View Filing Data

Document and Company Information - shares	9 Months Ended
Document and Company Information - shares	Sep. 30, 2009	Oct. 29, 2009
Document and Company Information [Abstract]
Entity Registrant Name	REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC.
Entity Central Index Key	0001060391
Document Type	10-Q
Document Period End Date	Sep. 30, 2009
Amendment Flag	false
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--12-31
Entity Well-known Seasoned Issuer	Yes
Entity Voluntary Filers	No
Entity Current Reporting Status	Yes
Entity Filer Category	Large Accelerated Filer
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		380,144,098

Consolidated Balance Sheets - USD ($) $ in Millions	9 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
Consolidated Balance Sheets - USD ($) $ in Millions	Sep. 30, 2009	Dec. 31, 2008
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$ 107.3	$ 68.7
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $54.2 and $65.7 as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively	928.2	945.5
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	189.3	174.7
Deferred tax assets	179.5	136.8
Total current assets	1,404.3	1,325.7
Restricted cash and marketable securities	254.9	281.9
Property and equipment, net	6,585.6	6,738.2
Goodwill, net	10,534.0	10,521.5
Other intangible assets, net	517.7	564.1
Other assets	233.6	490.0
Total assets	19,530.1	19,921.4
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	458.8	564.0
Notes payable and current maturities of long-term debt	242.5	504.0
Deferred revenue	332.7	359.9
Accrued landfill and environmental costs, current portion	188.4	233.4
Accrued interest	110.5	107.7
Other accrued liabilities	765.1	796.8
Total current liabilities	2,098.0	2,565.8
Long-term debt, net of current maturities	6,813.3	7,198.5
Accrued landfill and environmental costs, net of current portion	1,251.0	1,197.1
Deferred income taxes and other long-term liabilities	1,323.2	1,239.9
Self-insurance reserves, net of current portion	303.7	234.5
Other long-term liabilities	$ 186.4	$ 203.1
Commitments and contingencies
Stockholders' equity:
Preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share; 50.0 shares authorized; none issued	$ 0.0	$ 0.0
Common stock; par value $0.01 per share; 750.0 shares authorized; 394.6 and 393.4 issued, including shares held in treasury, as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively	4.0	3.9
Additional paid-in capital	6,289.7	6,260.1
Retained earnings	1,720.1	1,477.2
Treasury stock, at cost (14.9 shares as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008)	(457.2)	(456.7)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax	(4.4)	(3.1)
Total Republic Services, Inc. stockholders' equity	7,552.2	7,281.4
Noncontrolling Interests	2.3	1.1
Total stockholders' equity	7,554.5	7,282.5
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity	$ 19,530.1	$ 19,921.4

Consolidated Statements of Income (Unaudited) - USD ($) shares in Millions, $ in Millions	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2009	Sep. 30, 2008	Sep. 30, 2009	Sep. 30, 2008
Statement [Line Items]
Revenue	$ 2,073.5	$ 834.0	$ 6,200.1	$ 2,440.7
Expenses:
Cost of operations	1,207.5	499.5	3,643.1	1,553.5
Depreciation, amortization and depletion	218.3	77.3	658.7	226.9
Accretion	22.2	4.6	67.4	13.5
Selling, general and administrative	225.4	85.6	658.7	252.0
Loss (gain) on disposition of assets, net	0.9	0.0	(144.3)	0.0
Restructuring charges	12.3	0.0	55.9	0.0
Operating income	386.9	167.0	1,260.6	394.8
Interest expense	(144.8)	(22.6)	(448.8)	(65.1)
Loss on extinguishment of debt	(31.8)	0.0	(31.8)	0.0
Interest income	0.5	2.6	1.7	7.9
Other income (expense), net	1.3	(1.6)	2.8	(0.7)
Income before income taxes	212.1	145.4	784.5	336.9
Provision for income taxes	91.1	56.7	323.9	131.4
Net income	121.0	88.7	460.6	205.5
Less: net income attributable to noncontrolling interests	(0.5)	0.0	(1.2)	0.0
Net income attributable to Republic Services, Inc.	$ 120.5	$ 88.7	$ 459.4	$ 205.5
Basic earnings per share attributable to Republic Services, Inc. stockholders:
Basic earnings per share	$ 0.32	$ 0.49	$ 1.21	$ 1.13
Weighted average common shares outstanding	379.7	182.3	379.3	182.6
Diluted earnings per share attributable to Republic Services, Inc. stockholders:
Diluted earnings per share	$ 0.32	$ 0.48	$ 1.21	$ 1.11
Weighted average common and common equivalent shares outstanding	381.1	184.1	380.3	184.4
Cash dividends per common share	$ 0.19	$ 0.19	$ 0.57	$ 0.53

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited) - USD ($) $ in Millions	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2009	Sep. 30, 2008
Cash Provided by Operating Activities:
Net income	$ 460.6	$ 205.5
Adjustments to reconcile net income to cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment	389.9	145.7
Landfill depletion and amortization	216.3	76.5
Amortization of intangible and other assets	52.5	4.7
Accretion	67.4	13.5
Non-cash interest expense - debt	76.0	0.0
Non-cash interest expense - other	33.3	0.0
Restructuring and synergy related charges	33.2	0.0
Stock-based compensation	11.6	9.5
Deferred tax provision	5.6	24.1
Provision for doubtful accounts, net of adjustments	16.8	6.4
Excess income tax benefit from stock option exercises	(1.4)	1.8
Asset impairments	10.4	0.0
Loss on extinguishment of debt	31.8	0.0
Gain on disposition of assets, net	(156.2)	(1.1)
Other non-cash items	(0.1)	2.5
Change in assets and liabilities, net of effects from business acquisitions and divestitures:
Accounts receivable	1.0	(33.9)
Prepaid expenses and other assets	2.6	(42.6)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	(94.8)	7.0
Restructuring and synergy related expenditures	(53.4)	0.0
Capping, closure and post-closure expenditures	(60.2)	(9.8)
Remediation expenditures	(42.6)	(29.1)
Other liabilities	12.1	93.5
Cash Provided by Operating Activities	1,012.4	474.2
Cash Used in Investing Activities:
Purchases of property and equipment	(542.5)	(264.1)
Proceeds from sales of property and equipment	22.8	5.8
Cash used in acquisitions, net of cash acquired	(0.1)	(13.4)
Cash proceeds from divestitures, net of cash divested	473.3	0.0
Change in restricted cash and marketable securities	27.1	(6.4)
Other	0.0	(0.2)
Cash Used in Investing Activities	(19.4)	(278.3)
Cash Used in Financing Activities:
Proceeds from notes payable and long-term debt	948.2	693.4
Proceeds from senior notes	645.4	0.0
Payments of notes payable and long-term debt	(2,323.7)	(663.2)
Premiums paid on extinguishment of debt	(18.0)	0.0
Fees paid to issue and retire senior notes and certain hedging relationships	(9.0)	0.0
Issuances of common stock	17.9	20.2
Excess income tax benefit from stock option exercises	1.4	3.9
Purchases of common stock for treasury	(0.5)	(138.4)
Cash dividends paid	(216.1)	(93.7)
Cash Used in Financing Activities	(954.4)	(177.8)
Increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents	38.6	18.1
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period	68.7	21.8
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period	$ 107.3	$ 39.9

Basis of Presentation and Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2009
Basis of Presentation and Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements [Abstract]
Basis of Presentation and Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements	1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS Republic Services, Inc. (a Delaware corporation) and its subsidiaries (also referred to collectively as Republic, we, us, our, or the Company in this report) is the second largest provider of non-hazardous solid waste collection, transfer, recycling and disposal services in the United States, as measured by revenue. We manage and evaluate our operations through four geographic regions — Eastern, Midwest, Southern, and Western, which we have identified as our reportable segments. On December 5, 2008, we acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of Allied Waste Industries, Inc. (Allied) in a stock for stock transaction. The accompanying financial statements include the operating results of Allied from the date of the acquisition, and have not been retroactively restated to include Allied’s historical financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In accordance with the purchase method of accounting, the purchase price paid has been allocated to assets and liabilities acquired based upon their estimated fair values as of the effective date of the merger, with the excess of the purchase price over the net assets acquired being recorded as goodwill. We are in the process of valuing all of the assets and liabilities acquired in the merger, and, until we have completed our valuation process, there may be adjustments to our estimates of fair values and the resulting preliminary purchase price allocation. See Note 2, Business Acquisitions and Divestiture of Assets, Assets Held for Sale and Restructuring Charges, for additional information. The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Republic, its wholly owned and majority owned subsidiaries, and certain variable interest entities for which we have determined that we are the primary beneficiary. Our investments in variable interest entities are not material to our consolidated financial statements. We account for investments in entities in which we do not have a controlling financial interest under either the equity method or the cost method of accounting, as appropriate. These unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared by us pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated. Certain information related to our organization, significant accounting policies and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) have been condensed or omitted. In the opinion of management, these unaudited consolidated financial statements reflect all material adjustments (which include only normal recurring adjustments) necessary to fairly state the financial position and the results of operations for the periods presented, and the disclosures herein are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. Operating results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results that can be expected for a full year. These interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto appearing in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 and in our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed June 5, 2009. Management’s Estimates and Assumptions These unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP and include numerous estimates and assumptions made by management that affect the accounting for and recognition and disclosure of assets, liabilities, stockholders’ equity, revenue and expenses. We must make these estimates and assumptions because certain information that we use is dependent on future events, cannot be calculated with a high degree of precision from data available or simply cannot be readily calculated based on generally accepted methodologies. In some cases, these estimates are particularly difficult to determine and we must exercise significant judgment. The most difficult, subjective and complex estimates and assumptions that deal with the greatest amount of uncertainty relate to our accounting for our long-lived assets, landfill development costs, goodwill, and final capping, closure and post-closure costs, our valuation allowances for accounts receivable and deferred tax assets, our liabilities for potential litigation, claims and assessments, our liabilities for environmental remediation, employee benefit plans, stock-based compensation, deferred taxes, uncertain tax positions and self-insurance, our estimates of the fair values of the assets and liabilities acquired in our acquisition of Allied, and our estimates of the fair values of assets and liabilities to be divested. Each of these items is discussed in more detail in our description of our significant accounting policies, in Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 and in our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed June 5, 2009. Our actual results may differ significantly from our estimates. New Accounting Pronouncements *Convertible Debt Instruments* In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued new accounting guidance for convertible debt instruments that, by their stated terms, may be settled in cash (or other assets) upon conversion, including partial cash settlement of the conversion option. The guidance requires bifurcation of the instrument into a debt component that is initially recorded at fair value and an equity component. The difference between the fair value of the debt component and the initial proceeds from issuance of the instrument is recorded as a component of equity. The liability component of the debt instrument is accreted to par using the effective yield method; accretion is reported as a component of interest expense. The equity component is not subsequently re-valued as long as it continues to qualify for equity treatment. We adopted this guidance on January 1, 2009, and adoption did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Business Combinations* In December 2007, the FASB issued new guidance for business combinations applicable to all transactions and other events in which one entity obtains control over one or more other businesses. Under this new guidance all transaction and restructuring charges are required to be recognized as expenses as incurred. The new guidance requires the fair value of the purchase consideration, including the issuance of equity securities, to be determined as of the acquisition date. It also requires the acquirer to recognize assets acquired, liabilities assumed, consideration paid and any noncontrolling interests acquired at their acquisition-date fair values. Changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances and liabilities for tax uncertainties subsequent to the acquisition date that do not meet certain remeasurement criteria are also recorded in the income statement. The impact of the adoption of this new guidance on our consolidated financial statements is dependent on the nature and volume of future acquisitions, and, therefore, can not be determined at this time. The new guidance is required to be applied prospectively, and, in general, will be effective for businesses we acquire on or after January 1, 2009. However, in the case of deferred tax asset valuation allowances and uncertain tax position liabilities, the guidance will apply to the accounting for all business acquisitions, whether the acquisition occurred before or after adoption. *Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets* In April 2008, the FASB directed the FASB Staff to issue an amendment to the factors that should be considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions used for purposes of determining the useful life of a recognized intangible asset under previously existing guidance. The amendment is intended to improve the consistency between the useful life of a recognized intangible asset and the period of expected cash flows used to measure the fair value of the asset under GAAP. We adopted the amendment on January 1, 2009 and adoption of this amendment did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Fair Value Measurements* In September 2006, the FASB issued new guidance that defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with GAAP and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. The new guidance was effective for us on January 1, 2008. However, in February 2008, the FASB issued an amendment to this new guidance which delayed the effective date for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis, for one year. We adopted the guidance with respect to financial assets and liabilities beginning January 1, 2008 and with respect to our non-financial assets and liabilities effective January 1, 2009 pursuant to the requirements of the amendment. The impact of adopting this guidance and related amendment did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Noncontrolling Interests* In December 2007, the FASB issued new guidance requiring noncontrolling interests or minority interests to be treated as a separate component of equity, not as a liability or other item outside of permanent equity. Upon a loss of control, the interests sold, as well as any interest retained, are required to be measured at fair value, with any gain or loss recognized in earnings. Additionally, when control is obtained and a previous equity interest was held, a gain or loss will be recognized in earnings for the difference between the fair value of the previously held equity interest and its carrying value. Based on the new guidance, assets and liabilities will not change for subsequent purchase or sale transactions with noncontrolling interests as long as control is maintained. Differences between the fair value of consideration paid or received and the carrying value of noncontrolling interests are to be recognized as an adjustment to the parent interest’s equity. We adopted this new guidance on January 1, 2009, and the implementation did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities* In March 2008, the FASB issued new guidance which requires companies to provide enhanced disclosures regarding derivative instruments and hedging activities. It requires companies to better convey the purpose of derivative use in terms of the risks that they are intending to manage. Disclosures about (a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, (b) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for, and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect a company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows are required. This new guidance was effective for us beginning January 1, 2009. As this guidance relates specifically to disclosures, the adoption had no impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Determining Whether an Instrument is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock* In June 2008, the FASB issued guidance for determining whether an instrument (or an embedded feature) is indexed to an entity’s own stock when evaluating the instrument as a derivative. An instrument that is both indexed to an entity’s own stock and classified in stockholder’s equity in the entity’s statement of financial position is not considered a derivative. This new guidance provides a two-step process to determine whether an equity-linked instrument (or embedded feature) is indexed to its own stock first by evaluating the instrument’s contingent exercise provisions, if any, and second, by evaluating the instrument’s settlement provisions. We adopted this new guidance on January 1, 2009 and the adoption did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments* In April 2009, the FASB issued new guidance that expanded the fair value disclosures required for all financial instruments to be included in interim financial statements. In addition, the new guidance requires public companies to disclose the method and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value of those financial instruments and to discuss any changes of method or assumptions, if any, during the reporting period. This new guidance was effective for our quarter ended June 30, 2009. As this guidance relates specifically to disclosures, the adoption had no impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Subsequent Events* In May 2009, the FASB issued new guidance to establish general standards of accounting for and disclosures of events that occur after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. Among other things, this new guidance requires the disclosure of the date through which an entity has evaluated subsequent events and the basis for that date. This new guidance was effective for our quarter ended June 30, 2009. As this guidance relates specifically to disclosures, the adoption had no impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities* In June 2009, the FASB issued an amendment to the accounting and disclosure requirements for the consolidation of variable interest entities (VIEs) and requires an enterprise to perform an analysis to determine whether the enterprise’s variable interest or interests give it a controlling financial interest in a VIE. Under this new guidance, an enterprise has a controlling financial interest when it has (i) the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. An enterprise is required to assess whether it has an implicit financial responsibility to ensure that a VIE operates as designed when determining whether it has power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. It also requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a VIE, requires enhanced disclosures and eliminates the scope exclusion for qualifying special-purpose entities. This new guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009. We do not believe the impact of adopting this guidance will have a material effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. *Codification* In June 2009, the FASB issued the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (Codification). The Codification is the source of authoritative accounting principles recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities in the preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP. The Codification is effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. The Codification does not change GAAP and had no impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations.

