Greetings, and welcome to the Waste Connections Q4 2021 earnings conference call. During the presentation, all participants will be in a listen-only mode. Afterwards, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. At that time, if you have a question, please press the one followed by the four on your telephone. If at any time during the conference you need to reach an operator, please press star zero. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded Thursday, February 17th, 2022. I would now like to turn the conference over to Worthing Jackman, President and CEO. Please go ahead. Thank you, operator, and good morning. I'd like to welcome everyone to this conference call to discuss Q4 results and our outlook for both the Q1 and full year 2022. I'm joined this morning by Mary Anne Whitney, our CFO. As noted in our earnings release, 2021 ended on a high note as strong solid waste, organic growth and acquisition activity along with continuing underlying margin expansion drove Q4 financial results once again above expectations. Acquisition activity accelerated in the Q4, resulting in approximately $400 million in acquired annualized revenues in 2021 and setting up acquisition contribution approaching 6% in 2022, including transactions completed year to date. Along with solid waste price and growth of about 6.5%, this already positions us for double-digit% growth in revenue, adjusted EBITDA and adjusted free cash flow in 2022. Put simply, 2021 is a reflection of how an intentional culture of commitment and accountability to all stakeholders enabled us to excel in a challenging operating environment, overcome inflationary pressures and supply chain issues, execute our growth strategy, expand margins, support employee health and welfare, and position the company well for 2022 and beyond. Before we get into much more detail, let me turn the call over to Mary Anne for our forward-looking disclaimer and other housekeeping items. Thank you, Worthing, and good morning. The discussion during today's call includes forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. Actual results could differ materially from those made in such forward-looking statements due to various risks and uncertainties. Factors that could cause actual results to differ are discussed both in the cautionary statement included in our February 16th earnings release and in greater detail in Waste Connections' filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Securities Commissions or similar regulatory authorities in Canada. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as there may be additional risks of which we are not presently aware or that we currently believe are immaterial, which could have an adverse impact on our business. We make no commitment to revise or update any forward-looking statements in order to reflect events or circumstances that may change after today's date. On the call, we will discuss non-GAAP measures such as adjusted EBITDA, adjusted net income attributable to Waste Connections on both a dollar basis and per diluted share, and adjusted free cash flow. Please refer to our earnings releases for a reconciliation of such non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measures. Management uses certain non-GAAP measures to evaluate and monitor the ongoing financial performance of our operations. Other companies may calculate these non-GAAP measures differently. I will now turn the call back over to Worthing. Thank you, Mary Anne. We're extremely pleased with our strong operating and financial performance in Q4 and throughout 2021 as we managed through the pandemic and related impacts with an intentional approach to strategy, culture, execution and value creation. Our proactive approach to pricing through labor pressures, accelerating capital expenditures through supply chain constraints, and maintaining our focus on servicing our customers drove record performance in 2021 and positions us for another outsized year of revenue, adjusted EBITDA and adjusted free cash flow growth in 2022. We often highlight the importance of a culture in driving differentiated results, and our results are emblematic of that purposeful culture in action. Our culture guided our response from the onset of the pandemic as we focused on reducing employee concerns regarding health, welfare, and family obligations. To date, that investment totals over $50 million, primarily focused on our frontline employees, including $10 million during the recent Omicron surge in January, when we reinstituted both paid leave for COVID-19 related absences and supplemental wages in recognition of frontline efforts to honor our service commitments during an extremely tough operating environment. That intentional focus on execution also drove continuous improvement in safety in 2021 as we not only maintained the 12% gains we achieved in safety-related incident rates during 2020, but drove continued improvement in spite of reopening activity. During 2021, over 55% of our operating locations either posted zero safety-related incidents or year-over-year improvements, and our total recorded injury rate and cost of risk as a percentage of revenue remained well below industry averages. We also delivered 5% solid waste price in 2021, 100- basis points above our initial outlook as we recognized and addressed the need for incremental price throughout the year to help offset inflationary pressures. Adjusted EBITDA margin expanded each quarter, excluding the impact of acquisitions, and it was up 70- basis points for the full year, even including the impact of acquisitions. Moreover, we're already set up for pricing of about 6.5% in 2022 and perhaps ultimately approaching 7%. As we recognize the realities of continued elevated inflation rates, which informs our outlook for 2022. In spite of inflationary pressures and a 25% year-over-year increase in CapEx in 2021, adjusted free cash flow increased 20% and exceeded $1 billion with a conversion rate of over 52% of adjusted EBITDA. We are positioned for similar strong conversion and continuing double-digit free cash flow growth again in 2022. We continue to reinvest in and grow our business, successfully accelerating fleet and equipment purchases in spite of macro supply chain issues. Looking ahead, our 2022 outlook includes CapEx up another 14% to $850 million, including $100 million for new landfill gas and resource recovery facilities. Consistent with our priorities identified in our sustainability report, these investments include two greenfield recycling facilities in existing markets and renewable gas projects at two of our landfills, all projected to be operational in late 2023. At approximately $150 million in total capital outlays over two years, these are strategic investments with attractive paybacks, even at more normalized values for recovered resources. As we have consistently emphasized in our approach to ESG, these projects are an integral part of our business and are consistent with our focus on value creation. Looking specifically at the two renewable gas facilities at our