Clean Harbors
CLH
#1330
Rank
ยฃ12.72 B
Marketcap
ยฃ241.09
Share price
1.92%
Change (1 day)
39.43%
Change (1 year)
Text size:
As Filed With The Securities and Exchange Commission April 13, 2001

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

----------------

FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000

COMMISSION FILE NO. 0-16379

----------------

CLEAN HARBORS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

----------------

<TABLE>
<S> <C>
Massachusetts 04-2997780
(State or other jurisdiction (IRS Employer
of incorporation or organization) Identification Number)
1501 Washington Street, 02184-7535
Braintree, Massachusetts (Zip Code)
(Address of principal executive offices)
</TABLE>

Registrant's telephone number: (781) 849-1800 ext. 4454
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, $.01 par value

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding twelve months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [_]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item
405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to
the best of the registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any
amendment to this Form 10-K. [X]

On February 28, 2001, the aggregate market value of the voting stock of the
registrant held by nonaffiliates of the registrant was $14,730,644. Reference
is made to Part III of this report for the assumptions on which this
calculation is based.

On February 28, 2001, there were outstanding 11,317,155 shares of Common
Stock, $.01 par value.

----------------

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Certain portions of the registrant's definitive proxy statement for its 2001
annual meeting of stockholders (which is expected to be filed with the
Commission not later than April 30, 2001) are incorporated by reference into
part III of this report.

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forward-Looking Statements

In addition to historical information, this Annual Report contains forward-
looking statements, which are generally identifiable by use of the words
"believes," "expects," "intends," "anticipates," "plans to," "estimates,"
"projects," or similar expressions. These forward-looking statements are
subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those reflected in these forward-looking statements.
Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to,
those discussed in the section entitled "Management's Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations--Factors That May Affect
Future Results." Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these
forward-looking statements, which reflect management's opinions only as of the
date hereof. The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or publicly
release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements.
Readers should carefully review the risk factors described in other documents
the Company files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, including the Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q to be filed by the
Company in the fiscal year 2001.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Clean Harbors, Inc., through its subsidiaries (collectively, the "Company"),
operates in one industry segment providing a wide range of environmental
services to a diversified customer base in the United States and Puerto Rico.
The Company is managed on a regional basis, with a full range of services
being offered in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and Midwest regions, and a
presence in the Western region. The Company has a network of sales and
regional logistics offices and service centers located in 27 states and Puerto
Rico. The service centers interface with customers, and perform a variety of
environmental remediation and hazardous waste management activities. The
Company has 12 waste management facilities, which are managed separately from
the regions, that transport, store, treat and dispose of waste. The Company
also provides analytical testing, technical, and consulting and information
management services, which complement its primary services and permit it to
offer complete solutions to its customers' complex environmental requirements.

The Company is one of the largest providers of environmental services in the
United States. The Company has three major competitors, namely, Safety-Kleen
Corp, ONYX-North America (the waste management subsidiary of the Paris-based
Vivendi) and Philip Services Corp. The Company also competes against regional
waste management firms and a number of smaller companies. The Company seeks to
be recognized by customers as the premier supplier of a broad range of value-
added environmental services based upon quality, responsiveness, customer
service, information technologies, breadth of product offerings and cost
effectiveness. The Company's principal customers are utility, chemical,
petroleum, pharmaceutical, transportation and industrial firms, educational
institutions, other environmental service companies and government agencies.

The Company's past earnings were adversely affected by poor conditions in
the environmental services industry. Intense price competition, waste
minimization by industrial firms and unpredictable event business all
contributed to weakness across all segments of the environmental services
industry. The Company responded to industry conditions by implementing
business process review programs, expanding the network of service centers and
by enhancing revenue through increasing market share.

As part of its commitment to employee safety and quality customer service,
the Company has an extensive compliance program and a trained environmental,
health and safety staff. The Company adheres to a risk management program
designed to reduce potential liabilities for the Company and its customers.

The Company was incorporated in Massachusetts in 1980. The principal offices
of the Company are located in Braintree, Massachusetts.


1
Business Strategy

The Company's strategy is to develop and maintain an ongoing relationship
with a diversified group of customers who have recurring needs for treatment
and disposal services, site services, analytical services, and information
technologies and training in managing their overall environmental program. In
order to maintain and enhance its position in the environmental services
industry within the core markets in which it operates, the Company strives to
achieve internal growth through expanding the network of service centers
within the primary regions in which it operates, penetrating the industrial
maintenance services market, improving utilization of existing facilities by
increasing volumes of waste processed, developing new waste management
services, capitalizing on industry consolidation and providing e-commerce
solutions. In addition, the Company expects to achieve growth through
strategic acquisitions.

Expanded Network of Service Centers. The Company currently has 37 service
centers, 5 of which were opened in 2000. By opening additional service centers
within or contiguous to the regions in which it operates, the Company believes
that it can, with minimal expenditure of funds, increase its market share.
Much of the additional waste that is generated can be sent to existing
facilities to increase the utilization of the plants and thereby increase
their profitability.

Penetrating the Industrial Maintenance Services Market. In the second
quarter of 1999, the Company added to its service offerings industrial
cleaning and maintenance. The Company expanded this service to 4 locations, 1
of which was opened in 2000. The Company believes that industrial maintenance
services offer significant opportunities for growth for the Company because of
the multi-billion dollar size of the market and the Company's small current
penetration of this market. The expansion in industrial maintenance services
leverages the Company's hazardous waste disposal assets because hazardous
wastes are often removed in the cleaning process.

Improved Utilization of Waste Management Facilities. The Company currently
has 12 waste management facilities which represent a substantial investment in
permits, plants and equipment. This network of facilities provides the Company
with significant operating leverage. There are opportunities to expand waste
handling capacity at these facilities by modifying the terms of the existing
permits and by adding capital equipment and new technology. Through selected
permit modifications, the Company can expand the range of treatment services
which it offers to its customers without the large capital investment
necessary to acquire or build new waste management facilities.

New Waste Management Services. Industrial waste generators are demanding
alternatives to traditional waste disposal methods in order to increase
recycling and reclamation and to minimize the end disposal of hazardous waste.
The Company utilizes its technological expertise and innovation to improve and
expand the range of services which it offers to its customers, and to develop
less expensive methods of disposing of hazardous waste.

Capitalization on Industry Consolidation. The Company believes that its
large industrial customers are increasingly requiring a comprehensive range of
environmental services including: site services, industrial maintenance
services, emergency response services and waste consulting and information
management services to be provided by a select number of service providers.
This trend should place smaller operators at a competitive disadvantage due to
their size and limited financial resources. To respond to its customers'
needs, the Company has increased the range of environmental services it offers
and has as part of its strategy to acquire companies in existing, contiguous
and new market areas. Acquisitions within the Company's existing areas of
operation will capture incremental market share, while geographic expansion
creates new market opportunities. The Company continues to evaluate other
business opportunities in order to enhance service to its existing customer
base and expand its customer base.

E-commerce. In 1999, the Company enhanced its internet functionality to
provide order fulfillment, waste profiling and transportation scheduling. The
Company believes that its e-commerce capabilities are superior to

2
those of its competitors in the environmental services industry and that
increasing the percentage of transactions that utilize e-commerce will result
in lower costs of services.

Acquisitions

The Company has completed one acquisition since January 1, 1996.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Date of
Acquisition Acquisition Purchase Price
----------- ------------------------------------------ --------------
<C> <S> <C>
1999 The assets of the Texas Transportation and
Brokerage Divisions of American Ecology
Environmental Services Corporation $1.9 million
</TABLE>

Prior to completing any acquisition, the Company strives to investigate the
current and contingent liabilities of the company or assets to be acquired,
including potential liabilities arising from noncompliance with environmental
laws by prior owners for which the Company, as a successor owner, might become
responsible. The Company also seeks to minimize the impact of potential
liabilities by obtaining indemnities and warranties from the sellers which may
be supported by deferring payment of or by escrowing a portion of the purchase
price. See "Legal Proceedings" below for a description of the indemnities
which the Company has received in connection with past acquisitions.

SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE COMPANY

Services

The Company provides a wide range of environmental services. The services
provided can be discussed in three primary categories: treatment and disposal
of industrial wastes ("Treatment and Disposal"); site services provided at
customer sites ("Site Services"); specialized repackaging, treatment and
disposal services for laboratory chemicals and household hazardous wastes
("CleanPack(R)"). The Company also provides transportation for all forms of
hazardous wastes ("Transportation and Logistics Management, and Analytical
Testing Services"); and information management and training services. Although
they are discussed separately to provide an understanding of the services
offered, Site Services, CleanPack(R), and Transportation and Logistics
Management Services are typically provided from one service location. The
Company markets these services through its sales organizations and, in many
instances, services in one area of the business support or lead to work in
other service lines.

Treatment and Disposal

The Company transports, treats and disposes of industrial wastes for
commercial and industrial customers, health care providers, educational and
research organizations, other environmental services companies and
governmental entities. The wastes handled include substances which are
classified as "hazardous" because of their corrosive, ignitable, infectious,
reactive or toxic properties, and other substances subject to federal and
state environmental regulation. Waste types processed or transferred in drums
or bulk quantities include:

. flammables, combustibles and other organics;

. acids and caustics;

. cyanides and sulfides;

. solids and sludges;

. industrial wastewaters;

. items containing PCBs, such as utility transformers and electrical light
ballasts;

. medical waste;

3
. other regulated wastes; and

. nonhazardous industrial waste.

The Company receives a detailed waste profile sheet prepared by the customer
to document the nature of the customer's waste. A sample of the delivered
waste is tested to ensure that it conforms to the customer's waste profile
record and to select an appropriate method of treatment and disposal. Once the
wastes are characterized, compatible wastes are consolidated to achieve
economies in storage, handling, transportation and ultimate treatment and
disposal. At the time of acceptance of a customer's waste at the Company's
facility, a unique computer "bar code" identification label is assigned to
each container of waste, enabling the Company to use sophisticated computer
systems to track and document the status, location and disposition of the
waste.

Wastewater Treatment. The Company's wastewater treatment operations involve
processing hazardous and nonhazardous wastes through the use of physical and
chemical treatment methods. The solid waste materials produced by these
wastewater processing operations are then disposed of off-site at facilities
owned and operated by unrelated businesses, while the treated effluent is
discharged to the local sewer system under permit.

The Company treats a broad range of industrial liquid and semi-liquid wastes
containing heavy metals, organics and suspended solids, including:

. acids and caustics;

. ammonias, sulfides and cyanides;

. heavy metals, ink wastes and plating solutions;

. landfill leachates and scrubber waters; and

. oily wastes and water soluble coolants.

Wastewater treatment can be economical as well as environmentally sound, by
combining different wastewaters in a "batching" process that reduces costs for
multiple waste stream disposal. For instance, acidic waste from one source can
be neutralized with alkaline from a second source to produce a neutral
solution.

Physical Treatment. Physical treatment methods include distillation,
separation and stabilization. These methods are used to reduce the volume or
toxicity of waste material or to make it suitable for further treatment,
reuse, or disposal. Distillation uses either heat or vacuum to purify liquids
for resale. Separation utilizes techniques such as sedimentation, filtration,
flocculation and centrifugation to remove solid materials from liquids.
Stabilization refers to a category of waste treatment processes designed to
reduce contaminant mobility or solubility and convert waste to a more
chemically stable form. Stabilization technology includes many classes of
immobilization systems and applications. Stabilization is a frequent treatment
method for metal-bearing wastes received at several Company facilities, which
treat the waste to meet specific federal land disposal restrictions. After
treatment, the waste is tested to confirm that it has been rendered
nonhazardous. It can then be sent to a nonhazardous waste landfill, at
significantly lower cost than disposal at a hazardous waste landfill.

Thermal Treatment. Thermal treatment refers to processes that use high
temperature combustion as the principal means of waste destruction. The
Company's state-of-the-art hazardous waste incinerator in Kimball, Nebraska,
uses a fluidized bed thermal oxidation unit for maximum destruction efficiency
of hazardous waste.

Resource Recovery. Resource recovery involves the treatment of wastes using
various methods which effectively remove contaminants from the original
material to restore its fitness for its intended purpose and to reduce the
volume of waste requiring disposal. The Company operates treatment systems for
the reclamation and reuse of certain wastes, particularly solvent-based wastes
generated by industrial cleaning operations, metal finishing and other
manufacturing processes.

Spent solvents that can be recycled are processed through thin film
evaporators and other processing equipment and are distilled into usable
products. Upon recovery of these products, the Company either returns

4
the recovered solvents to the original generator or sells them to third
parties. Organic liquids and solids with sufficient heat value are blended to
meet strict specifications for use as supplemental fuels for cement kilns,
industrial furnaces and other high-efficiency boilers. The Company has
installed fuels blending equipment at its Chicago and Cincinnati plants to
prepare these supplemental fuels. The Company has established relationships
with a number of supplemental fuel users that are licensed to accept the
blended fuel material. Although the Company pays a fee to the users who accept
this product, this disposal method is substantially less costly than other
disposal methods.

Clean Extraction System. The Clean Extraction System ("CES") is a hazardous
waste treatment system commercialized by the Company at its Baltimore facility
which extracts organic compounds from industrial wastewater. CES removes
organic contaminants such as gasoline, acetone, methylene chloride, pesticides
and other chemicals from industrial wastewater known as "lean water." Lean
water is generated by firms such as oil companies, utilities, and
manufacturers of specialty chemicals and pharmaceuticals.

The CES process enables the Company to handle a broad range of complex,
difficult to treat organic and inorganic wastewaters which would otherwise be
sent to other companies for disposal. CES offers the Company's industrial
customers, such as chemical or pharmaceutical companies, an attractive
recycling alternative to incineration or deep well injection of their waste
waters.

Disposal. After treatment of industrial wastes at the Company's facilities,
the hazardous waste residues (such as sludges), which remain after such
treatment, are disposed of in facilities operated by third parties. The
Company also arranges for the disposal of its customers' hazardous wastes
which cannot be treated at Company-owned facilities. Wastes which cannot be
disposed of in the Nebraska hazardous waste incinerator are sent to other
incinerators, landfills, and disposal facilities operated by third parties. On
occasion, a customer's waste may be shipped directly to another disposal
company, such as a landfill or incinerator, if the size of the waste shipment
or its characteristics are such that the waste does not need to pass through
one of the Company's own waste management facilities. The Company has
negotiated appropriate commercial terms with a number of disposal companies.

Site Services

The Company provides a wide range of environmental site services to maintain
industrial facilities and process equipment, as well as clean up or contain
actual or threatened releases of hazardous materials into the environment.
These services are provided primarily to large chemical, petroleum,
transportation, utility, industrial waste management companies and
governmental agencies. The Company's strategy is to identify, evaluate, and
solve its customers' environmental problems, on a planned or emergency basis,
by providing a comprehensive interdisciplinary response to the specific
requirements of each project.

Industrial Maintenance. Many of the Company's customers have a recurring
need to clean equipment and facilities periodically in order to continue
operations, maintain and improve operating efficiencies of their plants, and
satisfy safety requirements. Industrial maintenance involves chemical
cleaning, hydroblasting, vacuuming, and other methods to remove deposits from
process equipment, such as paint booths and plating lines, and storage
facilities for material used in the manufacturing or production process, such
as feedstocks, chemicals, fuels, paints, oils, inks, metals and many other
items. The Company's service centers are equipped with special equipment, such
as high volume pumps, pressure washers, nonsparking and chemical resistant
tools, and a variety of personal protective equipment, to perform maintenance
services quickly, usually during "off periods" to minimize the customer's
production downtime.

Surface Remediation. Surface remediation projects arise in two principal
areas: the planned cleanup of hazardous waste sites and the cleanup of
accidental spills and discharges of hazardous materials, such as those
resulting from transportation and industrial accidents. In addition, some
surface remediation projects involve the cleanup and maintenance of industrial
lagoons, ponds and other surface impoundments on a recurring basis. In all of
these cases, an extremely broad range of hazardous substances may be
encountered.

5
Surface remediation projects generally require considerable interaction
among technical and project management services. Following the selection of
the preferred remedial alternative, the project team identifies the processes
and equipment for cleanup. Simultaneously, the Company's health and safety
staff develops a site safety plan for the project. Remedial approaches usually
include physical removal, mechanical dewatering and stabilization, or
encapsulation.

Groundwater Restoration. The Company's groundwater restoration services
typically involve response to above ground spills, leaking underground tanks
and lines, hazardous waste landfills, and leaking surface impoundments.
Groundwater restoration efforts often require complex recovery systems,
including recovery drains or wells, air strippers, biodegradation or carbon
filtration systems, and containment barriers. These systems and technologies
can be used individually or in combination to remove a full range of floating
or dissolved organic compounds from groundwater. The Company designs and
fabricates mobile or fixed site groundwater treatment systems.

Site and Facility Decontamination. Site and facility decontamination
involves the cleanup and restoration of buildings, equipment, and other sites
and facilities that have been contaminated by exposure to hazardous materials
during a manufacturing process, or by fires, process malfunctions, spills or
other accidents. The Company's projects have included decontamination of
electrical generating stations, electrical and electronics components,
transformer vaults, and commercial, educational, industrial, laboratory,
research and manufacturing facilities.

Emergency Response. The Company undertakes environmental remediation
projects on both a planned and emergency basis. Emergency response actions may
develop into planned remedial action projects when soil, groundwater,
buildings or facilities are extensively contaminated. The Company has
established specially trained emergency response teams which operate on a 24-
hour basis from their service centers. The Company has also established a
program called CleanER, which is a sub-contractor network responding to
emergency response actions. Many of the Company's remediation activities
result from a response to an emergency situation by one of its response teams.
These incidents can result from transportation accidents involving chemical
substances, fires at chemical facilities or hazardous waste sites, transformer
fires or explosions involving PCBs, and other unanticipated developments when
the substances involved pose an immediate threat to public health or the
environment, such as possible groundwater contamination.

Emergency response projects require trained personnel, equipped with
protective gear and specialized equipment, prepared to respond promptly
whenever these situations occur. To meet the staffing requirements for
emergency response projects, the Company relies in part upon a network of
trained personnel who are available on a contract basis for specific project
assignments. The Company's health and safety specialists and other skilled
personnel assist field managers in supervising these projects during and
subsequent to the cleanup. The steps performed by the Company include rapid
response, containment and control procedures, analytical testing and
assessment, neutralization and treatment, collection, and transportation of
the substances to an appropriate treatment or disposal facility.

Site Remediation. The Company provides technical capabilities and
operational expertise to manage large-scale environmental projects. The
interdisciplinary teams of managers, geologists, chemists, engineers,
scientists, technicians, and compliance experts design and implement solution-
oriented remedial programs incorporating both off-site and on-site treatment.
The areas of expertise include:

. remedial investigations;

. remediation technologies: design, in-house fabrication, installation, and
operations and maintenance;

. decontamination and decommissioning operations;

. high hazard materials handling; and

. mobile treatment services.

6
CleanPack(R) Services

The Company provides specialized handling, packaging, transportation and
disposal of laboratory quantities of outdated hazardous chemicals, household
hazardous wastes, and waste pesticides and herbicides. CleanPack(R) chemists
utilize the Company's CHOICE(TM) waste management software system to support
the Company's lab pack services and complete the regulatory information
required for every pick-up. The CleanPack(R) operation services a wide variety
of customers including:

. pharmaceutical companies;

. engineering, and research and development departments of industrial
companies;

. college, university and high school laboratories;

. commercial laboratories;

. hospital and medical care laboratories and Veterans Administration
facilities;

. state and local municipalities; and

. thousands of agri-businesses and residents through household hazardous
waste and pesticide/herbicide collection programs.

CleanPack(R) chemists collect, identify, label, and package waste into
Department of Transportation approved containers. Lab packed wastes are then
transported to one of the Company's facilities where the waste is consolidated
for recycling, reclamation, fuels blending, aqueous treatment, incineration or
secure chemical landfill.

Other services provided by the Company's CleanPack(R) operations include:

High Hazard Services. Reactive Materials Technicians utilize specialized
equipment and training to stabilize and desensitize highly reactive and
potentially explosive chemicals.

CustomPack(R) Services. The Company provides training, technical support,
and disposal services for customers with the resources and experience to
package their own waste chemicals.

Laboratory Move Services. CleanPack(R) chemists properly and safely
segregate, package, transport, and un-package hazardous chemicals being moved
from older laboratories to newer laboratories.

Transportation and Logistics Management, and Analytical Testing Services

As an integral part of the Company's services, industrial wastes are
collected from customers and transported by the Company to and between its
facilities for treatment or bulking for shipment to final disposal locations.
Customers typically accumulate waste in containers, such as 55-gallon drums,
bulk storage tanks or 20-cubic yard roll-off boxes. In providing this service,
the Company utilizes a variety of specially designed and constructed tank
trucks and semi-trailers as well as third-party transporters, including
railroads. Liquid waste is frequently transported in bulk, but may also be
transported in drums. Heavier sludges or bulk solids are transported in
sealed, roll-off boxes or bulk dump trailers. The Company's fleet is equipped
with a mobile satellite monitoring system and communications network which
allows real-time communication with the transportation fleet.

The Company operates a state-certified analytical testing laboratory at its
waste handling facility in Braintree, Massachusetts, which tests samples
provided by customers to identify and quantify toxic pollutants. The
laboratory staff evaluates the properties of a given material, selects
appropriate analytical methods and executes a laboratory work plan that
results in a comprehensive technical report. The Company also maintains
laboratories at its other principal waste management facilities to identify
and characterize waste materials prior to acceptance for treatment and
disposal.

7
Information Management and Personnel Training Services

Information Management Services. The Company provides customers with
software to streamline their environmental programs. The Company has developed
a proprietary software product CHOICE(R), as an on-site software product that
provides such key features as: waste tracking, manifesting, waste profiling,
labeling, least cost procurement and cost allocation reporting. Customers can
link their data via internet to the Company through CleanLink(R) web enabled
software. CHOICE(R) combined with CleanLink(R) provides customers with a total
information package of inventory management, waste shipment and waste tracking
information.

Personnel Training. The Company provides comprehensive personnel training
programs for its own employees and for its customers on a commercial basis.
Such programs are designed to promote safe work practices under potentially
hazardous conditions, whether or not toxic chemicals are present, in
compliance with stringent regulations promulgated under the Federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 ("RCRA") and the Federal Occupational
Safety and Health Act ("OSHA"). The Company's Technical Training Center
includes confined space entry, exit and extraction equipment, an air-system
demonstration maze, respirator fit testing room, leak and spill response
equipment, and a layout of a mock decontamination zone, all designed to
fulfill the requirements of OSHA Hazardous Waste and Emergency Response
Standards.