Business Acquisitions and Divestiture of Assets, Assets Held for Sale and Restructuring Charges

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2009

Business Acquisitions and Divestiture of Assets, Assets Held for Sale and Restructuring Charges [Abstract]

Business Acquisitions and Divestiture of Assets, Assets Held for Sale and Restructuring Charges

2. BUSINESS ACQUISITIONS AND DIVESTITURE OF ASSETS, ASSETS HELD FOR SALE AND RESTRUCTURING CHARGES

Allocation of Purchase Price for the Acquisition of Allied

On December 5, 2008, we acquired all the issued and outstanding shares of Allied in a stock-for-stock transaction for an aggregate purchase price of $11.5 billion which includes approximately $5.4 billion of debt, at fair value. The allocation of purchase price to the fair value of the assets and liabilities acquired in the acquisition of Allied is preliminary and subject to revision. Due to the volume and complexity of the information required to value these assets and liabilities, our valuation of certain significant balances, including landfill development costs, property and equipment, intangible assets, accrued landfill and environmental costs (which includes landfill asset retirement obligations and environmental remediation liabilities), deferred taxes and other long-term tax liabilities, and, included in other long-term liabilities, liabilities for litigation, claims and assessments, and self-insurance, is not completed. Our purchase price allocation includes values we finalized to date and estimates of the values not yet finalized. We expect our purchase price allocation for the acquisition of Allied to be completed during 2009. Adjustments after the allocation period made to the valuation of assets and liabilities acquired, will be recorded in the consolidated statement of income in the period in which such adjustments become known. Of the approximate $9.1 billion of goodwill resulting from the transaction, we expect substantially all of it will be non-deductible for income tax purposes.

Our preliminary allocation of purchase price as of December 5, 2008 is as follows:


							Adjusted						Adjusted
	Allocation						Allocation						Allocation
	at						at						at
	December 5,						December						September
	2008			Adjustments			31, 2008			Adjustments			30, 2009

Current assets	$	910.8		$	(0.9	)	$	909.9		$	(0.7	)	$	909.2
Landfill development costs		2,600.0			—			2,600.0			—			2,600.0
Other property and equipment		2,256.8			1.9			2,258.7			39.7			2,298.4
Goodwill		9,006.3			(0.8	)		9,005.5			59.1			9,064.6
Other intangible assets		541.0			—			541.0			6.0			547.0
Other assets		226.6			(1.1	)		225.5			(36.7	)		188.8
Current liabilities		(1,336.3	)		—			(1,336.3	)		(36.0	)		(1,372.3	)
Capping, closure and post-closure liabilities		(813.1	)		—			(813.1	)		(4.2	)		(817.3	)
Environmental liabilities		(208.1	)		—			(208.1	)		(1.5	)		(209.6	)
Deferred income taxes and other long-term tax liabilities		(774.1	)		0.9			(773.2	)		(25.6	)		(798.8	)
Other long-term liabilities		(906.9	)		—			(906.9	)		0.6			(906.3	)

Total purchase price	$	11,503.0		$	—		$	11,503.0		$	0.7		$	11,503.7

The following table summarizes the components of other intangible assets acquired in the Allied acquisition as of September 30, 2009:


	Fair Value of
	Other
	Intangible		Useful Life
	Assets		(in years)

Customer relationships	$	420.0		10
Franchise agreements		60.0		9
Other municipal agreements		30.0		3
Tradenames		30.0		5
Favorable lease agreements		6.0		23
Non-compete agreements		1.0		2

Total	$	547.0

The following unaudited pro forma information shows the results of our operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2008 as if the Allied acquisition had occurred as of January 1, 2008:


	Three Months		Nine Months
	Ended		Ended
	September 30,		September 30,
	2008		2008
	(unaudited)		(unaudited)

Revenue	$	2,440.2	$	7,113.4
Net income		169.0		399.0
Basic earnings per share		0.45		1.05
Diluted earnings per share		0.44		1.05

The above unaudited pro forma financial information includes adjustments for amortization of identifiable intangible assets, accretion of discounts to fair value associated with debt, environmental, self-insurance and other liabilities, accretion of capping, closure and post-closure obligations and amortization of the related assets, and provision for income taxes. These unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated results have been prepared for comparative purposes only and are not necessarily indicative of the actual results of operations had the acquisition taken place as of the beginning of 2008, or of the results of our future operations. Furthermore, the pro forma results do not give effect to all cost savings or incremental costs that may occur as a result of the integration and consolidation of the acquisition.

Assets Held For Sale

As a condition of the merger with Allied in December 2008, the Department of Justice (DOJ) required us to divest of certain assets and related liabilities. As such, we classified these assets and liabilities as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2008. Certain of the legacy Republic assets classified as held for sale were adjusted to their estimated fair values less costs to sell and resulted in the recognition of an asset impairment loss of $1.8 million in our consolidated statements of income for the three months ended March 31, 2009. As of September 30, 2009 we are complete with our required divestitures.

In October 2009, we divested a hauling operation in Miami-Dade County, Florida. As such we classified the assets and liabilities related to the operation as assets held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2009. We adjusted these assets to their estimated fair values less costs to sell, resulting in the recognition of an asset impairment loss of $8.7 million in our consolidated statement of income for the three months ended September 30, 2009.

Assets held for sale and related liabilities are as follows:


	September 30,		December 31,
	2009		2008

Prepaid expenses and other current assets	$	2.5	$	17.5
Other assets		31.9		285.1

Total assets	$	34.4	$	302.6

Accrued liabilities	$	1.7	$	3.1
Other long-term liabilities		—		31.0

Total liabilities	$	1.7	$	34.1

During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, we recognized a net gain (loss) on disposition of assets of $(0.9) million and $144.3 million, respectively. Proceeds from the sales were primarily used to reduce amounts outstanding under our Credit Facilities.

Restructuring Charges

As a result of our acquisition of Allied, we committed to a restructuring plan related to our corporate overhead and other administrative and operating functions. The plan included closing our corporate office in Florida, consolidating administrative functions to Arizona, the former headquarters of Allied, and reducing staffing levels. The plan also included closing and consolidating certain operating locations and terminating certain leases. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, we incurred $12.3 million and $55.9 million of restructuring and integration charges related to our integration of Allied of which, $33.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 consists of charges for severance and other employee termination and relocation benefits. The remainder of the charges primarily related to consulting and professional fees. Substantially all the charges are recorded in our “Corporate” segment. We expect to be substantially complete with our plan by the fourth quarter of 2009. We expect to incur additional charges approximating $12.8 million to complete our plan. We expect that the majority of these charges will be paid during the remainder of 2009 and 2010.


	Balance at							Balance at
	December 31,		Additions /					September 30,
	2008		Adjustments		Payments			2009

Severance and other termination benefits	$	12.5	$	31.1	$	(19.2	)	$	24.4
Relocation		17.9		2.1		(11.6	)		8.4

Total	$	30.4	$	33.2	$	(30.8	)	$	32.8

Accrued Liabilities Related to Allied

We include exit costs in the purchase price allocation of an acquired business if a plan to exit an activity of an acquired entity exists, as those costs have no future economic benefit to us and will be incurred as a direct result of the exit plan, and the exit costs represent amounts to be incurred by us under a contractual obligation of the acquired entity that existed prior to the acquisition date. We recognize employee termination benefits as liabilities assumed as of the acquisition date when management approved and committed to the plan and termination arrangements were communicated to the employees.