landfills, these projects are part of a group of 15-20 projects in various stages of development and expected to be completed over the next 10-15 years, with third-party partners involved in about two-thirds of these opportunities and Waste Connections owning the remainder. Looking next at acquisitions, following four years of above-average activity, 2021 once again stood out for the pace and magnitude of activity, which accelerated at year-end, as expected, to drive another outsized year. We completed over 30 acquisitions, all in solid waste and spread across our geographic footprint in both franchise and new competitive markets and including a number of tuck-ins to existing operations. We continue to be selective about the markets we pursue, the risk profiles we accept, and the valuations we determine to be appropriate. In total, we acquired approximately $400 million in annualized revenue in 2021, and we've closed another $100 million in annualized revenue year to date, providing 2022 acquisition contribution of about $350 million in revenue or about 6% from deals already completed. This strong start to the year, along with continued elevated acquisition dialogue, potentially sets up 2022 for another outsized year of activity. In spite of acquisition outlays of over $1 billion and almost doubling our return of capital to shareholders in 2021, our leverage remained essentially flat at about 2.4 times net debt to EBITDA. We remain well positioned for continuing elevated levels of investment in our solid waste growth strategy, whether via organic growth, new resource recovery projects, or solid waste acquisitions. It's an all-of-the-above approach with differentiated returns, not one with trade-offs, that drives continuing long-term double-digit free cash flow per share growth. 2021 marked our 18th consecutive year of positive total shareholder returns, and we returned $560 million to shareholders through dividends and opportunistic share repurchases, including about $350 million dollars of shares repurchased in early and late 2021. In addition, we've already repurchased another $425 million dollars of shares in 2022. Now I'd like to pass the call to Mary Anne to review more in depth the financial highlights of the Q4 and provide a detailed outlook for Q1 and our full year 2022. I will then wrap up before heading into Q&A. Thank you, Worthing. In the Q4, revenue was $1.624 billion, about $44 million above our outlook and up $226 million or 16% year-over-year. Acquisitions completed since the year-ago period contributed about $83 million of revenue in the quarter or about $79 million net of divestitures. Total price in Q4 of 5.7%, including about 70- basis points in fuel and material surcharges, was our highest reported price in a decade and ranged from about 2.6% in our mostly exclusive market Western region to between 5.8% and 7.2% in our competitive markets. Solid waste volumes of 1.2% exceeded our expectations with positive volumes in all U.S. regions. Volumes were strongest in our Central region, including Colorado and the Plains states, where mild winter weather through most of the quarter led to better-than-expected activity, and also in our Western region, where landfill activity was strong up until late December's epic snowfall. Underlying volumes were also up in Canada, but down on a reported basis due to the expiration during the quarter of a poor-quality municipal contract inherited in our 2016 Progressive Waste acquisition. Looking at year-over-year results in the Q4 on a same-store basis. Commercial collection revenue was up 13%. Roll-off revenue was up 11% on pulls per day up 5%, with revenue per pull up 6%. Landfill tons were up 4% on increases of 3%-5% in all waste types. Moving on to E&P waste. As expected, revenue was essentially in line with the prior quarter at about $34 million, up $9 million year-over-year and up about 45% from the lows we saw in mid-2020. We remain encouraged by increased rig counts and elevated crude pricing levels, which, if sustained, could lead to increased E&P waste activity over the course of 2022. Looking at Q4 revenues from recovered commodities, that is recycled commodities, landfill gas, and renewable energy credits or RINs. Excluding acquisitions in the aggregate, they were up about 90% year-over-year due to both higher RIN prices and higher recycled commodity revenues due to strong fiber values. Prices for OCC or old corrugated containers averaged about $185 per ton in Q4, decreasing during the quarter to end the year at about $170, with current values about $160 per ton. Renewable energy credits or RINs averaged about $2.80 in Q4, including the impact of a hedge which rolled off at year-end. During Q4, spot rates were in the range of $325-$350, where they have remained year to date. Adjusted EBITDA for Q4 is reconciled in our earnings release with $495 million, about $9 million above our outlook and 30.5% of revenue, up 20- basis points year-over-year, excluding the margin dilutive impact of acquisitions. Underlying solid waste margin expansion of about 40- basis points plus 90- basis points from recycled commodities, RINs, and E&P net of fuel, more than offset higher wages and COVID-19 related increased overtime and outside repairs, as well as the return of certain discretionary and COVID-19 related support costs. Capital expenditures of $744 million in 2021 were about $44 million above expectations as we continued to capitalize on opportunities to acquire fleet and equipment as we approached year-end. In spite of CapEx up 25% on a year-over-year basis, we delivered full year adjusted free cash flow up 20% year over year at $1.1 billion or 16.4% of revenue, reflecting a conversion of 52.6% of adjusted EBITDA. Moreover, we entered 2022 well-positioned from a working capital standpoint, which once again provides a strong cushion. I will now review our outlook for the Q1 and full year 2022. Before I do, we'd like to remind everyone once again that actual results may vary significantly based on risks and uncertainties outlined in our safe harbor statement and filings we've made with the SEC and the Securities Commissions or similar regulatory authorities in Canada. We encourage investors to review these factors carefully. Our outlook assumes no change in the current economic environment. It also excludes any impact from additional acquisitions that may close during the remainder of the year and expensing of transaction-related items during the period. Looking first at the full year 2022. Revenue in 2022 is estimated at $6.875 billion. For solid waste, we expect mostly price-led organic growth of 6.5%-7%, plus about $350 million from acquisitions already completed, with E&P waste revenue and the values for recycled commodities and renewable fuels assumed about in line with current levels. Adjusted EBITDA in 2022, as reconciled in our earnings release, is expected to be approximately $2.145 billion or 31.2% of revenue. Excluding the 20- basis points margin dilutive impact of acquisitions already completed and 15- basis points for January's COVID support costs, margins