Greetings and welcome to the USEC third quarter conference call with investors. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Mr. Steven Wingfield, Director of Investor Relations for USEC Inc.

Thank you for joining us for USEC's conference call regarding the third quarter of 2013. With me today are John Welch, President and Chief Executive Officer; John Barpoulis, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Bob Van Namen, Senior Vice President; Phil Sewell, Senior Vice President; and Tracy Mey, Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer. Before turning the call over to John Welch, I'd like to welcome all of our callers as well as those listening in to our webcast. This conference call follows our earnings news release issued yesterday afternoon. That news release is available on many financial websites and our corporate website, usec.com. All of our news releases and SEC filings are also available on our website. A replay of this call will be available on the USEC website. I'd like to remind everyone that certain of the information that we may discuss on this call today may be 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 and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. Finally, the forward-looking information provided today is time-sensitive and is accurate only as of today, November the 5, 2013. This call is the property of USEC. Any redistribution, retransmission or rebroadcast of this call in any form without the expressed written consent of USEC is strictly prohibited. Thank you for your participation. Now I'd like to turn the call over to John Welch.

Good morning and thank you for joining us today. This morning we will be discussing our third quarter results, our progress in demonstrating the commercial cascade of the American Centrifuge Technology and the headway we are making in transitioning the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant back to the DOE. Bottom line upfront, we reported a net loss for the third quarter of $44.3 million compared to net income of $4.5 million in the same quarter last year. For the year-to-date we reported a net loss of $87.2 million compared to a net loss of $116.3 million in the 9 month period of 2012. The net losses for the 2013 periods are due in part to lower SWU deliveries year-over-year. The more significant fact however was the recognition of non-production expenses related to the cessation of enrichment at the Paducah plant in June. The steps we are taking to prepare the Paducah GDP for return to DOE resulted in substantial non-production expenses that are charged directly to cost of sales and are playing a significant role in our financial results in 2013. Without these non-production expenses we would have reported a gross profit for the quarter and year-to-date. In the week since the decision was made in late May to cease enrichment at the plant we have taken steps to prepare facilities for eventual return to DOE. We notified all of our employees of potential lay-offs and we are presently in our second round of work-force reductions. The current round will continue into January and involves approximately 90 employees. We anticipate that additional lay-offs will occur in stages through 2014 depending on our business needs, regulatory requirements and the timing of plans to transition the site back to DOE in a safe and orderly manner. I want to be clear that we…

Thanks, John and good morning everyone. We reported revenue of $304 million for the third quarter, a decrease of $259 million compared to the same quarter of 2012. For the 9 month period revenue was $909 million, a decrease of $550 million. The average invoiced SWU price year-to-date in 2013 was 3% higher compared to the year before, the SWU sales volume was 43% lower in the first 9 months of 2013 compared to the same period last year. As we have noted in recent quarters the contract services segment has become a small revenue contributor following the completion of services to DOE at the former Portsmouth, Ohio plant and sale of our NAC subsidiary in March 2013. In prior periods when we reviewed our cost of sales our 2 largest cost components have historically been electric power and the price we pay Russia to purchase SWU. With the cessation of enrichment at Paducah the cost of power is no longer relevant but non-production expenses are being charged directly to cost of sales. Non-production expenses totaled $48 million and $123 million in the 3 and 9 month period of 2013. These include immediate asset retirement charges for property formerly used in the enrichment process at the Paducah GDP, inventory evaluation adjustments, site expenses including lease turnover activities, power contract losses and accelerated depreciation. Additionally we recorded special charges related to workforce reductions and advisory costs. Overall cost of sales in the third quarter was $334 million, a decrease of $193 million compared to the same quarter last year. For the 9 month period the cost of sales was $973 million, a decrease of $403 million compared to the same period of 2012. The decrease especially after consideration of non-production expenses was due primarily to lower SWU sales volume. We are…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Vladimir Jelisavcic of Bowery Investment.

A question regarding the new Russian contract. What type of physical infrastructure does USEC need to be able to service and operate under that contract?

This is Phil Sewell. We have been operating under the Megatons to Megawatts contract for 20 years now and we have developed the infrastructure necessary to support deliveries from Russia and then transfer to our customers. That same infrastructure will be applied as we move to the new contract with Russia from 2013 to 2022. So we have nothing new to prepare or to build in terms of infrastructure and we intend to implement that contract on the same basis and using the same procedures as we did it in the Megatons to Megawatts contract.

Okay, does that infrastructure include Paducah assets or are there other assets outside of Paducah?

That infrastructure includes, I will say assets throughout the country. It could be at Paducah, it could be other locations within the United States, including locations at fuel fabricators with respect to where the material was delivered and then provided either to fuel fabricators in the United States or fuel fabricators outside the United States. That logistical framework has been in place for quite some time and we just used a multitude of I’ll say locations dependent upon the customer's needs.

Understood. Is it possible to monetize or assign that contract, because it appears as though it’s not really core, not directly related to your initiatives under the ACP project?

I think strategically that one of -- I would like to address the second item first -- is that it is absolutely essential to the transition to American Centrifuge because without production out of the gaseous diffusion plant in Paducah and the American Centrifuge taking a period of time to build and deploy, that transitional supply, which is good through 2022 is really what we are restructuring towards as the interim to get to American Centrifuge.

Great. The business itself is -- so you are saying it’s a necessary source of cash going forward but the business itself appears to be unrelated?

One of the good things it does is, it maintains a position for us in the market and it maintains relationships with our customers which is absolutely critical.

And Vlad since privatization we have maintained at least 2 sources of enrichment with our Paducah production and historically the Megatons to Megawatts program. Again strategically we see this Russian supply as being very important and a very important complement for again the work that we are doing toward ACP deployment.

Understood. Regarding your statement about restructuring your balance sheet what options do you have available to mitigate and control various legacy employee benefits related liabilities at Paducah?

I guess, Vlad I’ll answer that in a couple of ways. One is from a -- restructuring takes many forms and so I won’t get into the broad swap that, that can conclude. We will note that we do have the October 2014 maturity of our convertible notes that we have out there. But with respect to our Paducah transition I would say we are stepping back to evaluate all of our benefits and how we proceed along those lines as frankly it seems that many companies are, across the country given the change in evolution and benefits across the board. Recall that we did for our salary workers we did freeze our pension in the third quarter as well.

Well, if there is no more questions operator, I think we’ll conclude today’s call.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. And thank you for your participation.