CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 29, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	CONTINGENCIES The Company is involved in various legal proceedings relating to environmental issues, employment, product liability, workers’ compensation claims and other matters. The Company periodically reviews the status of these proceedings with both inside and outside counsel, as well as an actuary for risk insurance. Management believes that the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on operations or financial condition taken as a whole. Government Investigation As previously disclosed, on January 19, 2024, the Company was notified by the Compliance and Field Operations Division (the “Division”) of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) that the Division intends to recommend the imposition of a civil penalty of approximately $32 million for alleged untimely reporting in relation to certain utility bars and miter saws that were subject to voluntary recalls in September 2019 and March 2022, respectively. The Company believes there are defenses to the Division’s claims, and has presented its defenses in a meeting with the Division on February 29, 2024 and in a written submission dated March 29, 2024. On April 1, 2024, the Division informed the Company's counsel that the Division intended to recommend that the CPSC refer the matter to the U.S. Department of Justice (the "DOJ"). On May 1, 2024, the Company was informed that the CPSC voted to refer the matter to the DOJ. In December 2024, the CPSC requested that the Company reproduce documents previously provided to the CPSC following changes to the agency’s electronic file sharing system. The Company has reproduced the requested documents to the CPSC. The Company has not heard anything further from the CPSC or the DOJ in relation to this matter since then and therefore is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount of potential loss, if any, from this matter. The Company is committed to upholding the highest standards of corporate governance and is continuously focused on ensuring the effectiveness of its policies, procedures, and controls. The Company is in the process, with the assistance of professional advisors, of reviewing and further enhancing relevant policies, procedures, and controls. Class Action Litigation As previously disclosed, on March 24, 2023, a putative class action lawsuit titled Naresh Vissa Rammohan v. Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00369-KAD (the “Rammohan Class Action”), was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut against the Company and certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors. The complaint was filed on behalf of a purported class consisting of all purchasers of Stanley Black & Decker common stock between October 28, 2021 and July 28, 2022, inclusive. The complaint asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 based on allegedly false and misleading statements related to consumer demand for the Company’s products amid changing COVID-19 trends and macroeconomic conditions. The complaint seeks unspecified damages and an award of costs and expenses. On October 13, 2023, Lead Plaintiff General Retirement System of the City of Detroit filed an Amended Complaint that asserts the same claims and seeks the same forms of relief as the original complaint. The Company intends to vigorously defend this action in all respects and on December 14, 2023 filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint in its entirety. Briefing on that motion concluded on April 5, 2024, and the Company awaits a decision on that motion. Given the early stage of this litigation, at this time, the Company is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount or range of potential losses, if any, from this action. Derivative Actions As previously disclosed, on August 2, 2023 and September 20, 2023, derivative complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, titled Callahan v. Allan, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-01028-OAW (the “Callahan Derivative Action”) and Applebaum v. Allan, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-01234-OAW (the “Applebaum Derivative Action”), respectively, by putative stockholders against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company premised on the same allegations as the Rammohan Class Action. The Callahan and Applebaum Derivative Actions were consolidated by Court order on November 6, 2023, and defendants’ responses to both complaints have been stayed pending the disposition of any motions to dismiss in the Rammohan Class Action. The individual defendants intend to vigorously defend the Callahan and Applebaum Derivative Actions in all respects. However, given the early stage of this litigation, at this time, the Company is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount or range of potential losses, if any, from these actions. As previously disclosed, on October 19, 2023, a derivative complaint was filed in Connecticut Superior Court, titled Vladimir Gusinsky Revocable Trust v. Allan, et al., Docket Number HHBCV236082260S, by a putative stockholder against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company. Plaintiff seeks to recover for alleged breach of fiduciary duties and unjust enrichment under Connecticut state law premised on the same allegations as the Rammohan Class Action. By Court order on November 11, 2023, the Connecticut Superior Court granted the parties’ motion to stay defendants’ response to the complaint pending the disposition of any motions to dismiss in the Rammohan Class Action. The individual defendants intend to vigorously defend this action in all respects. However, given the early stage of this litigation, at this time, the Company is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount or range of potential losses, if any, from this action. Environmental In the normal course of business, the Company is a party to administrative proceedings and litigation, before federal and state regulatory agencies, relating to environmental remediation with respect to claims involving the discharge of hazardous substances into the environment, generally at current and former manufacturing facilities. In addition, some of these claims assert that the Company is responsible for damages and liability, for remedial investigation and clean-up costs, with respect to sites that have never been owned or operated by the Company, but the Company has been identified as a potentially responsible party ("PRP"). In connection with the 2010 merger with Black & Decker, the Company assumed certain commitments and contingent liabilities. Black & Decker is a party to litigation and administrative proceedings with respect to claims involving the discharge of hazardous substances into the environment at current and former manufacturing facilities and has also been named as a PRP in certain administrative proceedings. The Company, along with many other companies, has been named as a PRP in numerous administrative proceedings for the remediation of various waste sites, including 23 active Superfund sites. Current laws potentially impose joint and several liabilities upon each PRP. In assessing its potential liability at these sites, the Company has considered the following: whether responsibility is being disputed, the terms of existing agreements, experience at similar sites, and the Company’s volumetric contribution at these sites. The Company’s policy is to accrue environmental investigatory and remediation costs for identified sites when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. If no amount in the range of probable loss is considered most likely, the minimum loss in the range is accrued. The amount of liability recorded is based on an