A description of certain environmental and other legal matters relating to certain of our subsidiaries is included in this section. In addition to the matters noted herein, we are from time to time subject to, and are presently involved in, other litigation and legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. We believe the outcome of such other litigation and legal proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Expenses for administrative and legal proceedings are recorded when incurred.

Our facilities and operations are subject to federal, state and local environmental and occupational health and safety laws and regulations of the U.S. and foreign countries. We take a proactive approach in our efforts to comply with these laws and regulations as they relate to our manufacturing operations and in proposing and implementing any remedial plans that may be necessary. We also regularly conduct comprehensive environmental, health and safety audits at our facilities to maintain compliance and improve operational efficiency.

Although we believe past operations were in substantial compliance with the then applicable regulations, we or one or more of our subsidiaries are involved with various investigation and remediation activities at 19 sites, all of which relate to the activities of legacy operations prior to the formation of Enpro in 2002. At 9 of the 19 sites, the future cost of investigation or remediation is expected to be less than $0.5 million. At 18 of the 19 sites, one or more of our subsidiaries (or an entity that merged with and into one of our subsidiaries) formerly conducted business operations but no longer do. We continue to conduct manufacturing operations at one site. In addition to these 19 sites, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the "EPA") has provided us notice that Enpro has potential responsibility at one additional site where one of our subsidiaries formerly conducted business operations but no longer does. We have responded to the EPA that we do not have responsibility at that site and are awaiting the EPA's response.

Our policy is to accrue environmental investigation and remediation costs when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated, which for ongoing remediation activities is typically over a period of five years and includes identified capital expenditures beyond the period. For sites with multiple future projected cost scenarios for identified feasible investigation and remediation options where no one estimate is more likely than all the others, our policy is to accrue the lowest estimate among the range of estimates. The measurement of the liability is based on an evaluation of currently available facts with respect to each individual situation and takes into consideration factors such as existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations and prior experience in the remediation of similar contaminated sites. Liabilities are established for all sites based on these factors. As assessments and remediation progress at individual sites, these liabilities are reviewed and adjusted to reflect additional technical data and legal information. As of March 31, 2026, and December 31, 2025, we had recorded liabilities aggregating $41.3 million and $42.2 million, respectively, in other liabilities for estimated future expenditures relating to environmental contingencies. The current portion of our aggregate environmental liability included in accrued liabilities at March 31, 2026, was $7.3 million. These amounts have been recorded on an undiscounted basis in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Given the uncertainties regarding the status of laws, regulations, enforcement policies, the impact of other parties potentially being fully or partially liable, technology and information related to individual sites, we do not believe it is possible to develop an estimate of the range of reasonably possible environmental loss in excess of our recorded liabilities.

We believe that our accruals for specific environmental liabilities are adequate based on currently available information. Based upon limited information regarding any incremental remediation or other actions that may be required at these sites, we cannot reasonably estimate any further loss or a reasonably possible range of loss related to these matters. Actual costs to be incurred in future periods may vary from estimates because of the inherent uncertainties in evaluating environmental exposures due to unknown and changing conditions, changing government regulations and legal standards regarding liability.

Based on our prior ownership of Crucible Steel Corporation a/k/a Crucible, Inc. (“Crucible”), we may have contingent liabilities in one or more significant environmental matters. One such matter, which is included in the 19 sites referred to above, is the Lower Passaic River Study Area ("LPRSA") of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site in New Jersey. The LPRSA includes a 17-mile tidal portion of the Passaic River stretching from the river’s mouth at Newark Bay to Dundee Dam in Garfield, New Jersey. Crucible operated a steel mill abutting the Passaic River in Harrison, New Jersey from the early 1900s until 1974, which was one of many industrial operations on the river dating back to the 1800s. Certain contingent environmental liabilities related to this site were retained by a predecessor of EnPro Holdings when it sold a majority interest in Crucible Materials Corporation

The EPA is leading the response actions for the LPRSA, which it has divided into two operating units: Operating Unit 2 (“OU2”), covering the lower 8.3 miles of the LPRSA, and Operating Unit 4 (“OU4”), encompassing the entire LPRSA. OU2 is a part of the larger OU4. The EPA issued a Record of Decision (“ROD”) for OU2 in March 2016, selecting a remedy involving construction of an engineered cap over the riverbed at an estimated cost of $1.38 billion. In September 2021, the EPA issued a ROD for OU4, selecting an interim remedy consisting of targeted dredging and capping for the portion of OU4 not including OU2, followed by a monitoring period to assess the river system’s response, at an estimated cost of $441 million.

