Actually, it was John Boehner who did not include the roposal for funding of USEC in the recent omnibus spending bill. FYI, John Boehner is a Republican who has rarely stuck his neck out in any way for USEC.
You're correct. I checked on Boehner's record again. He did nothing for the Piketon project despite being an Ohian. My lavish praise for the Republicans was premature. These days, there seems to be no difference between the two parties when it comes to incompetence.
I am going to guess the stock price would be affected in some way, but by how much depends on the assets USEC has at Paducah.
USEC leases the process buildings and support buildings at the plant. Over the years they have upgraded various systems that would ultimately be transfered to ACP or be liquidated through some agreement with DOE. Situations like that are what complicated the PORTS de-lease. The transition of the PORTS GDP from USEC to DOE was arguably the most complex transition of its kind in U.S. history, and unless they learned from their mistakes with Portsmouth, Paducah will be just as complicated.
The eventual de-lease of the diffusion plants was obviously not well thought out when the privatization act was first put in place.
"The stock price would be affected in some way." - That's a little bit of an understatement since Paducah is USU's sole facility for uranium enrichment. The stock would be worthless if they had to shut down the site. I'm still hoping they will procure DOE funding for the American Centrifuge Plant in Ohio though, esp. if the Republicans win the general election.
Why would the DOE want to let USEC leave just to hire another contractor to run the plant. Is USEC playing one big crazy game of "chicken" with the DOE, Congress, The Paducah plant and the ACP project? I really hope they have somethig up their sleeve.