evaluation of currently available facts with respect to each individual site and includes such factors as existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations, and prior experience in remediation of contaminated sites. The liabilities recorded do not take into account any claims for recoveries from insurance or third parties. As assessments and remediation progress at individual sites, the amounts recorded are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect additional technical and legal information that becomes available. As of March 29, 2025 and December 28, 2024, the Company had reserves of $273.3 million and $275.4 million, respectively, for remediation activities associated with Company-owned properties, as well as for Superfund sites, for losses that are probable and estimable. Of the March 29, 2025 amount, $51.5 million is classified as current within Accrued expenses and $221.8 million as long-term within Other liabilities which is expected to be paid over the estimated remediation period. As of March 29, 2025, the Company's net cash obligations, including the WCLC assets discussed below, is $256.0 million. As of March 29, 2025, the range of environmental remediation costs that is reasonably possible is $189.9 million to $405.8 million which is subject to change in the near term. The Company may be liable for environmental remediation of sites it no longer owns. Liabilities have been recorded on those sites in accordance with the Company's policy. West Cost Loading Corporation As of March 29, 2025, the Company has recorded $17.3 million in Other assets related to funding received by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and placed in a trust in accordance with the final settlement with the EPA, embodied in a Consent Decree approved by the United States District Court for the Central District of California on July 3, 2013. Per the Consent Decree, Emhart Industries, Inc. (a dissolved and liquidated former indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of The Black & Decker Corporation) (“Emhart”) has agreed to be responsible for an interim remedy at a site located in Rialto, California and formerly operated by WCLC, a defunct company for which Emhart was alleged to be liable as a successor. The remedy will be funded by (i) the amounts received from the EPA as gathered from multiple parties, and, to the extent necessary, (ii) Emhart's affiliate. The interim remedy required the construction of a water treatment facility and the treatment of ground water at or around the site for a period of approximately 30 years or more. The construction of the water treatment facility was completed in September 2023, and the treatment of ground water is ongoing. As of March 29, 2025, the Company's net cash obligation associated with these remediation activities, including WCLC assets, is $7.5 million. Centredale Site On April 8, 2019, the United States District Court approved a Consent Decree documenting the terms of a settlement between the Company and the United States for reimbursement of EPA's past costs and remediation of environmental contamination found at the Centredale Manor Restoration Project Superfund Site ("Centredale site"), located in North Providence, Rhode Island. Black & Decker and Emhart are liable for site clean-up costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA") as successors to the liability of Metro-Atlantic, Inc., a former operator at the Centredale site. The Company is complying with the terms of the settlement and has fully reimbursed the EPA for its past costs. Remediation work at the Centredale site remains ongoing. Technical and regulatory issues have arisen in connection with the disposal methods selected and described in the statement of work for contaminated Centredale site soils and sediment. Emhart’s contractor is working with the EPA and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (“RIDEM”) to develop alternatives. Based on these evolving technical and regulatory discussions, in the second quarter of 2024, the EPA and RIDEM began implementing regulatory changes that suggest that offsite landfill disposal now represents the most probable remedial alternative for the disposal of contaminated Centredale site soils and sediments. Significant open technical and regulatory issues relating to the implementation of this disposal alternative remain, including final EPA and RIDEM approvals, and further developments may result in additional or different remedial actions. Emhart’s contractor’s assessment of the offsite landfill disposal alternative involves soil and sediment volume estimates that could also change or increase as additional design investigations are performed at the site, which may further impact the remediation process. Emhart has recently entered into a cooperative agreement with the Federal and State Natural Resource Trustees to collectively conduct an assessment of what, if any, Natural Resource Damages may be associated with the contamination at the Centredale Site. Litigation continues in the District Court concerning Phase 3 of the case, which is addressing the potential allocation of liability to other PRPs who may have contributed to contamination of the Centredale site with dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls and other contaminants of concern. Emhart proceeded to trial in a six-week bench trial in Phase 3 on the issue of CERCLA liability against 4 PRPs in October 2024. Post trial briefing and argument relating to the trial has been completed. A decision is expected in 2025 and additional litigation over the equitable allocation of the Centredale site investigation and cleanup cost could be required depending on the outcome. As of March 29, 2025, the Company has reserved $160.7 million for this site. Lower Passaic River The Company and approximately 47 other companies comprise the Lower Passaic Cooperating Parties Group (the “CPG”). The CPG members and other companies are parties to a May 2007 Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (“AOC”) with the EPA to perform a remedial investigation/feasibility study (“RI/FS”) of the lower seventeen miles of the Lower Passaic River in New Jersey (the “River”). The Company’s potential liability stems from former operations in Newark, New Jersey. The CPG has substantially completed the RI/FS for the entire 17-mile River. The Company’s estimated costs related to the RI/FS are included in its environmental reserves. Lower 8.3 Miles On April 11, 2014, the EPA issued a Focused Feasibility Study (“FFS”) and proposed plan which addressed various early action remediation alternatives for the lower 8.3 miles of the River. On March 4, 2016, the EPA issued a Record of Decision ("ROD") selecting the remedy for the lower 8.3 miles of the River, which will include the removal of 3.5 million cubic yards of sediment, placement of a cap over the entire lower 8.3 miles of the River, and, according to the EPA, will cost approximately $1.4 billion and take 6 years to implement after the remedial design is completed. On September 30, 2016, Occidental Chemical Corporation ("OCC") entered into an agreement with the EPA to perform the remedial design for the cleanup plan for the lower 8.3 miles of the River. OCC has submitted the final remedial design, which was approved by EPA in May 2024. On June 30, 2018, OCC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against over 100 companies, including the Company, seeking CERCLA cost recovery or contribution for past costs relating to various investigations and cleanups OCC has conducted or is conducting in connection with the River. According to the complaint, OCC has incurred or is incurring costs which include the estimated cost ($165 million) to complete the remedial design for the cleanup plan for the lower 8.3 miles