Edgar Filing: VALHI INC /DE/

vhi10k123110.htm

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 - For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

Commission file number 1-5467

VALHI, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware		87-0110150
(State or other jurisdiction of Incorporation or organization)		(IRS Employer Identification No.)

5430 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1700, Dallas, Texas		75240-2697
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:

(972) 233-1700

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class		Name of each exchange on which registered

Common stock ($.01 par value per share)		New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None.

Indicate by check mark:

If the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes No X

If the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes No X

Whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No

Whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).* Yes No

The registrant has not yet been phased into the interactive data requirements.

If disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. Yes No X

Whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Large accelerated filer Accelerated filer non-accelerated filer X smaller reporting company .

Whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes No X .

The aggregate market value of the 5.6 million shares of voting common stock held by nonaffiliates of Valhi, Inc. as of June 30, 2010 (the last business day of the Registrant's most recently-completed second fiscal quarter) approximated $69.1 million.

As of March 4, 2011, 113,381,167 shares of the Registrant's common stock were outstanding.

Documents incorporated by reference

The information required by Part III is incorporated by reference from the Registrant's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this report.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Valhi, Inc. (NYSE: VHI) is primarily a holding company. We operate through our wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiaries, including NL Industries, Inc., Kronos Worldwide, Inc., CompX International Inc. and Waste Control Specialists LLC (“WCS”). Kronos (NYSE: KRO), NL (NYSE: NL) and CompX (NYSE Amex: CIX) each file periodic reports with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

Our principal executive offices are located at Three Lincoln Center, 5430 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1700, Dallas, Texas 75240. Our telephone number is (972) 233-1700. We maintain a worldwide website at www.valhi.net.

Brief History

LLC Corporation, our legal predecessor, was incorporated in Delaware in 1932. We are the successor company of the 1987 merger of LLC Corporation and another entity controlled by Contran Corporation. We are majority owned by subsidiaries of Contran, which own approximately 94% of our outstanding common stock at December 31, 2010. Substantially all of Contran's outstanding voting stock is held by trusts established for the benefit of certain children and grandchildren of Harold C. Simmons (for which Mr. Simmons is the sole trustee) or is held directly by Mr. Simmons or other persons or entities related to Mr. Simmons. Consequently, Mr. Simmons may be deemed to control Contran and us.

Key events in our history include:

1979 – Contran acquires control of LLC;

1981 - Contran acquires control of our other predecessor company;

1982 - Contran acquires control of Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., a predecessor to CompX;

1984 - Keystone spins-off an entity that includes what is to become CompX; this entity subsequently merges with LLC;

1986 - Contran acquires control of NL, which at the time owns 100% of Kronos and a 50% interest in Titanium Metals Corporation (“TIMET”);

1987 - LLC and another Contran controlled company merge to form Valhi, our current corporate structure;

1988 - NL spins-off an entity that includes its investment in TIMET;

1995 - WCS begins start-up operations;

1996 - TIMET completes an initial public offering;

2003 – NL completes the spin-off of Kronos through the pro-rata distribution of Kronos shares to its shareholders including us;

2004 through 2005 - NL distributes Kronos shares to its shareholders, including us, through quarterly dividends;

2007 – We distribute all of our TIMET common stock to our shareholders through a stock dividend;

2008 – WCS receives a license for the disposal of byproduct material and begins construction of the byproduct facility infrastructure;

2009 – WCS receives a license for the disposal of Class A, B and C low-level radioactive waste and completes construction of the byproduct facility;

2010 – Kronos completes a secondary offering of its common stock lowering our ownership of Kronos to 80%; and

2011 – WCS begins construction on its low-level and mixed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility.

- 1 -

Unless otherwise indicated, references in this report to “we”, “us” or “our” refer to Valhi, Inc. and its subsidiaries, taken as a whole.

Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. Statements in this Annual Report that are not historical facts are forward-looking in nature and represent management’s beliefs and assumptions based on currently available information. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the use of words such as "believes," "intends," "may," "should," "could," "anticipates," "expects" or comparable terminology, or by discussions of strategies or trends. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, we do not know if these expectations will be correct. Such statements by their nature involve substantial risks and uncertainties that could significantly impact expected results. Actual future results could differ materially from those predicted. The factors that could cause actual future results to differ materially from those described herein are the risks and uncertainties discussed in this Annual Report and those described from time to time in our other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) include, but are not limited to, the following:

Future supply and demand for our products;

The extent of the dependence of certain of our businesses on certain market sectors;

The cyclicality of certain of our businesses (such as Kronos’ titanium dioxide pigment (“TiO2”) operations);

Customer inventory levels (such as the extent to which Kronos’ customers may, from time to time, accelerate purchases of TiO2 in advance of anticipated price increases or defer purchases of TiO2in advance of anticipated price decreases;

Changes in raw material and other operating costs (such as energy costs);

Changes in the availability of raw materials (such as ore);

General global economic and political conditions (such as changes in the level of gross domestic product in various regions of the world and the impact of such changes on demand for, among other things, TiO2);

Competitive products and prices, including increased competition from low-cost manufacturing sources (such as China);

Possible disruption of our business or increases in the cost of doing business resulting from terrorist activities or global conflicts;

Customer and competitor strategies;

The impact of pricing and production decisions;

Competitive technology positions;

Our ability to protect our intellectual property rights in our technology;

The introduction of trade barriers;

Restructuring transactions involving us and our affiliates;

Potential consolidation or solvency of our competitors;

The ability of our subsidiaries to pay us dividends (such as Kronos’ suspension of its dividend in 2009 through the third quarter of 2010);

Uncertainties associated with new product development;

Fluctuations in currency exchange rates (such as changes in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and each of the euro, the Norwegian krone, the Canadian dollar and the New Taiwan dollar);

- 2 -

Operating interruptions (including, but not limited to, labor disputes, leaks, natural disasters, fires, explosions, unscheduled or unplanned downtime and transportation interruptions);

The timing and amounts of insurance recoveries;

Our ability to renew, amend, refinance or establish credit facilities;

Our ability to maintain sufficient liquidity;

The ultimate outcome of income tax audits, tax settlement initiatives or other tax matters;

Our ultimate ability to utilize income tax attributes or changes in income tax rates related to such attributes, the benefit of which has been recognized under the more-likely-than-not recognition criteria (such as Kronos’ ability to utilize its German net operating loss carryforwards);

Environmental matters (such as those requiring compliance with emission and discharge standards for existing and new facilities, or new developments regarding environmental remediation at sites related to our former operations);

Government laws and regulations and possible changes therein (such as changes in government regulations which might impose various obligations on present and former manufacturers of lead pigment and lead-based paint, including NL, with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the use of such products);

The ultimate resolution of pending litigation (such as NL's lead pigment litigation, environmental and other litigation, Kronos’ class action litigation and CompX’s patent litigation);

Uncertainties associated with the development of new product features;

Our ability to comply with covenants contained in our revolving bank credit facilities;

Our ability to complete, obtain approval of and comply with the conditions of our licenses and permits (such as approval by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“TCEQ”) of license conditions of WCS’s low-level radioactive waste disposal license); and

Possible future litigation.

Should one or more of these risks materialize (or the consequences of such development worsen), or should the underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results could differ materially from those currently forecasted or expected. We disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement whether as a result of changes in information, future events or otherwise.

- 3 -

Segments

We have three consolidated operating segments at December 31, 2010:

Chemicals Kronos Worldwide, Inc.	Our chemicals segment is operated through our majority control of Kronos. Kronos is a leading global producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide pigments (“TiO2”), a base industrial product used in a diverse range of customer applications and end-use markets, including coatings, plastics, paper, food, cosmetics, inks, textile fibers, rubber, pharmaceuticals, glass, ceramics and other industrial and consumer markets.

Component Products CompX International Inc.	We operate in the component products industry through our majority control of CompX. CompX is a leading global manufacturer of security products, precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support systems used in the office furniture, transportation, tool storage and a variety of other industries. CompX also manufactures stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges and throttle controls for the performance boat industry.

