Good morning. My name is Janisha, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2014 Earnings Release Conference Call. I will now turn the call over to Mr. Ed Egl, Director of Investor Relations. Thank you. Mr. Egl, you may begin your conference.

Thank you, Janisha. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us for our Fourth Quarter 2014 Earnings Conference Call. With me this morning are David Steiner, President and Chief Executive Officer; Jim Fish, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and Jim Trevathan, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Before we get started, please note that we have filed a Form 8-K this morning that includes the earnings press release and is available on our website at www.wm.com. The Form 8-K, the press release and the schedules to the press release include important information. During the call, you will hear forward-looking statements, which are based on current expectations, projections or opinions about future periods. Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. Some of these risks and uncertainties are discussed in today's press release and in our filings with the SEC, including our most recent Form 10-K. David and Jim will discuss our results in the areas of yield and volume, which unless otherwise stated, are more specifically references to internal revenue growth or IRG from yield or volume. Additionally, any comparisons unless otherwise stated, will be with the fourth quarter of 2013. During the call, David and Jim will discuss our earnings per diluted share, which they may refer to as EPS or earnings per share. David and Jim will also address operating EBITDA and operating EBITDA margin as defined in the earnings press release and Form 8-K filed today. EPS, effective tax rate, income from operations, income from operations margin, operating EBITDA, operating EBITDA margin, SG&A and SG&A as a percent revenue results discussed in the call have been adjusted, and EPS projections are anticipated to be adjusted to include items that management believe do not reflect our…

Your first question comes from the line of Alex Ovshey of Goldman Sachs. Alex Ovshey - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Thank you. Good morning, guys. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning. James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Good morning, Alex. Alex Ovshey - Goldman Sachs & Co.: On the cost saves, you talked about $60 million benefit on the SG&A line. Is there any target for the cost of goods line for 2015 and expected cost saves from the cost initiatives you have in place right now? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, the cost of goods sold line, we certainly have seen an improvement in that line as we've taken some aggressive steps, but I don't have an exact number for you there, Alex. I think we can get something to you though. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: But the key, Alex, is that as we manage those rebates better, our cost of goods sold as a percent of the commodity price that we achieve continues to improve. And so, we would expect that to continue to improve in 2015. As Jim said, we got to take some steps to really fix the recycling business because if you look at not just at Waste Management, but across the entire recycling industry, you're seeing a divestment in recycling assets. And so, for the benefit not just of Waste Management, but I think for the viability of recycling in the United States, we have to have some core fundamental changes that Jim described to make the business long-term viable. Alex Ovshey - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Makes sense, David. And on the Deffenbaugh acquisition, can you say when you expect that to close? And what you expect the contribution should be to the 2015 earnings number? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. We'll give the contribution number once we actually close it. And we would expect to be able to close it likely within the next 30 days. Alex Ovshey - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Very good. Thank you. I'll turn it over. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Joe Box of KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Hey. Good morning, guys. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning. James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Good morning, Joe.

So Jim, thanks for the rundown on the recycling business. I guess I'm just curious what your guys' views are on the market. If you look a couple years out, let's say hypothetically, commodity prices remain at this low level. I know a lot of operators are kind of intermingled with their businesses. So if you start to see guys really struggle in the recycling space, what is this space look like a couple years from now and how does that impact you? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: So Joe, as David mentioned in his script, I mean, we've done a good job of compensating for some of this price declines. In fact, he said that we just recently changed to this 3% to 5% negative guidance and that was because for the month of January, we felt pretty good about compensating for what was, at the time, about a $10 decline in pricing. We've seen an additional decline in February and hence the negative guidance for recycling. As far as what it looks like going forward, boy, we have not been real successful in projecting the outlook for recycling over years. So the only thing we can do to control that is take an aggressive stance on changing these contracts and then take a tough stance on cost control. Projecting the commodity price is something we haven't been very adept at. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: And Joe, again, look, the viability of recycling is, at its core, very simple. You sell the commodity for a certain price, right. In the past, what the industry has done is said we'll sell the commodity for a certain price and then whatever our processing cost is we'll be able to…