of the River. OCC also seeks a declaratory judgment to hold the defendants liable for their proper shares of future response costs for OCC's ongoing activities in connection with the River. The Company and other defendants have answered the complaint and have been engaged in discovery with OCC. On February 24, 2021, the Company and other defendants filed a third party complaint against the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners and forty-two municipalities to require those entities to pay their equitable share of response costs. On December 20, 2022, various defendants (including the Company) in the OCC litigation filed an unopposed motion to stay the litigation for six months which was granted by the Court on March 1, 2023 and has been extended while the Court considered the Consent Decree filed by the United States, as discussed below. The Company and 105 other parties received a letter dated March 31, 2016 from the EPA notifying such parties of potential liability for the costs of the cleanup of the lower 8.3 miles of the River. In a March 30, 2017 letter, the EPA stated that parties who did not discharge dioxins, furans or polychlorinated biphenyls (which are considered the contaminants of concern posing the greatest risk to human health or the environment) may be eligible for cash out settlement, but expected those parties' allocation to be determined through a complex settlement analysis using a third-party allocator. The EPA subsequently clarified this statement to say that such parties would be eligible to be "funding parties" for the lower 8.3 mile remedial action with each party's share of the costs determined by the EPA based on the allocation process and the remaining parties would be "work parties" for the remedial action. The Company participated in the allocation process and asserted that it did not discharge dioxins, furans or polychlorinated biphenyls and should be eligible to be a "funding party" for the lower 8.3 mile remedial action. The allocator selected by the EPA issued a confidential allocation report on December 28, 2020, which was reviewed by the EPA. As a result of the allocation process, on February 11, 2022, the EPA and certain parties (including the Company) reached an agreement in principle for a cash-out settlement for remediation of the entire 17-mile Lower Passaic River. On December 16, 2022, the United States lodged a Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in United States v. Alden Leeds, Inc. et al. (No. 2:22-cv-07326) that addressed the liability of 85 parties (including the Company) for an aggregate amount of $150 million based in part on the EPA-sponsored allocation report that found OCC 99.4% responsible for the cleanup costs of the River. The Consent Decree was subject to a 90-day public comment period, which ended March 22, 2023. On November 21, 2023, the United States informed the Court that it concluded, based on the public comments, that a small number of parties (not including the Company) should be removed from the settlement and that a change should be made to the United States’ reservation of rights (which was agreed to by the remaining settling parties). On January 17, 2024, the United States filed the modified Consent Decree with the Court and filed its motion to enter the modified Consent Decree on January 31, 2024. On April 1, 2024, the settling defendants (including the Company) and certain other parties filed briefs in support of, and OCC filed a brief in opposition to, the motion to enter the modified Consent Decree. On December 18, 2024, the Court issued its opinion granting the United States’ motion to enter the modified Consent Decree. The settlement funds will be paid to the United States as of the later of the expiration of the appeal deadline (sixty days after the entry) if no appeal is filed or the exhaustion of any appeals. On January 9, 2025, Nokia of America (a non-settling party) filed its Notice of Appeal of the Court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. On February 13, 2025, OCC also filed its Notice of Appeal of the Court's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Upper 9 Miles On October 10, 2018, the EPA issued a letter directing the CPG to prepare a streamlined feasibility study for the upper 9 miles of the River based on an iterative approach using adaptive management strategies. The CPG submitted a draft Interim Remedy Feasibility Study to the EPA on December 4, 2020, which identified various targeted dredge and cap alternatives with costs that range from $420 million to $468 million (net present value). The EPA issued the Interim Remedy ROD on September 28, 2021, selecting an alternative that the EPA estimates will cost $441 million (net present value). On March 2, 2023, the EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order requiring OCC to design the interim remedy for the upper 9 miles of the River (the “2023 UAO”). Notwithstanding the stay of the litigation commenced in 2018 (and two days after the public comment period on the Consent Decree closed), OCC filed a complaint named Occidental Chem. Corp. v. Givaudan Fragrances Corp., et al., No. 2:23‑cv-1699 at 2, 5 (D.N.J. Mar. 24, 2023) (the “2023 Litigation”) against forty parties (not including the Company) for recovery of past and future response costs it will incur in complying with the 2023 UAO. All of the defendants named in the 2023 Litigation are also defendants or third-party defendants in the litigation commenced in 2018. Maxus Bankruptcy Settlement Pursuant to a settlement agreement by and among the Maxus Liquidating Trust, YPF and Repsol submitted to the bankruptcy court on April 7, 2023, YPF and Repsol will jointly pay a combined sum of $573 million to various creditors. Based on the waterfall payout of the bankruptcy plan, the CPG received approximately $9 million, which will be used either to offset future CPG costs, including EPA RI/FS oversight and legal and administrative costs, or to reimburse CPG members for a portion of their past contributions to the RI/FS costs. At this time, the Company cannot reasonably estimate its liability related to the litigation and remediation efforts as discussed above, excluding the RI/FS, as the OCC litigation is pending and Court’s opinion granting the United States’ motion to enter the Consent Decree has been appealed. Kerr McGee Per the terms of a Final Order and Judgment approved by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on January 22, 1991, Emhart is responsible for a percentage of remedial costs arising out of the Kerr McGee Chemical Corporation Superfund Site located in Jacksonville, Florida. On March 15, 2017, the Company received formal notification from the EPA that the EPA had issued a ROD selecting the preferred alternative identified in the Proposed Cleanup Plan. The Multistate Trust managing the remediation provides quarterly projections for the remediation costs for work to be performed, and the Company adjusts the reserve for its percentage share of such costs accordingly. As of March 29, 2025, the Company has reserved $24.5 million for this site. The amounts recorded for the aforementioned identified contingent liabilities are based on estimates. Amounts recorded are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect additional technical and legal information that becomes available. Actual costs to be incurred in future periods may vary from the estimates, given the inherent uncertainties in evaluating certain exposures. Subject to the imprecision in estimating future contingent liability costs, the Company does not expect that any sum it may have to pay in connection with these environmental matters in excess of the amounts recorded will have a materially adverse effect on its financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

