Greetings, welcome to Perma-Fix Environmental Services' first quarter 2016 conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to turn the call over to your host, Mr. David Waldman with Crescendo Communications. Thank you. You may begin.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone, welcome to Perma-Fix Environmental Services' first quarter 2016 conference call. On the call with us this morning are Dr. Lou Centofanti, CEO, and Ben Naccarato, Chief Financial Officer. The company issued a press release this morning containing first quarter 2016 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'd 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 a statement of historical fact, are forward-looking statements that are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which could cause 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. Lou Centofanti. Please go ahead, Lou.
Thank you, David, welcome everyone. Let me start by saying the company is now on track for one of the most transformative events in the company's history, I'll talk about this in a moment. First, I'd like to discuss the weak results for the quarter. Although the numbers were weak, it was due in large part to timing, we expect a very strong second half of the year based on contracts and orders in hand. As a result, we also anticipate another strong year in 2016. Regarding our results for the quarter, funding that came in late in the government budget had a short-term negative impact on spending as the site contractors struggled to re-baseline the numbers. Essentially, they required additional time to prioritize the increased spending. This delayed several large waste treatment shipments that were pushed out to later in the year.
These delays occurred as expected, along with other logistical delays by our customers that we did not expect. Nevertheless, we've begun to receive some of these shipments, which should boost our treatment sales beginning in the second quarter, and even more so in the third and fourth. As I said, we are planning for a very strong second half of the year. In addition to our waste treatment business, which we anticipate will continue to grow in 2016, I'd like to talk about a rather significant event. I'm very limited in what I can say, but I'm extremely pleased to report that Perma-Fix has formed a team and been awarded an IDIQ contract by Department of Energy for up to $8.6 million to demonstrate the treatment of high-level waste by the end of the year.
We believe this demonstration opens the door to a significant market opportunity, much larger than our traditional low-level waste market. Turning now to the service segment. Again, we're very optimistic. Revenue decreased in the first quarter compared to the same period last year due to the completion of a large contract in December in the nuclear service area. Similar to our treatment segment, we've also had several new contracts that were slow to begin due to timing that impacted the first quarter. We're now seeing these projects ramp up and have received additional awards that are yet to begin. As an example, we were recently selected by the U.S. Navy as part of a winning team on a $240 million five-year contract for environmental remediation at various naval installations. We have not yet started the work on this project but are optimistic we'll provide significant revenue in 2016.
In addition, in February, awarded a six-month contract extension by Chevron, where we will continue to provide radiological support services to Chevron at the 10-acre Safety Light Corporation site in South Centre Township near Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania. We believe we were awarded these contracts due to our close working relationship with the respective partners and the fact that we're uniquely qualified with over 20 years experience characterizing, remediating, surveying radioactive material-impacted sites. These contracts, along with others, and several fairly significant we cannot announce, highlight the opportunities we see going forward in our service segment. As a result, we expect solid growth in 2016 in our service business. Based on our current sales pipeline improvement and visibility, we expect to see increase in our adjusted EBITDA over the $7 million of adjusted EBITDA in 2015.
As timing continues to be a concern, we plan to provide more detailed guidance on or before the next conference call. All of this does not factor in any of our opportunities related to the high-activity waste streams. Turning now to the medical side of our business, our majority-owned subsidiary, Perma-Fix Medical S.A., continues to advance the new process to produce Tc-99m. We are considering a variety of options that will bolster the strength of the subsidiary, including both strategic and capital market options. We now have a very good management and regulatory expertise that has been added and put in place, the feedback from within the industry, from both distributors and end users, has been very positive. We're in active discussions with a number of potential partners, distributors, customers, look forward to providing additional updates in the very near future.
We will continue to make progress on the regulatory front that's putting the company on a more solid footing from a capital market perspective. As I've said in the past, we believe we're in a position to be a major player in this billion-dollar market as our process is lower cost and does not use weapons-grade materials, can be easily deployed in standard research and commercial reactors worldwide, thereby solving the global supply chain concerns for this critical isotope. To wrap up, we saw adjusted EBITDA nearly double in 2015. For 2016, we anticipate continued growth in both our treatment and service segments. Although timing has had an impact in the first quarter and start of the second quarter, we anticipate a very strong second half of the year. I can say this confidently based on orders in hand.
With our recent demonstration project, the treatment of high-level waste could be a real game changer. We look forward to keeping you appraised of these developments as they unfold. I'd like to now turn the call over to Ben, who will go into more detail on the numbers, then I'll be back to answer questions at the conclusion of our formal remarks. Ben?
