Deborah Pawlowski – IR Dave Clark – President, CEO Tom Ehrlich – CFO Rick Van Horn – EVP, COO

Peter Homans – Parkman Jimmy Gilbert – Rice Voelker Jack Salzman – King Point David Snow – Energy Equity

Greetings and welcome to the Uranium Resources Incorporated fourth quarter and year end 2007 earnings release conference call. (Operator instructions). It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Ms. Deborah Pawlowski, Investor Relations for Uranium Resources. Thank you Ms. Pawlowski, you may begin.

Thank you Manny and good afternoon everyone. We certainly appreciate your time and interest in Uranium Resources. On the call today we have President and CEO Dave Clark, Tom Ehrlich the Chief Financial Officer and Rick Van Horn, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Dave and Tom are going to review the year end results and update you on the company and we’ll follow with a Q&A. If you don’t have the press release discussing our financial results, you should be able to get it on our website at uraniumresources.com. As you are aware, we may make some forward looking statements during the formal presentation and the Q&A portion of the teleconference. Statements apply to future events which are subject to risks and uncertainties as well as other factors that could cause the actual results to differ materially from where we are today. These factors are outlined in our earnings release as well as in documents filed by the company with the Securities and Exchange Commission and you can find them at our website or the SEC’s website which is sec.gov. Please review our forward looking statements in conjunction with these precautionary factors. With that, let me turn it over to Dave to begin the discussion.

Thanks Debbie and good afternoon everybody. Thanks again for your interest and time in, with this call and your interest in the company. I especially want to thank many of my Irish brothers that are out there that are delaying their celebration of St. Patrick’s Day to actually listen to this. We sent out the K this morning and the press release and there’s a lot of information there that I think is going to take a lot of time and effort for people to absorb. But I want to do is give you an overview with three major headings of hopefully put our company and our strategy in proper perspective for you. And I’d talk about first I’m going to talk about market observations and particularly something that happened last week that has turned me very bullish on uranium. Second I’d like to talk about positive developments we’re seeing in Texas that I believe will help us realize our goal longer term to produce a million to 2 million pounds per year and third I want to talk about some of our progress we’re making in New Mexico which I think will lead to the first production in New Mexico in the next couple of years since 1999 and will leave us in as a leader in that state that I think has the potential to produce 15-20 million pounds per year. So everything I’m going to discuss really all comes together in the form of our strategic goals and our strategic plan which is to be a 10 million pound producer by 2014 and to build our reserve base up to 2-300 million pounds of uranium. And as always it’s not just a plan that’s important but how we plan to get there and that’s kind of what…

Thanks Dave. I’ll be going over our production, our sales, costs that we’ve incurred, other financial highlights for both the year ended 2007 and the fourth quarter of 07. Starting with production, we had just over 68,000 pounds that were produced in the fourth quarter, the bulk of which or 60,000 pounds came from Kingsville, the balance was produced from Vasquez. This compares to about 104,000 pounds that we produced in the third quarter of 07. Because of the reduced production that we saw in the fourth quarter, our production costs rose into the $45 a pound range with operating costs in the mid 30’s, depreciation and depletion roughly $11.25 a pound. Production costs for the third quarter were in the $28-$29 a pound range. The production change we saw in the fourth quarter compared to the Q307 resulted again from the natural decline of the well fields that we’ve had on and the delay in timing from bringing on new well fields. On the bright side, at the end of December of 07 we did bring on a new well field at Kingsville, we brought on another well field, this one at Vasquez in February of 08 and we are planning on bringing on another well field with Kingsville expected before the end of this month. So we’re bringing some of those new ones on to replace some of the well fields that have been on for an extended period. Our annuals costs for 2007 were $32.61 a pound for the nearly 417,000 pounds we produced. Our operating costs were in the $18.00 a pound range, DD&A was around $14.60. These compare to our production costs in 06 for the full year of around $46.50 a pound for the roughly 260,000 pounds we produced. At year end 07, we…

Operator, we can take questions now.

(Operator instructions). Our first question comes from Peter Homans with Parkman, please proceed with your question. Peter Homans – Parkman: I have two sort of single word answer type question and one other. Where is contract to the extent that the contract deals are being made versus spot? And my understanding as a non lawyer is that the only court that can overrule a Supreme Court ruling is the Supreme Court itself. The EPA definition of Indian country which basically sent the case back to the 10th Circuit whose ruling the [Venity] case unanimously overruled in 98, flies in the face of the 98 ruling. It seems to be given the ability of lower courts, the inability of lower courts to overrule the Supreme, there’s no way that the 10th Circuit can affirm the EPA definition of Indian country. Is that your view? And final question is even though the governor did veto the legislation of the $0.50, am I correct in believing there’s nothing impeding you or the industry from negotiating directly with the Navajos absent any legislation once this study is done and when would that be done? A higher price which would be acceptable to them and they could without any legislation drop the moratorium.

