Cameco Corp (CCJ) 2010 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

Welcome to the Cameco Corporation fourth-quarter and year-end results conference call.

I would now like to turn the meeting over to Mr.

Bob Lillie, Director, Investor Relations.

Please go ahead, Mr.

Lillie.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone.

Welcome to Cameco's fourth quarter conference call to discuss the financial results.

Thanks for joining us.

With us today are Jerry Grandey, CEO, Tim Gitzel, President, Kim Goheen, Senior Vice President and CFO, Bob Steane, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, and Grant Isaac, Senior Vice President - Corporate Services.

We're also joined by our colleague, Laurie Thomas from Investor Relations.

First, a note, simply that we have posted our complete annual MD&A on the website this morning, and of course, filed it on SEDAR.com and Edgar.com.

To begin, Jerry will offer his perspective on the business results for the quarter and the year, as well as updates on our operations and development projects.

Next, Kim will update you on our plans to transition to International Financial Reporting Standards, starting in the first quarter.

Then, we'll open it up for questions.

Today's conference call is open to all members of the investment community, including the media.

During the Q&A session, please limit yourself to two questions, and then return to the queue.

Please note that this conference call will include forward-looking information, which is based on a number of assumptions, and actual results could differ materially.

Please refer to our annual information form and MD&A for more information about the factors that could cause these different results and the assumptions we have made.

On that note, I'll turn it over to Jerry.

Thank you, Bob, and again, welcome to all who have joined us on this call, as we discuss Cameco's fourth quarter results, review the progress made throughout 2010, and look ahead to the bright future for Cameco within the global and nuclear renaissance.

The results we report today reflect once again our success in delivering healthy cash flow and net income for our shareholders.

Longer term, Cameco remains well positioned to take advantage of the strong fundamentals within the nuclear industry, through our strategic goal of doubling uranium production from our existing assets by 2018.

Our ambition for growth will require a substantial capital spending program in the years to come, but we expect to continue funding this growth on a pay-as-you-go basis.

Our consistent financial strength has allowed us to boost our dividend 43% for 2011, reflecting our confidence in Cameco's future and is just one more measure of the ongoing benefit of investing in Cameco.

As was the case in 2009, our strong operational performance in 2010 underpinned our financial results.

We continue to build a record of robust, reliable production.

The 2 million extra pounds produced last year, a 10% increase over 2009, is a testament to our ongoing pursuit of excellence in all our operations.

Safe, clean and reliable production is an imperative at every one of our operating sites.

We are proud to report that 2010 was a record year for Cameco as measured by our safety statistics.

We have worked hard to ensure that a strong safety culture permeates the whole organization as part of our commitment to operational excellence.

In 2010, this safety record was recognized externally when two of our operations, McArthur River and Cigar Lake, won the top awards handed out by the Canadian Mining Industry for safety performance.

As important as our increase in safe production was, we were able to produce pounds with lower unit costs than the previous year.

At McArthur River and Key Lake, we took advantage of the plus production provision in our licenses to produce an extra 600,000 pounds for Cameco's account.

This was achieved amidst extensive underground development at McArthur River to ready new areas for future production.

At Key Lake, production takes place against the backdrop of ongoing mill renewal.

Rabbit Lake is also undergoing mill renewal.

At the same time, we continue to develop the underground infrastructure at the Eagle Point Mine that will allow production from deeper zones.

We now project another two years of mining at the Eagle Point deposit, extending the Rabbit Lake's remarkable history as a uranium producer through at least 2017.

Overseas, production at JV Inkai was 13% higher than planned, because of the smooth ramp-up and better recoveries.

Within our asset base as a whole, Cameco's exploration efforts have consistently added to our reserve and resource base at a rate sufficient to replace what we have mined.

In 2010, work continued on an exploration drift that is being constructed northward from the existing McArthur River mine infrastructure.

From this development tunnel, we will conduct delineation drilling of zones A and B, allowing us to better define this resource.

We expect to add more years to the mine's already long life, as more of this mineralization is drilled off.

Indeed, McArthur River's reign as the world's largest high grade mine should continue for decades to come.

Elsewhere in the prolific Athabasca Basin, progress is ongoing at Cigar Lake, the largest undeveloped high grade deposit.

At Cigar Lake we expect to complete the sinking of shaft two in 2011, and resume the development of critical mine workings later in the year.