The Company is involved in various legal proceedings relating to environmental issues, employment, product liability, workers’ compensation claims and other matters. The Company periodically reviews the status of these proceedings with both inside and outside counsel, as well as an actuary for risk insurance. Management believes that the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on operations or financial condition taken as a whole.

As previously disclosed, on January 19, 2024, the Company was notified by the Compliance and Field Operations Division (the “Division”) of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) that the Division intends to recommend the imposition of a civil penalty of approximately $32 million for alleged untimely reporting in relation to certain utility bars and miter saws that were subject to voluntary recalls in September 2019 and March 2022, respectively. The Company believes there are defenses to the Division’s claims, and has presented its defenses in a meeting with the Division on February 29, 2024 and in a written submission dated March 29, 2024. On April 1, 2024, the Division informed the Company's counsel that the Division intended to recommend that the CPSC refer the matter to the U.S. Department of Justice (the "DOJ"). On May 1, 2024, the Company was informed that the CPSC voted to refer the matter to the DOJ. In December 2024, the CPSC requested that the Company reproduce documents previously provided to the CPSC following changes to the agency’s electronic file sharing system. The Company has reproduced the requested documents to the CPSC. The Company has not heard anything further from the CPSC or the DOJ in relation to this matter since then and therefore is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount of potential loss, if any, from this matter.