Great. I appreciate the color on that. Can you guys talk about your coal ash business, maybe how it's different versus some of your other peers? And then I've seen a couple of awards for coal ash to be shipped to some of your landfills. I'm just curious what the quoting pipeline looks like right now for coal ash? Are utilities starting to look at remediating old surface impoundments outside of South Carolina and North Carolina? Or is it still too soon to start thinking about that? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. It's really too soon. We need to really try to put numbers around the coal ash. But what I'd tell you, Joe, is that we saw this coming three years ago, two-and-a-half years ago when the regulations were first proposed and we've been out in front of customers trying to work on solutions ever since. And so, we're not new to the party here. We've been doing it for a long time. We've developed those customer relationships, and so we would expect to do – I mean, to the extent that there is revenue generated from the new coal ash regulations, we would expect to get more than our fair share.

Thanks for the color, guys. Take care. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Corey Greendale of First Analysis.

Hey, good morning. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning.

First, I had more of a historical question. So you touched on the cost of ops. I'm not sure that I have a complete grasp of why the cost of ops was down so much. So I know that press release cites divestitures. I think Wheelabrator wasn't divested to the very end of the quarter. So could you just maybe elaborate a little bit on what drove the strong improvement in cost of ops both on a dollar basis and as a percent of revenue? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Yes. I think there were a couple things that drove the cost of operations down. First of all, we've taken a tough stance on – but the right stance to take on managing labor in operations. That will continue going forward. We've used some routing technology and that has started to bear some fruit. Additionally, of course, as everyone knows, fuel prices affect the cost of operations. And so while you see it coming off of the operating expense line, you'll also see it coming off the top line in the form of a fuel surcharge. James E. Trevathan - Chief Operating Officer & Executive Vice President: Yes, Corey, Jim Trevathan here. We're about halfway through at implementing our, what we call, service delivery optimization: the onboard computers that we put on all of our routed trucks and getting the value out of those through the routing tools that Jim mentioned. And the labor reductions, we've done a much better job recently at getting both labor and routes out as volume changes have occurred. And you see the results of that, in addition to fuel.

So Jim or Jim then, if you look at the 2015 guidance, you said you expect SG&A to be below 10% of revenue. Can you get some sense of what cost of ops assumption is baked into the guidance? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Gosh, cost of operations, look, I think for 2015 operating costs, we expect that we will be able to continue the progress we've made in 2014. I don't see a big increase in OpEx as a percent of revenue. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes, we would expect to see some modest improvement in costs as a percent of revenue. The big issue that we've got is volume, right. I mean, I think you all know that the ability to leverage costs from new commercial volumes is dramatic. We haven't seen commercial volumes turn positive. So we would expect to see some modest improvement in cost of operations as a percent of revenue, but we'll really see that improve as we start to see commercial volumes pick up in 2015 going through 2016. And then, we'd also expect to continue to see improvement in our operating costs at the recycling line. So we'll see some modest improvement in operating costs. As Jim said, we'll see some good improvement on SG&A. So we should see that 100 basis point plus improvement to margins next year.

Okay. Great. And then, David, to your point on volume, first of all, I think you made a comment about storms in the East. Does that suggest that we should be expecting a somewhat softer than the trend line on volume in Q1? And then, the comment you just made about lines improving on the commercial side. Does that suggest that you think overall volumes could go positive at some point during 2015 and then in 2016? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see at the back half of 2015 that we start to see the trend line turning positive from a volume point of view. Probably not till later in the year, but given what we've seen from the economy and housing starts, I wouldn't be surprised to see that at all coming out of 2015 and into 2016. With respect to the first quarter, no look, we see volume reports on a very frequent basis. You've seen a little bit of a drop-off in volumes, but as you know, sometimes those volumes bounce back real quickly in March because of the weather. So no, we're not trying to say that we will definitely see down volumes in the first quarter. But given what you all, particularly up on the East Coast, in Boston and other parts of the East Coast, what you're going through, we just wanted to make sure that everybody understands that you really can't judge the full year by first quarter volumes.

