Uranium Resources, Inc. (URRE)
Q2 2010 Earnings Call Transcript
August 9, 2010 11:00 am ET
Jim Culligan – IR, Kei Advisors LLC
Don Ewigleben – CEO
Tom Ehrlich – CFO
Rick Van Horn – EVP, Operations
Robert Burke [ph] – Wunderlich Securities
Dan Foley – Sleeping Giant Financial Services
Previous Statements by URRE
» Uranium Resources, Inc. Q1 2010 Earnings Call Transcript
» Uranium Resources, Inc. Q4 2009 Earnings Call Transcript
» Uranium Resources, Inc. Q3 2009 Earnings Call Transcript
It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Jim Culligan, Investor Relations for Uranium Resources Inc. Thank you. Mr Culligan, you may begin.
Thank you Melissa and good morning everyone. We appreciate your interest in Uranium Resources. On the call today, President and CEO, Don Ewigleben, will discuss recent events and the outlook for the company. He will be joined by Tom Ehrlich, CFO; Rick Van Horn, Exec VP of Operations; and Mark Pelizza, Senior VP of Environmental Affairs. We will conclude this call with an opportunity for Q&A. If you do not have today’s news release, it can be found on our Web site, which is www.uraniumresources.com.
As you are aware, we may make some forward-looking statements during the formal presentation and the Q&A portion of this teleconference. Those statements apply to future events and 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 the news release as well as in documents filed by the company with the SEC. You can find those on our Web site where we regularly post information about the company as well as on the SEC's Web site, www.sec.gov. So please review our forward-looking statements in conjunction with the precautionary factors.
With that, let me turn the call over to Don to begin the discussion.
Thank you Jim, and good morning to all. We appreciate your interest in Uranium Resources. I am going to touch on a couple of the basic things that occurred during the second quarter that has moved this company forward. It has been a very exciting time for us in the second quarter, and we are looking forward to what the rest of the year brings.
At the end of this discussion, I will turn it over to Tom Ehrlich, our CFO, who will discuss the financials for the quarter, and then we will open it up to questions and answers, and that is the reason I have asked Rick Van Horn and Mark Pelizza to join Tom and I on the call to discuss the various specifics that we can with regard to public information on our activities.
Let me start by saying that the second quarter was a very eventful quarter for Uranium Resources, Inc. It moved us down the track towards meeting multiple objectives that the Board of Directors had set for us in our new strategic plan as devised and approved in the first quarter. More specifically, we are going to be able to move forward on our development plans in New Mexico as a result of some court decisions, and the improved liquidity position that we find ourselves in today.
The first issue is the question of what happened in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. You will recall that for many years our permitting activities were in question because of jurisdictional disputes having to do with a particular part of our project known as Section 8. In that area of the Churchrock in Crownpoint project, the question had been raised whether under Federal Law that property was Indian country, and if it was, then the UIC or Underground Injection Control permit should have been issued by the USEPA as opposed to the State of New Mexico. We have that permit for some time and the opponents chose the court method to discuss this jurisdictional dispute.
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in June that in fact our Section 8 property of Churchrock was not Indian country and that ruling allows us to move forward with our activities in development of our properties at Churchrock and Crownpoint. Since the UIC permit is one of the two major permits that we need for our activities there, this question having been resolved allows us to move forward and get started on our feasibility study.
The other permit that is required we have had for some time and that is the NRC or Nuclear Regulatory Commission license for source materials. That is required anytime a proponent is seeking to mine uranium particularly using in situ recovery methodology, which we have proposed for this area. That was also the subject of a US Court of Appeals in the Tenth Circuit decision in May. At that time, the court denied a petition for re-hearing en banc or with all members of the court with regard to the license that we previously had received from the NRC. In essence, the license was upheld and that allows us with those two permits to get started in earnest about the development of this property.
We have started a campaign of feasibility taking our existing studies to determine exactly how much of these properties are amenable to the in situ recovery method to determine how large the resource can be, to determine where we will start the activities in production, and all of our technical requirements for local permitting issues. Those of course are just building code issues for the facilities.