Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 29, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies The Company is a party to various lawsuits, claims and loss contingencies arising in the ordinary course of its business, including insured worker's compensation, auto, and general liability claims, assertions by certain regulatory and governmental agencies related to various matters including labor and employment, employees benefits, occupational safety and health, wage and hour, compliance, sustainability, permitting requirements, environmental matters, including air, wastewater and storm water discharges from the Company’s processing facilities and other federal, state and local issues, litigation involving tort, contract, statutory, labor, employment, and other claims, and tax matters. The Company’s workers compensation, auto and general liability policies contain significant deductibles or self-insured retentions. The Company estimates and accrues its expected ultimate claim costs related to accidents occurring during each fiscal year under these insurance policies and carries this accrual as a reserve until these claims are paid by the Company. As a result of the matters discussed above, the Company has established loss reserves for insurance, regulatory, governmental, environmental and litigation. At March 29, 2025 and December 28, 2024, the reserves for insurance, regulatory, governmental, environmental and litigation reflected on the balance sheet in accrued expenses and other non-current liabilities was approximately $99.6 million and $97.1 million, respectively. The Company has insurance recovery receivables reflected on the balance sheet in other assets of approximately $39.0 million as of March 29, 2025 and December 28, 2024, related to the insurance contingencies. The Company’s management believes these reserves for contingencies are reasonable and sufficient based upon present governmental regulations and information currently available to management; however, there can be no assurance that final costs related to these contingencies will not exceed current estimates. The Company believes that the likelihood is remote that any additional liability from the pending lawsuits and claims that may not be covered by insurance would have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Lower Passaic River Area. In December 2009, the Company, along with numerous other entities, received notice from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) that the Company (as alleged successor-in-interest to The Standard Tallow Corporation) is considered a potentially responsible party (a “PRP”) with respect to alleged contamination in the lower 17-mile area of the Passaic River (the “Lower Passaic River”) which is part of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site located in Newark, New Jersey. The Company’s designation as a PRP is based upon the operation of former plant sites located in Newark and Kearny, New Jersey by The Standard Tallow Corporation, an entity that the Company acquired in 1996. In March 2016, the Company received another letter from the EPA notifying the Company that it had issued a Record of Decision (the “ROD”) selecting a remedy for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River area at an estimated cost of $1.38 billion. The EPA letter made no demand on the Company and laid out a framework for remedial design/remedial action implementation under which the EPA would first seek funding from major PRPs. The letter indicated that the EPA had sent the letter to over 100 parties, which include large chemical and refining companies, manufacturing companies, foundries, plastic companies, pharmaceutical companies and food and consumer product companies. The Company asserts that it is not responsible for any liabilities of its former subsidiary The Standard Tallow Corporation, which was legally dissolved in 2000, and that, in any event, The Standard Tallow Corporation did not discharge any of the eight contaminants of concern identified in the ROD (the “COCs”). Subsequently, the EPA conducted a settlement analysis using a third-party allocator and offered early cash out settlements to those PRPs for whom the third-party allocator determined did not discharge any of the COCs. The Company participated in this allocation process, and in November 2019, received a cash out settlement offer from the EPA in the amount of $0.6 million ($0.3 million for each of the former plant sites in question) for liabilities relating to the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River area. The Company accepted this settlement offer, and the settlement became effective on April 16, 2021 following the completion of the EPA's administrative approval process. In September 2021, the EPA released a ROD selecting an interim remedy for the upper nine miles of the Lower Passaic River at an expected additional cost of $441 million. In October 2022, the Company, along with other settling defendants, entered into a Consent Decree with the EPA pursuant to which the Company paid $0.3 million to settle liabilities for both of the former plant sites in question related to the upper nine miles of the Lower Passaic River. The Company paid this amount into escrow, as the settlement is subject to the EPA’s administrative approval process, which includes publication, a public comment period and court approval. In December 2024, the court granted the issuance of the Consent Decree; however, this decision has been appealed. 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 Lower Passaic River. 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 cost recovery or contribution for costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) relating to various investigations and cleanups OCC has conducted or is conducting in connection with the Lower Passaic River. According to the complaint, OCC has incurred or is incurring costs which include the estimated cost to complete the remedial design for the cleanup plan for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River. OCC is also seeking a declaratory judgment to hold the defendants liable for their proper shares of future response costs, including the remedial action for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River. The Company, along with 40 of the other defendants, had previously received a release from OCC of its CERCLA contribution claim of $165 million associated with the costs to design the remedy for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River. Furthermore, the Company’s settlements with the EPA described above could preclude certain of the claims alleged by OCC against the Company. The Company’s ultimate liability, if any, for investigatory costs, remedial costs and/or natural resource damages in connection with the Lower Passaic River area cannot be determined at this time; however, as of the date of this report, the Company has found no definitive evidence that the former Standard Tallow Corporation plant sites contributed any of the COCs to the Passaic River and, therefore, there is nothing that leads the Company to believe that this matter will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