Thank you, Lou. Starting with revenue, our total revenue from continuing operations for the first quarter was $10 million, compared to last year's first quarter of $13.6 million, a decrease of $3.6 million or 26.2%. This decrease in revenue was the result of the shortfalls in both of our operating segments. Timing delays of waste shipments in the treatment segment resulted in both lower volume at our waste treatment facilities, as well as a lower average price, related to revenue mix. Revenue from the service segment was impacted by the completion of certain large contracts and the delay in the startup of the new projects. Turning to cost of goods sold, our total cost of sales was $10 million in the first quarter, compared to $12.1 million in prior year.
Our treatment segment cost of sales was down by $1.2 million as a result of the lower volume of waste treated and the reduced fixed costs of $361,000. Cost of sales from the service segment were down $946,000 from prior year. Reduced project revenue resulted in the lower related project expenses. Our gross profit for the quarter was $34,000, compared to $1.5 million in 2015. Gross profit in our treatment segment decreased by $1.4 million compared to prior year. Our facilities carry a relatively large fixed cost burden, and the lower revenues, such as we had in the first quarter, failed to produce the incremental profit to cover these costs, thus the negative gross profit at our treatment facilities. Similarly, low revenue in the service segment resulted in a minimal gross profit. Our SG&A costs for the quarter were $3.1 million, up from $2.8 million last year.
We had increased marketing and bid and proposal type expenses, which offset a reduction in our administrative costs related to lower consulting and professional services. Our loss from continuing operations for the quarter before taxes was $3.8 million, compared to $2 million last year. Included in this cost are costs of $438,000 and $395,000 related to our medical isotopes segment for Q1 2016 and 2015 respectively. Our loss applicable to common shareholders was $3.8 million, compared to last year's net loss of $2.1 million. Again, included in these losses are costs of $438,000 and $395,000 related to the medical isotopes segment for Q1 2016 and 2015 respectively. Our total loss per share for the quarter was $0.33 compared to a loss of $0.18 in the prior year.
Our adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations, as defined in this morning's press release, was a loss of $2.3 million compared to a loss of $441,000 last year. Turning to the balance sheet, our cash was down $736,000, primarily from debt maintenance payments totaling $783,000. Our current receivables, both billed and unbilled, were down $2.6 million as a result of lower revenue in the quarter. Our waste backlog was $4.9 million compared to $4.7 million at year-end and $6.4 million in March of 2015. Our current debt, excluding our debt issuance costs, was $1.8 million, down $626,000 from year-end and lower than prior year's first quarter by $1.9 million. Our total debt, again excluding debt issuance costs at quarter end, were $9.2 million, $8.6 million of which is from our PNC lender and $600,000 from a shareholder loan. Finally, I'll summarize our cash flow activity in the first quarter.
Our cash provided by continuing operations was $251,000. Our cash used by discontinued operations was $184,000. Cash used in investing was $24,000, of which 9 is for capital spending, and cash for financing was $719,000. Finally, I'm going to address our notification of late filing of our Form 10-Q. Our covenant in our credit facility requires the company to maintain a fixed charge ratio of 1.15: 1 remain in compliance. We failed to achieve this in the first quarter, due in part to the aforementioned delays impacting our top-line revenue. We're in discussions to receive a waiver from our lender for this breach. Unfortunately, our bank was unable to finalize the waiver prior to the filing deadline, requiring us to file the extension. We do expect to receive this waiver prior to the end of the extension period, at which time we would file our 10-Q.
Additionally, our amendment to our loan agreement signed March 24th, 2016, significantly reduced our monthly loan payments, which will help in maintaining this covenant in the future. With that, operator, I'll now open the call to questions.
Thank you. At this time, we will be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment, please, while we poll for questions. Our first question comes from Anish Bhall with MHB Capital. Please proceed with your question.
Thank you and good morning. Just two quick questions. One is with regard to your bookings. You talked about some slippages. Were you able to actually book those contracts? If so, can you disclose that number?
Well, they are waste shipments, they vary. It is a number of different shipments, in total, probably the unexpected slippage was probably in the $2 million-$3 million range. Again, it is timing, it is facilities telling us that it is coming, struggling with transportation issues.
Logistical issues.
Logistical type issues like that. Easily $3 million, but again, it could've been more, could've been less.