Waste Management Waste Control Specialists LLC	WCS is our subsidiary which operates a West Texas facility for the processing, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous, toxic and certain types of low-level radioactive waste. WCS obtained a byproduct disposal license in 2008 and began disposal operations at this facility in October 2009. In January 2009 WCS received a low-level radioactive waste disposal license, which was signed in September 2009. Construction of the low-level radioactive waste facility began in January 2011, and the facility is expected to be operational in late 2011.

For additional information about our segments and equity investments see “Part II – Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Notes 2 and 7 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

- 4 -

CHEMICALS SEGMENT - KRONOS WORLDWIDE, INC.

Business Overview - Through our majority-controlled subsidiary, Kronos, we are a leading global producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide pigments, or TiO2, a base industrial product used in a wide range of applications. We, along with our distributors and agents, sell and provide technical services for our products to over 4,000 customers in approximately 100 countries with the majority of sales in Europe and North America. We believe we have developed considerable expertise and efficiency in the manufacture, sale, shipment and service of our products in domestic and international markets.

TiO2 is a white inorganic pigment used in a wide range of products for its exceptional ability to impart whiteness, brightness, opacity and durability. TiO2 is a critical component of everyday applications, such as coatings, plastics and paper, as well as many specialty products such as inks, food and cosmetics. TiO2 is widely considered to be superior to alternative white pigments in large part due to its hiding power (or opacity), which is the ability to cover or mask other materials effectively and efficiently. TiO2 is designed, marketed and sold based on specific end-use applications.

TiO2 is the largest commercially used whitening pigment because it has a high refractive rating giving it more hiding power than any other commercially produced white pigment. In addition, TiO2 has excellent resistance to interaction with other chemicals, good thermal stability and resistance to ultraviolet degradation. Although there are other white pigments on the market, we believe there are no effective substitutes for TiO2 because no other white pigment has the physical properties for achieving comparable opacity and brightness or can be incorporated in as cost-effective a manner. Pigment extenders such as kaolin clays, calcium carbonate and polymeric opacifiers are used in a number of end-use markets as white pigments. However, these products are not able to duplicate the opacity performance characteristics of TiO2 and we believe these products are unlikely to have a significant impact on the use of TiO2.

TiO2 is considered a “quality-of-life” product. Demand for TiO2 has generally been driven by worldwide gross domestic product and has generally increased with rising standards of living in various regions of the world. According to industry estimates, TiO2 consumption, excluding China, has grown at a compound annual growth rate of approximately 2.6% since 1990. Per capita consumption of TiO2 in the United States and Western Europe far exceeds that in other areas of the world, and these regions are expected to continue to be the largest consumers of TiO2. We believe that North America and Western Europe account for approximately 24% and 33% of global TiO2 consumption, respectively. Markets for TiO2 are increasing in South America, the Far East and China and we believe they will become significant as economies in these regions continue to develop and quality-of-life products, including TiO2, experience greater demand.

In recent years, global production capacity for TiO2 has modestly increased primarily due to debottlenecking existing chloride production facilities. However, during 2008 and 2009, several TiO2 manufacturers permanently reduced capacity at high operating cost facilities in Europe, North America and China, in part in connection with environmental-related issues. Decreased capacity, along with the decline in customer inventories which occurred in the first half of 2009, led to industry-wide tightness in TiO2 inventories. As a result of these factors, TiO2 selling prices began to increase in the second half of 2009 and continued to increase during 2010. Further increases in TiO2 selling prices are expected to be implemented in 2011. We believe the decreased capacity, higher demand and improved pricing should result in improved operating rates and product margins for TiO2 producers.

- 5 -

Products and End-Use Markets - We, including our predecessors, have produced and marketed TiO2 in North America and Europe, our primary markets, for over 80 years. In Europe and North America, we estimate our current market share at 22% and 19%, respectively. We believe we are the largest producer of TiO2 in Europe with approximately one-half of our sales volumes attributable to markets in Europe. The table below shows our market share for our significant markets, Europe and North America, for the last three years.

	Years Ended December 31,
	2008			2009			2010

Europe		19	%		19	%		22	%
North America		16	%		16	%		19	%

We believe we are the leading seller of TiO2 in several countries, including Germany, with an estimated 14% share of worldwide TiO2 sales volume in 2010. Overall, we are the world’s third-largest producer of TiO2.