The following table reflects the activity during the nine months ended September 30, 2009 associated with the liabilities (included in other accrued liabilities) incurred in connection with the termination benefits for employees who were employed by Allied at the date of the acquisition and notified that their employment was terminated:


	Balance at							Balance at
	December 31,		Additions /					September 30,
	2008		Adjustments		Payments			2009
Severance and other termination benefits	$	22.6	$	7.3	$	(22.6	)	$	7.3

As of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, we recorded $22.8 million and $31.5 million, respectively, of accrued liabilities in purchase accounting for the estimated liabilities related to various Allied legal matters.

We are in the process of evaluating certain operating contracts and leases acquired from Allied. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we recorded additional liabilities for unfavorable contract and lease exit costs of $21.4 million and $6.4 million, respectively. The underlying lease agreements and contracts have remaining non-cancellable terms ranging from 1 to 21 years. The following table reflects activity during the nine months ended September 30, 2009 associated with unfavorable contracts and lease exit liabilities:


	Balance at							Balance at
	December 31,				Payments /			September 30,
	2008		Additions		Amortization			2009
Lease exit costs	$	—	$	6.4	$	(1.4	)	$	5.0
Unfavorable contracts		33.3		21.4		(5.5	)		49.2

Total	$	33.3	$	27.8	$	(6.9	)	$	54.2

Landfill and Environmental Costs

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2009

Landfill and Environmental Costs [Abstract]

Landfill and Environmental Costs

7. LANDFILL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS

Accrued Landfill and Environmental Costs

A summary of landfill and environmental liabilities as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 is as follows:


	September 30,			December 31,
	2009			2008
Landfill final capping, closure and post-closure liabilities	$	1,076.1		$	1,040.6
Remediation		363.3			389.9

		1,439.4			1,430.5
Less: Current portion		(188.4	)		(233.4	)

Long-term portion	$	1,251.0		$	1,197.1

Total Available Disposal Capacity

As of September 30, 2009, we owned or operated 199 active solid waste landfills with total available disposal capacity of approximately 4.5 billion in-place cubic yards. Additionally, we currently have post-closure responsibility for 128 closed landfills.

Final Capping, Closure and Post-Closure Costs

The following table summarizes the activity in our asset retirement obligation liabilities, which include liabilities for final capping, closure and post-closure:


	Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2009			2008
Asset retirement obligation liabilities, beginning of year	$	1,040.6		$	277.7
Non-cash asset additions		25.0			14.3
Additions due to acquisitions		6.6			—
Asset retirement obligation adjustments		(1.0	)		—
Payments		(60.2	)		(9.8	)
Accretion expense		67.4			13.5
Other adjustments		(0.9	)		—
Adjustments to liabilities related to assets held for sale		(1.4	)		—

Asset retirement obligation liabilities, end of period		1,076.1			295.7
Less: Current portion		(114.9	)		(14.5	)

Long-term portion	$	961.2		$	281.2

Annually, in the fourth quarter, we review our calculations for asset retirement obligations. However, if there are significant changes in the facts and circumstances related to a site during the year, we will update our assumptions prospectively in the period that all the relevant facts and circumstances are known.

The fair value of assets that are legally restricted for purposes of collateralizing certain of our final capping, closure and post-closure obligations was approximately $61.1 million at September 30, 2009, and is included in restricted cash and marketable securities in our consolidated balance sheets.

Remediation

We accrue for remediation costs when they become probable and can be reasonably estimated. We believe that the amounts accrued for remediation costs are adequate. However, it is reasonably possible that we will need to adjust the liabilities recorded for remediation to reflect the effects of new or additional information, to the extent that such information impacts the costs, timing or duration of the required actions. Future changes in our estimates of the cost, timing or duration of the required actions could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The following table summarizes the activity in our environmental remediation liabilities:


	Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2009			2008
Remediation liabilities, beginning of year	$	389.9		$	67.5
Additions due to acquisitions		0.9			—
Additions charged to expense		—			68.0
Payments		(42.6	)		(29.1	)
Accretion expense		15.1			—

Remediation liabilities, end of period		363.3			106.4
Less: Current portion		(73.5	)		(10.5	)

Long-term portion	$	289.8		$	95.9

The following is a discussion of certain of our significant remediation matters:

Countywide Landfill. In 2007, we were issued Final Findings and Orders (F&Os) by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) related to environmental conditions at our Countywide Recycling and Disposal Facility (Countywide) in East Sparta, Ohio and we agreed to undertake certain other remedial actions with the OEPA as well. During 2008, Republic Services of Ohio II, LLC (Republic-Ohio), an Ohio limited liability company and wholly owned subsidiary of ours and parent of Countywide, entered into an Agreed Order on Consent (AOC) with the EPA requiring the reimbursement of costs incurred by the EPA and requiring Republic-Ohio to perform certain remediation activities at Countywide. Republic-Ohio also has completed construction of an isolation break under the authority and supervision of the U.S. EPA. On September 30, 2009, Republic-Ohio entered into a set of F&Os with the OEPA that supersede previous F&Os mentioned above. The F&Os require the implementation of a comprehensive operation and maintenance program for managing the remediation area. The operation and maintenance program requires Republic-Ohio to maintain the temporary cap and other engineering controls to prevent odors and isolate and contain the reaction. The operation and maintenance program is ultimately designed to result in the final capping and closure of the 88-acre remediation area at Countywide. The remediation liability remaining for Countywide recorded as of September 30, 2009 is $76.6 million, of which approximately $2.1 million is expected to be paid out during the remainder of 2009.

West Contra Costa County Landfill. In 2006, we were issued an Enforcement Order by the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) for the Class 1 Hazardous waste cell at the West Contra Costa County Landfill (West County). Subsequently, we entered into a Consent Agreement with DTSC in 2007 at which time we agreed to undertake certain remedial actions. The remediation liability remaining for West County recorded as of September 30, 2009 is $44.0 million, of which approximately $2.9 million is expected to be paid out during the remainder of 2009.

Sunrise Landfill. On August 1, 2008, Republic Services of Southern Nevada (RSSN), our wholly owned subsidiary, signed a Consent Decree with the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management and Clark County, Nevada related to the Sunrise Landfill. Under the Consent Decree, RSSN has agreed to perform certain remedial actions at the Sunrise Landfill for which RSSN and Clark County were otherwise jointly and severally liable. We also paid $1.0 million in sanctions related to the Consent Decree. RSSN is currently working with the Clark County Staff and Board of Commissioners to develop a mechanism to fund the costs to comply with the Consent Decree. However, we have not recorded any potential recoveries. The remediation liability remaining for Sunrise recorded as of September 30, 2009 is $37.2 million, of which approximately $0.7 million is expected to be paid out during the remainder of 2009.

Environmental Operating Costs

In the normal course of business, we incur various operating costs associated with environmental compliance. These costs include, among other things, leachate treatment and disposal, methane gas and groundwater monitoring and systems maintenance, interim cap maintenance, costs associated with the application of daily cover materials, and the legal and administrative costs of ongoing environmental compliance. These costs are expensed as cost of operations in the period in which they are incurred.

Debt

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2009

Debt [Abstract]

Debt

8. DEBT

Our notes payable, capital leases and long-term debt at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 are listed in the following table, and are presented net of unamortized discounts and premiums, adjustments to fair market value related to hedging transactions and the unamortized portion of adjustments to fair value recorded in purchase accounting. The debt we acquired as part of the acquisition of Allied was recorded at fair value as of the acquisition date.


	Debt Balance at
	September 30, 2009			December 31, 2008
$1.0 billion Revolver due 2012	$	—		$	—
$1.75 billion Revolver due 2013, Eurodollar and Base Rate borrowings		—			665.0
Receivables secured loans		215.0			400.0
7.125% senior notes due 2009		—			99.3
6.500% senior notes due 2010		235.4			333.2
5.750% senior notes due 2011		266.4			371.1
6.375% senior notes due 2011		217.6			257.7
6.750% senior notes due 2011		398.7			464.2
7.875% senior notes due 2013		426.5			422.4
6.125% senior notes due 2014		377.1			370.5
7.375% senior notes due 2014		366.8			363.5
7.250% senior notes due 2015		538.1			531.7
7.125% senior notes due 2016		524.7			518.7
6.875% senior notes due 2017		652.2			645.7
5.500% senior notes due 2019		645.4			—
9.250% debentures due 2021		93.1			92.8
6.086% senior notes due 2035		249.3			249.1
7.400% debentures due 2035		266.6			266.0
4.250% senior subordinated convertible debentures due 2034		210.7			201.3
Tax-exempt bonds and other tax-exempt financings; fixed and floating interest rates ranging from .30% to 8.25%; maturities ranging from 2010 to 2037		1,228.7			1,308.2
Other debt unsecured and secured by real property, equipment and other assets; interest rates ranging from 5.99% to 11.90% maturing through 2042		143.5			142.1

Total debt		7,055.8			7,702.5
Less: Current portion		(242.5	)		(504.0	)

Long-term portion	$	6,813.3		$	7,198.5

Revolving Credit Facilities

Our $1.0 billion revolving credit facility due April 2012 and our $1.75 billion revolving credit facility due September 2013 (collectively, the Credit Facilities) bear interest at a Base Rate, or a Eurodollar Rate for the Credit Facility due September 2013, both terms defined in the agreements, plus an applicable margin based on our Debt Ratings, also a term defined in the agreements. As of December 31, 2008, the interest rate for our borrowings under our Credit Facilities was 3.43%. The Credit Facilities are also subject to facility fees based on applicable rates defined in the agreements and the aggregate commitments, regardless of usage. At September 30, 2009, we had no Eurodollar Rate borrowings or Base Rate borrowings and $1,630.7 million of revolver capacity used to support outstanding letters of credit, leaving $1,119.3 million of available liquidity under the Credit Facilities. The agreements governing the Credit Facilities require us to maintain certain financial and other covenants. We have the ability to pay dividends and to repurchase common stock provided that we are in compliance with these covenants. At September 30, 2009, we were in compliance with the covenants of the Credit Facilities.

Receivables Secured Loans

We have an accounts receivable securitization program with two financial institutions that allows us to borrow up to $300.0 million on a revolving basis under loan agreements secured by receivables. In May 2009, we renewed the facility for 364 days and reduced the borrowing capacity from $400.0 million to $300.0 million. If we are unable to renew the facility when it matures in May 2010, we will refinance any amounts outstanding with our Credit Facilities or with other long-term borrowings. Despite our ability to refinance or renew the facility, the loan is classified as current because it has a contractual maturity of less than one year.

The receivables securitizing this facility are held in and owned by a wholly owned and fully consolidated subsidiary. This subsidiary is a separate corporate entity whose assets, or collateral securing the borrowings, are available first to satisfy the claims of the subsidiary’s creditors. At September 30, 2009, the total amount of accounts receivable (gross) serving as collateral securing the facility was $469.2 million. This facility is accounted for as a secured borrowing with a pledge of collateral. The receivables and debt obligation remain on our consolidated balance sheet. The borrowings under this facility bear interest at the financial institutions’ commercial paper rate plus an applicable spread and interest is payable monthly.

Senior Notes and Debentures

In September 2009, we issued $650.0 million of 5.500% senior notes due 2019 in a private placement transaction. The net proceeds from this offering, less discounts and certain fees, were approximately $641 million. The notes are general senior unsecured obligations and mature on September 15, 2019. Interest is payable semi-annually on March 15 and September 15, beginning March 15, 2010. The notes are guaranteed by each of our subsidiaries that also guarantee our Credit Facilities. These guarantees are general senior unsecured obligations of the subsidiary guarantors. In addition, in September 2009, we entered into a Registration Rights Agreement with the representatives of the initial purchasers of the notes. Under the Registration Rights Agreement, we agreed to use our reasonable best efforts to cause to become effective a registration statement to exchange the notes for freely tradable notes issued by us. If we are unable to effect the exchange offer within 365 days, we agreed to pay additional interest on the notes.