Seasonality

The Company's operations may be affected by seasonal fluctuations due to
weather and budgetary cycles influencing the timing of customers' spending for
remedial activities. Typically during the first quarter of each year there is
less demand for environmental services due to the cold weather, particularly
in the Northeast and Midwest regions. In addition, factory closings for the
year end holidays reduce the volume of industrial waste generated, which
results in lower volumes of waste handled by the Company during the first
quarter of the following year.

Customers

The Company's sales efforts are directed toward establishing and maintaining
relationships with businesses which have ongoing requirements for one or more
of the Company's services. The Company's customer list includes many of the
largest industrial companies in the United States. The Company's customers are
primarily chemical, pharmaceutical, petroleum, transportation, utility and
industrial firms, other environmental services companies and government
agencies. Management believes that the Company's diverse customer base, in
terms of number, industry and geographic location, as well as its large
presence in New England, the Mid-Atlantic and Upper Midwest, provide it with a
recurring revenue base. The Company estimates that more than 80% of its
revenues are derived from previously served customers with recurring needs for
the Company's services. For the years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998,
no single customer accounted for more than five percent of the Company's
revenues. The Company believes the loss of any single customer would not have
a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition or results of
operations.

Although the Company's customer base is diverse, two industries each
provided over 10% of the Company's revenue in 2000. Approximately 20% of the
Company's revenues in 2000 were from the chemical, pharmaceutical and allied
products industry, while approximately 14% were from the electric, gas and
sanitary industry. In 1999, those same two industries each provided over 10%
of the Company's revenue, with approximately 20% of the Company's revenues in
1999 from the chemical, pharmaceutical and allied products industry and
approximately 14% from the electric, gas and sanitary industry. In addition to
serving industrial customers such as utilities, railroads, pipelines,
pharmaceutical manufacturers, and chemical companies, the Company serves
health care and educational institutions, federal, state and local
governmental bodies, and thousands of small quantity generators.

Under applicable environmental laws and regulations, generators of hazardous
wastes retain legal liability for the proper handling of those wastes up to
and including their ultimate disposal. In response to these potential

8
concerns, many large generators of industrial wastes and other purchasers of
waste management services (such as general contractors on major remediation
projects) have decreased the number of providers they use for such services.
The Company has been selected as an approved vendor by large generators
because the Company possesses comprehensive collection, recycling, treatment,
transportation, disposal, and waste tracking capabilities and has the
expertise necessary to comply with applicable environmental laws and
regulations. By becoming an approved vendor for a large waste generator or
other purchaser, the Company becomes eligible to provide waste management
services to the multiple plants and projects of each generator or purchaser
located in the Company's service areas. However, in order to obtain such
approved vendor status, it may be necessary for the Company to bid against
other qualified competitors in terms of the services and pricing to be
provided. Furthermore, large generators or other purchasers of waste
management services often periodically audit the Company's facilities and
operations to ensure that the Company's waste management services are being
performed in compliance with applicable laws and regulations and other
criteria established by the Company and such customers.

Compliance/Health & Safety

The Company regards compliance with applicable environmental regulations,
and the health and safety of its workforce as critical components of its
overall operations. The Company strives to maintain the highest professional
standards in its compliance, and health and safety activities; its internal
operating requirements are in many instances more stringent than those imposed
by regulation. The Company's compliance program has been developed for each of
its waste management facilities and service centers under the direction of the
Company's corporate staff. The compliance, and health and safety staffs are
responsible for facilities permitting and regulatory compliance, health and
safety, field safety, compliance training, transportation compliance, and
related record keeping. The Company also performs periodic audits and
inspections of the disposal facilities of other firms utilized by the Company.

The Company's treatment, storage and recovery facilities are frequently
inspected and audited by regulatory agencies, as well as by customers.
Although the Company's facilities have been cited on occasion for regulatory
violations, the Company believes that each facility is currently in
substantial compliance with applicable requirements. Major facilities and
service centers have a full-time compliance, or health and safety
representative to oversee the implementation of the Company's compliance
program at the facility or service center. These highly trained regulatory
specialists are independent from operations and report to the Director of
Regulatory Affairs or the Director of Health and Safety, who in turn report to
the General Counsel.

Environmental Liabilities and Capital Expenditures

The Company operates facilities that treat or store hazardous waste. Such
facilities must obtain a RCRA license from the EPA or an authorized state
agency, and must comply with certain operating requirements. The EPA and state
agencies allocate their resources to remediation projects that they determine
to be of high priority. None of the Company's RCRA facilities has been
assessed a high priority by the EPA or state agency. This results in site
investigation and environmental remediation being performed according to the
timetable set by the EPA or state agencies. The following table summarizes
non-reimbursed environmental remediation expenditures capitalized and expenses
incurred for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Environmental expenditures capitalized....................... $ 92 $274 $674
Environmental expenses incurred.............................. 225 37 95
---- ---- ----
$317 $311 $769
==== ==== ====
</TABLE>

Although further investigation may cause a change in estimate, the Company
expects remediation expenditures of the magnitude incurred for the last three
years to continue for the foreseeable future. The

9
Company believes that environmental cleanup can be financed out of results
from operations and that compliance with environmental laws will not adversely
affect its competitive position.

Management of Risks

The Company adheres to a program of risk management policies and practices
designed to reduce potential liability, as well as to manage customers'
ongoing environmental exposures. This program includes installation of risk
management systems at the Company's facilities, such as fire suppression,
employee training, environmental auditing and policy decisions restricting the
types of wastes handled. The Company evaluates all revenue opportunities and
declines those which it believes involve unacceptable risks.

The Company disposes of its wastes at the Company's Kimball incineration
facility, the Company's wastewater facilities, or at facilities owned and
operated by firms which the Company has audited and approved. Typically, the
Company applies established technologies to the treatment, storage and
recovery of hazardous wastes. The Company believes its operations are
conducted in a safe and prudent manner and in substantial compliance with
applicable laws and regulations.

Insurance

The Company's insurance programs cover the potential risks associated with
its multifaceted operations from two primary exposures: direct physical damage
and third-party liability. The Company maintains a casualty insurance program
providing coverage for vehicles, workers' compensation, employer's liability
and commercial general liability in the aggregate amount of $30,000,000 per
year, subject to a retention of $250,000 per occurrence, except for general
liability where the retention is $500,000 per occurrence. The workers'
compensation limits are established by state statutes. Since the early 1980s,
casualty insurance policies have typically excluded liability for pollution,
which is covered under a separate pollution liability program.

The Company has pollution liability insurance policies covering the
Company's potential risk in three areas: as a contractor performing services
at customer sites, as a transporter of waste and for waste processing at the
Company's facilities. The Company has contractor's liability insurance of
$10,000,000 per occurrence and $10,000,000 in the aggregate, covering off-site
remedial activities and associated liabilities. Steadfast Insurance Company (a
unit of Zurich Insurance N.A.) provides pollution liability coverage for waste
in-transit with single occurrence and aggregate liability limits of
$30,000,000. This Steadfast policy covers liability in excess of $1,000,000
for pollution caused by sudden and accidental occurrences during
transportation of waste, from the time waste is picked up from a customer
until its delivery to the final disposal site. The Company's $30,000,000
commercial umbrella liability policy provides additional coverage for in-
transit pollution losses from accidents for a total of $60,000,000 of in-
transit coverage.

Federal and state regulations require liability insurance coverage for all
facilities that treat, store or dispose of hazardous waste. The Resource
Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TOSCA)
and comparable state hazardous waste regulations typically require hazardous
waste handling facilities to maintain pollution liability insurance in the
amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate for sudden
occurrences and $3,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 in the aggregate for
non-sudden occurrences. In May 2000, the Company purchased from Steadfast
Insurance Company a policy insuring the Company's treatment, storage and
disposal activities that meets the regulatory requirements. In addition, this
policy provides excess limits above the regulatory requirements up to
$30,000,000.

Operators of hazardous waste handling facilities are also required by
federal and state regulations to provide financial assurance for closure and
post-closure care of those facilities should the facilities cease operation.
Closure would include the cost of removing the waste stored at a facility
which ceased operating and sending the material to another company for
disposal. The Company had purchased closure surety bonds from Frontier
Insurance Company, as had a number of other companies that operate hazardous
waste facilities. In June 2000 due to deteriorating financial condition,
Frontier Insurance Company was dropped from the listing of approved

10
sureties. This required any company that had obtained financial assurance
through Frontier Insurance Company to obtain financial assurance through some
other source. In July 2000, the Company replaced the required financial
assurance for closure through another qualified insurance company. Obtaining
this replacement insurance required the Company to place $5,250,000 of
collateral in the form of a letter of credit. The decrease in available funds
to borrow due to the issuance of the letter of credit was partially offset by
the release to the Company's general use of restricted investments of
$1,152,000. These funds were released when financial assurance that had been
provided by the Company's captive insurance company was placed with Steadfast
Insurance Company. The Company utilizes its captive insurance company to
provide financial assurance for the lagoons and incinerator located at the
Chicago facility. Financial assurance for closure and post-closure relating
the Company's incineration facility located in Kimball, Nebraska is provided
under separate policies issued by Steadfast Insurance Company.

The Company's ability to continue conducting its industrial waste management
operations could be adversely affected if the Company should become unable to
obtain sufficient insurance or surety bonds to meet its business and
regulatory requirements in the future. The availability of insurance may also
be influenced by developments within the insurance industry, although other
businesses in the environmental services industry would be similarly impacted
by such developments.

Under the Company's insurance programs, coverage is obtained for
catastrophic exposures, as well as those risks required to be insured by law
or contract. It is the policy of the Company to retain a significant portion
of certain expected losses related primarily to workers' compensation,
commercial general and vehicle liability. Provisions for losses expected under
these programs are recorded based upon the Company's estimates of the
aggregate liability for claims. The Company believes that policy cancellation
terms are similar to those of other companies in other industries.

Competition

The Company competes with three major companies, namely, Safety-Kleen
Corp., ONYX-North America (the environmental services subsidiary of the Paris-
based Vivendi) and Philip Services Corp. The Company also competes against
regional waste management firms and numerous small companies. Each of these
competitors is able to provide one or more of the environmental services
offered by the Company, and some of which have access to greater financial
resources. The Company believes that it offers a more comprehensive range of
environmental services than its competitors in major portions of its service
territory, that its ability to provide comprehensive services supported by
unique information technologies capable of managing the customers' overall
environmental program constitutes a significant competitive advantage, and
that its stable ownership allows the Company to focus on building long-term
relationships with its customers.

Treatment and disposal operations are conducted by a number of national and
regional environmental services firms. The Company believes that the ability
to collect and transport waste products efficiently, quality of service,
safety, and pricing are the most significant factors in the market for
treatment and disposal services.

In site services and CleanPack, the Company's competitors include several
major national and regional environmental services firms, as well as numerous
smaller local firms. The Company believes that availability of skilled
technical professional personnel, quality of performance, diversity of
services and price are the key competitive factors in this service industry.

Employees

As of February 26, 2001, the Company employed 1,459 full time employees.
None of the Company's employees is subject to a collective bargaining
agreement, and the Company believes that its relationship with its employees
is satisfactory.


11
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

The properties of the Company consist primarily of its 12 waste management
facilities and 37 service centers, various environmental remediation
equipment, and a fleet of approximately 1,000 registered pieces of
transportation equipment. Most service center locations are leased, and
occasionally move to other locations as operations and space requirements
change. All of the waste management facilities are owned by the Company,
except (i) the Chicago hazardous waste management facility which is leased
with terms (including extensions) that expire September 2020, (ii) the Woburn,
Massachusetts waste oil treatment and storage facility which is leased with
terms (including extensions) that expire February 2013, and (iii) the Virginia
waste oil treatment and storage facility which is leased with terms (including
extensions) that expire February 2002. In connection with the placement of an
industrial revenue bond in 1996, the Company entered into a facilities lease
with the City of Kimball, Nebraska, whereby the City acquired a leasehold
interest in the Kimball incinerator and the Company leased the incinerator
back from the City. The Company retains title to the incinerator.
Substantially all of the Company's properties are pledged as collateral for
its loans.

Hazardous Waste Management Facilities. The Company operates hazardous waste
management facilities at which it processes, treats and temporarily stores
hazardous wastes for later resale, reuse, or off-site treatment or disposal.
Every facility that treats, stores or disposes of hazardous wastes must obtain
a license from the federal EPA or an authorized state agency and must comply
with certain operating requirements. See "Environmental Regulation--Federal
Regulation of Hazardous Waste" below for a description of licenses issued
under RCRA. All of the Company's hazardous waste management facilities are
subject to RCRA licensing and have been issued RCRA Part B licenses, except
for the Cleveland facility, which is regulated under the Clean Water Act.

Some of the facilities described above are waste oil treatment and storage
facilities. Some petroleum products, such as gasoline, are considered
hazardous waste under federal law, and certain operations are located in
states which regulates waste oil as a hazardous waste. In order to handle a
variety of waste oil and petroleum products and support its site service
activities in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions, the Company has obtained
a RCRA license for its Woburn, Massachusetts waste oil facility. The Company's
Virginia waste oil facility currently operates under RCRA interim status.

The Company has made substantial modifications and improvements to the
physical plant, and treatment and process equipment in recent years at its
treatment facilities. These modifications are consistent with the Company's
strategy to upgrade the quality and efficiency of treatment services, to
expand the range of services provided, and to ensure regulatory compliance and
operating efficiencies at these facilities. Major features of this program are
the addition of new treatment systems, expansion of analytical testing
laboratories, drum storage and processing facilities, and equipment
rearrangement and replacement to improve operating efficiency. Further, the
Company believes that it can, with minor modifications at its plants, make
changes such that the existing plants would be able to process significantly
increased volumes of hazardous wastes and that no new facilities will be
required.

Chicago, IL. The Chicago, Illinois facility is located on the south side of
Chicago, on Lake Calumet. It provides treatment of nonhazardous and hazardous
industrial wastewaters, hazardous waste fuels blending, drummed waste
processing and consolidation, and transfer and repackaging of laboratory
chemicals into lab pack containers. In November 1993, the Illinois EPA issued
a Part B license for a ten-year term.

In November, 1995, the Company acquired assets from Chemical Waste
Management, Inc. ("ChemWaste") on an adjoining leased site, together with the
existing improvements, in exchange for sharing the costs of dismantling an
existing hazardous waste incinerator and cleaning up the adjoining site. The
existing improvements on the ChemWaste site, and other improvements completed
from 1995 through 1997 by the Company, have expanded the waste storage and
handling capabilities at the Chicago plant. Waste materials are shipped via
rail and truck to Chicago. The waste materials are either treated or processed
for transshipment in Chicago.

12
Under the sharing arrangement with ChemWaste, the Company could over a
period of 15 years be required to contribute up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for
dismantling and decontaminating the incinerator and other equipment, and up to
a maximum of $7,000,000 for studies and cleanup of the site. Any additional
costs beyond those contemplated by the sharing arrangement during this time
period would be borne by ChemWaste. The Company believes that it can
appropriately capitalize the expenditures in excess of amounts accrued that
are required to clean up the property. In addition, the Company entered into a
five year disposal services agreement with ChemWaste in connection with the
acquisition of the assets on the adjoining site. Pursuant to the terms of the
disposal services agreement, the Company has agreed to use best efforts to
deliver waste materials to ChemWaste facilities for disposal subject to
certain customer preferences, scheduling and other considerations.

Kimball, NE. In May 1995, the Company acquired a newly constructed hazardous
waste incinerator in Kimball, Nebraska from Ecova Corporation, an affiliate of
Amoco Oil Company. The Kimball facility includes a 45,000 ton-per-year
fluidized bed thermal oxidation unit for maximum destruction efficiency of
hazardous waste. The incinerator has a RCRA Part B license issued by the
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality ("NDEQ") that was issued
effective July 30, 1999 for a period of five years.

The incinerator is located on a 600 acre site, which includes a landfill for
disposal of incinerator ash. If the chemical composition of the ash meets
permit requirements, the ash can be classified as "delisted" and will no
longer be regulated as hazardous waste under federal and state laws. Although
the ash will be classified as nonhazardous, the landfill has been constructed
to meet the same stringent requirements as landfills designed to handle
hazardous waste.

As part of the acquisition, the Company agreed to make royalty payments to
Ecova Corporation through 2004, based on the number of tons processed at the
facility. In 2000, this agreement was amended. The amended agreement reduced
the royalty paid per ton processed and extended the term through 2009.

Braintree, MA. The Braintree facility is located just south of Boston. The
facility is primarily engaged in drummed waste processing and consolidation,
solvent recovery, transformer decommissioning, PCB storage and processing,
blending of waste used as supplemental fuel by cement kilns or industrial
furnaces, and pretreatment of waste to stabilize it before it is sent to
landfills. The facility was acquired by the Company in 1985 and operates under
a state Hazardous Waste Facility License issued by the Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection ("DEP") on January 13, 1999 for a five
year term.

Natick, MA. The Natick, Massachusetts facility is located just west of
Boston. The facility has a state Hazardous Waste Facility License (the state
equivalent of a Part B license), which was last issued in 1994 for a five year
term. In January 2000, the Company submitted a permit renewal application,
which allows the facility to maintain its hazardous waste management authority
until a new license is issued. The facility is also authorized by the federal
EPA to handle PCBs. Subsequent to year end the Company decided to sell the
facility and the facility is going through RCRA closure in preparation for
sale.

Cleveland, OH. The Cleveland, Ohio facility is located south of downtown
Cleveland. It is a wastewater treatment facility that treats nonhazardous and
hazardous industrial wastewaters, and it serves as a transfer station for
various types of containerized hazardous and nonhazardous waste. The facility
is not subject to Part B licensing requirements, since its on-site wastewater
treatment activities are regulated pursuant to the Clean Water Act, and
therefore are exempt from RCRA.

Baltimore, MD. The Baltimore, Maryland facility is located in central
Baltimore. It provides treatment of nonhazardous and hazardous industrial
aqueous wastes, treatment of "lean waters" through the CES process, drummed
waste processing, waste stabilization, and transfer of lab pack containers.
The facility has a state Controlled Hazardous Substances permit (the state
equivalent of a Part B license), which was issued January 10, 2000 for a
period of five years. The permit also allows handling of material destined for
fuels blending and rail shipment of hazardous and nonhazardous waste.


13
Bristol, CT. The facility is located in Bristol, Connecticut, approximately
20 miles southwest of Hartford. It provides hazardous wastewater treatment,
drummed waste processing and consolidation, and transfer of lab pack
containers. This facility also provides treatment of special categories of
hazardous wastewaters known as "listed" wastewaters resulting from industrial
processes such as electroplating. The facility has a Part B license which was
last issued in 1995 for a five year term. In December 1999, the Company
submitted a permit renewal application, which allows the operations to
continue until the renewal application is approved.

Cincinnati, OH. The facility is located north of downtown Cincinnati, Ohio.
It provides hazardous wastewater treatment, drummed waste processing and
consolidation, pretreatment of waste to stabilize it before it is sent to
landfills, fuels blending, and transfer of lab pack containers. The facility
is also authorized to handle PCBs. The facility holds a state Hazardous Waste
Facility Installation and Operation permit (RCRA Part B) which was renewed in
December 1993 for a five-year term. A federal permit under the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments to RCRA was issued in December 1996. In December 1998,
the Company submitted a permit application, which allows operations to
continue until the state issues the renewal permit.

Waste Oil Treatment and Storage Facilities. The Company has four waste oil
treatment and storage facilities: two in Massachusetts, one in Maine and one
in Virginia. The Massachusetts facilities are located in Kingston and Woburn,
in the Boston area. The Kingston facility has a state recycling permit and is
able to store oil collected from various activities, ranging from routine
cleaning of oil storage terminals to oil spill cleanups. The facility is also
used for maintenance activities, and for training of employees of the Company
and third-party customers. The Woburn facility is a waste oil storage and
transfer facility, which was issued a Part B license in October 1993 for a
five-year term. A renewal application was submitted to the state in November
1998, which allows operations to continue until the renewal application is
approved.

The facility in South Portland, Maine is a petroleum reclamation facility
that handles most of the waste oil received by the Company, which comes
primarily from the Company's remediation activities. It has a municipal sewer
user permit allowing the discharge of water separated from oil. The Company
also owns another property on Main Street in South Portland, which has a
license to store virgin oil, and it is also permitted for the temporary
storage and transfer of containerized hazardous waste.

The Prince George, Virginia facility is located near Richmond and was
acquired in September 1994. The facility is able to store waste oil and
gasoline-contaminated hazardous wastes collected from various activities,
ranging from routine cleaning of oil storage terminals to oil spill cleanups.
The state has agreed that this facility is regulated under the Clean Water Act
and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to obtain a RCRA Part B permit.
At this time the facility is proceeding with RCRA closure, and will
subsequently operate as an industrial wastewater treatment facility exempt
from RCRA permitting requirements.

ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION

While the Company's business has benefited substantially from increased
governmental regulation of hazardous waste transportation, storage and
disposal, the environmental services industry itself has become the subject of
extensive and evolving regulation by federal, state and local authorities. The
Company is required to obtain federal, state and local licenses, or approvals
for each of its hazardous waste facilities. Such licenses are difficult to
obtain and, in many instances, extensive studies, tests, and public hearings
are required before the approvals can be issued. The Company has acquired all
operating licenses and approvals now required for the current operation of its
business, and has applied for or is in the process of applying for, all
licenses and approvals needed in connection with continued operation and
planned expansion or modifications of its operations.

The Company makes a continuing effort to anticipate regulatory, political
and legal developments that might affect its operations, but is not always
able to do so. The Company cannot predict the extent to which any
environmental legislation or regulation that may be enacted or enforced in the
future may affect its operations.

14
Federal Regulation of Hazardous Waste

The most significant federal environmental laws affecting the Company are
RCRA, the Superfund Act and the Clean Water Act.

RCRA. RCRA is the principal federal statute governing hazardous waste
generation, treatment, transportation, storage and disposal. Pursuant to RCRA,
the EPA has established a comprehensive, "cradle-to-grave" system for the
management of a wide range of materials identified as hazardous waste. States
such as Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Ohio and Nebraska,
that have adopted hazardous waste management programs with standards at least
as stringent as those promulgated by the EPA, have been authorized by the EPA
to administer their facility permitting programs in lieu of the EPA's program.

