Table of Contents

During the year ended December 31, 2017,2020, we completed 1421 acquisitions for consideration having a net fair value of $562.2$481.6 million. During 2016, we acquired Progressive Waste for consideration transferred having a net fair value of $5.167 billion. During the year ended December 31, 2016,2019, we completed 12 other21 acquisitions for consideration having a net fair value of $17.1$837.7 million. During the year ended December 31, 2015,2018, we completed 1420 acquisitions for consideration having a net fair value of $347.9 million.$1.032 billion.

HUMAN CAPITAL

We believe that people are our greatest differentiator. We aim to be an employer of choice that attracts and retains high performing talent with the mindset, skillset and commitment to uphold our values of safety, integrity, customer service, and being a great place to work and the premier solid waste services company in the U.S. and Canada. All employees are responsible for upholding the Waste Connections Vision and Values, and the Waste Connections Code of Conduct, which form the foundation of our policies and practices. Moreover, we are committed to an inclusive, supportive environment built on the principles of Servant Leadership, valuing diversity and inspiring employee growth.  As such, developing our talent and maintaining our culture through employee engagement are integral to the growth and sustainability of our business.

Our Workforce

As of December 31, 2020, our employee population consisted of 18,933 active employees, 9,788 of whom are commercial truck drivers and 1,610 of whom are mechanics. There were 15,978 employees located in the United States and 2,955 employees located in Canada.  39% of our employees were ethnic minorities, 16% were women, and 8% of our employees were from the armed services.  

As of December 31, 2020, 3,172 employees, or approximately 17% of our workforce, were employed under collective bargaining agreements. The majority of our collective bargaining agreements are with the Teamsters Union in both the U.S. and Canada. These collective bargaining agreements are renegotiated periodically. In 2020, we did not experience any work stoppages or have any days idle as a result of labor issues.  We have 17 collective bargaining agreements covering 1,254 employees that have expired or are set to expire during 2021. We do not expect any significant disruption in our overall business in 2021 as a result of labor negotiations, employee strikes or organizational efforts by labor unions or their representatives.  

COVID-19 Related Employee Support

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, protecting the health, safety and welfare of our employees has been our top priority. In order to support and protect our employees, we established protocols and implemented operational changes focused on the health and safety of our frontline employees and accommodated transitions to remote work environments for customer service representatives and other support personnel. In addition, recognizing the potential for financial hardship and other challenges, we looked to provide a safety net for our employees on issues of income and family health.

To that end, in 2020 we incurred over $35 million in incremental COVID-19-related costs, primarily supplemental pay for front line employees.  This included bonus payments as well as supplemental wages, which were provided to all front-line employees, whether union or non-union, remote or on-site, as well as temporary workers. We provided full base wages for employees feeling ill, under quarantine, or caring for family members, and two-thirds of base wages for up to 12 weeks for those with childcare needs.  We also expanded our Employee Relief Fund for those experiencing financial hardship, launched the Waste Connections Scholarship Program to assist our employees’ children in pursuing their educational goals, covered COVID-19-related testing and medical costs, and expanded and extended access to medical benefits.

In addition to our near-term COVID-19-related financial commitments, we raised our minimum hourly wage target to $15 per hour, which exceeds many state, provincial and local wage requirements. Looking beyond our people, we also recognized the needs of the communities where we live and work, increasing the level of charitable contributions to assist food banks, families at risk, and organizations with a focus on addressing racial inequities at a local or national level, providing meals for healthcare workers and higher risk populations, and donating critical personal protective equipment.

Table of Contents

Safety

Safety is our first operating value at Waste Connections.  We are committed to the safety of our employees, customers, and the communities we serve.  Our ultimate goal is to “Drive to ZERO”, that is, to achieve zero incidents and accidents. Our success in safety is driven by our self-directed and empowered employees taking personal ownership for their safety and the safety of those around them.  As servant leaders, we endeavor every day to protect our employees and the communities we are privileged to work in and around. We utilize on-board event recording technology to identify both risky behavior, which is coached, and best practices, which are reinforced.  We have developed a risk-based scoring system for our drivers to improve their safe driving skills and hold our leaders responsible for the performance of the employees they are privileged to serve.

In 2020, this behavior-based approach to safety resulted in a reduction in our incident rate by approximately 12%, with over 60% of our operating locations posting zero safety-related incidents or reduced incident frequency over the prior year.

Safety training is an integral part of our culture of safety.  To reinforce safe driving skills and safe work practices throughout Waste Connections, we require both initial training for all new driver employees and reinforcement training each year.  Areas of focus in training include: “Target 4” defensive driving, Smith System driving fundamentals, Injury & Illness prevention, and Safe Work Practices training.  We further emphasize the importance of safety through regular tailgate safety meetings and rollout safety instructions for our drivers, and through the utilization of electronic safety communication boards, safety alerts, and other communications to heighten awareness and maintain focus every day on the importance of safety.  

While we attribute our successful safety record to our culture and behavior-based approach, we recognize that advances in fleet design and technology can be important tools in identifying risky behaviors and providing coaching opportunities to further our efforts to achieve our long-term aspirational target of a 25% reduction in incident rates as described in our 2020 Sustainability Report (www.wasteconnections.com/sustainability). To that end, in 2020, we initiated a two-year, $10 million fleet-wide upgrade of our on-board event recording technology and introduced Freightliner EconicSD trucks with an overhauled cab design that incorporates many of the safety features already included in passenger vehicles, as well as an integrated collision mitigation system, enhanced visibility, and several ergonomic improvements.  

Culture/Servant Leadership

At Waste Connections, we maintain that our purposeful culture drives differentiated results, and therefore investing in our people is a priority as we employ an approach guided by Servant Leadership. This concept inverts the traditional management hierarchy, positioning leaders to serve their employees both professionally and personally. The philosophy empowers employees by prioritizing their needs, sharing responsibility and driving personal development.  As a result, a significant amount of management time and resources are dedicated to leadership training and development.

Training and Development

Our leadership development efforts focus on multi-day Servant Leadership training sessions, in which approximately 25% of our leadership team participated in 2020 in spite of the limitations on in-person training as a result of COVID-19-related travel restrictions.  These leadership training sessions, generally conducted in-person but also available online, are developed and administered by dedicated internal resources and also include participation by the senior leadership team.

In addition, the Company provides a broad range of other training and on-the-job learning opportunities, including district management training, varying leadership webinar topics, and other safety, sales, maintenance, operations and financial training courses engaging every level of employee throughout the Company.  Through our Learning Management System (“LMS”), we track employee progress and can utilize the LMS to share new course topics and additional content.

Table of Contents

Employee Pay and Benefits

We strive to make Waste Connections a great place to work. Our approach to attracting safe, productive workers includes a focus on providing full time, stable, local jobs with competitive pay and benefits.  

Our pay and benefits strategy is designed to provide programs and services that help meet the varying needs of our employees, particularly during challenging periods like the COVID-19 pandemic, when we increased our targeted minimum wage to $15 per hour and introduced the Waste Connections Scholarship Program, in addition to providing discretionary supplemental pay and benefits, including expanded access to our Employee Relief Fund. Our total rewards package for front line employees includes market-competitive pay, bonus opportunities, affordable and comprehensive healthcare plans, market-leading retirement benefits, generous and flexible time off plans, and the opportunity to share in the Company’s success through an Employee Share Purchase Plan.  Our leaders also are eligible for incentive compensation programs consisting of an annual cash bonus, equity, or both, dependent on their contributions to improving safety, financial results, and key human capital measures like turnover, employee development and employee survey scores.  

