Good morning and welcome to United Rentals’ fourth quarter and full year 2009 investor conference call. Please be advised that this call is being recorded. Before we begin, please note that the company’s press release comments made on today’s call and responses to your questions contain forward-looking statements. The company’s business and operations are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties, many of which beyond its control and consequently actual results may differ materially from those projected. A summary of these uncertainties is included in the Safe Harbor Statement contained in the release. For a more complete description of these and other possible risks, please refer to the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as well as to subsequent filings with the SEC. You can access these filings on the company’s website at www.ur.com. Please note that United Rentals has no obligation and makes no commitment to update or publicly release any revisions to the forward-looking statements in order to reflect new information or subsequent events, circumstances, or changes in expectation. You should also note that today’s call will include references to free cash flow, adjusted EPS, EBITDA, and adjusted EBITDA, each of which is a non-GAAP term. Speaking for United Rentals is Michael Kneeland, Chief Executive Officer; and William Plummer, Chief Financial Officer. I will now turn the call over to Mr. Kneeland. Mr. Kneeland, you may begin.

Good morning everyone and thank you for joining us today. With me is Bill Plummer, our Chief Financial Officer, and other members of our senior management team. Bill will discuss 2009 financial performance, which as you know from the release, we showed a loss for the year of $0.98 per share. That’s obviously not where we want to be, but 2009 was more about controlling the things that we could control, and in that regard, our performance included numerous accomplishments. This morning I want to spend some time on the improvements that helped us outperform almost every target that was part of our outlook. As reported last night, we reduced our SG&A expense by $101 million in 2009 year over year. The reduction and cost of rentals excluding depreciation was $227 million. Our free cash flow was very strong at $367 million, and our net rental capex showed a modest outflow of $31 million compared to the net zero we projected because we saw opportunities to make strategic investments and the right kinds of rental fleet. This was a solid performance. With the cost of rentals, we fell short impart because our rental revenues were higher than we expected in fourth quarter. Now Bill is going to go over and discuss this further in just a minute, but still as I mentioned, we took cost of rentals down by $227 million, which is still a big number. As you’ll hear from us today, the numbers are only part of the story. I want to use our time this morning to talk candidly with you about where we are taking this company and how our strategy is intended to transform United Rentals into a company that is much better equipped to create value. It began with Operation United more than a…

As Mike said, I’ll provide more detail on our fourth quarter and full year financial results, but before I do that, I’d like to comment on the timing of this call. Those of you who have followed the company for a while may note that this call is happening about three weeks earlier in the month than it has historically, and I just wanted to point out that that is the result of a tremendous amount effort on the part of people within the finance organization here at United Rentals. Our view is that the sooner we can get through the reporting process, the sooner we’re able to refocus on driving improvement in the business and so we have set an objective of continuing to report on an earlier basis, so you’ll see our annual reports happen along about this time every year going forward. You’ll also see the quarterly reports happen a week sooner in the quarter than we have historically as well. This is no accident. It’s the result of a lot of hard work by a lot of people at United Rentals, so I wanted to take this opportunity to say thanks to all the folks who made it happen. Let’s turn to our performance against the targets that we have been laying out for 2009. Starting with SG&A, as Mike noted, we delivered $101 million of SG&A reductions for the year, and that included $20 million of reduction in the fourth quarter alone, consistent with what we saw through 2009, those savings in SG&A came in nearly every line of our SG&A total. We had reductions in salaries, benefits, travel and entertainment, professional fees, marketing spend; again anywhere you look in SG&A, we had improvements. On cost of rent excluding depreciation, we reduced cost by $227…

(Operator Instructions). Your next question comes from the line of Henry Kirn – UBS. Henry Kirn – UBS: Could you talk a little about how you see nonresidential industrial demand for renal is as we go through 2010, maybe compared with what you saw in the fourth quarter?

