 2005, we hired an environmental and
geological engineer named Mr. Bruce Yeomans who provided us with a detailed and
comprehensive geology report and analysis of our Mineral Claim properties.
Because this report provides a more comprehensive evaluation of our properties,
including exploration targets and the estimated costs thereof.  We have
included or summarized portions of such report below. Our plan to explore our
mineral claims focuses on, based on such report, not only evaluating certain
specific exploration targets but also completing eight (8) separate work
sequences identified below, the cost of which has, to date, been borne by us
with what capital we have had  The specific steps or sequence of events or
milestones necessary to attract a mineral exploration partner or joint
venturer and otherwise implement a mineral exploration program are as
follows:  1) Locate the claim corners in the field so
that property boundaries are known. (This step was accomplished three or four
years ago by our consulting geologist when we commissioned his geology report.
If we need more specific or exact markers, we will hire a surveyor to do so. We
anticipate that the cost would be between $1,000 or $2,000. As of now, and
unless requested or required by a mineral exploration partner, we do not believe
that this cost or expense will be necessary.  2) Evaluate the status of adjacent mineral
claims, so that investor interest will not be limited to the three claims we
hold. Several of the mineral targets trend off of our claims. (The adjacent
claims to which we refer are known as the Grand Central Claims. While we have
not thoroughly evaluated the status of these adjacent claims, we know the owner
and have been in discussions with the owner over the last several years. This
individual, who is also a geologist, has indicated to us that he would be
willing to work out a suitable arrangement with a mineral exploration partner,
if we can bring one to the table. There is no cost associated with this step or
sequence of events as what information needs to be known about the Grand Central
Claims and their geology can and would be supplied by the current owner.
Accordingly, this step or sequence is essentially complete.)  22     3) Collect additional surface rock samples,
as indicated by surface mapping or inspection. If so indicated, sampling will be
conducted in accessible portions of the scattered surface mine diggings and in
areas of exposed hydrothermal alteration. Samples will be analyzed for gold,
silver and "pathfinder" elements, including arsenic and barium. Anomalous areas
at the surface may indicate "leakage" of hydrothermal fluids along faults and
fault intercepts from potential mineralized zones at depth. These areas will be
incorporated into a three-dimensional evaluation of the property for potential
drill testing. (Based on what our consulting geologist has told us, we are not
aware that rock samples are necessary to be obtained at this point. We believe
that if an interested mineral exploration partner is interested in our mineral
claims, they would likely want to do sampling themselves, as they would likely
want to analyze the results themselves. Having said this, our geologist would
charge us by the hour for sampling if necessary and then we would pay for
assaying at a recognized assaying laboratory. This, we believe, would cost
between $1,000 and $2,000. We are not aware that this step or work sequence is
necessary at this time, particularly given the lack of current interest in our
Mineral Claims.)  4) Update our more recent, April 24, 2005,
report if necessary as a result of any surface sampling. Contact and distribute
report to target groups familiar with high-grade underground mineral exploration
ventures. (This report was authored by our consulting geologist and we know of
nothing at this point that would require us to update it. Accordingly, there is
no cost that we know of at the present time associated with this sequence of
events or step. As of the date of this annual report, we have provided our
geology report to three large US and Canadian mining companies, one junior
Canadian mining company, and one junior mining company located in England.
 We are also informed that our consulting geologist provided a copy of our
report to a small mining company that has been doing exploration work in the
Carlin, Nevada, area.)  5) Keep abreast of ongoing E.P.A. response
activities in the District. (There is no cost associated with this step or work
sequence and we intend to do it ourselves as an incident to our business. At the
same time, our consulting geologist is aware of EPA and
Utah Department of Oil, Gas & Mining (DOGM) responses in the district and he
has indicated an intent to communicate any changes to us if they are material to
us and our Plan of Operation.)  6) Contact as many mining and mineral
exploration companies as possible who we believe might be interested in
partnering or joint venturing with us to explore our mineral claims. (This is a
task that comprises the principal part of our business plan at this point and we
have been doing it in the ordinary course of our business over the last 3 to 4
years. While we have contacted several mining companies to date, unfortunately
we have not been able to get any potential exploration partner or joint venturer
interested in either our Mineral Claims, the Mammoth area, or the overall Tintic
Mining District.  We are not sure why though we believe it is related to
the three factors summarized in the beginning of Item 7 above.)  7) Conduct property tours with interested
parties. (The only cost associated with this step is whether we would be
accompanied by our consulting geologist. If so, we would pay him by the hour.
The only additional cost is transportation. To date, we have conducted only two
Mineral Claim property tours, one with a large US mining company whose stock
trades on the NY Stock Exchange and another with a junior Canadian Mining
Company.  Neither subsequently expressed any interest in our claims and
both indicated that they would get back to us but, to date, they have
not.)  8) Negotiate mineral agreement to explore
the mineral claims. (This task has obviously not been accomplished and we
believe that the only cost associated with this might be attorney's fees, if in
fact we got to the point where we would need or want an attorney to review a
draft agreement.)  We have NOT identified any one potential
mineral exploration partner. There are several mining companies in the United
States and elsewhere that we are hopeful may, at some point, become interested
in our Mineral Claims.  Most if not all are familiar with the Tintic Mining
District.  Unfortunately, we can make no assurance that anyone will ever
become interested in us or our Mineral Claims.  Because we have not been
successful in our efforts to attract a joint venture mining partner, we have
nothing to report in that regard at this time.  EXPLORATION TARGETS  The following discusses certain specific
and suggested exploration targets on our mineral claims that we currently
believe would be suitable for exploration. We believe by identifying such
targets, we have done significant work, in advance, on behalf of a potential or
prospective mineral exploration partner or joint venturer.  23     1. Background.  The limited past development and production
to date from our claims is in part due to the fact that the stratigraphic (i.e.,
geology dealing with the earth's strata) and structural controls to ore
formation were not well understood when the Emerald Mine was originally dug or
excavated. The Emerald Mine exploration and most of the District's exploration
and development work was completed (1880's to 1920's) before G. W. Crane
("Crane"), an engineer for U.S. Smelting and Refining, compiled the first
district-wide mapping in 1930. U.S. Smelting and Refining owned and operated the
Centennial-Eureka Mine, the largest producer of gold and copper in the District.
After reaching an agreement with the numerous independent mine owners in the
Main Tintic District, Crane was authorized to determine stratigraphic and
structural controls to ore deposit formation by mapping each mine. For the first
time in the District's history, but unfortunately after the District was into
the end of its productive life, ore controls on mineralization that crossed
property boundaries were determined. Centurion Mines Corporation, a former
lessee of our mineral claims, built on Crane's work in the late 1980's and early
1990's, by having access to all of his underground mapping and sampling. Crane's
ore controls were evaluated within the more newly developed understanding of the
structural complexities of wrench fault systems, systems that are prevalent in
the Tintic Mining District.   Exploration work relating to our Emerald
Mine intersected scattered weak mineralization on all levels of the mine but not
in large enough quantities to contribute to significant development or
production. Favorable gold values were reported on the 600 foot level of the
mine and were documented and evaluated by G.W. Crane during his District-wide
ore controls evaluation. Crane felt that this mineralization was evidence of the
southerly continuation of the Centennial Ore Channel mined in the Grand Central
and Centennial-Eureka Mines. Crane wrote in an internal report to U.S. Smelting
and Refining:  "The Emerald Mine happens to be at the
extreme southern, or gold/ copper end of the Gemini or Centennial Channel, the
largest producer of five major ore zones, and for this and other reasons, is due
to become a producer of ore consisting of gold. On the same fissure, to which
recent developments in the Emerald Mine have been directed, ore bodies on the
lower levels of the Grand Central Mine have their principle values in gold and
copper, indicating the trend in the direction of the Emerald" (G. Crane, March
28, 1933).  2. Generalized Exploration Targets on
the Tintic Gold Claims.  The majority of all Tintic Main District
ore is preferentially developed within only five of the numerous Paleozoic
carbonate formations that have been found to be present in the District. Of
these units, a formation named the Ajax Formation has hosted most of the
copper-gold production in the District. The Ajax Formation crops out extensively
on the Tintic Gold mineral claims group and is cut by intersecting faults which
are known to be mineralized in the Emerald Mine workings and in the adjacent
Grand Central, Mammoth and Centennial-Eureka Mines. The Ajax Formation on our
claims is near vertical to steeply west dipping and lies on the western limb of
the broad Tintic Syncline. The most persistently mineralized portion of the
formation is the Emerald Unit which lies in the lower half of the 640 foot thick
Ajax Formation. The Emerald is a medium grained grayish-white colored massive
dolomite bed that lies about 100 to 180 feet above the base of the unit and
averages about 30 feet thick. Ore mined in the deepest portions of the Grand
Central (Grand Central Ore Channel) and Centennial-Eureka Mines (Oklahoma
Stopes) which are located directly north of the Tintic Gold ground, is also
hosted by the Ajax Formation. In those mines, however, the Ajax Formation dips
about 45 degrees to the north and the bedding conformable ore is subhorizontal
since they lie near the axial plane of the syncline at a mine depth of from
1,900 to 2,300 feet.  We believe, at the present time, that the
up dip extension of the mineralized Ajax host in the Grand Central and
Centennial-Eureka Mines is the best exploration target on our claims. The Ajax
Formation -- especially the Emerald member --- is cross cut by the ore
controlling, generally steeply west dipping, north trending sinistral faults,
namely, the Iron Break Fissure (Grand Central and Centennial-Eureka Mines), the
West Break Fissure (Grand Central Mine), the West Mammoth Split Fault (Mammoth
Mine), the Mammoth Fault (Mammoth Mine) and the Grand Central Fault (Grand
Central Mine). The sinistral or northerly trending faults provide the conduits
and structural preparation for potential ore development in the reactive and
brittle carbonates that are present there. We believe that these faults in the
Ajax Formation are especially good targets for exploration where they are
intersected by east-west faults.    24    3. Specific Exploration Targets on the
Tintic Gold Mineral Claims. **** On the 600 Level
(6,224 feet above mean sea level ("amsl")) of the Emerald Mine, southeast of the
shaft (6,830 feet amsl), a winze was sunk on a vein of gold bearing quartz in
the Ajax Formation. The vein is reported by G. Crane to have positive gold
assays in the winze and small sublevel drift. The vein lies on the intersection
of the east-west striking 245 Fissure in the Emerald Mine and the sinistral,
northeast striking Iron Break Fissure which carries 2 to 3 opt silver in the
Centennial-Eureka Mine 1800 foot level drift (4,935 feet amsl). The Iron Break
Fissure controls north trending ore deposition in the Opohonga Formation in the
Grand Central Mine 1300 to 1800 foot levels (5,828 to 5,347 feet amsl) and in
the large westerly trending Ajax Formation stopes on the 2000 to 2300 foot
levels (5,147 to 4,845 feet amsl). Crane believed that this intersection and the
gold-bearing quartz was the top of an irregular ore pipe that was 5 to 6 feet in
diameter where exposed in the workings. He felt that additional prospecting
should be conducted below this mineralization in the Ajax and Opex Formation
carbonates.  On the Emerald 600 Level (6,224 feet amsl),
drifting on the level to the south of the quartz vein described above cut
various positive gold results approximately 350 feet and 950 feet away in the
Ajax and underlying Opex Formations. The lowest of the
assay results was on the lower Ajax formation probably on a fault but it is not
described. The higher or more positive assay value is on a north-north east
striking 60 to 72 degree west dipping fault where it is cut by an east-west
striking fault. Another positive gold result was collected by Crane on the 600
Emerald Level where the same south drift in the Ajax Formation crosses into the
underlying Opex Formation. We believe that these scattered gold values found by
Crane deserve testing for potential bonanza grade mineralization in the
receptive lower Ajax and underlying Opex Formation carbonates.  We also believe that the 1300 foot long by
1000 foot wide exploration gap between the southwestern-most stopes on the Grand
Central Mine 2000 to 2300 foot levels (5,147 to 4,845 feet amsl) and the
northern-most drifts on the Emerald 700, 900 and 1000 foot levels (6,124, 5,924
& 5,824 feet amsl) should be evaluated. The northeast trending steeply west
dipping West Break (Grand Central Mine), Iron Break Fissure (Grand Central and
Centennial-Eureka Mines), and West Mammoth Split (Mammoth Mine) should be
tested, especially where they are cut by the steeply dipping east-west striking
cross faults. We believe that the prime area for exploration and possible ore
development in this exploration gap is at fault intersections which occur in the
Ajax Formation as it dips towards the Grand Central stopes.  Glossary of Terms to Assist the Reader in
Understanding Technical Terminology.  Amsl
                                   