The EPA also initiated an allocation process in 2017, explaining that a fair, carefully structured, information-based allocation of responsibility for the LPRSA was necessary to promote settlements. This effort resulted in the EPA’s retained allocator issuing a final Allocation Recommendation Report (the “Report”) in December 2020. Using the Report and other factors as a basis for subsequent settlement negotiations, more than 80 PRPs, including EnPro Holdings, entered an agreement with the EPA to resolve their share of responsibility concerning both OU2 and OU4, and a Consent Decree resolving the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA") claims was lodged with the District Court of New Jersey in December 2022. EnPro Holdings paid $5.9 million into escrow as its share of the settlement in September 2022, and the District Court of New Jersey approved and entered the settlement in December 2024. Two non-settling PRPs, Nokia of America Corporation and Occidental Chemical Corporation (“OCC”), the successor to the entity that operated the Diamond Alkali chemical manufacturing facility, intervened and subsequently appealed the court's approval of the settlement. EnPro Holding’s payment will be held in escrow until all appeals have been resolved by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

In October 2025, following the announcement that Berkshire Hathaway would be acquiring OCC, OCC notified the Third Circuit that it is now known as Environmental Resource Holdings LLC as a result of a corporate reorganization that split the appellant entity into two entities, Environmental Resource Holdings LLC and Occidental Chemical Corporation (a Texas corporation) ("OxyChem TX"). Certain PRPs, including EnPro Holdings, filed a declaratory judgment action in February 2026 to obtain an order holding the newly formed OxyChem TX is joint and severally liable for its predecessor's CERCLA liabilities at the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, including the LPRSA. That action is currently pending.

Before the settlement that is now the subject of the pending appeal was reached, OCC filed claims in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against more than 120 parties, including EnPro Holdings, seeking recovery of certain response costs under the CERCLA. Such costs include an estimated $165 million to develop and design the remedy for the LPRSA. This litigation, which will include consideration of the effect of the settlement on OCC’s cost‑recovery claims, is currently stayed by the Court pending resolution of the appeal described above.

EnPro Holdings has received notices from the EPA asserting that it is a potentially responsible party under the CERCLA as the successor to a former operator of eight uranium mines in Arizona, including two EPA-designated “priority” mines located in the Cameron Chapter of the Navajo Nation and six EPA-designated “non-priority” mines located in the more remote Bodaway Gap Chapter of the Navajo Nation, which are collectively one of the 19 sites referenced above. The former operator conducted operations at these mines from 1954 to 1957, prior to Enpro's formation in 2002. In the 1990s, remediation work performed by others consisted of capping the exposed areas of these mines. We entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Interim Removal Action with the EPA effective November 7, 2017 for the investigation and remediation of these mines. We entered into a First Modification of Original Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent effective July 8, 2022 for the performance of Engineering Evaluations and Cost Analyses (EE/CA's) of potential remedial options at each of the mines. Our reserve at March 31, 2026 for this site was $11.3 million, which reflects estimated costs to consolidate mining waste on-site and construct enhanced caps for each of the eight mines and is the low end of the range of our reasonably likely liability with respect to these mines.

evaluated remedial options include consolidating and capping mining wastes on site on the low end of reasonably likely liability and excavating and transporting mining waste to an off-site “regional repository” location on the high end of reasonably likely liability. Estimable costs of our reasonably likely liability with respect to the two priority mines range from $3.6 million to $15.9 million based on these two options. The draft EE/CAs that Enpro Holdings submitted to the EPA ranked consolidating and capping mining wastes on site as the most preferred option at each of the two priority mines. The EPA’s review of the draft EE/CAs is ongoing. The accrual for the two priority mines is $3.6 million, which is the low end of the range of our reasonably likely liability.