Employee Engagement

Beyond compensation and benefits, we believe employee engagement includes increased investments in training and development of our leaders and frontline employees, and innovating new technology offerings to increase connectivity both inside and outside of the Company, using a variety of channels to facilitate open and direct communication, including employee resource groups.  We recognize the importance of engagement in driving culture and increasing retention, which was magnified in 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the use of remote alternatives to in-person training and development and highlighted the importance of connectivity both inside and outside of the Company.

Indicators of employee engagement include retention, voluntary turnover and satisfaction, as measured through annual Servant Leadership surveys.  In 2020, our total turnover improved by 11.2%, with voluntary turnover down 18.0% on a year-over-year basis.  

We conduct an annual Servant Leadership survey, which provides employees the opportunity to evaluate their managers on an anonymous basis and provide written feedback. We target continuous improvement in the scores as an element of the long-term aspirational goals included in our 2020 Sustainability Report.  In 2020, our managers’ Servant Leadership scores increased by 1.9%, with an employee response rate of over 87%.

Diversity and Inclusion

We are committed to building and developing diverse teams that function in an environment of mutual respect, where employees feel valued, empowered to contribute and positioned for success.  

In keeping with our efforts to support and encourage diversity and inclusion, we have undertaken several initiatives, including adopting in 2019 a formal Diversity Policy for our Board of Directors and Senior Management with aspirational targets for female Board representation, and additional disclosure on workforce composition.  In addition, in 2020, we incorporated diversity and inclusion into Servant Leadership training, focused our leadership summit on understanding and mitigating unintended biases, expanded our Servant Leadership assessments of managers by employees to include diversity and inclusion, enhanced recruiting practices to ensure the broadest candidate pools, established financial commitments to organizations that focus on racial inequities and that support women and children at risk, and supported the development of resource groups including our Women’s Network and Veterans’ S.E.R.V.E. Network. Waste Connections is a signatory to the CEO Action for Diversity & Inclusion, the largest CEO-driven business commitment to advance diversity and inclusion within the workplace.  

Employee Recruiting

In 2020, we hired 4,417 employees through our network of internal recruiters operating on a regional basis out of 10 locations. Our internal recruiting team endeavors to not only fill open positions, but to partner with hiring managers to

Table of Contents

continuously improve our efforts with respect to marketing, screening, interviewing, onboarding and employee retention.  In addition to recruiting locally in the communities we serve, we use job fairs, open house events, employee referral programs, social media channels, local radio and television advertising, and school to work partnerships.  Our job opportunities are hosted on www.careers.wasteconnections.com, posted on www.indeed.com, www.linkedin.com, as well as state and provincial job boards, and syndicated to expand our reach to dozens of diversity-oriented and military-focused recruiting websites such as www.honorher.works, www.jobs.vetjobs.org, www.diversity.dejobs.org, www.enableamerica.dejobs.org and www.campuspride.jobs.

Sustainability/ESG

Environmental, organizational and financial sustainability initiatives have been key components of our success since we were founded in 1997. We continuously monitor and evaluate new technologies and investments that can enhance our commitment to the environment and improve our competitive positioning. We remain committed to growing and expanding these efforts as our industry and technology continue to evolve. To that end, we have made a $500 million commitment to the advancement of the long-term aspirational targets outlined in our 2020 Sustainability Report.

The targets include reducing environmental impact through expanded resource recovery capacity, increased landfill gas recovery and biogas generation, and increased on-site leachate treatment at our landfills. In addition, they focus on enhancing employee safety and engagement through reducing safety incident rates, continuous improvement in voluntary turnover, and increased Servant Leadership scores.

WASTE SERVICES

Collection Services

We provide collection services to residential, commercial, municipal, industrial and E&P customers. Our services are generally provided under one of the following arrangements:  (1) governmental certificates; (2) exclusive franchise agreements; (3) exclusive municipal contracts; (4) residential subscriptions; (5) residential contracts; or (6) commercial, industrial and E&P service agreements.

Governmental certificates, exclusive franchise agreements and exclusive municipal contracts grant us rights to provide MSW services within specified areas at established rates and are long-term in nature. Governmental certificates, or G Certificates, are unique to the State of Washington and are awarded by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, or WUTC, to solid waste collection service providers in unincorporated areas and electing municipalities. These certificates typically grant the holder the exclusive and perpetual right to provide specific residential, commercial and/or industrial waste services in a defined territory at specified rates, subject to divestiture and/or overlap or cancellation by the WUTC on specified, limited grounds. Franchise agreements typically provide an exclusive period of seven years or longer for a specified territory; they specify a broad range of services to be provided, establish rates for the services and oftencan give the service provider a right of first refusal to extend the term of the agreement. Municipal contracts typically provide a shorter service period and a more limited scope of services than franchise agreements and generally require competitive bidding at the end of the contract term. In markets where exclusive arrangements are not available, we may enter into residential contracts with homeowners’ associations, apartment owners and mobile home park operators, or work on a subscription basis with individual households. In such markets, we may also provide commercial and industrial services under customer service agreements generally ranging from one to five years in duration. Finally, in certain E&P markets with “no pit” rules or other regulations that limit on-site storage or treatment of waste, we offer containers and collection services to provide a closed loop system for the collection of drilling wastes at customers’ well sites and subsequent transportation of the waste to our facilities for treatment and disposal.

Landfill Disposal Services

As of December 31, 2017,2020, we owned or operated 66 MSW landfills, 1112 E&P waste landfills, which only accept E&P waste, and 13 non-MSW landfills, which only accept construction and demolition, industrial and other non-putrescible waste.waste, and one development stage landfill. Eight of our MSW landfills also received E&P waste during 2017.2020. We generally own landfills to achieve vertical integration in markets where the economic and regulatory environments make landfill

Table of Contents

ownership attractive. We also own landfills in certain markets where it is not necessary to provide collection services because we believe that we are able to attract volume to our landfills, given our location or other market dynamics. Over time, MSW landfills generate a greenhouse gas, methane, which can be converted into a valuable source of clean energy. We deploy gas recovery systems at 5051 of our landfills to collect methane, which can then be used to generate electricity for local households, fuel local industrial power plants or power alternative fueled vehicles. In some cases, landfill gas generated at our landfills qualifies as a renewable fuel for which renewable fuel credits may be available.

For landfills we operate but do not own, the owner of the property, generally a municipality, usually holds the permit and we operate the landfill pursuant to a landfill operating agreement for a contracted term, which may be the life of the landfill. Where the contracted term is not the life of the landfill, the property owner is generally responsible for final capping, closure and post-closure obligations. We are responsible for all final capping, closure and post-closure obligations at our operated landfills for which we have life-of-site agreements.

The expiration date of one of our operating agreements for which the contracted term is less than the life of the landfill occurs in 2018. This landfill contributed $3.0 million of revenue during the year ended December 31, 2017. The expiration dates of three operating agreements for which the contracted term is less than the life of the landfill range from 2019 to 2024. These three landfills contributed $4.3 million of revenue during the year ended December 31, 2017. We intend to seek renewal of all four contracts prior to, or upon, their expiration.

Based on remaining permitted capacity as of December 31, 2017,2020, and projected annual disposal volumes, the average remaining landfill life for our owned and operated landfills and landfills operated, but not owned, under life-of-site agreements, is estimated to be approximately 2629 years. Many of our existing landfills have the potential for expanded disposal capacity beyond the amount currently permitted. We regularly consider whether it is advisable, in light of changing market conditions and/or regulatory requirements, to seek to expand or change the permitted waste streams or to seek other permit modifications. We also monitor the available permitted in-place disposal capacity of our landfills on an ongoing basis and evaluate whether to seek capacity expansion using a variety of factors.

We are currently seeking to expand permitted capacity at 17ten of our landfills, for which we consider expansions to be probable. Although we cannot be certain that all future expansions will be permitted as designed, the average remaining landfill life for our owned and operated landfills and landfills operated, but not owned, under life-of-site agreements is estimated to be approximately 3032 years when considering remaining permitted capacity, probable expansion capacity and projected annual disposal volume.