We offer our customers a broad portfolio of products that include over 40 different TiO2 pigment grades under the Kronos® trademark which provide a variety of performance properties to meet customers’ specific requirements. Our major customers include domestic and international paint, plastics and paper manufacturers. We ship TiO2 to our customers in either a powder or slurry form via rail, truck or ocean carrier. Sales of our core TiO2 pigments represented approximately 90% of our net sales in 2010. We and our agents and distributors primarily sell and provide technical services for our products in three major end-use markets: coatings, plastics and paper. The following tables show our approximate sales volume by geographic region and end use for the year ending December 31, 2010:

Sales Volumes Percentages by Geographic Region		Sales Volumes Percentages by End Use

Europe	53%	Coatings	52%
North America	33%	Plastics	35%
Asia Pacific	10%	Other	8%
Rest of World	4%	Paper	5%

Some of the principal applications for our products include the following:

TiO2 for Coatings. Our TiO2 is used to provide opacity, durability, tinting strength and brightness in industrial coatings, as well as coatings for home interiors and exteriors, automobiles, aircraft, machines, appliances, traffic paint and other special purpose coatings. The amount of TiO2 used in coatings varies widely depending on the opacity, color and quality desired. Generally, the higher the opacity requirement of the coating, the greater the TiO2 content.

TiO2 for Plastics. We produce TiO2 pigments that improve the optical and physical properties in plastics, including whiteness and opacity. TiO2 is used to provide opacity in items such as containers and packaging materials, and vinyl products such as windows, door profiles and siding. TiO2 also generally provides hiding power, neutral undertone, brightness and surface durability for housewares, appliances, toys, computer cases and food packages. TiO2’s high brightness along with its opacity, is used in some engineering plastics to help mask their undesirable natural color. TiO2 is also used in masterbatch, which is a concentrate of TiO2 and other additives and is one of the largest uses for TiO2 in the plastics end-use market. In masterbatch, the TiO2 is dispersed at high concentrations into a plastic resin and is then used by manufacturers of plastic containers, bottles and packaging and agricultural films.

- 6 -

TiO2 for Paper. Our TiO2 is used in the production of several types of paper, including laminate (decorative) paper, filled paper and coated paper, to provide whiteness, brightness, opacity and color stability. Although we sell our TiO2 to all segments of the paper end-use market, our primary focus is on the TiO2 grades used in paper laminates, where several layers of paper are laminated together using melamine resin under high temperature and pressure. The top layer of paper contains TiO2 and is the layer that is printed with decorative patterns. Paper laminates are used to replace materials such as wood and tile for such applications as counter tops, furniture and wallboard. TiO2 is beneficial in these applications because it assists in preventing the material from fading or changing color after prolonged exposure to sunlight and other weathering agents.

TiO2 for Other Applications. We produce TiO2 to improve the opacity and hiding power of printing inks. TiO2 allows inks to achieve very high print quality while not interfering with the technical requirements of printing machinery, including low abrasion, high printing speed and high temperatures. Our TiO2 is also used in textile applications where TiO2 functions as an opacifying and delustering agent. In man-made fibers such as rayon and polyester, TiO2 corrects an otherwise undesirable glossy and translucent appearance. Without the presence of TiO2, these materials would be unsuitable for use in many textile applications.

We produce high purity sulfate process anatase TiO2 used to provide opacity, whiteness and brightness in a variety of cosmetic and personal care products, such as skin cream, lipstick, eye shadow and toothpaste. Our TiO2 is also found in food products, such as candy and confectionaries, and in pet foods where it is used to obtain uniformity of color and appearance. In pharmaceuticals, our TiO2 is used commonly as a colorant in pill and capsule coatings as well as in liquid medicines to provide uniformity of color and appearance. Kronos® purified anatase grades meet the applicable requirements of the CTFA (Cosmetics, Toiletries and Fragrances Association), USP and BP (United States Pharmacopoeia and British Pharmacopoeia) and the FDA (United States Food and Drug Administration).