As previously disclosed, on March 24, 2023, a putative class action lawsuit titled Naresh Vissa Rammohan v. Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00369-KAD (the “Rammohan Class Action”), was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut against the Company and certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors. The complaint was filed on behalf of a purported class consisting of all purchasers of Stanley Black & Decker common stock between October 28, 2021 and July 28, 2022, inclusive. The complaint asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 based on allegedly false and misleading statements related to consumer demand for the Company’s products amid changing COVID-19 trends and macroeconomic conditions. The complaint seeks unspecified damages and an award of costs and expenses. On October 13, 2023, Lead Plaintiff General Retirement System of the City of Detroit filed an Amended Complaint that asserts the same claims and seeks the same forms of relief as the original complaint. The Company intends to vigorously defend this action in all respects and on December 14, 2023 filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint in its entirety. Briefing on that motion concluded on April 5, 2024, and the Company awaits a decision on that motion. Given the early stage of this litigation, at this time, the Company is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount or range of potential losses, if any, from this action.

As previously disclosed, on August 2, 2023 and September 20, 2023, derivative complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, titled Callahan v. Allan, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-01028-OAW (the “Callahan Derivative Action”) and Applebaum v. Allan, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-01234-OAW (the “Applebaum Derivative Action”), respectively, by putative stockholders against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company premised on the same allegations as the Rammohan Class Action. The Callahan and Applebaum Derivative Actions were consolidated by Court order on November 6, 2023, and defendants’ responses to both complaints have been stayed pending the disposition of any motions to dismiss in the Rammohan Class Action. The individual defendants intend to vigorously defend the Callahan and Applebaum Derivative Actions in all respects. However, given the early stage of this litigation, at this time, the Company is not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on its financial condition or to estimate the amount or range of potential losses, if any, from these actions.

As previously disclosed, on October 19, 2023, a derivative complaint was filed in Connecticut Superior Court, titled Vladimir Gusinsky Revocable Trust v. Allan, et al., Docket Number HHBCV236082260S, by a putative stockholder against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company. Plaintiff seeks to recover for alleged breach of fiduciary duties and unjust enrichment under Connecticut state law premised on the same allegations as the Rammohan Class Action. By Court order on November 11, 2023, the Connecticut Superior Court granted the parties’ motion to stay defendants’ response to the complaint pending the disposition of any motions to dismiss in the Rammohan Class Action. The individual defendants intend

In the normal course of business, the Company is a party to administrative proceedings and litigation, before federal and state regulatory agencies, relating to environmental remediation with respect to claims involving the discharge of hazardous substances into the environment, generally at current and former manufacturing facilities. In addition, some of these claims assert that the Company is responsible for damages and liability, for remedial investigation and clean-up costs, with respect to sites that have never been owned or operated by the Company, but the Company has been identified as a potentially responsible party ("PRP").

