We are subject to occasional governmental proceedings and orders pertaining to occupational safety and health or to protection of the environment, such as proceedings or orders relating to noise abatement, air emissions or water discharges. As part of our continuing program of stewardship in safety, health and environmental matters, we have been able to resolve such proceedings and to comply with such orders without any material adverse effects on our business.

We have received notices from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or similar state or local agencies that we are considered a potentially responsible party (PRP) at a limited number of sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) or similar state and local environmental laws. Generally, we share the cost of remediation at these sites with other PRPs or alleged PRPs in accordance with negotiated or prescribed allocations. There is inherent uncertainty in determining the potential cost of remediating a given site and in determining any individual party's share in that cost. As a result, estimates can change substantially as additional information becomes available regarding the nature or extent of site contamination, remediation methods, other PRPs and their probable level of involvement, and actions by or against governmental agencies or private parties.

We have reviewed the nature and extent of our involvement at each Superfund site as well as potential obligations arising under other federal, state and local environmental laws. While ultimate resolution and financial liability is uncertain at a number of the sites, in our opinion, based on information currently available, the ultimate resolution of claims and assessments related to these sites will not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows, although amounts recorded in a given period could be material to our results of operations or cash flows for that period. Amounts accrued for environmental matters (measured on an undiscounted basis) are presented below:

•LOWER PASSAIC RIVER STUDY AREA (DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS and SUPERFUND SITE) — The Lower Passaic River Study Area is part of the Diamond Shamrock Superfund Site in New Jersey. Vulcan and approximately 70 other companies are parties to a May 2007 Administrative Order on Consent with the EPA to perform a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (draft RI/FS) of the lower 17 miles of the Passaic River (River). The draft RI/FS was submitted recommending a targeted hot spot remedy; however, the EPA issued a record of decision in March 2016 that calls for a bank-to-bank dredging remedy for the lower 8 miles of the River. The EPA estimates that the cost of implementing this proposal is $1.38 billion. In September 2016, the EPA entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent with Occidental Chemical Corporation (Occidental) in which Occidental agreed to undertake the remedial design for this bank-to-bank dredging remedy and to reimburse the United States for certain response costs.

In 2021, certain PRPs, including Vulcan, received a joint confidential settlement demand from the EPA/Department of Justice (DOJ). Vulcan and certain of the other PRPs that received the joint confidential settlement demand reached an agreement to settle with the EPA/DOJ and negotiated a Consent Decree. The court granted the motion to enter the Consent Decree in December 2024. Occidental thereafter filed an appeal challenging the entry of the Consent Decree. The appeal remains pending. Vulcan’s portion of the settlement is within the immaterial loss recorded for this matter in 2015.

In July 2018, Vulcan, along with more than 100 other defendants, was sued by Occidental in United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Newark Vicinage. Occidental is seeking cost recovery and contribution under CERCLA for costs related to the River. This lawsuit is currently stayed. In another related proceeding, Occidental filed a lawsuit in March 2023 against Vulcan and 39 other defendants in United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Newark Vicinage seeking cost recovery and contribution under CERCLA for costs related to the upper 9 miles of the River. It is unknown at this time how the settlement and approval of the Consent Decree with the EPA/DOJ would affect the Occidental lawsuits.

•1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE LITIGATION (DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS) — During the operation of our former Chemicals Division, which was divested to Occidental in 2005, Vulcan manufactured a chlorinated solvent known as 1,1,1-trichloroethane. Vulcan faces liabilities related to 1,1,1-trichloroethane stabilized with 1,4-dioxane ("TCA"). We are one of the defendants in cases filed in both state and federal courts, including one case filed by the State of New Jersey. According to the various complaints, the plaintiffs seek damages including, but not limited to, unspecified compensatory damages associated with the remediation of water wells allegedly contaminated with 1,4-dioxane, natural resource damages, disgorgement of profits from the sale of TCA, punitive damages, as well as penalties and attorney's fees under various statutes. During the fourth quarter of 2025, a Vulcan insurer directly negotiated the settlement of the largest plaintiff case filed in federal court in New York. Vulcan’s insurer funded the settlement in excess of Vulcan’s immaterial self-insured retention amount. We will vigorously defend the remaining cases on substantive and procedural grounds. At this time, we cannot determine the likelihood of loss, or reasonably estimate a range of loss, if any, pertaining to the above-referenced cases.

•HEWITT LANDFILL MATTER (SUPERFUND SITE) — In 2015, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issued a Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO) directing Calmat Co., a Vulcan subsidiary (hereinafter Vulcan), to assess, monitor, cleanup, and abate wastes that have been discharged to soil, soil vapor, and/or groundwater at the former Hewitt Landfill in Los Angeles.

Following an extensive investigation and pilot scale testing, Vulcan implemented an onsite corrective action plan approved by RWQCB that includes a groundwater pump, treat and reinjection system. In 2024, the RWQCB made a request under the CAO for a work plan to install additional monitoring wells and optimize and expand the existing on-site remediation system. This request complements expansion discussions with the EPA and other stakeholders as part of an Alternative Design Plan (ADP). Currently-anticipated costs of these on-site source control activities have been fully accrued.