The following table reflects estimated landfill capacity and airspace changes, as measured in tons, for owned and operated landfills and landfills operated, but not owned, under life-of-site agreements (in thousands):

​

​

The estimated remaining operating lives for the landfills we own and landfills we operate under life-of-site agreements, based on remaining permitted and probable expansion capacity and projected annual disposal volume,

Table of Contents

in years, as of December 31, 2017,2020, and December 31, 2016,2019, are shown in the tables below. The estimated remaining operating lives include assumptions that the operating permits are renewed.

​

​

​

The disposal tonnage that we received in 20172020 and 20162019 at all of our landfills is shown in the tables below (tons in thousands):

​

​

​

The expiration dates for the four operated landfills range from 2022 to 2027.  We intend to seek renewal of all four contracts prior to, or upon, their expiration.

Transfer Station and Intermodal Services

We own or operate MSW transfer stations and E&P waste transfer stations with marine access. Transfer stations receive, compact and/or load waste to be transported to landfills or treatment facilities via truck, rail or barge. They extend our direct-haul reach and link collection operations or waste generators with distant disposal or treatment facilities by concentrating the waste stream from a wider area and thus providing better utilization rates and operating efficiencies.

Intermodal logistics is the movement of containers using two or more modes of transportation, usually including a rail or truck segment.  We provide these services for railing containerized international import and export goods through the Pacific Northwest, along with the transport of MSW waste and industrial construction debris.  Additionally we operate two intermodal facilities primarily for the shipment of waste by rail to distant disposal facilities that we do not own.  Our fleet of double-stack railcars provides dedicated direct-line haul services among terminals in Portland, Boardman, Tacoma and Seattle.  We have a contract with Union Pacific railroad for the movement of containers among our intermodal operations.  We also provide our customers container and chassis sales and leasing services. 

We intend to further expand our intermodal business through cross-selling efforts with our solid waste services operations.  We believe that a significant amount of solid waste is transported currently by truck, rail and barge from primarily the Seattle-Tacoma and Metro Portland areas to remote landfills in Eastern Washington and Eastern Oregon.  We believe our ability to market both intermodal and disposal services will enable us to more effectively compete for these volumes. 

Recycling Services

We offer residential, commercial, industrial and municipal customers recycling services for a variety of recyclable materials, including compost, cardboard, officemixed paper, plastic containers, glass bottles and ferrous and aluminum metals. We own orand operate recycling operations and sell othermarket collected recyclable materials to third parties for processing before

Table of Contents

resale. The majority of the recyclables we process for sale are paper products and are shipped primarily to customers in the United States and Canada, as well as other markets, including Asia. Changes in end market demand as well as other factors can cause fluctuations in the prices for such commodities, which can affect revenue, operating income and cash flows. We believe that recycling will continue to be an important component of local and state solid waste management plans due to the public’s increasing environmental awareness and expanding regulations that mandate or encourage recycling.

We also believe that the costs of processing recyclables, including the costs of contamination, which have historically been subsidized by the sale of recycled commodities, need to be fully recognized. To that end, we have increased the fees that we charge for the collection of recyclables and for processing at our recycling facilities to more fully reflect the processing costs associated with the separation of recyclables into marketable commodities. In some instances, we will look to pass the risk associated with the volatility of recycled commodity prices onto our customers.

E&P Waste Treatment, Recovery and Disposal Services

E&P waste is a broad term referring to the by-products resulting from oil and natural gas exploration and production activity. These generally include: waste created throughout the initial drilling and completion of an oil or natural gas well, such as drilling fluids, drill cuttings, completion fluids and flowback water; production wastes and produced water during a well’s operating life; contaminated soils that require treatment during site reclamation; and substances that require clean-up after a spill, reserve pit clean-up or pipeline rupture. E&P customers are oil and natural gas exploration and production companies operating in the areas that we serve. E&P revenue is therefore driven by vertical and horizontal drilling, hydraulic fracturing, production and clean-up activity; it is complemented by other services including closed loop collection systems and the sale of recovered products. E&P activity varies across market areas which are tied to the natural resource basins in which the drilling activity occurs and reflects the regulatory environment, pricing and disposal alternatives available in any given market.

We provide E&P waste treatment, recovery and/or disposal services from a network of E&P waste landfills, MSW landfills that also receive E&P waste, E&P liquid waste injection wells and E&P waste treatment and oil recovery facilities. Treatment processes vary by site and regulatory jurisdiction. At certain treatment facilities, loads of flowback and produced water and other drilling and production wastes delivered by our customers are sampled, assessed and tested by third parties according to state regulations. Solids contained in a waste load are deposited into a land treatment cell where liquids are removed from the solids and are sent through an oil recovery system before being injected into saltwater disposal injection wells or placed in evaporation cells that utilize specialized equipment to accelerate evaporation of liquids. In certain locations, fresh water is then added to the remaining solids in the cell to “wash” the solids several times to remove contaminants, including oil and grease, chlorides and other contaminants, to ensure the solids meet specific regulatory criteria that, in certain areas, are administered by third-party labs and submitted to the regulatory authorities.

COMPETITION

The North America municipal solid waste, or MSW, services industry is highly competitive and requires substantial labor and capital resources. Besides the Company, the industry includes and we compete with:Our competition includes: three national, publicly heldpublicly-held solid waste companies – companies—Waste Management, Inc., Republic Services, Inc. and Advanced Disposal Services,GFL Environmental, Inc.; several regional, publicly held and privately owned companies; and several thousand small, local, privately owned companies, including independent waste brokers, some of which we believe have accumulated substantial goodwill in their markets. We compete for collection, transfer and disposal volume based primarily on the price and, to a lesser extent, quality of our services. We also compete with operators of alternative disposal facilities, including incinerators, and with counties, municipalities and solid waste districts that maintain their own waste collection and disposal operations. Public sector operators may have financial and other advantages over us because of their access to user fees and similar charges, tax revenues, tax-exempt financing and the ability to flow-control waste streams to publicly owned disposal facilities.

From time to time, competitors may reduce the price of their services in an effort to expand their market shares or service areas or to win competitively bid municipal contracts. These practices may cause us to reduce the price of our services or, if we elect not to do so, to lose business. We provide a significant amount of our residential, commercial and industrial collection services under exclusive franchise and municipal contracts and G Certificates. Exclusive franchises and municipal contracts may be subject to periodic competitive bidding. Competition in the solid waste industry is also

Table of Contents

affected by the increasing national emphasis in the U.S. and Canada on recycling and other waste reduction programs, which may reduce the volume of waste we collect or deposit in our landfills.

The U.S. and Canadian MSW services industries have undergone significant consolidation, and we encounter competition in our efforts to acquire collection operations, transfer stations and landfills. We generally compete for acquisition candidates with publicly owned regional and national waste management companies. Accordingly, it may become uneconomical for us to make further acquisitions or we may be unable to locate or acquire suitable acquisition candidates at price levels and on terms and conditions that we consider appropriate, particularly in markets we do not already serve.

Competition for E&P waste comes primarily from smaller regional companies that utilize a variety of disposal methods and generally serve specific geographic markets. We also compete in certain markets with publicly held and privately owned companies such as Waste Management, Inc., Republic Services, Inc., Clean Harbors, Inc., US Ecology, Inc., Secure Energy Services Inc., Nuverra Environmental Solutions, Trinity Environmental Services, LLC, Ecoserv, PetroWaste Environmental LLP,Oilfield Water Logistics (OWL) and others. In addition, customers in many markets have the option of using internal disposal methods or outsourcing to another third-party disposal company. The principal competitive factors in this business include: gaining customer approval of treatment and disposal facilities; location of facilities in relation to customer activity; reputation; reliability of services; track record of environmental compliance; ability to accept multiple waste types at a single facility; and price.