would be up about 35- basis points. Any moderation in inflationary trends, increases in the values for recovered commodities or in E&P waste activity or additional acquisitions closed during the year would provide upside to our initial 2022 outlook. Regarding tax rates, our effective tax rate for 2022 is expected to be approximately 22% with some quarter-to-quarter variability, and cash taxes are expected at 50%-60% of book. Finally, our share count is expected to be about 259 million on a fully diluted basis, consistent with the share repurchases already completed year to date. Adjusted free cash flow in 2022, as reconciled in our earnings release, is expected to be approximately $1.15 billion or about 53.5% of adjusted EBITDA and about 16.7% of revenue on CapEx totaling $850 million, including $100 million for new landfill gas and resource recovery facilities, as Worthing described. To be clear, 2022 adjusted free cash flow of $1.15 billion, projected up 13.9% year-over-year, includes the incremental $100 million in CapEx. Turning now to our outlook for Q1 2022. Revenue for Q1 is estimated to be approximately $1.61 billion. We expect price plus volume growth for solid waste of about 6.5%, primarily price. The positive volume trends we saw in most of Q4 continued into January, but severe winter weather has since impacted many parts of the U.S. Reported volumes will also continue to be impacted by the expiration of the municipal contract in Canada noted earlier, as well as the end earlier this quarter of the remaining low-quality Progressive Waste municipal contract in our southern region. We've mentioned looking forward to the end of these lingering poor quality contracts since completing the Progressive Waste acquisition in 2016. In the aggregate, they account for revenues of about $50 million or about 80 basis points of volume. We're happily redeploying assets from both of these expired contracts for better returns. E&P waste revenue and recovered commodity values are expected to remain in line with current levels. Adjusted EBITDA in Q1 is estimated to be approximately $495 million or 30.7% of revenue, down 30- basis points year-over-year. Excluding 30- basis points margin dilutive impact from acquisitions already completed and 60- basis points impact from January's COVID support, margins would be up about 60- basis points in the quarter. Depreciation and amortization for the Q1 is estimated to be about 13.4% of revenue, including amortization of intangibles of about $37 million or $0.11 per diluted share, net of tax. Interest expense, net of interest income is estimated at approximately $40 million. Now let me turn the call back over to Worthing for some final remarks before Q&A. Terrific. Thank you, Mary Anne. We define intentional to mean a sustained commitment to being deliberate and purposeful in everything we do to achieve desired, predictable, and differentiated results. The strength and consistency of our results reflect the durability of our market model and the benefits of an intentional culture focused on employees and value creation. Put simply, we have a playbook that has served us well, whether at revenues of $30 million or now approaching $7 billion, providing the visibility to deliver on our commitments. We recognize that the onset of the pandemic, that the challenges of this period could create opportunities for differentiation in terms of culture, strategy, and value creation. Looking back at the past two years, we couldn't be prouder of our teams and their accomplishments, driving outsized financial performance and operational excellence while adhering to the values that have set Waste Connections apart since the company's inception. As we enter our 25th anniversary year in 2022, we look forward to more opportunities to be back together, to celebrate the successes that have driven a track record of growth and value creation, and to further accelerate our speed of execution. Moreover, we're looking ahead as we position ourselves for revenue of $10 billion and more. We appreciate your time today. I'll now turn this call over to the operator to open up the lines for your questions. Operator? Thank you. One moment, please, for the first question. Our first question comes from the line of Walter Spracklin with RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question. Thanks very much, operator, and good morning, everyone. Morning, Walter. Good morning. My first question, I guess, is on capital deployment and certainly when large companies get a lot of cash, a lot of investors have some concerns about strategic drift and so on. When you look at your opportunity set going forward, whether it's RNG, whether it's acquisitions or other growth opportunities, how do you prioritize? Is there any risk that, you know, as you get bigger, you start to have less and less opportunities in your core markets and start to look at projects that perhaps outside of solid waste, you know, perhaps whether you can talk a little bit about where those priorities are and where you see that opportunity set, or is that still far off in the distance? Yeah. You know, as I tried to wrap up my comments today, our priorities remain, you know, to maintain the playbook that we know has driven our success, and that is, you know, capitalizing on opportunities in solid waste. You know, as you know, the opportunity basket's quite large. We focus on a subset of the opportunity basket, some $3.5 billion-$4 billion of revenue that fits our market model. That's a fraction of the total available or addressable market when it comes to that. I was pretty clear on in October with my thoughts on moving away from solid waste to other, quote, environmental solutions or services type businesses. It's... I'll stand by those comments back in October, so it's not something we look at with regards to a drift. When it comes to capital deployment, you know, I think our view has always been we have an all-of-the-above approach, as I said also. It's not about trade-offs. Look, when you think about acquisitions, sellers drive most of the timing and the transactions we do, whether it be last year early on and, you know, people concerned about changing tax rates, that was a big impetus for a while, as the year moved on and we got more clarity on that. Frankly, you know, owner exhaustion in trying to run a business in a pandemic world, in a labor-constrained environment, in an inflationary environment, et cetera, you know, it takes a different focus to succeed in this. That seems to be driving a lot of the transactions that we're looking at right now. Again, sellers drive most of the opportunities and the timing around that. We're ready to take advantage of that and capitalize on that. Again, the resource recovery projects, you know, we look at it and these are years in development. The ones we're finally breaking ground on today have been years, you know, on the drawing board, and the timing of those really is nothing more than now the expansions at landfills might have been done or the permitting's in place or the pipelines are now