Every facility that treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste must
obtain a RCRA permit from the EPA or an authorized state agency, unless a
specific exemption exists, and must comply with certain operating
requirements. Under RCRA, hazardous waste management facilities in existence
on November 19, 1980 were required to submit a preliminary license application
to the EPA, the so-called Part A Application. By virtue of this filing, a
facility obtained interim status, allowing it to operate until licensing
proceedings are instituted pursuant to more comprehensive and exacting
regulations (the Part B licensing process). Interim Status facilities may
continue to operate pursuant to the Part A Application until their Part B
licensing process is concluded. Of the Company's 12 waste management
facilities, only the Virginia waste oil facility operates under interim
status. The Cleveland facility operates under a RCRA exemption for wastewater
treatment tank systems and is subject to regulations under the Clean Water
Act.

RCRA requires that Part B licenses contain provisions for required on-site
study and cleanup activities, known as "corrective action," including detailed
compliance schedules and provisions for assurance of financial responsibility.

The Company has begun RCRA corrective action investigations at its Part B
licensed facilities in Braintree, Natick, Chicago, Cincinnati, and Woburn. The
Company is also involved in site studies at its non-RCRA facilities in
Cleveland, Ohio; Kingston, Massachusetts; and on Main Street in South
Portland, Maine. Corrective action at the Bristol, Connecticut, facility was
completed in 1996. The Company spent approximately $317,000, $311,000 and
$769,000 on corrective action at the foregoing facilities for the years ended
December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998, respectively.

While the final scope of the work to be performed at these sites has not yet
been agreed upon, the Company believes, based upon information known to date
about the nature and extent of contamination at these sites, that accruals
have been established when required and such costs are not expected to have a
material effect on its results of operations or its competitive position, and
that it will be able to finance from operating revenue any additional
corrective action required at the sites.

The Bristol, Connecticut and Cincinnati, Ohio facilities were acquired from
a subsidiary of Southdown, Inc. Southdown Inc. has agreed to indemnify the
Company against any costs incurred or liability arising from contamination on-
site, including the cost of corrective action, or waste disposed of off-site,
including any liability under the Superfund Act, at those facilities.

The Company was also involved in a RCRA corrective action investigation at a
site in Chester, Pennsylvania owned by PECO Energy Company ("PECO"). The site
consists of approximately 30 acres which PECO had leased to various companies
over the years. In 1989, the Company acquired by merger a public company named
ChemClear Inc., which operated a hazardous waste treatment facility on
approximately eight acres of the Chester site leased from PECO. The Company
ceased operations at the Chester site, decontaminated the plant and equipment,
engaged an independent engineer to certify closure, and obtained final
approval from the Pennsylvania regulatory authorities, certifying final
closure of the facility. In 1993, the EPA ordered PECO to perform a RCRA
corrective action investigation at the Chester site. PECO asked the Company to
participate in the site studies, and in October 1994, the Company agreed to be
responsible for seventy-five percent of the cost

15
of these studies, which was estimated to be in the range of $2,000,000, by,
among other things, performing site services work and analytical services
required to complete the site studies and providing other environmental
services to PECO at discounted rates. The Company had provided discounts and
credits to PECO totaling $908,000 through August 2, 1999. The Company and PECO
then negotiated an amendment to their 1994 agreement, whereby the Company's
responsibility for its share of the cost of site studies was capped at
$1,733,000. The Company had accrued $825,000 relating to this liability at
December 31, 1999. The $825,000 balance owed under the amendment was paid in
2000.

The Superfund Act. The Superfund Act provides for immediate response and
removal actions coordinated by the EPA to releases of hazardous substances
into the environment, and authorizes the government to respond to the release
or threatened release of hazardous substances or to order persons responsible
for any such release to perform any necessary cleanup. The statute assigns
joint and several liability for these responses and other related costs,
including the cost of damage to natural resources, and to the parties involved
in the generation, transportation and disposal of such hazardous substances.
Under the statute, the Company may be deemed liable as a generator or
transporter of a hazardous substance which is released into the environment,
or as the owner or operator of a facility from which there is a release of a
hazardous substance into the environment. See "Item 3--Legal Proceedings" for
a description of certain such proceedings involving the Company.

Clean Water Act. This legislation prohibits discharges into the waters of
the United States without governmental authorization. The EPA has promulgated
"pretreatment" regulations under the Clean Water Act, which establish
pretreatment standards for introduction of pollutants into publicly owned
treatment works ("POTW"). In the course of its treatment process, the
Company's wastewater treatment facilities generate wastewater, which they
discharge to POTW pursuant to permits issued by the appropriate governmental
authority. In December 2000 the EPA promulgated new effluent limitations,
pretreatment standards and source performance standards for centralized waste
treatment ("CWT") facilities. The Company's Bristol, Connecticut; Baltimore,
Maryland; Chicago, Illinois; Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio; South Portland,
Maine; and Prince George, Virginia facilities are subject to the CWT
regulations. The Company has until December 22, 2003 to achieve compliance
with the new regulations. Compliance is achieved by meeting the effluent
limits for specific contaminants using the best practicable treatment or
"equivalent" technology. "Equivalent" technology is demonstrated by procedures
negotiated with the local governmental authority responsible for operating the
pretreatment program for the POTW. Until such time as the governmental
authorities issue guidance on procedures to determine "equivalence" there is
no way for the Company to quantify the impact of the CWT regulation on the
facilities.

Other Federal Laws. Company operations are also subject to the Toxic
Substances Control Act ("TSCA"), pursuant to which the EPA regulates over
60,000 commercially produced chemical substances, including the proper
disposal of PCBs. TSCA has established a comprehensive regulatory program for
PCBs, under the jurisdiction of the EPA, which oversees the storage, treatment
and disposal of PCBs at the Company's facilities in Braintree and Natick,
Massachusetts; Cincinnati, Ohio; and Bristol, Connecticut. Under the 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments, the EPA regulates emissions into the air of
potentially harmful substances. The recently promulgated Maximum Achievable
Control Technology ("MACT") rule of the Clean Air Act, effective September 30,
2002, places a new set of technology-based emissions standards on
incinerators, cement kilns and lightweight aggregate kilns. The Company's
Kimball, Nebraska incinerator has demonstrated emissions levels that are at or
below MACT standards with negligible investments or facility modifications.

In its transportation operations, the Company is regulated by the U.S.
Department of Transportation, the Federal Railroad Administration, and the
U.S. Coast Guard, as well as by the regulatory agencies of each state in which
it operates or through which its trucks pass. Health and safety standards
under the Occupational Safety and Health Act are also applicable.

State and Local Regulations

Pursuant to the EPA's authorization of their RCRA equivalent programs,
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Ohio, and Nebraska have
regulatory programs governing the operations and permitting of

16
hazardous waste facilities. Accordingly, the hazardous waste treatment,
storage and disposal activities of the Company's Braintree, Natick, Woburn,
Bristol, Chicago, Baltimore, Cincinnati, and Kimball facilities are regulated
by the relevant state agencies in addition to federal EPA regulation.

Some states, such as Connecticut and Massachusetts, classify as hazardous
some wastes which are not regulated under RCRA. For example, Massachusetts
considers PCBs and used oil as "hazardous wastes," while RCRA does not.
Accordingly, the Company must comply with state requirements for handling
state regulated wastes, and, when necessary, obtain state licenses for
treating, storing, and disposing of such wastes at its facilities.

The Company believes that each of its facilities is in substantial
compliance with the applicable requirements of RCRA, state laws and
regulations. Eleven of the Company's 12 waste management facilities have been
issued final licenses, except for the Virginia facility which operates as an
interim status facility under RCRA. Once issued, such licenses have maximum
fixed terms of a given number of years which differ from state to state,
ranging from three years to ten years. The issuing state agency may review or
modify a license at any time during its term. The Company anticipates that
once a license is issued with respect to a facility, the license will be
renewed at the end of its term if the facility's operations are in compliance
with applicable requirements. However, there can be no assurance that
regulations governing future licensing will remain static, or that the Company
will be able to comply with such requirements.

The Company's wastewater treatment facilities are also subject to state and
local regulation, most significantly sewer discharge regulations adopted by
the municipalities which receive treated wastewater from the treatment
processes. The Company's continued ability to operate its liquid waste
treatment process at each such facility is dependent upon its ability to
continue these sewer discharges.

The Company's facilities are regulated pursuant to state statutes, including
those addressing clean water and clean air. Local sewer discharge and
flammable storage requirements are applicable to certain of the Company's
facilities. The Company's facilities are subject to local siting, zoning and
land use restrictions. Although the Company's facilities occasionally have
been cited for regulatory violations, the Company believes it is in
substantial compliance with all federal, state and local laws regulating its
business. Superfund legislation permits strict joint and several liability to
be imposed without regard to fault, and as a result one PRP might be required
to bear significantly more than its proportional share of the cleanup costs if
other PRP's do not pay their share of such costs.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Certain Company subsidiaries have transported or generated waste sent to
sites, which have been designated state or federal Superfund sites. As a
result, the Company has been named as a potentially responsible party ("PRP")
in a number of lawsuits arising from the disposal of wastes at 27 state and
federal Superfund sites.

Fourteen of these sites involve two subsidiaries which the Company acquired
from ChemWaste, a former subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc. As part of the
acquisition, ChemWaste agreed to indemnify the Company with respect to any
liability of its Braintree and Natick subsidiaries for waste disposed of
before the Company acquired them. Accordingly, Waste Management is paying all
costs of defending the Company's Braintree and Natick subsidiaries in these 14
cases, including legal fees and settlement costs.

The Company's subsidiary which owns the Bristol, Connecticut facility is
involved in one Superfund site. As part of the acquisition of the Bristol,
Connecticut and Cincinnati, Ohio facilities, the seller and its now parent
company, Cemex, S.A., agreed to indemnify the Company with respect to any
liability for waste disposed of before the Company acquired the facilities,
which would include any liability arising from Superfund sites.

Six of the sites involve former subsidiaries of ChemClear Inc. One of the
six sites is the Strasburg Landfill site in Pennsylvania, which the Company
settled with the U.S. Government in late 1998. The Company is also a

17
settling party at the other five ChemClear sites. The Company believes its
ultimate exposure in these cases will not have a material impact on its
financial position or results of operations.

Mr. Frank, Inc., which was acquired by the Company in July 1992, is involved
in four Superfund sites, as a transporter of waste generated by others prior
to the Company's purchase of Mr. Frank, Inc. The Company acquired Mr. Frank,
Inc. in exchange for 233,000 shares of the Company's common stock, of which
33,222 shares were deposited into an escrow account to be held as security for
the sellers' agreement to indemnify the Company against potential liabilities,
including environmental liabilities arising from prior ownership and operation
of Mr. Frank, Inc. The Company has been identified as a PRP at two sites, at
which the Company believes that it has no liability.

The Company believes that any future settlement costs arising from any or
all of the 27 Superfund sites described above will not be material to the
Company's operations or financial position. The Company routinely reviews each
Superfund site in which the Company's subsidiaries are involved, considers
each subsidiary's role at each site and its relationship to the Company and
other PRPs at the site, the quantity and content of the waste it disposed of
at the site, and the number and financial capabilities of the other PRPs at
the site. Based on reviews of the various sites and currently available
information, and management's judgment and prior experience with similar
situations, expense accruals are provided by the Company for its share of
future site cleanup costs, and existing accruals are revised as necessary. As
of December 31, 2000 and 1999, the Company had accrued environmental costs of
$144,000 and $285,000, respectively, for cleanup of Superfund sites.

Environmental regulations stipulate the amount of transit and holding time
that shipments of hazardous waste are allowed. Certain federal agencies,
including the EPA, conducted an inquiry concerning certain railcars which were
destined for the Company's Kimball, Nebraska incinerator. Several railcars
containing waste materials generated by the Company's waste treatment plants
were not delivered to the Company's Sterling, Colorado rail transfer facility
in a timely manner by the railroad company. The Company has cooperated fully
with federal and state authorities and has arranged for company personnel to
be interviewed and has produced records, documents and other materials
concerning the railcars in question. The Company has conducted its own
internal investigation and believes that there has been no wrongdoing on the
part of the Company with respect to the late delivery of railcars. However,
assurances cannot be given that the government authorities may not reach a
different conclusion or may attempt to levy penalties. The Company is engaged
in settlement negotiations with the government.

In October 1995 an employee was killed in an accident when a drum exploded
at a facility in Cincinnati, Ohio operated by a subsidiary, Spring Grove
Resource Recovery, Inc. ("Spring Grove"). During 1999 the Company was notified
by the Justice Department that the Department believed it had a cause of
action against a subsidiary for potential civil and/or criminal violations of
its permit issued under the Federal Resources Conservation and Recovery Act of
1976 ("RCRA") as a result of the 1995 accident. The Company has conducted an
exhaustive internal review of the circumstances leading up to the accident and
believes that the subsidiary did not knowingly violate any relevant terms of
its RCRA permit. The Company has also engaged the services of external legal
and regulatory experts to review the situation and they have also concluded
that the available evidence does not support a conclusion that the subsidiary
knowingly violated its permit. Assurances can not be given, however, that
government authorities will not reach a different conclusion and proceed with
legal action or attempt to levy penalties. The Company has executed tolling
agreements with the government and is presently engaged in discussions with
the government in an effort to resolve this matter.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

No matters were submitted to a vote of the Company's security holders during
the fourth quarter of 2000.

18
PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS

The Company's common stock began trading publicly in the over-the-counter
market on November 24, 1987 and was added to the NASDAQ National Market System
effective December 15, 1987. The Company's common stock trades on The Nasdaq
Stock Market under the symbol: CLHB. The following table sets forth the high
and low sales prices of the Company's common stock for the indicated periods
as reported by NASDAQ.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
High Low
------ ------
<S> <C> <C>
1999
First Quarter................................................ $2.438 $1.563
Second Quarter............................................... 2.000 1.563
Third Quarter................................................ 1.813 1.313
Fourth Quarter............................................... 1.813 1.063
<CAPTION>
High Low
------ ------
<S> <C> <C>
2000
First Quarter................................................ $4.250 $1.188
Second Quarter............................................... 2.969 1.531
Third Quarter................................................ 3.250 1.563
Fourth Quarter............................................... 3.000 1.500
</TABLE>

On February 26, 2001 there were 656 holders of record of the Company's
common stock, excluding stockholders whose shares were held in nominee name.

The Company has never declared nor paid any cash dividends on its common
stock, and the Company is prohibited under its loan agreements from paying
dividends on its common stock. In February 1993, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of up to 156,416 shares designated as Series B
Convertible Preferred Stock (the "Preferred Stock"), with a cumulative
dividend of 7% during the first year and 8% thereafter, payable either in cash
or by the issuance of shares of common stock. On February 16, 1993, 112,000
shares of Preferred Stock were issued in partial payment of the purchase price
for the Cincinnati facility. Except for payment of dividends on the Preferred
Stock, the Company intends to retain all earnings for use in the Company's
business and therefore does not anticipate paying any cash dividends on its
common stock in the foreseeable future.

Dividends on the Company's Preferred Stock are payable on the 15th day of
January, April, July and October, at the rate of $1.00 per share, per quarter;
112,000 shares are outstanding. The Company currently is restricted in the
payment of cash dividends due to covenants in its loan agreements. Under the
terms of the Preferred Stock, the Company can elect to pay dividends in cash
or in common stock with a market value equal to the amount of the dividend
payable. The Company was required to pay the 2000 dividends in common stock
due to restrictions under its loan agreements. The share price of the common
stock and the shares of common stock issued to holders of preferred stock
during 2000 were as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Record Date Share Price Common Stock Issued
----------- ----------- -------------------
<S> <C> <C>
January 1, 2000............................ $1.206 92,849
April 1, 2000.............................. 2.859 39,169
July 1, 2000............................... 2.025 55,308
October 1, 2000............................ 2.831 39,558
</TABLE>

The Company anticipates that commencing in the third quarter of 2001 the
Preferred Stock dividends will be paid in cash.


19
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following selected consolidated financial information should be reviewed
in conjunction with Item 7-- Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8--Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data of this report.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
For the Year Ended December 31,
------------------------------------------------
Income Statement Data: 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996
- ---------------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
(in thousands except per share amounts)
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Revenues.................... $233,466 $202,965 $197,439 $183,767 $200,213
Cost of revenues............ 166,303 149,637 147,214 140,926 154,773
Selling, general and
administrative expenses.... 42,238 37,190 34,976 34,114 36,161
Depreciation and
amortization of intangible
assets..................... 10,656 9,501 9,112 9,228 9,827
-------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Income (loss) from
operations................. 14,269 6,637 6,137 (501) (548)
Other income, net........... -- -- -- 800 --
Interest expense, net....... 9,167 8,599 9,631 9,182 9,170
-------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Income (loss) before
provision for (benefit
from)
income taxes............... 5,102 (1,962) (3,494) (8,883) (9,718)
Provision for (benefit from)
income taxes............... (2,016) 282 360 4,845 (2,775)
-------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Net income (loss)........... $ 7,118 $ (2,244) $ (3,854) $(13,728) $ (6,943)
======== ======== ======== ======== ========
Basic earnings (loss) per
share...................... $ 0.60 $ (0.25) $ (0.42) $ (1.42) $ (0.77)
======== ======== ======== ======== ========
Diluted earnings (loss) per
share...................... $ 0.59 $ (0.25) $ (0.42) $ (1.42) $ (0.77)
======== ======== ======== ======== ========
Weighted average number of
common shares outstanding.. 11,085 10,649 10,309 9,959 9,653
======== ======== ======== ======== ========
Weighted average common
shares plus potentially
dilutive common shares..... 11,305 10,649 10,309 9,959 9,653
======== ======== ======== ======== ========
Financial Data:
Earnings before interest,
taxes, depreciation and
amortization (EBITDA)...... $ 24,925 $ 16,138 $ 15,249 $ 9,527 $ 9,279
Working capital............. $(33,474) $ 14,565 $ 11,245 $ 10,448 $ 14,245
Total assets................ $149,568 $145,247 $145,910 $147,850 $177,997
Debt........................ $ 67,727 $ 74,797 $ 74,032 $ 73,707 $ 75,373
Stockholders' equity........ $ 41,635 $ 34,171 $ 36,310 $ 40,024 $ 53,584
</TABLE>

No cash dividends have been declared on the Company's common stock.

Provision for (benefit from) income taxes. The 1997 provision for income
taxes was primarily due to an increase in the valuation allowance for deferred
taxes. The 2000 benefit from income taxes was primarily due to the partial
reversal of this valuation reserve. See item captioned Income Taxes in Item 7,
Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition.

Other Income. During 1997, the Company recorded a $950,000 receivable in
connection with the settlement of a lawsuit and incurred approximately
$150,000 in costs related to the litigation. The Company recognized a pre-tax
gain, net of related legal fees, of $800,000 resulting from the settlement,
which is included in other income, net in the consolidated statement of
income.


20
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth for the periods indicated certain operating
data associated with the Company's results of operations. This table and
subsequent discussions should be read in conjunction with Item 6 Selected
Financial Data and Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this
report.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Percentage Of Total Revenues
------------------------------------
Twelve-month Year
Ended December 31,
------------------------------------
2000 1999 1998 1997 1996
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Revenues............................... 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Cost of revenues:
Disposal costs paid to third
parties............................. 10.9 12.5 14.3 13.9 13.8
Other costs.......................... 60.3 61.2 60.3 62.8 63.4
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Total cost of revenues............. 71.2 73.7 74.6 76.7 77.2
Selling, general and administrative
expenses.............................. 18.1 18.3 17.7 18.6 18.2
Depreciation and amortization of
intangible assets..................... 4.6 4.7 4.6 5.0 4.9
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Income (loss) from operations.......... 6.1 3.3 3.1 (0.3) (0.3)
Other income, net...................... -- -- -- 0.4 --
Interest expense, net.................. 3.9 4.3 4.9 4.9 4.6
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Income (loss) before provision for
(benefit from) income taxes........... 2.2 (1.0) (1.8) (4.8) (4.9)
Provision for (benefit from) income
taxes................................. (0.8) 0.1 0.2 2.7 (1.4)
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Net income (loss).................... 3.0% (1.1)% (2.0)% (7.5)% (3.5)%
===== ===== ===== ===== =====
</TABLE>

Revenues for 2000 were $233,466,000 up $30,501,000 or 15.0% compared to
revenues of $202,965,000 for 1999. Of the total revenue increase for the year,
approximately 52% came from site services, which includes higher margin
emergency response events, and 48.0% came from transportation and disposal
services. The volume of waste processed through the Company's facilities
increased 16.9%. The pricing of waste processed was flat. The Company cannot
predict whether or not recent trends in volumes or pricing will continue.

Revenues for 1999 were $202,965,000 as compared to $197,439,000 for 1998, an
increase of $5,526,000 or 2.8%. Of the total revenue increase for the year,
approximately $7,722,000 came from site services, due to a greater amount of
services performed, which was partially offset by a $2,196,000 decrease in
transportation and disposal services. The acquisition of the Texas
Transportation and Brokerage Divisions of American Ecology Environmental
Services resulted in a 0.4% increase in revenues. The volume of waste
processed through the Company's facilities declined by 8.1%. Most of the
decrease in the volume of waste processed through the Company's facilities was
due to the Company's decision to increase the selling prices on certain waste
streams that were determined to be unprofitable or only marginally profitable.
Pricing on waste processed through the Company's facilities decreased by 3.3%.

In June 2000, a major competitor of the Company, Safety-Kleen Corp.,
announced that it had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The Company
does not believe that revenues for the year ended December 31, 2000 were
significantly impacted by Safety-Kleen's announcement.

There are many factors which have impacted, and continue to impact, the
Company's revenues. These factors include: competitive industry pricing;
continued efforts by generators of hazardous waste to reduce the amount of
hazardous waste they produce; significant consolidation among treatment and
disposal companies; industry-wide overcapacity; direct shipment by generators
of waste to the ultimate treatment or disposal location; and budgetary cycles
influencing the timing of customers' spending for remedial activities.

21
Cost of Revenues. Cost of revenues was $166,303,000 for 2000 compared to
$149,637,000 for 1999, an increase of $16,666,000. As a percentage of
revenues, cost of revenues decreased from 73.7% for 1999 to 71.2% for 2000.
One of the largest components of cost of revenues is the cost of sending waste
to other companies for disposal. Disposal costs paid to third parties as a
percentage of revenue declined from 12.5% for 1999 to 10.9% for 2000. This
decrease was due to disposal revenues decreasing as a percentage of total
revenues due to the revenue mix, and to continuing efforts to internalize the
disposal of waste, to develop alternative lower cost disposal technologies and
to identify lower cost suppliers. Other costs of revenues as a percentage of
revenues declined from 61.2% for 1999 to 60.3% for 2000. This decrease was
primarily due to increased margins on site service work performed due to the
mix of jobs performed and due to increased margins on waste processed through
the Company's facilities due to the increase in the volume of waste processed
and fixed cost nature of the facilities.