As a result of the matters discussed above, the Company has established loss reserves for insurance, regulatory, governmental, environmental and litigation. At March 29, 2025 and December 28, 2024, the reserves for insurance, regulatory, governmental, environmental and litigation reflected on the balance sheet in accrued expenses and other non-current liabilities was approximately $99.6 million and $97.1 million, respectively. The Company has insurance recovery receivables reflected on the balance sheet in other assets of approximately $39.0 million as of March 29, 2025 and December 28, 2024, related to the insurance contingencies. The Company’s management believes these reserves for contingencies are reasonable and sufficient based upon present governmental regulations and information currently available to management; however, there can be no assurance that final costs related to these contingencies will not exceed current estimates. The Company believes that the likelihood is remote that any additional liability from the pending lawsuits and claims that may not be covered by insurance would have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Lower Passaic River Area. In December 2009, the Company, along with numerous other entities, received notice from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) that the Company (as alleged successor-in-interest to The Standard Tallow Corporation) is considered a potentially responsible party (a “PRP”) with respect to alleged contamination in the lower 17-mile area of the Passaic River (the “Lower Passaic River”) which is part of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site located in Newark, New Jersey. The Company’s designation as a PRP is based upon the operation of former plant sites located in Newark and Kearny, New Jersey by The Standard Tallow Corporation, an entity that the Company acquired in 1996. In March 2016, the Company received another letter from the EPA notifying the Company that it had issued a Record of Decision (the “ROD”) selecting a remedy for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River area at an estimated cost of $1.38 billion. The EPA letter made no demand on the Company and laid out a framework for remedial design/remedial action implementation under which the EPA would first seek funding from major PRPs. The letter indicated that the EPA had sent the letter to over 100 parties, which include large chemical and refining companies, manufacturing companies, foundries, plastic companies, pharmaceutical companies and food and consumer product companies. The Company asserts that it is not responsible for any liabilities of its former subsidiary The Standard Tallow Corporation, which was legally dissolved in 2000, and that, in any event, The Standard Tallow Corporation did not discharge any of the eight contaminants of concern identified in the ROD (the “COCs”). Subsequently, the EPA conducted a settlement analysis using a third-party allocator and offered early cash out settlements to those PRPs for whom the third-party allocator determined did not discharge any of the COCs. The Company participated in this allocation process, and in November 2019, received a cash out settlement offer from the EPA in the amount of $0.6 million ($0.3 million for each of the former plant sites in question) for liabilities relating to the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River area. The Company accepted this settlement offer, and the settlement became effective on April 16, 2021 following the completion of the EPA's administrative approval process. In September 2021, the EPA released a ROD selecting an interim remedy for the upper nine miles of the Lower Passaic River at an expected additional cost of $441 million. In October 2022, the Company, along with other settling defendants, entered into a Consent Decree with the EPA pursuant to which the Company paid $0.3 million to settle liabilities for both of the former plant sites in question related to the upper nine miles of the Lower Passaic River. The Company paid this amount into escrow, as the settlement is subject to the EPA’s administrative approval process, which includes publication, a public comment period and court approval. In December 2024, the court granted the issuance of the Consent Decree; however, this decision has been appealed. 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 Lower Passaic River. 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 cost recovery or contribution for costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) relating to various investigations and cleanups OCC has conducted or is conducting in connection with the Lower Passaic River. According to the complaint, OCC has incurred or is incurring costs which include the estimated cost to complete the remedial design for the cleanup plan for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River. OCC is also seeking a declaratory judgment to hold the defendants liable for their proper shares of future response costs, including the remedial action for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower

Passaic River. The Company, along with 40 of the other defendants, had previously received a release from OCC of its CERCLA contribution claim of $165 million associated with the costs to design the remedy for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River. Furthermore, the Company’s settlements with the EPA described above could preclude certain of the claims alleged by OCC against the Company. The Company’s ultimate liability, if any, for investigatory costs, remedial costs and/or natural resource damages in connection with the Lower Passaic River area cannot be determined at this time; however, as of the date of this report, the Company has found no definitive evidence that the former Standard Tallow Corporation plant sites contributed any of the COCs to the Passaic River and, therefore, there is nothing that leads the Company to believe that this matter will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.