Operator: And your next question is coming from Steve Fein.
Unidentified Analyst: Can you hear me? Because I’m on a speaker. Can you hear me?
Mark Duff: We can hear you.
Unidentified Analyst: Okay. I got a question for Rob. One on the — I have a lot of questions. But on the depreciation and amortization, why was that so dramatically up? I mean, I’m looking at here that for ’23, depreciation and amortization was 2124 versus 1433, why is that so significantly up?
Ben Naccarato: Yes, Steve, that was a unique situation with our new facility in Oak Ridge. The depreciation we’re talking about, isn’t your typical capital depreciation. It’s the closure related, and there’s some closure costs, and the way closure costs work, it’s called ARO, in accounting lingo, and goes in as an asset against the liability. And we just needed to ramp up, accelerate the closure number on the balance sheet. You would see an offsetting asset number.
Unidentified Analyst: So that’s just the — it’s operating. It’s just though a one-time deal?
Ben Naccarato: Correct. Yes, it will slow down.
Unidentified Analyst: I do have a bunch of questions. When I — I have not heard about this contaminated waste that’s come out of the — that’s in the [tisker]. So my question there is, Mark, the fact that it’s contaminated, does that change the classification of it?
Mark Duff: It’s just a little bit more contamination of a specific time kind is not within the design basis of the DFLAW.
Unidentified Analyst: What — can I ask what the contamination was? Is it something that’s hard for DOE to handle, or something that they could put again through the [tisker].
Mark Duff: They can put it again through [tisker]. I’ve tried to reduce it — I believe it’s a radio isotope. It’s high. I thought it was cesium, but I’d have to check the press release, but contaminant from within the tank that they put it in, after they ran through the [tisker].
Unidentified Analyst: But if they would redo it, would they not have tank problems?
Mark Duff: They have to put it in a different tank. So what…
Unidentified Analyst: Yes, okay. All right, fine. When Howard was initially asking, about how long — and this is how long, let’s say, Hanford would be, if they did the vitrification and Perma-Fix got the secondary ways. Is it not true that they passed to liquefy the waste, so the actual waste is not 59 million gallons, it’s probably closer to hundreds of millions of gallons because of the liquification. And that’s why we take so long.
Mark Duff: That’s absolutely correct. It’s believed to be about 1 to 3, 1 to 2.5 to 3, for every gallon that you have in the tank, you’re able to add a couple of gallons of water to get it out, because most of that tank waste itself is either dry, or [intricacies] it will require a slurry to get it out. So you have to add some to remove it.
Unidentified Analyst: I’m going to move over to Europe. So you succeed in Europe, is it what the people be provided by Westinghouse, if you created a plant?
Mark Duff: Yes, it would be our technology Westinghouse’s facility and license. So — it’s a joint venture of Westing.
Unidentified Analyst: And is that 50%, 50%?
Mark Duff: It’s 55%, 45%.
Unidentified Analyst: Okay, allright. So do you know but the — but to me, the real main thing here is, you’re joining with somebody, who is a big player and that’s a fabulous. With regard to the comments we talked about, okay, the vitrification plant goes on, and then there’s a secondary waste, and then the secondary waste comes to per the rod — in part of the rod in January you mentioned, and then an additional you’re really only player. In that rod, it states that the way you treat it, would go back to Hanford. So my question is, as there have been work done, that way that secondary waste could go back and be buried in Hanford.
Mark Duff: For the DFLAW, that’s the value the Perma-Fix buyers of Perma-Fix brings to DOE is that waste, it will be disposed of at the Hanford landfill, as opposed to anywhere else, which makes non-regional treatment capabilities, a lot less attractive, that the ship out of state have retreated, and ship it back into state for disposal. That adds the value of the — of being local is that the DOE has a disposal cell there for this waste…
Unidentified Analyst: Yes, excuse me. My real question was, can it be disposed in Hanford if you get the secondary waste.
Mark Duff: The secondary waste has to be disposed of Handford, and for as long as it meets the…
Unidentified Analyst: All right. I just wanted to — Okay, I did — I think all my questions were answered, but I’ve been assiduously listened to you guys, since then somewhere I think in 2016, and I remember when you came on Mark, there was a period somewhere in ’18 or ’19, where you kept saying or getting there, we’re going to move towards $100 million and then you achieved it. And I remember the stock moved. And so when I look at history, when I look back at history, having been a like I always say, I was a positive chemical manufacturers, so I do understand what you encounter, but I do take your statements so positively that, you know today because I’ve learned to listen to you, when you’re always been very transparent that when you say that there will be that you do see the possibility that there will be this space and $90 million to $100 million.
And that is so critical because that covers your overhead and so forth, and gives you breathing room. And then all these other things I look at, as you know, hey, the potential is just so great and you know, my strategy when I was in business was, to have a base business, pay for my business, and just keep pushing. And then what happens is, something happens that, you know, something happens that’s just changed the status quo, and that’s the reality. And so I guess what I’m trying to say, as I look at this very positively, you’re clearly diversifying, you’re clearly bidding more. And at the same time, you’re saying that you do see a vision that you could get to a solid base, which is the key that you’re paying your bills, and then when some of these other circumstances occur, then you know, here we go.
So I, yes, again, I commend you guys and yes, I think the it’s hard, it’s world hard, but you’re taking big leaps and that’s all. So anyway, thank you.
Mark Duff: Thank you, Steve. Appreciate it.
Operator: Unfortunately, that’s all the questions we have time for today. I would now like to turn the floor over to Mark Duff for any closing remarks.
Mark Duff: Okay. Thank you. I’d like to thank everyone for participating in our third quarter conference call. We remain extremely confident in the outlook of our business, and we appreciate the continued support of our shareholders, and look forward to providing further updates as developments unfold. Thank you, everyone.
Operator: This does conclude today’s conference call. You may disconnect your phone lines at this time, and have a wonderful day. Thank you for your participation.