Proceeds from the notes were used to purchase and retire $325.5 million of our outstanding senior notes maturing in 2010 and 2011. During the three months ended September 30, 2009, we incurred a $31.8 million charge associated with the early extinguishment of these notes. The following table lists the notes and the principal amount of notes repurchased:


	Principal				September 30,
	Outstanding				2009
	Prior to		Principal		Principal
	Repurchase		Repurchased		Outstanding
6.500% Senior Notes due 2010	$	346.5	$	104.1	$	242.4
5.750% Senior Notes due 2011		396.5		116.8		279.7
6.375% Senior Notes due 2011		270.0		42.6		227.4
6.750% Senior Notes due 2011		450.0		62.0		388.0


	$	1,463.0	$	325.5	$	1,137.5

As of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, our senior notes and debentures totaled $5,257.9 million and $4,985.9 million, net of unamortized discounts and premiums of $31.5 million and $27.5 million, remaining unamortized adjustments to fair value recorded in purchase accounting for the acquisition of Allied of $468.7 million and $536.2 million, and adjustments to fair value related to our interest rate swap agreements of $11.3 million and $15.1 million, respectively.

Senior Subordinated Convertible Debentures

Our $230.0 million of 4.25% unsecured senior subordinated convertible debentures due 2034 are convertible into 5.2 million shares of our common stock at a conversion price of $43.86 per share. These debentures are convertible at the option of the holder anytime if certain conditions occur, as outlined in the agreement. We can elect to settle the conversion in stock, cash or a combination of stock and cash. We can elect to call the debentures at any time after April 15, 2009 at par for cash only. The holders can require us to redeem some or all of the debentures on April 15th of 2011, 2014, 2019, 2024 and 2029 at par for stock, cash or a combination of stock and cash at our option. If the debentures are redeemed in stock, the number of shares issued will be determined at the par value of the debentures divided by the average trading stock price of the preceding five-day period.

At September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the unamortized adjustment to fair value recorded in purchase accounting for these debentures was $19.3 million and $28.7 million, respectively, which is being amortized to interest expense through April 15, 2011, the first date that the holders can require us to redeem the debentures.

Tax-Exempt Financings

As of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, we had $1,228.7 million and $1,308.2 million, respectively, of fixed and variable rate tax-exempt financings outstanding with maturities ranging from 2010 to 2037.

Approximately two-thirds of our tax-exempt financings are remarketed weekly or daily, by a remarketing agent to effectively maintain a variable yield. These variable rate tax-exempt financings are credit enhanced with letters of credit having terms in excess of one year issued by banks with credit ratings of A or better. The holders of the bonds can put them back to the remarketing agent at the end of each interest period.

As of September 30, 2009, we had $254.9 million of restricted cash and marketable securities, of which $113.4 million were proceeds from the issuance of tax-exempt bonds and other tax-exempt financings, and will be used to fund capital expenditures under the terms of the agreements. Restricted cash also includes amounts held in trust as a financial guarantee of our performance.

At September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the unamortized adjustment to fair value recorded in purchase accounting for these tax-exempt financings was $50.0 million and $52.9 million, respectively, which is being amortized to interest expense.

Other Debt

Other debt primarily includes capital lease liabilities of $141.7 million and $139.5 million as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively, with maturities ranging from 2009 to 2042.

Fair Value of Debt

The fair value of our fixed rate senior notes using quoted market rates is $6.0 billion and $5.2 billion at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. The carrying value of our fixed rate senior notes is $5.3 billion and $5.0 billion at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. The carrying amounts of our remaining notes payable and tax-exempt financings approximate fair value because interest rates are variable and, accordingly, approximate current market rates for instruments with similar risk and maturities. The fair value of our debt is determined as of the balance sheet date and is subject to change. For active hedge arrangements, the fair value of the derivatives is included in the consolidated balance sheets.

Guarantees

Substantially all of our subsidiaries have guaranteed our obligations under the Credit Facilities.

We and substantially all of our subsidiaries (including substantially all of the subsidiaries of Allied) guarantee series of senior notes issued by Allied Waste North America, Inc. (AWNA), a subsidiary of Allied (the AWNA Senior Notes). The guarantees of the AWNA Senior Notes by our subsidiaries (other than the guarantee by Allied) would be automatically released upon the release of such subsidiaries from their guarantee obligations under the Credit Facilities.

We and substantially all our subsidiaries (including substantially all of the subsidiaries of Allied) also guarantee the 9.250% debentures due 2021 and the 7.400% debentures due 2035 issued by Browning-Ferris Industries, LLC (successor to Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.) (BFI), another subsidiary of Allied (the BFI Debentures). The guarantees of the BFI Debentures by our subsidiaries (other than the guarantees by Allied and AWNA) would be automatically released upon the release of such subsidiaries from their guarantee obligations under the Credit Facilities.

Substantially all of our subsidiaries (including Allied and substantially all of its subsidiaries) have guaranteed our 6.750% senior notes due 2011, our 5.500% senior notes due 2019 and our 6.086% senior notes due 2035 (the Republic Senior Notes). The guarantees of the Republic Senior Notes by our subsidiaries would be automatically released upon the release of such subsidiaries from their guarantee obligations under the Credit Facilities.

We have guaranteed some of the tax-exempt bonds of our subsidiaries. If a subsidiary fails to meet its obligations associated with tax-exempt bonds as they come due, we will be required to perform under the related guarantee agreement. No additional liability has been recorded for these guarantees because the underlying obligations are reflected in our consolidated balance sheets.

Interest Paid

Interest paid was $346.0 million and $72.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The components of interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:


	Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2009			2008			2009			2008
Interest expense	$	112.4		$	23.6		$	344.1		$	67.1
Accretion of debt discounts		25.4			—			76.0			—
Accretion of remediation and risk reserves		9.9			—			33.3			—
Less: capitalized interest		(2.9	)		(1.0	)		(4.6	)		(2.0	)


Interest expense	$	144.8		$	22.6		$	448.8		$	65.1

Interest Rate Swap Agreements

Our ability to obtain financing through the capital markets is a key component of our financial strategy. Historically, we have managed risk associated with executing this strategy, particularly as it relates to fluctuations in interest rates, by using a combination of fixed and floating rate debt. We also entered into interest rate swap agreements to manage risk associated with fluctuations in interest rates. The swap agreements have a total notional value of $210.0 million and mature in August 2011. This maturity is identical to our senior notes that also mature in 2011. Under the swap agreements, we pay interest at floating rates based on changes in LIBOR and receive interest at fixed rates of 6.75%. We have designated these agreements as hedges in changes in the fair value of our fixed-rate debt. We have determined that these agreements qualify for the short-cut method, and, therefore, changes in the fair value of the agreements are assumed to be perfectly effective in hedging changes in the fair value of our fixed rate debt due to changes in interest rates.

As of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, interest rate swap agreements are reflected at their fair value of $11.3 million and $15.1 million, respectively, and are included in other assets and as an adjustment to long-term debt in our consolidated balance sheets.

The following table summarizes the impact of changes in the fair value of our derivatives and the underlying hedged items on our results of operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 (in millions):


	Gain (Loss) on Swap								Gain (Loss) on Fixed-Rate Debt
	Three and Nine Months Ended September 30,								Three and Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2009				2008				2009						2008
Interest Expense	$	2.2	$	6.6	$	0.5	$	2.7	$	(2.2	)	$	(6.6	)	$	(0.5	)	$	(2.7	)

From time to time, we enter into treasury locks for the purpose of managing exposure to fluctuations in interest rates in anticipation of future debt issuances. In September 2009, we entered into treasury lock agreements having an aggregate notional amount of $500.0 million to hedge interest rates on the 10 year U.S. Treasury Notes in connection with the issuance of our $650.0 million 5.500% senior notes. Upon issuance of the notes we terminated the treasury locks and paid approximately $2.5 million to the counterparties. The $1.4 million, net of tax was recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income and will be amortized as an increase to interest expense over the life of the issued debt. This transaction was accounted for as a cash flow hedge. As of September 30, 2009, no treasury lock cash flow hedges were outstanding.

Income Taxes	9 Months Ended
Income Taxes	Sep. 30, 2009
Income Taxes [Abstract]
Income Taxes	9. INCOME TAXES Income taxes have been provided for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 based on our anticipated annual effective income tax rate. Income taxes paid (net of refunds received) were $360.9 million and $65.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We and our subsidiaries are subject to income tax in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, as well as income tax in multiple state and local jurisdictions. These authorities may challenge the positions taken in our tax filings. As such, to provide for certain potential tax exposures, we maintain liabilities for uncertain tax positions for our estimate of the final outcome of the examinations. We recognize interest and penalties as incurred within the provision for income taxes in the consolidated statements of income. As of September 30, 2009, we have accrued a liability for penalties of $89.4 million and interest (including interest on penalties) of $172.3 million related to our uncertain tax positions,. We believe that the liabilities for uncertain tax positions recorded are appropriate. However, during the next twelve months we believe it is reasonably possible that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will likely increase or decrease. We are unable to estimate a range at this time. A significant assessment against us in excess of the liabilities recorded could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. We have acquired Allied’s open tax periods as part of the acquisition. We are currently under examination or administrative review by various state and federal taxing authorities for certain tax years, including federal income tax audits for calendar years 2000 through 2007. We are also engaged in tax litigation related to our risk management companies which are subsidiaries of Allied. These matters are further discussed below. *Risk Management Companies* Prior to Allied’s acquisition of BFI in July 1999, certain BFI operating companies, as part of a risk management initiative to manage and reduce costs associated with certain liabilities, contributed assets and existing environmental and self-insurance liabilities to six fully consolidated BFI risk management companies (RMCs) in exchange for stock representing a minority ownership interest in the RMCs. Subsequently, the BFI operating companies sold that stock in the RMCs to third parties at fair market value which resulted in a capital loss of approximately $900 million for tax purposes, calculated as the excess of the tax basis of the stock over the cash proceeds received. On January 18, 2001, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) designated this type of transaction and other similar transactions as a “potentially abusive tax shelter” under IRS regulations. During 2002, the IRS proposed the disallowance of all of this capital loss. At the time of the disallowance, the primary argument advanced by the IRS for disallowing the capital loss was that the tax basis of the stock of the RMCs received by the BFI operating companies was required to be reduced by the amount of liabilities acquired by the RMCs even though such liabilities were contingent and, therefore, not liabilities recognized for tax purposes. Under the IRS interpretation, there was no capital loss on the sale of the stock since the tax basis of the stock should have approximated the proceeds received. Allied protested the disallowance to the Appeals Office of the IRS in August 2002. In April 2005, the Appeals Office of the IRS upheld the disallowance of the capital loss deduction. As a result, in late April 2005, Allied paid a deficiency to the IRS of $22.6 million for BFI tax years prior to the acquisition. Allied also received a notification from the IRS assessing a penalty of $5.4 million and interest of $12.8 million relating to the asserted $22.6 million deficiency. In July 2005, Allied filed a suit for refund in the United States Court of Federal Claims (CFC). The Department of Justice (DOJ) thereafter filed a counterclaim in the case for the $5.4 million penalty and $12.8 million of interest claimed by the IRS. In December 2005, the IRS agreed to suspend the collection of this penalty and interest until a decision was rendered on Allied’s suit for refund. Another refund suit related to this same issue is currently pending in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. In August 2008, Allied received from the IRS a Statutory Notice of Deficiency (Notice) related to its utilization of BFI’s capital loss carryforward on Allied’s 1999 tax return. Because of the high rate of interest associated with this matter, Allied previously paid all tax and interest related to this tax year. Consequently, the Notice related only to the IRS’ asserted penalty for Allied’s 1999 tax year. On October 30, 2008, Allied filed a suit for refund in the Arizona District Court. Similar to the BFI action in the CFC, the DOJ has filed a counterclaim for the asserted penalty and related penalty interest. As a consequence, we expect the IRS will suspend collection of the penalty, as occurred in connection with the BFI action. However, there can be no assurance that the IRS will suspend its collection efforts. In December 2008, subsequent to our acquisition of Allied, a hearing was held in the CFC. At this hearing, we informed the judge of our intention to withdraw our suit from the CFC in order to continue to litigate the merits of our position exclusively in the Arizona District Court. We believe the decisional law applicable to this matter is more favorable to taxpayers there than in the CFC. To accomplish the withdrawal from the CFC, in January 2009, we paid the government’s counterclaim for penalty and penalty interest of approximately $11 million. Prior to December 31, 2008, Allied had already paid $51.0 million in tax and interest relating to the 1997 through 1999 BFI tax years. As a result, all tax, interest and penalties related to the 1997 through 1999 BFI tax years have been paid. On April 28, 2009, the judge in the CFC issued an order dismissing our case with prejudice. As a consequence, the tax, interest and penalty amounts paid by us for the BFI tax years will not be recoverable in any subsequent action. If the capital loss deduction is fully disallowed for all applicable years, we estimate that it would have a total cash impact (including amounts already paid to the IRS as described below) of approximately $449 million related to federal taxes, state taxes and interest, and, approximately $172 million related to penalty and penalty-related interest. These amounts have been fully accrued in our consolidated balance sheets, and therefore, disallowance would not materially affect our consolidated results of operations. However, a payment beyond the amounts already paid would adversely impact our cash flow in the period such payment was made. The accrual of additional interest charges through the time these matters are resolved will affect our consolidated results of operations. Due to the high rate of interest associated with this matter, we or Allied have previously paid the IRS and various state tax authorities $395 million related to capital loss deductions taken on BFI’s 1997 through 1999 and Allied’s 1999 through 2002 tax returns. In addition, we or Allied have paid approximately $11 million of penalty and penalty-related interest for the BFI 1997 — 1999 tax years. Although we have fully accrued all tax, interest, penalty, and penalty-related interest relating to this matter, we intend to vigorously prosecute our suit for refund of the tax and interest and defend against the IRS’ claims for penalties and penalty-related interest in the Arizona District Court unless a settlement is reached between the parties. Presently, the parties have been engaged in settlement discussions. While there can be no assurances, we anticipate that the final resolution of the dispute, through adjudication or settlement, may be more favorable than the full amount currently accrued for tax, interest, penalty and penalty-related interest. *Exchange of Partnership Interests* In April 2002, Allied exchanged minority partnership interests in four waste-to-energy facilities for majority partnership interests in equipment purchasing businesses, which are now wholly owned subsidiaries. In November 2008, the IRS issued a formal disallowance to Allied contending that the exchange was instead a sale on which a corresponding gain should have been recognized. Although we intend to vigorously defend our position on this matter, if the exchange is treated as a sale, we estimate it could have a potential federal and state cash tax impact of approximately $156 million plus accrued interest through September 30, 2009 of approximately $56 million. In addition, the IRS has asserted a penalty of 20% of the additional income tax due. The potential tax and interest (but not penalty or penalty-related interest) for this matter have been fully reserved in our consolidated balance sheets. The successful assertion by the IRS of penalty and penalty-related interest in connection with this matter could have a material adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations and cash flows. *Methane Gas* As part of its examination of Allied’s 2000 through 2006 federal income tax returns, the IRS reviewed Allied’s treatment of costs associated with its landfill operations. As a result of this review, the IRS has proposed that certain landfill costs be allocated to the collection and control of methane gas that is naturally produced within the landfill. The IRS’ position is that the methane gas produced by a landfill is a joint product resulting from operation of the landfill and, therefore, these costs should not be expensed until the methane gas is sold or otherwise disposed. We plan to contest this issue at the Appeals Office of the IRS. We believe we have several meritorious defenses, including the fact that methane gas is not actively produced for sale by us but rather arises naturally in the context of providing disposal services. Therefore, we believe that the subsequent resolution of this issue will not have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Employee Benefit Plans