The EPA and Vulcan entered into a 2017 Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) for the design of two extraction wells south of the Hewitt Landfill to protect the North Hollywood West (NHW) wellfield. Thereafter, LADWP proposed and ultimately constructed two water production and well head treatment facilities—the NHW system and the North Hollywood Central (NHC) system—at LADWP wellfields located near the Hewitt Landfill. After significant evaluation of the likely effect of LADWP’s water production facilities on other previously-feasible remediation options and the exchange of numerous workplans and evaluation reports, Vulcan submitted an ADP to the EPA in 2025. The ADP relies upon the RWQCB-approved expansion of the onsite Hewitt remedy and, necessarily, the two well head treatment systems operated by LADWP as the preferred method to address the off-site impacts that were the target of the 2017 AOC. The ADP further contemplates an agreement on the coordination of the operation of the onsite Hewitt remedy and LADWP’s well head treatment systems. The EPA, Vulcan, and LADWP continue to engage in a dialogue regarding the coordination of the systems. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of a loss pertaining to potential work completed at the direction of the EPA.

Additionally, Vulcan is in a dispute with LADWP regarding the cost and necessity of LADWP's construction of the two well head treatment facilities and Vulcan's relative contribution to their construction and operation. LADWP has alleged that the Hewitt Landfill is one of the primary sources of contamination at the NHW system and one of the sources of contamination at the NHC system. According to information available on the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) website, the

capital cost of the NHW system is estimated at $92 million, and the capital cost of the NHC system is estimated at $245 million. LADWP has also alleged that it incurred damages related to investigation and monitoring costs and its historical inability to use water in the vicinity of its wellfields. LADWP’s investigation and monitoring allegations include its publicly-reported six-year $11.5 million Groundwater System Improvement Study and the installation and monitoring of 26 wells in support of the study, for which LADWP has reported costs of an additional $22 million. Additionally, both systems will incur significant costs for operation and maintenance. LADWP presented a demand to Vulcan in January 2026 that included actual costs in excess of these publicly-reported estimates.

We anticipate continued discussions with LADWP regarding its alleged damages and potential claims. In conjunction with those discussions, we are engaging in further efforts to gather and analyze records and data in order to assess the extent of possible contribution by the Hewitt Landfill to the groundwater contamination in the area, consistent with the parallel request by the EPA, and the reasonableness of LADWP’s efforts. This work is also intended to assist in identification of other PRPs that may have contributed to groundwater contamination in the area of the NHW and NHC systems. Together, these efforts will allow us to analyze our anticipated equitable contribution to LADWP’s treatment systems and the ongoing operation of the systems. Among other factors, we anticipate that any contribution should take into account the on-site source control and other measures implemented by Vulcan at the former Hewitt Landfill, the relative contribution and duration of any contaminants originating from the Hewitt Landfill to the LADWP systems, the contribution and duration of contaminants originating from the property and activities of LADWP, and the cost-effectiveness of the LADWP systems. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of a loss pertaining to LADWP’s potential contribution claim. However, as discussions continue with LADWP and as additional records and data are analyzed, it is reasonably possible that an estimated material loss could be recognized in the near term.

•NAFTA ARBITRATION — In September 2018, our subsidiary Legacy Vulcan, LLC (Legacy Vulcan), on its own behalf, and on behalf of our Mexican subsidiary Calizas Industriales del Carmen, S.A. de C.V. (Calica), served the United Mexican States (Mexico) a Notice of Intent to Submit a Claim to Arbitration under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). This NAFTA claim relates to the treatment of a portion of our quarrying operations in Quintana Roo, Mexico arising from, among other measures, Mexico’s failure to comply with a legally binding zoning agreement and relates to other unfair, arbitrary and capricious actions by Mexico’s environmental enforcement agency. We assert that these actions are in breach of Mexico’s international obligations under NAFTA and international law.

As required by Article 1118 of NAFTA, we sought to settle this dispute with Mexico through consultations. Notwithstanding our good faith efforts to resolve the dispute amicably, we were unable to do so and filed a Request for Arbitration with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) in December 2018. In January 2019, ICSID registered our Request for Arbitration.

A hearing on the merits took place in July 2021. While we awaited the final resolution from the tribunal, we continued to engage with government officials to pursue an amicable resolution of the dispute. On May 5, 2022, Mexican government officials unexpectedly and arbitrarily shut down Calica’s remaining operations in Mexico. On May 8, 2022, Legacy Vulcan filed an application in the NAFTA arbitration seeking provisional measures and leave to file an ancillary claim in connection with this latest shutdown (see Part I, Item 2 "Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" under the caption "Known Trends or Uncertainties"). In July 2022, the NAFTA arbitration tribunal granted Legacy Vulcan’s application and ordered Mexico not to take any action that might further aggravate the dispute between the parties or render the resolution of the dispute potentially more difficult. A hearing on the merits of the ancillary claim took place in August 2023. We expect that the NAFTA arbitration tribunal will issue a decision on the claim and ancillary claim during 2026.

It is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of these and other legal proceedings in which we are involved, and a number of factors, including developments in ongoing discovery or adverse rulings, or the verdict of a particular jury, could cause actual losses to differ materially from accrued costs. No liability was recorded for claims and litigation for which a loss was determined to be only reasonably possible or for which a loss could not be reasonably estimated. Legal costs incurred in defense of lawsuits are expensed as incurred. In addition, losses on certain claims and litigation described above may be subject to limitations on a per occurrence basis by excess insurance, as described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K.