LITIGATION AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

The Company operated a leather tannery in Rockford, Michigan from the early 1900s through 2009 (the “Tannery”). The Company also owns a parcel on House Street in Plainfield Township that the Company used for the disposal of Tannery byproducts until about 1970 (the "House Street" site). Beginning in the late 1950s, the Company used 3M Company’s Scotchgard™ in its processing of certain leathers at the Tannery. Until 2002 when 3M changed its Scotchgard™ formula, Tannery byproducts disposed of by the Company at the House Street site and other locations may have contained PFOA and/or PFOS, two chemicals in the family of compounds known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (together, “PFAS”). PFOA and PFOS help provide non-stick, stain-resistant, and water-resistant qualities, and were used for many decades in commercial products like firefighting foams and metal plating, and in common consumer items like food wrappers, microwave popcorn bags, pizza boxes, Teflon™, carpets and Scotchgard™.

The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has concluded that studies of the health effects of PFOA and PFOS are “inconsistent and inconclusive,” but in May 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) announced a lifetime health advisory level of 70 parts per trillion ("ppt") combined for PFOA and PFOS. Lifetime health advisories, while not enforceable, serve as guidance and are benchmarks for determining if concentrations of chemicals in tap water from public utilities are safe for public consumption. In January 2018, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (“MDEQ”) enacted a drinking water criterion of 70 ppt combined for PFOA and PFOS, which set an official state standard for acceptable concentrations of these contaminants in groundwater used for drinking water purposes.

The Company has been served with two regulatory actions including a civil action filed by the MDEQ under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (“RCRA”), Part 201 of the Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (“NREPA”) and Part 31 of NREPA, and a Unilateral Administrative Order issued by the EPA under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) Section 106. The Company has also been served with individual lawsuits and three putative class action lawsuits.

Regulatory and Civil Actions of EPA and MDEQ

On January 10, 2018, the MDEQ filed a civil action against the Company under the federal RCRA and Parts 201 and 31 of NREPA alleging that the Company’s past and present handling, storage, treatment, transportation and/or disposal of solid waste at the Company’s properties has contributed to the disposal of solid wastes that was done in a way that resulted in releases of PFAS at levels that resulted in detections exceeding applicable Michigan cleanup criteria for PFOA and PFOS (the "MDEQ Action"). Plainfield and Algoma Townships have intervened in the MDEQ Action alleging claims under RCRA, CERCLA, Part 201 of NREPA, and common law nuisance.

The MDEQ Action seeks to require the Company to investigate the location and extent of PFAS in the environment, develop and implement plans for the continued sampling and analysis of impacts to drinking water wells from PFAS released or disposed of by the Company, and provide alternative drinking water supplies to homes impacted by PFAS for which the Company is allegedly responsible. The MDEQ Action further seeks to require the Company to connect users of drinking water wells to municipal drinking water supplies to address allegedly unacceptable risks posed by a release or threat of release of PFAS attributable to the Company. On December 19, 2018, the Company filed a third-party complaint against the 3M Company seeking, among other things, recovery of the Company’s remediation and other costs incurred in defense of the MDEQ Action.

The Company is working with the MDEQ to analyze the Tannery property, House Street site and other relevant disposal sites, test nearby residential drinking water wells and coordinate communications to impacted homeowners. The Company’s current remediation efforts have included, among other items, providing alternate drinking water to impacted homes, including bottled water and water filtration systems, sampling residential wells, installing and sampling monitoring wells and collecting and analyzing soil and sediment samples. The Company continues to collect and analyze this data on a continuing basis with the MDEQ and EPA.

On January 10, 2018, the EPA entered a Unilateral Administrative Order (the “Order”) under Section 106(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9606(a). The effective date of the Order was February 1, 2018. The Order pertains to the Company's Tannery and House Street sites and directs the Company to conduct specified removal actions to abate actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances at or from the sites. On February 1, 2018, the Company filed its Notice of Intent to Comply with the EPA Order, which outlined the Company’s position on certain aspects of the proposed Order. In its response, the Company has agreed to comply with the terms of the Order, but has identified inaccuracies and shortcomings in the Order that challenge the legal basis for the Order. Pursuant to the Order, in May and June of 2018, the Company submitted to the EPA its final removal work plans for performing the removal actions at the Tannery and House Street sites. The Company has also provided the EPA with other submittals required by the Order, including a Sampling and Analysis Plan, Health and Safety Plan, Quality Assurance Project Plan, monthly progress reports and other technical reports.

The Company discusses its reserve for remediation costs in the environmental liabilities section below.