The intermodal services industry is also highly competitive.  We compete against other intermodal rail services companies, trucking companies and railroads, many of which have greater financial and other resources than we do.  Competition is based primarily on price, reliability and quality of service. 

REGULATION

Introduction

Our operations in the United States and Canada, including landfills, transfer stations, solid waste transportation, intermodal operations, vehicle maintenance shops, fueling facilities and oilfield waste treatment, recovery and disposal operations, are all subject to extensive and evolving federal, state, provincial and, in some instances, local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, the enforcement of which has become increasingly stringent. These laws and regulations may, among other things, require securing permits or other authorizations (collectively, “permits”) for regulated activities; govern the amount and type of substances that may be released or emitted into the environment in connection with our operations; impose clean-upcleanup or corrective action responsibility for releases of regulated substances into the environment; restrict the way we handle, manage or dispose of wastes; limit or prohibit our activities in sensitive areas such as wetlands, wilderness areas or areas inhabited by endangered or threatened species; require investigatory and remedial actions to mitigate pollution conditions caused by our operations or attributable to former operations; and impose specific standards addressing worker protection and health. Compliance is often costly or difficult to achieve, and the violation of these laws and regulations may result in the denial or revocation of permits, issuance of corrective action orders, assessment of administrative and civil penalties and even criminal prosecution.

In many instances in the United States, liability is often “strict,” meaning it is imposed without a requirement of intent or fault on the part of the regulated entity. The environmental regulations that affect us in the United States are generally administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, or the EPA, state environmental agencies, and other federal, state and local agenciesauthorities having jurisdiction over our U.S. operations.

The environmental legislation that affects us in Canada is administered by federal and provincial regulatory agencies, which have jurisdiction over certain aspects of our Canadian operations. The relevant Canadian federal environmental legislation that affects our operations is administered by federal departments such as Environment and Climate Change Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.Canada. Provincial and local agencies and departments administer their own environmental legislation, such as the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Climate Change.Parks. In most instances in Canada, liability for violations of environmental and health and safety matterslaws is imposed without a requirement of intent on the part of the regulated entity, but is subject to a defense of due diligence.

Compliance with existing environmental regulatory requirements and permits requires significant capital and operating expenditures. It is possible that substantial costs for compliance or penalties for non-compliance may be incurred in the future. We believe that in recent years, environmental regulation of the industry has increased as have the number of enforcement actions brought by regulatory agencies. It is also possible that other developments, such as the adoption of additional or more stringent environmental laws, regulations and enforcement policies, could result in additional costs or liabilities that we cannot currently foresee or quantify. Moreover, changes in environmental laws or regulations could

Table of Contents

reduce the demand for our services and adversely impact our business. We also expend significant resources (both administrative and financial) directed toward development, expansion, acquisition, and permitting of landfills, transfer stations, and other facilities we operate. Regarding any permit issued by a regulatory agency necessary for our operations, there are no assurances that we will be able to obtain or maintain all necessary permits or that any such permit held may ultimately be renewed on the same or similar terms. Further, permits obtained impose various requirements and may restrict the size and location of disposal operations, impose limits on the types and amount of waste a facility may receive or manage, as well as a waste disposal facility’s overall capacity. Additional operational conditions or restrictions may be included in the renewal or amendment of a previously issued permit. As regulations change, our permit requirements could become more stringent and compliance may require material expenditures at our facilities, impose significant operational restraints, or require new or additional financial assurance related to our operations. Regarding any permit that has been issued, it remains subject to renewal, modification, suspension or revocation by the agency with jurisdiction.

Various laws impose clean-upcleanup or remediation liability on responsible parties, which are discussed in more detail below. Substances subject to clean-upcleanup liability have been or may have been disposed of or released on or under certain of our facility sites, including our exploration and production, or E&P, sites. At some of our facilities, we have conducted and continue to conduct monitoring or remediation of known soil and groundwater contamination and, as required, we will continue to perform such work. It is possible that monitoring or remediation could be required in the future at other facilities we own or operate, or previously owned or operated. These monitoring and remediation efforts are usually overseen by environmental regulatory agencies. Further, it is not uncommon for neighboring landowners andor other third parties to file claims for personal injury or property damage allegedly caused by the release of regulated substances into the environment. In addition, from time to time, our intermodal services business undertakes the transport of hazardous materials. This transportation function is also regulated by various federal, state, provincial and potentially local agencies.

A number of major statutes and regulations apply to our operations, which are generally enforced by regulatory agencies. Typically, in the United States, federal statutes establish the general regulatory requirements governing our operations, but in many instances these programs are delegated to the states, which have independent and sometimes more strict regulation. In Canada, it is typically provincial statutes that establish the primary regulatory requirements governing our waste operations. Federal statutes in Canada govern certain aspects of waste management, including international and interprovincial transport of certain kinds of waste. Certain of these statutes in the United States and Canada contain provisions that authorize, under certain circumstances, lawsuits by private citizens to enforce certain statutory provisions. In addition to penalties, some of these statutes in the United States authorize an award of attorneys’ fees to parties that successfully bring such an action. Enforcement actions for a violation of these statutes and related rules, or for a violation of or failure to have a permit, which is required by certain of these statutes, may include administrative, civil and criminalcriminal/regulatory penalties, as well as injunctive relief in some instances. In our ordinary course of business, we incur significant costs complying with these statutes, regulations and applicable standards.

standards they impose.

A brief description of certain of the primary statutes affecting our operations is discussed below.

Laws and Regulations

A.   Waste and Hazardous Substances

In the United States, RCRA regulates the generation, treatment, storage, handling, transportation and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste and requires states to develop programs to ensure the safe disposal of solid waste. Regulations promulgated under RCRA impose broad requirements on the waste management industry. In October 1991, the EPA adopted what are known as the Subtitle D Regulations, which govern solid non-hazardous waste landfills. The Subtitle D Regulations establish, among other things, location restrictions, minimum facility design and performance standards, operating criteria, closure and post-closure requirements, financial assurance requirements, groundwater monitoring requirements, groundwater remediation standards and corrective action requirements. These and other applicable requirements, including permitting, are typically implemented by the states, butand in some instances, states have enacted more stringent requirements.

Table of Contents

Waste related to oil and gas exploration and production, or “E&P,” is typically regulated differently than those wastes designated as “hazardous waste.” Regarding the management and disposal of E&P waste, although E&P wastes may contain hazardous constituents, most E&P waste is exempt from stringent RCRA regulation as a hazardous waste. We are required to obtain permits for the land treatment and disposal of E&P waste as part of our operations. The construction, operation and closure of E&P waste land treatment and disposal operations are generally regulated at the state level. These regulations vary widely from state to state. None of our oilfield waste recycling, treatment and disposal facilities are currently permitted to accept hazardous wastes for disposal.wastes. Some wastes handled by us that currently are exempt from regulation as hazardous wastes may in the future be designated as “hazardous wastes” under RCRA or other applicable statutes if changes in lawlaws or regulations were to occur. If the RCRA E&P waste exemption is repealed or modified, we could become subject to more rigorous and costly operating and disposal requirements.

A breach of laws or regulations governing facilities we operate may result in suspension or revocation of necessary permits, civil liability, and imposition of fines and penalties. Moreover, if we experience a delay in obtaining, are unable to obtain, or suffer the revocation of required permits, we may be unable to serve our customers, our operations may be interrupted and our growth and revenue may be limited.

RCRA also regulates underground storage of petroleum and other materials it defines as “regulated substances.” RCRA requires tank registration, compliance with technical standards for tanks, release detection and reporting and corrective action, among other things. Certain of our facilities and operations are subject to these requirements, which are typically implemented at the state level and may be more stringent in certain states.