Let me go back to your first question was between spot and long term, I didn’t quite catch that.

Are you asking Peter what our current selling price that we’re getting now or? Peter Homans – Parkman: No, sort of market wide, not just you guys but sort of wide, is there a generic or industry wide contract price per pound which is different than spot and what is that?

The long term price is $95 and all I can tell you from my market experience there’s very few contracts that are the same, they’re all different. Peter Homans – Parkman: Okay, but long term is something on the order of $20 above where spot is?

That is correct. And that is either straight base escalated contracts of which apparently is in vogue also is using a base escalated component and a market related component. Peter Homans – Parkman: Right, okay.

As to your second on the Supreme Court, that’s my understanding as well. The Supreme Court will hear cases, the 60-70 cases out of 8,000 that comes in basically on constitutional issues. And whether they want to expand this, certainly if it comes to then and they’re going to overturn it they will hear it. Peter Homans – Parkman: Well, but, but, but the 10th Circuit ruled in 96 the rule that made this six part definition of Indian Country which the 98 Supreme Court ruling unanimously overturned. The EPA used the 10th Circuit 96 definition. So if the 10th Circuit gets it back, wouldn’t they in order to rule in favor of the EPA have to be overruling the Supreme Court and my understanding is that the only court that can overrule the Supreme Court is the Supreme Court itself.

That’s correct but I’m not a lawyer but generally things that get there you grey them up just enough so it is a slightly different interpretation. The Supreme Court can certainly say there is no difference here, this is what it is. Peter Homans – Parkman: Okay and then when is the study…

The study will be done by the end of April is my understanding. It does not preclude and is not being done just for the Navajo, its being done from a statewide basis again, a grass roots up effort to bring this industry back to the state. Peter Homans – Parkman: But there is nothing, you don’t need legislation to negotiate with the Navajos with respect to dropping their moratorium if you were to come up with a higher price after the study.

No we don’t but I think it is what helps bring more people on board, the fact that we’re engaged with the legislature to help resolve this issue, gain support and the more support there is, that includes the conventional milling itself. [Overlay]. Peter Homans – Parkman: So you would be inclined to try and negotiate with the Navajos without having legislation in hand?

Correct, that was not the reason for backing the legislation but it certainly helps. Peter Homans – Parkman: Okay, thank you.

Thank you our next question comes from Jimmy Gilbert with Rice Voelker, please proceed with your question. Jimmy Gilbert – Rice Voelker: Hey it’s Jimmy Gilbert, Dave, how are you?

Hi Jimmy, how are you doing? Jimmy Gilbert – Rice Voelker: I am fine. I noticed that you gave a number for in place mineralized material as new ISR sighted Ambrosia Lake at 2.4 million pounds but I didn’t see a number in the press release for the OSO project you planned to reopen at Ambrosia Lake. Do you have a number there and also what was it producing prior to it being shut down?

Well there’s a separation here, we have sections where we own the gold mines. The process was done by both Rio Algom and Home Stake in the 90’s, so there’s not just our sections, certainly it’s something that can be extended with the acquisition of Rio Algom but we’d only be looking at our two sections, what we know we can get out of there and an additional section after closing with [Ramel]. Jimmy Gilbert – Rice Voelker: Okay thank you very much.

I’m not sure that’s a total answer to your question, again there’s a lot of sections, I think it’s an eight mile trend. You know Rick you might want to elaborate on that.

Most of the 300 plus million pounds that came out of the district came out of the Ambrosia Lake area and there’s a trend that Rio Algom holds but we also have a checkerboard of our Santa Fe lands in the middle of this. That are our own sections and the two sections in particular produce 50 million pounds between the two of them. They consist now of old open stopes, they are flooded and that’s how the open stope bleach works. Estimating the reserve on these is almost impossible however. Jimmy Gilbert – Rice Voelker: Okay and could you just kind of talk just for a second, Rick, I didn’t realize you were there, could you talk for a little bit about the open stope process and how that works? I mean I’ve never heard of that before so I just wanted, maybe you could tell me a little bit about it.