In the meantime, our surface freezing strategy will allow a portion of the deposit to be ready for an accelerated ramp-up.

We continue to project the first pounds coming out of Cigar Lake in mid-2013.

At Kintyre in Western Australia, our extensive delineation drilling of the past year will allow the first 43-101 compliant resource estimate to be published later this year.

Environmental assessment work at Kintyre continues while we conduct discussions to secure a mine development agreement, with the Martu, the traditional owners in this part of Western Australia.

Expansion of existing mines and bringing on development projects that are already in our portfolio is the key to Cameco's double-view strategy.

It is from this asset base that we intend to produce an additional 20 million pounds of annual production to reach our goal of 40 million pounds by 2018.

In our MD&A, we discussed the milestones that we need to achieve to reach this objective.

Besides our strong production portfolio, Cameco has always been a leader in bringing uranium from other sources into the marketplace.

We continue to pursue such opportunities.

Our recently announced agreement with Talvivaara Mining Company of Finland, to extract Uranium from nickel zinc ore is an example of our ability to partner with others to access Uranium and deliver it to the market.

Cameco of course continues to be more than just a supplier of uranium concentrates.

Our production and revenue from our fuel services division this past year is a reflection of again having full-year production capability at Port Hope and the benefit of an ongoing relationship with the Springfields facility in the UK.

Cameco continues to work with our partner there, and with Kazatomprom, in exploring the best options to meet the conversion needs of the nuclear renaissance.

As time goes on, it's becoming clear to outside observers that this declared nuclear renaissance is not just a fanciful notion of the industry.

At the start of 2011, there were 65 reactors under construction across the globe.

We expect an additional 104 to be operating in 2020, over and above the 441 reactors now in operation.

At least half of these new reactors will be in China, which has more than 25 under construction today.

This large number of new reactors means an ever-increasing demand for Uranium fuel.

With secondary supplies dwindling, this new demand has to be filled by primary mine supply.

For those who follow the uranium market, there's been a slow realization that the rather static supply/demand paradigm of the past has changed.

A substantial rise in the price of uranium since the middle of 2010 is remarkable.

This dramatic movement reflects a wider awareness that new Uranium supplies must get developed.

The current prices and acknowledgement that new sources of supply will require higher prices for Uranium than what the market was willing to provide in the previous three years.

So before we open the call to questions, our Chief Financial Officer, Kim Goheen, has an update on the transition Cameco has made to the new accounting rules that govern our business.

Kim?

Thank you, Jerry.

Good morning, all.

As you are aware by now, the fourth quarter of 2010 marks the end of Canadian GAAP reporting, and in the first quarter of 2011 onwards we will report under the International Reporting Financial Standards which will include providing IFRS-compliant quarterly and full year financial statements for 2010.

During our IFRS workshop this past December, we had the opportunity to discuss the impacts adoption of these new financial standards will have on our financial statements.

Where do we stand today?

First, we have completed our analysis of these accounting effects and quantified the items under IFRS for the three-month period ended September 30, 2010.

As was already the case for the quarters ended March 31 and June 30, accounting differences between Canadian GAAP and IFRS are minimal.

Second, we have changed our approach to accounting for joint ventures.

Previously, we had planned to adopt the equity method to account for our interest in jointly-controlled enterprises, such as Bruce Power.

The requirement to move away from the current method of proportionate consolidation to the equity method was expected to have come into effect in the near term.

However, timing for the new standard remains uncertain.

We have decided to continue with proportionate consolidation of jointly-controlled enterprises until more information becomes available.

Third, in our MD&A today, we have provided our IFRS transition-based balance sheet together with explanations of the IFRS-related differences.

Finally, the outlook for 2011 provided in the MD&A has been prepared in accordance with IFRS.

Generally speaking, these numbers are similar to what they would have been under Canadian GAAP.

But most important, I would like to reiterate what IFRS does not change.

It does not change the way we set objectives, how we measure performance, or our strategy of being a dominant nuclear energy company producing uranium fuel and generating clean electricity.

More information on IFRS can be found the investor section of our website under the heading IFRS transition.

Thank you, Kim.

Okay.

With that, operator, we'll open the call to questions.

Thank you.

We will now take questions from investors, analysts and media.

In order to respect everyone's time on the call today we will the take your questions question and allow one follow-up question.