Our TiO2 business is enhanced by the following three complementary businesses, which comprised approximately 10% of our net sales in 2010:

We own and operate two ilmenite mines in Norway pursuant to a governmental concession with an unlimited term. We commenced production from our second mine in 2009. Ilmenite is a raw material used directly as a feedstock by some sulfate-process TiO2 plants. We believe we have a significant competitive advantage because our mines supply our feedstock requirements for all of our European sulfate-process plants. We also sell ilmenite ore to third-parties, some of whom are our competitors. The mines have estimated ilmenite reserves that are expected to last at least 60 years.

We manufacture and sell iron-based chemicals, which are co-products and processed co-products of the sulfate and chloride process TiO2 pigment production. These co-product chemicals are marketed through our Ecochem division and are primarily used as treatment and conditioning agents for industrial effluents and municipal wastewater as well as in the manufacture of iron pigments, cement and agricultural products.

We manufacture and sell titanium oxychloride and titanyl sulfate, which are side-stream specialty products from the production of TiO2. Titanium oxychloride is used in specialty applications in the formulation of pearlescent pigments, production of electroceramic capacitors for cell phones and other electronic devices. Titanyl sulfate productions are used in pearlescent pigments, natural gas pipe and other specialty applications.

- 7 -

Manufacturing, Operations and Properties - We produce TiO2 in two crystalline forms: rutile and anatase. Rutile TiO2 is manufactured using both a chloride production process and a sulfate production process, whereas anatase TiO2 is only produced using a sulfate production process. Many end-use applications can use either form, especially during periods of TiO2 supply tightness such as we are currently experiencing. The chloride process is the preferred form for use in coatings and plastics, the two largest end-use markets. Due to environmental factors and customer considerations, the proportion of TiO2 industry sales represented by chloride process pigments has increased relative to sulfate process pigments and, in 2010, chloride process production facilities represented approximately 60% of industry capacity. The sulfate process represents a much smaller percentage of annual global TiO2 production and is preferred for use in selected paper products, ceramics, rubber tires, man-made fibers, food and cosmetics. Once an intermediate TiO2 pigment has been produced by either the chloride or sulfate process, it is “finished” into products with specific performance characteristics for particular end-use applications through proprietary processes involving various chemical surface treatments and intensive micronizing (milling).

Chloride Process. The chloride process is a continuous process in which chlorine is used to extract rutile TiO2. The chloride process typically has lower manufacturing costs than the sulfate process due to higher yield, less waste, lower energy requirements and lower labor costs. This process has also gained market share over the sulfate process because of the relatively lower upfront capital investment in plant and equipment required. The chloride process produces less waste than the sulfate process because much of the chlorine is recycled and feedstock bearing higher titanium content is used. The chloride process produces an intermediate base pigment with a wide range of properties.

Sulfate Process. The sulfate process is a batch process in which sulfuric acid is used to extract the TiO2 from ilmenite or titanium slag. After separation from the impurities in the ore (mainly iron) the TiO2 is precipitated and calcined to form an intermediate base pigment ready for sale or can be upgraded through finishing treatment.

We produced 524,000 metric tons of TiO2 in 2010, up from the 402,000 metric tons we produced in 2009. Such production amounts include our 50% interest in the TiO2 manufacturing joint-venture discussed below. Our average production capacity utilization rates were near full capacity in 2008 and 2010 and approximately 76% in 2009. In late 2008, and as a result of the sharp decline in global demand, we experienced a build up in our inventory levels. In order to decrease our inventory levels and improve our liquidity, we implemented production curtailments during the first half of 2009. Consequently, our average production capacity utilization rates were approximately 58% during the first half of 2009 as compared to 94% during the second half of 2009.

We operate four TiO2 plants in Europe (one in each of Leverkusen, Germany; Nordenham, Germany; Langerbrugge, Belgium; and Fredrikstad, Norway). In North America, we have a TiO2 plant in Varennes, Quebec, Canada and, through the manufacturing joint venture described below in “TiO2 Manufacturing Joint Venture,” a 50% interest in a TiO2 plant in Lake Charles, Louisiana.