Cost of revenues was $149,637,000 for 1999 compared to $147,214,000 for
1998. As a percentage of revenues, cost of revenues decreased from 74.6% for
1998 to 73.7% for 1999. One of the largest components of cost of revenues is
the cost of sending waste to other companies for disposal. Disposal costs paid
to third parties declined from 14.3% for 1998 to 12.5% for 1999. The costs of
sending waste to third parties decreased as a percentage of revenues primarily
due to the decline in the volume of waste processed by the Company and the
decrease in the proportion of disposal revenues to total revenues. In
addition, the Company has continued to upgrade the quality and efficiency of
its waste treatment services through the development of new technology and
continued modifications and upgrades at its facilities. In 1999, other costs
of revenues as a percentage of revenues increased largely due to the inclusion
of the settlement of an insurance claim in cost of revenues in 1998 for an
amount, net of legal expenses of $1,168,000.

The Company believes that its ability to manage operating costs is an
important factor in its ability to remain price competitive. The Company
continues to upgrade the quality and efficiency of its waste treatment
services through the development of new technology and continued modifications
and upgrades at its facilities. In addition during the first quarter 1999, the
Company commenced a strategic sourcing initiative in order to reduce operating
costs by identifying suppliers that are able to supply goods and services at
lower costs, by obtaining volume discounts where the Company is currently
purchasing goods and services from various suppliers and consolidating these
purchases with a small number of suppliers, and by reducing the internal costs
of purchasing goods and services by reducing the number of suppliers that the
Company uses through reducing the number of purchase orders that must be
prepared and invoices that must be processed. No assurance can be given that
the Company's efforts to manage future operating expenses will be successful.
Efforts to reduce costs are ongoing.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Selling, general and
administrative expenses increased to $42,238,000 for 2000 from $37,190,000 for
1999, an increase of $5,048,000 or 13.6%. The increase in amounts earned under
management incentive and commission plans due to improved results of
operations and increased sales, as well as 401(K) contributions linked to the
Company's performance, accounted for the largest portion of the increase in
selling, general and administrative expenses. The next largest components of
the increase resulted from increases in headcount due to higher levels of
revenues, increases in headcount in sales and marketing due to strategic
business initiatives and increases in compensation to remain competitive in
the employment markets in which the Company operates. Strategic initiatives
related to e-commerce and Harbor Industrial Services also resulted in
increases in selling, general and administrative expenses. Partially
offsetting these increases were decreases achieved across a number of expense
categories through cost reductions.

Selling, general and administrative expenses increased to $37,190,000 in
1999 from $34,976,000 in 1998 an increase of $2,214,000 or 6.3%. In the third
quarter of 1998, the Company formed Harbor Management Consultants and in the
second quarter of 1999 initiated Harbor Industrial Services. Just under a
majority of the increase in selling, general and administrative expenses for
1999 as compared to 1998 is due to expenses of these new divisions. Salaries
and benefits increased due to increases in headcount due to higher revenues,
increases in headcount in sales and marketing due to strategic business
initiatives and increases in compensation to remain competitive in the
employment markets in which the Company operates. Expenses relating to
information

22
technologies increased due to initiatives to improve the quality of management
information. Partially offsetting these increases were decreases achieved
across a number of expense categories through cost reductions.

Interest Expense, Net. Interest expense increased from $8,599,000 in 1999 to
$9,167,000 in 2000. A large part of the increase was due to interest income of
$439,000 recorded on an income tax refund in 1999. The remainder of the
increase was due primarily to higher variable interest rates on the revolving
credit facility and term notes.

Interest expense decreased during 1999 to $8,599,000 from $9,631,000 in
1998. A large part of the decrease was due to interest income recorded on an
income tax refund. The remainder of the decrease in interest expense was due
primarily to decreases in the average balance of loans outstanding.

Income Taxes. In 2000, an income tax benefit of $2,016,000 was recorded on
pre-tax income $5,102,000, for an effective tax rate of (39.5%), as compared
to income tax expense of $282,000 that was recorded on a pre-tax loss of
$(1,962,000) for an effective tax rate of (14.4%) in 1999, and as compared to
tax expense of $360,000 that was recorded on a pre-tax loss of $(3,494,000)
for an effective tax rate of (10.3%) for the year ended 1998. SFAS 109,
"Accounting for Income Taxes," requires that a valuation allowance be
established when, based on an evaluation of objective verifiable evidence,
there is a likelihood that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will
not be realized. The Company continually reviews the adequacy of the valuation
allowance for deferred tax assets, and in 1997, based upon this review, the
valuation allowance was increased to cover almost all net deferred tax assets.
In 1998 and 1999 the valuation allowance was adjusted so as to reserve all net
deferred tax assets. In the fourth quarter of 2000, the Company once again
reviewed the valuation allowance for deferred tax assets. Based on the level
of earnings for 2000 and management's projections for profits in future years,
it was determined that it was more likely than not that $2,400,000 of the net
deferred tax assets would be utilized. Accordingly, the 2000 provision for
income taxes included a $2,400,000 benefit related to adjusting the valuation
allowance. The actual realization of the net operating loss carryforwards and
other tax assets depend on having future taxable income of the appropriate
character prior to their expiration. The 1998 tax expense consists of $247,000
of state income tax expense, which was primarily due to tangible property
taxes and net worth taxes that are levied as a component of state income
taxes, and providing a valuation allowance for $113,000 of additional net
deferred tax assets. Income tax expense for the year ended 1999 consists
primarily of tangible property and net worth taxes that are levied as a
component of state income taxes. Partially offsetting these taxes in 1999 was
a $79,000 federal income tax refund that was filed for in 1999. The 2000 tax
benefit consists of the $2,400,000 partial reversal of the valuation allowance
and an $81,000 federal income tax refund. These benefits were partially offset
by $360,000 of tangible property and net worth taxes that are levied as a
component of state income taxes and $105,000 of federal alternative minimum
taxes.

The actual realization of the net operating loss carryforwards and other tax
assets depend on having future taxable income of the appropriate character
prior to their expiration under the tax laws. If the Company reports losses in
the future, some portion or all of the 2000 benefit of $2,400,000 may be
reversed which would increase income tax expense in future years. If the
Company reports earnings from operations in the future, and depending on the
level of these earnings, some portion or all of the $2,217,000 valuation
reserve at December 31, 2000 would be reversed, which would increase net
income reported in future periods.

During the ordinary course of its business, the Company is audited by
federal and state tax authorities which may result in proposed assessments.
The Company has received a notice of intent to assess state income taxes from
one of the states in which it operates. The case is currently undergoing
administrative appeal. If the Company loses the administrative appeal, the
Company may be required to make a payment of approximately $3,000,000 to the
state. The Company cannot currently predict when the decision for the
administrative appeal will be made. The Company believes that it has properly
reported its state income and intends to contest the assessment vigorously.
While the Company believes that the final outcome of the dispute will not have
a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition or results of
operations, no assurance can be given as to the final outcome of the dispute,
the amount of any final adjustments or the potential impact of such
adjustments on the Company's financial condition or results of operations.

23
Factors That May Affect Future Results

From time to time, the Company and employees acting on behalf of the Company
make forward-looking statements concerning the expected revenues, results of
operations, capital expenditures, capital structure, plans and objectives of
management for future operations, and future economic performance. This report
contains forward-looking statements. There are many factors which could cause
actual results to differ materially from those projected in a forward-looking
statement, and there can be no assurance that such expectations will be
realized.

The Company's future operating results may be affected by a number of
factors, including the Company's ability to: utilize its facilities and
workforce profitably, in the face of intense price competition; maintain or
increase market share in an industry which appears to be downsizing and
consolidating; realize benefits from cost reduction programs; and generate
incremental volumes of waste to be handled through its facilities from
existing sales offices and service centers.

The future operating results of the Kimball incinerator may be affected by
factors such as its ability to: obtain sufficient volumes of waste at prices
which produce revenue sufficient to offset the operating costs of the
facility; minimize downtime and disruptions of operations; and compete
successfully against other incinerators which have an established share of the
incineration market.

The recently promulgated Maximum Achievable Control Technology ("MACT") rule
of the Clean Air Act, places a new set of technology-based emissions standards
on incinerators, cement kilns and lightweight aggregate kilns. Although the
Company's only impacted facility, its Kimball, Nebraska incinerator, has
demonstrated emissions levels that are at or below MACT standards with
negligible investments or facility modifications, the Company believes that
facilities owned or operated by others may be uneconomic to upgrade to the new
MACT standards. Management believes this could result in the closure of
facilities, causing a reduction in incineration capacity and lead to improved
pricing for incineration. However, no assurance can be given that this will
happen.

The Company's operations may be affected by the commencement and completion
of major site remediation projects; cleanup of major spills or other events;
seasonal fluctuations due to weather and budgetary cycles influencing the
timing of customers' spending for remedial activities; the timing of
regulatory decisions relating to hazardous waste management projects; changes
in regulations governing the management of hazardous waste; secular changes in
the waste processing industry towards waste minimization and the propensity
for delays in the remedial market; suspension of governmental permits; and
fines and penalties for noncompliance with the myriad of regulations governing
the Company's diverse operations. As a result of these factors, the Company's
revenue and income could vary significantly from quarter to quarter, and past
financial performance should not be considered a reliable indicator of future
performance.

Typically during the first quarter of each calendar year there is less
demand for environmental remediation due to the cold weather, particularly in
the Northeast and Midwest regions, and increased possibility of unplanned
weather related plant shutdowns. In addition, customer factory closings for
the yearend holidays reduce the volume of industrial waste generated, which
results in lower volumes of waste handled by the Company during the first
quarter of the following year.

The Company participates in a highly volatile industry with multiple
competitors, several of which have taken large write-offs and asset write-
downs, operated under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and undergone major
restructurings during the past several years. Periodically, the Company
reviews long-lived assets for financial impairment. At the end of 2000, the
Company determined based on this review that no asset write-downs were
required; however, if conditions in the industry deteriorate further, certain
assets could be determined to be impaired and an asset write-off could be
required. Also, industry conditions may result in significant volatility of
the Company's common stock price, as well as that of its competitors.


24
Environmental Contingencies

While increasing environmental regulation often presents new business
opportunities to the Company, it likewise often results in increased operating
and compliance costs. The Company strives to conduct its operations in
compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including environmental rules
and regulations, and has 100% compliance as its goal.

This effort requires programs to promote compliance, such as training
employees and customers, purchasing health and safety equipment, and in some
cases hiring outside consultants and lawyers. Even with these programs,
management believes that in the ordinary course of doing business, companies
in the environmental services industry are routinely faced with governmental
enforcement proceedings resulting in fines or other sanctions and will likely
be required to pay civil penalties or to expend funds for remedial work on
waste management facilities.

From time to time, the Company has paid fines or penalties in governmental
environmental enforcement proceedings, usually involving its waste treatment,
storage and disposal facilities. The possibility always exists that
substantial expenditures could result from governmental proceedings, which
would have a negative impact on earnings for a particular reporting period.
More importantly, federal, state and local regulators have the power to
suspend or revoke permits or licenses needed for operation of the Company's
plants, equipment, and vehicles, based on the Company's compliance record, and
customers may decide not to use a particular disposal facility or do business
with a company because of concerns about the compliance record. Suspension or
revocation of permits or licenses would impact the Company's operations and
could have a material adverse impact on financial results.

Certain Company subsidiaries have transported or generated waste sent to
sites which have been designated state or federal Superfund sites. As a
result, the Company has been named as a potentially responsible party at 27
state and federal Superfund sites. Fourteen of these sites involve two
subsidiaries which the Company acquired from Chemical Waste Management, Inc.
("ChemWaste"), a former subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc. and one site
involves a subsidiary, which the Company acquired from Southdown, Inc., a
public company. As part of these acquisitions, ChemWaste and Southdown, Inc.
agreed to indemnify the Company with respect to any liability of such
subsidiaries for waste disposed of before the Company acquired them. With
respect to the other Superfund sites, the Company has established reserves or
escrows, which it believes are appropriate, such that any future settlement
costs of lawsuits arising from any or all of the 27 Superfund sites are not
expected to be material to the Company's operations or financial position. The
Company had accrued environmental costs of approximately $144,000 and $285,000
for cleanup of Superfund sites at December 31, 2000 and 1999, respectively.

The Company operates facilities that are subject to RCRA regulation. Under
RCRA, every facility that treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste must
obtain a RCRA permit from the EPA or an authorized state agency and must
comply with certain operating requirements. Of the Company's 12 waste
management facilities, nine are subject to RCRA licensing. RCRA requires that
permits contain a schedule of required on-site study and cleanup activities,
known as "corrective action," including detailed compliance schedules and
provisions for assurance of financial responsibility.

The EPA or applicable state agency have begun RCRA corrective action
investigations at the Company's RCRA licensed facilities in Baltimore,
Maryland; Chicago, Illinois; Braintree, Massachusetts; Natick, Massachusetts;
Woburn, Massachusetts; and Cincinnati, Ohio. The Company is also involved in
site studies at its non-RCRA facilities in Cleveland, Ohio; Kingston,
Massachusetts; and South Portland, Maine.

In January 1995, the Company entered into a definitive agreement with
ChemWaste to lease a site previously leased by ChemWaste which adjoins the
Company's Chicago facility. During November 1995, the Company acquired the
existing improvements on the ChemWaste site in exchange for agreeing to share
the costs of dismantling an existing hazardous waste incinerator and cleaning
up the site. The improvements on the

25
ChemWaste site allowed the Company to increase processing capacity at the
location and introduce efficiency initiatives relative to collection,
transportation, treatment and disposal of routinely created hazardous wastes
throughout its facility network. Under the sharing arrangement with ChemWaste,
the Company will manage the RCRA corrective action investigation at the site
and over a period of 15 years could be required to contribute up to a maximum
of $2,000,000 for dismantling and decontaminating the incinerator and other
equipment and up to a maximum of $7,000,000 for studies and cleanup of the
site. Any additional costs beyond those contemplated by the sharing
arrangement during this time period would be borne by ChemWaste. The Company
had accruals of $1,729,000 and $1,627,000 relating to this liability at
December 31, 2000 and 1999, respectively, which are the unused amounts of a
remediation accrual that was established as part of the acquisition of
ChemWaste's Chicago Facility. In addition, the Company believes that it would
be able to appropriately capitalize the remediation expenditures, in excess of
the amounts accrued, that it may be obligated to make under the agreement. No
estimate can be made as to when the remediation activities will be completed.

The Company acquired its RCRA facilities in Bristol, Connecticut and
Cincinnati, Ohio from a subsidiary of Southdown, Inc. Southdown has agreed to
indemnify the Company against any costs incurred or liability arising from
contamination on-site arising from prior ownership, including corrective
action. The prior owner of the Woburn facility provided a limited indemnity
for any costs or liability arising from contamination on-site due to prior
ownership.

The following table summarizes non-reimbursed environmental remediation
expenditures capitalized and expenses incurred relating to the Company's
facilities for the years ended December 31, (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Environmental expenditures capitalized..................... $ 92 $274 $674
Environmental expenses incurred............................ 225 37 95
---- ---- ----
$317 $311 $769
==== ==== ====
</TABLE>

The Company expects environmental remediation expenditures of the magnitude
incurred for the last three years to continue for the foreseeable future.
While the final scope of work to be performed at these sites has not yet been
agreed upon, the Company believes, based upon information known to date about
the nature and extent of contamination at these sites, that accruals have been
established when required and such costs are not expected to have a material
effect on its results of operations or its competitive position, and that it
will be able to finance from operating revenue any additional corrective
action required at the sites.

The Company was also involved in a RCRA corrective action investigation at a
site in Chester, Pennsylvania owned by PECO Energy Company ("PECO"). The site
consists of approximately 30 acres which PECO had leased to various companies
over the years. In 1989, the Company acquired by merger a public company named
ChemClear Inc., which operated a hazardous waste treatment facility on
approximately eight acres of the Chester site leased from PECO. The Company
ceased operations at the Chester site, decontaminated the plant and equipment,
engaged an independent engineer to certify closure, and obtained final
approval from the Pennsylvania regulatory authorities, certifying final
closure of the facility. In 1993, the EPA ordered PECO to perform a RCRA
corrective action investigation at the Chester site. PECO asked the Company to
participate in the site studies, and in October 1994, the Company agreed to be
responsible for seventy-five percent of the cost of these studies, which was
estimated to be approximately $2,000,000, by, among other things, performing
site services work and analytical services required to complete the site
studies and providing other environmental services to PECO at discounted
rates. The Company had provided discounts and credits to PECO totaling
$908,000 through August 2, 1999. The Company and PECO then negotiated an
amendment to their 1994 agreement, whereby the Company's responsibility for
its share of the cost of site studies was capped at $1,733,000. The Company
had accrued $825,000 relating to this liability at December 31, 1999. The
$825,000 balance owed under the amendment was paid in 2000.


26
Environmental regulations stipulate the amount of transit and holding time
that shipments of hazardous waste are allowed. Certain federal agencies,
including the EPA, are conducting an inquiry concerning certain railcars,
which were destined for the Company's Kimball, Nebraska incinerator. Several
railcars containing waste materials generated by the Company's waste treatment
plants were not delivered to the Company's Sterling, Colorado rail transfer
facility in a timely manner by the railroad Company. The Company has
cooperated fully with federal and state authorities and has arranged for
company personnel to be interviewed and has produced records, documents and
other materials concerning the railcars in question. The Company has conducted
its own internal investigation and believes that there has been no wrongdoing
on the part of the Company with respect to the late delivery of railcars.
However, assurances cannot be given that the government authorities may not
reach a different conclusion or attempt to levy penalties.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

For the year ended December 31, 2000, the Company generated $13,569,000 of
cash from operations. Sources of cash consisted primarily of $7,118,000 of net
income for the period and non-cash expenses of $10,656,000 for depreciation
and amortization, $684,000 for the allowance for doubtful accounts and
$345,000 for the amortization of deferred financing costs. Partially
offsetting the non-cash expenses of $11,685,000 was a non-cash tax benefit
related to the partial reversal of the valuation allowance for deferred taxes
of $2,400,000 and a $70,000 gain on sale of fixed assets. Additional sources
of cash from operations totaled $2,686,000 and consisted primarily of
increases in other accrued expenses, accrued disposal costs and accounts
payable. These increases in accrued expenses and accounts payable were
primarily due to the greater amount of business performed in the fourth
quarter of 2000 as compared to the fourth quarter of 1999. Partially
offsetting these sources of cash were uses of cash from operations which
totaled $5,450,000 and consisted primarily of a $4,105,000 increase in
accounts receivable which was due to the greater amount of business performed
in the fourth quarter of 2000 as compared to the fourth quarter of 1999.

The Company defines free cash flow as cash provided by operations less cash
required to maintain property, plant and equipment and additions to permits.
In 2000, additions to property, plant and equipment totaled $7,403,000 which
consisted of approximately $2,500,000 relating to the purchase of vehicles and
rolling stock that had previously been leased under operating leases and
approximately $4,900,000 in expenditures to maintain property, plant and
equipment. The purchase of the vehicles and rolling stock was financed by
borrowings under a $3,000,000 term note. Additions to permits were $92,000.
The Company utilized the approximately $8,577,000 of free cash flow together
with the $500,000 in term note borrowings in excess of vehicles and rolling
stock purchased, a net reduction in restricted cash of $384,000, proceeds from
the employee stock purchase plan of $154,000, proceeds from the exercise of
stock options of $156,000, proceeds from the sale of fixed assets of $148,000
and a $154,000 reduction in cash on hand to reduce debt by $10,070,000.

The Company expects 2001 capital expenditures to be approximately
$7,500,000. This consists of $5,000,000 that is required to maintain existing
property, plant and equipment and $2,500,000 of strategic initiatives to
expand the Company's capabilities. The Company believes that it has all of the
facilities required for the foreseeable future. Thus, capital expenditures are
expected to be limited to maintaining existing capital assets, replacing site
services equipment, upgrading information technology hardware and software,
and specific strategic initiatives. The Company continues to evaluate
potential acquisitions and opening additional site services offices within and
next to the Company's service areas. Thus, it is possible that capital
additions could exceed the $7,500,000 currently planned.

The goal of the Company is to maximize shareholder value over time. The
Company believes that shareholder value will be maximized by using free cash
flow to make strategic investments in fixed assets to expand the Company's
capabilities, to expand operations within or contiguous to the regions in
which it operates, to expand its capabilities through acquisitions and to
reduce debt. However, no assurance can be given that the Company will be able
to generate free cash flow in the future.


27
For the year ended December 31, 1999, the Company generated $6,106,000 from
operations even though the net loss was $(2,244,000) for the period. This
result was due to sources and uses of cash that vary from when the related
revenues and expenses were recorded. The primary sources of cash from
operations were non-cash expenses that totaled $10,528,000 and consisted of
depreciation and amortization of $9,501,000, additions to the allowance for
doubtful accounts of $683,000 and amortization of deferred financing costs of
$344,000. A major additional source of cash was an income tax refund of
$1,114,000. These sources of cash were partially offset by uses of cash of
$2,800,000 due to increased levels of accounts receivable and the net loss for
the period of $(2,244,000).

For the year ended December 31, 1999, the Company obtained $896,000 from
financing activities. Sources of cash from financing activities were
$4,139,000 due to additional borrowings under the term promissory note and
$131,000 due to the issuance of additional stock under the employee stock
purchase plan. Partially offsetting these sources of cash was $3,050,000 in
payments on long-term obligations and net repayments of $324,000 on the
revolving credit agreement.

For the year ended December 31, 1999, the Company had proceeds of $1,225,000
from the sales and maturities of restricted investments, which was almost
completely due to the release of restricted funds that were held in a debt
service reserve fund at December 31, 1998. These proceeds together with cash
from operations and financing activities were used to acquire property, plant
and equipment of $5,080,000, to acquire two divisions of American Ecology
Environmental Services Corporation for $1,900,000 and to increase the amount
of cash and cash equivalents by $888,000.