Then, if you have a further question, please return to the queue and we'll get to them after others have had their chance.

(Operator Instructions).

There will be a brief pause while participants register for questions.

Thank you for your patience.

The first question is from David Snow from Energy Equities, Incorporated.

Please go ahead.

Good morning.

I'm wondering -- I think I had in my notes from a previous conference call that advanced or accelerated production from Cigar might -- I don't know if it was me or you that said put 5 million pounds into 2014 and 10 million pounds into 2015.

And I'm wondering is that possible and will you update that later in the year with your later 2011 technical report, including the surface freezing strategy?

David, I'm not sure where you got the numbers.

We've said it will advance up to 10 million pounds, and all that will be in the technical report.

And is 18 million still the longer term?

18 million pounds is the production objective and steady state; that's right.

Could you review the surface freeze strategy, how that accelerates production?

It really decouples underground development from the freezing in the first section of the ore body, so you don't have a lot of competing demands on the underground infrastructure.

The next question is from Alan Campbell from Xinhua News Agency.

Please go ahead.

Hello.

Hello.

Yes, good morning.

I'm from Xinhua News Agency, China's national news agency.

I want to ask you, you signed two big deals with China last year.

How important is China for the future of the Company and when are you going to start making these deliveries, please?

With construction going on in China, new reactors, I indicated more than 25 currently under construction, quite ambitious goals to 2020 and I think targets well in excess of that beyond 2020.

China's going to become, and frankly already is, a very important market to not just Cameco but to all of the suppliers that are out there.

So we were delighted to get the first two contracts, one that we announced I think in June, another one that followed a couple of months later.

With the two bigger Chinese utilities, taken in total, that was 52 million pounds and deliveries began this year and next, I think.

Are you expecting more China investment?

Investment by China in nuclear utility, in nuclear reactors?

No, into your Company for more orders?

I think over time we would expect to obtain additional contracts, supply contracts with China and frankly, look at expanding the relationship in other areas as well.

Is it going to be any problem with actually getting the stuff there for transport?

Is there any -- from the various ports?

No, no impediments other than NECs from time to time.

Okay.

Thank you.

The next question is from Greg Barnes from TD Securities.

Please go ahead.

Thank you.

Jerry, you said you accelerated production or flexed up production at McArthur this year because you allowed the agreement you had with CMSC.

What is full capacity at McArthur, Key Lake, what do you think you can push out?

I think we really look at that as about 18.7, as not just the license, but that would be kind of an expected steady state, Greg.

If you're really lucky, and you can mitigate or minimize the time we have to shut the plant down every year for some refurbishment, repair, you can do a little bit better than that.

But it isn't millions of pounds greater year after year.

Until we get this plant kind of refurbished and expanded, which we're working on through the licensing and then ultimately with replacement as we're doing now, the oxygen plant and the acid plant.

Okay, thank you.

Just switching topics a little bit, do you have any sense of how much Chinese demand has been satisfied by long-term contracts they've put in place with you, with AREVA, with others?

No.

A lot of that of course depends on the duration of the contracts and their own first core approach, as well as their stockpiling approach, all of which are unknowns in the equation.

Okay.

Thank you.

I would expect, Greg, that they will continue to be active in the long-term market, though.

Yes.

Thanks.

Thank you.

The next question is from Brian MacArthur from UBS Securities.

Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Two questions.

Just following up on Greg's, as far as the catch-up on McArthur River, where do we stand right?

Because obviously this last year you recaptured some of the loss pulled in previously?How much is left there that you can still catch up on under the contract or the licensing agreement?

I'm going to ask Bob Steane to respond.

Bob?

I think it's about 4 million pounds, plus or minus a bit, but in that neighborhood that we have in our catch-up bank.

Great.

Thank you.

Then on a totally unrelated topic, probably I guess for Kim, but this recovery, tax recovery of 0% to 5%, can you just go through again exactly what's going on.

I know there's some tax pulls.

I realize there's different tax rates in different countries.

Can you just exactly break down exactly the pieces of how you get there and give me a guidance going forward in 2012, what that may look like when we get through all these pools.

The pools themselves really are a cash impact, Brian.

Big picture here behind it, the bulk of the expenses that you would see in a -- or you would expect at a corporate level, interest expense, admin expense, exploration, those types of them, all of those are predominantly reside in Cameco Corp, the parent Company.

