Greetings and welcome to the Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. Second Quarter Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host David Waldman of Crescendo Communications. Thank you. Mr. Waldman, you may now begin.

Thank you. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Perma-Fix Environmental Services second quarter conference call. On the call with us this morning are Dr. Louis Centofanti, Chairman and CEO, and Ben Naccarato, Chief Financial Officer. The company issued a press release this morning containing second quarter 2012 financial results, which is also posted on the company’s website. If you have any questions after the call or would like any additional information about the company, please contact Crescendo Communications at 212-671-1020. I would also like to remind everyone that certain statements contained within this conference call may be deemed forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements on this conference call other than the statements of historical facts are forward-looking statements that are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties and other factors which could cause the actual results and performance of the company to differ materially from such statements. These risks and uncertainties are detailed in the company’s filings with the U.S Securities and Exchange Commission. The company makes no commitment to disclose any revisions to forward-looking statements or any facts, events or circumstances after the date hereof that bear upon forward-looking statements. I’d now like to turn the call over to Dr. Louis Centofanti. Please go ahead Lou.

Thank you, David, and welcome, everyone. We achieved the year-over-year sales growth and generated positive EBITDA for the quarter despite a very difficult funding environment at DOE as well as some legacy contracts we inherited from SEC that hurt our results. I'll address both these topics in some detail as well as our growth initiatives which have positioned us for a stronger second half and a much stronger year in 2013. As we anticipated and we discussed on the prior call, our results were impacted by several factors. First, our treatment segment was extremely weak in the first half of 2012 as we processed a lot of our backlog. DOE has -- what we have seen is redirected some funding towards several large projects we are not currently involved in such as the rectification plant at Hanford. This has temporarily delayed some of the funding both for our waste treatment projects and our service work at Hanford and other sites. Heading into the third quarter, our treatment segment is starting to pick up and we expect a much stronger second half of the year. Second factor impacting our results was, again back to DOE, they've been slow to award service contracts in the present environment. For example at Los Alamos we were one of just 3 bidding teams for each project that was awarded the right to bid on approximately $450 million of task orders over the next 3 years. Though we expected to hear from DOE by now, the final task orders -- no task orders has still been issued. But we still feel we are very well positioned on that master task order bid. In total what we see out there is quite substantial. As we sit today we are bidding on approximately 25 contracts in our pipeline…

Thank you, Lou. Let me begin with revenue. Our total revenue from continuing ops for the second quarter was $34 million compared to $28.9 million in the second quarter of 2011, an increase of $5.1 million or 17.5%. Revenue from the services segment increased by $12.7 million or 112.2%. Revenue from the Safety and Ecology acquisition totaled $17.3 million but was offset by reductions in revenue at our Hanford contract of $4.6 million. The drop at Hanford relates to the reduction in scope on the Plateau Remediation Contract resulting in lower headcount at the time -- and on this time and materials contract. In our Treatment segment, revenue decreased by $7.6 million or $43.1%. This decrease was directly related to continued shortfall in waste received from our government customers primarily the DOE sites. So the value of our shipments received was down 62% [ph] compared to prior year. Of the revenue recognized much of the revenue was high volume of lower margin low level waste. Similarly over the 6 months ended June 30th our revenue increased 37.2% with $35.9 million received from the SEC acquisition, but offset by lower revenue of $9.3 million and $7.1 million from the Hanford and Treatment segment respectively. Turning to cost of goods sold, our total cost of sales was $30.2 million in the second quarter compared to $20.9 million in the prior year. Cost of sales from our services segment was up $12 million from prior year. $16.3 million of these were from the SEC acquisition while the Hanford costs were down $4.2 million primarily due to lower labor cost. Our Treatment segment costs were down $2.7 million due to the variable expenses related to decreased revenue and lower payroll expenses related to headcount reductions made in the latter part of the second quarter…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Gregg Hillman from First Wilshire Securities Management.

Just a couple of questions. First of all, when you make those medical isotopes, did you use the cyclotron?

No. We use a research reactor or a commercial reactor.

And is that a big capital cost? How much is the cost if a hospital was going to buy one of those things?

No, 0 because the materials are made in research reactors basically for a fee or a commercial reactor for a fee. So you take a sample, you irradiate it in either your research reactor or a commercial reactor.

Okay. And then also -- and then I want to ask you about that pipeline [ph] of $600 million in a potential market side, how much of that is commercial and how much of that is government, either DOE or military?

It’s 2/3 government, either Corps of Engineers, Department of Defense, or Department of Energy, or NIH.

And the rest of the government -- what kind of customers are the commercial customers?

Nuclear utilities, hospitals, research enrichment facilities, international.

[Operator Instructions] We do have another question coming from Robert Brous from Wunderlich Securities.

The $600 million potential pipeline, that would be over a 5-year period, a 10-year period?

That’s over approximately a 2-year period, and the comment I would make about that pipeline, number one, is that we just don’t bid on anything. We look for things where we see an advantage. That’s one positive. The second is we do have partners on most of those bids. So that isn't necessarily all our percentage and it would be difficult to try to break all that out. But, we see it as -- as I said it’s as strong as it’s ever been.

So on most of that, you are designated sub?

We could be the upfront or we could be a sub. It’s all the above. We are bidding projects where we're the lead.

And that percentage onsite versus treatment?

That’s all onsite. Now the treatment is separate.

I will now turn the call back to management for closing comments.

Thank you all very much. Look forward to the next call. I'm sure it'll be more positive. So we will talk to you then.

Thank you. This does conclude today’s teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time and have a wonderful day.