Okay. Can you elaborate more on that high-level contract you talked about, Lou, you mentioned in the opening remarks, please? Maybe talk about the timing and when the-
Yes
Fruition of the contract could be realized.
Yeah. The contract is to actually demonstrate treating high-level waste. It's really to treat commercial quantities at a fairly small amount, but to demonstrate the process we would go through and to lay out the course. Our part would be not real significant, maybe a million and a half of the contract to actually carry out the treatment. The variety of it is more laying out the rules, the laws, and how we would do it. To actually treat and have waste in the ground by the end of the year.
When does that treatment begin? Is it beginning in Q2 or Q3?
It's already started.
Okay.
Yeah, it started immediately. The treatment, again, this is as much of a logistical exercise in laying out all the details, the laws, the rules, and how it's going to be done. That part has already begun.
Yeah. Just last question then is that, you're starting already, you will not know if you're successful because of logistics and other third parties till the end of the year. Is that what I just heard you say?
Well, we're pretty confident we'll be successful. For those of you that follow me know we've been proposing this almost for 10 years. We have a very defined course that's laid out we're very confident will work. Like I said, we.
Well, good luck. Thank you.
Thank you. Next question comes from Robert Manning, a private investor. Please proceed with your question.
Hi. Just any other detail you might feel free to give us on this contract. I think you mentioned that the total amount of the contract was $8.6 million, then it sounds like $1 million-$2 million is our part for treatment. Are we a sub to somebody else? What can you tell us about the part of this $8.6 million that's not for treatment? Does that go to us for planning? Whatever you're free to tell us about that, I'd be interested in.
Yeah. We're part of the prime contract.
Most of it goes to the paperwork that's required to do what we're about to do, the layout, and to fill in all the details and demonstration. Our main part is the treatment of it. Finally, it will also then be disposed of in a disposal facility. We're part of the prime.
Bob, it's a partnership LLC type arrangement, if that was your question.
With a prime. Yeah.
Right.
With a prime contract. All the money will flow through the prime contract, but we're part of it, but we won't recognize those parts that are not ours.
Okay. What we would recognize of this is the range of $1 million-$2 million.
Yeah. Correct. Yeah.
Okay. Good. Now, you said this has already started. Does that mean we're already treating waste, or we've got the paperwork rolling?
Yeah, you got to really do studies and lay out the plan on how it's going to work.
The idea is that we would actually be treating waste by the end of the year. Do I understand that correctly?
Correct. Yes.
Okay.
We'll have it treated by the end of the year. Mm-hmm.
Yeah. Now, will it all be done by the end of the year, or we just get started and I'm sort of wondering in line with the earlier question. Now, when do we find out if they agree that we have succeeded?
By the end of the year.
We should be complete by then. We should easily be able to do this by the end of the year.
Yeah. Now, we are usually a subcontractor. Is this, our being sort of co-prime contractors, is that new and unusual for us?
Not for smaller contracts like this. We're usually a sub to primes when it's $50 million or greater. In general, in this case, with smaller contracts, we usually prime them.
It's more contract management size that's usually a limit for us than the type of project.
Yeah. As this does go ahead and becomes much larger, would we be a sub to somebody else, or would we continue in this prime role?
We would continue as the prime.
Mm-hmm. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Evan Greenberg with Legends Capital Funds. Please proceed with your question.
Yeah. What makes this waste unique, and how large is the opportunity after this treatment on the waste load?
What makes it unique is it's high-level waste. When you read the paper about that nobody knows, we can't do anything with anything on the nuclear side, it only pertains to high-level waste. The inventory that's easily treated throughout DOE today is somewhere between 50 and 100 million gallons at the various sites. We'll be treating about 50 gallons.
Okay. All right. Thanks a lot.
Our next question comes from Al Scanz with American Capital Partners. Please proceed with your question.
Yeah, gentlemen, good morning. Ben, are we going to have to pay any kind of a fee to get this waiver from the bank?
In the past, we have. It's been somewhat minimal.
Okay.
As of right now, they've not informed us of any, but our history with them has been a minimal fee in the $10,000-$20,000 range.
Okay. Lou, without getting too technical, what gives you confidence that our approach will succeed where so many others have failed?
Well, in simple terms, I think the answer is, from a chemistry point of view, we're very optimistic that what we're doing. Part of the answer is that what we're doing is really treating a very large, if this works, we'll be able to treat a very large fraction, very simply, of high-level waste. There'll still be a small fraction that probably would need some very unique treatment that with time we could develop. What our first proposal is to treat the very simple portion of it, which is maybe 80% of the volumes. That's why we're very confident. We're looking at a material that from a chemistry point of view is, in one way, very simple to treat. There'll continue to be a small fraction that will need very specialized treatment.