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2009

Employee Benefit Plans [Abstract]

Employee Benefit Plans

10. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS

Stock-Based Compensation

In July 1998, we adopted the 1998 Stock Incentive Plan (1998 Plan) to provide for grants of options to purchase shares of common stock, restricted stock and other equity-based compensation to our employees and non-employee directors who are eligible to participate in the 1998 Plan. The 1998 Plan expired on June 30, 2008. In February 2007, our Board of Directors approved the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (2007 Plan) to replace the 1998 Plan when it expired. The 2007 Plan was approved by our stockholders in May 2007. As of September 30, 2009, there are 6.7 million shares reserved for future grants under the 2007 Plan.

Options granted under the 1998 Plan and the 2007 Plan are non-qualified and are granted at a price equal to the fair market value of our common stock at the date of grant. Generally, options granted have a term of seven to ten years from the date of grant, and vest in increments of 25% per year over a four year period beginning on the first anniversary date of the grant. Options granted to non-employee directors have a term of ten years and are fully vested at the grant date.

In December 2008, the Board of Directors adopted the Republic Services, Inc. 2006 Incentive Stock Plan (previously the Allied Waste Industries, Inc. 2006 Incentive Stock Plan (the 2006 Plan)) as amended and restated effective December 5, 2008. Allied’s stockholders approved the 2006 Plan in May 2006. The 2006 Plan was amended and restated effective December 5, 2008 to reflect that Republic Services, Inc. is the new sponsor of the Plan, that any references to shares of common stock is to shares of common stock of Republic Services, Inc., and to adjust outstanding awards and the number of shares available under the Plan to reflect the merger. The 2006 Plan, as amended and restated, provides for the grant of non-qualified stock options, incentive stock options, shares of restricted stock, shares of phantom stock, stock bonuses, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights, performance awards, dividend equivalents, cash awards, or other stock-based awards. Awards granted under the 2006 Plan prior to December 5, 2008 became fully vested and nonforfeitable upon the closing of the merger. Awards may be granted under the 2006 Plan, as amended and restated, after December 5, 2008 only to employees and consultants of Allied Waste Industries, Inc. and its subsidiaries who were not employed by Republic Services, Inc. prior to such date. As of September 30, 2009, shares reserved for future grants under the 2006 Plan are 15.3 million.

Stock Options

We use a lattice binomial option-pricing model to value our stock option grants. We recognize compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the award, or to the employee’s retirement eligible date, if earlier. Expected volatility is based on the weighted average of the most recent one-year volatility and a historical rolling average volatility of our stock over the expected life of the option. We use historical data to estimate future option exercises, forfeitures and expected life of the options. When appropriate, separate groups of employees that have similar historical exercise behavior are considered separately for valuation purposes. The risk-free interest rate is based on Federal Reserve rates in effect for bonds with maturity dates equal to the expected term of the option. The weighted-average estimated fair values of stock options granted during the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 were $3.77 and $5.26 per option, respectively, which were calculated using the following weighted-average assumptions:


	Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2009			2008
Expected volatility		28.7	%		23.2	%
Risk-free interest rate		1.4	%		2.4	%
Dividend yield		3.1	%		2.2	%
Expected life (in years)		4.2			4.1
Contractual life (in years)		7			7
Expected forfeiture rate		3.0	%		3.0	%

The following table summarizes the stock option activity for the nine months ended September 30, 2009:


						Weighted Average		Aggregate
				Weighted Average		Remaining		Intrinsic
	Number			Exercise		Contractual Term		Value
	of Shares			Price per Share		(Years)		(in millions)
Outstanding at December 31, 2008		18.7		$	23.6
Granted		0.3			20.9
Exercised		(1.0	)		16.6			$	8.6

Cancelled		(1.7	)		28.5

Outstanding at September 30, 2009		16.3		$	23.5		5.2	$	63.5

Exercisable at September 30, 2009		12.3		$	23.4		4.8	$	51.5

During the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, compensation expense for stock options was $6.0 million and $5.6 million, respectively.

As of the effective date of the acquisition of Allied in December 2008, all of Republic’s unvested stock options outstanding were vested in accordance with the change in control provisions of the 1998 and 2007 Plans.

As of September 30, 2009, total unrecognized compensation expense related to outstanding stock options was $9.1 million, which will be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.1 years.

We classified excess tax benefits of $1.4 million and $3.9 million as cash flows from financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. All other tax benefits related to stock options have been presented as a component of cash flows from operating activities.

Other Stock Awards

The following table summarizes the restricted and deferred stock unit and restricted stock activity for the nine months ended September 30, 2009:


	Number of Deferred			Weighted-		Weighted-
	Stock Units and			Average		Average		Aggregate
	Restricted			Grant Date		Remaining		Intrinsic
	Stock			Fair Value per		Contractual		Value
	(In Thousands)			Share		Term (Years)		(In Millions)
Unissued at December 31, 2008		255.6		$	23.4
Granted		483.6			23.9
Vested and Issued		(15.9	)		22.6
Cancelled		(31.9	)		23.5

Unissued at September 30, 2009		691.4		$	23.8		1.2	$	18.4


Vested and unissued at September 30, 2009		76.9		$	24.8

During the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, we awarded 307,420 and 36,000 restricted and deferred stock units to our non-employee directors under our 2007 and 1998 Plans. 76,855 and 36,000, respectively, of the stock units awarded vested immediately. The remaining shares awarded during 2009 vest in three equal annual installments beginning on the anniversary date of the original grant. The directors receive the underlying shares only after their board service ends or a change in control occurs, as defined by the 1998 and 2007 Plans. The stock units do not carry any voting or dividend rights, except the right to receive additional restricted stock units in lieu of dividends.

Also during the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we awarded 176,253 shares of restricted stock to executive and other officers, of which 110,669 of the shares vest effective May 14, 2010 and 38,670 of the shares awarded vest effective January 31, 2012. The remaining 26,914 shares awarded vest in four equal annual installments beginning on the anniversary date of the original grant. During the vesting period, the participants have voting rights and receive dividends declared and paid on the shares, but the shares may not be sold, assigned, transferred or otherwise encumbered. Additionally, granted but unvested shares are forfeited in the event the participant resigns employment with us for other than good reason.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2008, we awarded 190,500 shares of restricted stock to our executive officers, of which 160,500 of the shares awarded were to vest in four equal annual installments beginning on the anniversary date of the original grant except that vesting may be accelerated if certain performance targets are achieved or under certain other conditions and the remaining 30,000 shares awarded had an original vesting date of December 31, 2008. As of the effective date of the acquisition of Allied in December 2008, all of Republic’s unvested restricted stock outstanding were vested in accordance with the change in control provisions of the 1998 and 2007 Plans.

Our executive officers received an annual grant of 236,170 shares of restricted stock in December 2008 after the acquisition of Allied under our new annual grant program initiated in December 2008, which would have been previously granted during the three months ended March 31, 2009. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, 31,915 of these shares were cancelled. The remaining shares vest in four equal annual installments beginning on the anniversary date of the original grant.

The fair value of restricted and deferred stock units and restricted stock on the date of grant is amortized ratably over the vesting period, or the accelerated vesting period if certain performance targets are achieved. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, compensation expense related to restricted and deferred stock units and restricted stock totaled $5.6 million and $3.9 million, respectively.

Multi-Employer Pension Plans

We contribute to 25 multi-employer pension plans under collective bargaining agreements covering union-represented employees. We acquired responsibility for contributions for a portion of these plans as part of our acquisition of Allied.

Approximately 22% of our total current employees are participants in these multi-employer plans. These plans generally provide retirement benefits to participants based on their service to contributing employers. We do not administer these multi-employer plans. In general, these plans are managed by a board of trustees with the unions appointing certain trustees and other contributing employers of the plan appointing certain members. We generally are not represented on the board of trustees.