We continue to see a decline in our primary markets. That came through the back half of 2009. The rate of decline seemed to have mitigated itself, ever so slightly. As I’ve stated before, we do believe that we will hit bottom in 2010 and begin a slow climb out, but it’s not going to be until 2011 before you really see any meaningful comparisons on a year over year basis. We’re going to continue to defleet Henry, as we go through this year, but just not at the pace we did last year, so that will obviously have some impact on our revenue generation. Henry Kirn – UBS: How should we be thinking about the capex for nonrental PPE, and how should we be thinking about interest expense as we go into 2010?

For non-rental capex, I think you can look for us to continue to be aggressive in how we manage that number, and so compared to 2009, I think that’d be starting place but we will be aggressive in trying to shave non-rental capex against what we did in 2009. Henry Kirn – UBS: And on the interest expense?

You see all the components of debt. You can probably do the math as well as I can. I would expect that on a GAAP basis, interest expense will be up slightly compared to 2009 simply because we had so many of the gains on debt repurchases that flowed through interest expense in 2009. If you adjust to take out those gains and other amortization writeoffs from the 2009 number, I think you’re looking at interest expense being again just slightly down from that adjusted basis. So it’ll be up slightly on a GAAP basis, let’s put it that way.

Your next question comes from the line of David Wells – Thompson Research. David Wells – Thompson Research: Could you walk us through the difference in your rental margin between Q4 and Q3? I am just trying to get a sense of given the topline decrease, we saw I guess a greater decrease in margin, and was that just a deleveraging effect or were there some factors in that?

Renal margin Q3 was 32%, Q4 was 26.2%. Within that, it’s a seasonally soft period for us, so revenues in general will come, so you will have less ability to amortize fixed costs over the revenues. So that’s just sort of a normal seasonal pattern for us. We did have as I noted greater investments in some of the fleet, and so we had a little bit of incremental cost to get that fleet out into rental status. We had the nonoperating adjustments that I referred to as well. The $4 million of insurance reserves that we took in the fourth quarter contributed to the margin reductions, and then a host of other puts and takes that really are a lot of small ones. So those are the key things that I pointed out. David Wells – Thompson Research: Looking at the free cash flow guidance for year, I’m trying to get a sense of where the swing is coming relative to 2009. I guess your Capex is going up $70 million plus. Presumably you’ve got $100 million of additional cost savings, so where is that differential of $150 million relative to ’09 coming? Is that just softness in operating results or are there some other factors at work there?

You have to remember that we’re defleeting during the course of this year, so our average fleet size is going to be down significantly from ’09 to 2010; so smaller fleet, less fleet on rent, less ability to generate operating capex. We’ve also got rate carryover ’09 to ’10. Our rates came down during ’09, so even if we kept the rates at a constant level throughout the entire year, there’d be a negative carryover effect from rate, and a point of rate is worth a decent amount of EBITDA and cash flow, so those are probably the two big offsets to the benefits that we’ll have from lower cost and the other good things that are going on in the company. David Wells – Thompson Research: Lastly, given what you’ve scene on the rate front over the last four months, would you anticipate that you’d be able to push rates up on fleet to combat the incremental piece of fleet that goes out the door, or is it just too early to tell?

It’s still too early. We’re right in the thick of the lowest part of the cycle—our seasonality in the first quarter, and we come back and see our rates every day. As Bill mentioned, our rates were down 11.8% for the year, so that’s not where we want to be. We do have systems in place. Having said that there are opportunities and areas where we are seeing demand. We are taking full advantage of that. So where we’re spending our capital and where we see demand in the field, clearly that’s where we see the opportunities to improve rates. It’s still challenging. It’s something that we as an industry have wrestled, but the reality of it is, we continue to struggle with all the competitors out there for various reasons, but the actions that we’re taking we think will bear some fruit. What do I mean by that? I do that the ability to change our rates systematically with one switch overnight will give us the opportunity to react quicker and to adjust our rates. So that’s where we’re going, and also having that discussion before you make that rate has also helped us. It’s an ongoing process in our industry and for the company.

