SPX (SPXC) SDConflict minerals disclosure

Exhibit 1.01

SPX Corporation

Conflict Minerals Report

Reporting Period: January 1, 2021 – December 31, 2021

This Conflict Minerals Report (this “Report”) of SPX Corporation (“SPX,” “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our”) for the reporting period from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021 (the “Reporting Period”) has been prepared pursuant to Rule 13p-1 and Form SD promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

Forward-looking statements contained in this Report are made based on events and circumstances known by us at the time of release and, as such, are inherently subject to unforeseen uncertainties and risks. Statements in this Report which express a belief, expectation, or intention, as well as those that are not historical fact, are forward-looking statements, including statements related to the Company’s business, products, compliance efforts, and expected actions identified in this Report. These forward-looking statements are subject to various risks, uncertainties, and assumptions, including, among other matters, our customers’ requirements to use certain suppliers, our suppliers’ responsiveness and cooperation with our due diligence efforts, our ability to implement improvements in our conflict minerals program, changes to the sourcing status of smelters and refiners in our supply chain, and our ability to identify and mitigate related risks in our supply chain. If one or more of these or other risks materialize, actual results may vary materially from those expressed. For a more complete discussion of these and other risk factors, see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 and subsequent Forms 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The Company makes these statements as of the date of this disclosure, and undertakes no obligation to update them unless otherwise required by law.

Under SEC regulations, if any “conflict minerals” (as defined below) are necessary to the functionality or production of a product manufactured by the Company or contracted by the Company to be manufactured, the Company must conduct in good faith a reasonable country of origin inquiry (“RCOI”) regarding those “conflict minerals” that is reasonably designed to determine whether any of the “conflict minerals” originated in the Covered Countries (as defined below) or are from recycled or scrap sources. Form SD defines “conflict minerals” as (i) columbite-tantalite (coltan), cassiterite, gold, wolframite, and their derivatives, which are currently limited to tantalum, tin, and tungsten; or (ii) any other mineral or its derivatives determined by the U.S. Secretary of State to be financing conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an “adjoining country,” as such term is defined in Form SD, (collectively, the “Covered Countries”).

The Company’s operations may at times manufacture, or contract to manufacture, products for which conflict minerals are necessary to the functionality or production of those products. As required by SEC’s conflict minerals rule, the Company has conducted a good faith RCOI regarding conflict minerals included in the Company’s products during the Reporting Period to determine whether any such conflict minerals originated in the Covered Countries and/or whether any of the conflict minerals were from recycled or scrap sources. Where applicable, the Company has conducted additional due diligence within the meaning of the SEC’s conflict minerals rule. The results of SPX’s RCOI, as well as the Company’s additional due diligence regarding the sources of conflict minerals, are contained in this Report.

This Report is publically available on our website at www.spx.com. The content on, or accessible through, our website or any website referred to in this Report is not, and shall not be deemed to be, part of this Report or incorporated into this or any other filings SPX makes with the SEC unless expressly noted.

Company Overview and Product Description

SPX Corporation is a supplier of highly engineered products and technologies, holding leadership positions in the HVAC and detection and measurement markets. Based in Charlotte, North Carolina, SPX Corporation had more than $1.2 billion in revenue in the year ended December 31, 2021 and approximately 3,100 employees in 15 countries.

The Company’s operations may at times manufacture, or contract to manufacture, products for which conflict minerals are necessary to the functionality or production of those products (collectively, the “products”). Certain of the products contain materials or components that use metallic forms of tin, tantalum, tungsten, and/or gold (“subject minerals”). For the Reporting Period, the Company reasonably determined that the following product groups contain subject minerals:

The due diligence efforts noted below were undertaken on the products manufactured by us in the Reporting Period.

Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry

SPX conducted a good faith RCOI regarding the potential inclusion of conflict minerals in the products during the Reporting Period. There is significant overlap between the Company’s RCOI efforts and the due diligence measures performed. Although some of our products contain subject minerals, we typically do not purchase raw materials directly from mines, smelters, or refiners and we are many steps removed in the supply chain from the sources of ore from which these metals are produced and the smelters/refiners that process those ores. Accordingly, we rely on direct suppliers in the supply chain between us and the original sources of raw materials to provide information regarding the origin of any conflict minerals that may be included in the products.

We have taken steps to identify the applicable smelters and refiners of such subject minerals metals in our supply chain. However, as a downstream purchaser of components and materials that contain subject minerals, our RCOI and due diligence measures can provide only reasonable - not absolute - assurance regarding the source and chain of custody of the conflict minerals. The Company’s RCOI and due diligence processes are based on the necessity of seeking data from direct suppliers and those suppliers seeking similar information within their supply chains to identify the original sources of the subject minerals contained in components and materials supplied to us. Another complicating factor is the unavailability of country of origin and chain of custody information from direct suppliers on a continuous, real-time basis. The Company’s available sources of information may yield inaccurate or incomplete information and may be subject to fraud. The Company engaged Source Intelligence, a third-party consultant with expertise in supplier engagement, to assist the Company in its RCOI.

The Company began its RCOI by identifying product families and commodities that may contain subject minerals. Using information derived from the Company’s procurement systems, supplemented by information supplied by personnel in the Company’s business units supply chain, SPX identified direct suppliers of components and materials that may contain subject minerals.

Direct suppliers were provided information by the Company describing its Conflict Minerals Compliance Program (the “CMCP”) requirements and identifying Source Intelligence as the Company’s third-party consultant assisting in the process. The third-party consultant sent direct suppliers additional information with respect to the CMCP, including an educational tool to facilitate a deeper understanding of the program and why information was being requested. We requested that each of these identified direct suppliers complete a survey utilizing the Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative’s Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (“CMRT”). Suppliers were offered two options to submit the required information, either by uploading the CMRT in Microsoft Excel format or by completing an online survey version of this template directly in the third-party consultant’s platform. This survey, among other things, solicited information regarding the location and identity of smelters and refiners. Suppliers that did not promptly complete a survey were contacted in accordance with an escalating protocol by our third-party consultant and, if still not responding, by us in efforts to get all direct suppliers to complete the survey.

Suppliers were asked to provide information regarding the sourcing of their materials with the ultimate goal of identifying the smelters or refiners of the conflict minerals and associated mine countries of origin. Suppliers who had already performed a RCOI through the use of the CMRT were asked to upload this document into the third-party consultant’s platform or to provide this information in the online survey version. Where a supplier was unable to provide a CMRT, the third-party consultant requested information on its suppliers of products or components which may require conflict minerals for their production or functionality. These Tier 2 suppliers, and subsequent tiers of suppliers as needed, were then engaged following the contact procedures explained above. When contact information was provided, Tier 2 and beyond suppliers were contacted via email in order to build a chain-of-custody back to the smelter or refiner. Suppliers were given the ability to share information at a level with which they were most comfortable, i.e. company, product or user-defined, but the declaration scope was required to be specified.

Supplier responses were evaluated for plausibility, consistency, and gaps. If any of the following “quality control” flags were raised, suppliers were contacted and requested to provide clarification:

Using the information collected from the surveys completed by these direct suppliers, we determined the products that contained one or more of the subject minerals. Upon conclusion of the RCOI, the origin of these subject minerals could not be definitively determined. As such, we proceeded to exercise due diligence.

Due Diligence Framework and Measures

We designed our due diligence framework to materially conform to applicable portions of the OECD (2016), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Third Edition, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264252479-en] (“OECD Guidelines”).