- 8 -

Our production capacity in 2010 was 532,000 metric tons, approximately three-fourths of which was from the chloride production process. The following table presents the division of our 2010 manufacturing capacity by plant location and type of manufacturing process:

		% of Capacity by TiO2 Manufacturing Process
Facility	Description	Chloride			Sulfate

Leverkusen, Germany (1)	TiO2 production, chloride and sulfate process, co-products		41	%		26	%

Nordenham, Germany	TiO2 production, sulfate process, co-products		-			40

Langerbrugge, Belgium	TiO2 production, chloride process, co-products, titanium chemicals products		20			-

Fredrikstad, Norway (2)	TiO2 production, sulfate process, co-products		-			20

Varennes, Canada	TiO2 production, chloride and sulfate process, slurry facility, titanium chemicals products		20			14

Lake Charles, Louisiana (3)	TiO2 production, chloride process		19			-

Total			100	%		100	%

(1)

The Leverkusen facility is located within an extensive manufacturing complex owned by Bayer AG. We own the Leverkusen facility, which represents about one-third of our current TiO2 production capacity, but we lease the land under the facility from Bayer under a long term agreement which expires in 2050. Lease payments are periodically negotiated with Bayer for periods of at least two years at a time. Bayer or its affiliates provides some raw materials including chlorine, auxiliary and operating materials, utilities and services necessary to operate the Leverkusen facility under separate supplies and services agreements.

(2)

The Fredrikstad plant is located on public land and is leased until April 2013 with an option to extend the lease for an additional 50 years.

(3)

We operate this facility in a 50/50 joint venture with Tioxide Americas Inc., a subsidiary of Huntsman Corporation. See Note 7 to our Consolidated Financial Statements and “TiO2 Manufacturing Joint Venture.”

We own the land underlying all of our principle production facilities unless otherwise indicated in the table above.

Our production capacity has increased by approximately 30% over the past ten years due to debottlenecking programs, with only moderate capital expenditures. We believe that our annual attainable production capacity for 2011 is approximately 532,000 metric tons and we currently expect we will operate at near full production capacity for the year.

We also operate two ilmenite mines in Norway pursuant to a governmental concession with an unlimited term. In addition, we operate a rutile slurry manufacturing plant in Lake Charles, Louisiana, which converts dry pigment manufactured at the Lake Charles TiO2 facility into a slurry form that is then shipped to customers.

- 9 -

We have various corporate and administrative offices located in the U.S., Germany, Norway, Canada and Belgium and various sales offices located in the U.S., Canada, Belgium, France, the Netherlands and the U.K.

TiO2 Manufacturing Joint Venture - Kronos Louisiana, Inc., one of our subsidiaries, and Huntsman Corporation each own a 50% interest in a manufacturing joint venture, Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P., or LPC. LPC owns and operates a chloride-process TiO2 plant located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. We and Huntsman share production from the plant equally pursuant to separate offtake agreements.

A supervisory committee directs the business and affairs of the joint venture, including production and output decisions. This committee is composed of four members, two of whom we appoint and two of whom Huntsman appoints. Two general managers manage the operations of the joint venture acting under the direction of the supervisory committee. We appoint one general manager and Huntsman appoints the other.

We are required to purchase one-half of the TiO2 produced by the joint venture. The joint venture is not consolidated in our financial statements, because we do not control it. We account for our interest in the joint venture by the equity method. The joint venture operates on a break-even basis and therefore we do not have any equity in earnings of the joint venture. We share all costs and capital expenditures equally with Huntsman with the exception of raw material and packaging costs for the pigment grades produced. Our share of net costs is reported as cost of sales as the TiO2 is sold. See Notes 6 and 7 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

Raw Materials - The primary raw materials used in chloride process TiO2 are titanium-containing feedstock (natural rutile ore or purchased slag), chlorine and coke. Chlorine is available from a number of suppliers, while petroleum coke is available from a limited number of suppliers. Titanium-containing feedstock suitable for use in the chloride process is available from a limited but increasing number of suppliers principally in Australia, South Africa, Canada, India and the United States. We purchase chloride process grade slag from Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium under a long-term supply contract that expires at the end of 2011 and from Exxaro TSA Sands (PTY) LTD under a supply contract that expires in December 2013. We purchase upgraded slag from Q.I.T. Fer et Titane Inc. (a subsidiary of Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium) under a long-term supply contract that expires at the end of 2015. We purchase natural rutile ore primarily from Iluka Resources, Limited under contracts that expire at the end of 2011. In the past we have been, and we expect in the future, we will continue to be, successful in obtaining long-term extensions to these and other existing supply contracts prior to their expiration. We expect the raw materials purchased under these contracts to meet our chloride process feedstock requirements over the next several years.