Your next question comes from the line of Scott Schneeberger – Oppenheimer. Scott Schneeberger – Oppenheimer: Bill, congratulations on the faster reporting. It’s symbolic of the improvement going on there, so nice work. Just following up on some of the free cash flow questions, how do you think about it with regard to your spend? I view it as potentially conservative if we have another tough year. There will be a lot more fleet reduction and therefore you will be spending less on growth and there could be upside from that. Of course, there is the offset of the lower cash from operations, but how did you build that up and would you say that it comes at a conservative level?

I think that we’ve always been labeled as being conservative, and we try to be down the fairway. The one thing for both Bill and I, if we can wrap our arms around it, we’ll update you as we go forward. What we see right now to address your question on spend, it is really driven by demand that we’re seeing from some of the customers that we’re bringing in, these national accounts, these industrial accounts, areas where we’re positioned well. It’s a balancing act, and it’s balancing against what demand and where we anticipate it going. Keep in mind, you’re right, we could always sell more fleet. We could spend less if need be, and I think we’ve proven in 2009 that we’re willing to do that if we have to. For 2010, we think that we’ll start to see the bottom and see some improvement. We’re making some strides with some of our customers, and we see that as opportunity, so the way we look at it today and it can change obviously, and we’ll update you, but with costs, it’s what we can wrap our arms around. If we get more, we’ll report it and we’ll say we can do more. With regard to our spend, if demand is there, we’ll spend it. If it’s not there, we won’t, and if we have to balance that against selling something today in the market for 30 or 40 cents on the dollar and say next year you have to spend 100 cents on the dollar, that’s the ongoing process that we go through every day. So it’s not a perfect answer to your question, but we’re balancing it, but we have the vision of looking at what our customer demand is. Scott Schneeberger – Oppenheimer: With regard to industrial, could you speak to developments you’re seeing in pricing there relative to the nonindustrial business? Are the pricing trends similar, or are we seeing a spread between the two emerging?

Our average is not dynamically different from our company average, and again what’s attractive is the fact that they keep it out for longer periods, they don’t damage it, that’s less costly for us to turn it around. So that’s the opportunity that we see out there on the rate side of things. Scott Schneeberger – Oppenheimer: With regard to industrial, and I’m going to tie national accounts into this, you said industrial in the past had a goal of 30%. I think it’s at 18% if I’m recalling correctly. How quickly do you get there based on what you’re looking at for 2010? What pieces of your mix of industial, nonindustrial, other do you see going up and down over this coming year, and then just tying in national accounts as well in the end?

Of the 233 national accounts, 62 were industrial. We have to continue to earn that business every day. Joel Dickson and his team, I continue to focus with them to sign more accounts to bring them into us, and then our management team has to go out there and continue to earn not only their business but their share of wallet, and that’s what we’re focusing on. Our goal is to be at 30% in two years. That’s our goal. It’s a stretched goal, but I think we can get there. I think that we’re setting the stage today as an organization, that we’re focused on the customer, and that we’re driving the metrics that will attract that customer and hold that customer, but that’s where we stand and that’s our internal goal. Scott Schneeberger – Oppenheimer: On national accounts, any particular goal for 2010? Is it at 24% right now?

It’s at 24%. We don’t publicly come out with what we expect every year. Our goal over the next several years would be somewhere in the vicinity of 40-45%.

Your next question comes from the line of Emily Shanks – Barclays Capital. Emily Shanks – Barclays Capital: Bill, I missed your comment. On your free cash flow, if I caught it correctly, includes a cash tax refund of what amount?

About $40 million. Emily Shanks – Barclays Capital: When will that be paid out?

It will be in the first half; it could be first quarter, it could be second quarter. Emily Shanks – Barclays Capital: What is the exact number of your OEC? The amount of outstanding, instead of the 3.8, can you give us more figures?

It’s 3763. Emily Shanks – Barclays Capital: Speaking to the business itself, as you talk about the incremental COGS savings that you’re targeting for this coming year, where exactly are those coming from, or can you bucket those for us and give us a little sense of how you will go about achieving them?