Above mean sea level.  Anomalous
areas              Rocks
that contain gold and/ or other pathfinder elements that may indicate proximity
to mineralization.  Assay values
                    
Metals content of a sample submitted to a laboratory for assay. There are.
various standardized assay methodologies used depending upon the grade and.
element being determined.  Axial plane of the syncline A syncline is a fold in the rock that
can incorporate one rock strata or numerous formations that contain many rock
strata.  Synclines are "U" shaped folds with. the open end up. The axial
plane of a syncline is used to describe the orientation of the syncline in
space. The plane equally divides the syncline down the middle such that equal
portions of the syncline lie on either side of the axial plane.  Bedding conformable ore  Bedding conformable means that the
ore lies within a certain layer or bed of rock and that the outline of the ore
conforms to the outline or some portion of the outline of the rock layer.  Bonanza grade
                   
Any high grade metals enrichment sampled, generally regardless of the size of
the zone.  Core drilling
                       
Core drilling is slower and more expensive to complete than reverse circulation
drilling. A continuous section of rock is recovered during core drilling. Core
allows the geologist and mine engineer to better evaluate rock types, structure,
and hydrothermal alteration among other rock attributes as compared to reverse
drilling.  Dip and strike
                    
Dip and strike are used to define the orientation of the rock strata in space.
The plane that defines the orientation of a rock unit will dip in one direction
and strike in two directions.   25    Dolomite bed
                     
Dolomite is a magnesium-bearing carbonate rock. A dolomite bed is a layer or
horizon of dolomite rock.  Hydrothermal alteration     Rocks that have been
changed partially or completely in mineral composition and/ or texture and/ or
have pathfinder elements added to them by hydrothermal
(warm water) solutions.   Hydrothermal solutions have deposited the
minerals in the Tintic District that make up the historically mined ore.
Geologists and mine engineers are trained to recognize hydrothermal alteration
as an aid in delineating ore and the proximity to ore.  "Leakage" of hydrothermal Hydrothermal fluids formed the Tintic
ore fluids bodies. "Leakage," or the movement of hydrothermal fluids along zones
of  permeability, potentially leading to or from areas of mineralized rock
can result in hydrothermal alteration. The "leakage" of  hydrothermal
fluids from a mineralized zone at depth along a fault might lead to hydrothermal
alteration in rocks at the surface above the mineralized rock.  Mineralization
                   
Mineralization is metals anomalous hydrothermal alteration that is not ore
grade.  Ore is defined as mineralized rock that is economic to mine.
Mineralization may not be ore due to a variety of factors including current
metals prices, size and/ or grade of mineralization, depth to mineralization,
and  others.  Opt
                                      
Ounces per ton. 1 troy ounce per short ton equals 34.2857 grams per metric
tonne, or 34.2857 parts per million.  Paleozoic carbonate formations-Paleozoic is an era and refers to
the age of the rocks ranging from 542 to 251 million years ago. Carbonate rocks
are sedimentary rocks that are deposited as chemical precipitates, such a
limestone or many dolomites. A formation is a scientifically established
grouping of rocks with specific characteristics that geologists have developed
to understand the geology of an area or region. See also: "strata" below.  Pathfinder elements
          Elements such as barium,
silver, thallium, arsenic or mercury and others that may be deposited in
association with gold mineralizing  hydrothermal solutions and commonly
form larger anomalies than gold itself. Pathfinder elements can vary between
mining districts and within mining districts depending upon the geologic type of
the ore deposit. Areas of anomalous pathfinder elements can be used to aid in
delineating gold mineralization at depth and laterally, both from surface
samples and from  samples collected below the surface, such as in drill
cuttings. Gold itself is one of the best pathfinder elements for locating gold
deposits.  QA/ QC program
             A
quality assurance and quality control program to help ensure that the sampling
and assaying program portion of the mineral evaluation project are
representative of what is actually going on. The QA/ QC program typically
includes using a reputable assay lab which uses its own QA/ QC program to ensure
assay result validity, check assays of mineralized intercepts sent to a second
reputable assay lab, and the incorporation of blanks (rock samples with no
detectable metals), standards (rock samples with established metals values) and
sample duplicates to arrive at a statistically valid sampling protocol. QA/ QC
programs also require sample security to ensure that samples are not
contaminated either unintentionally or intentionally.  Sinistral faults
                    