Right.

So those are tax deductible expenses that I can report in my book tax calculation here, when I expect to have a reasonable chance of using them in the future, which I do.

That swing -- and then as you talked about, other jurisdictions that are generating income at lower tax rates, is how we get to that position of such a low overall tax rate.

You take the expenses are in the high tax company and the income is in the lower tax company.

Right.

And then -- how does Bruce work into that?

Obviously that's going to be say here tax rate, isn't it?

Yes, the Bruce tax rate this the mid-20s, roughly.

Okay.

It's just that differential between that and the other areas.

That's correct.

Thanks very much.

Thank you.

(Operator Instructions).

Our next question is from Terence Ortslan from TSO & Associates.

Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Spot conversion volume in general was a record high, 3, 4, times the amount it typically is.

What should we read into it?

Is that a one shot deal?

Is that a trend of some sort?

Is that backlog?

Is it catch-up?

What exactly is going on there?

I want to make sure I heard you.

You say spot conversion?

Yes.

Volume, yes.

Little uncertain I think at this stage of the game.

We've noticed that increased activity as well, and remember that a good supply of conversion is likely to disappear in the market in 2013.

We've seen operating issues from time to time at conversion plants and some uncertainty, labor issues and technical issues.

I think the utility world is generally becoming more concerned about conversion and conversion supplies and where two years ago there was a lot of conversion, if you will, or deconversion from 2006 back through 2008, putting a lot of conversion on the market, I think we're seeing less of that.

It may be in anticipation of conversion supplies tightening up in a year or two.

Okay.

Unrelated question from Kazhakstan.

Do you export or have you exported anything from Kazhakstan to China, and will you do more in the future?

I'm not sure that we have yet.

Bob, do you have -- ?

All of the products from our Inkai operation has gone to Blind River for processing.

Okay.

All right.

Thanks.

You bet.

Thank you.

The next question is from Oscar Cabrera from Banc of America-Merrill Lynch.

Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone.

My question is with respect to capital spending, in specific to sustaining capital.

McArthur River, Key Lake, sustaining capital went down significantly from what you had planned originally in 2010.

And this has been basically replaced with higher capital spend in Rabbit Lake and from what I can see here, in fuel services.

Should we be expecting this to sustain for the life of McArthur or will you be increasing that to 220 million later on?

Yes, really what we've said on there, directly to your question, some of the projects at Key Lake were related to the acid and oxygen plant which we made very significant investments in 2010.

As those projects get completed, yes, that would reduce going forward.

They will likely be replaced with other projects.

What we've really said is that the capital levels, CAD575 million for 2011, is what you should expect for the next couple years, in that range.

Beyond that, really I would -- I'm going to point you to our technical reports as the source.

We really don't provide guidance beyond the next couple years.

Right.

No, I'm just trying to get two years.

That's fine.

Sorry.

My second question is with regards to your production at Inkai.

The increase in 2011, does that accrue for your 5.2 million of the total of the project of 5.2 million pounds?

Do you need permits to reach these levels in 2011?

Oscar, yes, we do.

We need permission from partner and government to go up to 2,000 tons or 5.2 million pounds per year.

We're working on that with our partner.

I don't want to over-welcome my stay.

When do you expect these -- let me rephrase that.

What was the assumption for your production level?

The assumptions in what?

Timing, we expect approvals from our partner and the government later this year.

Can you give us an idea what you assume for putting the guidance that you put in Inkai this year?

I don't have the specific date but it would be in the second half of the year sometime we expect approval, Oscar.

That's fair, thank you very much.

The next question is from Ben Elias from Sterne, Agee.

Please go ahead.

Thank you.

Good morning, Ben Elias, Sterne, Agee.

Just a couple of questions.

Could you elaborate on Bruce Power going forward, all the investment needed to keep that up and running, relicensing over the next -- I don't know what the long-term plan is.

Recall we're only in the Bruce B units, not in the A units.

Okay

So, these are the four units.

Ultimately are likely to run through the latter part of this decade before refurbishment is required.

So over the next several years, Bruce will be looking at that internally and working with the Ontario Government on what that means and how it would be conducted, timing and financing and these kinds of things.

Okay.

So nothing in the next five to six years?

Whatever needs be done will have to be done towards the end of the decade or -- ?