Why do you think-
They probably do. It's just we haven't focused on that part yet.
Okay. Why do you think it's eluded so many others?
Really there's two parts to this. We have the technologies and experience after all these years of treating radioactive waste, and also we have facilities that are extremely capable and licensed and permitted that could do it. You have a very unique combination of technology, expertise, experience, and facilities that don't exist other places.
Okay. Would it be safe to say that you've spent a good part of your career, the last 10 to 15 years, working on this effort?
You've heard me talk about it over the years, and it's sort of been my dream, and it's the biggest step we've been able to take. I'm under limits on what I can say.
I understand.
I probably have gone too far already, but the size and the importance of this contract, from a legal point of view, made it necessary that we at least say something about it.
Right.
You can tell in my hesitancy, I'm walking a fine line here.
I understand. Okay. Good luck, Lou, to you and your team.
Hey, Al. Yeah, thank you. I may have fallen off the wire, from a legal point of view and a information point of view, our attorneys thought it was essential something be said.
I understand. Thank you.
Hey, how are you? Our next question comes from Doug Dyer, a private investor. Please proceed with your question.
Good morning, everyone.
Good morning, Doug.
About three or four weeks ago, Hanford reported more leaks. What I'd like to know is, does this cause a sense of urgency on the part of the Department of Energy to move forward quicker? Is this waste that leaked, is it the high-level waste that you're referring to?
There's been a series of events throughout DOE facilities, not only at Hanford, but at other sites where there's high-level waste. There's tremendous concern. You've got the tanks at Hanford that are leaking. You've got concerns about the progress that's being made, and also just, I think more importantly, we've made advances in how to treat this in a much simpler way that could dramatically help DOE's efforts with the various projects they're doing. It's a real complement to where they want to go. I think, just a combination of things has convinced them, the advances in technology, advances in our expertise, and the way this might fit into their overall program for dealing with high-level waste.
I think there's just a whole combination of events that have occurred across the whole complex, Hanford just being one of them, because there's also a major effort at Savannah River to treat high-level waste. There's very significant volumes of this material that our technologies and our expertise could play a major role in.
All right. Thank you, Lou.
Yeah.
Our next question comes from Sam Rubatsky with SER Asset Management. Please proceed with your question.
Good morning, Lou.
Hey, Sam.
Did I understand you say that you're only going to treat 50 gallons out of 50 million-100 million gallons potential?
Yeah, you've got to start small.
Okay.
The demo's graded on a small scale.
Okay. Are we able to name the person we're working with, or we're unable to? Okay.
Yeah.
One further thing. This type of thing that they're going to test us, is this something that Kurion has been doing in Japan? If we demonstrate our abilities, we could do what Kurion has been demonstrating?
No, this is totally different from what's going on there with Kurion at Fukushima. They're doing just simple separation of isotopes in water. This is a much more significant, broader project.
This is more complicated than what they are doing.
It's different.
Different.
From our point of view, to actually be honest with you, we think it's fairly simple, but no one else does.
Okay. Now, the money that's coming for this, there was a recent bill either that was passed Congress in the last week or two with, I don't remember how many billions involved. Is this relative to what just came out of Congress?
No. This was money already allocated in the past budget.
Okay. Recently, there were, I think, some significant bills for cleanup and waste. Is there any monies that we're going to be able to bid for or get on? I don't think it's been signed by the President yet, but I think it came out of Congress in the last couple of weeks, multi-billion dollars for what?
We were very pleased with the funding in Congress for all our various projects. It did increase the markup on the cleanup program and has allocated it a little bit more to make us happy. In terms of all the work we're doing across the board, we were more pleased with the budget than it has been. This has nothing to do with Congress, what we're doing today.
Okay. There's going to be more contracts for us to bid on. Are you able to quantify the number of contracts or a dollar value on contracts that you might bid on?
We're seeing tremendous activity right now. Again, unfortunately, many of our contracts we can't discuss. The service group is ramping up very nicely, and it's extremely busy. We're seeing a variety of new opportunities on the service side. We, in fact, in terms of where we're going, as I'm hoping here in the very near future, we'll be adding some fairly high-level staff that will come in with tremendous expertise in these areas. Hopefully, you'll see that in the next couple of weeks, some announcements on that. We see great opportunity here. Like I say, our nuclear business seems to be ramping very nicely. Timing is not quite what we like, because you see the results. They never can seem to ship it to us when we would like it.