CERCLA, which is also known as the “Superfund” law, established a program in the United States allowing federal authorities to provide for the investigation and clean upcleanup of facilities where, or from which, a release of any hazardous substance into the environment has occurred or is threatened. CERCLA defines “hazardous substances” broadly. One of the primary ways that CERCLA addresses a release or threatened release of hazardous substances is by imposing strict, joint and several liability for clean upcleanup on its broad categories of responsible parties. This means that responsible parties can bear liability without fault and that each responsible party potentially could bear liability for the entirety of clean-upcleanup costs, notwithstanding its individual contribution. Generally, responsible parties are current owners andand/or operators of the contaminated site; former owners and operators of the site at the time when the hazardous substances were disposed; any person who arranged for treatment or disposal of the hazardous substances; and transporters who selected the disposal site. In addition to CERCLA’s liability framework, the EPA may issue orders directing responsible parties to respond to releases of hazardous substances. Further, the EPA and private parties, who have response liability to the EPA or who have incurred response costs, can bring suit against other responsible parties to seek to recover certain costs incurred in their response efforts. CERCLA also imposes liability for the cost of evaluating and remedying damage to natural resources. Various states have enacted laws analogous to and independent of CERCLA that also impose liability, which is typically strict and joint and several, for investigation, clean-up,cleanup and other damages associated with the release of hazardous or other regulated substances. We may handle hazardous substances within the meaning of CERCLA, or hazardous and other substances regulated under similar state statutes, in the course of our ordinary operations. As a result, we may be jointly and severally liable under CERCLA or similar states statutes for all or part of the costs required to clean upcleanup sites if and where these hazardous substances have been released into the environment. CERCLA and these analogous state laws and regulations may also expose us to liability for acts or conditions that were in compliance with applicable laws at a prior time. Under certain circumstances, our sales of residual crude oil collected as part of the saltwater injection process could result in liability to us if the residual crude contains hazardous substances or is covered by one of the state statutes and the entity to which the oil was transferred fails to manage and, as necessary, dispose of it or components thereof in accordance with applicable laws.

The primary waste laws regulating our business in Canada are imposed by the provinces. These include provincial laws that regulate waste management, including requirements to obtain permits and approvals, and regulations with respect to the operation of transfer stations and landfilling sites. Each provincial jurisdiction in Canada will havehas its own regulatory regime; however, the key requirements under these regimes are similar across Canada. For example, the Environmental

Table of Contents

Protection Act, or the EP Act, in Ontario and its underlying regulations regulate the generation, treatment, storage, handling, transportation and disposal of wastes in Ontario, among other things. The EP Act requires an approval or, in some cases, a registration, for the establishment, operation or alteration of a waste management system (which includes all facilities or equipment used in connection with waste) or a waste disposal site. The specific terms and conditions of an approval may impose emission limits, monitoring and reporting requirements, siting and operating criteria, financial assurance or insurance and decommissioning requirements. Certain landfilling sites are subject to more stringent regulatory requirements that can include detailed prescribed design standards, leachate collection systems, landfill gas management or collection systems and/or site closure plans including post-closure care requirements. The federal Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 imposes requirements with respect to the interprovincial and international movement of hazardous wastes and hazardous recyclable material, which can affect the movement of wastes and recyclables to our Canadian facilities. The expansion or establishment of certain waste management projects, including waste treatment and landfilling sites, may also be subject to provincial or federal environmental assessment requirements.

A breach of laws or regulations governing facilities we operateour operations may result in suspension or revocation of necessary approvals and imposition of fines and penalties. Moreover, if we experience a delay in obtaining, are unable to obtain, or suffer the revocation of required approvals, we may be unable to serve our customers, our operations may be interrupted, and our growth and revenue may be limited.

There are provincial and federal laws in Canada that regulate spills and releases of substances into the environment and require the remediation of contaminated sites. Clean up of contaminated sites in connection with our business is primarily regulated by provincial environmental laws. Each province will havehas its own regulatory regime; however, the key requirements under these regimes are similar across Canada. For example, the EP Act in Ontario authorizes the agency to issue orders to responsible persons to undertake remedial or other corrective actions to investigate, monitor, and remediate the discharge or presence of contaminants in the environment. These orders can generally be issued on a joint and several liability basis to categories of responsible persons, including persons who caused or permitted the discharge of a contaminant, persons who owned the discharged substance, as well as current and past owners of lands or the source of the contamination and persons who have or have had charge, management or control over lands or the source of the contamination. Responsible parties can bear liability under an order without fault.  The costs to comply with an order can be very substantial. Some provincial jurisdictions provide a statutory right to compensation from the owner or person in control of a substance that is discharged into the environment to any person who suffers loss as a result. The federal government has also enacted laws that regulate the release of certain substances into the environment. We handle many contaminants and pollutants in the course of our ordinary operations and, as a result, may be liable under provincial and federal statutes for all or part of required clean-upcleanup costs if substances have been released into the environment. Under such laws, we could be required to remove previously disposed substances and wastes (including substances disposed of or released by prior owners or operators) or remediate contaminated property (including soil and groundwater contamination, whether from prior owners or operators or other historic activities or spills).

B.   Wastewater/Stormwater Discharge

The Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of pollutants from a variety of sources, including, without limitation, solid waste disposal sites,facilities, transfer stations and oilfield waste facilities into Waters of the United States’ waters,States, or WOTUS, including surface and potentially ground waters. Under the Clean Water Act, sites or facilities that discharge pollutants to waters of the United States must have a permit authorizing that discharge. If run-off or other contaminants from our owned or operated transfer stations or oilfield waste facilities, or run-off, collected leachate or other contaminants from our owned or operated landfills or other facilities is discharged into streams, rivers or other regulated waters, the Clean Water Act would require a discharge permit,permit. These permits typically containingcontain requirements to conduct monitoring and, under certain circumstances, to treat and reduce the quantity of pollutants in such discharge. Further, if a landfill or other facility discharges wastewater through a treatment works, it may be required to comply with additional permitting and other specific requirements. Also, virtually all landfills are required to comply with the EPA’s storm water regulations, which are designed to prevent the introduction of contaminated storm water run-off into United States’ waters.

Table of Contents

At this time, the ultimate regulatory test for defining WOTUS is unclear, and the determination therefor will be based upon the outcome of regulatory promulgations and associated litigation, that are currently pending. The manner in which waters areWOTUS is defined could affect our operations by potentially increasing or modifying regulatory requirements governing our discharges. For example, in June 2017,In 2015, the Clean Water Rule was promulgated, which would expand federal control over many U.S. water resources by broadening the definition of WOTUS, thereby potentially classifying a larger range of water resource types as jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. Since promulgation of the 2015 Clean Water Rule, the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, or the Corps, proposedhave sought to rescind it and to promulgate a 2015 rule redefining “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS. The 2015 rule, which was stayed nationwide by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, would have expanded federal control over many U.S. water resources. The 2017 proposed rule seeks to re-codify therevised definition of WOTUS existing priorthat would establish federal jurisdiction more narrowly, thereby reducing the scope of Clean Water Act applicability. To that end, on December 11, 2018, the EPA and the Corps proposed a rule to promulgationredefine WOTUS. Eventually, in October 2019, the 2015 Clean Water Rule was repealed, effectively reverting to the pre-2015 regulatory definition as of December 23, 2019.  The EPA published a new Navigable Waters Protection Rule on April 21, 2020, which went into effect on June 22, 2020. This rule narrows the scope of wetlands and waterways under federal jurisdiction. The new rule has already been challenged in court in eight states and the District of Columbia. The Navigable Waters Protection Rule is currently in effect in every state and district except for Colorado, where a federal judge granted a stay. The scope of the 2015 rule consistent with Supreme Court decisions and longstanding practice, including applicable agency guidance documents. Additionally,WOTUS definition will likely remain fluid until litigation is finalized. To the agencies will pursue notice and comment rulemaking to reevaluateextent that a regulation expands the WOTUS definition. At this time, the ultimate regulatory test for defining WOTUS is unclear, and will depend on the resolutionscope of the 2017 proposed rulejurisdiction under the Clean Water Act with respect to WOTUS, we could face increased costs and any associated litigation.

delays in obtaining permits under the Clean Water Act. Further, regulatory uncertainty may increase costs to our customers.