As amended, the Company had at December 31, 2000, a $33,500,000 Loan
Agreement (the "Loan Agreement") with a financial institution. The Loan
Agreement provided for a $24,500,000 revolving credit portion (the
"Revolver"), a $6,000,000 term promissory note (the "Term Note"), and a
$3,000,000 term promissory note (the "2000 Term Note"). In May 1999, the Term
Note was amended. The Term Note as amended allowed the Company to increase the
amount borrowed under the Term Note by $4,139,000 from the $1,861,000 owed
prior to the amendment of the Term Note to the $6,000,000 principal amount of
the Term Note as amended. The Term Note had monthly principal payments of
$100,000 with the last payment due in May, 2004. In March of 2000, the Loan
Agreement was amended and an additional term promissory note, the 2000 Term
Note, was entered into with the financial institution. The original principal
amount of the 2000 Term Note is $3,000,000, and it is payable in 36 monthly
installments commencing on May 1, 2000. The funds provided from the 2000 Term
Note have been used primarily to purchase vehicles and rolling stock that the
Company previously leased under operating leases. The Revolver allowed the
Company to borrow up to $24,500,000 in cash and letters of credit, based on a
formula of eligible accounts receivable. Letters of credit may not exceed
$20,000,000 at any one time. At December 31, 2000 and 1999, funds available to
borrow under the Revolver were $12,760,000 and $8,603,000, respectively. The
Revolver requires the Company to pay a line fee of one- half of one percent on
the unused portion of the line. In March 2000, the term of the Revolver was
extended from May 8, 2001 to May 8, 2003.

The Loan Agreement allowed for up to 80% of the outstanding balance of the
Revolver and 100% of the balance of the term notes to bear interest at the
Eurodollar rate plus three percent; the remaining balance bears interest at a
rate equal to the "prime" rate plus one and one-half percent. The Loan
Agreement was collateralized by substantially all of the Company's assets, and
the Loan Agreement provided for certain covenants including, among others,
maintenance of a minimum level of working capital and adjusted net worth. The
Loan Agreement as amended in March 2000 redefined the working capital covenant
to specifically exclude the Senior Notes as a component of working capital and
required that the Company maintain $6,000,000 of working capital, excluding
the Senior Notes. The net worth covenant was changed to require $30,000,000 of
adjusted net worth. At December 31, 2000, the Company had working capital and
adjusted net worth of $16,526,000 and $41,635,000, respectively. The Company
was required to maintain borrowing availability of not less than $4,500,000
for sixty consecutive days prior to paying principal and interest on its other
indebtedness and dividends in cash on its preferred stock. In the first half
of 1999 and the first quarter of 2000, the Company violated this covenant,
which was waived by the financial institution through May 15, 1999 and 2000,
respectively. Since May 15, 2000 the Company has been in compliance with this
covenant.

28
In 1996 the Company assumed $10,000,000 of 10.75% Economic Development
Revenue Bonds due September 1, 2026 issued by the City of Kimball, Nebraska
(the "Bonds"). In connection with the issuance of the Bonds, the Company
entered into a facilities lease with the City of Kimball, whereby the City
acquired a leasehold interest in the facility and the Company leased the
facility back from the City. The Company retains title to the facility. The
Bonds were issued at 100% of their principal value. The Bonds are not
redeemable prior to September 1, 2006. From that date until September 1, 2008,
the Bonds are redeemable at a premium. After September 1, 2008, the Bonds are
redeemable at par. Sinking fund payments began on September 1, 1999 in the
amount of $100,000 annually and continue in this amount until the year 2008,
when the annual sinking fund payment will gradually increase.

Effective June 1, 2000, the Bond Documents were amended in order to modify
the limitation on additional debt covenant and certain related debt service
reserve fund requirements. Under the amended Bond Documents, the Company may
now issue Bank Debt up to $35,000,000 provided that after the issuance, the
ratio of the Company's total debt to total capital (debt plus stockholders'
equity) does not exceed 72% (which ratio will be reduced to 70% on January 1,
2006 and 65% on January 1, 2011).

The amended Bond Documents require that the Company make six equal monthly
payments of $125,000 each for a total of $750,000 into a debt service reserve
fund held by the trustee, if either of the following occurs: (i) the Company's
ratio of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
("EBITDA") to total interest (the "EBITDA coverage ratio") for most recently
completed fiscal year is less than 1.5 to 1.0, or (ii) the Company's ratio of
debt to total capital at the end of such fiscal year is greater than 65%. The
amended bond documents required that the Company satisfy these ratios
retroactively to December 31, 1999. Because the Company did not satisfy both
of these ratios as of December 31, 1999, the amended Bond Documents required
that the Company make six monthly payments of $125,000 each into the debt
service reserve fund commencing on June 1, 2000, for total of $750,000. In
addition to the $750,000 required to be deposited into the debt service
reserve fund based upon the level of the Company's additional debt, the
Company could be required to make additional payments to bring the total of
the debt service reserve fund to a maximum of approximately $1,200,000
(including the $750,000 described above) if the EBITDA coverage ratio for any
fiscal year is less than 1.25 to 1.0. The EBITDA coverage ratio for the year
ended December 31, 1999 was 1.39 to 1.0, and the Company was therefore not
required to make any such additional payments into the debt service reserve
fund based upon the Company's EBITDA coverage ratio. The maximum amount of the
debt service reserve fund of approximately $1,200,000 is the same as under the
Bond Documents prior to the amendment, but the amendment modified the terms
under which the Company may be required to make payments into the fund
described above.

As of December 31, 2000, Bank Debt totaled $7,927,000 which was less than
the $35,000,000 allowed; the Company's total debt to total capital ratio was
61.9% which is less than the 72.0% allowed; and the EBITDA coverage ratio was
2.24 to 1.0 which is greater than the 1.50 to 1.0 required. The Company
expects to be in compliance with the Bond covenants at December 31, 2001.
Under the Bond covenants, if the Company attains an EBITDA coverage ratio at
the end of a calendar year of greater than 1.5 to 1.0, the balance on deposit
in the debt service reserve fund in excess of $750,000 will be released for
the Company's general use. The Bond Documents require that a minimum balance
of $750,000 be maintained in the debt service reserve fund until the Bonds
mature.

The Company has outstanding $50,000,000 of 12.50% Senior Notes due May 15,
2001 (the "Senior Notes"). The Senior Notes are not collateralized, and the
Senior Note indenture does not provide for the maintenance of certain
financial covenants, although it does limit, among other things, the issuance
of additional debt by the Company or its subsidiaries and the payment of
dividends on, and redemption of, capital stock of the Company and its
subsidiaries. Interest is paid twice each year on the Senior Notes. The Senior
Notes require that the Company provide not less than 30-day prior notice if
the Senior Notes are to be redeemed prior to the due date. Notice of
redemption has been given to the holders of the Senior Notes, providing for
redemption on April 30, 2001. As described below, on April 12, 2001, the
Company signed two agreements with lenders which provide that such lenders
will provide the funds required to redeem the Senior Notes on the redemption
date.


29
As described previously, the Company had at December 31, 2000 a $33,500,000
Loan Agreement (the "Loan Agreement") with a financial institution (the
"Lender"). The Loan Agreement provided for a $24,500,000 revolving credit
facility (the "Revolver"), a $6,000,000 term promissory note (the "Term
Note"), and a $3,000,000 term promissory note (the "2000 Term Note"). On April
12, 2001, the Company signed and closed a $51,000,000 Amended and Restated
Loan Agreement (the "Amended Loan Agreement") with the Lender. The Amended
Loan Agreement increased the amount available to borrow under the Revolver to
$30,000,000 and extended the term of the Revolver to April 12, 2004. The
Revolver allows the Company to borrow up to $30,000,000 in cash and letters of
credit, based on a formula of eligible accounts receivable. Letters of credit
may not exceed $20,000,000 at any one time. The Revolver requires the Company
to pay an unused line fee of one-half of one percent on the unused portion of
the line. The Amended Loan Agreement required the payment on April 12 of the
then $3,800,000 outstanding balance on the Term Note and provided for the
issuance of a new $19,000,000 term promissory note (the "Term Note B"). On
April 12, 2001, $4,000,000 was advanced under Term Note B to pay the Term Note
and other amounts then borrowed by the Company. The Amended Loan Agreement
provides for the $15,000,000 balance of Term Note B to be advanced on April 30
to redeem the Senior Notes on that date, provided the representations of the
Company in the Amended Loan Agreement remain true and correct in all material
respects, the Company is not then in default of the Amended Loan Agreement,
and the Company has then issued the Subordinated Notes described below. The
interest rate for Term Note B is the greater of the prime rate plus 3.50% or
12.00%, and it is payable in 84 monthly installments commencing May 1, 2001.
The terms of the 2000 Term Note remain unchanged.

The Amended Loan Agreement allows for up to 80% of the outstanding balance
of the Revolver and 100% of the balance of the 2000 Term Note to bear interest
at the Eurodollar rate plus three percent; the remaining balance bears
interest at the "prime" rate plus one and one-half percent. The Amended Loan
Agreement is collateralized by substantially all of the Company's assets, and
the Amended Loan Agreement provides for certain covenants including, among
others, maintenance of a minimum level of working capital, adjusted net worth
and earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization
("EBITDA"). The Amended Loan Agreement requires that the Company maintain
$10,000,000 of working capital excluding the current portion of liabilities
under the Amended Loan Agreement and the Subordinated Note Agreement. The
Company had $18,726,000 of working capital calculated on a pro forma basis as
if the redemption had taken place on December 31, 2000. The net worth covenant
requires that the Company maintain $35,000,000 of net worth until the
Subordinated Notes described below are funded and, once the Notes are funded,
the net worth covenant requires adjusted net worth, defined as net worth plus
the the balance owned on the Subordinated Notes, to be greater than
$60,000,000. At December 31, 2000, the pro forma adjusted net worth calculated
as if the redemption had taken place on December 31, 2000 was $76,635,000. The
Amended Loan Agreement requires that the Company maintain on a rolling four
quarter basis a minimum EBITDA of $20,000,000. For the four quarter period
ended December 31, 2000, the Company reported EBITDA of $24,925,000. The
Amended Loan Agreement also requires that the Company maintain a Senior Debt
to EBITDA ratio of not more than 2.25 to 1.0. At December 31, 2000, the pro
forma ratio calculated as if the redemption had taken place on December 31,
2000 was 1.33 to 1.0. The Amended Loan Agreement also has conditions precedent
to making loans (including the Revolver) including no material adverse change
in assets, business or prospects of the Company.

On April 12, 2001, the Company also signed a Securities Purchase Agreement
(the "Subordinated Note Agreement") providing for the Company to issue on
April 30, 2001, $35,000,000 of 16% Senior Subordinated Notes (the
"Subordinated Notes"). Until October 30, 2006, the Company, at its option, may
pay the interest at the 16% rate or may pay interest at 14% and defer payment
of the remaining 2% until the Subordinated Notes are due. Interest payable in
cash on the Subordinated Notes is due in semi-annual payments on April 30 and
October 30. In conjunction with the Subordinated Notes, the Company will issue
detachable warrants for 1,519,020 shares of common stock that are exercisable
at $0.01 per share. One-half of the Subordinated Notes are due on April 30,
2007 with the balance due on April 30, 2008. The Subordinated Note Agreement
calls for the $35,000,000 to be advanced on April 30, 2001 in order to redeem
the Senior Notes. The Subordinated Note Agreement contains conditions of
closing the most restrictive of which are that representations by the Company
in the Agreement remain true, that the Company have not less than $3,500,000
available under the Revolver on

30
April 30, 2001, and that no material adverse change shall have occurred prior
to April 30, 2001 in the business and financial condition of the Company. The
Subordinated Note Agreement provides that the holders of the Subordinated
Notes will be able to call the Notes in the event of a change in control of
the Company.

The Subordinated Note Agreement contains covenants the most restrictive of
which require that the Company maintain a rolling four quarter fixed charge
coverage ratio of not less than 1.10 to 1.0. For the year ended December 31,
2000, the fixed charge coverage ratio was 1.82 to 1.0. The Subordinated Notes
require that the Company maintain a tangible capital base of not less than
$27,000,000 for the quarters ending March 31 and June 30, 2001, not less than
$30,500,000 for the quarter ending September 30, 2001, not less than
$33,000,000 for the quarter ending December 31, 2001 and not less than
$35,500,000 for quarters ending thereafter. At December 31, 2000, the tangible
capital base was $45,169,000. The Company is required to maintain rolling four
quarter earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization
(EBITDA) of not less than $18,000,000. For the four quarter period ended
December 31, 2000, EBITDA was $24,925,000. The Company shall maintain a
priority debt to EBITDA ratio calculated as of the last day of each fiscal
quarter of not more than 2.25 to 1.0. Priority debt currently consists of debt
issued under the Amended Loan Agreement. At December 31, 2000, the pro forma
priority debt to EBITDA ratio calculated as if the redemption had taken place
on December 31, 2000 was 1.33 to 1.0. The Company is required to maintain a
ratio of total liabilities to tangible capital base of not more than 3.00 to
1.0 for the fiscal quarters ending June 30, September 30 and December 31, 2001
and for the quarters ending March 31, 2002 and thereafter a ratio of not more
than 2.75 to 1.0. At December 31, 2000 the total liabilities to tangible
capital base ratio was 1.61 to 1.0.

The Company believes that cash generated from operations in the future
together with availability under its Revolver will be sufficient to operate
the business and fund capital expenditures. In addition, the Company believes
that interest expense in 2001 will be somewhat higher than in 2000 with an
increase in interest expense due to higher average interest rates being
partially offset by lower average debt outstanding.

Dividends on the Company's Series B Convertible Preferred Stock are payable
on the 15th day of January, April, July and October, at the rate of $1.00 per
share, per quarter; 112,000 shares are outstanding. Under the terms of the
preferred stock, the Company can elect to pay dividends in cash or in common
stock with a market value equal to the amount of the dividend payable. Since
March 1995, the Company has been required to pay the dividends in common stock
due to restrictions under its loan agreements. The Company issued a total of
227,000 shares of common stock to the holders of the preferred stock for the
year 2000. The Company anticipates that commencing in the third quarter of
2001 the preferred stock dividends will be paid in cash.

New Accounting Pronouncements

In March 2000, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued FASB
Interpretation No. 44, "Accounting for Certain Transactions involving Stock
Compensation" ("FIN 44"). FIN 44 clarifies the application of APB Opinion No.
25 and, among other issues, clarifies the following: the definition of an
employee for purposes of applying APB Opinion No. 25; the criteria for
determining whether a plan qualifies as a non-compensatory plan; the
accounting consequences of various modifications to the terms of previously
fixed stock options or awards; and the accounting for an exchange of stock
compensation awards in a business combination. FIN 44 is effective July 1,
2000 but certain conclusions in FIN 44 cover specific events that occurred
after either December 15, 1998 or January 12, 2000. The application of FIN 44
did not have a material impact on the Company's results of operations or its
financial position.

In December 1999, the Securities and Exchange Commission released Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 101 ("SAB 101"), "Revenue Recognition in Financial
Statements." This bulletin summarizes certain views of the staff on applying
generally accepted accounting principles to revenue recognition in financial
statements. The staff believes that revenue is realized or realizable and
earned when all of the following criteria are met: persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists; delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; the
seller's price to the buyer is fixed or determinable; and collectibility is
reasonably assured. The Company believes that its current revenue recognition
policy complies with the Commission's guidelines. SAB 101 became effective in
the fourth quarter of 2000.

31
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The Company is subject to market risk on the interest that it pays on its
debt due to changes in the general level of interest rates. The Company
manages its interest rate exposure by borrowing at fixed rates for longer time
horizons to finance non-current assets and by borrowing at variable rates for
working capital and other short term needs. As previously discussed, the
Company has outstanding $50,000,000 of 12.50% Senior Notes due May 15, 2001.
The Senior Notes require that the Company provide not less than 30-day notice
if the Senior Notes are to be redeemed prior to the due date. Notice of
redemption has been given to the holders of the Senior Notes, providing for
redemption on April 30, 2001. The following table provides information
regarding the Company's fixed rate borrowings assuming that the Senior Notes
are redeemed as expected and partially replaced with $35,000,000 of
Subordinated Notes (dollars in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Scheduled Maturity Dates 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Thereafter Total
- ------------------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---------- -------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Economic Development Revenue
Bonds........................ $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $ 9,300 $ 9,800
Subordinated Notes............ -- -- -- -- -- 35,000 35,000
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------- -------
Total......................... $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $44,300 $44,800
==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ======= =======
Weighted average interest rate
on fixed rate borrowings
excluding amortization of
debt discount for warrants
issued....................... 13.8% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9%
==== ==== ==== ==== ====
</TABLE>

In addition to the fixed rate borrowings described in the table above, the
Company had at December 31, 2000 borrowings at variable interest rates of
$7,927,000 under the Revolver and Term Notes which bear interest at the
"prime" rate (9.50% at December 31, 2000) plus 1.5% or at the Eurodollar rate
(6.64% at December 31, 2000) plus 3.0%. As previously discussed, notice of
redemption has been given to the holders of the Senior Notes. The redemption
of the Senior Notes is expected to result in a larger amount of variable rate
debt being outstanding in 2001 as compared to the amount of variable rate debt
outstanding at December 31, 2000. If the redemption of the Senior Notes had
occurred on December 31, 2000, the amount of variable rate debt outstanding at
December 31, 2000 would have been $22,927,000. The following table presents
hypothetical situations of the amount of interest expense that would be
incurred in 2001 if the redemption had taken place December 31, 2000, assuming
that this amount remained outstanding for the entire year and assuming three
scenario for interest rates: (i) interest rates remain unchanged from those on
December 31, 2000, (ii) interest rates increase by 200 basis points and (iii)
interest rates decrease by 200 basis points (dollars in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Pro Forma Interest if Interest if Interest if
Principal Interest Rates Interest Rates Interest Rates
Description of Debt Balance Remain Unchanged Increase 200 b.p. Decrease 200 b.p.
------------------- --------- ---------------- ----------------- -----------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Term Note B............. $19,000 $2,470 $2,850 $2,280
2000 Term Note.......... 2,333 225 271 178
Revolver................ 1,594 171 203 139
------- ------ ------ ------
Total................... $22,927 $2,866 $3,324 $2,597
======= ====== ====== ======
</TABLE>

The Company is not subject to market risk arising from transactions in
foreign currencies since substantially all revenues and expenses are
transacted in U.S. dollars. The Company is subject to minimal market risk
arising from purchases of commodities since no significant amount of
commodities are used in the treatment of hazardous waste.

32
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Clean Harbors, Inc.:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index
appearing under Item 14(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the
financial position of Clean Harbors, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the "Company")
at December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the results of their operations and their
cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2000,
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement
schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 14(a)(2) presents fairly, in
all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in
conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. These
financial statements and the financial statement schedule are the
responsibility of the Company's management; our responsibility is to express
an opinion on these financial statements and the financial statement schedule
based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements in accordance
with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America,
which require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing
the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management,
and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
February 6, 2001 (except for Note 16, as to which
the date is April 12, 2001)

33
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
For the years ended
December 31,
----------------------------
2000 1999 1998
-------- -------- --------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Revenues........................................ $233,466 $202,965 $197,439
Cost of revenues................................ 166,303 149,637 147,214
Selling, general and administrative expenses.... 42,238 37,190 34,976
Depreciation and amortization of intangible
assets......................................... 10,656 9,501 9,112
-------- -------- --------
Income from operations.......................... 14,269 6,637 6,137
Interest expense, net........................... 9,167 8,599 9,631
-------- -------- --------
Income (loss) before provision for (benefit
from) income taxes............................. 5,102 (1,962) (3,494)
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes....... (2,016) 282 360
-------- -------- --------
Net income (loss)............................... $ 7,118 $ (2,244) $ (3,854)
======== ======== ========
Basic earnings (loss) per share................. $ 0.60 $ (0.25) $ (0.42)
======== ======== ========
Diluted earnings (loss) per share............... $ 0.59 $ (0.25) $ (0.42)
======== ======== ========
Weighted average common shares outstanding...... 11,085 10,649 10,309
======== ======== ========
Weighted average common shares outstanding plus
potentially dilutive common shares............. 11,305 10,649 10,309
======== ======== ========
</TABLE>


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.

34
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

ASSETS

(dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
As of December
31,
-----------------
2000 1999
-------- --------
<S> <C> <C>
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents.................................. $ 2,629 $ 2,783
Restricted cash or investments............................. 768 1,116
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts
of $1,549 and $1,157, respectively........................ 47,201 43,780
Prepaid expenses........................................... 1,563 1,094
Supplies inventories....................................... 3,379 2,808
Income tax receivable...................................... 203 122
Deferred tax assets........................................ 2,400 --
-------- --------
Total current assets..................................... 58,143 51,703
-------- --------
Property, plant and equipment:
Land....................................................... 8,478 8,478
Buildings and improvements................................. 42,700 40,612
Vehicles and equipment..................................... 90,794 84,528
Furniture and fixtures..................................... 2,225 2,219
Construction in progress................................... 794 1,224
-------- --------
144,991 137,061
Less--accumulated depreciation and amortization............ 89,389 80,849
-------- --------
55,602 56,212
-------- --------
Other assets:
Goodwill, net.............................................. 19,799 20,566
Permits, net............................................... 11,667 12,633
Other...................................................... 4,357 4,133
-------- --------
35,823 37,332
-------- --------
Total assets............................................. $149,568 $145,247
======== ========
</TABLE>


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.

35
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

(dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
As of December
31,
------------------
2000 1999
-------- --------
<S> <C> <C>
Current liabilities:
Current maturities of long-term obligations.............. $ 52,300 $ 1,300
Accounts payable......................................... 19,100 17,830
Accrued disposal costs................................... 7,479 6,591
Other accrued expenses................................... 12,601 11,360
Income taxes payable..................................... 137 57
-------- --------
Total current liabilities.............................. 91,617 37,138
-------- --------
Other liabilities:
Long-term obligations, less current maturities........... 14,958 72,683
Other.................................................... 1,358 1,255
-------- --------
Total other liabilities................................ 16,316 73,938
-------- --------
Commitments and contingent liabilities (Notes 5, 7, 9, 10,
11 and 16)
Stockholders' equity:
Preferred stock, $.01 par value:
Series A convertible preferred stock:
Authorized 2,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding--
none.................................................. -- --
Series B convertible preferred stock:
Authorized 156,416 shares; issued and outstanding
112,000 shares (liquidation preference of
$5,600,000)........................................... 1 1
Common stock, $.01 par value:
Authorized 20,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding
11,216,107 and 10,798,007 shares, respectively........ 112 108
Additional paid-in capital............................... 61,999 61,245
Accumulated other comprehensive loss..................... -- (36)
Accumulated deficit...................................... (20,477) (27,147)
-------- --------
Total stockholders' equity............................. 41,635 34,171
-------- --------
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity............. $149,568 $145,247
======== ========
</TABLE>


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.