We do not have current plan financial information from the plans’ administrators, but based on the information available to us, we believe that some of the multi-employer plans to which we contribute are underfunded. The Pension Protection Act, enacted in August 2006, requires underfunded pension plans to improve their funding ratios within prescribed intervals based on the level of their underfunding. Until the plan trustees develop the funding improvement plans or rehabilitation plans as required by the Pension Protection Act, we are unable to determine the amount of assessments we may be subject to, if any. Accordingly, we cannot determine at this time the impact that the Pension Protection Act may have on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Furthermore, under current law regarding multi-employer benefit plans, a plan’s termination, our voluntary withdrawal, or the mass withdrawal of all contributing employers from any under-funded, multi-employer pension plan would require us to make payments to the plan for our proportionate share of the multi-employer plan’s unfunded vested liabilities. It is possible that there may be a mass withdrawal of employers contributing to these plans or plans may terminate in the near future. We could have adjustments to our estimates for these matters in the near term that could have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Incentive Compensation Plans

Our compensation program includes a management incentive plan, which has been approved by our stockholders and uses certain performance metrics such as free cash flow, targeted earnings and return on invested capital to measure performance. In addition, in connection with our acquisition of Allied, our Board of Directors approved an integration bonus plan, which has also been approved by our stockholders and provides compensation that depends on our achieving targeted annual synergies of approximately $150.0 million by the end of 2010 and is payable in the first quarter of 2012. Incentive awards are payable in cash.

Other Comprehensive Income

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2009

Other Comprehensive Income [Abstract]

Other Comprehensive Income

12. OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

A summary of comprehensive income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 is as follows:



	Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2009			2008			2009			2008
Net Income	$	121.0		$	88.7		$	460.6		$	205.5
Settlement and amortization of treasury lock hedges, net of tax		(1.4	)		—			(1.4	)		—
Change in value of commodity hedges, net of tax		(1.2	)		(0.6	)		(3.6	)		(1.4	)
Change in value of fuel hedges, net of tax		(0.4	)		(12.9	)		3.7			3.8

Comprehensive income		118.0			75.2			459.3			207.9
Less: comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests		(0.5	)		—			(1.2	)		—


Comprehensive income attributable to Republic Services, Inc.	$	117.5		$	75.2		$	458.1		$	207.9

The tax effect of the above described transactions were calculated at a 42.0% and 38.5% rate for 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Fuel Hedges

We have entered into multiple option agreements designated as cash flow hedges to mitigate some of our exposure related to changes in diesel fuel prices. The options qualified for, and were designated as, effective hedges of changes in the prices of forecasted diesel fuel purchases (fuel hedges).

The following table summarizes our outstanding fuel hedges at September 30, 2009 and 2008:

Notional Amount

(in Gallons

Contract Price

Inception Date

Commencement Date

Termination Date

per Month)

per Gallon

January 26, 2007

January 7, 2008

December 29, 2008

500,000

2.83

January 26, 2007

January 5, 2009

December 28, 2009

500,000

2.83

January 26, 2007

January 4, 2010

December 27, 2010

500,000

2.81

November 5, 2007

January 5, 2009

December 30, 2013

60,000

3.28

March 17, 2008

January 5, 2009

December 31, 2012

50,000

3.72

March 17, 2008

January 5, 2009

December 31, 2012

50,000

3.74

September 22, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2011

150,000

4.16 - 4.17

July 10, 2009

January 1, 2010

December 31, 2010

100,000

2.84

July 10, 2009

January 1, 2011

December 31, 2011

100,000

3.05

July 10, 2009

January 1, 2012

December 31, 2012

100,000

3.20

If the national U.S. on-highway average price for a gallon of diesel fuel (average price) as published by the Department of Energy exceeds the contract price per gallon, we receive the difference between the average price and the contract price (multiplied by the notional gallons) from the counter-party. If the national U.S. on-highway average price for a gallon of diesel fuel is less than the contract price per gallon, we pay the difference to the counter-party.

The fair values of the fuel hedges are obtained from third-party counter-parties and are determined using standard option valuation models with assumptions about commodity prices being based on those observed in underlying markets (Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy). The aggregated fair value of the outstanding fuel hedges at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 is a net liability of $5.8 million and $11.7 million, respectively, and are recorded in other accrued liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets.

The effective portions of the changes in fair value as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, are recorded in stockholders’ equity as components of accumulated other comprehensive income. The ineffective portions of the changes in fair value are recorded in other income, net in our consolidated statements of income. Realized gains or losses related to these fuel hedges are included in cost of operations in our consolidated statements of income.

The following table summarizes the impact of our fuel hedges on our results of operations and comprehensive income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008:


														Amount of Gain or
														(Loss)
													Location of Gain	Recognized in
													(Loss) Recognized	Income on
													in Income on	Derivative
	Amount of Gain												Derivative	(Ineffective
	or (Loss)												(Ineffective Portion	Portion and
Derivatives in	Recognized in												and Amount	Amount Excluded
Cash Flow	OCI on						Statement of	Amount of					Excluded from	from
Hedging	Derivatives						Income	Realized Gain or					Effectiveness	Effectiveness
Relationships	(Effective Portion)						Classification	(Loss)					Testing)	Testing)
	Three Months							Three Months						Three Months
	Ended September 30,							Ended September 30,						Ended September 30,
	2009			2008				2009			2008			2009		2008
Fuel hedges	$	(0.4	)	$	(12.9	)	Cost of operations	$	(1.5	)	$	2.3	Other income net	$	—	$	(0.5	)

	Nine Months							Nine Months						Nine Months
	Ended September 30,							Ended September 30,						Ended September 30,
	2009			2008				2009			2008			2009		2008
Fuel hedges	$	3.7		$	3.8		Cost of operations	$	(6.2	)	$	5.7	Other income net	$	0.1	$	0.1

Recycling Commodity Hedges

Our source of revenue from sales of recycling commodities is primarily from sales of old corrugated cardboard (OCC) and old newspaper (ONP). We have entered into multiple option agreements related to certain forecasted recycling commodity sales designated as cash flow hedges to mitigate some of our exposure related to changes in commodity prices. The options qualified for, and were designated as, effective hedges of changes in the prices of certain forecasted recycling commodity sales (commodity hedges).

The following table summarizes our outstanding commodity hedges at September 30, 2009 and 2008:

Contract

Notional Amount

Price

(in Short Tons

Per Short

Inception Date

Commencement Date

Termination Date

Transaction Hedged

per Month)

Ton

April 28, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

OCC

1,000

106.00

April 28, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

OCC

1,000

110.00

April 28, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

ONP

1,000

106.00

April 28, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

ONP

1,000

103.00

May 16, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

OCC

1,000

105.00

May 16, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

OCC

1,000

103.00

May 16, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

ONP

1,000

102.00

May 16, 2008

January 1, 2009

December 31, 2010

ONP

1,000

106.00

If the price per short ton of the hedging instrument (average price) as reported on the Official Board Market is less than the contract price per short ton, we receive the difference between the average price and the contract price (multiplied by the notional short tons) from the counter-party. If the price of the commodity exceeds the contract price per short ton, we pay the difference to the counter-party.

The fair values of the commodity hedges are obtained from third-party counter-parties and are determined using standard option valuation models with assumptions about commodity prices being based on those observed in underlying markets (Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy). The aggregated fair value of the outstanding commodity hedges at September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 is an asset of $3.0 million and $8.8 million, respectively, and are recorded in other current assets in our consolidated balance sheets.

The effective portion of the change in fair value are recorded in stockholders’ equity as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income. The ineffective portions of the change in fair value is recorded in other income, net in our consolidated statements of income. Realized gains or losses related to these commodity hedges are included in revenue in our consolidated statements of income.

The following table summarizes the impact of our commodity hedges on our results of operations and comprehensive income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008:


													Amount of Gain or
													(Loss)
												Location of Gain	Recognized in
												(Loss) Recognized	Income on
												in Income on	Derivative
	Amount of Gain											Derivative	(Ineffective
	or (Loss)											(Ineffective Portion	Portion and
Derivatives in	Recognized in											and Amount	Amount Excluded
Cash Flow	OCI on						Statement of	Amount of				Excluded from	from
Hedging	Derivatives						Income	Realized Gain or				Effectiveness	Effectiveness
Relationships	(Effective Portion)						Classification	(Loss)				Testing)	Testing)
	Three Months							Three Months					Three Months
	Ended September 30,							Ended September 30,					Ended September 30,
	2009			2008				2009		2008			2009			2008
Recycling commodity hedges	$	(1.2	)	$	(0.6	)	Revenue	$	1.0	$	—	Other income, net	$	—		$	(0.1	)

	Nine Months							Nine Months					Nine Months
	Ended September 30,							Ended September 30,					Ended September 30,
	2009			2008				2009		2008			2009			2008
Recycling commodity hedges	$	(3.6	)	$	(1.4	)	Revenue	$	4.3	$	—	Other income, net	$	(0.1	)	$	(0.2	)

Fair Value Measurements

In measuring fair values of assets and liabilities, we use valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs (Level 1) and minimize the use of unobservable inputs (Level 3). We also use market data or assumptions that we believe market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability, including assumptions about risk when appropriate.

As of September 30, 2009, our assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis include the following:


			Fair Value Measurements Using
			Quoted		Significant
			Prices in		Other		Significant
			Active		Observable		Unobservable
			Markets		Inputs		Inputs
	Total		(Level 1)		(Level 2)		(Level 3)
Assets:
Restricted cash and marketable securities	$	254.9	$	254.9	$	—	$	—
Commodity hedges — other current assets		3.0		—		3.0		—
Interest rate swaps — other assets		11.3		—		11.3		—

Total assets	$	269.2	$	254.9	$	14.3	$	—

Liabilities:
Fuel hedges — other accrued liabilities	$	5.8	$	—	$	5.8	$	—

Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2009

Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

14. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

We are involved in routine judicial and administrative proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business and that relate to, among other things, personal injury or property damage claims, employment matters and commercial and contractual disputes. We are subject to federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. Due to the nature of our business, we are also routinely a party to judicial or administrative proceedings involving governmental authorities and other interested parties related to environmental regulations or liabilities. From time to time, we may also be subject to actions brought by citizens’ groups, adjacent landowners or others in connection with the permitting and licensing of our landfills or transfer stations, or alleging personal injury, environmental damage, or violations of the permits and licenses pursuant to which we operate.

The following is a discussion of certain proceedings against us. Although the ultimate outcome of any legal matter cannot be predicted with certainty, except as otherwise described below or in Note 9, Income Taxes, we do not believe that the outcome of our pending legal and administrative proceedings will have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Countywide Matter

On March 26, 2007, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) issued Final Findings and Orders (F&Os) to Republic Services of Ohio II, LLC (Republic-Ohio), an Ohio limited liability company and our wholly owned subsidiary. The F&Os relate to environmental conditions attributed to a chemical reaction resulting from the disposal of certain aluminum production waste at the Countywide Recycling and Disposal facility (Countywide) in East Sparta, Ohio. The F&Os, and certain other remedial actions Republic-Ohio agreed with the OEPA to undertake to address the environmental conditions, include, without limitation, the following actions: (a) prohibiting leachate recirculation, (b) refraining from the disposal of solid waste in certain portions of the site, (c) updating engineering plans and specifications and providing further information regarding the integrity of various engineered components at the site, (d) performing additional data collection, (e) taking additional measures to address emissions, (f) expanding the gas collection and control system, (g) installing an isolation break, (h) removing liquids from gas extraction wells, and (i) submitting a plan to the OEPA to suppress the chemical reaction and, following approval by the OEPA, implementing such plan. Republic-Ohio has performed certain interim remedial actions required by the OEPA, but the OEPA has not approved Republic-Ohio’s plan to suppress the chemical reaction. Republic-Ohio has received additional orders from the OEPA requiring certain actions to be taken by Republic-Ohio, including additional air quality monitoring and the installation and continued maintenance of gas well dewatering systems.

On September 30, 2009 Republic-Ohio entered into two legally binding agreements with the State of Ohio designed to further refine the activities necessary to resolve alleged compliance and licensing issues at the Countywide facility.