Sinistral faults are fault planes of movement in rock that have a left lateral
displacement, such that as seen by the observer, the relative movement of the
rock on the other side of the fault plane from the observer is to the left.
 Dextral faults have right lateral movement.  Strata
                                 
Geologists group sedimentary rocks (rocks  formed by erosion of preexisting
rocks or rocks like limestones and many dolomites that form as chemical
precipitates) into age and often rock-type packages to help define the geology
of a region. Sedimentary strata or rock strata are these groupings of rocks or
parts of these rock packages that can be identified at
various localities throughout a  26    region or mining district.  Stratigraphic controls        
These are the controls to potential ore deposition provided by the rocks
themselves. In each mining district, certain strata are more favorable to ore
development within the district than are other strata. At Tintic, the bulk of
 historic gold production has come from the Ajax Formation. Drill testing
the Ajax Formation where a fault intersection cuts the unit (structural
controls) may be a logical place to expect the formation of a potential ore
body.  Structural controls
            
Structural controls are the controls to potential ore deposition provided by
rock structures: especially areas of potentially high hydrothermal fluid flow
along faults and fault intercepts with other faults. Geologists map faults to
determine potential structural controls to district ore deposition. See also
wrench fault systems.  Stope
                                  
A step-like open excavation in an underground mine left by the mining of ore.
Depending upon the mining method and size of the ore body, an open cavity (a
stope) may be left with no pillars to support the roof.  Reverse circulation drilling A relatively rapid drilling method
whereby drilling is completed with air and either a rotary or hammer bit is used
to complete the drill hole. Reverse circulation drilling usually involves using
dual walled drilling pipe with high pressure air passing through the outer
annulus of the pipe and rock cuttings exiting through the inner annulus of the
pipe. Drill cuttings are typically logged, collected and assayed in 5 foot
intervals.  Winze
                                  
An internal underground shaft that was constructed by digging downwards from the
access point.  Wrench fault systems       Wrench faults
are defined by the relative movement along the fault plane. The Tintic District
lies in a wrench fault system. These faults are lateral-type faults with rocks
on one side of a fault having a relative displacement to the left or right of
the rocks on the other side of the fault plane of movement. Wrench fault systems
are systems because other fault types often form as a result of the
directionally focused compressional forces the rock has been subjected to.
Wrench faults often result in a system of orthogonal faults between the regional
planes of wrench fault movement as well as smaller "S"-shaped lateral faults
(Riedel shears) that merge at their ends with the wrench-fault planes of
movement. These fault systems and where these faults intercept each other can
become transmissive areas for the potential movement and focus of mineralizing
hydrothermal fluids.     The Phased Nature of Our Planned or
Proposed Exploration Program.  The following discussion sets forth the
two-phase exploration program that we would recommend or which we would suggest
to an interested joint venture exploration partner:  A two-phase exploration program is
recommended and which may involve a total expenditure of US $2,658,000. We
believe our claims have excellent targets for drill testing as shown by geology,
structural controls to known mineralization, and historic underground sampling
results in the Ajax and Opex Formations. The program would utilize both reverse
circulation and core drilling to confirm the presence, tenor and characteristics
of mineralization indicated in the historic underground sampling results.  An initial surface drilling program of ten
reverse circulation drill holes approximately 840 feet deep would target the
1,000 foot long area of gold anomalous ground intersected on the Emerald 600
foot level. This area is located east and southeast of the Emerald Shaft. The
drill holes would be collared to test areas of historic high grade gold sampled
by Crane in the late 1920's. Two additional reverse circulation drill holes
would be collared to test the northeast extension of potential mineralization
along the Iron Break Fissure, located northeast of the Emerald Shaft. Results of
historic sampling in the Centennial-Eureka Mine workings by Crane indicate
significant silver mineralization on the fissure. Drill holes collared in this
area would have completion depths of approximately 1,000 feet and would also
test the prospective Ajax Formation located above the mineralized fissure. Drill
holes in this program would be spaced relatively close to one another because of
the discrete, high- grade nature of
mineralization in the Tintic District.  27     Prior to drilling, patented claim corners
would be reestablished in the field using a licensed surveyor to ensure project
activities are conducted within the our claims' boundaries. Surface rock chip
samples should be collected by a qualified person from the scattered cuts and
altered rocks that crop out on the property to determine the potential for
additional drill targets.  Upon conclusion of the first phase of
exploration, data compilation and analysis, interpretive drawing of geology,
grade and mineralized envelopes in sections and plans should be completed.
Initial metallurgical studies would also be conducted. The second phase drilling
program is contingent upon the compiled results from the initial drill
program.  Second phase drilling, provided that the
first phase is successful, would target and expand on mineralized areas
intersected in the first phase of drilling and should include both core and
reverse circulation drilling. Core drilling provides a better sampling media and
a better control for structural analyses, engineering and metallurgical studies,
and on geology. The drilling program should include a rigorous QA/QC program
which includes blanks, repeats, standards, paired assays and variance studies to
ensure that sample preparation and analytical protocols are not adding
unreasonable variance to assay data. More detailed feasibility and metallurgical
studies would also be completed during this phase and include mineral
speciation, mineral liberation/ recovery and waste stream evaluations.  The recommended budget for Phase I is US
$517,000. The recommended budget for Phase II is US $2,141,000. If feasibility
studies conducted as part of Phase II indicate the economic viability of mining
zones intersected in drilling, then mine development will probably require the
construction of underground access to develop the claims.  28        Recommended Phase I
ExpendituresItem
Expenses in
U.S.Drilling: Reverse
Circ: 10 holes, 8400 ft @ $45/ft
$
                  378,000Roads and
sites
$
                      7,500Reclamation
$
                      8,500Bonding
$
                     20,000Assays: FA/AA,
1680 samples @ $25
$
                    42,000Supplies:
splitter, boxes, bags, etc.
$
                      5,000Geological
Consultants 1 @ 2 months @ $8000/mo
$
                     16,000Resource
Estimate
$
                     10,000Lodging, meals,
expenses
$
                       5,000Contingency +/-
5%
$
                      24,600TOTAL PHASE I
RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURE
$
                     516,600Recommended Phase
II ExpendituresItem
Expenses in
U.S.Drilling: Reverse
Circ: 20 holes, 20000 ft @ $45/ft
$
                  900,000Core-HQ-size: 10
holes, 10,000 ft @ $65/ft
$
                  650,000Roads and
sites
$
                     15,000Reclamation
$
                     18,000Bonding
$
                     40,000Assays: FA/AA,
6000 samples @ $25
$
                   150,000Supplies:
splitter, boxes, bags, etc.
$
                     20,000Geological
Consultants 3 @ 4 months @ $8000/mo
$
                     96,000Resource Estimate
and Engineering Studies
$
                    100,000Lodging, meals,
expenses
$
                      50,000Contingency +/-
5%
$
                     101,950TOTAL PHASE II
RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURE
$
                  2,140,950 The foregoing recommended expenditures are
estimates devised by our consulting geologist. We have no way of predicting, at
this time, whether these estimates are too high or too low. We have simply come
up with these estimates in order to give a prospective exploration program
partner or joint venturer an initial idea of what it might be looking at
spending on any such program(s).  Phased Exploration Plan and How the
Results of Prior Phases Will Determine Whether to Proceed with Further
Phases.    In spite of the foregoing events and
information concerning our inability to locate and negotiate with a joint
venture mining partner, our plan, nonetheless, to contract with a mining company
or mineral exploration partner, upon completion of the work sequences we have
detailed above, includes:  * An investigation of mining and mineral
exploration companies, which are currently operating in the general area of our
mineral claims. This investigation may include the use of industry databases, as
well as the investigation of governmental records and industry experts. We do
not expect this cost to exceed $2,500.  * Initial discussions with those potential
mineral exploration company partners as determined from our investigation. We do
not expect this cost to exceed $5,000.  * Contract negotiations with an interested
mineral exploration partner. We do not expect the costs, legal or otherwise, to
exceed $10,000. Though no formal agreement exists between us and our current
officers and directors, our current officers and  29    directors have
agreed to fund the costs of such plan to the extent that these costs do not
exceed $25,000. If we are able to contract with a mineral exploration company,
we anticipate that all expenses for exploration and possible exploitation of our
mineral claim properties will be borne by the mineral exploration company and
not by us. In return, we would receive a royalty fee based on a percentage of
the proceeds from the sale of those minerals the mining or mineral exploration
company may recover from our properties.  It is noteworthy that even if we were to
complete a successful mineral exploration program and we successfully identify a
mineral deposit (something to which there can be no assurance whatsoever), we
will nonetheless have to obtain substantial additional funds from a joint
venture partner in order to undertake further drilling and engineering studies
(i.e., development) to determine if that mineral deposit does in fact have
commercial viability and if so, how the same can be extracted through an actual
mining extraction program. In short, there are three
phases to mining: exploration, development, and extraction. Accordingly, if in
fact we embark upon and undertake a successful exploration program, we will
still be required to complete the second phase, namely, that of "developing" the
claims in order to determine if it is commercially feasible to embark upon the
final phase, namely, actual mineral extraction.  We are unable to make any guarantees
that:  * we will be able to identify and negotiate
an arrangement with a mining or mineral exploration company within the next
twelve to eighteen months,  * our mineral claim properties will be
found attractive to a prospective mining company partner,  * we will be able to attract sufficient
outside funding or financing necessary to undertake and complete an exploration
program, or  * if commercial quantities of
mineralization is found after an exploration program is carried out, that our
properties would produce any saleable minerals or metals that would result in
our receiving any income.  While we believe that such opportunities
can be investigated, reviewed and consummated for minimal costs, we cannot give
any assurances that related costs will be minimal or that we can ultimately
afford them or, that our officers, directors or significant shareholders will
agree to continue to make the continued equity investments necessary to do
so.  We have no employees. Our officers and
directors serve our company without receiving a salary. However, from time to
time as appropriate, they may receive expense reimbursements and possible stock
options. Though we have no formal written agreement in place, our office space
and administrative support is provided by Mr. George Christopulos, our Chairman
of the Board, President, and CEO out of his home. Other than those costs and
expenses previously discussed, we do not plan on any significant expenditures
for new projects of any sort within the next twelve to eighteen months.  Time Frame Involved in Investigating and
Negotiating a Contract with a Joint Venture Partner.  We do not know and have no way of knowing
the anticipated time frame involved in which our management would investigate
each prospective or potential joint venture mineral exploration partner, let
alone how long it would take any such a prospective partner to investigate us or
negotiate a contract with us. As we have stated in this document, we have
approached large mining companies over the last 3 to 4 years that have, or have
had, the funding to finance exploration in the United States or which have
otherwise done mineral exploration work in Utah and the surrounding states.
Unfortunately, as set forth above, our efforts to generate such interest have so
far been unsuccessful.  We are not exactly sure why.  Accordingly,
based on what has occurred, or failed to occur during the last 3 to 4 years, we
have no way of predicting how long investigating us and our Mineral Claim
properties would take a potential joint venture mining partner to undertake nor
do we have any way of predicting how long it would take to negotiate any kind of
contract with a prospective joint venture mining partner.  The fact is that
as of the date of this report, we do NOT have any joint venture mineral
exploration partner prospects.  Our "Day-to-Day" Operations.  With respect to our "day to day"
operations, we have no employees or formal office facilities. Our officer and
directors have  30    other full time
employment or engagements, all as stated elsewhere in this document. They will
therefore NOT be devoting their full time and energy, on a daily basis, to our
Company or the completion of our Business Plan. We can say, however, that
completion of, and carrying out, our Plan of Operation involves reliance on
other experts and we expect to line up and hire, as necessary, whatever experts
are needed to complete our Plan of Operation and our various work sequences. To
the extent that this requires us to make a phone call or
two at least every day, and otherwise follow up with people, we will do that. To
the extent it requires more, we are committed to doing that also, even if it is
on a daily basis. At some point, we will be waiting for prospective mineral
exploration partners to get back to us on their evaluation of our mineral claims
or what more information that they need or want from us in order to make an
informed decision about us and our mineral claims. When that is the case, there
will be little we can do "day to day," other than to wait for those tasks to be
completed by them, circumstances that will largely be beyond our direct control.
We will also have to wait for prospective joint partner candidates to "get back
to us" while they are reviewing materials we will have provided them. If and
when we are waiting for such persons "to get back to us," there is little that
we will be able to do on a "day to day" basis.  Maps  A map of our mineral claims is an exhibit
to this Annual Report. This map shows the actual location of our mineral claims
near the town of Mammoth, Utah. This map also shows where the Emerald Mine is
located. See the PDF file attached and which is identified in our List of
Exhibits below as Exhibit 99.1.  We have also inserted below an index map
showing where our mineral claims are situated in relationship to the state and
county in which they are located. See the PDF file attached. This second map
exhibit is identified in our List of Exhibits below as Exhibit 99.2.      ITEM
7A.  QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.  No response to this item is required for smaller
reporting companies.    ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTRY DATA.       31                 TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  December 31, 2008                           32           REPORT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM    Board of Directors Tintic Gold Mining Company Salt Lake City, Utah  We have audited the
accompanying balance sheets of Tintic Gold Mining Company [an exploration
stage company] as of December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the related statements
of operations, stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of the
years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2008 and for the period from
inception of exploration stage on December 31, 1997 through December 31, 2008.
Tintic Gold Mining Companys management is responsible for these financial
statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits.  We conducted our audits in accordance with
the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to
perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our
audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a
basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances,
but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the
Companys internal control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we
express no such opinion.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements,
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.
 We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.  In our opinion, the
financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects,
the financial position of Tintic Gold Mining Company as of December 31, 2008 and
2007 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years
in the two-year period ended December 31, 2008 and for the period from inception
of exploration stage on December 31, 1997 through December 31, 2008, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.  The accompanying
financial statements have been prepared assuming Tintic Gold Mining Company will
continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements,
Tintic Gold Mining Company has incurred losses since its inception and has not
yet established profitable operations.  These factors raise substantial
doubt about the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern.
 Managements plans in regards to these matters are also described in Note
5.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of these uncertainties.    PRITCHETT, SILER & HARDY,
P.C.  Salt Lake City, Utah March 19, 2009   33    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  BALANCE SHEETS    December 31,

December 31,2008

2007ASSETSCURRENT ASSETS:Cash

$
             4,228

$
             471Total Current Assets

4,228

471$
             4,228

$
             471LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY (DEFICIT)CURRENT LIABILITIES:Accounts payable

$
                 136

$
                 436Related party advances

16,210

1,210Accrued Liabilities - related party
24,000

15,000Total Current Liabilities
40,346

16,646STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT):Common stock, $.001 par value,50,000,000 shares authorized,2,109,643 shares issued andoutstanding at December 31, 2008 and 2007

2,110

2,110Capital in excess of par value

194,165

194,165Deficit accumulated during theexploration stage

(232,393)

(212,450)Total Stockholders' Equity (Deficit)

(36,118)

(16,175)$
             4,228

$
                 471           The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  34    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS    From inception ofexploration stageon December 31,For the Year Ended

1997, throughDecember 31,

December 31,2008

2007

2008Revenues
$
                       -

$
                       -

$
                                      -Total Revenues
-

-

-ExpensesGeneral & Administrative
19,943

27,358

165,072Failed acquisition costs
-

-

85,758Total Expenses
19,943

27,358

250,830Loss From Operations
(19,943)

(27,358)

(250,830)Other IncomeInterest Income
-

-

8,632Interest Expense
-

-

(44)Gain on Sale of Securities
-

-

8,084Total Other Income
-

-

16,672Loss Before Income Taxes
(19,943)

(27,358)

(234,158)Current Income Taxes (Benefit)
-

-

(1,765)Deferred Tax Expense
-

-

-Net Loss
$
                 (19,943)

$
                 (27,358)

$
                          (232,393)Loss per Share
$
                    (0.01)

$
                    (0.01)          The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  35    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company] STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
(DEFICIT) FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION ON DECEMBER
31, 1997 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008   UnrealizedDeficit

GainsAccumulated

(Losses) onAdditional

During the

Available -

TotalCommon
Stock

Paid-In

Exploration

For-Sale

Shareholders'Shares

Amount

Capital

Stage

Securities

EquityBalance -
December 31, 1997
231,797

$    232

$  39,743

$
             -

$
            -

$        39,975Net Income for
December 31, 1997through December
31, 2000
-

-

-

11,007

-

11,007Unrealized
losses available-for-sale-securities, net of tax
-

-

-

-

(278)

(278)Stock issued for
services in December,2001 at $.30 per
share
50,006

50

14,950



-

15,000Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2001
-

-

-

(35,530)



(35,530)Unrealized
losses available-for-sale-securities, net of tax
-

-

-

-

278

278Balance
December 31, 2001
281,803

282

54,693

(24,523)

-

30,452Stock issued for
services in December,2002 at $.175
per share
134,153

134

23,343

-

-

23,477Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2002
-

-

-

(34,774)

-

(34,774)Balance
December 31, 2002
415,956

416

78,036

(59,297)

-

19,155Stock issued for
services inFebruary, 2003
at $0.10 per share
536,611

537

53,124

-

-

53,661Stock issued for
services inDecember, 2003
at $0.10 per share
57,076

57

5,651

-

-

5,708Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2003
-

-

-

(81,978)

-

(81,978)Balance
December 31, 2003
1,009,643

1,010

136,811

(141,275)

-

(3,454)Issuance of
500,000 shares of Common Stock for$25,000 or $.05
per share, August, 2004
500,000

500

24,500

-

-

25,000Related party
debt forgivenessrecorded as
capital contribution
-

-

3,454

-

-

3,454Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2004
-

-

-

(7,552)

-

(7,552)Balance
December 31, 2004
1,509,643

1,510

164,765

(148,827)

-

17,448Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2005
-

-

-

(12,245)

-

(12,245)Balance
December 31, 2005
1,509,643

1,510

164,765

(161,072)

-

5,203Issuance of
600,000 shares of Common Stockfor $30,000 or
$.05 per share, November, 2006
600,000

600

29,400

-

-

30,000Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2006
-

-

-

(24,020)

-

(24,020)Balance
December 31, 2006
2,109,643

2,110

194,165

(185,092)

-

11,183Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2007
-

-

-

(27,358)

-

(27,358)Balance
December 31, 2007
2,109,643

2,110

194,165

(212,450)

-

(16,175)Net loss for the
year ended December 31, 2008






(19,943)



(19,943)Balance
December 31, 2008
2,109,643

$
 2,110

$
194,165

$
   (232,393)

-

$
      (36,118)      The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  36    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS From inception ofexploration stageon December 31,For
the Year Ended

1997, throughDecember 31,

December 31,

December 31,2008

2007

2008Cash flows used in operating
activities:Net income (loss)
$
    (19,943)

$
    (27,358)

$
          (232,393)Adjustments to reconcile net loss to cash
usedin operating activitiesNon-cash stock issued for services rendered
-

-

97,846Loss from sale of securities
-

-

(8,086)Change in operating assets and liabilities:Increase (decrease) in accounts payable
(300)

(2,313)

(11)Accrued liabilities - related party
9,000

15,000

24,000(Decrease) in income taxes payable
-

-

(565)Net cash used in operating activities
(11,243)

(14,671)

(119,209)Cash flows from investing activities:Purchase of securities
-

-

(7,609)Proceeds from sale of securities
-

-

23,962Net cash flows provided by investing
activities
-

-

16,353Cash flows from financing activities:Proceeds from note payable - related party
-

-

3,501Proceeds from related party advances
15,000

-

16,210Proceeds from sale of common stock
-

-

55,000Net cash flows from financing activities
15,000

-

74,711Net increase (decrease)  in cash
3,757

(14,671)

(28,145)Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of
period
471

15,142

32,373Cash and cash equivalents at end of
period
$     
   4,228

$
         471

$ 
               4,228Supplemental Disclosures of Cash Flow
Information:Cash paid during the periods for:Interest
$
             -

$
            -

$                     
-Income taxes
$
             -

$
            -

$                3,565Supplemental Schedule of Non-cash Investing and
Financing Activities$
             -

$
            -   The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these financial statements.  37    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS  NOTE 1 -- ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES  History and Nature
of Business -Tintic Gold Mining Company (the Company) was organized under
the laws of the State of Nevada on March 8, 2004 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Tintic Gold Mining Company (Parent), a Utah corporation, (now known as KIWA
Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation).  The Company was founded for the
purpose of continuing the exploration of the mining claims of its former Parent.
 On March 12, 2004 as part of an acquisition agreement, Parent acquired
KIWA Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation (KIWA).  Following the
organization of the Company, Parent transferred all of its mining claims to the
Company in exchange for 1,009,643 shares of the Companys common stock. The
mining claims were transferred because KIWA, the successor to Parent and being
in a substantially different business, did not want to own, manage or be
responsible for mining claims.  Accordingly, as part of Parents merger
transaction with KIWA, the Company and Parent separately entered into a
Distribution Agreement which obligated the Company to file a registration
statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) and
when that registration statement became effective, the Company would distribute
the 1,009,643 shares, then-issued and outstanding, to the pre-KIWA shareholders
of Parent on a pro-rata basis.  This is called a spin-off transaction.
 The Company filed such registration statement and on October 18, 2006, the
Commission declared it effective.  In November 2006, the Companys stock
transfer agent distributed the shares.  The mining claims include three
patented mining claims known as the Emerald, the Ruby and Diamond Lode Mining
Claims located in the central portion of the Tintic Mining District, Juab
County, Utah.  Tintic Gold Mining
Company ("Parent") was incorporated in the State of Utah on June 14, 1933.
 Parent was incorporated for the purpose of mining, milling, ore reducing,
and smelting. At the time of its incorporation, Parent acquired certain patented
mining claims from the Emerald Mining Company, which mining claims the Company
continues to own.  These mining claims are located in the Tintic Mining
District of Juab County, Utah. Prior to December 31, 1997, the Parent was
dormant.  Quasi-Reorganization.   On June 21, 2001, a
majority of the shareholders of Parent approved a quasi-reorganization of
Parent, retroactive to December 31, 1997. On June 21, 2001, the Parent amended
its articles of incorporation to reduce the par value per share from $0.10 to
$0.001. As a result of the quasi-reorganization, the common stock of Parent was
written down to its par value of $0.001 per share, the accumulated deficit of
$191,797 was eliminated, and additional paid-in capital was adjusted to reflect
the difference between the historical cost of existing assets and liabilities as
of December 31, 1997.  Financial Statement
Presentation.The accompanying financial statements include the prior
operations of Parent from its inception of exploration stage activities on
December 31, 1997 through the spin-off of the Company, and include the accounts
of the Company from its date of incorporation to the date of the financial
statements.       38    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage
Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  NOTE 1 
ORANGIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
[Continued]  Exploration
Stage.  The Company is considered to be an Exploration Stage Company,
however, the Company does not have any current mining exploration, development
or production activities on its existing properties.  The Company is
currently unable to estimate the length of time necessary to initiate an
exploration stage program and has no assurance that a commercially viable ore
body exists in its properties until appropriate geological work and testing of
the mineralized areas can support an economically feasible evaluation which the
Company is unable to perform due to a lack of working capital.  Stock-Based
Compensation.   Compensation or services that are received in
exchange for the issuance of common stock is recognized based on the fair value
of the services received or the fair value of the common stock issued, which
ever is more reliably measured.  Cash and Cash
Equivalents - The Company considers all highly-liquid debt investments
purchased with a maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.  Mining Properties -Pre-operating and mine development costs including acquisition costs
relating to mining properties are capitalized until such properties are placed
in production, disposed of, or abandoned.  The Company periodically reviews
its mining property for impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of
Long-Lived Assets.  Income Taxes -The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes [See
Note 6].  The Company adopted the
provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes, on January 1, 2007.  As a result of the implementation of
Interpretation 48, the Company recognized approximately no increase in the
liability for unrecognized tax benefits.  The Company has no tax
positions at December 31, 2008 and 2007 for which the ultimate deductibility is
highly certain but for which there is uncertainty about the timing of such
deductibility.  The Company recognizes
interest accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense and
penalties in operating expenses.  During the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007, the Company recognized no interest and penalties.  The
Company had no accruals for interest and penalties at December 31, 2008, and
2007.  Loss Per Share -
The computation of loss per share is based on the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding during the period presented in accordance with
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, Earnings Per Share
[See Note 7].    39    TINTIC GOLD
MINING COMPANY [An Exploration Stage
Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  NOTE 1  ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING
POLICIES [Continued]  Accounting
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, the disclosures of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amount of
revenues and expenses during the reported period.  Actual results could
differ from those estimated.  Recently Enacted
Accounting Standards -Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS)
No. 157, Fair Value Measurements, SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities  Including an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 115, SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interest in Consolidated
Financial Statements (as amended), SFAS No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities  an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133,
SFAS No. 162, The Hierarchy of GAAP Sources for Non-governmental entities, and
SFAS No. 163, Accounting for Financial Guarantee Insurance Contracts were
recently issued.  SFAS No. 157, 159, 160, 161, 162 and 163 have no current
applicability to the Company or their effect on the financial statements would
not have been significant.  NOTE 2 - MINING CLAIMS  At the time of
organization, the Company acquired certain patented mining claims from Parent
which were recorded at the carryover basis of $0 [See Note 3].  The
mining claims are located in the Tintic Mining District of Juab County, Utah.
 The Company does not have any current mining exploration, development, or
production activities on its existing properties. The Company intends to explore
its existing properties in the future and to acquire additional mining
properties that contain potential exploration opportunities if funding becomes
available for such purpose.  NOTE 3 - CAPITAL STOCK  Common Stock -The Company has authorized 50,000,000 shares of common stock with a par
value of $.001.  In November 2006 the
Company issued 600,000 shares of common stock.  The shares were issued for
cash of $30,000, or $.05 per share.  In 2004 the Company
issued a total of 1,509,643 shares of common stock of which 500,000 shares were
issued for cash of $25,000, or $.05 per share and 1,009,643 shares were issued
for mining claims of Parent valued at carryover basis of $0.  NOTE 4 - RELATED PARTY
TRANSACTIONS  Related Party
Advances As of December 31, 2008 officers and shareholders of the Company
had advanced the Company a total of $16,210.  The advances bear no interest
and are due on demand.  Accrued Liabilities
-A shareholder of the Company has performed legal services for a total of
$24,000 which has been accrued for on the Companys books.    40    TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An
Exploration Stage Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS  NOTE 4 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
[Continued]  Management
Compensation - For the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company
did not pay any compensation to any officer or director of the Company.  Office Space -
The Company has not had a need to rent office space.  An officer of the
Company is allowing the Company to use his address, as needed, at no expense to
the Company.   NOTE 5 - GOING CONCERN  The accompanying
financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplate
continuation of the Company as a going concern.  However, the Company has
not yet been successful in establishing profitable operations and has current
liabilities in excess of current assets. These factors raise substantial doubt
about the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern.  In this
regard, management is proposing to raise any necessary additional funds not
provided by operations through loans or through additional sales of its common
stock or through a possible business combination.  There is no assurance
that the Company will be successful in raising this additional capital or in
achieving profitable operations.  The financial statements do not include
any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.  NOTE 6 - INCOME TAXES  The Company accounts
for income taxes in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.  SFAS No. 109 requires the Company
to provide a net deferred tax asset/liability equal to the expected future tax
benefit/expense of temporary reporting differences between book and tax
accounting methods and any available operating loss or tax credit
carryforwards.  The Company has
available at December 31, 2008 an unused operating loss carryforward of
approximately $91,100 which may be applied against future taxable income and
which expires in 2028.  The amount of and ultimate realization of the
benefits from the operating loss carryforwards for income tax purposes is
dependent, in part, upon the tax laws in effect, the future earnings of the
Company, and other future events, the effects of which cannot be determined.
 Because of the uncertainty surrounding the realization of the net deferred
tax assets, the Company has established a valuation allowance equal to their tax
effect and, therefore, no deferred tax asset has been recognized.  The net
deferred tax assets are approximately $13,700 and $10,648 as of December 31,
2008 and 2007, with an offsetting valuation allowance of the same amount.
 The change in the valuation allowance for the year ended December 31, 2008
is approximately $3,052.        41    TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY [An
Exploration Stage Company]  NOTES TO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS   NOTE 7 - LOSS PER SHARE  The following data
shows the amounts used in computing loss per share:  For
the Year EndedDecember
31,2008

2007Loss from continuing operations available to commonshareholders (numerator)

$
       (19,943)

$
       (27,358)Weighted average number of commonshares outstanding used in loss pershare for the period (denominator)

2,109,643

2,109,643  Dilutive loss per share
was not presented, as the Company had no common stock equivalent shares for all
periods presented that would affect the computation of diluted loss per
share.  NOTE 8  COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES  Former Officer During 1980, a former president of Parent entered into an agreement with
Parent whereby he settled a note due from Parent and relinquished his direct
control of Parent.  Among other consideration, Parent conveyed to the
former president a 3% net smelter return on any ores sold from its historical
patented mining claims held, plus surface rights.  Parent retained rights
to enter and exit the property for exploration and mining activity.  In
March 2004, the Company issued 1,009,643 shares of common stock for the mining
claims of Parent [See Note 2]. Environmental  In 2002 the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality conducted soil sampling in the town of Mammoth, Utah, in
an area adjacent to the Companys mining claims.  Those samples indicate
elevated contaminated metals levels. The nearby Mammoth mine had significant
workings and production in the past, while the Companys properties have only
had a small amount of ore produced.  The source of the elevated
contaminants is unclear.  No claims have been made against the Company nor
has anyone asserted that the Company is a responsible party. The Environmental
Protection Agency has listed Eureka, Utah, as a superfund clean-up site.
 While the Companys properties are in the same overall mining district as
Eureka, Utah, the Company does not expect the Eureka, Utah, superfund cleanup
project will expand to include either the Mammoth area or the Companys
properties.  The Company is not aware of any state or federal agencys plan
or intention to do any environmental cleanup or other work to or with any
property located in or near Mammoth or the Companys properties.    42    ITEM
9.  CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.  None; not applicable.      ITEM
9A AND 9A(T).  CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.  Our management evaluated the effectiveness
of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by
this Annual Report.  Based on that evaluation, management concluded that
our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by
the Annual Report were effective such that the information required to be
disclosed by us in our reports filed under the Exchange Act is (i) recorded,
processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
SECs rules and forms and (ii) accumulated and communicated to our management as
appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding disclosure.  A controls
system cannot provide absolute assurance, however, that the objectives of the
controls system are met, and no evaluation of controls can provide absolute
assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within a
company have been detected.  Management's Annual Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting.  Our management is responsible for establishing and
maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Rule 13a-15)(f) under the Exchange Act).  Our internal control system is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation and fair presentation of financial
statements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States.  All internal controls over financial reporting, no matter
how well designed, have inherent limitations, including the possibility of human
error and the circumvention or overriding of controls.  Therefore, even
effective internal control over financial reporting can provide only reasonable,
and not absolute, assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and
presentation. Further, because of changes in conditions, the effectiveness of
internal controls over financial reporting may vary over time. Because of its
inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may also fail to
prevent or detect misstatements. Therefore, even those systems determined to be
effective can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their control
objectives.  Our management, including our chief executive officer and
chief financial officer, assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2008.  In making its assessment of
internal control over financial reporting, management used the criteria set
forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO) in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework.  Based on this
evaluation, our management concluded that, as of December 31, 2008, our internal
control over financial reporting was effective.  This annual report does not include an attestation report
of the Companys independent 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.  Changes in Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting.  There have been no changes in internal control over
financial reporting.    ITEM
9B. OTHER INFORMATION.  None.        43    PART III     ITEM 10.
 DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.  DIRECTORS. Under our Articles and Bylaws,
our directors are elected to serve until the next annual shareholders' meeting
or until their respective successors are elected and qualify. Currently, we have
three directors.  Interim replacements for vacancies on the Board of
Directors are appointed by the remaining, incumbent directors. No director that
was appointed or elected since our inception in March 2004 has declined to
serve, and none has been found unable or unfit to serve.  EXECUTIVE OFFICERS. Our officers hold
office until the meeting of the Board of Directors immediately following the
next annual shareholders' meeting or until removal by the Board of Directors.
Our Bylaws specify that of our officers, there shall be a president, one or more
vice presidents, a secretary and a treasurer. Interim replacements for officers
that have resigned or been terminated are appointed by the Board of
Directors.  The following sets forth pertinent information about each
of our directors and executive officers:    Name
Age
PositionGeorge Christopulos
59
President, Chief Executive
Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Director (Chairman of the
Board)Hugh Coltharp
57
Secretary/Treasurer and
DirectorJack Coombs
82
Director and Vice
President  Mr. CHRISTOPULOS is currently employed by
the Salt Lake County Assessor's office as a commercial real estate appraiser. He
received a B.S. degree in Accounting from the University of Utah in 1974,
graduating cum laude. He has been the chairman of the board and the president of
the Company since 1982. He is NOT currently an officer, director or "control
person" of any other "reporting company."  Mr. COLTHARP is a retired stockbroker,
formerly of Potter Investment Company, a local stock brokerage firm, who
currently buys, sells and restores antique cars. He was a director of our
predecessor or parent company longer than any other director, having first
become a director of that company in 1980. He is NOT currently an officer,
director or "control person" of any other "reporting company."  Mr. COOMBS is a retired Salt Lake City
businessman and private investor. Mr. Coombs graduated from the University of
Utah in 1950 with a B.S. degree in business administration. He has been involved
with other exploratory mining companies in the past. Mr. Coombs served as an
officer and director of a company known as Vis Viva Corporation, now known as
WideBand Corporation, and which currently trades on the Pink Sheets under the
symbol ZWBC.PK. He is NOT currently an officer, director or "control person" of
any other "reporting company."  We do not believe that any of our officers
or directors come within the definition of a "promoter" as defined in Rule 405
of the General Rules and Regulations of the Commission, 17 CFR Section
230.405.  No officer or director, or greater than 5%
shareholder, has been involved, directly or indirectly, in any bankruptcy or
insolvency proceeding of any kind. None is currently involved in any litigation
nor has any been involved in any litigation that would have a bearing on any
such person's fitness or other ability to act and serve as a director or officer
of us.  No arrangement or understanding exists
between or among any of the directors or executive officers and any other person
pursuant to which any director was elected, or any executive officer was
appointed. None of our directors or officers are currently directors or officers
of any other company registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  Each director and executive officer intends
to devote such amount of time as that person's responsibilities require, but
none of them work full-time for us. Also, no family relationship exists among
any of the named directors and executive officers. None  44    of the directors
or officers has ever been employed by a mining company and none has any college
or university degree involving or relating to mining.  BOARD MEETINGS.Pursuant to Nevada
law, the Board of Directors conducted all of its business and approved all
corporate action during fiscal 2008 by the consent of all its members, in the
absence of formal Board meetings and as applicable to the business at hand.  STANDING AUDIT AND COMPENSATION
COMMITTEES; NO OTHER COMMITTEES.The Board of Directors has not established
Compensation or Audit Committees. At present, the Board does not have a
nominating committee, or any other board committees.  We do not believe our
current Plan of Operation requires such, however, if required by Sarbanes-Oxley,
we will form any necessary committee.   COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.Section 16(a) of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934 requires officers, directors, and persons who own more than
ten percent (10%) of an issuer's common stock to file initial reports of
beneficial ownership and to report changes in such ownership with the Commission
and the NASD. These persons are also required to furnish the Company with copies
of all Section 16(a) forms they file. These requirements commenced upon the
effective date of the Company's SB-2/A-7 registration statement. Therefore, as
of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, these persons have been subject
to the requirements of Section 16(a). We have informed these persons of their
obligations under Section 16(a). Further, we have set up a procedure whereby
periodically we will (i) notify these persons of their Section 16(a)
obligations; (ii) review the copies of Forms 3, 4, and 5 that these persons
furnish to the Company; (iii) request written representations from them that no
other transactions were required; and (iv) make a determination that the
pertinent officers, directors and principal shareholders have complied with all
applicable Section 16(a) requirements during the fiscal year.  We are not aware of any reporting persons
who filed late reports or failed to file appropriate reports.  DIRECTOR AND OFFICER LIABILITY
LIMITATION. Our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, limit the personal
liability of directors, officers and the shareholders to the full extent allowed
by Nevada law. This is a risk factor that an investor or potential investor
should consider because it means that a disgruntled or injured investor's
remedies may not be as significant or meaningful as might otherwise be the case
in the absence of these statutory and common law protections.  CODE OF ETHICS.  We have adopted a Code of Ethics which is
attached to this report as Exhibit 14.  See Item 15 of Part IV below.      ITEM
11.  EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION  Compensation of Directors and Executive
Officers  Because our officers and directors are the
same persons, we are discussing both categories of persons together under this
disclosure item. This includes those persons referred to under Item 402 of
Regulation S-K as "Named Executive Officers."  We have paid no remuneration to our
directors or officers, other than the fact that each bought restricted shares
of our stock in August 2004 and in December 2006 at $0.05 per share in order to
provide us with sufficient operating or working capital to file and complete the
Spin-Off transaction and otherwise carry out the terms and conditions of the
Distribution Agreement with Tintic-Utah.  We do NOT have any contracts with or
contractual arrangements for compensation of directors or officers. We also do
NOT pay any monetary fees or other form of cash compensation for their services.
Directors and officers are entitled to receive reimbursement of out-of-pocket
expenses incurred by them on behalf of us. Because none of our officers or
directors has received individual total annual salary and bonus in excess of
$100,000 for any fiscal year, we have NOT included a SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE
under this item describing such compensation as would otherwise be required.
Such compensation, if it had occurred, would include the dollar value of base
salaries and bonus awards, the number and value of stock options granted, and
any other compensation, if any, none of which occurred.  45     No Retirement, Pension or Profit Sharing
Plans  At present, our directors and officers do
NOT receive any award of options, warrants, or stock appreciation rights (SAR's)
for their services. There are no retirement, pension, or profit sharing plans
for the benefit of officers, directors or key employees as of the date of this
filing.   No Stock Incentive or Compensation Plans  We have NOT adopted a stock incentive plan
to provide deferred stock incentives to key employees, if any, and directors,
who contribute significantly to our long- term performance and growth. This does
not mean that we may not do so in the future. If one is established, the board
will be authorized to amend and rescind any rules and regulations relating to
any stock incentive plan as may be necessary for efficient administration of any
such stock incentive plan. Any board action will require a majority vote of the
members of the board.  Three types of awards would likely be
available under any stock incentive plan, if adopted:  * nonqualified stock options or incentive
stock,  * stock appreciation rights and  * restricted stock.  No shares of our common stock have yet been
reserved to be issued under any stock incentive plan.  Restricted Stock  The board may in its discretion award
common stock.  If so, it would have restrictions on its transferability.
Restricted stock issued as part of any stock incentive plan may not be sold,
assigned, transferred, pledged, hypothecated or otherwise disposed of, except by
the laws of descent and distribution, for a period of time as determined by the
board, from the date on which the award is granted. Certificates for restricted
stock will bear an appropriate legend referring to the restrictions. A holder of
restricted stock may exercise all rights of ownership incident to his ownership
including the right to vote and receive dividends, unless the board has imposed
limitations.     ITEM
12.  SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.  The following table sets forth the
beneficial ownership of our common stock with respect each person known to be
the owner of 5% or more of our common capital stock, each director, each
officer, and all executive officers, directors and 5% or greater shareholders of
the Company as a group. As of December 31, 2008, there were 2,109,643 common
capital shares issued and outstanding.   46     Name of Beneficial Owner
Number of Shares of Common Stock
Beneficially* Owned
Percent of Ownership of Common
Stock outstandingGeorge Christopulos
3131 Teton Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah
84109
660,739(2)
31.3%Hugh Coltharp(3)
1478 Roosevelt Avenue
Salt Lake City, Utah
84105
155,361(4)
7.4%Jack Coombs (5)
2581 East 1300 South
Salt Lake City, Utah
84108
359,272(6)
17.0%John Michael Coombs (7)
3098 South Highland Drive, Suite
#323
Salt Lake City, Utah
84106
495,212(8)
23.5%All 5% or more owners, all
directors and all officers as a group (4 persons)
1,670,584
79.2%   * Beneficial ownership is determined in
accordance with the rules and regulations of the Commission and generally
includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. Shares of common
stock issuable upon the exercise of options or warrants currently exercisable,
or exercisable or convertible within 60 days of our year end, are also deemed
outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such
options or warrants but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage
ownership of any other person.  (1) Mr. Christopulos is the president of
the Company and the chairman of the board. He has been president of the Company
since its inception in March 2004.  Mr. Christopulos served as president
and chairman of the board of the Companys predecessor previously known as
Tintic-Utah from approximately 1981 until March 2004.  (2) Of these 660,739 shares, 168,079 were
received in November 2006 by Mr. Christopulos as a stock dividend and, being
registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these shares bear a control
person legend.  The certificates representing the remaining 492,660 shares
bear a standard restrictive legend.  (3) Mr. Coltharp is the secretary/treasurer
of the Company and a director.  He has been secretary/treasurer and a
director of the Company since its inception in March 2004.  Mr. Coltharp
served as secretary/treasurer of the Companys predecessor previously known as
Tintic-Utah from approximately 1981 until March 2004.  (4) Of these 155,361 shares, 17,429 were
received by Mr. Coltharp as a stock dividend and, being registered shares, the
certificate(s) representing these shares bear a control person legend.
 The certificates representing the remaining 137,932 shares bear a standard
restrictive legend.  (5) Mr. Jack Coombs is the vice president
and a director of the Company.  He has been vice president and a director
of the Company since its inception in March 2004.  Mr. Coombs served as
vice president and a director of the Companys predecessor previously known as
Tintic-Utah from approximately 1981 until March 2004.  (6) Of these 359,272 shares, 104,627 were
received in November 2006 by Mr. Coombs as a stock dividend and, being
registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these shares bear a control
person legend.  The certificates representing the remaining 254,645 shares
bear a standard restrictive legend.  This figure of 359,272 shares also
represents or includes 13,329 shares that were held in a securities brokerage
account on the record date of the spin-off, namely, March  5, 2004, and
which were subject to the November 2006 stock dividend.  These 13,329
dividend shares, however, have not as yet been placed in Mr. Jack Coombss
brokerage account because they cannot, at present, be located.  When they
are, or if the posting of a lost  47    instrument bond
is undertaken, they will be placed in such brokerage account and treated as
control shares.  (7) Mr. J. Michael Coombs is an attorney
and has acted as our legal counsel since our inception.  He also acted as
legal counsel to our predecessor, Tintic-Utah, from approximately 1994 until
March 2004 when its name was changed and it engaged in a change of control
transaction with Kiwa.  He is not and never has served as an officer or
director of us or our predecessor, Tintic-Utah.  Mr. J. Michael Coombs is
the son of director and officer, Jack Coombs.  (8) Of these 495,212 shares, 280,449 were
received in November 2006 by Mr. J.M. Coombs as a stock dividend and, being
registered shares, the certificate(s) representing these shares bear a control
person legend.  The certificates representing the remaining 214,763 shares
bear a standard restrictive legend.  This figure of 495,212
shares also represents or includes 1,950 shares that were held in a securities
brokerage account on the record date of the spin-off, namely, March  5,
2004, and which were subject to the November 2006 stock dividend.  These
1,950 dividend shares, however, have not as yet been placed in Mr. J.M. Coombss
brokerage account because they cannot, at present, be located.  When they
are, or if the posting of a lost instrument bond is undertaken, they will be
placed in such brokerage account and treated as control shares.     ITEM
13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE.  Related Transactions.  We have not been a party to any
transaction, or proposed transaction, in which any director, executive officer,
or principal shareholder had or will have a direct or indirect material
interest, where:  (1) the amount involved in the transaction
or series of similar transactions exceeds $60,000; or (2) the person's interest arises solely from the ownership of our
securities, and the person receives no extra or special benefit not shared
equally (pro rata) by all holders of the same class of securities.  Our Board of Directors has not adopted or
approved any policy regarding future transactions with related third parties.
 This is because the Revised Nevada Statutes governing corporations
contains provisions which address and govern these types of issues.  No Parent or Subsidiary.  We have no parent or subsidiary
corporations at the present time which might create related transactions.  Transactions with Promoters and Control
Persons.  During our fiscal year ended December 31,
2008, there were no related transactions between such persons and the Company.
 However, our three
officers and directors, and one shareholder, did, however, loan or advance us a
total of $15,000 in January 2008 to meet our current obligations.  This
amount is or will be carried on our books as a payable.  While our insiders
have in the past contributed money as an equity investment, we decided that this
time the money needed would be loaned or advanced by such persons and we would
not issue additional shares as an equity investment in us.      ITEM
14.  PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES  AUDIT AND NON-AUDIT FEES   Aggregate fees for
professional services rendered for us by Pritchett Siler & Hardy are set
forth below.  The aggregate fees included in the Audit category are fees
billed for the fiscal years for the audit of our annual financial statements and
review of financial statements and statutory and regulatory filings or
engagements.  The aggregate fees included in each of the other categories
are fees billed in the fiscal years.  (All reference to $ in this Annual
Report are to United States dollars.)   48     AUDIT FEES
$
                  7,915
$
                 9,200AUDIT-RELATED FEES
$
                          -
$
                         -TAX FEES
$
                          -
$
                         -ALL OTHER FEES
$
                          -
$
                         -TOTAL
$
                   7,915
$
                  9,200  Audit fees for the
fiscal years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, were for professional services
rendered for the audits of the financial statements of the Company, quarterly
review of the financial statements included in Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q,
consents, and other assistance required to complete the year end audit of the
financial statements.  Audit-Related Fees as of
the fiscal years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 were for assurance and related
services reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of
financial statements and not reported under the caption Audit Fees.  Tax Fees as of the
fiscal years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 were for professional services
related to tax compliance, tax authority audit support and tax planning.  There were no fees that
were classified as All Other Fees as of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2008
and 2007.  As we do not have a
formal audit committee (see end of Item 10 above), the services described above
were not approved by the audit committee under the de minimus exception provided
by Rule 2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) under Regulation S-X.  Further, as we do not have
a formal audit committee, we do not have audit committee pre-approval policies
and procedures.   PART IV.   ITEM
15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES.  Reports on Form 8-K.  None.  Exhibits.  14
         Code of Ethics  31.1       302
Certification of George Christopulos  31.2       302
Certification of Hugh Coltharp  32
         906 Certification of both
George Christopulos and Hugh Coltharp  99.1       Index Map*  99.2
      Property Location Map*  * Exhibits identified with this mark are attached to and
made a part of this document in the form of pdf files.  The following Exhibits are
incorporated by reference as a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K:  3.1
        Articles of Incorporation, which
were filed as an exhibit to our Form SB-2/A registration statement  3.2
        Bylaws, which were filed as an
exhibit to our Form SB-2/A registration statement       49    SIGNATURES  In accordance with the provisions of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules and regulations promulgated
thereunder, Tintic Gold Mining Company has duly caused this Annual Report on
Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  TINTIC GOLD MINING COMPANY,
Issuer  /s/ George P.
Christopulos George P.
Christopulos Chairman of the
Board, President, CEO And Chief
Financial Officer (CFO) Dated: March 19,
2009  /s/Hugh N.
Coltharp Hugh N.
Coltharp Secretary/Treasurer
and director Dated:
 March 19, 2009               50