Last year, they came just about in every line, and we expect that to be the case again this year, so we’ll continue to make decisions about salary and benefit levels, headcount levels underneath those. We’ll continue to be aggressive around our facility costs. We had some benefits there this year. Mike noted that R&M expense was down 17% year over year. We put in some new technologies that we think can help us take R&M expense again down this year. And again a host of other lines that we could point to that come out of process changes, out of technology changes, out of streamlining our processes overall, and out of automating that we think can play through the whole rental process. So it’s hard to describe what the program is for taking cost out because it’s so broad across the entire organization. Emily Shanks – Barclays Capital: The last bucket of questions I have is around the borrowing base. It’s kind of two-fold; first, can you remind us how often the borrowing base is calculated, and then secondly comment on what trends you’re seeing around residual values please?

We have an audit and review every six months. The last one was in September, so we’re coming up again in March, so we’ll be looked at again at the end of March. With respect to trends, I think RALS would probably be a better source, and what they’ve seen is that values have increased over the last several months. I think the December RALS report was just out yesterday, for example, and I believe they showed an increase of about 1.6% over November, and that’s been the trend for the last few months. They’ve been up in that 1% area, so it seems like there is a little bit of an uptick in values. Let’s hope that that continues.

Your next question comes from the line of David Raso with ISI. David Raso – ISI: I didn’t fully understand the answer about the reduced free cash flow for ’10. If we’re generally speaking of $180 million decline in free cash flow year to year, we can account for roughly 80 of it from the higher net capex, so focusing on that other 100, first $110 million of cost savings year over year from a P&L perspective, is most of that cash savings?

Yes. Most of it is cash cost flowing down. David Raso – ISI: Then you also mentioned, I believe a tax cash saving of around $40 million?

Yes. There’s a cash tax refund based on the losses that we incurred in 2009 that we will realize in 2010. That’s part of the free cash flow for this year, and that was $40 million. David Raso – ISI: So the analysis of how do I lose another $100 million of cash. So far, I’m up $150 million. So I have to find a negative swing of $250. If your revenues decline 11% next year and you lose every dollar of cash, meaning every cost you have is fixed, which obviously is not true, then I see the $250. How am I losing $250 million cash flow there somewhere? I must be missing something.

We’ve got a powerful de-fleet cycle going, and you have to really understand that to really be able to get into the cash impact of that. What we said in our press release was that our fleet would end the year at $3.6 billion as I recall, and that’s down from $3763 that I just gave at the end of 2009. The average size of our fleet during 2010 will be down as a result of that, so when you look at the reduction in size of our fleet, along with an assumption around time utilization which is, let’s just say time utilization stays flat year over year, that’s a pretty powerful negative impact on earnings and cash flow, so that’s a big chunk of that missing cash flow if you will, and then you have to look at the impact of rate. I mentioned that we’ve got a negative carryover effect from rate, and that’s assuming that rates stay stable throughout the course of 2010. If revenues are going down, to use your 11% number, you have to make it some kind of assumption about how rates are going to perform in that environment. They are likely to be down, so rate impact is very powerful in affecting cash flow as well, so the combination of de-fleet and rate challenges is probably the bulk of the delta that you’re trying to explain in free cash flow. There are other nicks in that; as I said interest expense would be up a little bit, so there will be a little bit of an impact from cash interest expense. It’s not major, and then there are some elements in terms of the mix of revenues that could have an impact. Those are the key missing pieces, and we’ve made our estimate for what 2010 is going to look like and that’s where the cash flow falls at. Does that make sense to David?

The next question comes from the line of Philip Volpicelli with Cantor Fitzgerald. Philip Volpicelli – Cantor Fitzgerald: First question is what is the restrictive payments capacity to go from United Rentals North America to United Rentals, Inc., please?