The uranium in the mines contains or excuse me the water in the mines contains uranium and basically what we do is we pump the water out of the mine, we run it over resin, much like we do in an ISR process and recover the uranium and then return the water back to the mines. And so well we’re doing is recovering the uranium that is basically in the waters in the old workings already and in fact what we’re doing is we’re cleaning it up, but we’re recovering uranium as we go. The process on service is basically the same as ISR. Jimmy Gilbert – Rice Voelker: Okay, alright well thank you very much guys, that answers my questions.

Thank you our next question comes from Jack Salzman with Kings Point, please proceed with your question. Jack Salzman – King Point: Thank you, hi guys. I wonder if you could discuss a little bit about the needs on cash flow if you expect to be cash flow positive this year ex-ing out the acquisition and a little bit of how you plan on financing this acquisition if you have a certain amount of dilution in mind that kind of thought process, thanks.

We’re working on all fronts so stripping out the Rio Algom acquisition is, we believe we’re going to close that and I’m not sure we’ve looked at it without doing that. So we’re building up the expense to take over this company and run this company once we acquire it. From that aspect we’re not building cash we’re investing our cash. That would include the Rio Algom acquisition, it would include acquisitions in Texas as well. So as the operations generate cash we have been spending it. I’m not sure if that fully answers your questions or not, if you’re still there. Jack Salzman – King Point: Yeah, I guess I’m curious if you can give us an order of magnitude and what you guys expect in terms of cash flow going in, cash flow going out, financing or dilution if you’re looking at equity, if you have something in mind in terms of what the overall total impact will be this year?

Part of what we’re looking at is, I think I got a better feeling for your question, as we’ve said since we announced this acquisition, there is a lot of interest in New Mexico with other companies that also need this mill. We are in active negotiations with them. And it’s what can we do with them not only for helping us finance the purchase of the mill but also financing the next year or two for gaining an operating license for the mill. So there’s two things we’re looking for right now, the cash we need to generate to close this deal and to advance these assets. So there’s two major parts, is what can we do and what will that cost to work with other companies and there’s a strategic and tactical consideration there. And then what is available and what can be done in financing and it’s working the two against each other. And that’s all taking place at the same time. Jack Salzman – King Point: Okay, thanks.

(Operator instructions). Our next question comes from David Snow with Energy Equity, please proceed with your question. David Snow – Energy Equity: Yes, good morning or good afternoon. I’m trying to find on my desk which is always an impossibility and article that indicated that all the pressure vessels in the world are coming from one plant in Japan, an old sword factory that made cannons and is the only one that can make these single piece pressure walls and I’m wondering if the Chinese are going to not use pressure vessels or what? See how are they going to get around that constraint?

Well the pressure vessel is what the reactor is, so it’s not a containment vessel, it’s a pressure vessel so that is something that you need. And that is something that has been one of the choke points that people have been looking at. I know some of you who watch utilities have been buying these central pieces for reactors as they haven’t ordered yet in anticipation that they will and they just want to be in line for this. I think my main point is the way I see it is once there’s sufficient demand for that you build that infrastructure to build the pressure vessels and everything else. David Snow – Energy Equity: I’m seeing in the article it would take five years and if these people are hoping to get 60,000 gigawatts by you know whenever 2020, it’s pretty difficult unless it’s a different design of reactors that they’re talking about.

It’s not a different design but it’s also, I mean they’re buying from the French, they’re buying from the Russians, they’re building their own. The Chinese method in the past is buy enough from West until they figure out the technology themselves and they go for technology transfer and then they’ll build their own. I don’t think long term this 3-600 megawatts long term that they could essentially buy, they’re going to all buy it from us, they’re going to build their own. David Snow – Energy Equity: Alright and I’m wondering if you could give me the, I thought old stope bleaching was a marginal recovery process and how many pounds per ton do you get out of that or what type of a recovery do you get there versus ISR and what kind of cost per pound is it versus ISR, might be another way to look at it.

It was Rio Algom ran there was about through 1999 when prices dropped below $10, so that gives you a relative idea of what the, it was just the cash cost. All they were doing was circulating water, you get a certain parts per million from the water you circulate and bring to the surface and you run it over resin. As long as that is economic you do it. David Snow – Energy Equity: Is there any way to quantify the amount of recovery you get in terms of pounds for the effort? Is it a very small amount or what?

It is, I mean they were producing on the order of 2-300,000 pounds per year for most of the 90’s. David Snow – Energy Equity: Okay so that was from a number of sections I guess?

Correct and elaborate on this Rick that you know you work on different shafts, different vent holes, whatever and you produce from each one of those as long as it’s got a high enough concentration and is economic.

Then you move onto the next.