available, et cetera. There's a host of things that drive the timing. That's why we look at it and say over, you know, the next 10-15 years, you know, we can see a pipeline of projects. As we look at it's not like we're going to own all of them. As we said before, you know, two-thirds as we see it already involve third parties in this planning and development. Frankly, in many cases it's because the landfill rights are already under some contractual obligation that we're now talking to them about tearing up existing contracts and kind of redoing things for the benefit of both parties. It's, you know, we don't see a large amount of capital being deployed on the landfill gas side because that's, as I said, it's only a third of the projects or less that we'll own. Frankly, if you look back at these two projects and look at some press releases that have been out there the past two months, I mean, there are two other projects that we're doing a partnership with third parties that have been out there at two of our landfills. Theoretically out of the four that we're doing right now, two are owned. In other words, that's not consuming so much capital that there's a trade-off of that or something else. Acquisitions are always more accretive than buying back our stock. Obviously, the market episodically provides opportunities to buy back our stock, but we clearly understand that deploying capital in acquisitions is accretive to value creation. Doing the smaller transactions provide a lower risk profile and a lot better return per dollar of capital deployed than doing larger public-to-public type transactions. What's made us successful, as I said, the last 25 years will continue to be our playbook going forward. We talked about a pathway to $10 billion or more in revenue, we'll execute the playbook to that. That's fantastic and certainly a prioritization that's consistent with, I think, what investors are looking for. Now, second, my follow-up question here is really on if we look out a number of years. I guess firstly, you did $1 billion in acquisitions. That's certainly well above what you kind of trended in prior years. How many more years, you know, billion-dollar years are there? When we're past that, whenever that might be, can you give us a peek into what your return of capital strategy will be once you get to a size that acquisitions simply won't be able to, there won't be enough out there. How would you look at return of capital to shareholders? Sure. We've been consistent in saying this for probably a decade now as we continue to grow the business. 'Cause, you know, it's not about chasing a growth rate. You know, what we look at is on a risk-return basis, you know, the lowest risk path to a double-digit free cash flow per share growth. We have said all along, as we get bigger, our expectation's always been that shrinking the denominator in the share count becomes a, you know, a component of that pathway to double digit, not just increasing the numerator. It's just the fact that's happened over the past 6, 7 or more years. You know, the top line growth from acquisitions has driven a numerator growth that has allowed lower mid-teens free cash flow per share CAGR. I mean, our belief has always been that at some point in time we transition to, you know, the organic side, providing, you know, 7, 8, 9% of that pathway to top line growth, acquisitions, you know, topping that off by 1 or 2 percentage points. Then a repurchase of 1-2% of our stock, providing another couple of points to that growth. The pathway to get to the double-digit sustained free cash flow per share growth can change over time. Frankly, it's a, you know, if organic growth continues to drive more of it over time, you know, it's a much lower CapEx deployment for that attainment. Makes a lot of sense. Appreciate the time as always. Congrats on a great quarter. Thanks, Worthy. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Hamzah Mazari with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question. Okay, good morning. My question is just around just operating leverage. I know you guided that to 20 bps. Maybe you could just talk about, you know, with price led organic growth of 7%, how does that sort of break out between open market and franchise? Then just what's your assumption on cost inflation in that guide of kind of 20 bps, op leverage? Sure. I'll start and then hand it off to Mary Anne. Good question, Hamzah. You know, I know it's atypical for folks to run models in an inflationary environment because it's new to many. If you think as we look at it right here, assuming a 6% overall cost inflation, you know, it takes 4.5% of price just to overcome that on a dollar basis, right? If that's all we did, that's about 80- basis points dilutive. The fact is that to drive, you know, 20- basis points on a reported basis of expansion ex acquisitions, it's really a 100-basis point margin expansion. Because, you know, first thing we do is by going to 6.5 or more, is we're overcoming the 80- basis points dilution that inflation just results in, and then some because we're driving at 6.5%-7% price. It's the optics. I know why the optics. You say, "Well, why is it just 20 in such a strong pricing environment?" The fact is it's a 100- basis points margin expansion over the impact of inflation, the reported numbers. Mary Anne, that breaks down half. Sure. So again, when you think about that 6.5% maybe plus on price. The way it breaks down in our exclusive markets, that's around 4%, and in the competitive markets, that's 6%-8%. You know, 50-100 basis points higher on both sides in terms of what's driving the difference between 5% last year and, you know, 6.5% this year. And as Worthing said, we think of that as addressing the inflationary environment we're currently in. You know, exactly how you'd define that, whether you call that 5.5%-6%, that type of inflation, that's what we're seeing around us and that's what we're addressing. As you'll recall, Hamzah, back in October, we talked about thinking, you know, maybe 5.5%-6%, then we said we were comfortable at the high end of the range. We've stepped that up to 6.5%, and as Worthing mentioned in his remarks, maybe higher than that, maybe ultimately it's 7%, because what we're doing is addressing the environment we're in, and we think that's the right way to be proactive, from a pricing standpoint. Importance of understanding the need to get the 80- basis points back and then some on the margin side is inflation is not just in the P&L. Inflation's on capital as well, right in the CapEx, and we're seeing increases, as you might imagine, on fleet construction and other outlays. You not only have to cover it through what's impacting your P&L, but what's impacting your CapEx as well, because that's how we maintain the very high conversion rate of EBITDA to free cash flow. Very, very helpful. My second question, and I'll turn it over, is just at what point does your leverage get too low, where I guess your leverage is 2.4 times net. You know, it feels like the acquisition environment, you know, as you pointed