36
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
For the years ended
December 31,
-------------------------
2000 1999 1998
------- ------- -------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income (loss)................................. $ 7,118 $(2,244) $(3,854)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net
cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization................... 10,656 9,501 9,112
Allowance for doubtful accounts................. 684 683 559
Amortization of deferred financing costs........ 345 344 490
Deferred income taxes........................... (2,400) -- 113
(Gain) loss on sale of fixed assets............. (70) -- 15
Changes in assets and liabilities, net of
acquisition:
Accounts receivable........................... (4,105) (2,800) (4,132)
Prepaid expenses.............................. (469) (155) 579
Supplies inventories.......................... (571) 50 (47)
Income tax receivable......................... (81) 1,114 433
Other assets.................................. (224) 463 (198)
Accounts payable.............................. 374 (231) 4,107
Accrued disposal costs........................ 888 256 (765)
Other accrued expenses........................ 1,241 (769) (2,573)
Income taxes payable.......................... 80 7 40
Other liabilities............................. 103 (113) 17
------- ------- -------
Net cash provided by operating activities..... 13,569 6,106 3,896
------- ------- -------
Cash flows from investing activities:
Additions to property, plant and equipment........ (7,403) (5,080) (4,534)
Acquisition....................................... -- (1,900) --
Proceeds from sales and maturities of restricted
investments...................................... 1,152 1,225 150
Cost of restricted investments purchased.......... (768) -- (1,425)
Proceeds from sale of fixed assets................ 148 -- 83
Increase in permits............................... (92) (359) (674)
------- ------- -------
Net cash used in investing activities......... (6,963) (6,114) (6,400)
------- ------- -------
Cash flows from financing activities:
Payments on long-term obligations................. (1,867) (3,050) (4,037)
Net borrowings (payments) under long-term
revolver......................................... (8,203) (324) 4,363
Issuance of long-term debt........................ 3,000 4,139 --
Proceeds from employee stock purchase plan........ 154 131 133
Proceeds from exercise of stock options........... 156 -- 5
------- ------- -------
Net cash provided by (used in) financing
activities................................... (6,760) 896 464
------- ------- -------
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents... (154) 888 (2,040)
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year....... 2,783 1,895 3,935
------- ------- -------
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year............. $ 2,629 $ 2,783 $ 1,895
======= ======= =======

Supplemental information:
Cash payments (receipts) for interest and income
taxes:
Interest, net..................................... $ 9,172 $ 7,463 $ 9,967
Income taxes, net................................. 381 (1,236) (201)
Non cash investing and financing activities:
Stock dividend on preferred stock................. $ 448 $ 448 $ 448
Property, plant & equipment accrued............... 896 194 131
</TABLE>

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.

37
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

(in thousands)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Series B
Preferred
Stock Common Stock Accumulated
------------ ------------ Other Retained
Number $0.01 Number $0.01 Additional Comprehensive Comprehensive Earnings/ Total
of Par of Par Paid-in Income Income (Accumulated Stockholders'
Shares Value Shares Value Capital (Loss) (Loss) Deficit) Equity
------ ----- ------ ----- ---------- ------------- ------------- ------------ -------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Balance at December 31,
1997................... 112 $ 1 10,101 $101 $60,087 -- $(12) $(20,153) $40,024
Net loss............... -- -- -- -- -- $(3,854) -- (3,854) (3,854)
Other comprehensive
loss, net of tax
Unrealized holding
gains arising in the
period................ -- -- -- -- -- 2 -- -- --
Reclassification
adjustment for gains
included in net loss.. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-------
Other comprehensive
income................ -- -- -- -- -- 2 2 -- 2
-------
Comprehensive loss..... -- -- -- -- -- $(3,852) -- -- --
=======
Preferred stock
dividends:
Series B............... -- -- 229 2 446 -- -- (448) --
Employee stock purchase
plan.................. -- -- 88 1 132 -- -- -- 133
Proceeds from exercise
of stock options...... -- -- 3 -- 5 -- -- -- 5
--- --- ------ ---- ------- ------- ---- -------- -------
Balance at December 31,
1998................... 112 $ 1 10,421 $104 $60,670 -- $(10) $(24,455) $36,310
Net Loss............... -- -- -- -- -- $(2,244) -- (2,244) (2,244)
Other comprehensive
loss, net of tax
Unrealized holding
gains arising in the
period................ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Unrealized losses on
securities, net of
reclassification
adjustment............ -- -- -- -- (26) -- -- --
-------
Other comprehensive
loss.................. -- -- -- -- -- (26) (26) -- (26)
-------
Comprehensive loss..... -- -- -- -- -- $(2,270) -- -- --
=======
Preferred stock
dividends:
Series B............... -- -- 279 3 445 -- -- (448) --
Employee stock purchase
plan.................. -- -- 98 1 130 -- -- -- 131
--- --- ------ ---- ------- ------- ---- -------- -------
Balance at December 31,
1999................... 112 $ 1 10,798 $108 $61,245 -- $(36) $(27,147) $34,171
Net Income............. -- -- -- -- -- $ 7,118 -- 7,118 7,118
Other comprehensive
income, net of tax
Unrealized holding
gains arising in the
period................ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Reclassification
adjustment for losses
included in net
income................ -- -- -- -- -- 36 -- -- --
-------
Other comprehensive
income................ -- -- -- -- -- 36 36 -- 36
-------
Comprehensive income... -- -- -- -- -- $ 7,154 -- -- --
=======
Preferred stock
dividends:
Series B............... -- -- 227 2 446 -- -- (448) --
Employee stock purchase
plan.................. -- -- 115 1 153 -- -- -- 154
Proceeds from exercise
of stock options...... -- -- 76 1 155 -- -- -- 156
--- --- ------ ---- ------- ------- ---- -------- -------
Balance at December 31,
2000................... 112 $ 1 11,216 $112 $61,999 -- $ -- $(20,477) $41,635
=== === ====== ==== ======= ======= ==== ======== =======
</TABLE>

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.

38
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(1) OPERATIONS

Clean Harbors, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, the
"Company") provide a broad range of environmental services including:
industrial waste management services involving transportation, treatment and
disposal of industrial wastes; site services provided at customer sites;
industrial cleaning and maintenance; and specialized handling of laboratory
chemicals and household hazardous wastes. The Company provides these services
to a diversified customer base across the United States, primarily in the
Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Western Regions.

(2) SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The accompanying consolidated financial statements of the Company reflect
the application of certain significant accounting policies as described below:

(a) Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated statements include the accounts of Clean
Harbors, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All material intercompany
accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

(b) Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenues and accrues the related cost of treatment
and disposal upon the receipt of waste materials, except for incineration
where revenue is recognized as waste is burned. Other revenues are recognized
as the related costs are incurred.

(c) Income Taxes

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based upon the difference
between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities as
measured by the enacted tax rates which will be in effect when these
differences reverse. Deferred tax expense or benefit is the result of changes
between deferred tax assets and liabilities.

A valuation allowance is established when, based on an evaluation of
objective verifiable evidence, there is a likelihood that some portion or all
of deferred tax assets will not be realized.

(d) Earnings per Share

Basic EPS is calculated by dividing income available to common shareholders
by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period.
Diluted EPS gives effect to all potential dilutive common shares that were
outstanding during the period.

(e) Segment Information

The Company operates in a single segment as a full service provider of
environmental services within the United States and Puerto Rico, and no
individual customer accounts for more than 5% of revenues.

(f) Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid instruments purchased with original
maturities of less than three months to be cash equivalents.

39
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(2) SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES--(Continued)


(g) Investments

Debt securities are classified as "available for sale" or "held to
maturity." Available for sale securities are recorded at fair value with the
offsetting unrealized gain or loss included, net of tax, in stockholders'
equity. Held to maturity securities are recorded at amortized cost.

(h) Supplies inventory

Supplies inventory, stated at the lower of cost or market, is charged to
operations on a first-in, first-out basis.

(i) Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. The Company depreciates
and amortizes the cost of these assets, less the estimated salvage value,
using the straight-line method as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Estimated
Asset Classification Useful Life
-------------------- -----------
<S> <C>
Buildings and improvements..................................... 5-30 years
Vehicles and equipment......................................... 3-15 years
Furniture and fixtures......................................... 5-8 years
</TABLE>

Leaseholds are amortized over the shorter of the life of the lease or the
asset. Depreciation expense includes depreciation of property, plant and
equipment, and equipment capitalized under capital leases. Depreciation
expense was $8,831,000 for 2000, $7,694,000 for 1999 and $7,461,000 for 1998.
Upon retirement or other disposition, the cost and related accumulated
depreciation of the assets are removed from the accounts and the resulting
gain or loss is reflected in income.

Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred.

(j) Goodwill and Permits

Goodwill and permits, as further discussed in Note 6, are stated at cost and
are being amortized using the straight-line method over 20 years for permits
and periods ranging from 20 to 40 years for goodwill.

An impairment in the carrying value of long-lived assets, including goodwill
and permits, is recognized when the expected future undiscounted cash flows
derived from the assets are less than its carrying value. In addition, the
Company's evaluation considers nonfinancial data such as market trends and
changes in management's market emphasis.

(k) Deferred Financing Costs

Deferred financing costs are amortized over the life of the related debt
instrument, and they are carried as a component of long-term debt.

(l) Costs to Treat Environmental Contamination

Costs relating to environmental cleanup resulting from operating activities
are expensed as incurred. Environmental cleanup costs that improve properties,
as compared with the condition of that property when originally acquired, are
capitalized to the extent that they are recoverable.

40
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(2) SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES--(Continued)


(m) Letters of Credit

The Company utilizes letters of credit to provide collateral assurance to
regulatory authorities that certain funds will be available for closure as
described in Note 5. In addition the Company utilizes letters of credit to
provide collateral for casualty insurance programs, to provide collateral for
the vehicle lease line and to provide collateral for a transportation permit.
As of December 31, 2000 and 1999, the Company had outstanding letters of
credit amounting to $10,347,000 and $6,299,000, respectively.

As of December 31, 2000, the Company had no significant concentrations of
credit risk.

(n) Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the
dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and
expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these
estimates.

(o) Reclassifications

Certain reclassifications have been made in the prior years' consolidated
financial statements to conform to the 2000 presentation.

(3) ACQUISITION

On May 25, 1999, the Company acquired the assets of the Texas Transportation
and Brokerage Divisions of American Ecology Services Corporation for a cash
price of $1,900,000. The divisions operate out of locations in Dallas and
Houston, Texas. The divisions provide waste management services primarily to
small quantity generators throughout Texas and transportation services for
both solid and liquid wastes. This acquisition has been accounted for under
the purchase method of accounting. The purchase price has been allocated based
on estimated fair values of assets acquired at the date of acquisition. The
acquisition resulted in $272,000 of acquired goodwill, which is being
amortized on the straight-line basis over 20 years. The results of the
acquired businesses have been included in the consolidated financial
statements since the acquisition date. The acquisition did not materially
affect revenues or results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2000
and 1999.

Assuming this acquisition had occurred January 1, 1998, consolidated, pro
forma revenues, net loss and loss per share would not have been materially
different than the amounts reported for the years ended December 31, 1998 and
1999. Such unaudited pro forma amounts are not indicative of what the actual
consolidated results of operations might have been if the acquisition had been
effective at the beginning of 1998.

41
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)



(4) FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents approximate fair value.
The fair value of restricted investments is based on quoted market prices for
these securities. The fair values of the Company's bank borrowings approximate
fair value because the interest rates are based on floating rates identified
by reference to market rates. The fair values of the Company's senior notes
and industrial development revenue bonds (the "Bonds") cannot be determined,
since there is no active market in these securities. At December 31, 2000 and
1999, the estimated fair values of the Company's financial instruments are as
follows (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Net
Carrying Fair Unrealized
Amount Value Loss
-------- ------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
December 31, 2000
Cash and cash equivalents...................... $2,629 $2,629 $ --
Restricted cash and cash equivalents........... 768 768 --
Senior Notes and Bonds for which no quoted
market prices
are available................................. 59,800 -- --
Other long-term obligations.................... 7,827 7,827 --
December 31, 1999
Cash and cash equivalents...................... $2,783 $2,783 $ --
Restricted investments available for sale...... 840 840 (55)
Restricted investments held to maturity........ 276 276 --
Long-term obligations for which no quoted
market prices
are available................................. 59,900 -- --
Other long-term obligations.................... 14,897 14,897 --
</TABLE>


Restricted cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2000, as further
discussed in Note 9, consists of investments in money market funds held in a
debt service reserve fund. Available for sale securities are mortgage backed
securities. Held to maturity securities consists primarily of collateralized
mortgage obligations. Contractual maturities as of December 31, 1999 range
from one to ten years, with the majority being five years or less. As further
discussed in Note 5, securities available for sale and held to maturity were
sold in 2000 when financial assurance for closure and post closure care of
facilities was placed with a qualified insurance company.

(5) RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS

Operators of hazardous waste handling facilities are required by federal and
state regulations to provide financial assurance for closure and post-closure
care of those facilities, should the facilities cease operation. Closure would
include the cost of removing the waste stored at a facility which ceased
operating and sending the material to another company for disposal. The
Company had purchased closure insurance from Frontier Insurance Company, as
had a number of other companies that operate hazardous waste facilities. In
June 2000 due to deteriorating financial condition, Frontier Insurance Company
was dropped from the listing of approved sureties. This required any company
that had obtained financial assurance through Frontier Insurance Company to
obtain financial assurance through some other source within 60 days. In July
2000, the Company obtained the required closure insurance through a qualified
insurance company. As part of this transaction, closure insurance that had
been placed with a wholly-owned captive insurance company was cancelled and
placed with insurance from a third party insurer. The cancellation of the
insurance with the wholly-owned captive insurance company allowed for the sale
of the previously restricted securities. No restricted securities were held by
the wholly-owned captive insurance company at December 31, 2000.

42
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(5) RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS--(Continued)


At December 31, 1999 the wholly-owned captive insurance company held
securities that were restricted for future payment of insurance claims. These
securities had an amortized cost of $1,171,000. A valuation allowance of
$55,000 was recorded to reflect the fair value of available for sale
securities of $840,000. No valuation allowance was required to reflect the
fair value of held to maturity securities of $276,000.

In 2000 as further discussed in Note 9, the Company was required to pay
funds into a debt service reserve fund. These funds were restricted as to use
and were to provide additional security to the holders of the bonds. At
December 31, 2000, these payments plus interest earned totaled $768,000.

(6) INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Below is a summary of intangible assets at December 31, 2000 and 1999 (in
thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999
------- -------
<S> <C> <C>
Goodwill.................................................. $28,948 $28,948
Permits................................................... 20,693 20,601
------- -------
49,641 49,549
Less accumulated amortization............................. 18,175 16,350
------- -------
$31,466 $33,199
======= =======
</TABLE>

Permits consist of the value of permits acquired through acquisition and
environmental cleanup costs that improve facilities, as compared with the
condition of that property when originally acquired. Amounts capitalized as
permits were $92,000 and $359,000 in 2000 and 1999, respectively.

Amortization expense approximated $1,825,000, $1,807,000 and $1,651,000, for
the years 2000, 1999, and 1998, respectively.

(7) LEGAL MATTERS AND OTHER CONTINGENCIES AND COMMITMENTS

(a) Legal Matters

In the ordinary course of conducting its business, the Company becomes
involved in environmentally related lawsuits and administrative proceedings.
Some of these proceedings may result in fines, penalties or judgments against
the Company.

As of December 31, 2000, the Company has been named as a potentially
responsible party ("PRP") in a number of lawsuits arising from the disposal of
wastes by certain Company subsidiaries at 27 state and federal Superfund
sites. Fourteen of these cases involve two subsidiaries which the Company
acquired from Chemical Waste Management, Inc. ("ChemWaste"), a former
subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc. ("Waste Management"). As part of the
acquisition, ChemWaste agreed to indemnify the Company with respect to any
liability of its Braintree and Natick subsidiaries for waste disposed of
before the Company acquired them. Accordingly, Waste Management is paying all
costs of defending the Natick and Braintree subsidiaries in these 14 cases,
including legal fees and settlement costs. Four cases involve Mr. Frank, Inc.
and one case involves Connecticut Treatment Center ("CTC"). Southdown, Inc.,
from which the Company bought CTC, has agreed to indemnify the Company with
respect to any liability for waste disposed of by CTC before the Company
acquired CTC, and the sellers of Mr. Frank, Inc. agreed to a limited indemnity
against certain environmental liabilities arising from prior operations of Mr.
Frank, Inc. Six pending cases involve subsidiaries which the Company acquired
in January 1989, when it purchased all of the outstanding shares of ChemClear
Inc., a publicly traded

43
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(7) LEGAL MATTERS AND OTHER CONTINGENCIES AND COMMITMENTS--(Continued)

company ("ChemClear"). The Company has also been identified as a PRP at two
additional sites at which the Company believes it has no liability.

Management routinely reviews each Superfund site in which the Company's
subsidiaries are involved, considers each subsidiary's role at each site and
its relationship to the other PRPs at the site, the quantity and content of
the waste it disposed of at the site, and the number and financial
capabilities of the other PRPs at the site. Based on reviews of the various
sites and currently available information, and management's judgment and prior
experience with similar situations, expense accruals are provided by the
Company for its share of future site cleanup costs, and existing accruals are
revised as necessary. The Company had accrued environmental costs, based on
the Company's estimate of its expected liability of $144,000 and $285,000 for
cleanup of Superfund sites at December 31, 2000 and 1999, respectively.
However, Superfund legislation permits strict joint and several liability to
be imposed without regard to fault and, as a result, one PRP might be required
to bear significantly more than its proportional share of the cleanup costs if
other PRPs do not pay their share of such costs.

Environmental regulations stipulate the amount of transit and holding time
that shipments of hazardous waste are allowed. Certain federal agencies,
including the United States Environmental Protection Agency, conducted an
inquiry concerning certain railcars which were destined for the Company's
Kimball, Nebraska incinerator. Several railcars containing waste materials
generated by the Company's waste treatment plants were not delivered to the
Company's Sterling, Colorado rail transfer facility in a timely manner by the
railroad company. The Company has cooperated fully with the federal and state
authorities and has arranged for company personnel to be interviewed and has
produced records, documents and other materials concerning the railcars in
question. The Company has conducted its own internal investigation and
believes that there has been no wrongdoing on the part of the Company with
respect to the late delivery of railcars. However, assurances cannot be given
that the government authorities may not reach a different conclusion or
attempt to levy penalties. The Company is engaged in settlement negotiations
with the government.

In October 1995 an employee was killed in an accident when a drum exploded
at a facility in Cincinnati, Ohio operated by a subsidiary, Spring Grove
Resource Recovery, Inc. ("Spring Grove"). During 1999 the Company was notified
by the Justice Department that the Department believed it had a cause of
action against the subsidiary for potential civil and/or criminal violations
of its permit issued under the Federal Resources Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976 ("RCRA") as a result of the 1995 accident. The Company has conducted
an exhaustive internal review of the circumstances leading up to the accident
and believes that the subsidiary did not knowingly violate relevant terms of
its RCRA permit. The Company has also engaged the services of external legal
and regulatory experts to review the situation and they have also concluded
that the available evidence does not support a conclusion that the subsidiary
knowingly violated its permit. No assurances can be given, however, that
government authorities will not reach a different conclusion and proceed with
legal action or attempt to levy penalties. The Company has executed tolling
agreements with the government and is presently engaged in discussions with
the government in an effort to resolve this matter.

(b) Environmental Matters

Under the Federal Resources Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 ("RCRA"),
every facility that treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste must obtain
a RCRA permit from the EPA or an authorized state agency and must comply with
certain operating requirements. Of the Company's 12 waste management
facilities, nine are subject to RCRA licensing. RCRA requires that permits
contain a schedule of required on-site study and

44
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(7) LEGAL MATTERS AND OTHER CONTINGENCIES AND COMMITMENTS--(Continued)

cleanup activities, known as "corrective action," including detailed
compliance schedules and provisions for assurance of financial responsibility.

The EPA or applicable state agency have begun RCRA corrective action
investigations at the Company's RCRA licensed facilities in Baltimore,
Maryland; Chicago, Illinois; Braintree, Massachusetts; Natick, Massachusetts;
Woburn, Massachusetts; and Cincinnati, Ohio. The Company is also involved in
site studies at its non-RCRA facilities in Cleveland, Ohio; Kingston,
Massachusetts; and South Portland, Maine.

In January 1995, the Company entered into a definitive agreement with
ChemWaste to lease a site previously leased by ChemWaste which adjoins the
Company's Chicago facility. During November 1995, the Company acquired the
existing improvements on the ChemWaste site in exchange for agreeing to share
the costs of dismantling an existing hazardous waste incinerator and cleaning
up the site. Under the sharing arrangement with ChemWaste, the Company will
manage the RCRA corrective action investigation at the site and over a period
of 15 years could be required to contribute up to a maximum of $2,000,000 for
dismantling and decontaminating the incinerator and other equipment, and up to
a maximum of $7,000,000 for studies and cleanup of the site. Any additional
costs beyond those contemplated by the sharing arrangement during this time
period would be borne by ChemWaste. The Company had accruals of $1,729,000 and
$1,627,000 relating to this liability at December 31, 2000 and 1999,
respectively, which are the unused amounts of a remediation accrual plus
accrued interest that was established as part of the acquisition of
ChemWaste's Chicago Facility. In addition, the Company believes that it would
be able to appropriately capitalize the remediation expenditures in excess of
the amount accrued that it may be obligated to make under the agreement. No
estimate can be made as to when the remediation activities will be completed.

Two RCRA facilities in Bristol, Connecticut and Cincinnati, Ohio were
acquired from a subsidiary of Southdown, Inc. Southdown has agreed to
indemnify the Company against any costs incurred or liability arising from
contamination on-site arising from prior ownership, including the cost of
corrective action. The prior owner of the Woburn facility provided a limited
indemnity for any costs incurred or liability arising from contamination on-
site due to prior ownership.