Yes. Understood. Thank you. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Al Kaschalk with Wedbush Securities.

Good morning. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning, Al.

I just wanted to follow up on the volume question. It just strikes me as, I don't know if it's sending out a warning sign or what, but you guys are collecting trash, so I don't think, the weather has never stopped you before, so what's behind the comment, David? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: There is absolutely nothing behind that comment, other than the fact that we say it every year, which is when you start to see the seasonal uptick from March through June, we'll get a real good feel for the prior question, which is will we see positive volumes in the back half of the year. But the only point we're making is that we're not going to make any assumptions on full year volumes based on the first quarter because the first quarter always has a weather impact.

Great. And then on the volume side again, just what's ticking higher better than your expectations? Because I would have thought the volume guidance range would have been a little bit wider than 50 basis points to flat. In other words, closer to the down 1% to flat. So what's ticking up for you? And obviously, it showed up in the fourth quarter as well. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. Look, when we look across the various lines, let's take them one line at a time. On the commercial line, we're seeing net service increases improve. We're seeing pounds per yard improve. And I think we're seeing generally sort of overall economic improvement, whether it's new business starts or new housing starts. And so we've been waiting for the pick-up in commercial volumes for a long time. And I guess for the first time in the last three years, what I would say is we're pretty optimistic they're going to improve. Now, we're not going to try to say they're going to turn positive in 2015. But we haven't said in three years that we're pretty optimistic that they're going to improve in 2015. On the industrial line, again looking at the general economy, looking at housing starts, that's all good. A big part of our industrial line is our energy services, and I think everybody would acknowledge that energy services is a big question mark for 2015. But we've done a spectacular job in energy services of increasing our market share where we have assets. And so, we expect to see increased market share at least partially offset some of the volumes on the industrial line of business. So we're fairly positive there. On the residential side, we've lost a lot of residential…

And that was, sorry Jim, that was to drive or recover collection volumes to gain the operating leverage, was that the point? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Right. As we see collection volumes start to improve, which was what we've seen with 110 basis point improvement sequentially from Q3 to Q4, we need to make sure that we have all of the pieces in place operating-wise to control costs. Collection volumes have a higher operating cost, variable operating cost than do landfill volumes. So we feel good about going into 2015 with those pieces in place.

Okay. And finally, if I may, I don't know if I heard correctly what the benefit in Q4 was on fuel, but what maybe have you baked into 2015 whether that's a dollar volume or a dollar level or versus margin benefit? And then secondly in regards to that, how do you expect the competitors to react, particularly in the highly competitive markets, on this lower fuel price because isn't that simply an incentive for them to perhaps even lower price? So do you see that as a particular option? And then finally, I think, David, congratulations to you on this past weekend's performance. Thanks. James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: So setting aside that congratulations, let me address the – we beat you to it. Let me address the first question, Al. Look, as far as fuel goes – I mean, look, large price declines as we've seen recently, large price spikes, put us into an under-recovery or over-recovery position. Large price declines put us into an over-recovery position. But over time, our fuel surcharge program fully recovers cost increases for us. So for the most part, we're generally agnostic with respect to the price of fuel. In 2015, we expect there would be a slight benefit to margin, maybe 10 basis points from lower fuel cost. But for the most parts, we would expect that that fuel surcharge, which has a lag to it, will catch up and we'll be in kind of a full recovery position where we aren't over-recovering or under-recovering depending on the direction of fuel. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: And to the competitive question, I think generally what we've seen in declining fuel markets is that the competition doesn't generally take that as an opportunity to go out and lower price. They take it as an opportunity to improve their bottom line. And the other part is that, for the most part, our largest competitors also have a fuel surcharge, so it shouldn't have any difference to them whatsoever.