out, could be as good as 2021. You know, that's going to add a lot more EBITDA. If you're sitting below two times, you know, I'm not saying you're going to sit below two next year, but at some point, if you're below two, do you do a special dividend? Do you just buy back more stock? At what point do you just say that the balance sheet is too under-levered? Good question. If you look at the outlays this year, if this year looks like last year, you know, we'll exit the year closer to three times leverage, right? Because between the $1 billion outlay in acquisitions, if that occurs, the outlay you've already seen on share repurchases of $425 million, and we're just early in the year, right? You know, we expect to exit the year closer to three. That gives us all the flexibility, again, looking forward to continue the growth model and return of capital. Hamzah, it's hard to imagine that we would ever get below two times, given the way we're running the business. Right. To Worthing's earlier comments about capital deployment, you know, again, we've tried to be consistent to remind people that look back to pre-Progressive, we were buying back 3%-4% of shares. There's certainly optionality to increase the capital, the return of capital to shareholders in that environment. Got it. Thank you so much. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Tyler Brown with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question. Hey, good morning. Morning. Hey, Mary Anne, just real quick. Do you specifically have what E&P and fuel, the impact there on margins? It sounded like there was a lot in that 90- basis points of commodity and other stuff in there that you talked about. Looking ahead, it's a nominal tailwind. You know, if you think about where we are this year versus where we averaged last year, kind of the tailwinds from recycling, RINs and E&P, net of fuel, you know, maybe that's 20- basis points of tailwind net as we move ahead. Small nominal benefit in 2022. Yeah, Tyler, we Okay. We de-risked fuel somewhat more late last year when you saw that, you know, massive dislocation in crude for that brief period of time in December. Okay. Okay, that's helpful. I appreciate the Q1 guidance, very helpful. Maybe Worthing you kind of already addressed this, but how should we think about the cadence of margins through the year? I mean, it sounded like you guys might be a little bit more consistent versus more back-end loaded. That's right. I think that's a great observation and, you know, we recognize that there are some puts and takes, but as we think about, you know, the guiding the full year up 20- basis points, tax acquisitions, and then telling you, "Well, look, it's up 30- basis points in Q1," that tells you that it's going to be pretty similar as we move through the year. It's really not a bet on something changing in the back half of the year. We acknowledge that there's a little more benefit for recycling RINs, et cetera, earlier in the year, but we told you about COVID costs. I'd say that there, you know, sort of puts and takes that then, you know, dissipate as you move through the year. There's less of that noise, and the year-over-year margin activity therefore becomes far more consistent as you move through the year quarter by quarter. Yeah. I think it's consistent in 2022 because it was consistent in 2021. Okay. Right. There's not an assumption that things, you know, inflation gets significantly easier in the back half in the guide. Right. Yeah, that's correct. Nor is there, you know, entering the year with a big year-over-year decline that makes that, you know, back-end assumption, you know, a taller mountain. On the sustainability-linked CapEx, I realize that there's a good pipeline of RNG projects, but can you talk about the two MRFs? I guess, is there a tail opportunity there, or were these just kind of advantageous opportunities to internalize some third-party commodity volumes? Just any thoughts there. Yeah, that's the way to think about it, Tyler. You know, as we've described in our sustainability objectives, that we'd increase our recycling capacity. We've talked about the fact that there would be these greenfield opportunities. These are two markets where we already have the recyclables, we're collecting them, and we were utilizing a third-party facility. What this does for us, of course, is it internalizes those tons. It de-risks the processing fee aspect of it, and it also provides an opportunity to put the new technology into a new facility. The use of robotics, more optical sorters, less reliance on labor. Really a win-win in terms of the timing and the opportunity there. Those, you know, are somewhat unique opportunities. We'll certainly look for others, but that's the way to think about that opportunity set. Okay. Okay, great. All right. I will pass it on. Once we do those projects, we're mostly optimized throughout our footprint with regard to recycling facilities. Okay. Okay, that's very helpful. Okay, thanks. I'll pass it on. Thanks. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jerry Revich with Goldman Sachs. Please proceed with your question. Yes. Hi, good morning, everyone. Morning. Marianne, can we just talk about the Q1 guidance a bit more? You folks are going to get good core price contribution, you know, probably closer to seven points in the Q1. I just want to make sure I understand the volume comments that you made because, you know, it looks like maybe the volume contemplates flat to down organic volume. Is that the impact of the winter weather that you referred to? Can you just expand on that? Or is there just, you know, enough moving pieces in the guide to give us room to execute in this environment? Sure. Well, I'd say, you know, first off, you know, we sort of like to guide to what we know and leave upside for things outside of our control, and we'd put volume in that category, particularly during the winter. With that observation, I'd then, you know, call out the fact that we have baked in these contracts that went away. If you think about our full year guidance at, you know, whether it's 0.5 point of volume, add to that the 80- basis points for these contracts that went away, and you're in what we would characterize as a more normalized, call it 1.5% type of volume environment. I'd say the Q1 the same way with that caveat around winter weather and just, you know, arguably rather waiting to see until that comes. Now what I would say is, if I look at trends in January, it is encouraging to see that the same kind of positive, you know, sort of low single digit type of numbers coming out of our landfills and our roll-off hauls, which are, you know, those are good real-time indicators of what we're seeing out there and could be indicative of the kind of volumes we'll report. Terrific. You know, in terms of the recycling opportunities for you folks, can you just remind us of, you know, what proportion of your collections business is recycling today? Of that, what proportion do you dispose to third-party facilities? You know, are you folks optimistic on acquisition