Investigation of the six non-priority mines in the Bodaway Gap Chapter is ongoing, and we expect to prepare and submit draft EE/CAs to the EPA in the next one to two years. The accrual for the six non-priority mines is set at $7.6 million, which is the low end of the range of our reasonably likely liability with respect to these mines and is based on the remedial option of capping and consolidating wastes on site. The EPA has not identified a potential “regional repository” location for mines in the Bodaway Gap Chapter. Accordingly, we are not able at this time to estimate the upper end of a range of reasonably likely liability with respect to the non-priority mines.

On October 18, 2021, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona approved and entered a Consent Decree pursuant to which the U.S government will reimburse the Company for 35% of necessary costs of response, as defined in 42 U.S.C. section 9601(25), previously or to be in the future incurred by the Company which arise out of or in connection with releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances at or emanating from these mines. Based on current reserve amounts, we expect future contributions of $3.5 million from the U.S. government towards remediation of these mines. This amount is included in other assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at March 31, 2026.

Under the agreement governing the November 2022 sale of GGB to The Timken Company, Enpro retained responsibility for compliance with New Jersey's Industrial Site Remediation Act ("ISRA") with respect to two GGB facilities located in Thorofare, New Jersey, which are collectively one of the 19 sites referenced above. ISRA requires the environmental investigation and remediation of industrial properties in association with the closure, sale or transfer of operations. All work under ISRA must be conducted under the direction of a Licensed Site Remediation Professional (“LSRP”) certified by a state licensing board. On September 9, 2024, the Company’s LSRP submitted Preliminary Assessment and Site Investigation Reports (“PA/SI Reports”) for this site to the state agency, confirming that the preliminary assessment identified, among other things, concentrations of certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS”) in soil and groundwater at the site. The PA/SI Reports also include the LSRP’s recommendations to further investigate the PFAS impacts in soil and groundwater at the site. Our reserve at March 31, 2026 for the site was $2.8 million. These reserves are based on currently available facts about the site and may be revised as investigation of the site continues in accordance with the ISRA requirements, or based on future technical consultation with the state agency.

In connection with manufacturing operations of a former division of EnPro Holdings, the Company has been implementing and managing a solution to clean trichloroethylene ("TCE") soil and groundwater contamination at a location in Water Valley, Mississippi (the “Water Valley Facility”). A corporate predecessor of EnPro Holdings operated the Water Valley Facility from 1972 through 1996. By 1987, TCE was no longer used at the Water Valley Facility. In 1996, Enpro Holdings’ corporate predecessor sold the division, including the Water Valley Facility, to BorgWarner. In 2021, BorgWarner sold the Water Valley Facility to Solero Technologies, which currently operates it.

On June 4, 2024, eight former employees at the Water Valley Facility filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Northern District of Mississippi (the “Federal Court”) against Enpro Inc., EnPro Holdings and two manufacturers of TCE or equipment that uses TCE alleging personal injury, nuisance, and other claims related to alleged exposure to TCE. In response to an order of the Federal Court issued on March 17, 2025 dismissing the former employees’ occupational exposure related claims with prejudice based upon the exclusivity of the Mississippi Workers' Compensation Act and identifying defects in the remaining claims, the eight former employees filed an amended complaint with the Federal Court re-alleging certain of their remaining claims on March 31, 2025. On February 23, 2026, these eight plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice with the Federal Court with respect to these remaining claims against all defendants, including Enpro Inc. and Enpro Holdings, terminating that proceeding.

After that dismissal, between February 24, 2026 and May 4, 2026, thirteen lawsuits have been filed in Yalobusha County Circuit Court in Mississippi (the “Mississippi State Court Proceedings”) by a combined total of 531 alleged former employees at the Water Valley Facility or family members of alleged deceased former employees. Eleven of these Mississippi State Court Proceedings, with a total of 427 plaintiffs, did not name any Enpro entities or subsequent operators of the Water Valley Facility as defendants. Instead, they sued the two alleged manufacturers of TCE or equipment that uses TCE named in the above-described Federal Court, and two individual consultants and six consulting and construction firms alleged to have performed