Thank you our next question from fro Peter Homans with Parkman, please proceed with your question. Peter Homans – Parkman: Yes, just, Dave, you and I both know a consultant who consults with the [unintelligible] industry and [unintelligible] living in France and that person’s view of why the spot market became soft in the latter quarter of last year was that purchasing manager’s for utilities basically get walking around money at the beginning of every year and that allows them to respond to auctions that might you know be announced one day and be effective five days later. But that by September, October that walking around money gets used up and so they have to, they still buy but that have to go and get Board approval so they can’t respond to auctions therefore there are fewer people at auctions. But they should have all reloaded if that analysis is correct at the beginning of this year. Do you agree with that analysis as to why spot started to fall off last year and is it true that the purchasing managers for the utilities are in a position of having walking around money again and should that lead to more people at auctions and possibly more higher prices?

Knowing the utility budgeting process they will put in there what they expect to purchase during the year and question whether they buy it as part of a long term contract or spot purchases is a decision they make through the year. I think when you get to the third quarter that’s when the activity traditionally has dropped off because people particularly in Europe go on summer vacation and you get that strengthening in the fall. But I think ultimately the underlying part at least from the utility part of the demand side is what is their uncovered demand, what do they need to purchase. They have covered a lot of that under long term contracts than spot purchases over the last several years. So the total demand by utilities I think is down. That simply makes it much more important, the question what is traders buying, what are the physical guys buying, what are producers buying. And when the total volume is down it’s not a question of how much demand is or how much supply is, it is the relative balance between the two and at certain period of times it can get illiquid. I think the market on the way up got way overextended, it was an extreme sellers market, sellers were actually afraid to sell because they didn’t want to have a delivery three months down the road way below market and then when it rolled over and turned down, buyers are the same way. Peter Homans – Parkman: Okay and how do you see demand overall utility demand next year versus this year if you had, I know there’s no crystal ball but in conversations you must have gotten some anecdotal sense.

I think and it’s confirmed by what UX, you know they put out an uncovered demand related to a survey of utilities and what’s their uncovered demand, I think the utility view, especially US utilities is similar to the industry price view, which it will stay high for the next several years and then drop. So when you get out beyond the next couple of years, a lot of US utilities become uncovered, because they expect the price to drop, why contract now when it will go down? Peter Homans – Parkman: Uncovered, meaning not contracted, okay.

That’s correct. And as I’ve said often, markets prove the majority wrong the majority of the time and I think the consensus view is the opposite of the way it seems to be playing out. Peter Homans – Parkman: Right, okay thank you.

Thank you, we have a follow up question from David Snow with Energy Equity, please proceed with your question. David Snow – Energy Equity: Yeah, hi, I guess you had talks with the Indians in Washington last summer is that progress of sorts of ending the Indian talk ban and does that mean that you’re inching forward in that you’re able to open a dialogue with them at this point or and can you tell us anything about what transpired?

I can’t give you great detail. I mean part o the Navajo ban is you’re not allowed to talk with uranium companies if you’re a Navajo, on the reservation certainly as a member of the Navajo government. We respect that. So it’s for us it’s a matter of finding avenues of communication. We’ve had direct contact with the Navajo on several issues, so we see openings there. Again I think their issue is still about safety, we need to demonstrate that, we’re working on that front by everything else we’re doing in the state. So I’m encouraged. You know a year ago, when I got into this position I was talking about you know finding a way for a negotiated settlement versus legal only means and I think we’ve now had the team in place where that’s now personified and we’re moving forward and I’m very satisfied with the direction we’ve taken and the progress we’ve made and beyond that I’m not going to get into details. David Snow – Energy Equity: Wonderful, now is the closing obligation 110 plus 35 in the prepaid up front for reclamation?

Correct. David Snow – Energy Equity: Okay and then when you mentioned 2-300,000 pounds a year by Rio, you’re going to do the same amount of sections or less sections? How would you compare in terms of that type of number?

We have a couple of sections we know we can do that immediately. As far as how long we can do it would depend on whether we close the Rio Algom deal or not because they have again mines in the same area that would use the same process. David Snow – Energy Equity: So it could go on for a number of years if you close the deal at that level I guess?

Yes. David Snow – Energy Equity: Okay and then I guess, well okay that’s it. I very much appreciate it.

Thank you, I would now like to turn the floor back over to David Clark for any closing comments.

Again, thank you for your time and interest in the company. Hopefully we answered your questions. Again there was a lot of information in the 10K that will take time to absorb so I’m sure Debbie will appreciate that if you have questions, give her a call, if I can help she’ll put you in contact with me. So again, thank you for your interest and have a good day, thanks.

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