opportunities, you know, in areas that don't require greenfields, as you alluded to? Is there an opportunity for accelerated M&A in parts of the footprint where you dispose to third parties? Yeah, I mean, again, as I said earlier, these last two facilities optimize our recycling position in our current footprint. You know, the majority of our tons in our facilities come off our trucks. To Marianne's point about reducing our reliance or risk exposure to third parties, you know, this buttons that up. Obviously, acquisitions that bring us into new markets create new opportunities. You know, you've seen the transaction we did in Massachusetts last year. That is more of a resource recovery market. But those acquisitions are coming with their own resource recovery facilities. Obviously, as we do more tuck-ins in those markets, we'll be able to bring more volumes into those facilities to the extent we're not already getting those. Once you've got your footprint down, after that, it's minor investments with regards to robotics and additional sorters to again reduce our reliance on labor as well as increase the quality of the output and therefore the price of the commodities. Got it. Thanks. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Kevin Chiang with CIBC. Please proceed with your question. Hi, good morning, and thanks for taking my question. I just want to clarify something you mentioned in your prepared remarks. I think you said a lot of your safety metrics, and I think you said your cost of risk was at a lower year-over-year or trending lower. I guess when I think of an environment where labor's been tight, so you have more new employees, you've obviously made a lot of acquisitions, and typically, you know, safety is one of the places you find synergies. Just wondering maybe what's driving, you know, this better safety performance, maybe relative to those, I guess, perceived headwinds, at least on my part. Well, again, I think that's a longer story. I mean, we've always talked about our behavioral-based approach to safety, where every person's accountable. I mean, this is not a safety department's responsibility in this company. We reinforce those behaviors, we coach behaviors, and we hold ourselves accountable for continuous improvement. But simply, you're right when you point out that acquisitions do typically come along at higher incident rates. That's opportunity. It's opportunities, not just financially, but most importantly for the health of our employees and the safety within their communities. I mean, that's of paramount importance. It's not uncommon for acquisitions to come to us with incident rates at four to eight times our average. When we see that, we look at our most improved performers year over year, and this past year, our most improved performer was a recent acquisition in the prior year, and, you know, they were down, what, some 65% or 70% in incident rates in year one. It's possible, it's just, it's about culture, it's about relationships, it's about accountability, and it's about owning it. That's helpful. Just for my second question, maybe going back to something Walter had asked. I think you've talked about, you know, this pipeline of opportunities or subset of opportunities at kind of $3.5 billion-$4 billion, and I think that's been pretty consistent for a number of years now. It does feel like, you know, the underlying solid waste industry has you know gotten more rational. I think the industry, you know, seems to be stronger. Just wondering, does that not play a role in what goes into that pipeline? Like, are there markets that, you know, five years ago weren't attractive because of the way the overall solid waste market was positioned versus here in 2022? Well, you know, it's not that they weren't attractive, it's that the proper way to enter it wasn't available at the time. You know, as we move through, like you've seen us do in many new markets these past, you know, several years, those new market entries are the beachhead for us to continue our model, right? You know, just 'cause we're not in a market today doesn't mean we may not be in a market in the future. We're just waiting for that right entry point to be available. That's why the addressable market really hasn't changed too much because while we're very active in what we're executing on, we're actually replacing what we're closing with the opportunities that we now have in those new markets. Okay. That makes a lot of sense. Congrats on a good quarter. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Sean Eastman with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question. Hi, guys. Nice strong finish to the year. I just wanted to come back to the CapEx. So, you know, it's helpful to call out exactly what's in there for the sustainability investments. If you pull that out, you know, underlying 11% as a percent of revenue, how do we think about the go forward? We got a big pipeline of sustainability-linked investment opportunities. Does that $100 million ramp into next year? And then, you know, is that 11% underlying sort of the right way to think about the next couple of years as well? Just some color on the trajectory of those two pieces would be great. Sure. First of all, with respect to your question about the pipeline of projects, the way to think about it is for those four discrete projects that we called out that are, you know, that are unique, as Worthing said, those are two unique recycling facilities and two of the few RNG facilities that we plan to own are, you know, included there. For next year, you know, in addition to the $100 we're spending this year, there'd be another about $50 would finish those four projects. Beyond that, we're not talking about layering in more as you look ahead. That's one aspect of the answer. The second would be with respect to what is arguably been some outsized CapEx. We thought that was prudent in 2021 to make sure that we were positioning ourselves given supply chain constraints and any concerns about deliveries to make sure we were positioned to get it in, and we talked about that all last year. Coming into this year, we felt the same way. We've positioned ourselves again, and those are the numbers we've communicated. As we look further down the road, you know, we would say think more about a more normalized CapEx as a percentage of revenue back at that 10.5% type of range that you've historically seen us in. Okay, very helpful. I wanted to ask about the E&P upside optionality. You know, it's hard to ignore the leading indicators, which are looking very encouraging. You know, probably prudent to leave that as upside, but you know, is there any other reason other than just, you know, prudent conservatism to think that E&P won't have some potentially meaningful uplifts over the course of 2022? Sure. We don't disagree, Sean, that there's certainly the fundamentals would suggest that there's an opportunity there. What we typically would say is, "Look, let's get into the spring because that's when we have better visibility, because that's when the drillers have