The first agreement is a Consent Order that resolves ongoing allegations of noncompliance at the facility and reflects agreements regarding the status of facility licensing. The allegations of noncompliance were summarized in a complaint that was filed by the Ohio Attorney General in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas and resolved the same day in accordance with terms of an agreed upon Consent Order entered into between Republic-Ohio and the State of Ohio. The Consent Order with Ohio requires Republic-Ohio to pay civil penalties and financial relief of $10.0 million, submit updated permit documents, and assess, evaluate, and determine the appropriate time to address certain compliance issues at the facility. Compliance with the terms of the Consent Order and other applicable rules will result in Countywide being considered to be in substantial compliance or on a legally enforceable schedule to return to compliance for annual licensing purposes.

The second agreement is a set of F&Os that were agreed to and entered into with the Ohio EPA. The F&Os require the implementation of a comprehensive operation and maintenance program that contains specific requirements for managing the remediation area. The operation and maintenance program is ultimately designed to result in the final capping and closure of the 88-acre remediation area at Countywide.

The September 30, 2009 F&Os supersede previous F&Os (discussed above) that were issued to Republic-Ohio regarding the reaction in the remediation area of the landfill. The operation and maintenance program requires Countywide to, among other things, maintain the temporary cap and other engineering controls designed to prevent odors and isolate and contain the reaction. The operation and maintenance program also contains provisions that require the installation of composite cap in the remediation area when conditions become conducive to such installation.

Republic-Ohio has also entered into an Agreed Order on Consent (AOC) with the U.S. EPA requiring the reimbursement of costs incurred by the U.S. EPA and requiring Republic-Ohio to (a) design and install a temperature and gas monitoring system, (b) design and install a composite cap or cover, and (c) develop and implement an air monitoring program. The AOC became effective on April 17, 2008 and Republic-Ohio has complied with the terms of the AOC. Republic-Ohio also has completed construction of an isolation break under the authority and supervision of the U.S. EPA and reimbursed the U.S. EPA for certain costs associated with the U.S. EPA’s involvement in overseeing implementation of the AOC.

The Commissioner of the Stark County Health Department (Commissioner) previously recommended that the Stark County Board of Health (Board of Health) suspend Countywide’s 2007 annual operating license. The Commissioner also intended to recommend that the Board of Health deny Countywide’s license application for 2008. Republic-Ohio obtained a preliminary injunction on November 28, 2007 prohibiting the Board of Health from suspending its 2007 operating license. Republic-Ohio also obtained a preliminary injunction on February 15, 2008 prohibiting the Board of Health from denying its 2008 operating license application. The litigation with the Board of Health has been concluded pursuant to a Consent Order entered into between Republic-Ohio and the Board of Health in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas. The Consent Order requires the Board of Health to issue conditional and/or final operating license to Countywide and requires Republic-Ohio to reimburse the Board of Health for certain expenses incurred related to monitoring and investigation of complaints regarding Countywide not to exceed $300,000. Countywide’s 2009 operating license has been challenged by Tuscarawas County but it remains in full force and effect.

We believe that we have performed or are diligently performing all actions required under the F&Os, the AOC, and any applicable Consent Orders and that Countywide does not pose a threat to the environment. Additionally, we believe that we satisfy the rules and regulations that govern the operating license at Countywide.

In a suit filed on October 8, 2008 in the Tuscarawas County Ohio Court of Common Pleas, approximately 700 plaintiffs have named Republic Services, Inc. and Republic-Ohio as defendants. The claims alleged are negligence and nuisance and arise from the operation of Countywide. Republic-Ohio has owned and operated Countywide since February 1, 1999. Waste Management, Inc. and Waste Management Ohio, Inc., previous owners and operators of Countywide, have been named as defendants as well. Plaintiffs are individuals and businesses located in the geographic area around Countywide. They claim that due to the acceptance of a specific waste stream and operational issues and conditions, the landfill has generated odors and other unsafe emissions which have allegedly impaired the use and value of their property. There are also allegations that the emissions from the landfill may have adverse health effects. A second almost identical lawsuit was filed on October 13, 2009 in the Tuscarawas County Ohio Court of Common Pleas with approximately 82 plaintiffs. These plaintiffs have named Republic Services, Inc. and Republic-Ohio as defendants. Waste Management, Inc. and Waste Management Ohio, Inc., previous owners and operators of Countywide, have been named as defendants as well. The relief requested on behalf of each plaintiff in both actions is: (1) an award of compensatory damages according to proof in an amount in excess of $25,000 for each of the three counts of the amended complaint; (2) an award of punitive damages in the amount of two times compensatory damages, pursuant to applicable statute, or in such amount as may be awarded at trial for each of the three counts of the amended complaint, (3) costs for medical screening and monitoring of each plaintiff; (4) interest on the damages according to law; (5) costs and disbursements of the lawsuit; (6) reasonable fees for attorneys and expert witnesses; and (7) any other and further relief as the court deems just, proper and equitable. We intend to vigorously defend against the plaintiffs’ allegations in both actions. We cannot at this time predict the ultimate outcome of this matter or the reasonably possible loss, if any.

Sunrise Matter

On August 1, 2008, Republic Services of Southern Nevada (RSSN), our wholly owned subsidiary, signed a Consent Decree with the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management and Clark County, Nevada related to the Sunrise Landfill. Under the Consent Decree, RSSN has agreed to perform certain remedial actions at the Sunrise Landfill for which RSSN and Clark County were otherwise jointly and severally liable. We also paid $1.0 million in sanctions related to the Consent Decree. RSSN is currently working with the Clark County Staff and Board of Commissioners to develop a mechanism to fund the costs to comply with the Consent Decree. However, we have not recorded any potential recoveries.

Luri Matter

On August 17, 2007, a lawsuit was filed against us and certain of our subsidiaries relating to an alleged retaliation claim by a former employee, Ronald Luri v. Republic Services, Inc., Republic Services of Ohio Hauling LLC, Republic Services of Ohio I LLC, Jim Bowen and Ron Krall in the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court in Ohio. On July 3, 2008, a jury verdict was awarded against us in the amount of $46.6 million, including $43.1 million in punitive damages. On September 24, 2008, the Court awarded pre-judgment interest of $0.3 million and attorney fees and litigation costs of $1.1 million. Post-judgment interest is presently accruing at a rate of 8% for 2008 and 5% for 2009. Management anticipates that post-judgment interest could accrue through the middle of 2011 for a total of $7.7 million. Post-judgment motions filed on our behalf and certain of our subsidiaries were denied, and on October 1, 2008, we filed a notice of appeal. The parties submitted their appeal briefs and oral argument was scheduled for October 27, 2009. On October 23, 2009, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal finding that it was not based on a final appealable trial court order. We expect that the case will return to the trial court for additional proceedings which may include entry of additional order(s) by the trial court followed by another appeal. It is reasonably possible that following all appeals a final judgment of liability for compensatory and punitive damages may be assessed against us related to this matter. Although it is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome, management believes that the amount of any final, non-appealable judgment will not be material.

Forward Matter

The District Attorney for San Joaquin County filed a civil action against Forward, Inc. and Allied Waste Industries, Inc. on February 14, 2008. Forward and Allied accepted service of the complaint in October 2008, and in November 2008, each filed answers denying all material allegations of the complaint. The complaint seeks civil penalties of $2,500 for each alleged violation, but no less than $10.0 million, and an injunction against Forward and Allied for alleged permit and regulatory violations at the Forward Landfill. The District Attorney contends that the alleged violations constitute unfair business practices under the California Business and Professions Code section 17200, et seq., by virtue of violations of Public Resources Code Division 30, Part 4, Chapter 3, Article 1, sections 44004 and 44014(b); California Code of Regulations Title 27, Chapter 3, Subchapter 4, Article 6, sections 20690(11) and 20919.5; and Health and Safety Code sections 25200, 25100, et seq., and 25500, et seq. Although the complaint is worded very broadly and does not identify specific permit or regulatory violations, the District Attorney has articulated three primary concerns in past communications, alleging that the landfill: (1) used green waste containing food as alternative daily cover, (2) exceeded its daily solid waste tonnage receipt limitations under its solid waste facility permit, and (3) received hazardous waste in violation of its permit (i.e., auto shredder waste). Additionally, it is alleged that the landfill allowed a concentration of methane gas in excess of five percent. Discovery is currently underway. We are vigorously defending against the allegations.

Sycamore Matter

On July 10, 2008, the State of West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection filed suit against Allied’s subsidiary Allied Waste Sycamore Landfill, LLC (Sycamore Landfill) in Putnam County Circuit Court alleging thirty-eight violations of the Solid Waste Management Act, W. Va. Code sec. 22-15-1 et seq., the Water Pollution Control Act, W. Va. Code Sec. 22-11-1 et seq. and the Groundwater Protection Act, W. Va. Code sec. 22-12-1 et seq. (collectively, the Applicable Statues) between January 2007 and August 2007. The State of West Virginia sought injunctive relief requiring the Sycamore Landfill to comply with the Applicable Statutes as well as to eliminate all common law public nuisances, and sought monetary sanctions of up to $25,000 per day for each violation. Pursuant to a Consent Judgment entered by the court on March 18, 2009, the parties agreed that we had complied with all applicable statutes and eliminated all common law public nuisances. We also agreed to a remedy that is estimated to cost approximately $154,000, comprised of approximately $93,000 in six quarterly payments and a supplemental environmental project estimated to cost approximately $61,000. We have commenced the payments and the project is underway.

Carter Valley Matter

On April 12, 2006, federal agents executed a search warrant at BFI Waste Systems of Tennessee, LLC’s Carter Valley Landfill (the Landfill) and seized information regarding the Landfill’s receipt of special waste from one of its commercial customers. On the same date, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Tennessee served a grand jury subpoena on Allied seeking related documents (the 2006 Subpoena). Shortly thereafter, the government agreed to an indefinite extension of the time to respond to the subpoena, and there were no further communications between Allied and the federal government until 2008. In 2007, while the federal investigation was pending, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation investigated the Landfill’s receipt of the same special waste, determined that there was not a sufficient basis to conclude that the Landfill had disposed of hazardous waste, and took no enforcement action. On April 2, 2008, the US Attorney’s Office issued a new grand jury subpoena seeking the same categories of documents requested in the 2006 Subpoena. On September 14, 2009, the DOJ informed us that it declined to prosecute us or any of our current or former employees and that it would be returning the documents and other items previously seized pursuant to a search warrant. The DOJ subsequently stated in a September 28, 2009 email to Company counsel that it considers its investigation “closed.”

Carbon Limestone Matter

On May 4, 2009, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) issued Proposed Findings and Orders (F&Os) to Carbon Limestone Landfill, LLC, our wholly owned subsidiary. The proposed F&Os allege violations regarding the acceptance of hazardous waste from two customers and issues regarding the site’s leachate management collection system and groundwater monitoring program. While the proposed F&Os would require the site to undertake various corrective actions and pay a civil penalty of $155,311, a number of issues have been clarified during negotiations with OEPA. It is expected that a revised proposal from OEPA will reverse the estimated penalty to less than $75,000. We will continue to vigorously defend the claims.

Litigation Related to Fuel and Environmental Fees

On July 8, 2009, CLN Properties, Inc. and Maevers Management Company, Inc., filed a complaint against the Company and one of its subsidiaries in the United States District Court in Arizona, in which plaintiffs complain about fuel recovery fees and environmental recovery fees charged by the Company or one of its subsidiaries. On July 23, 2009, Klingler’s European Bake Shop & Deli, Inc., filed a complaint against the Company and one of its subsidiaries in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, in which plaintiff complains about fuel/environmental recovery fees and administrative fees charged by the Company or one of its subsidiaries. The CLN Properties complaint, which the plaintiffs amended on August 31, 2009, purports to be filed on behalf of a nationwide class of similarly-situated plaintiffs, while the Klingler’s complaint purports to be filed on behalf of a class of similarly situated plaintiffs in Alabama. Each complaint asserts various legal and equitable theories of recovery and alleges in essence that the fees were not properly disclosed, were unfair, and were contrary to contract. We intend to vigorously defend the claims in both lawsuits.