environmental investigation or remediation work at the Water Valley Facility. The claims filed in these eleven lawsuits include product liability, negligence and wrongful death claims based on alleged exposure to TCE at the Water Valley Facility. It is uncertain whether any party to these eleven lawsuits may seek to assert claims against Enpro Inc., EnPro Holdings or any other Enpro entity in those proceedings. The two remaining lawsuits included in the Mississippi State Court Proceedings were filed by 104 plaintiffs and are substantially similar to the other eleven lawsuits, except that they add the Company and certain of its affiliates, Enpro Holdings, OldCo LLC and Coltec, Inc., as well as Goodrich Corporation, as defendants and assert two claims– public nuisance and negligence – against the Company and these additional defendants. In addition, legal counsel for certain of these former employees have previously indicated to the Company's legal counsel that they have identified a significant number of potential claimants who are not current or former employees of the Water Valley Facility for whom they may file complaints, which would not be subject to the workers' compensation system. At this time, the Company does not have further information regarding potential non-employee claimants and no such additional lawsuits have been filed.

From May 28, 2025 through August 27, 2025, 150 individuals, including the eight former employees who filed the amended complaint in Federal Court described above, filed petitions with the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission alleging that they are former employees at the Water Valley Facility and suffered injury caused by workplace exposure to toxic chemicals. These claimants allegedly worked at the Water Valley Facility for varying periods spanning from prior to 1972 to present. These petitions name EnPro Holdings’ corporate predecessor and certain of the subsequent operators of the Water Valley Facility as potentially liable employers, and one of these employers, BorgWarner, has sent a demand for indemnification to Enpro with respect to these claims. The discovery process for these workers' compensation petitions is ongoing and is in early stages. No final hearing date has been set for any of the petitions.

Given the early stage of these pending legal proceedings, Enpro cannot estimate a range of reasonably possible outcomes of the pending workers' compensation petitions, or any other potential lawsuits or claims based on similar allegations. Enpro had not accrued reserves for such legal proceedings at March 31, 2026. We have notified relevant workers' compensation and general liability insurers of the claims and petitions described above.

For several years, EnPro Holdings has been conducting investigation and remediation activities to address TCE contamination in groundwater and areas of polychlorinated biphenyl (“PCB”) oil-impacted soil at an electrical transformer facility site in Pine Bluff, Arkansas (the “Pine Bluff Site”). A corporate predecessor of EnPro Holdings operated the site from the 1950s until its sale in 1994 to a buyer that continues to manufacture electrical transformers there. As the corporate successor to the former owner and operator, EnPro Holdings remains responsible for environmental conditions that existed prior to the sale.

In addition to the ongoing operation of a “pump and treat” groundwater remediation system, the reserves for the Pine Bluff Site include projected costs for implementing in situ chemical reduction to further address groundwater contamination; evaluating whether the groundwater plume may be affecting indoor air quality within on-site structures and, if necessary, mitigating any confirmed vapor intrusion; conducting additional investigation and monitoring of off-site impacts; and continuing to address PCB oil impacts to on‑site soils. Our reserve at March 31, 2026 for the site was $6.9 million.

Crucible, which was engaged primarily in the manufacture and distribution of high technology specialty metal products, was a wholly owned subsidiary of EnPro Holdings until 1983 when its assets and liabilities were distributed to a new subsidiary, Crucible Materials Corporation. EnPro Holdings sold a majority of the outstanding shares of Crucible Materials Corporation in 1985 and divested its remaining minority interest in 2004. Crucible Materials Corporation filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in May 2009 and is no longer conducting operations.

We have certain ongoing obligations, which are included in other liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets, including workers’ compensation, retiree medical and other retiree benefit matters, in addition to those mentioned previously related to EnPro Holdings' period of ownership of Crucible. Based on EnPro Holdings' prior ownership of Crucible, we may have certain additional contingent liabilities, including liabilities in one or more significant environmental matters included in

We provide warranties on many of our products. The specific terms and conditions of these warranties vary depending on the product and the market in which the product is sold. We record a liability based upon estimates of the costs we may incur under our warranties after a review of historical warranty experience and information about specific warranty claims. Adjustments are made to the liability as claims data, historical experience, and trends result in changes to our estimate.