better visibility and are communicating that to us." The one additional element I would say is that the realities of labor constraints are impacting the drillers as well. You know, even though you see rig movement, it doesn't mean that the waste is being as generated as quickly as it might otherwise be because people may not be moving as quickly. That would be a limiting factor in the near term, but we agree with your characterization of the opportunity as we move through 2022. As you'll recall, we typically guide to what we see. That's why the guidance is what it is. Of course, we acknowledge there should be an opportunity as we move through the year. Understood. Thanks very much. Sure. Thank you. As a reminder, to register for a question, please press star 1 on your telephones. Our next question comes from the line of Noah Kaye with Oppenheimer. Please proceed with your question. Good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. My first one is about investments at the landfill and specifically around leachate management. You know, it seems like we're circling a date for PFAS regulations to potentially come down the pike, you know, maybe mid-next year. Even when that happens, it just seems like it's going to take a huge toll on private and public, you know, water treatment infrastructure, wastewater treatment infrastructure. You know, to what extent are you addressing that proactively with some of your investments? Do you think the industry's ready to handle the incremental expenses of leachate disposal? What might the implications be for landfill pricing? Yeah. Well, I can just say I know what we're doing 'cause we've been focusing on de-risking, you know, our exposure to third-party treatment providers for many years now. Plus making R&D investments into how to address PFAS or H2S emissions at landfills. It's, you know, we like the position we're in right now. Clearly, we're investing, whether it be in thermal treatment or whether it be in leachate wastewater treatment on-site, and those efforts continue. We monitor our progress in what percent we're handling on-site versus third parties. Look, you gotta remember that landfills are the regulated capsule to contain PFAS. Mm-hmm. You know, this is an opportunity for us and how we treat this less of a risk. But you're right to point out that in the wastewater treatment plants, that's where there's a much bigger focus, and it is a bigger, more complicated issue for utilities. Okay, thanks. The second one is just around the subjects of labor and automation. You know, clearly, you know, this is a people-first business. You continue to invest, you know, in your frontline employees. You know, obviously some industry players have been talking about automation as a lever to really optimize operations and potentially even drive natural attrition, you know, in the labor force. Just love your perspective on that. To what extent do you see, you know, automation as, you know, a further tool for optimizing your labor costs? Where are you investing? How would you frame it from the way Waste Connections is approaching it? Sure. Look, it's just called running a good business. You know, we don't talk about what might happen and therefore you have expectations and kind of, you know, look to the future for something that may or may not be delivered upon. Look, our view is, as you know, we've already been proactive on robotics to reduce the labor headcounts at recycling facilities. Those investments will continue. You got to remember, as good things happen, you know, there's always pushes, gives and takes, right, in every P&L and then in market by market. I don't view this as a layer cake-able, taking thousands of employees out, and representing ourselves in a whole different view. The reality is you chip away, and you know, you run a better operation. You try to reduce your reliance on labor in a tough environment. You know, I wouldn't hold out hope for something that, you know, may sound good but, you know, may be more difficult to deliver upon. Okay. Thanks very much as always. Sure. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Hoffman with Stifel. Please proceed with your question. Hey, gang. Congratulations on 25 years. It's been a pretty cool run. I got a bunch of questions that are about the model, not in any particular order. Rising rates in the business model. It's not about your interest expense going up or down. What do you think about rising rates as operating a garbage company and some of the issues, the consequences of rates going up? Well, I'd say from our perspective, since the majority of our debt is fixed, and our weighted average interest expense is around 3%, you know, even with a modest increase that I don't think it moves the needle. I think what you should expect is to the extent we take on more debt, we'd look for opportunities to fix more because we can still consider this an attractive environment in spite of the fact that rates are up. You know, perhaps for other people who've relied on the low cost of debt to be more aggressive with respect to acquisitions or other decisions they've made, I think it would have a bigger impact. Again, that's not us. Yeah. Away from interest expense, as you say, Michael, I mean, if the view is to increase interest rates to kind of dislocate this economy and potentially, you know, have a recession on the horizon, this industry does very well in a recession. I mean, as we all know, it's a very resilient industry. In fact, the recession, if it dislocates the labor force and increases our available pool of labor makes us an easier business to operate. You look back over time, we performed quite well in recessions, whether it be the early 2000s, late 2000s, et cetera. You know, it's an industry that does well, and for us, it's a market model that, you know, allows for that continued differentiation. Perfect. Mary Anne, I was writing numbers down so fast, you may have said it and I missed it. Did you give an interest expense for the full year? You gave it for the Q1, but did you give interest expense for 2022? It's about 160. 