The Company, along with many other companies, has been named as a PRP in numerous administrative proceedings for the remediation of various waste sites, including 23 active Superfund sites. Current laws potentially impose joint and several liabilities upon each PRP. In assessing its potential liability at these sites, the Company has considered the following: whether responsibility is being disputed, the terms of existing agreements, experience at similar sites, and the Company’s volumetric contribution at these sites.

The Company’s policy is to accrue environmental investigatory and remediation costs for identified sites when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. If no amount in the range of probable loss is considered most likely, the minimum loss in the range is accrued. The amount of liability recorded is based on an evaluation of currently available facts with respect to each individual site and includes such factors as existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations, and prior experience in remediation of contaminated sites. The liabilities recorded do not take into account any claims for recoveries from insurance or third parties. As assessments and remediation progress at individual sites, the amounts recorded are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect additional technical and legal information that becomes available. As of March 29, 2025 and December 28, 2024, the Company had reserves of $273.3 million and $275.4 million, respectively, for remediation activities associated with Company-owned properties, as well as for Superfund sites, for losses that are probable and estimable. Of the March 29, 2025 amount, $51.5 million is classified as current within Accrued expenses and $221.8 million as long-term within Other liabilities which is expected to be paid over the estimated remediation period. As of March 29, 2025, the Company's net cash obligations, including the WCLC assets discussed below, is $256.0 million. As of March 29, 2025, the range of environmental remediation costs that is reasonably possible is $189.9 million to $405.8 million which is subject to change in the near term. The Company may be liable for environmental remediation of sites it no longer owns. Liabilities have been recorded on those sites in accordance with the Company's policy.

As of March 29, 2025, the Company has recorded $17.3 million in Other assets related to funding received by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and placed in a trust in accordance with the final settlement with the EPA, embodied in a Consent Decree approved by the United States District Court for the Central District of California on July 3, 2013. Per the Consent Decree, Emhart Industries, Inc. (a dissolved and liquidated former indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of The Black & Decker Corporation) (“Emhart”) has agreed to be responsible for an interim remedy at a site located in Rialto, California and formerly operated by WCLC, a defunct company for which Emhart was alleged to be liable as a successor. The remedy will be funded by (i) the amounts received from the EPA as gathered from multiple parties, and, to the extent necessary, (ii) Emhart's affiliate. The interim remedy required the construction of a water treatment facility and the treatment of ground water at or around the site for a period of approximately 30 years or more. The construction of the water treatment facility was completed in September 2023, and the treatment of ground water is ongoing. As of March 29, 2025, the Company's net cash obligation associated with these remediation activities, including WCLC assets, is $7.5 million.

On April 8, 2019, the United States District Court approved a Consent Decree documenting the terms of a settlement between the Company and the United States for reimbursement of EPA's past costs and remediation of environmental contamination found at the Centredale Manor Restoration Project Superfund Site ("Centredale site"), located in North Providence, Rhode Island. Black & Decker and Emhart are liable for site clean-up costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA") as successors to the liability of Metro-Atlantic, Inc., a former operator at the Centredale site. The Company is complying with the terms of the settlement and has fully reimbursed the EPA for its past costs.