It will depend upon the sequencing, because the Ontario Government isn't going to want all of their nuclear units being refurbished at the same time, whether they be OPGs or Bruce's units and of course there's several other units at Bruce A beyond the two that are being refurbished currently so all of that is going to have to be sequenced by agreement with the province and then sorted out in terms of schedule timing and precisely the way in which the units will be brought back into the market.

Okay.

And I was wondering if you could -- in your outlook you did mention higher realized prices in the fuel services business.

And we know [Considyne] is trying the to push through some price increases that include all kinds of inflation adjustors.

To what extent, or what is the magnitude of these price increases and when do they start impacting your business?

Well, it's a competitive market and I guess I just won't speculate on future prices.

We do see it strengthening, which is a good sign.

Okay.

But is it strengthening as you mentioned earlier, there's an impending lack of capacity, you've got an impending lack of capacity and you have one of the competitors finally admitting things weren't great and now raising price so that's quite clearly beneficial to you.

The reality is conversion needs higher prices for reinvestment to be made.

We've been saying that for quite a number of years.

But you don't need any extra capacity for the extra 20 million pounds?

The two are somewhat independent, because we, with our customers, will sell either Uranium concentrate U-308 or if they want a packaged product we'll sell UF-6 or if they just want conversion services, then we'll sell them the services.

The fact that we produce 40 million pounds a year, some of that may come as UF-6 but that depends on how much we have to sell and the needs and desires of our customers.

Okay.

Thanks.

And if I may, just one last question on cash use.

You have about CAD1.3 billion in cash and equivalents.

What are your top three priorities for cash use right now?

Well, we're always mindful of returning cash to shareholders and you saw what we did toward the end of last year with the dividend increase.

Kim talked about the capital requirements to achieve the strategy of Double U and making sure that our assets are operating at level of excellence that we demand.

So there's plenty of requirements within the business for cash.

All of this expansion, the Double U will be financed internally and as I say, we're always mindful of returning value and cash to shareholders.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next question is from David Snow from Energy Equities, Incorporated.

Please go ahead, sir.

Yes, I'm wondering, you mentioned the long-term contract is normally, has been over time 13% higher than spot.

Right now it's about at spot.

Would you expect the long-term to resume that premium or spot to come down or what's the outlook going forward?

David, over the years always seen the long-term price at a premium, not always 13% but that's pretty good as an estimate, I guess.

There have been, what, three or four times when they've either converged or actually been in a reverse situation.

That hasn't lasted very long, and so my own belief here is that the predictability for both the buyer and the seller of the long-term fixed price requires a premium over spot.

Whether that means spot goes down or the long-term price goes up, I have no idea.

Okay.

And I was wondering, it seems that although you produced a couple million extra pounds in 2010, you're guiding down from 22.8 million, to 21.9 million in 2011.

What's going on there?

Well, we have licenses.

We talk about the capacity of our mills at Rabbit and Key as well as what we have in the US at Inkai and Kazhakstan.

As we entered 2011, that was the best guess of what we thought we would do in 2011.

One always hopes you can do better as we did in 2010, and so we, as you might expect, challenge all of our sites to do a little bit better but always being mindful of safety and operational excellence.

I got cut off when I was trying to figure out exactly how the freezing at the surface will interrelate with how it would have been done, or how it would compare with how you would have done it in the past.

Could you just give a little more color on that?

Historically we would as we do at McArthur, freeze from underground.

The decision was made to see if we could decouple the freezing of the first part of the ore body with all the other underground development that's going to go on to achieve first production.

So by reducing the level of activity, putting the freezing from the surface for the first years of production should allow us to accelerate the ramp-up of production a little bit.

So it will already be frozen down there when you go to start mining it, I guess?

That's the hope.

Terrific.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next question is from Greg Barnes from TD Securities.

Please go ahead.

Thank you, Kim I, I want to go all the way back to Brian's question on taxes.

Do you anticipate your tax rate will climb once the HEU agreement expires?

I assume that's all done offshore.

It is held as a foreign sub, Greg, yes.

In that single item, if that were the only point going on, yes, the overall tax rate would rise.

And I guess it's too far out to give some kind of view?

Yes.

Okay.

Fair enough.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next question is from Orest Wowkodaw from Canaccord Genuity.

Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning.

A financial question for Kim.