160. Okay. I missed that. I appreciate, and you've been very clear you're going to walk away from bad business and therefore don't freak out if volumes are negative or are zero. Can you give us the cadence of when I'm seeing that? Because I think it feels like I'm probably negative in the H1 and positive in the H2, and the H2 reflects what's actually happening in the market on a go-forward basis. You're talking about with respect to the two contracts that went away. Right. One, one went in Q4 and one in Q1. It's pretty steady, a little bit lower in one and four, higher in two and three, 80- basis points across the four quarters. Okay. Being, you know, negative in one and negative to flat in two and then slightly positive to more positive is sort of the way to think about it. It could be positive in one and would have been more positive without the losses. Okay. Okay. Yeah. No, look, we think of this environment right now as kind of an underlying, you know, 1%+ environment. You factor out that 80- basis points, and it gives you a sense of what might be reported. Obviously, you know, if we do better than 1%, that layers on top of that. Got it. Then, you've shared your internal cost of inflation, which is predominantly a wage issue in addition to the capital issue. Where are you on open positions and sort of the trend in actually being able to fill positions? No, I wouldn't say it's just a wage and CapEx issue. First off, I'd say the wages, we were very proactive last year, going all the way back to the H1 of last year, when we started ticking those up notably just in anticipation of what was going to come the remainder of the year. We do start to anniversary some of those as we work through the H1 of this year. There are all sorts of pressures out there, whether it be pressures around repair and maintenance, pressures around third-party trucking availability, because they have the same wage, excuse me, same wage and labor availability issues that we all do. Yet the waste still has to move from the transfer stations to the landfills, right? No, there are many line items that pop. You know, our belief right now is, you know, the underlying is at least 6%. As we move through the year, as Mary Anne said, if we think that pressure for the full year is to be higher than that, you'll see us step up, as I alluded to, maybe pricing approaches 7% because of that. Okay. Open positions, are you finding that you're being able to find people now a little bit easier, that you had the worst of it was sort of in early 3Q and it's gotten a little bit better, or is it still at the same high level of open positions? Yeah. I mean, we're still running, you know, at that 5% or so of open positions. You know, when you spread across so many operating locations, you know, running in that 4%-5% is not unexpected. You know, I'd say we were stressed, obviously, in many locations with Omicron, as you know, at some points in time, over 1,000 employees, you know, were affected or impacted by that in some ways. Those that were able to show up, you know, there was extra pressure to get the work done, which is why we did what we did in the month of January. I think the telling sign really is going to be how do you get through the spring? Because obviously, you know, the spring and is where you start getting the pressures. It's, you know, right now we like where we stand, but obviously we'd love to make some inroads in that and put some more seats in the trucks. Okay. This is down in the weeds a bit, but there's a change in political party in Seneca area where your landfill is and you're trying to get a host fee, a community host fee agreement. Do you change your handicapping on that now, given what happened in November? Look, it's we don't control the outcome, and so we'll just let time play out and determine where that heads. Okay. Last, did I hear you correctly say you spent $425 million on a share buyback in January, and so that's like 3.25 million shares? That's right. That's why we gave you a share count of what, 259 for the full year- That's right. which was good today. Yes. A point already bounced back up over a point. Okay. All right. That's terrific to hear. Thank you very much. Mm-hmm. Thank you. Our last question comes from the line of Chris Murray with ATB Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question. Yeah, thanks, folks. Just a quick question going back to the inflation question. If we were to think about the fact that maybe there's a chance that we could see some moderation on some of the inflation pressures as we go into the H2 of the year, can you just, you know, again, back to the understanding the mechanics of inflation, is it fair to think that all the pricing that you all have been putting in and the stuff you've got in your captive markets, like, that's going to be sticky? Those increases will be on an annualized basis. That really leads to what your comment about perhaps some margin improvement on the back half if inflation moderates? Right. I mean, what we're saying moderation is upside, not what it takes to produce a wishful H2 recovery. That's right. Just, Chris, to your point, we put in the majority of our price increases early in the year. To the extent there's CPI-linked, that's where there's the lag. Those are known numbers for 2022. To the extent that were to happen, it could have an impact on 2023 for those, you know, 'cause where we sit now, it only gets better in 2023 because of the inflationary pressures we've seen in terms of pricing. All right. No, that's fair. I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't something that reverses back out on you. Then my last question very, very quickly is just around the base dividend. You know, Worthing, you made the comment a few times that you know the idea was as you were growing you know the dividend would probably outgrow the pace of your cash flow generation. You know, in the last couple of years now we've seen cash flow, and we look at your 2022 guide, certainly this year it looks like it's going to be pretty strong as well. Now you're kind of outstripping the growth in the base dividend. Appreciating that you're also supplementing that with some share buybacks. You know, how do we think about that base dividend in terms of growth? You know, I think, you know, Hamzah asked a question about a special, but you know, just going back to the base dividend and where you see that longer term, and do you start, you know, trying to grow that at above cash flow in the future? A couple of observations, Chris. First of all, it has been about a 15% CAGR since we initiated the dividend 11 years ago. We have consistently raised it double digits, and we do anticipate that when the outsize acquisition slows down as a percentage of our total free cash flow, that will grow from the 20%-22% where it is now. We could see that growing to more like 30% of free cash flow. The other observation would be in a year like this, in 2021, we actually doubled the return of capital to shareholder from the prior year between our share repurchases and the continued growth in the dividend. Coming into this year, having already done share repurchases and being well-positioned for continued growth in the dividend, you should expect something comparable. All right. That's fair. Thanks for your time. Sure. Sure. Thank you. Mr. Jackman, there are no further questions at this time. I will now turn the call back to you. Please continue with your presentation or closing remarks. Well, if there are no further questions, on behalf of our entire management team, we appreciate your listening to and interest in the call today. Mary Anne and Joe Box are available today to answer any direct questions that we did not cover that we're allowed to answer under Reg FD, Reg G, and applicable securities laws in Canada. Thank you again, and we look forward to seeing you at upcoming investor conferences or on our next earnings call. Thank you. That does conclude the conference call for today. We thank you for your participation and ask that you please disconnect your lines.