Remediation work at the Centredale site remains ongoing. Technical and regulatory issues have arisen in connection with the disposal methods selected and described in the statement of work for contaminated Centredale site soils and sediment. Emhart’s contractor is working with the EPA and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (“RIDEM”) to develop alternatives. Based on these evolving technical and regulatory discussions, in the second quarter of 2024, the EPA and RIDEM began implementing regulatory changes that suggest that offsite landfill disposal now represents the most probable remedial alternative for the disposal of contaminated Centredale site soils and sediments. Significant open technical and regulatory issues relating to the implementation of this disposal alternative remain, including final EPA and RIDEM approvals, and further developments may result in additional or different remedial actions. Emhart’s contractor’s assessment of the offsite landfill disposal alternative involves soil and sediment volume estimates that could also change or increase as additional design investigations are performed at the site, which may further impact the remediation process. Emhart has recently entered into a cooperative agreement with the Federal and State Natural Resource Trustees to collectively conduct an assessment of what, if any, Natural Resource Damages may be associated with the contamination at the Centredale Site. Litigation continues in the District Court concerning Phase 3 of the case, which is addressing the potential allocation of liability to other PRPs who may have contributed to contamination of the Centredale site with dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls and other contaminants of concern. Emhart proceeded to trial in a six-week bench trial in Phase 3 on the issue of CERCLA liability against 4 PRPs in October 2024. Post trial briefing and argument relating to the trial has been completed. A decision is expected in 2025 and additional litigation over the equitable allocation of the Centredale site investigation and cleanup cost could be required depending on the outcome. As of March 29, 2025, the Company has reserved $160.7 million for this site.

The Company and approximately 47 other companies comprise the Lower Passaic Cooperating Parties Group (the “CPG”). The CPG members and other companies are parties to a May 2007 Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (“AOC”) with the EPA to perform a remedial investigation/feasibility study (“RI/FS”) of the lower seventeen miles of the Lower Passaic River in New Jersey (the “River”). The Company’s potential liability stems from former operations in Newark, New Jersey. The CPG has substantially completed the RI/FS for the entire 17-mile River. The Company’s estimated costs related to the RI/FS are included in its environmental reserves.

On April 11, 2014, the EPA issued a Focused Feasibility Study (“FFS”) and proposed plan which addressed various early action remediation alternatives for the lower 8.3 miles of the River. On March 4, 2016, the EPA issued a Record of Decision ("ROD") selecting the remedy for the lower 8.3 miles of the River, which will include the removal of 3.5 million cubic yards of sediment, placement of a cap over the entire lower 8.3 miles of the River, and, according to the EPA, will cost approximately $1.4 billion and take 6 years to implement after the remedial design is completed. On September 30, 2016, Occidental Chemical Corporation ("OCC") entered into an agreement with the EPA to perform the remedial design for the cleanup plan for the lower 8.3 miles of the River. OCC has submitted the final remedial design, which was approved by EPA in May 2024. On June 30, 2018, OCC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against over 100 companies, including the Company, seeking CERCLA cost recovery or contribution for past costs relating to various investigations and cleanups OCC has conducted or is conducting in connection with the River. According to the complaint, OCC has incurred or is incurring costs which include the estimated cost ($165 million) to complete the remedial design for the cleanup plan for the lower 8.3 miles of the River. OCC also seeks a declaratory judgment to hold the defendants liable for their proper shares of future response costs for OCC's ongoing activities in connection with the River. The Company and other defendants have answered the complaint and have been engaged in discovery with OCC. On February 24, 2021, the Company and other defendants filed a third party complaint against the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners and forty-two municipalities to require those entities to pay their equitable share of response costs. On December 20, 2022, various defendants (including the Company) in the OCC litigation filed an unopposed motion to stay the litigation for six months which was granted by the Court on March 1, 2023 and has been extended while the Court considered the Consent Decree filed by the United States, as discussed below.

The Company and 105 other parties received a letter dated March 31, 2016 from the EPA notifying such parties of potential liability for the costs of the cleanup of the lower 8.3 miles of the River. In a March 30, 2017 letter, the EPA stated that parties who did not discharge dioxins, furans or polychlorinated biphenyls (which are considered the contaminants of concern posing the greatest risk to human health or the environment) may be eligible for cash out settlement, but expected those parties' allocation to be determined through a complex settlement analysis using a third-party allocator. The EPA subsequently clarified this statement to say that such parties would be eligible to be "funding parties" for the lower 8.3 mile remedial action with each party's share of the costs determined by the EPA based on the allocation process and the remaining parties would be "work parties" for the remedial action. The Company participated in the allocation process and asserted that it did not discharge dioxins, furans or polychlorinated biphenyls and should be eligible to be a "funding party" for the lower 8.3 mile remedial action. The allocator selected by the EPA issued a confidential allocation report on December 28, 2020, which was reviewed by the EPA. As a result of the allocation process, on February 11, 2022, the EPA and certain parties (including the Company)