Additionally, the Clean Water Act’s spill prevention, control and countermeasure requirements require development of site-specific plans, and appropriate containment berms and similar structures to help contain and prevent the contamination of regulated waters in the event of a hydrocarbon storage tank release. The Clean Water Act also contains provisions whichthat can prohibit development or require permitting before developmentconstruction or expansion of a landfill may occur in areas designated as wetlands. Various states in which we operate or may operate in the future have been delegated authority to implement the Clean Water Act and its permitting requirements, and some of these states have adopted regulations that are more stringent than federal Clean Water Act requirements.

Our United States E&P underground injection operations are subject to the SDWA, as well as analogous state laws and regulations. Under the SDWA, the EPA established the underground injection control, or UIC, program, which includes requirements for permitting, testing, monitoring, record keeping and reporting of injection well activities, as well as a prohibition against the migration of fluid containing any contaminant into underground sources of drinking water. Certain state regulations require us to obtain permits from the applicable regulatory agencies to operate our underground injection wells. Leakage from the subsurface portions of the injection wells could cause degradation of fresh groundwater resources, potentially resulting in suspension of our UIC permit, fines and penalties, the incurrence of expenditures for remediation of the affected resource and potential liability to third parties for property damages. In July 2018, the EPA partnered with New Mexico to assess alternatives to immediate disposal of E&P wastewater by reusing it and/or treating it for reintroduction into the hydrologic cycle, as well as potential regulations related thereto. Moreover, in May 2019, EPA issued its draft Study of Oil and Gas Extraction Wastewater Management Under the Clean Water Act regarding EPA’s examination of whether to alter its regulation of the treatment and discharge of E&P wastewater. The final report was released in May 2020. The EPA has yet to determine its next steps for managing E&P wastewater under the Clean Water Act.  If regulations requiring reuse or treatment are developed and implemented on a broad scale, it may increase our compliance costs or reduce the volume of E&P wastes that may be disposed of via underground injection.

There is legislation in Canada at both the federal and provincial levels that protects water quality and regulates the discharge of substances into the aquatic environment. Federal water pollution control authority is derived primarily from the Fisheries Act, which contains provisions for the protection of water quality and fish habitat. This includes a general prohibition on the deposit of any deleterious substances into water that is frequented by fish, unless otherwise authorized. There is legislation in each provincial jurisdiction that also protects water sources and regulates water pollution.pollution, and generally requires an approval or permit for a discharge of any effluent, including in some cases stormwater, into a water body. For example, in Ontario, the Ontario Water Resources Act, or OWRA, prohibits the discharge of material of any kind into any water that may impair the quality of the water. The OWRA requires that an approval be obtained for the use

Table of Contents

and operation of certain sewage and stormwater works. Such approvals typically contain monitoring requirements and impose restrictions on effluent characteristics. Other provinces in Canada have similar regimes for the protection of water. If run-off or other contaminants from our landfills, transfer stations or other waste facilities is discharged or migrates into waters and causes impairment, we could face significant liability under provincial and federal laws.

C.   Air Emissions

In the United States, the CAA generally regulates the emissions of air pollutants from a variety of sources, including certain landfills and oilfield waste facilities, based on factors such as the date of the construction and tons per year of emissions of regulated pollutants. Typically, federal requirements are delegated to the states and implemented at the state level. The CAA and analogous state laws require permits for and impose other restrictions on facilities and equipment that have the potential to emit pollutants into the atmosphere. Under the CAA, a source deemed to be a major source generally must be authorized by a permit. In those situations where major source permitting is not required, typically state laws and rules will require permitting as a type of minor source. Larger landfills and landfills located in areas where the ambient air does not meet certain air quality standards called for by the CAA may be subject to even more extensive air pollution controls and emissions limitations. In addition to the potential CAA permitting of landfill facilities, CAA permitting may be required for the construction of gas collection and flaring systems, composting and other operations. In some instances, federal operating permits may be required depending on the nature and volume of air emissions.

In addition to permitting, the CAA imposes other regulatory obligations, including, in some instances, performance standards on operations and equipment. The EPA has issued what are known as new source performance standards, or NSPS, and emissions guidelines, which impose requirements regarding control of landfill gases from new and existing large landfills. The EPA has also issued regulations imposing maximum achievable control technology, or MACT, on large MSW landfills. The MACT standards impose limits on landfill emissions and often require installation of landfill gas collection system tanks.systems. The EPA published a final rule on March 26, 2020, which declined to amend the MACT at that time.  Additional or more stringent regulations of our facilities may occur in the future, which could increase operating costs or impose additional compliance burdens.

On August 29, 2016, the EPA issued “Subpart XXX” that applies to MSW landfills constructed, modified or reconstructed after July 17, 2014. The Subpart XXX reducesNSPS reduce the non-methane organic compounds, or NMOC, emissions threshold at which MSW landfills must install emission controls, requires monitoring surface emissions of methane, monitoring of temperature and pressure at the well headwellhead of landfill gas collection systems and imposes other requirements. Further, the EPA promulgated “Guidelines” on August 29, 2016, known as Subpart Cf, which require states to implement similar requirements on existing landfills that are not subject to NSPS Subpart XXX. Subpart Cf updates existing Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for existing MSW landfills. The Subpart Cf Guidelines apply to landfills that accepted waste after November 8, 1987 and commenced construction or modification on or before July 17, 2014. Subpart XXX and Subpart Cf are intended to result in the reduction of landfill gas emissions, including methane, by lowering the thresholds where anat which a MSW landfill must install a gas collection and control system. Subpart Cf will ultimately affect existing sources that are not affected by Subpart XXX. In May 2017,October 2018, the EPA announcedproposed a rule to delay implementation of the Guidelines, and indicated that it was reconsidering certain portions thereof. The EPA is reconsidering several portionsstill in the process of reconsideration. In March 2020, the EPA finalized amendments to the most recent MSW Landfill NSPS and emission guidelines that would allow regulated entities to demonstrate compliance with landfill gas control, operating, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements by following the corresponding requirements in the MSW Landfills hazardous air pollutant regulations at Subpart XXXAAAA. These amendments were intended to improve compliance and Subpart Cf, and issued a 90-day stayimplementation of these subparts. Although the 90-day stay expiredregulations. EPA published its final rules on August 26, 2019, under which the deadline for states to submit their plans to implement the emission control requirements was extended from May 29, 2017 to August 30, 2021.  Various groups are litigating this deadline extension in the D.C. Circuit. The rules also give EPA up to six months to review the completeness of state plans and the 2016 rules remain in effect, the EPA has stated that it intendsan additional 12 months thereafter to complete the reconsideration process for Subpart XXX and Subpart Cf.approve or disapprove such plans. Regardless of whether or how EPA will amend Subpart XXX and Subpart Cf,the time extensions that the new rules allow, eventual compliance with these regulatory requirements could result in significant additional compliance costs, which we will incur in our ordinary course of business. In addition, state air regulatory requirements may impose additional restrictions beyond federal requirements, which could also result in

Table of Contents

compliance costs. For example, some state air programs uniquely regulate odor and the emission of certain specific toxic air pollutants.