Thank you, David and Jim. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Tyler Brown of Raymond James. Patrick Tyler Brown - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Hey. Good morning, guys. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning. Patrick Tyler Brown - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Hey. Jim, just at a very high level, can you just kind of bridge the $2.4 billion in pro forma operating cash flow to the midpoint here in 2015 to $2.7 billion? I mean, I'm just kind of looking for the big puts and takes. I mean, presumably, you've got a drag from commodities, FX, but then you do have some offsets with Deffenbaugh, the tuck-ins, internal growth, the cash taxes, et cetera. But just trying to help us understand the components of that $300 million? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Yes. So as you said, there's going to be a number of pluses and minuses there. On the minus side, as we talked about, we've got some recycling challenges potentially. We have a little bit of added capital expenditures versus where we finished the year, mostly related to the big contracts coming on board. We have a year-over-year working capital hit from the fact that last year we accelerated bonus. But we also have some working capital pick-up as well: the fact that hopefully we won't have another big legal settlements this year. And we're making quite a bit of progress on working capital, as well on DSO and DPO. So on the plus side, we've got the restructuring impact. We have lower interest expense. We've got those working capital items. And then, really, at that point, you get to our core business, which includes the aggressive approach to cost control. It includes pricing. And so…

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Hoffman of Stifel. Michael E. Hoffman - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.: Hi. Thank you very much for taking my questions this morning. Nice end to the 2014. On recycling, just so I understand all the data you're sharing with us on your guidance, giving the negative $0.03 to $0.05, but there's an offset. And if I look at the offset you recorded in – and the offset you trying to run the business better that you recorded in the fourth quarter, down about proportionally the same in 4Q as we are sort of going into 2015. So am I right in you've got about $0.12 you're trying to drive savings – or I mean, sorry, there's $0.12 of loss from paper and there's $0.07 to $0.09 of savings that you're trying to drive. So the question is how much more do you have to play in that sort of $0.07 to $0.09 range to work with going forward? If we're structurally in a long-term low paper price environment, and we got a long tail on the solution – I get you're working on the solution. But how much more do you have to play with in driving incremental improvements? James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Yes. I guess, Michael, when I look at this on a blended basis, so I'm not breaking it out, my answer won't be on a OCC versus plastics versus other commodities. But on a blended basis, we finished the year 2014 at $98, and we saw a January drop about $10, so to $89 and that impacts us on the 6 million tons that we actually pick up and take to our MRFs, about $60 million in revenue, which equates…

Your next question comes from the line of Scott Levine of Imperial.

Hey. Good morning, guys. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Morning.

I just wanted to be clear on the comments regarding the thoughts on replacing the Wheelabrator or the lost business in general at seven times multiple. Firstly, should we be assuming that – what should we be assuming for share repurchase in your 2015 guidance, should I say? And then the seven times multiple you expect to pay, is that strictly on the solid waste side of the business? Or maybe a little update with regard to your interest in energy waste and additional color regarding your assumptions there. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. So for the share repurchase, you can assume that we offset dilution, but that we're going to do it in the back half of the year. So obviously, there will be a little bit of an earnings effect because you're not replacing dilution right at the beginning of the year. And so, we would expect to do share repurchases to offset dilution. James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: And as far as energy services goes, look, there's two things going on with energy services right now. On the price side, and I think you may have heard that from some of the other calls earlier or last week I guess, on the price side, we're working with E&P companies on addressing their price concession requests. We'll see where that ends up. On the volume side, we do expect to see a slowdown in drilling. I guess the good news is though that it seems to be hitting the big three the hardest, those being Permian, Bakken and Eagle Ford. And we have no exposure in Permian and limited exposure in Bakken and Eagle Ford. So it's also important to understand that our energy services business, while it's a great business for us, is still small as a percentage of our overall business. And while we will feel some price and volume pressures there in 2015, I think we'll be able to make up that in the other parts of our manufacturing and industrial business such as coal ash and petrochemical plant production, things like that.