The waste side is ramping up, and service business is. We see a very rich environment right now for bids and opportunities.
Okay. You indicate that you anticipate increase in adjusted EBITDA for the full year 2016 compared to 2015. Do you expect to be profitable for 2016, or what's your thoughts there?
Our thought is that we would be.
Okay.
If we hit the higher EBITDAs like we expect, we would be profitable.
Okay, great. All right. Good luck, Lou. Hopefully, you show them how it's supposed to be done.
We're heading that way. Thank you, Sam.
Okay.
Hi. Our next question is from Jon Gruber with Gruber & McBaine. Please proceed with your question.
Yeah, Lou. I'm a little confused. Your portion of this contract's 15%, 18%, 20%, something like that. In future contracts, what is the other guy doing?
Well-
Is there a lot of planning and stuff? Like in future contracts, when you're really doing a lot of waste, will you be getting 75% of the contract, or what's the other guy doing to get all the revenue?
The first contract is skewed towards planning and laying out the rules, the laws, and how it would work. It's very much skewed to paperwork. We have several consultants in there.
My question then is, what kind of revenue, if things go right with the first contract, could you get in 2017 on this contract?
The contract would then go to more treatment and disposal, which would be almost 50/50.
50/50, you would get how much? $20 million? $40 million? $3 million? If things go right, what could it be?
It's hard to project a price. As we look at this, though, prices would be somewhere in the $50 a gallon range for treatment.
What's your capacity for this kind of stuff per year?
It's very high.
1 million gallons? What's very high? I don't know what very high is. Give us a little bit help here.
We could do those kind of volumes, yes.
1 million times $50.
With minor adjustments, we could do those kind of volumes.
With minor adjustments. Okay. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Anthony Marchese, a private investor. Please proceed with your question.
Hey, Lou. Question for you with respect to-- Congratulations on this contract. Given the fact that the vast majority of the shareholders do not listen to this conference call, and you've not made anything public until this day, do you think it would be appropriate to issue some type of press release talking about this? I realize that you can't name the other parties, but I think given the fact that you're discussing it on a conference call, I just think it would benefit 99% of the people.
I really didn't argue about delaying our call because my hope was there may be an announcement coming out by DOE, which has not happened. At this point, it's very hard for me to issue a press release.
Again, I'm not trying to be difficult, how do you expect that the vast majority of your shareholders, again, I don't know how many people are on this call?
Not many.
I have to believe that 90-plus % of your shareholders would be interested in this. I think that in spite of the fact that the DOE has not made an announcement, the fact that you're even talking about it on this call, I would assume, means that your attorneys have said that it's okay to talk about it. Again, I'm not trying to be difficult, Lou, all I'm saying is if it's a transformative event, the vast majority of shareholders are not on this call. It's a good thing, it's not a negative thing. I just think you owe it to the vast majority of your shareholders to at least make them aware of it. Otherwise, how would you expect them to be aware of it, given the fact that it's material to the future of the company?
Well, it's something I've struggled with and, like I say, I'm walking a tightrope with agreements signed.
To even mention the contract would be Do you believe that to even mention it, you can do it at an 8-K, certainly. If you, for whatever reason, have a prohibition against putting out a formal press release, you can certainly do it. I just think that the fact that you're saying that it's a transformative event, again, I'm not trying to be argumentative, trust me. The fact that it's a transformative event for the company, in your own words, I think deserves either an 8-K or some type of press release. Again, doesn't have to mention your partner, which I'm sure you're restricted against talking about. Personally, I just think that it's important that the remainder of your shareholders know about it. That's all. Anyway, congratulations, and I think given your-
I appreciate your comment. Yeah.
All right. Thanks.
Thanks.
Our next question comes from Bill Chapman with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.
Lou, Ben, good morning.
Morning, Bill.
Listen, I was curious on the Perma-Fix Medical, that article that was in the paper that the company's trying to go public here in the U.S. by year-end. Have you guys hired an investment banking firm that would help facilitate the IPO?
We're presently interviewing investment bankers. Yes.
Okay.
We've been discussing with several, and we're negotiating with several. Yeah.
Okay. You're anticipating NASDAQ. Did I hear that right, or read that right?
That was our thought, yes.
Okay.
Of course, all of the way of the market and everything else. We're continuing to look at all options there in terms of continuing the funding of the medical division.