The EPA recently modified, or is in the process of modifying, other standards promulgated under the CAA in a manner whichthat could increase our compliance costs. For example, the EPA has recently modified or discussed modifying national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) applicable to particulate matter, carbon monoxide and oxides of sulfur and nitrogen, ozone and other standards to make them more stringent. Current rule proposals retain 2015 NAAQS levels; a new administration, however, may propose more restrictive standards.It is possible these additional regulations could result in additional capital or operating expenditures. We do not believe, however, they will have a material adverse effect on our business as a whole. Further, our customers’ operations may be subject to existing and future CAA permitting and regulatory requirements that could have a material effect on their operations, which could have an adverse effect on our business.

In Canada, the primary laws regulating air emissions from our operations come from provincial laws. Provincial laws may require approvals for air emissions and may impose other restrictions on facilities and equipment that have the potential to emit pollutants into the atmosphere. Provincial laws may require the construction of landfill gas management systems, including gas collection and flaring systems, which are subject to approvals or other regulatory requirements. Failure to obtain an approval or comply with approval requirements could result in the imposition of substantial administrative or regulatory penalties.

D.   Occupational Health and Safety

In the United States, the OSH Act is administered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, and many state agencies whose programs have been approved by OSHA. The OSH Act establishes employer responsibilities for worker health and safety, including the obligation to maintain a workplace free of recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious injury, comply with adopted worker protection standards, maintain certain records, provide workers with required disclosures, and implement certain health and safety training programs. Various OSHA standards may apply to our operations, including standards concerning notices of hazards, safety in excavation and demolition work, the handling of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials and worker training and emergency response programs. Moreover, the Department of Transportation, OSHA, and other agencies regulate and have jurisdiction concerning the transport, movement, and related safety of hazardous and other regulated materials. In some instances, state and local agencies also regulate the safe transport of such materials to the extent not preempted by federal law.

In Canada, each province establishes and administers a provincial occupational health and safety regime. Similar to the United States, these regimes generally identify the rights and responsibilities of employers, supervisors and workers. Employers are required to implement all prescribed safety requirements and to exercise reasonable care to protect employees from workplace hazards, among other things. Various occupational health and safety standards may apply to our Canadian operations, including requirements relating to communication of and exposure to hazards, safety in excavation and demolition work, the handling of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials and worker training and emergency response programs. In addition to the provincial departments of transportation, Transport Canada has jurisdiction to regulate the transportation of dangerous goods, which can include wastes.

We also review regulatory developments that may affect our business, including, among others, those described below.

Table of Contents

EPA’s ability to fully assess the matter. The EPA is also currently conductingpublished in May 2018 a detailed study of centralized waste treatment, or CWT, facilities accepting oil and gas extraction wastewater to ensure that current controls are adequate and to analyzewastewater. The study assessed the environmental impactsregulatory status of dischargesCWTs, characteristics of wastewaters discharged from CWTs,them, available treatment technologies and associated costs.EPA has yet to implement regulations or guidelines based on this study. The impactsimpact of rules that the EPA is contemplating, has proposed or has recently promulgated is proposing or considering will be uncertain until the rules are finalized and fully implemented.

If the EPA’s newly promulgated or proposed rules, or other new federal, state or local laws, regulations or policies restricting hydraulic fracturing are adopted, such legal requirements could result in delays, eliminate certain drilling and injection activities and make it more difficult or costly for our customers to perform hydraulic fracturing. Any such regulations limiting, prohibiting or imposing operational requirements on hydraulic fracturing could reduce oil and natural gas E&P activities by our customers and, therefore, adversely affect our business. Such laws or regulations could also materially increase our costs of compliance.

Certain of our facilities accept drilling fluids and other E&P wastes for disposal via underground injection. The disposal of drilling fluids is generally regulated at the state level, and claims, including some regulatory actions, have been brought against some owners or operators of these types of facilities for nuisance, seismic disturbances and other claims in relation to the operation of underground injection facilities. To date, our facilities have not been subject to any such litigation, but could be in the future.

Generally, the promulgation of climate change laws or regulations restricting or regulating greenhouse gas, or GHG, emissions could increase our costs to operate. The EPA’s current and proposed regulation of GHG emissions may adversely impact our operations. In 2009, the EPA made an endangerment finding allowing GHGs to be regulated under the CAA. The CAA requires stationary sources of air pollution to obtain New Source Review, or NSR, permits prior to construction and, in some cases, Title V operating permits. Pursuant to the EPA’s rulemakings and interpretations, certain Title V and NSR Prevention of Significant Deterioration, or PSD, permits issued on or after January 2, 2011, must address GHG emissions. As a result, new or modified emissions sources may be required to install Best Available Control Technology to limit GHG emissions. The EPA’s recently adopted Subpart XXX also requires the reduction of GHG emissions from new or modified landfills, and the Guidelines, known as Subpart Cf, published by the EPA in August 2016, will require the reduction of GHG emissions from existing landfills, although the EPA has delayed implementation of, and is reconsidering portions of, these regulations, as detailed above. In addition, the EPA’s Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule sets monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to certain landfills and other entities.

The Canadian federal government announced a national carbon-pricing regime in 2016, the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change, which required all provinces to adopt a carbon-pricing scheme or have a federal carbon regime imposed upon them. Alternatively, provinces may implement a cap-and-trade system, but will need to demonstrate that the province's emissions are consistent with both Canada's national target and the results of the provinces who have implemented the carbon-pricing scheme. In JanuaryJune 2018, the Canadian federal government released a draftenacted the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, which established a national carbon-pricing regime starting in 2019 for provinces and territories in Canada where there is no provincial regime in place or where the provincial regime does not meet the federal benchmark. Often referred to as the federal backstop, the federal carbon-pricing regime consists of a carbon levy that is intendedapplied to apply in any province or territory that does not have its own carbonfossil fuels and an output-based pricing system in place by 2019(“OBPS”) that meets the federal criteria.is applied to certain industrial facilities with reported emissions of 50,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (“CO2e”) or more per year. The federal government proposal would place acarbon levy on certain fossilapplies to prescribed liquid, gaseous, and solid fuels at a rate that is equivalent to $30 per tonne of CAD $10 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalentCO2e in 2018, rising by CAD $10 per ton each year to CAD2020, increasing annually, until it reaches $50 per ton in 2022, as well as an out-put based carbon pricing systemtonne of CO2e by 2022. On November 19, 2020, the federal government introduced Bill C-12, the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, which establishes the framework for certain larger industrial emitters.

national GHG emissions reduction targets to attain net-zero emissions by 2050.

Certain states and manyseveral Canadian provinces have promulgated legislation and regulations to limit GHG emissions through requirements of specific controls, carbon levies, cap and trade programs or other measures. Comprehensive GHG legislation or regulation, will affectincluding carbon pricing, affects not only our business, but also that of our customers.

Heightened regulation of our customers’ operations could also adversely affect our business. The regulation of GHG emissions from oil and gas E&P operations may increase the costs to our customers of developing and producing hydrocarbons and, as a result, may have an indirect and adverse effect on the amount of E&P waste delivered to our facilities. On June 3, 2016, the EPA promulgated NSPS Subpart OOOOa, which in conjunction with NSPS Subpart OOOO

Table of Contents

sets methane and VOC requirements for certain new and modified sources, including hydraulically fractured oil wells, certain tankage and equipment. Although, as discussed above, the EPA is reconsidering portions ofrevised these regulations in September 2020, they are currently being challenged in court and they will continue to require, in some instances, additional emissions controls and increased capital costs for our customers, which could reduce their E&P activities, and subsequently negatively impact our business operations. As discussed above, certain states have enacted rules analogous to or even more stringent than the federal rules.