The RP limitation right now is the most stringent one is in the 6-1/2s, which are still outstanding, and that as we have said in the past several hundred million dollars negative. The basket is negative by several hundred million dollars. Once we redeem that issue, the next most restrictive payment limitation will be in our senior subordinated notes. Both the 7 and the 7-3/4 have RP limitations. Their baskets are also large negative, several hundred billion large negative there. The good news there is that they are subnotes, so the limitation would only prohibit us from upstreaming cash to the holding company, but I also should point out that the new senior unsubordinated notes that we did, the 10-7/8 and the 9-1/4 have RP limitations as well, and their baskets are also negative, but slightly negative. They are only negative to the extent of net losses that we have incurred since they have been issued, so I think the 10-7/8s, the RP basket is negative in the tens of millions. Philip Volpicelli – Cantor Fitzgerald: In terms of free cash flow, you said you were going to pay down debt. Is it continuing to extend maturities or is there something special that you plan to do with the cash flow?

We certainly will look at the best opportunities for paying down debt. We’ve got as I am sure you know a put on our 1-7/8s convertible note issue that is available to investors in October. We expect that to be put, so that’ll absorb $115 million roughly of the cash flow, and then we’ll look for opportunities beyond that that make sense for us. We don’t have a specific action in mind right now for using the rest of the cash. Philip Volpicelli – Cantor Fitzgerald: In terms of overall fleet oversupply in the industry, it appears that it might be getting a little bit more in line with demand. How do you guys see that, and can you break it up possibly regionally?

I would say that there’s still an oversupply of aerial equipment, particularly the smaller units. Large boom seems to be doing very well, and that would be across North American on balance. Earth moving is starting to improve. Earth moving is not just the big earth moving, but more like small excavators, loaders, skids loaders. You see pockets of that. It’s actually doing well on the West Coast and also up in the North East and in Canada as well. Florida I think is still ways off from needing any kind of equipment and probably still a little oversaturated, but I would say from a macro view, earth moving is doing better, as you would expect because it’s usually the first line into the business, or in the construction cycle, and aerial will be toward the tail end, and that’s also reflective if you take a look at the RALS report. The used prices are actually increasing on earth moving, and aerial is flat and in some products it’s actually down.

The next question comes from the line of Chris Doherty with Oppenheimer & Co. Chris Doherty – Oppenheimer & Co: On your expectations for fleet at the end of 2010, at that point, do you expect that your fleet will be such that you’re running at what has historically been a 68 to 70% type target on utilization or do you think that there still be some fleet in their that will be able to absorb demand as it comes back into 2011?

Given the profile of 2010 that we’ve assumed right now, I would say it’s hard to imagine that a $3.6 billion fleet would be able to operate at high 60s, 67-68% utilization at the end of this year. Mike, feel free to disagree with me, but that would be a great environment if we were able to achieve it.

That’s right. Are we building towards that? Yes. Are we changing our customer segmentation to maximize the fleet? Yes. Will it take time? Yes, but not in ’10. Chris Doherty – Oppenheimer & Co: When demand does come back in 2011 as you expect, you probably won’t have to increase your capex spend to handle that. You’ll have some latent EBITDA growth there before you have to actually spend to service it.

That’s a great point, and it’s something that I have mentioned when I was out on the road. You’re right. When people ask us about the needs for capital, we still have room to improve our time utilization, and we would get improvements in our rates at the same timeframe, so those are the two areas that you would see, first time, rate, and then you would see more investment needed. Chris Doherty – Oppenheimer & Co: Your rates were down this quarter, I think you said 9 point something percent. If you think of the effect of mix on that, is mix a positive or a negative to that number?

Mix has some of it. Geography has it as well, and it plays out all over North America, but some of the regions do better, but it’s all market driven. Mix is part of it, but not all of it. Chris Doherty – Oppenheimer & Co: But that number that you gave does not include mix, does it?

It’s constant.

It’s a constant mix calculation Chris, and so there is not an explicit mix impact there, but I think Mike’s comments are dead on. Even if we had a mix impact, it’s probably not the major part of the story.

I’ll like to turn the program back to management for any further remarks.

I want to thank all of you for joining us today, and as you can see, while we are mindful of the economy, our focus is on the elements of our business that are within our control, and we also have updated our investor presentation on our website last night, so please feel free to download a fresh copy and call us with any questions here. Thank you very much. Have a great day and look forward to our next call.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.