Got it. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: And then, Scott, to the question of the replacement of the EBITDA, the acquisitions that we do will be core solid waste or very closely related to core solid waste. So we feel pretty comfortable that we can look at those type of acquisitions and understand exactly what kind of synergies we're going to get out of those, right. And so what we've always said is that we're not going to go out and pay a higher multiple than what we're trading at. If I'm going to buy something at the multiple we're trading at, and we've always used sort of the long-term 8.5 times EBITDA, I'd rather buy back our own stock than buying a business I don't know. And so, post synergies, we'd expect those type of acquisitions to, on the high end, come in at sort of the 7 to 8 times EBITDA, and on the low end, come in at sort of the 5 to 6 times EBITDA. So somewhere between, I would say generally when we're looking to replace the Wheelabrator divested EBITDA, I would say that generally, we're looking at larger acquisitions which trade a little bit higher than normal tuck-in acquisitions. So I would say that the EBITDA there is going to be somewhere between 6 and 8 times. We used 7 for our assumption, and that assumption is made at least to us being able to replace the full amount of Wheelabrator EBITDA and still have a significant amount of cash proceeds left.

Right. So to be clear, you do see enough within the pipeline of that larger acquisition type you're talking within core solid waste to assign a high probability to your chances of replacing the bulk of that, with good visibility, by the middle of the year? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. I would say – I wouldn't put high probability on it quite yet. I think by midyear we'll know if there's a high probability. We've got some good acquisition candidates, but we've got to make sure that we can do a deal that works for both of them and for us. And so we've talked to a few larger acquisition targets that it seems like we're on the same page. We've talked to at least one where we're not on the same page, where they wanted more like 11 to 12 times EBITDA. And we basically said look, we've got two choices. We can either buy your business at 11 to 12 times EBITDA or we can go in and buy smaller businesses that mirror your geographic footprint and we could go in and do that. And so we're not going to pay 11 to 12 times EBITDA. We'd rather go out and buy smaller – in that geographic area, we'd rather buy smaller companies. So we do think there's some targets, but before I say that I'm confident, we can replace the Wheelabrator EBITDA, we want to make sure that we're on the same page from a valuation point of view. And like we said, we should have a very good feel for that by midyear.

Okay. We'll stay tuned. Thanks. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Your final question comes from the line of Barbara Noverini of Morningstar.

Hey. Good morning, everybody. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Morning.

When analyzing the acquisition landscape, can you give us a general sense for the health of the recycling operations of tuck-in candidates that are similar in size to a Deffenbaugh, for instance. So if these businesses come with existing recycling contracts that are unattractive from a rebate standpoint, let's say, do you have to wait for these contracts to be rebid? Or can you improve the recycling economics of these tuck-ins immediately, despite instituting some of the costs control you've talked about today? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. Generally, frankly, the acquisitions that we're looking at really don't have a recycling component associated with them. And quite honestly, if they did have a recycling component associated with them, we're either going to pay very little for it or we're actually going to subtract from it. I think you hit the nail right on the head. If they have bad recycling contracts that they can't get out of, we're just not going to pay them for it. Or we might even reduce the price because of those recycling contracts. So when we look at the acquisition candidate, what we're going to is we're going to pay for the business that we know. We're going to pay for the business that we can very easily find out what kind of synergies we get. And then we're not going to pay for the businesses where we don't have the synergies. But you're also correct that if they did have a recycling component, there's plenty of places where geographically we can then consolidate with our facilities. So what I would say as a quick summation is that most of the assets that we're looking at buying don't have a strong residential recycling component to them. To the extent that they do, we would take that into account in connection with the value we pay for the business.

Got it. That's helpful. And then, what is your appetite for acquisitions within energy services? So you had mentioned increasing market share, so are you looking at this area in particular to deploy some of the Wheelabrator proceeds? David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Yes. We're probably looking at it a lot harder at $80 oil then $50 oil. But look, over the long-term, I think that's going to be a very good business. If we could get assets in that line of business at the right price, we would certainly look at doing that. But I would tell you that the right price today is not what the right price was six months ago. And so, it would have to be something where we would feel fairly confident that over the long-term, we could make the business profitable.

Got it. Thanks and great job this year. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you. James C. Fish - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thank you. David P. Steiner - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you all for joining our earnings call. As you can see, our team here at corporate and our team out in the field created some great momentum in 2014. We fully expect that to continue through 2015. And as we replace the Wheelabrator EBITDA in 2015, we're going to accelerate that growth into 2016. So thank you all and we'll talk to you soon.