In accordance with applicable portions of the OECD Guidance for downstream companies such as the Company, the due diligence measures we performed include, but are not limited to, the following:

Due Diligence Results

We utilized the CMRT to solicit our relevant direct suppliers to gather detailed information regarding the existence of subject minerals in materials or components sold to us, as well as the origin and chain of custody of the subject minerals. We compared the list of SORs identified to us by suppliers with those included in lists of validated conflict free and verified facilities: the RMAP, the London Bullion Market Association Good Delivery Program and the Responsible Jewellery Council Chain-of-Custody Certification. If the SOR is not certified by these internationally-recognized schemes, the thitd-party consultant attempted to contact the SOR to gain more information about their sourcing practices, including countries of origin and transfer, and whether there are any internal due diligence procedures in place or other processes the SORs takes to track the chain-of-custody on the source of its mineral ores. Relevant information includes: whether the SOR has a documented, effective and communicated conflict-free policy, an accounting system to support a mass balance of materials processed, and traceability documentation. Internet research was also performed to determine whether there are any outside sources of information regarding the SOR’s sourcing practices.

To date information received from direct suppliers was inconclusive in indicating that subject minerals in our supply chain directly or indirectly financed or benefitted armed groups in the Covered Countries; even so, based on the information provided by these suppliers and our own due diligence efforts for the Reporting Period, we do not have sufficient information to conclusively determine the countries of origin or chain of custody of subject minerals in the products. Some suppliers disclosed to us that scrap/recycled sources of subject minerals were identified in their supply chains and did not require due diligence.

Based on the information provided by these suppliers and information available from RMI and the other sources identified above, SPX believes the smelters and refiners and the countries of origin of subject minerals processed by these smelters and refiners that may have been used to produce subject minerals used in the products include those listed on Annexes A and B.

In addition, based on our due diligence certain potential smelters/refiners listed by our direct suppliers were omitted from this Report because the verification status for the smelter/refiner was inconclusive for a variety of reasons. These reasons include, without limitation, that a direct supplier listed the smelter/refiner for processing a metal the smelter/refiner it is not known to process; that RMI determined the smelter/refiner no longer meets the definition of a smelter or refiner; that RMI determined the company listed as a smelter/refiner does not smelt or refine, or exclusively recycles subject minerals; that RMI has retired the parent or group level smelter/refiner; that RMI determined the smelter/refiner does not meets the definition of a smelter/refiner; or otherwise our due diligence was inconclusive with regard to the entity.

Additional Due Diligence and Risk Mitigation

SPX intends to continue to evaluate its due diligence program, and, in particular, intends to periodically review the criteria used to select suppliers for solicitation. We expect to continue to engage with our direct suppliers so that they more closely comply with SPX’s conflict minerals policy and are able to track the sourcing of conflict minerals with greater precision. To that end, the Company expects to continue outreach efforts among the direct supplier base, particularly with respect to direct suppliers that have not previously conducted business with the Company and with respect to direct suppliers that are unable to provide greater transparency as to their own sourcing practices.

Independent Audit Report

Consistent with Rule 13p-1 and the SEC’s April 29, 2014 statement^* relating to Rule 13p-1, this Report is not required to be accompanied by an independent private sector audit.

^* Statement on the Effect of the Court of Appeals Decision on the Conflict Minerals Rule, Keith F. Higgins, Director, SEC Division of Corporation Finance, April 29, 2014.

Annexes

The information in the below tables, Annexes A and B, have been gathered and transmitted through multiple levels of our supply chain, and there is a risk that it is not accurate or current. In most cases, direct suppliers provided smelter and/or refiner information and therefore any country of origin data related to such smelter and/or refiner for their entire supply chain without identifying which smelters and/or refiners may have contributed conflict minerals to components and materials actually supplied to us. Accordingly, we cannot verify that any of the smelters and/or refiners or country of origin data shown in these tables actually were part of our supply chain. The presence of a smelter or refiner in this table does not necessarily mean that conflict minerals processed at that smelter or refiner were used in any components and materials supplied to us or in any SPX Corporation products.

Annex A

Below is a list of the smelters/refiners collected as a result of our due diligence activities:

† Smelter or refiner names as reported by Responsible Minerals Initiative.

* Status defined as follows:

Annex B

Below is a list of the mineral country of origin information collected as a result of our due diligence activities: