Good day and welcome everyone to the USEC Inc. Fourth Quarter 2008 Earnings Results Conference Call. This call is being recorded. With us today from the company is Mr. John Welch, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Mr. Steven Wingfield, the Director of Investor Relations. Management will make opening remarks, which will be followed by a question-and-answer period. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to Mr. Steve Wingfield. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning. Thank you for joining us for USEC’s conference call on the fourth quarter and full year 2008, which ended December 31 2008. With me today are, John Welch, President and Chief Executive Officer; John Barpoulis, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Phil Sewell, Senior Vice President, Bob Van Namen, Senior Vice President; and Tracy Mey, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer. Before turning the call over to John Welch, I want to welcome all of our callers, as well as those listening to our webcast via the Internet. This conference call follows our earnings news release issued yesterday after the markets closed. That news release is available on many financial websites, as well as our corporate website usec.com. I want to inform all of our listeners that our news releases and SEC filings, including our 10-K, 10-Qs, and 8-Ks, are available on our website. We expect to file our annual report on Form 10-K later today. A replay of this call also will be available later this morning on the USEC website. I’d like to remind everyone that certain of the information that we may discuss on this call today maybe considered forward-looking information that involves risk and uncertainty, including assumptions about the future performance of USEC. Our actual results may differ materially from those in our forward-looking statements. Additional information concerning factors that could cause actual results to materially differ from those in our forward-looking statements is contained in our filings with the SEC, including our annual report on Form 10-K. Finally, the forward-looking information provided today is time-sensitive and is accurate only as of today, February 26, 2009. This call is the property of USEC. Any redistribution, retransmission or re-broadcast of this call in any form without the expressed written consent of USEC is strictly prohibited. Thanks for your participation, and now I would like to turn the call over to John.

Good morning to you all and thank you for joining us to discuss our 2008 results. We pre-announced our results early in February and so you are likely aware that we had a better than expected fourth quarter which in turn pushed our net income for the year above the range in our guidance. Taking a look at the bottom line, we earned $25.1 million in the fourth quarter matching the net income in the same quarter last year. For the full year, we earned $48.7 million compared to $96.6 in the same period of last year. Revenue tracked our expectations for the year. As we noted throughout 2008, our sales volume was substantially lower in 2008 than in 2007. And as we have also noted we expect 2009 sales volume to be at least as good as 2007, a year when we set a record for revenue and volume. Majority of the reactors served by USEC are refueled on an 18 to 24 month cycle, so we are seeing the delivery scheduled in 2009 for many customers who refueled and purchased fuel from us in 2007. We provided guidance for 2009 in the earnings release that went out yesterday after the markets closed. John Barpoulis, will go into more detail about those guidance during his remarks, but I would like to hit on a few of the highlights of that guidance. We expect a strong uptick in revenue as a result of a 40% increase in SWU sales volume. We also expect the average price for SWU build to customer to increase 10%. We see total revenue coming in a range of $2.2 billion to $2.5 billion, with approximately $1.8 billion coming from the sale of SWU. Revenue from government services are expected to be relatively flat year-over-year. Uranium…

Thanks John, and good morning everyone. We want to get to your questions and since we expect to issue our 10-K report later today I will keep my report to the highlights. I’ll also give some color to our results for the fourth quarter since the 10-K is more focused on the full year. Starting at the top line for the quarter, revenue was $432 million, a decrease of 30% or $185 million over the same quarter of last year. As it’s the norm, SWU sales made up the majority of revenue at $314. SWU sales in the fourth quarter reflected a 45% decline in sales volume, but a 6% increase in the average price billed to customers. The good news here is that we are seeing the higher prices in contracts we signed in recent years being part of a mix of delivery. We expect that trend to continue in 2009 as average SWU prices billed to customers are anticipated to increase by approximately 10% year-over-year. Uranium revenue was $63 million, which was an increase of more than 100% over the same quarter last year. This is a good example of the variability of our sales quarter-to-quarter. In the third quarter of 2008, uranium revenue was about half that reported in the quarter of 2007. Uranium sales volume was down 37%, but the average price billed to customers was up by more than 200%. Nonetheless, we saw uranium prices dropped during the second half of 2008, along with other energy commodities due to the selling by financial players and recessionary concerns. Although we believe there is solid demand for uranium over the medium-to-long-term, uranium prices are well below where they were a year ago. We will seek to be opportunistic in placing the uranium we obtain from underfeeding into…

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) We’ll go first to Laurence Alexander of Jefferies. Laurence Alexander – Jefferies: Good morning.

Good morning Laurence. Laurence Alexander – Jefferies: I guess first of all, given the historical lumpiness quarter-by-quarter in your business, how many months of liquidity are you comfortable with before you start to changing your spending plans?

Laurence, I think we are constantly looking at our liquidity capabilities, resources, as well as our expected spending profile. I think our expectation in our plan is to always ensure that we have sufficient liquidity for our ongoing business. And so that, that’s clearly our priority. I couldn’t tell you a specific number of month horizon, I can just tell you that we are ensuring that we’re capable of meeting that. Laurence Alexander – Jefferies: And then how much if you ratcheted back your spending to the minimum level that you identified, what would that level be on a run rate basis?

I think that is indicated I think in our release earlier in the month. We are now in detailed discussion with our suppliers, looking at the overall spending profile with a view in mind of when funding could be available from DOE. We expect that that timeframe changes very much a function of our discussions with DOE and their progress in reviewing our application, we would need to begin to further ratchet down our spending profile. And so, again I wouldn’t give you a dollar threshold, but it’s something that will be a function of the horizon to get to DOE Loan Guarantee funding. Laurence Alexander – Jefferies: And then have the DEO given any color on and how sort of delays in your schedule affects their perspective on the program? Or how they look at your funding request versus other applicants?

No I think that they have in the course of our various conversations, the discussions have been very constructive. They’ve provided us with constructed feedback and I would characterize it as a dialog it’s in parallel with any other discussions that they may be having. Laurence Alexander – Jefferies: Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

We will go next to Roger Read of Natixis Bleichroeder. Roger Reed – Natiexis Bleichroeder: Hey, good morning gentlemen.

Good morning Roger.

Good morning Roger. Roger Reed – Natiexis Bleichroeder: I guess kind of following-up on Laurence’s question there, you indicate you are optimistic that DOE might have something moving forward. I guess, late spring I think I wrote down, is there a - I don’t know is there an announcement that we could watch or commentary we could watch on DOE that would lead us to believe that that is a more or less likely event. I mean, it’s certainly been much more vocal over the last, lets say two months and probably we heard in the prior 12 months, but I just wondered if there is any sort of hurdles or anything we should look for here?

Yeah this is John. I think certainly we are encouraged by Secretary Chu’s comments that they would like to start making announcements in April. I mean, we need to remember that in December of 2007, there were 16 renewable projects that were selected. None of those have been finalized yet and then of course we’re clearly focused on the second phase with the Loan Guarantee Program, which was our nuclear projects both fuel cycle as well as the reactor projects. I think you can look that it would follow a three-phase type of approach. There would be a selection, which then is followed by a period of getting to a conditional commitment and then there is a third phase, which would be the detailed final negotiations leading up to closing. That’s expected to be a multiple month timeframe, but certainly the first hurdle you would expect to see and the case of the nuclear projects would be selection on the case of renewable projects you would probably hear an announcement more along the lines of conditional commitment and we certainly are hoping that his projection of doing that mid later or part of April would hold true. Roger Reed – Natiexis Bleichroeder : Okay. So, in terms of how we should consider your spending on ACP in 2009, and this process of getting the DOE to commit to actually provide funding. I mean, it’s probably we are probably looking at delay that takes most of 2009. You think that’s a reasonable assumption on our part?

I mean, I think I certainly would hope that it's not that long. I think that we have been given indications that once they get to a selection point, that the process is several months, but we would hope it does not take that long. John, anything else you want to add to that?

No, I think to the extent that there is a view or we have a view as we get more information, clearly we’ll be providing that as I’m sure DOE will, as well as they move forward in the steps in the process. Again, the steps in the process selection, commitment, and then closing on alone itself with funding. And so those are the three concrete steps that we would look toward and any announcements by DOE on that as well. Roger Reed – Natiexis Bleichroeder: Okay, thank you. That’s helpful. I guess, move to the operational side, we saw the 8-K on the Russian agreement the other day, talked a little bit about here on the call. As we look at Russian prices 2008 up 11% roughly the same level in 2009. As I look to 10, 11, 12 as the agreement runs its course, should I consider price increases or cost increases to you, obviously considerably less than that 11%, about the same, or it’s just going to depend based on what the markers and indexes tell us?

This is Phil Sewell. The new agreement with the Russians represents a new pricing methodology that really provides more stability with respect to future pricing. And with that stability, we’re looking for a moderation of the rate of increase in prices under that contract. And the Russians were looking for stability in terms of flow of income, and payments to them and because of that, we have a recent agreement with them that represents, I’ll say, pricing that is more consistent with the pricing in the marketplace with customers. And therefore, the moderation will be consistent with what we’re seeing today in our sales contracts and throughout the future.

Okay, that’s kind of what I thought, just want to make sure. And then my final question, on the TVA power gone through the coal is the big driver there along with the drought conditions, other than watching the weather channel for rain, is there any particular coal price that you think is a sort of a trigger point where we could say, coal prices dropped below this then you are kind of back to the base cost as opposed to base plus a premium?

Sure, Bob Van Namen here. A couple of things to watch out for one is, you don’t necessarily look for rainfall as much as you do run off and I’ve learned in no uncertain terms the difference because, given the fact that TVA has been through a drought for several years, the ground is still fairly dry. They have to get a enough range to really soak into the ground as well as being able to replenish the reservoir. So, keep an eye on both those factors. On the coal subject, obviously coal rose and stuck up at higher prices much longer than we saw oil and natural gas. It has definitely started to come back down, but TVA still does have a large backlog of coal contracts that are substantially below even where the market price is today. So, we are looking for them to judiciously replenish their backlog of coal contracts and do so at the market optimum time, we do continue to see because coal prices do continue to stick up above historical levels, if there will still be some upward pressure on prices as they roll off their coal, but again we are seeing that offset by hopefully the return of hydro prices, their operations on their nuclear units and the fact that purchased power is coming down as natural gas prices come down.

Okay, that's helpful. Thank you.

We will go next to Gabriela Bis of Goldman Sachs. Gabriela Bis – Goldman Sachs: Good morning

Hi, Gabby.

Good morning. Gabriela Bis – Goldman Sachs: Can you provide us a little bit of guidance on how you expect the breakdown of quarterly revenues for 2009, do you expected to be more primarily a front-end loaded, back-end loaded, anything would be helpful?

I know it’s something that we recognize that our investors and analysts would like to get a better sense of the quarterly information, but again due to the lumpiness, on the whole we do not provide specifics on a quarterly basis and we also recognize our customers do modify the timing of the deliveries. I would say that again not providing any quantitative guidance. I think that we are seeking and hoping that the delivery schedule is more stable over the year and as opposed to very either volatile or spotty quarters. That’s an objective, but again I won’t provide a quantitative guidance for you. Gabriela Bis – Goldman Sachs: Okay, thank you.

Sure. Gabriela Bis – Goldman Sachs: And can you provide us with a refresher on the details surrounding the DOE Loan Guarantee and how you expect the program will pan out? Is it going to be direct financing from the government? Do you still expect that only one project will be chosen for the full amount, and if you could just give us a little refresher that be great?

Sure, with respect to process, we have been meeting with the Loan Guarantee Program staff regularly for month. We had submitted our parts one and parts two of our application in July and August of last year. The deadlines for those were September and December of last year and so we have provide our applications well ahead of the deadline. Once the application was in, we began to have a conversation with DOE staffs and well I can’t really disclose the content of this discussions, and again those discussions I think have been constructive. We receive constructive feedback from the Loan Guarantee Office. The staff is evaluating not only our projects, obviously our competing bid, as well as the nuclear power plant projects and alternative energy projects. So they’ve got a full play. With respect to the steps in the process, the first step would be a selection of a project under the solicitation, the second step would be, after selection, we would expect - one would expect we are negotiating with the Loan Guarantee staff on a conditional commitment, and so the next step would be a commitment a formal commitment. And then, between the commitment and final closing on the loan, obviously at that point you are putting in place all of the necessary documentation to get to closing. So those are the three steps. With respect to, whether, who actually does the financing, or the program has evolved, so that it is, I wouldn’t call just a Loan Guarantee Program anymore, the funding would be from the Department of Treasury in our case, in the case of someone who is seeking the level of that guarantee that we are. So seeking a that 100% of our debt is guaranteed, the guarantor technically is the Department of Energy, but the Department of Treasury would be the lender. Last is, with respect to whether they would award all 2 billion or something less to a project, we have applied for 2 billion, because that is the amount that we need from that standpoint and so we do not expect that there would be a reduced amount, on the other hand, it’s a function of what DOE will actually do. John?

Yeah, the only thing I would add to that Gabriela is, the size and cost of the project were designed to meet the policy objectives of Department of Energy, and the Energy Policy Act 2005 that established the Loan Guarantee Program. Without the full $2 billion we’d have to take a very hard look at the impacts of the reduced funding on the project and including the basic economics of the projects itself. Gabriela Bis – Goldman Sachs: Great. Thank you, and one little detailed question. Did you guys provide any tax guidance for 2009 as it’s similar to '08 around 30% at there?

We encourage people and our guidance to use the statutory levels and obviously as we go through the year to the extent that changes we would update. Gabriela Bis – Goldman Sachs: Great. Thank you very much.

We’ll go to Suzanna Trostdorf of Swiss Re Suzanna Trostdorf – Swiss Re: Good morning.

Good morning. Suzanna Trostdorf – Swiss Re: I have basically three questions. One is a followup question to make sure my understanding is correct. You mentioned in terms of the DOE plan approval, those three phases and then you mentioned the timing indication end or later part of April, can you reconfirm for which phase it was, whether it’s for the selection or you already think there would be an announcement for the conditional commitment?

The timing that John had outlined with respect to the end of April is not with respect to our project, it is with respect to Secretary Chu’s announcements of leaking to announce and that would be selections we believe at the end of April, but again I would look to his specific wordings on what that’s said. Suzanna Trostdorf – Swiss Re: Okay. Thank you. The second question relates to the pension liabilities. I just noted on the balance sheet that they increased by $200 million from quarter-to-quarter. Can you give us a little bit more color around that and also get us some insight of how much or if there any unfunded and you mentioned that you need to fund another $15 million, but can you provide us a bit more color around it? And also in terms of cost increases for 2009, you gave us some indication, but what do we expect thereafter?

As with many companies, that has defined benefit plans, we were not unaffected by the events of the fourth quarter of 2008 and continued volatility in the stock markets. We have conservatively invested our pension assets, but again those did see declines. The balance sheet number that you mentioned is a shift from a net pension asset to a net pension liability. In our guidance we did outlined that the, the increase in expense is the GAAP side, the increase in funding in 2009 was about $15 million. And so that is the level that we will expect for 2009. Again the funding level is a function of the funding requirements under the Pension Protection Act of 2006 as well IRS guidelines, and so will be following those. With respect to - we provide our guidance for one year with respect to anything further out, very much a function of future years, but also a function of the performance of our asset investments. So, there is a considerable amount of detail on our pensions that will be provided in the 10-K, rather than getting into selective numbers here. I would encourage you to take a look at the footnotes. Suzanna Trostdorf – Swiss Re: And the final question is regarding the revolving credit facility, the 400 million, which I believe expires in August 2010. It includes some financial covenants. Now given to the situation at you will, I think in the front-end of this year continue to invest in the ACP, for the ACP program to what extent are you coming to financial levels, which might hit covenants?

There are – there is one financial covenants. That covenants only kicks in when we exceed certain availability thresholds or usage thresholds. And so, we do not - have not met those thresholds, and now at this point or previously. Again, there is a considerable amount of detail - additional detail in our 10-K with respect to the credit facility and the various levels that we will certainly be keeping an eye on with respect to availability. And I would again encourage you to take a look at those. Suzanna Trostdorf – Swiss Re: Can I just followup on the financial covenants, which is mentioned, or it was mentioned before in your filings, but was never defined in terms of what level it is? Can you provide some more in sight, what – is this the minimum that growth covenant or leverage covenants?

I would encourage you - actually the credit facility itself is a filed document. And so to the extent that you would like to take a look at the specific definitions around that financial covenants to look at, it is a coverage, a debt service coverage, covenant. Suzanna Trostdorf – Swiss Re: Thank you, very much.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

At this time, there are no other questions in the queue. I will turn the conference back to Mr. John Welch for any additional remarks.

Well, thank you for your questions this morning. We have made substantial progress on our project during 2008. And we are clearly at an inflection point regarding the future of nuclear power in the United States and we are attempting lead that effort to reestablishing, the manufacturing infrastructure for our industry. We are actively engaged with DOE regarding the Loan Guarantee Program and we are cautiously optimistic based on recent actions and statements by Secretary Chu. As we move forward, the American Centrifuge Project, we are also keeping a sharp focus on our current operations. We have a vision for delivering long-term shareholder value, and we are focused on executing that plan. Thank you for your interest and investment in USEC and have a good day.

That concludes today’s conference call. We thank you for your participation. You may disconnect at this time.