These statutes and regulations increase our costs and our customers’ costs, and future climate change statutes and regulations may have an impact as well. If we are unable to pass such higher costs through to our customers, or if our customers’ costs of developing and producing hydrocarbons increase, our business, financial condition and operating results could be adversely affected. The impact of any potential rules affecting existing sources is uncertain.

Certain permits and state and local regulations, known as flow control restrictions, may limit a landfill’s or transfer station’s ability to accept waste that originates from specified geographic areas, to import out-of-state waste or wastes originating outside the local jurisdictions or to otherwise accept non-local waste. While certain courts have deemed these laws to be unenforceable, other courts have not. Certain state and local jurisdictions may seek to enforce flow control restrictions contractually. These actions could limit or prohibit the importation of wastes originating outside of local jurisdictions or direct that wastes be handled at specified facilities. These restrictions could limit the volume of wastes we can manage in jurisdictions at issue and also result in higher disposal costs for our collection operations. If we are unable to pass such higher costs through to our customers, our business, financial condition and operating results could be adversely affected. Additionally, certain local jurisdictions have sought or may seek to impose extraterritorial obligations on our operations in an effort to affect flow control and may enforce tax and fee arrangements on behalf of such jurisdictions.

6. Potential Regulation of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) and Other Emerging Contaminants

Pursuant to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the United States EPA has promulgated the Renewable Fuel Standards, or RFS, which require refiners to either blend “renewable fuels,” such as ethanol and biodiesel, into their transportation fuels or to purchase renewable fuel credits, known as renewable identification numbers, or RINs, in lieu of blending. In some cases, landfill gas generated at our landfills in the United States and Canada qualifies as a renewable fuel for which RINs are available. Such RINs can be sold by the Company. The price of RINs has been extremely volatile and the value of RINs is dependent upon a variety of factors. The EPA annually establishes the renewable fuel volumes required under the RFS for the following year. The 2020 renewable fuel and 2021 biomass-based diesel volume requirements were published on February 6, 2020, increasing required volumes from 2019 requirements. The regulation is being challenged judicially in the D.C. Circuit, but the challenge remains unresolved. Reductions or limitations on the requirement to blend renewable fuel would likely reduce the volume of RINs purchased to meet the RFS blending requirements. On November 30, 2017, EPA promulgated its 2018 RFS, with minor changes to the 2017 renewable fuel volume requirements across all types of biofuels under the RFS program. However,Further, there have been proposals to legislativelyrevise, and in some instances limit, the RFS program in the United States. For example,As recently as October 2019, House Energy and Commerce Committee members, Representatives Shimkus and Flores, introduced the 21st Century Transportation Fuels Act that aims to eliminate volume-based renewable fuels mandates and instead rely upon the transition to a national octane standard and automobile manufacturing standards to govern fuel composition. This bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change in 2016, a bill (H.R. 5180) was introduced inOctober 2019, but no further action has been taken.  Various parties have also sought for the United States Houseexecutive branch to revise the RFS. Limiting or eliminating the RFS could have the effect of Representatives seeking to limitreducing or eliminating the volumesvolume of ethanolRINs required to be blended by refiners to no more than 9.7%meet blending requirements, which could adversely affect the demand for RINS and accordingly the revenue stream we have historically derived from the sale of the total volume of gasoline expected to be sold or introduced into commerce in the United States.RINs. ‎

In Canada, theThe Renewable Fuels Regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 require impose obligations on producers and importers of gasoline, diesel fuel and heating distillatecertain liquid petroleum fuels to acquire a certain number of renewable fuel compliance units or Compliance Units, in connection with the volumes of fuelfuels they produce or import. Compliance Units can be generated in a number of ways, including through the blending of renewable fuel into liquid petroleum fuels. In some cases, landfill gas generated at our landfills in Canada qualifies as a renewable fuel that can be sold by our Company to blenders or refiners for the purpose of creating Compliance Units. Certain provincial jurisdictions in Canada also impose obligations to incorporate renewable fuels into fuels that are distributed within the jurisdiction.  The price for our renewable fuel in Canada is dependent on a variety of factors, including demand. The Canadian federal government released detailspublished the draft Clean Fuel Regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 on a proposed new clean fuel regulatory framework at the end of 2017.December 19, 2020. The proposed frameworkdraft Clean Fuel Regulations would impose lifecycle carbon intensity requirements on certain liquid, gaseous and solid fuels that are used in transportation, industry and buildings, and establish rules relating to the trading of compliance credits. The carbon intensity requirements would become more stringent over time. Carbon intensity would be differentiated between different types of renewable fuels to reflect the associated emissions reduction potential. Regulated parties, which may include fuel producers and importers would have flexibility with respectof certain liquid petroleum fuels, which could be satisfied, in part, through compliance credits generated through the supply of low carbon intensity

Table of Contents

fuels.  The draft Clean Fuel Regulations are expected to how to achieve lower carbon fuelscome into force in Canada. The Canadian federal government has indicated that over time, the new clean fuel standard would replace the current Renewable Fuels Regulations. The Canadian federal government is currently conducting public consultation on the proposed framework.December 2022.  At this time, we do not know how athe new clean fuel regulatory frameworkClean Fuel Regulations in Canada couldwill impact demand for our renewable fuel.

A significant reduction in the value of RINs in the United States or the price paid for our renewable fuel in Canada could adversely impact our reported results.Canada.

Certain states have enacted laws and regulations regulating NORM. In the course of our E&P waste operations, some of our equipment involved in E&P waste management and disposal may be exposed to naturally occurring radiation associated with oil and gas deposits. Further, certain E&P wastes we handle could be NORM contaminated. NORM wastes exhibiting levels of naturally occurring radiation exceeding established state standards are typically subject to special handling and disposal requirements, and any storage vessels, piping, equipment and work area affected by NORM waste may be subject to remediation or restoration requirements. It is possible that we may incur significant costs or liabilities associated with inadvertently handling NORM contaminated waste or equipment that becomes NORM contaminated based on exposure or contact with elevated levels of NORM.

EPR regulations place responsibility on product manufacturers or suppliers to assume certain waste management or recycling responsibility for their products after such products’ useful life or otherwise impose obligations on product manufacturers or suppliers to reduce the volume of waste associated with their products.

EPR regulations have yet to be promulgated at the federal level in the United States, but have been promulgated or considered in state and local jurisdictions in the United States. EPR regulations could have an adverse effect on our business if enacted at the federal level or if widely enacted by state or local governments.

Numerous provincial jurisdictions in Canada have promulgated EPR and related waste diversion legislation and other programs that mandate or encourage recycling and waste reduction and restrict the landfill disposal of certain types of waste. The enactment of new and more stringent regulations reducing the types or volumes of wastes available for disposal in landfills could impact our future operations.

In some states, public authorities regulate the rates that landfill operators may charge. The adoption of rate regulation or the reduction of current rates in states in which we own or operate landfills could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

RISK MANAGEMENT, INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SURETY BONDS

Risk Management

We maintain environmental and other risk management programs that we believe are appropriate for our business. Our environmental risk management program includes evaluating existing facilities and potential acquisitions for environmental law compliance. We do not presently expect environmental compliance costs to increase materially above current levels, but we cannot predict whether future acquisitions will cause such costs to increase. We also maintain a worker safety program that encourages safe practices in the workplace. Operating practices at our operations emphasize minimizing the possibility of environmental contamination and litigation. Our facilities comply in all material respects with applicable federal, state and provincial regulations.

Insurance

We have a high deductible or self-insured retentionmaintain an insurance program for automobile liability, general liability, employer’s liability claims, environmental liability, cyber liability, employment practices liability and directors’ and officers’ liability as well as for employee group health insurance, property and workers’ compensation. Our loss exposure for insurance claims is generally limited to per incident deductibles or self-insured retentions. Losses in excess of deductible or self-insured retention levels are insured subject to policy limits.