The following table summaries non-reimbursed environmental remediation
expenditures capitalized and expenses incurred relating to the Company's
facilities for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Environmental expenditures capitalized..................... $ 92 $274 $674
Environmental expenses incurred............................ 225 37 95
---- ---- ----
$317 $311 $769
==== ==== ====
</TABLE>

The Company was also involved in a RCRA corrective action investigation at a
site in Chester, Pennsylvania owned by PECO Energy Company ("PECO"). The site
consists of approximately 30 acres which PECO had leased to various companies
over the years. In 1989, the Company acquired by merger a public company named
ChemClear Inc., which operated a hazardous waste treatment facility on
approximately eight acres of the Chester site leased from PECO. The Company
ceased operations at the Chester site, decontaminated the plant and equipment,
engaged an independent engineer to certify closure, and obtained final
approval from the Pennsylvania regulatory authorities, certifying final
closure of the facility. In 1993, the EPA ordered PECO to perform a RCRA
corrective action investigation at the Chester site. PECO asked the Company to
participate in the site studies, and in October 1994, the Company agreed to be
responsible for seventy-five percent of the cost of these studies, which was
estimated to be in the range of $2,000,000, by, among other things, performing
field

45
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(7) LEGAL MATTERS AND OTHER CONTINGENCIES AND COMMITMENTS--(Continued)

services work and analytical services required to complete the site studies
and providing other environmental services to PECO at discounted rates. The
Company had provided discounts and credits to PECO totaling $908,000 through
August 2, 1999. The Company and PECO then negotiated an amendment to their
1994 agreement, whereby the Company's responsibility for its share of the cost
of site studies was capped at $1,733,000. The studies were completed in 2000,
whereupon the EPA's order will terminate. The Company had accrued $825,000
relating to this liability at December 31, 1999. The $825,000 balance owed
under the amendment at the end of 1999 was paid in 2000.

(c) Other Contingencies

The Company is subject to various regulatory requirements, including the
procurement of requisite licenses and permits at its facilities. These
licenses and permits without which the Company's operations would be adversely
affected are subject to periodic renewal. The Company anticipates that, once a
license or permit is issued with respect to a facility, the license or permit
will be renewed at the end of its term if the facility's operations are in
compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements.

Under the Company's insurance programs, coverage is obtained for
catastrophic exposures, as well as those risks required to be insured by law
or contract. It is the policy of the Company to retain a significant portion
of certain expected losses related primarily to workers' compensation,
comprehensive general and vehicle liability. Provisions for losses expected
under these programs are recorded based upon the Company's estimates of the
aggregate liability for claims.

(8) OTHER ACCRUED EXPENSES

Other accrued expenses consist of the following (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999
------- -------
<S> <C> <C>
Insurance.................................................. $ 2,597 $ 2,329
Other items................................................ 10,004 9,031
------- -------
$12,601 $11,360
======= =======
</TABLE>

46
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)



(9) FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS

The following table is a summary of the Company's long-term debt
obligations:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
December 31,
2000 1999
------- -------
(in thousands)
<S> <C> <C>
Long-term obligations consist of the following:
Economic development revenue bonds, bearing interest at
10.75%.................................................... $ 9,800 $ 9,900
Revolving credit with a financial institution, bearing
interest at the Eurodollar rate (6.64% at December 31,
2000) plus 3.00% or the "prime" rate (9.50% at December
31, 2000) plus 1.50%, collateralized by substantially all
assets.................................................... 1,394 9,597
Term note payable, bearing interest at the Eurodollar rate
(6.64% at December 31, 2000) plus 3.00% or the "prime"
rate (9.50% at December 31, 2000) plus 1.50%
collateralized by substantially all assets................ 4,200 5,300
2000 Term Note payable, bearing interest at the Eurodollar
rate (6.64% at December 31, 2000 plus 3.00% or the "prime"
rate (9.50% at December 31, 2000) plus 1.50%
collateralized by substantially all assets................ 2,333 --
Senior notes payable, bearing interest at 12.50%........... 50,000 50,000
------- -------
67,727 74,797
Less current maturities.................................... 52,300 1,300
Less unamortized financing costs........................... 469 814
------- -------
Long-term obligations...................................... $14,958 $72,683
======= =======
</TABLE>

Below is a summary of minimum principal payments due under the Company's
long-term obligations (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Year Amount
---- -------
<S> <C>
2001............................................................. $52,300
2002............................................................. 2,300
2003............................................................. 3,027
2004............................................................. 700
2005............................................................. 100
Thereafter....................................................... 9,300
-------
Total minimum payments due under long-term obligations including
current maturities.............................................. $67,727
=======
</TABLE>

As amended, the Company had a $33,500,000 Loan Agreement (the "Loan
Agreement") with a financial institution. Subsequent to year end and as
further disclosed in Note 16, the Company signed and closed on a $51,000,000
Amended and Restated Loan Agreement with the same financial institution. The
Loan Agreement provided for a $24,500,000 revolving credit portion (the
"Revolver"), a $6,000,000 term promissory note (the "Term Note"), and a
$3,000,000 term promissory note (the "2000 Term Note"). In May 1999, the Term
Note was amended. The Term Note as amended allowed the Company to increase the
amount borrowed under the Term Note by $4,139,000 from the $1,861,000 owed
prior to the amendment of the Term Note to the $6,000,000 principal amount of
the Term Note as amended. The Term Note had monthly principal payments of
$100,000 with the last payment due in May, 2004. In March of 2000, the Loan
Agreement was amended and an additional

47
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(9) FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS--(Continued)

term promissory note, the 2000 Term Note, was entered into with the financial
institution. The original principal amount of the 2000 Term Note is
$3,000,000, and it is payable in 36 monthly installments commencing on May 1,
2000. The funds provided from the 2000 Term Note have been used primarily to
purchase vehicles and rolling stock that the Company previously leased under
operating leases. The Revolver allowed the Company to borrow up to $24,500,000
in cash and letters of credit, based on a formula of eligible accounts
receivable. Letters of credit may not exceed $20,000,000 at any one time. At
December 31, 2000 and 1999, funds available to borrow under the Revolver were
$12,760,000 and $8,603,000, respectively. The Revolver requires the Company to
pay a line fee of one half of one percent on the unused portion of the line.
In March 2000, the term of the Revolver was extended from May 8, 2001 to May
8, 2003.

The Loan Agreement allowed for up to 80% of the outstanding balance of the
Revolver and 100% of the balance of the term notes to bear interest at the
Eurodollar rate plus three percent; the remaining balance bears interest at a
rate equal to the "prime" rate plus one and one-half percent. The Loan
Agreement was collateralized by substantially all of the Company's assets, and
the Loan Agreement provided for certain covenants including, among others,
maintenance of a minimum level of working capital and adjusted net worth. The
Loan Agreement, as amended in March 2000, redefined the working capital
covenant to specifically exclude the Senior Notes as a component of working
capital and required that the Company maintain $6,000,000 of working capital,
excluding the Senior Notes. The net worth covenant was changed to require
$30,000,000 of adjusted net worth. At December 31, 2000, the Company had
working capital and adjusted net worth of $16,526,000 and $41,635,000,
respectively. The Company must also maintain borrowing availability of not
less than $4,500,000 for sixty consecutive days prior to paying principal and
interest on its other indebtedness and dividends in cash on its preferred
stock. In the first half of 1999 and the first quarter of 2000, the Company
violated this covenant, which was waived by the financial institution through
May 15, 1999 and 2000, respectively. Since May 15, 2000 the Company has been
in compliance with this covenant.

In 1996 the Company assumed $10,000,000 of 10.75% Economic Development
Revenue Bonds due September 1, 2026 issued by the City of Kimball, Nebraska
(the "Bonds"). In connection with the issuance of the Bonds, the Company
entered into a facilities lease with the City of Kimball, whereby the City
acquired a leasehold interest in the facility and the Company leased the
facility back from the City. The Company retains title to the facility. The
Bonds were issued at 100% of their principal value. The Bonds are not
redeemable prior to September 1, 2006. From that date until September 1, 2008,
the Bonds are redeemable at a premium. After September 1, 2008, the Bonds are
redeemable at par. Sinking fund payments began on September 1, 1999 in the
amount of $100,000 annually and continue in this amount until the year 2008,
when the annual sinking fund payment will gradually increase.

Effective June 1, 2000, the Bond Documents were amended in order to modify
the limitation on additional debt covenant and certain related debt service
reserve fund requirements. Under the amended Bond Documents, the Company may
now issue Bank Debt up to $35,000,000 provided that after the issuance, the
ratio of the Company's total debt to total capital (debt plus stockholders'
equity) does not exceed 72% (which ratio will be reduced to 70% on January 1,
2006 and 65% on January 1, 2011).

The amended Bond Documents require that the Company make six equal monthly
payments of $125,000 each for a total of $750,000 into a debt service reserve
fund held by the trustee, if either of the following occurs: (i) the Company's
ratio of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
("EBITDA") to total interest (the "EBITDA coverage ratio") for most recently
completed fiscal year is less than 1.5 to 1.0, or (ii) the Company's ratio of
debt to total capital at the end of such fiscal year is greater than 65%. The
amended bond documents required that the Company satisfy these ratios
retroactively to December 31, 1999. Because the

48
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(9) FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS--(Continued)

Company did not satisfy both of these ratios as of December 31, 1999, the
amended Bond Documents required that the Company make six monthly payments of
$125,000 each into the debt service reserve fund commencing on June 1, 2000,
for total of $750,000. In addition to the $750,000 required to be deposited
into the debt service reserve fund based upon the level of the Company's
additional debt, the Company could be required to make additional payments to
bring the total of the debt service reserve fund to a maximum of approximately
$1,200,000 (including the $750,000 described above) if the EBITDA coverage
ratio for any fiscal year is less than 1.25 to 1.0. The EBITDA coverage ratio
for the year ended December 31, 1999 was 1.39, and the Company was therefore
not required to make any such additional payments into the debt service
reserve fund based upon the Company's EBITDA coverage ratio. The maximum
amount of the debt service reserve fund of approximately $1,200,000 is the
same as under the Bond Documents prior to the amendment, but the amendment
modified the terms under which the Company may be required to make payments
into the fund described above.

As of December 31, 2000, Bank Debt totaled $7,927,000 which was less than
the $35,000,000 allowed; the Company's total debt to total capital ratio was
61.9% which is less than the 72.0% allowed; and the EBITDA coverage ratio was
2.24 to 1.0 which is greater than the 1.50 to 1.0 required. Under the Bond
covenants, if the Company attains an EBITDA coverage ratio of greater than 1.5
to 1.0, the balance on deposit in the debt service reserve fund in excess of
$750,000 will be released for the Company's general use. The Bond Documents
require that a minimum balance of $750,000 be maintained in the debt service
reserve fund until the Bonds mature.

The Company has outstanding $50,000,000 of 12.50% Senior Notes due May 15,
2001. The Senior Notes are not collateralized, and the Senior Note indenture
does not provide for the maintenance of certain financial covenants, although
it does limit, among other things, the issuance of additional debt by the
Company or its subsidiaries and the payment of dividends on, and redemption
of, capital stock of the Company and its subsidiaries. Interest is paid twice
each year on the Senior Notes. The Senior Notes require that the Company
provide not less than 30-day prior notice if the Senior Notes are to be
redeemed prior to the due date. Notice of redemption has been given to the
holders of the Senior Notes, providing for redemption on April 30, 2001. As
further described in Note 16, the Company signed two agreements with lenders
which provide that such lenders will provide the funds required to redeem the
Senior Notes on the redemption date.

In October 1999, the Company made the final $1,000,000 installment payment
on its 10% senior convertible notes.

49
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)



(10) LEASES

The Company leases facilities and personal property under certain operating
leases in excess of one year. Some of these lease agreements contain an
escalation clause for increased taxes and operating expenses and are renewable
at the option of the Company. Future minimum lease payments under operating
leases are as follows (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Total
Operating
Year Leases
---- ---------
<S> <C>
2001............................................................. $ 5,929
2002............................................................. 4,988
2003............................................................. 4,070
2004............................................................. 2,861
2005............................................................. 1,746
Thereafter....................................................... 1,167
-------
$20,761
=======
</TABLE>

During the years 2000, 1999 and 1998 rent expense was approximately
$13,289,000, $14,058,000, and $13,328,000, respectively.

(11) FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAXES

The provision for income taxes consists of the following (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999 1998
------- ---- ----
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Federal: Current........................................ $ 24 $(78) $ --
Deferred.............................................. (2,025) -- --
State: Current.......................................... 360 360 247
Deferred.............................................. (375) -- 113
------- ---- ----
Net provision for (benefit from) income taxes........... $(2,016) $282 $360
======= ==== ====
</TABLE>

The effective income tax rate varies from the amount computed using the
statutory federal income tax rate as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999 1998
------ ----- -----
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Statutory rate............ 34.0% (34.0)% (34.0)%
Increase (decrease) in
taxes resulting from:
Valuation allowance..... (120.5) 20.4 32.5
Adjustment of prior
year's estimated
attributes............. 24.7 (9.4) --
State income taxes, net
of federal benefit..... 12.7 18.4 7.1
Goodwill amortization... 5.1 12.6 7.0
Meals and
entertainment.......... 4.5 10.4 5.8
Other permanent
differences............ -- (4.0) (8.1)
------ ----- -----
Net provision for (benefit
from) income taxes....... (39.5)% 14.4% 10.3%
====== ===== =====
</TABLE>

50
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(11) FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAXES--(Continued)


The components of the total net deferred tax asset at December 31, 2000 and
1999 were as follows (in thousands):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999
------ -------
<S> <C> <C>
Current:
Net operating loss carryforwards............................. $ 778 $ --
Workmens' compensation accrual............................... 745 731
Accrued closure.............................................. 14 506
Provision for doubtful accounts.............................. 624 466
Litigation accruals.......................................... 250 279
Accrued rent holiday......................................... 99 104
Health insurance accrual..................................... 34 34
Miscellaneous................................................ 81 197
Permits...................................................... (225) (226)
Valuation allowance.......................................... -- (2,091)
------ -------
Total current deferred tax asset............................. $2,400 $ --
------ -------
Long-term:
Net operating loss carryforwards............................. $6,374 $11,198
Tax credit carryforwards..................................... 1,951 1,927
Property, plant and equipment................................ (3,915) (4,410)
Permits...................................................... (2,193) (2,440)
Valuation allowance.......................................... (2,217) (6,275)
------ -------
Total long-term deferred tax asset........................... $ -- $ --
------ -------
Net deferred tax asset....................................... $2,400 $ --
====== =======
</TABLE>

SFAS 109, "Accounting for Income Taxes," requires that a valuation allowance
be established when, based on an evaluation of objective verifiable evidence,
there is a likelihood that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will
not be realized. The Company continually reviews the adequacy of the valuation
allowance for deferred tax assets, and, in 1997, based upon this review, the
valuation allowance was increased to cover almost all net deferred tax assets.
In 1998 and 1999 the valuation allowance was adjusted so as to reserve all net
deferred tax assets. In the fourth quarter of 2000, the Company once again
reviewed the valuation allowance for deferred tax assets. Based on the level
of earnings for 2000 and management's projections for profits in future years,
it was determined that it was more likely than not that $2,400,000 of the net
deferred tax assets would be utilized. Accordingly, the 2000 provision for
income taxes included a $2,400,000 benefit related to adjusting the valuation
allowance. The actual realization of the net operating loss carryforwards and
other tax assets depend on having future taxable income of the appropriate
character prior to their expiration.

For federal income tax purposes at December 31, 2000, the Company had
regular tax net operating loss carryforwards of $14,887,000 which expire in
2010 and thereafter. The Company also had $3,333,000 of SRLY net operating
loss carryforwards which may only be used to offset future taxable income, if
any, of former ChemClear entities. These net operating loss carryforwards
expire in the amounts of $489,000, $648,000 and $2,196,000 in the years 2001,
2002 and 2003, respectively.

During the ordinary course of its business, the Company is audited by
federal and state tax authorities, which may result in proposed assessments.
In 1996, the Company received a notice of intent to assess state income taxes
from one of the states in which it operates. This case is currently undergoing
administrative appeal.

51
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(11) FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAXES--(Continued)

If the Company loses the administrative appeal, the Company may be required to
make a payment of approximately $3,000,000 to the state. The Company cannot
currently predict when the decision for the administrative appeal will be
made. The Company believes that it has properly reported its state income and
intends to contest the assessment vigorously. While the Company believes that
the final outcome of the dispute will not have a material adverse effect on
the Company's financial condition or results of operations, no assurance can
be given as to the final outcome of the audit, the amount of any final
adjustment or the potential impact of such adjustments on the Company's
financial condition or results of operations.

(12) INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

The following is a reconciliation of basic and diluted loss per share
computations (in thousands except for per share amounts):

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Year Ended 2000
-----------------------------------
Income Shares Per-Share
(Numerator) (Denominator) Income
----------- ------------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Net income............................. $ 7,118
Less preferred dividends............... 448
------- ------ ------
Basic EPS (income available to
shareholders)......................... 6,670 11,085 0.60
Effect of dilutive securities.......... -- 220 (0.01)
------- ------ ------
Diluted EPS
Income available to common
shareholders plus assumed
conversions.......................... $ 6,670 11,305 $ 0.59
======= ====== ======

<CAPTION>
Year Ended 1999
-----------------------------------
Income Shares Per-Share
(Numerator) (Denominator) Loss
----------- ------------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Net loss............................... $(2,244)
Less preferred dividends............... 448
------- ------ ------
Basic and diluted EPS
(loss available to shareholders)...... $(2,692) 10,649 $(0.25)
======= ====== ======

<CAPTION>
Year Ended 1998
-----------------------------------
Income Shares Per-Share
(Numerator) (Denominator) Loss
----------- ------------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Net loss............................... $(3,854)
Less preferred dividends............... 448
------- ------ ------
Basic and diluted EPS
(loss available to shareholders)...... $(4,302) 10,309 $(0.42)
======= ====== ======
</TABLE>

The Company has issued options, warrants and convertible preferred stock
which are potentially dilutive to earnings. For the year ended December 31,
2000, some of the options outstanding but none of the warrants or convertible
preferred stock are dilutive. Only those options where the options' exercise
price was less than the average market price of the common shares for the
period are included in the above calculations. For the years ended December
31, 1999 and 1998, the options, warrants and convertible stock outstanding
have not been included in the above calculations, since their inclusion would
have been antidilutive for the period.

52
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)



(13) STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

(a) Stock Option Plans

In 1987, the Company adopted a nonqualified stock option plan ("1987 Plan"),
in 1992 the Company adopted an equity incentive plan, which provides for a
variety of incentive awards, including stock options ("1992 Plan"), and in
2000, the Company adopted a stock incentive plan, which provides for awards in
the form of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options and
restricted stock ("2000 Plan"). As of December 31, 2000, all awards under the
1992 and 2000 Plans were in the form of non-qualified stock options. These
options generally become exercisable after a period of one to five years from
the date of grant, subject to certain employment requirements, and terminate
ten years from the date of grant. At December 31, 2000, the Company has
reserved 955,600, 1,250,000 and 800,000 shares of common stock for issuance
under the 1987, 1992 and 2000 Plans, respectively.

Under the terms of the 1987, 1992 and 2000 Plans, as amended, options may be
granted to purchase shares of common stock at an exercise price less than the
fair market value on the date of grant. No compensation expense related to
stock option grants was recorded in 2000, 1999 or 1998, as the option exercise
prices were equal to, or greater than, the fair market value on the date of
grant.

(b) Supplemental Disclosures for Stock-Based Compensation

The Company applies APB Opinion No. 25 and related Interpretations in
accounting for the Plans. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123,
"Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation", ("SFAS 123"), issued in 1995,
defined a fair value method of accounting for stock options and other equity
instruments. Under the fair value method, compensation cost is measured at the
grant date based on the fair value of the award and is recognized over the
service period, which is usually the vesting period. The Company elected to
continue to apply the accounting provisions of APB Opinion No. 25 for stock
options. The required disclosures under SFAS 123 as if the Company had applied
the new method of accounting are made below.

Activity under the Plans for the three years ended December 31, 2000 is as
follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Number of Weighted Average
Shares Exercise Price
--------- ----------------
<S> <C> <C>
Outstanding at December 31, 1997................ 1,302,560 $2.21
Granted at fair value......................... 618,125 1.77
Forfeited..................................... (516,536) 2.16
Exercised..................................... (2,700) 2.13
--------- -----
Outstanding at December 31, 1998................ 1,401,449 2.04
Granted at fair value......................... 40,500 1.91
Granted at a value greater than fair value.... 2,750 1.50
Forfeited..................................... (145,286) 2.07
Exercised..................................... -- --
--------- -----
Outstanding at December 31, 1999................ 1,299,413 2.03
Granted at fair value......................... 603,894 2.32
Forfeited..................................... (280,035) 2.25
Exercised..................................... (75,800) 2.06
--------- -----
Outstanding at December 31, 2000................ 1,547,472 $2.10
========= =====
</TABLE>


53
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(13) STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY--(Continued)

Summarized information about stock options outstanding at December 31, 2000
is as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Exercisable
------------------
Weighted
Average Weighted Weighted
Range of Number of Remaining Average Number Average
Exercise Options Contractual Exercise of Exercise
Prices Outstanding Life Price Options Price
-------- ----------- ----------- -------- ------- --------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
$1.44-1.75 113,250 6.64 $1.50 52,400 $1.52
1.81-1.81 344,025 7.32 1.81 139,050 1.81
1.88-2.06 241,250 7.68 1.98 16,000 1.97
2.13-2.13 476,403 3.74 2.13 453,533 2.13
2.42-13.25 372,544 8.19 2.58 74,694 2.89
</TABLE>

Options exercisable at December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 were 735,677,
747,263 and 599,605, respectively. The weighted average exercise prices for
the exercisable options at December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998 were $2.10, $2.17,
and $2.28, respectively.