Yeah, what are your other avenues then, if you could address that, please?
Well, they're all the above. You've got strategics, you've got private money. You've got all sorts of options that we're going down at the same time.
Okay. If the IPO route doesn't work, you mentioned a few others. Do you feel confident you'll be able to raise money through private investors or strategics?
Well, we feel confident in the end we'll be able to do something. I hate to give you the definitive answer here.
Right
on what the various options. We're keeping all open, and we're going down many paths, and it's a major effort right now.
Okay.
We are able then to get to a point where we have a commercial product. Yeah.
Okay. Are you looking to upgrade exchanges in Poland? Would that be also accomplished?
Well, we've looked at that and explored that. That is an option. Although I hate to rate things, it's probably a lot lower on our options scale right now than.
Okay
doing something more even with the other options.
Okay. Is the market value on that exchange in Poland still around, what, $12 million-$14 million?
Close, yes.
Close, yeah.
Yeah, it vacillates a little.
Yeah.
It's moved up over the last month or so, and it's back in that range. Yeah.
Okay. Well, it seems like a bizarre evaluation for the technology you guys have.
Yes. Very much so. That's why we're looking at various other exchanges and options.
Okay. All righty then. Thank you very much.
Okay. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Mohnish Paul with MHB Capital. Please proceed with your question.
Yeah. Lou, I just had two more quick follow-ups. One was the drop in services revenue. I would've thought that'd be more stable given the fact that's recurring in nature. Was there any reason why it dropped so much? Was it all tied to the treatment?
No. The service side, we have contracts that come and go. In general, it is more stable. The first quarter was sort of the perfect storm. Everything seemed to go haywire for us in the first quarter, and we ended a fairly significant contract in the first quarter. We have several that we see Picking that slack up that we've won. In the first quarter, it didn't occur. There was timing issues that were negative on both on the waste side and on the service side.
Yeah. I would think.
The service group now has picked up pretty significantly as we sit here. That's already occurred.
Okay. I don't want to keep beating this dead horse. With regard to how you're going to disclose the progress on this contract, are you going to give us updates on a quarterly basis, or is there something you can do in between as far as how the contract's progressing?
No, I think we can continue to update. It's hard for me just to do a press release, that's all.
Sure. Okay, no problem. Okay. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.
Okay.
As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. One moment, please, while we poll for questions. Our next question comes from Sam Rubatsky with SER Asset Management. Please proceed with your question.
Yeah. Hi, Lou. Just to follow up, I think Seeking Alpha will transcribe the conference call, which will publicize the announcement. Also to the extent that you file an 8-K of the conference call, that achieves the same thing of notifying the public of the information that's presented here. Once the information is transcribed, that notifies everybody what's going on. Just a suggestion.
Okay, Sam, thank you.
Our next question comes from Bill Chapman with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.
Guys, one more question. The process that you came up with to treat the high-level waste, is that patented?
No. Processes, in general, are hard to defend.
Yeah. Right.
It's really the barriers to entry there are the proprietary, the permits, licenses, and expertise. It's one thing to say you can do.
Yeah
like this, someone else has actually done it.
Okay.
In general, we don't patent processes.
Yeah. Okay.
It's almost impossible to defend.
Well, thank you. One last question. This process, is this a lower cost process versus the process they use in Japan?
Well, remember, Japan is not treating high-level waste. They're treating high-activity waste like we treat every day. What they're doing in Japan is just taking water and removing cesium, strontium. We can do that every day. This is totally different than Japan.
Okay. Now,
We can do the Japan stuff every day.
Well, didn't the company doing that work, didn't a private equity company invest in that company at a substantial premium that's doing this work in Japan?
Yes. Very much so. It was just sold to Veolia for an extreme premium.
Well, it makes us wonder what we're worth, then. Just a thought here, so thank you for telling me that.
Yeah. No, it's a tremendous difference in valuation.
Yeah, exactly. Okay, thank you very much.
Yeah.
There are no further questions. At this time, I'd like to turn the call back to management for any closing comments.
Once again, thank you, everyone, for participating first quarter call. We have improved visibility, primarily as it relates to the government spending, anticipated solid growth in treatment and services in 2016. We're pursuing several large contracts in the service segment, which we hope to announce in the near future. We see a growing number of opportunities, treatment segment, including our recent demonstration project for high-level waste with a very significant opportunity for Perma-Fix. I'd like to thank you all for your continued support and look forward to providing additional updates. Thank you.