Just in terms of the adjusted earnings, looks like there was a CAD53 million pretax gain on derivatives in the income statement, and if I sort of back out the annual versus year-to-date Q3.

But it looks like you're only adding back CAD16 million to get your adjusted number.

I'm just wondering if there's something else there or I'm missing something here?

Of course, without grabbing the numbers, what we do for the adjusted earnings is, on the foreign exchange contracts in particular, we notionally allocate those between periods as if we were doing hedge accounting.

We just don't go through the whole process of formally designating them as hedges.

It's just not worth the process.

What you will probably be seeing there is some of those contracts, the gain's being unrealized under that basis and will come in future periods.

I think that's what you're probably talking -- what you see in there.

I'll be glad to talk to you later on the specifics of the numbers but that's my guess for right now.

Okay.

Thanks, Kim.

Thank you.

(Operator Instructions).

Our next question is from Brian MacArthur from UBS Securities.

Please go ahead.

I was wondering if you could just clarify, when you've done the capital spending for the Key Lake and the McArthur revitalization, over the next two years, at that point would you have the operational capability to go to the 22 million pounds all-in, if you could get the regulatory approval or does some other capital or something else have to be done after that?

The design pieces for the Key Lake, all done is a 25 million-pound capacity.

Okay.

At one time that was 22 million.

You're saying 25 million now.

Would that be the capability by, say, 2013 theoretically if you could get the license?

The first we need licenses and approvals, you're right, and that won't be in place by 2013, more like 2015.

Okay.

And then got to move forward the construction.

The long-term and having -- we have application to increase the production to that 22 million pounds.

We're looking at the plant capacity, design capacity to be available for future opportunities as they arise.

So if we can't get the 25 million in 2013, could we get the 22 million, subject to approval?

Not likely, would be in place by that time.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

On a secondary issue, in the CapEx spending, there's another category of other, which is CAD14 million.

Is that enrichment or is there any money being spent on that, or where are we with that.

Brian, the enrichment would be separate.

That other would be some corporate costs lumped in there.

The GLE is in a separate item.

You won't see the capital rolled through our statements.

At all.

Okay.

How much are you spending on that this year?

This any budget or anything?

I'm sorry, Brian, I don't have that at my fingertips.

They will be moving that project forward but I don't have the number for you, sorry.

Okay.

Great.

The next question is from David Snow from Energy Equities, Incorporated.

Please go ahead.

Just to follow that up.

Does it sound like they're going to move forward with that global laser project?

David, absolutely.

They're continuing with the work to try to design and do the engineering for commercial operation.

Okay.

Will there be an update on that sometime this year?

We'll do that in the various MD&As that we update people.

Does the increased McArthur River potential, 25 million pounds in 2015, is that in your 10-year plan of doubling uranium output?

This is Bob Steane.

I didn't want to imply McArthur River would be 25 million pounds.

We're putting in the infrastructure at Key Lake, so the Key Lake mill would have that, the McArthur River deposit we're looking at the 22 million pounds expansion, subject to regulatory approval and getting everything in place.

But the expansion at Key was to provide opportunity for other deposits or other opportunities should they arise.

You are putting 22 million for McArthur River into the 10 year plan for the -- 2000 whatever.

On that event, yes, the higher number we will be looking at for McArthur going forward, the exact timing I'm not sure for you here, but yes, we will be looking at a higher number eventually for McArthur.

Thank you very much.

That will be post-2018.

Yes.

I think it's beyond --

It's beyond.

It's not -- there is some extra there but it's not by 2015.

Thank you.

This will conclude the questions from the telephone lines.

I would now like to turn the meeting back over to Mr.

Jerry Grandey for his closing remarks.

Thank you very much, operator and likewise to all who took the time to be on the call today.

At Cameco, we see a bright future ahead.

Our determination to achieve safe, clean and reliable production in our day-to-day operations is delivering solid financial results to all of our shareholders.

By planning ahead on a 10-year horizon we're confident in our ability to deliver on the Double U strategy.

We intend to achieve our goal while delivering continued financial success this year and the years that will follow.

With that, thanks to all of you for joining the call.

Thank you for your support of Cameco, and I wish you a good day.

Thank you.

The Cameco Corporation fourth-quarter results conference call has now ended.

Please disconnect your lines at this time.

We thank you for your participation, and have a great day.