Individual and Class Action Litigation

Individual lawsuits and three putative class action lawsuits have been filed against the Company that raise a variety of claims, including claims related to property, remediation, and human health effects. In addition, the current owner of a former landfill and gravel mining operation has sued the Company seeking damages and cost recovery for property damage allegedly caused by the Company’s disposal of tannery waste containing PFAS (collectively with the individual lawsuits and putative class actions, the “Litigation Matters”). Assessing potential liability with respect to the Litigation Matters at this time, however, is difficult. The Litigation Matters are in various stages of discovery and preliminary motions. In addition, there is minimal direct and relevant precedent for these types of claims related to PFAS, and the science regarding the human health effects of PFAS exposure in the environment remains inconclusive and inconsistent, thereby creating additional uncertainties. Due to these factors, combined with the complexities and uncertainties of litigation, the Company is unable to conclude that adverse verdicts resulting from the Litigation Matters are probable, and therefore no amounts are currently reserved for these claims. The Company intends to continue to vigorously defend itself against these claims.

In addition, in December 2018 the Company filed a lawsuit against certain of its historic liability insurers, seeking their participation in Wolverine's defense and remediation efforts.

Other Litigation

The Company is also involved in litigation incidental to its business and is a party to legal actions and claims, including, but not limited to, those related to employment and intellectual property. Some of the legal proceedings include claims for compensatory as well as punitive damages. While the final outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, considering, among other things, the meritorious legal defenses available and liabilities that have been recorded along with applicable insurance, it is management’s opinion that the outcome of these items are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Environmental Liabilities

The following is a summary of the activity with respect to an environmental remediation reserve established by the Company:



	Quarter Ended
(In millions)	March 30, 2019			March 31, 2018
Remediation liability at beginning of the year	$	22.6		$	31.1
Changes in estimate	—			0.9
Amounts paid	(2.3		)	(2.8		)
Remediation liability at the end of the quarter	$	20.3		$	29.2

The reserve balance as of March 30, 2019 comprises $9.2 million that is expected to be paid within the next twelve months and is recorded as a current obligation in other accrued liabilities, with the remaining $11.1 million expected to be paid over the course of up to 28 years, recorded in other liabilities.

The Company establishes a reserve for estimated environmental remediation costs based upon the evaluation of currently-available facts with respect to each individual site. The liabilities are recognized on an undiscounted basis when they are probable and reasonably estimable, generally no later than the completion of feasibility studies or the Company’s commitment to a plan of action. Liabilities for estimated costs of environmental remediation are based primarily upon third-party environmental studies, other internal analysis and the extent of the contamination and the nature of required remedial actions at each site. No estimated recoveries from legacy insurance policies or other responsible parties are included in the reserve.

The Company's remediation activity at the Tannery property, House Street site and other relevant disposal sites is ongoing. It is difficult to estimate the cost of environmental compliance and remediation given the uncertainties regarding the interpretation and enforcement of applicable environmental laws and regulations, the extent of environmental contamination and the existence of alternative cleanup methods. Developments may occur that could materially change the Company’s current cost estimates, including, but not limited to: (i) changes in the information available regarding the environmental impact of the Company’s operations and products; (ii) changes in environmental regulations, changes in permissible levels of specific compounds in drinking water sources, or changes in enforcement theories and policies, including efforts to recover natural resource damages; (iii) new and evolving analytical and remediation techniques; (iv) changes to the form of remediation; (v) success in allocating liability to other potentially responsible parties; and (vi) the financial viability of other potentially responsible parties and third-party indemnitors. For locations at which remediation activity is largely ongoing, the Company cannot estimate a possible loss or range of loss in excess of the associated established reserves for the reasons described above. The Company adjusts recorded liabilities as further information develops or circumstances change.

Minimum Royalties and Advertising Commitments

Minimum future royalty and advertising obligations for the fiscal periods subsequent to March 30, 2019 under the terms of certain licenses held by the Company are as follows:



(In millions)	2019		2020		2021		2022		2023		Thereafter
Minimum royalties	$	1.0	$	1.5	$	1.7	$	1.8	$	—	$	—
Minimum advertising	2.7		3.2		3.3		3.4		3.5		3.6

Minimum royalties are based on both fixed obligations and assumptions regarding the Consumer Price Index. Royalty obligations in excess of minimum requirements are based upon future sales levels. In accordance with these agreements, the Company incurred royalty expense of $0.5 million and $0.5 million for the quarters ended March 30, 2019 and March 31, 2018, respectively.

The terms of certain license agreements also require the Company to make advertising expenditures based on the level of sales of the licensed products. In accordance with these agreements, the Company incurred advertising expense of $0.4 million and $0.8 million for the quarters ended March 30, 2019 and March 31, 2018, respectively.