The fair value of each option granted during 2000, 1999 and 1998 is
estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model
with the following assumptions:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
2000 1999 1998
---- ---- ----
<S> <C> <C> <C>
Dividend yield........................................... none none none
Expected volatility...................................... 80.5% 75.2% 75.0%
Risk-free interest rate.................................. 6.3% 5.4% 5.8%
Expected life............................................ 6.0 6.0 6.0
</TABLE>

Weighted average fair value of options granted at fair value during:

<TABLE>
<S> <C>
2000................................................................. $2.32
=====
1999................................................................. $1.91
=====
1998................................................................. $1.81
=====
</TABLE>

Weighted average fair value of options granted at greater than fair value
during:

<TABLE>
<S> <C>
2000................................................................. $ --
=====
1999................................................................. $1.50
=====
1998................................................................. $ --
=====
</TABLE>

54
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(13) STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY--(Continued)


Had compensation cost for the Company's stock option grants been determined
based on the fair value at the grant dates, as calculated in accordance with
SFAS 123, the Company's net income and net income per common share for the
years ended December 31, 2000, 1999 and 1998, would approximate the pro forma
amounts as compared to the amounts reported:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Net Income Net Income (Loss)
(Loss) per Diluted Share
----------- -----------------
<S> <C> <C>
As reported:
2000........................................ $ 7,118,000 $ 0.59
1999........................................ (2,244,000) (0.25)
1998........................................ (3,854,000) (0.42)
Pro forma:
2000........................................ $ 6,261,000 $ 0.55
1999........................................ (2,945,000) (0.28)
1998........................................ (3,947,000) (0.43)
</TABLE>

The effects of applying SFAS 123 in this pro forma disclosure are not
indicative of future amounts. Additional awards in future years are
anticipated.

(c) Employee Stock Purchase Plan

In May of 1995, the Company's stockholders approved an Employee Stock
Purchase Plan (the "ESPP"), which is a qualified employee stock purchase plan
under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, through
which employees of the Company are given the opportunity to purchase shares of
common stock. A total of one million shares of common stock under the ESPP has
been reserved for offering to employees through April 1, 2005. Employees who
elect to participate in an offering may utilize up to 10% of their pay for the
purchase of common stock at 85% of the closing price of the stock on the first
day of such quarterly offering or, if lower, 85% of the closing price on the
last day of the offering. For the years ended December 31, 2000 and 1999,
114,991 and 98,200 shares, respectively, of common stock had been purchased
under the ESPP. The weighted average fair per share value of the purchase
rights granted under the ESPP during 2000, 1999 and 1998 were $0.92, $0.25 and
$0.41, respectively.

(d) Warrants

In connection with the issuance of senior subordinated notes payable in May
1989, the Company issued warrants to purchase 100,000 shares of common stock
at $20.75 per share in exchange for $300,000. In April 1990, the exercise
price of the warrants was reduced to $9 per share. In February 1991, in
connection with the refinancing of the Company's short-term debt, the exercise
price was further reduced to $5 per share. These warrants expired on February
1, 2001.

In connection with the refinancing of the Company's short-term debt in
February 1991, the Company issued warrants to purchase 425,000 shares of
common stock at $5 per share to the three banks which provided the Revolver.
These warrants expired on February 6, 2001.

55
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(13) STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY--(Continued)


(e) Preferred

On February 16, 1993 the Company issued 112,000 shares of Series B
Convertible Preferred Stock, $0.01 par value ("Preferred Stock"), for the
acquisition of its Spring Grove facility. The liquidation value of each
preferred share is the liquidation preference of $50 plus unpaid dividends.
Preferred Stock may be converted by the holder into Common Stock at a
conversion rate of $18.63. There is no expiration date associated with the
conversion option. The Company had the option to redeem such Preferred Stock
at liquidation value plus a redemption premium of 2%, if the redemption
occurred on or before August 16, 2000; thereafter, the redemption premium
declines 1% each year. Each preferred share entitles its holder to receive a
cumulative annual cash dividend of $4.00 per share, or at the election of the
Company, a common stock dividend of equivalent value.

Dividends on the Preferred Stock are payable on the 15th day of January,
April, July and October, at the rate of $1.00 per share, per quarter. The
Company elected to pay the 2000 dividends in common stock with a market value
equal to the amount of the dividend payable. During 2000 the Company issued
226,884 shares of common stock to the holders of the Preferred Stock. The
Company anticipates that commencing in the third quarter of 2001 the Preferred
Stock dividends will be paid in cash.

(14) EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN

The Company has a profit-sharing plan under Section 401(K) of the Internal
Revenue Code covering substantially all employees. The plan allows employees
to make contributions up to a specified percentage of their compensation. The
Company accrued $600,000 for the plan in 2000 which was paid in 2001. No
contribution was made by the Company for 1999 or 1998.

(15) QUARTERLY DATA (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
First Second Third Fourth
Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter
------- ------- ------- -------
(in thousands except per share
amounts)
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
2000
Revenue.................................. $52,737 $62,242 $60,290 $58,197
Income from operations................... 938 6,094 4,366 2,871
Net income (loss)........................ (1,440) 3,639 1,907 3,012
Basic earnings (loss) per share.......... (0.14) 0.32 0.16 0.26
Diluted earnings (loss) per share........ (0.14) 0.32 0.15 0.25

1999
Revenue.................................. $44,648 $51,118 $54,602 $52,597
Income (loss) from operations............ (523) 2,995 2,635 1,530
Net income (loss)........................ (2,842) 705 317 (424)
Basic and diluted earnings (loss) per
share................................... (0.28) 0.06 0.02 (0.05)
</TABLE>

As further discussed in Note 11, included in the net income for the fourth
quarter of 2000 is a $2,400,000 benefit related to the partial reversal of a
valuation allowance for deferred tax assets. With the exception of the partial
reversal of the valuation allowance, the above quarterly data reflects all
adjustments that are necessary to fairly state the results of the interim
periods presented, and adjustments required are of a normal recurring nature.

Earnings per share are computed independently for each of the quarters
presented. Due to this, the 2000 quarterly diluted earnings (loss) per share
do not equal the total computed for the year.

56
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)



(16) SUBSEQUENT EVENT

The Company has outstanding $50,000,000 of 12.50% Senior Notes due May 15,
2001 (the "Senior Notes"). The Senior Notes require that the Company provide
not less than 30-day prior notice if the Senior Notes are to be redeemed prior
to the due date. Notice of redemption has been given to the holders of the
Senior Notes, providing for redemption on April 30, 2001. As described below,
on April 12, 2001, the Company signed two agreements with lenders which
provide that such lenders will provide the funds required to redeem the Senior
Notes on the redemption date.

As described in Note 9, the Company had at December 31, 2000 a $33,500,000
Loan Agreement (the "Loan Agreement") with a financial institution (the
"Lender"). The Loan Agreement provided for a $24,500,000 revolving credit
facility (the "Revolver"), a $6,000,000 term promissory note (the "Term
Note"), and a $3,000,000 term promissory note (the "2000 Term Note"). On April
12, 2001, the Company signed and closed a $51,000,000 Amended and Restated
Loan Agreement (the "Amended Loan Agreement") with the Lender. The Amended
Loan Agreement increased the amount available to borrow under the Revolver to
$30,000,000 and extended the term of the Revolver to April 12, 2004. The
Revolver allows the Company to borrow up to $30,000,000 in cash and letters of
credit, based on a formula of eligible accounts receivable. Letters of credit
may not exceed $20,000,000 at any one time. The Revolver requires the Company
to pay an unused line fee of one-half of one percent on the unused portion of
the line. The Amended Loan Agreement required the payment on April 12 of the
then $3,800,000 outstanding balance on the Term Note and provided for the
issuance of a new $19,000,000 term promissory note (the "Term Loan B"). On
April 12, 2001, $4,000,000 was advanced under Term Note B to pay the Term Note
and other amounts then borrowed by the Company. The Amended Loan Agreement
provides for the $15,000,000 balance of Term Note B to be advanced on April 30
to redeem the Senior Notes on that date, provided the representations of the
Company in the Amended Loan Agreement remain true and correct in all material
respects, the Company is not then in default of the Amended Loan Agreement,
and the Company has then issued the Subordinated Notes described below. The
interest rate for Term Note B is the greater of the prime rate plus 3.50% or
12.00%, and it is payable in 84 monthly installments commencing May 1, 2001.
The terms of the 2000 Term Note remain unchanged.

The Amended Loan Agreement allows for up to 80% of the outstanding balance
of the Revolver and 100% of the balance of the 2000 Term Note to bear interest
at the Eurodollar rate plus three percent; the remaining balance bears
interest at the "prime" rate plus one and one-half percent. The Amended Loan
Agreement is collateralized by substantially all of the Company's assets, and
the Amended Loan Agreement provides for certain covenants including, among
others, maintenance of a minimum level of working capital, adjusted net worth
and earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization
("EBITDA"). The Amended Loan Agreement requires that the Company maintain
$10,000,000 of working capital excluding the current portion of liabilities
under the Amended Loan Agreement and the Subordinated Note Agreement. The
Company had $18,726,000 of working capital calculated on a pro forma basis as
if the redemption had taken place on December 31, 2000. The net worth covenant
requires that the Company maintain $35,000,000 of adjusted net worth until the
Subordinated Notes described below are funded, and once the Notes are funded,
the net worth covenant requires adjusted net worth, defined as net worth plus
the balance owed on the subordinated notes, to be greater than $60,000,000. At
December 31, 2000, the pro forma adjusted net worth calculated as if the
redemption had taken place on December 31, 2000 was $76,635,000. The Amended
Loan Agreement requires that the Company maintain on a rolling four quarter
basis a minimum EBITDA of $20,000,000. For the four quarter period ended
December 31, 2000 the Company reported EBITDA of $24,925,000. The Amended Loan
Agreement also requires that the Company maintain a Senior Debt to EBITDA
ratio of not more than 2.25 to 1.0. At December 31, 2000 the pro forma ratio
calculated as if the redemption had taken place on December 31, 2000 was 1.33
to 1.0. The Amended Loan Agreement also has conditions precedent to making
loans (including the Revolver) including no material adverse change in the
assets, business or prospects of the Company.

57
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS--(Continued)

(16) SUBSEQUENT EVENT--(Continued)

On April 12, 2001, the Company also signed a Securities Purchase Agreement
(the "Subordinated Note Agreement") providing for the Company to issue on
April 30, 2001, $35,000,000 of 16% Senior Subordinated Notes (the
"Subordinated Notes"). Until October 30, 2006, the Company, at its option, may
pay the interest at the 16% rate or may pay interest at 14% and defer payment
of the remaining 2% until the Subordinated Notes are due. Interest payable in
cash on the Subordinated Notes is due in semi-annual payments on April 30 and
October 30. In conjunction with the Subordinated Notes, the Company will issue
detachable warrants for 1,519,020 shares of common stock that are exercisable
at $0.01 per share. One-half of the Subordinated Notes are due on April 30,
2007 with the balance due on April 30, 2008. The Subordinated Note Agreement
calls for the $35,000,000 to be advanced on April 30, 2001 in order to redeem
the Senior Notes. The Subordinated Note Agreement contains conditions of
closing the most restrictive of which are that representations by the Company
in the Agreement remain true, that the Company have not less than $3,500,000
available under the Revolver on April 30, 2001, and that no material adverse
change shall have occurred prior to April 30, 2001 in the business and
financial condition of the Company. The Subordinated Note Agreement provides
that the holders of the Subordinated Notes will be able to call the Notes in
the event of a change in control of the Company.

The Subordinated Note Agreement contains covenants the most restrictive of
which require that the Company maintain a rolling four quarter fixed charge
coverage ratio of not less than 1.10 to 1.0. For the year ended December 31,
2000, the fixed charge coverage ratio was 1.82 to 1.0. The Subordinated Notes
require that the Company maintain a tangible capital base of not less than
$27,000,000 for the quarters ending March 31 and June 30, 2001, not less than
$30,500,000 for the quarter ending September 30, 2001, not less than
$33,000,000 for the quarter ending December 31, 2001 and not less than
$35,500,000 for quarters ending thereafter. At December 31, 2001, the tangible
capital base was $45,169,000. The Company is required to maintain rolling four
quarter earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization
(EBITDA) of not less than $18,000,000. For the four quarter period ended
December 31, 2000, EBITDA was $24,925,000. The Company shall maintain a
priority debt to EBITDA ratio calculated as of the last day of each fiscal
quarter of not more than 2.25 to 1.0. Priority debt currently consists of debt
issued under the Amended Loan Agreement. At December 31, 2000, the pro forma
priority debt to EBITDA ratio calculated as if the redemption had taken place
on December 31, 2000 was 1.33 to 1.0. The Company is required to maintain a
ratio of total liabilities to tangible capital base of not more than 3.00 to
1.0 for the fiscal quarters ending June 30, September 30 and December 31, 2001
and for the quarters ending March 31, 2002 and thereafter a ratio of not more
than 2.75 to 1.0. At December 31, 2000 the total liabilities to tangible
capital base ratio was 1.61 to 1.0.

58
CLEAN HARBORS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

SCHEDULE II

VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

For the Three Years Ended December 31, 2000

(in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Additions
Balance Charged to Deductions Balance
Allowance for Beginning Operating From End of
Doubtful Accounts of Period Expense Reserves(a) Period
- ----------------- --------- ---------- ----------- -------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
1998................................. $1,050 $559 $596 $1,013
1999................................. 1,013 683 539 1,157
2000................................. 1,157 684 292 1,549
</TABLE>
- --------
(a) Amounts deemed uncollectible, net of recoveries.

59
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES

None.

PART III

The information called for by Item 10 (Directors and Executive Officers of
the Registrant), Item 11 (Executive Compensation), Item 12 (Security Ownership
of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management) and Item 13 (Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions) is incorporated herein by reference to
the registrant's definitive proxy statement for its 2001 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders, which definitive proxy statement is expected to be filed with
the Commission not later than April 30, 2001.

For the purpose of calculating the aggregate market value of the voting
stock of the registrant held by nonaffiliates as shown on the cover page of
this report, it has been assumed that the directors and executive officers of
the registrant, as will be set forth in the Company's definitive proxy
statement for its 2001 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, are the only affiliates
of the registrant. However, this should not be deemed to constitute an
admission that all of such persons are, in fact, affiliates or that there are
not other persons who may be deemed affiliates of the registrant.

PART IV

ITEM 14. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES, AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

(a) Documents Filed as a Part of this Report

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Page
-----
<S> <C>
1. Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Accountants...................................... 33

Consolidated Statements of Income for the Three Years Ended December 34
31, 2000.............................................................

Consolidated Balance Sheets, December 31, 2000 and 1999................ 35-36

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Three Years Ended 37
December 31, 2000....................................................

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity for the Three Years
Ended December 31, 2000.............................................. 38

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements............................. 39-58

2. Financial Statement Schedule:

Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts.......................... 59
</TABLE>

All other schedules are omitted because they are not applicable, not
required, or because the required information is included in the financial
statements or notes thereto.

60
3. Exhibits:

Exhibits to the Form 10-K have been included only with the copies of the
Form 10-K filed with the Commission. Upon request to the Company and payment
of a reasonable fee, copies of the individual exhibits will be furnished. The
Company undertakes to furnish to the Commission upon request copies of
instruments (in addition to the exhibits listed below) relating to the
Company's long-term debt.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Item No. Description Location
-------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---------
<C> <S> <C>
See Note:
3.1 Restated Articles of Organization of Clean Harbors, Inc.
and amendments thereto................................... (1)
3.2 Certificate of Vote of Directors Establishing a Series of
a Class of Stock (Series B Convertible Preferred Stock).. (2)
3.4A Amended and Restated By-laws of Clean Harbors, Inc....... (3)
4.1 Senior Note Indenture dated as of August 4, 1994, between
Clean Harbors, Inc., the Guarantor Subsidiaries of the
Company, and Shawmut Bank, N.A., as trustee for the
holders of the Company's 12.50% Senior Notes due May 15,
2001..................................................... (4)
4.2 Loan and Security Agreement dated May 8, 1995 by and
between Congress Financial Corporation (New England) and
the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers.................. (5)
4.3 Term Promissory Note dated May 8, 1995 from the Company's
Subsidiaries as Debtors to Congress Financial Corporation
(New England) in the amount of $10,000,000............... (5)
4.4 Guarantee dated May 8, 1995 by Clean Harbors, Inc. to
Congress Financial Corporation (New England) of the
obligations of the Company's Subsidiaries under the
Financing Agreements..................................... (5)
4.5 General Security Agreement dated May 8, 1995 by Clean
Harbors, Inc. in favor of Congress Financial Corporation
(New England)............................................ (5)
4.6 Letter Agreement dated November 21, 1995 by and between
Congress Financial Corporation (New England) and the
Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers...................... (8)
4.7 Second Amendment to Financing Agreements dated March 20,
1996 by and between Congress Financial Corporation (New
England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers and
Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor......................... (8)
4.8 Amended and Restated Term Promissory Note dated March 20,
1996 from the Company's Subsidiaries as Debtors to
Congress Financial Corporation (New England) in the
amount of $15,000,000.................................... (8)
4.9 Third Amendment to Financing Agreements dated September
6, 1996 by and between Congress Financial Corporation
(New England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers,
and Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor..................... (8)
4.10 Fourth Amendment to Financing Agreements dated June 20,
1997 by and between Congress Financial Corporation (New
England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers, and
Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor......................... (9)
4.11 Fifth Amendment to Financing Agreements dated January 1,
1998 by and between Congress Financial Corporation (New
England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers, and
Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor......................... (9)
4.12 Sixth Amendment to Financial Agreements dated June 23,
1998 by and between Congress Financial Corporation (New
England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers, and
Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor......................... (11)
</TABLE>


61
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Item No. Description Location
-------- ---------------------------------------------------- --------------
<C> <S> <C>
4.13 Seventh Amendment to Financial Agreements dated May
24, 1999 by and between Congress Financial
Corporation (New England), the Company's
Subsidiaries as Borrowers, and Clean Harbors, Inc.
as Guarantor........................................ (13)
4.14 Second Amendment and Restated Term Promissory Notes
Dated May 24, 1999 by and between Congress Financial
Corporation (New England), the Company's
Subsidiaries as Borrowers, and Clean Harbors, Inc.
as Guarantor........................................ (13)
4.15 Eighth Amendment to Financial Agreements dated March
28, 2000 by and between Congress Financial
Corporation (New England), the Company's
Subsidiaries as Borrowers, and Clean Harbors, Inc.
as Guarantor........................................ (14)
4.16 2000 Term Promissory Note dated March 28, 2000 by
and between Congress Financial Corporation (New
England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers,
and Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor................ (14)
4.17 Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement
dated April 12, 2001 by and between Congress
Financial Corporation (New England), the Company's
Subsidiaries as Borrowers, And Clean Harbors, Inc.
as Guarantor........................................ Filed herewith
4.18 Term Promissory Note B dated April 12, 2001 by and
between Congress Financial Corporation (New
England), the Company's Subsidiaries as Borrowers,
and Clean Harbors, Inc. as Guarantor................ Filed herewith
4.19 Securities Purchase Agreement dated April 12, 2001
by and between institutional investors and Clean
Harbors, Inc........................................ Filed herewith
4.20 Subordination Agreement dated April 12, 2001 by and
between Clean Harbors, Inc. and its subsidiaries,
Congress Financial Corporation (New England) and
institutional investors............................. Filed herewith
10.35 Stock Purchase Agreement among Clean Harbors, Inc.,
Southdown Environmental Treatment Systems, Inc. and
Southdown, Inc. dated as of June 23, 1992........... (2)
10.36 Stock Purchase Agreement among Clean Harbors, Inc.,
Southdown Environmental Treatment Systems, Inc. and
Southdown, Inc. dated as of February 16, 1993....... (2)
10.37 Clean Harbors, Inc. 1987 Stock Option Plan.......... (6)
10.38 Clean Harbors, Inc. 1992 Equity Incentive Plan...... (6)
10.39 Asset Purchase Agreement among Clean Harbors of
Chicago, Inc., Clean Harbors, Inc., CWM Chemical
Services, Inc. and Chemical Waste Management, Inc.
dated as of January 30, 1995........................ (7)
10.40 Asset Purchase Agreement among Clean Harbors
Technology Corporation, Clean Harbors Inc. and Ecova
Corporation dated as of March 31, 1995.............. (5)
10.41 Disposal Services Agreement by and between Chemical
Waste Management, Inc. and its subsidiary and
affiliated companies and Clean Harbors Environmental
Services, Inc. and its affiliated companies dated as
of October 31, 1995................................. (8)
10.42 Clean Harbors, Inc. 2000 Stock Incentive Plan....... (15)
10.43 Key Employee Retention Plan......................... (12)
21 Subsidiaries........................................ Filed herewith
23 Consent of Independent Accountants.................. Filed herewith
</TABLE>


62
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Item No. Description Location
-------- ----------------------------------------------------- --------------
<C> <S> <C>
24 Power of Attorney for Christy W. Bell, John F.
Kaslow, Daniel J. McCarthy, John T. Preston, Thomas
J. Shields and Lorne R. Waxlax....................... Filed herewith
</TABLE>
- ---------------------
(1) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form S-1
Registration Statement (No. 33-17565).

(2) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the Year 1992.

(3) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4A to the Company's Form 10-K
Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ended February 28, 1991.

(4) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company's Form S-2
Registration Statement (No. 33-54191).

(5) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the Quarterly Period Ended June
30, 1995.

(6) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the Year 1993.

(7) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the Year 1994.

(8) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the Year 1995.

(9) Incorporated, by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the Year 1996.

(10) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the Quarterly Period ended
September 30, 1996.

(11) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.12 to the Company's Form 10-Q
Quarterly Report for the Quarterly Period ended June 30, 1998.

(12) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the Quarterly Period ended March
31, 1999.

(13) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the Quarterly Period ended June
30, 1999.

(14) Incorporated by reference to the similarly numbered exhibit to the
Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the Year 1999.

(15) Incorporated by reference to the Company's Form DEF 14A Proxy Statement
filed on April 28, 2000.

(b) Reports on Form 8-K

No reports on Form 8-K were filed during the fourth quarter of 2000.

63
SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed
on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized on April 12, 2001.

<TABLE>
<S> <C>
Clean Harbors, Inc.


/s/ Alan S. McKim
By: _______________________________________
Alan S. McKim
Chief Executive Officer
</TABLE>

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this
report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Signature Title Date
--------- ----- ----

<S> <C> <C>
/s/ Alan S. McKim Chairman Of The Board Of April 12, 2001
___________________________________________ Directors and Chief
Alan S. McKim Executive Officer

/s/ Roger A. Koenecke Senior Vice President and April 12, 2001
___________________________________________ Chief Financial Officer
Roger A. Koenecke

* Director April 12, 2001
___________________________________________
Christy W. Bell

* Director April 12, 2001
___________________________________________
John F. Kaslow

* Director April 12, 2001
___________________________________________
Daniel J. McCarthy

* Director April 12, 2001
___________________________________________
John T. Preston

* Director April 12, 2001
___________________________________________
Thomas J. Shields

* Director April 12, 2001
___________________________________________
Lorne R. Waxlax

/s/ Alan S. McKim
*By: ______________________________________
Alan S. McKim
(Attorney-in-Fact )
</TABLE>

64