Imperial Landfill Matter

On May 18, 2009, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) and the Allegheny County Health Department issued to the Imperial Landfill a proposed consent order and agreement for a series of alleged violations related to landfill gas, leachate control, cover management, and resulting nuisance odor complaints. PADEP subsequently issued four additional notices of violation for similar alleged violations. The combined penalties proposed by the agencies total approximately $1 million. We are engaged in on-going discussions with the agencies to reach a negotiated settlement, and have been aggressively working to correct any issues alleged in the order.

Colorado Landfills Matter

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment submitted to the Company a proposed combined Compliance Order on Consent (Proposed Consent Order) in June 2009 in connection with notices of violation it had previously issued to Tower Road Landfill, Foothills Landfill, and Denver Regional North Landfill, located in Commerce City, Golden, and Denver, Colorado, respectively, alleging certain violations of the Clean Air Act and the landfills’ operating permits. On October 15, 2009, the Consent Order was signed which resolved all issues and included a total penalty of $102,200.

Litigation Related to the Merger with Allied

On December 3, 2008, the DOJ and seven state attorneys general filed a complaint, Hold Separate Stipulation and Order, and competitive impact statement, together with a proposed final judgment, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, in connection with approval under the HSR Act of our merger with Allied. The court entered the Hold Separate Stipulation and Order on December 4, 2008, which terminated the waiting period under the HSR Act and allowed the parties to close the transaction subject to the conditions described in the Hold Separate Stipulation and Order. These conditions include the divestiture of certain assets. However, the final judgment can only be approved by the court after the DOJ publishes a notice in the Federal Register and considers comments it receives. During this period, if the DOJ believes that the final judgment is no longer in the public interest, the DOJ may withdraw its support of the final judgment and seek to prevent the final judgment from becoming final in its present form. Likewise, the court may, in its discretion, modify the divestitures or other relief sought by the DOJ if the court believes that such modification is in the public interest. On July 16, 2009, the DOJ and the seven state attorneys general filed a motion seeking entry of the proposed final judgment. The precise timing for the confirmation of the final judgment is not known. Management believes that the court will enter the final judgment and that modifications to the final judgment, if any, will not be material.

Contracting Matter

We recently discovered actions of non-compliance by one of our subsidiaries with the subcontracting provisions of certain government contracts in one of our markets. We reported the discovery to, and expect further discussions with, law enforcement authorities. Such non-compliance could result in payments by us in the form of restitution, damages, or penalties, or the loss of future business. Based on the information currently available to us, including our expectation that our self-disclosure will be viewed favorably by the applicable authorities, we presently believe that the resolution of the matter, while it may have a material impact on our results of operations or cash flows in the period in which it is recognized or paid, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position.

Lease Commitments

We lease real property, equipment and software under various operating leases with terms from one month to twenty years.

Unconditional Purchase Commitments

We have various unconditional purchase commitments, consisting primarily of long-term disposal agreements that require us to dispose of a minimum number of tons at certain third-party facilities.

Restricted Cash and Other Financial Guarantees

We are required to provide financial assurance to governmental agencies and a variety of other entities under applicable environmental regulations relating to our landfill operations for capping, closure and post-closure costs, and our performance under certain collection, landfill and transfer station contracts. We satisfy the financial assurance requirements by providing surety bonds, letters of credit, insurance policies or trust deposits. The amount of the financial assurance requirements for capping, closure and post-closure costs is determined by applicable state environmental regulations, which vary by state. The financial assurance requirements for capping, closure and post-closure costs can either be for costs associated with a portion of the landfill or the entire landfill. Generally, states will require a third-party engineering specialist to determine the estimated capping, closure and post-closure costs that are used to determine the required amount of financial assurance for a landfill. The amount of financial assurance required can, and generally will, differ from the obligation determined and recorded under GAAP. The amount of the financial assurance requirements related to contract performance varies by contract. Additionally, we are required to provide financial assurance for our self-insurance program and collateral for certain performance obligations.

We had the following financial instruments and collateral in place to secure our financial assurances:


	September 30,		December 31,
	2009		2008
Letters of credit	$	1,670.2	$	1,753.1
Surety bonds		2,237.3		2,119.2

The letters of credit include $1,630.7 million and $1,686.5 million as of September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively, of utilized availability under our Credit Facilities. Surety bonds expire on various dates through 2038.

These financial instruments are issued in the normal course of business and are not debt. As we currently have no liability for this financial assurance, it is not reflected in our consolidated balance sheets. However, we have recorded capping, closure and post-closure obligations and self-insurance reserves as they are incurred. The underlying financial assurance obligations, in excess of those already reflected in our consolidated balance sheets, would be recorded if it is probable that we would be unable to fulfill our related obligations. We do not expect this to occur.

Our restricted cash deposits and marketable securities include, among other things, restricted cash held for capital expenditures under certain debt facilities, and restricted cash and marketable securities pledged to regulatory agencies and governmental entities as financial guarantees of our performance related to our final capping, closure and post-closure obligations at our landfills, as follows:


	September 30,		December 31,
	2009		2008
Financing proceeds	$	113.4	$	133.5
Capping, closure and post-closure obligations		61.1		63.2
Other		80.4		85.2

Total restricted cash and marketable securities	$	254.9	$	281.9

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have no off-balance sheet debt or similar obligations, other than operating leases and the financial assurances discussed above, which are not classified as debt. We have no transactions or obligations with related parties that are not disclosed, consolidated into or reflected in our reported financial position or results of operations. We have not guaranteed any third-party debt.

Guarantees

We enter into contracts in the normal course of business that include indemnification clauses. Indemnifications relating to known liabilities are recorded in the consolidated financial statements based on our best estimate of required future payments. Certain of these indemnifications relate to contingent events or occurrences, such as the imposition of additional taxes due to a change in the tax law or adverse interpretation of the tax law, and indemnifications made in divestiture agreements where we indemnify the buyer for liabilities that relate to our activities prior to the divestiture and that may become known in the future. We do not believe that these contingent obligations will have a material effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

We have entered into agreements with property owners to guarantee the value of certain property that is adjacent to certain of our landfills. These agreements have varying terms. We do not believe that these contingent obligations will have a material effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Other Matters

Our business activities are conducted in the context of a developing and changing statutory and regulatory framework. Governmental regulation of the waste management industry requires us to obtain and retain numerous governmental permits to conduct various aspects of our operations. These permits are subject to revocation, modification or denial. The costs and other capital expenditures which may be required to obtain or retain the applicable permits or comply with applicable regulations could be significant. Any revocation, modification or denial of permits could have a material adverse effect on us.

We are subject to various federal, state and local tax rules and regulations. Our compliance with such rules and regulations is periodically audited by tax authorities. These authorities may challenge the positions taken in our tax filings. As such, to provide for certain potential tax exposures, we maintain liabilities for uncertain tax positions for our estimate of the final outcome of the examinations. For further information related to our liabilities for uncertain tax positions, see Note 9, Income Taxes.

We believe that the liabilities we have for uncertain tax positions recorded are adequate. However, a significant assessment against us in excess of the liabilities recorded could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Self-Insurance Reserves

Our insurance programs for workers’ compensation, general liability, vehicle liability and employee-related health care benefits are effectively self-insured. We carry general liability, vehicle liability, employment practices liability, pollution liability, directors and officers liability, workers’ compensation and employer’s liability coverage, as well as umbrella liability policies to provide excess coverage over the underlying limits contained in these primary policies. We also carry property insurance. Claims in excess of self-insurance levels are fully insured subject to policy limits.

In general, our self-insurance reserves are recorded on an undiscounted basis. However, our estimate of the self-insurance liabilities we acquired in the acquisition of Allied have been recorded at fair value, and, therefore, have been discounted to present value using a rate of 9.75%. Discounted reserves are accreted to interest expense through the period that they are paid.

Our liabilities for unpaid and incurred but not reported claims at September 30, 2009 (which includes claims for workers’ compensation, general liability, vehicle liability and employee health care benefits) were $435.1 million under our current risk management program and are included in other current liabilities and other liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets. While the ultimate amount of claims incurred is dependent on future developments, in our opinion, recorded reserves are adequate to cover the future payment of claims. However, it is possible that recorded reserves may not be adequate to cover the future payment of claims. Adjustments, if any, to estimates recorded resulting from ultimate claim payments will be reflected in our consolidated statements of income in the periods in which such adjustments are known.

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders Equity and Comprehensive Income (Unaudited) shares in Millions, $ in Millions	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2009 USD ($) shares
Common Stock Par Value
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ 3.9
Beginning Balance, shares \| shares	378.5
Issuances of common stock	$ 0.1
Issuances of common stock, shares \| shares	1.2
Ending Balance	$ 4.0
Ending Balance, shares \| shares	379.7
Additional Paid-in Capital
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ 6,260.1
Issuances of common stock	17.8
Stock-based compensation	11.8
Ending Balance	6,289.7
Treasury Stock
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	(456.7)
Purchases of common stock for treasury	(0.5)
Ending Balance	(457.2)
Retained Earnings
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	1,477.2
Net income	459.4
Cash dividends declared	(216.3)
Stock-based compensation	(0.2)
Ending Balance	1,720.1
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, Net of Tax
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	(3.1)
Change in value of derivative instruments, net of tax	(1.3)
Ending Balance	(4.4)
Noncontrolling Interests
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	1.1
Net income	1.2
Ending Balance	$ 2.3

Subsequent Events	9 Months Ended
Subsequent Events	Sep. 30, 2009
Subsequent Events [Abstract]
Subsequent Events	15. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS We notified the registered holders of our 7.875% Senior Notes due 2013 and our 4.250% Senior Subordinated Convertible Debentures due 2034 that we will redeem all of the notes outstanding in the fourth quarter of 2009. The 7.875% Senior Notes due 2013 will be redeemed at 102.625% and the 4.250% Senior Subordinated Convertible Debentures due 2034 will be redeemed at par. With respect to this redemption, we expect to incur a fourth quarter loss on extinguishment of debt of approximately $55 million. We intend to use cash on hand and, if necessary, incremental borrowings under our revolving credit facility to fund the redemptions. We may also explore capital market opportunities to fund the redemptions if market conditions are favorable. Subsequent events have been evaluated by management through November 3, 2009, the date these financial statements were filed. No additional material subsequent events have occurred since September 30, 2009 that required recognition or disclosure in our current period financial statements.

Label	Element	Value
Dividends, Common Stock, Cash	us-gaap_DividendsCommonStockCash	$ (216,300,000)
Other Comprehensive Income, Derivatives Qualifying as Hedges, Net of Tax	us-gaap_OtherComprehensiveIncomeDerivativesQualifyingAsHedgesNetOfTaxPeriodIncreaseDecrease	(1,300,000)
Stock Issued During Period, Value, New Issues	us-gaap_StockIssuedDuringPeriodValueNewIssues	17,900,000
Treasury Stock, Value, Acquired, Par Value Method	us-gaap_TreasuryStockValueAcquiredParValueMethod	(500,000)
Adjustments to Additional Paid in Capital, Share-based Compensation, Requisite Service Period Recognition, Value	us-gaap_AdjustmentsToAdditionalPaidInCapitalSharebasedCompensationRequisiteServicePeriodRecognitionValue	$ 11,600,000

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Parenthetical) - USD ($) shares in Millions	Sep. 30, 2009	Dec. 31, 2008
Current assets:
Allowance for doubtful accounts	$ 54,200,000	$ 65,700,000
Stockholders' equity:
Preferred stock, par value	$ 0.01	$ 0.01
Preferred stock, shares authorized	50.0	50.0
Preferred stock, shares issued	0.0	0.0
Common stock, par value	$ 0.01	$ 0.01
Common stock, shares authorized	750.0	750.0
Common stock, shares issued	394.6	393.4
Treasury stock, shares at cost	14.9	14.9