reached an agreement in principle for a cash-out settlement for remediation of the entire 17-mile Lower Passaic River. On December 16, 2022, the United States lodged a Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in United States v. Alden Leeds, Inc. et al. (No. 2:22-cv-07326) that addressed the liability of 85 parties (including the Company) for an aggregate amount of $150 million based in part on the EPA-sponsored allocation report that found OCC 99.4% responsible for the cleanup costs of the River. The Consent Decree was subject to a 90-day public comment period, which ended March 22, 2023. On November 21, 2023, the United States informed the Court that it concluded, based on the public comments, that a small number of parties (not including the Company) should be removed from the settlement and that a change should be made to the United States’ reservation of rights (which was agreed to by the remaining settling parties). On January 17, 2024, the United States filed the modified Consent Decree with the Court and filed its motion to enter the modified Consent Decree on January 31, 2024. On April 1, 2024, the settling defendants (including the Company) and certain other parties filed briefs in support of, and OCC filed a brief in opposition to, the motion to enter the modified Consent Decree. On December 18, 2024, the Court issued its opinion granting the United States’ motion to enter the modified Consent Decree. The settlement funds will be paid to the United States as of the later of the expiration of the appeal deadline (sixty days after the entry) if no appeal is filed or the exhaustion of any appeals. On January 9, 2025, Nokia of America (a non-settling party) filed its Notice of Appeal of the Court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. On February 13, 2025, OCC also filed its Notice of Appeal of the Court's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

On October 10, 2018, the EPA issued a letter directing the CPG to prepare a streamlined feasibility study for the upper 9 miles of the River based on an iterative approach using adaptive management strategies. The CPG submitted a draft Interim Remedy Feasibility Study to the EPA on December 4, 2020, which identified various targeted dredge and cap alternatives with costs that range from $420 million to $468 million (net present value). The EPA issued the Interim Remedy ROD on September 28, 2021, selecting an alternative that the EPA estimates will cost $441 million (net present value).

On March 2, 2023, the EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order requiring OCC to design the interim remedy for the upper 9 miles of the River (the “2023 UAO”). Notwithstanding the stay of the litigation commenced in 2018 (and two days after the public comment period on the Consent Decree closed), OCC filed a complaint named Occidental Chem. Corp. v. Givaudan Fragrances Corp., et al., No. 2:23‑cv-1699 at 2, 5 (D.N.J. Mar. 24, 2023) (the “2023 Litigation”) against forty parties (not including the Company) for recovery of past and future response costs it will incur in complying with the 2023 UAO. All of the defendants named in the 2023 Litigation are also defendants or third-party defendants in the litigation commenced in 2018.

Pursuant to a settlement agreement by and among the Maxus Liquidating Trust, YPF and Repsol submitted to the bankruptcy court on April 7, 2023, YPF and Repsol will jointly pay a combined sum of $573 million to various creditors. Based on the waterfall payout of the bankruptcy plan, the CPG received approximately $9 million, which will be used either to offset future CPG costs, including EPA RI/FS oversight and legal and administrative costs, or to reimburse CPG members for a portion of their past contributions to the RI/FS costs.

Per the terms of a Final Order and Judgment approved by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on January 22, 1991, Emhart is responsible for a percentage of remedial costs arising out of the Kerr McGee Chemical Corporation Superfund Site located in Jacksonville, Florida. On March 15, 2017, the Company received formal notification from the EPA that the EPA had issued a ROD selecting the preferred alternative identified in the Proposed Cleanup Plan. The Multistate Trust managing the remediation provides quarterly projections for the remediation costs for work to be performed, and the Company adjusts the reserve for its percentage share of such costs accordingly. As of March 29, 2025, the Company has reserved $24.5 million for this site.

The amounts recorded for the aforementioned identified contingent liabilities are based on estimates. Amounts recorded are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect additional technical and legal information that becomes available. Actual costs to be incurred in future periods may vary from the estimates, given the inherent uncertainties in evaluating certain exposures. Subject to the imprecision in estimating future contingent liability costs, the Company does not expect that any sum it may have to pay in connection with these environmental matters in excess of the amounts recorded will have a materially adverse effect on its financial position, results of operations or liquidity.