The primary raw materials used in sulfate process TiO2 are titanium-containing feedstock, primarily ilmenite or purchased sulfate grade slag and sulfuric acid. Sulfuric acid is available from a number of suppliers. Titanium-containing feedstock suitable for use in the sulfate process is available from a limited number of suppliers principally in Norway, Canada, Australia, India and South Africa. As one of the few vertically-integrated producers of sulfate process TiO2, we operate two rock ilmenite mines in Norway, which provided all of the feedstock for our European sulfate process TiO2 plants in 2010. We expect ilmenite production from our mines to meet our European sulfate process feedstock requirements for the foreseeable future. For our Canadian sulfate process plant, we also purchase sulfate grade slag primarily from Q.I.T. Fer et Titane Inc. (a subsidiary of Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium), under a long-term supply contract that expires at the end of 2014. We expect the raw materials purchased under these contracts to meet our sulfate process feedstock requirements over the next several years.

- 10 -

Many of our raw material contracts contain fixed quantities we are required to purchase, although these contracts allow for an upward or downward adjustment in the quantity purchased. The pricing under these agreements is generally negotiated annually.

The following table summarizes our raw materials purchased or mined in 2010.

Production Process/Raw Material	Raw Materials Procured or Mined
	(In thousands of metric tons)

Chloride process plants:
Purchased slag or natural rutile ore		439

Sulfate process plants:
Ilmenite ore mined and used internally		328
Purchased slag		31

Sales and Marketing - Our marketing strategy is aimed at developing and maintaining strong customer relationships with new and existing accounts. Because TiO2 represents a significant raw material cost for our customers, the purchasing decisions are often made by our customers’ senior management. We work to maintain close relationships with the key decision makers, through in-depth frequent in-person meetings. We endeavor to extend these commercial and technical relationships to multiple levels within our customers’ organization using our direct sales force and technical service group to accomplish this objective. We believe this has helped build customer loyalty to Kronos and strengthen our competitive position. Close cooperation and strong customer relationships enable us to stay closely attuned to trends in our customers’ businesses. Where appropriate, we work in conjunction with our customers to solve formulation or application problems by modifying specific product properties or developing new pigment grades. We also focus our sales and marketing efforts on those geographic and end-use market segments where we believe we can realize higher selling prices. This focus includes continuously reviewing and optimizing our customer and product portfolios.

Our marketing strategy is also aimed at working directly with customers to monitor the success of our products in their end-use applications, evaluate the need for improvements in product and process technology and identify opportunities to develop new product solutions for our customers. Our marketing staff closely coordinates with our sales force and technical specialists to ensure that the needs of our customers are met, and to help develop and commercialize new grades where appropriate.

We sell a majority of our products through our direct sales force operating from six sales offices in Europe and one sales office in North America. We also utilize sales agents and distributors who are authorized to sell our products in specific geographic areas. In Europe, our sales efforts are conducted primarily through our direct sales force and our sales agents. Our agents do not sell any TiO2 products other than Kronos® brand products. In North America, our sales are made primarily through our direct sales force and supported by a network of distributors. In addition to our direct sales force and sales agents, many of our sales agents also act as distributors to service our smaller customers in all regions. We offer the same high level of customer and technical service to the customers who purchase our products through distributors as we offer to our larger customers serviced by our direct sales force.

- 11 -

We sell to a diverse customer base and no single customer made up more than 10% of our sales for 2010. Our largest ten customers accounted for approximately 27% of sales in 2010.

Neither our business as a whole nor that of any of our principal product groups is seasonal to any significant extent. However, TiO2 sales are generally higher in the second and third quarters of the year, due in part to the increase in paint production in the spring to meet demand during the spring and summer painting seasons. We have historically operated our production facilities at near full capacity rates throughout the entire year, which among other things helps to minimize our per-unit production costs. As a result, we normally will build inventories during the first and fourth quarters of each year, in order to maximize our product availability during the higher demand periods normally experienced in the second and third quarters.

Competition - The TiO2 industry is highly competitive. We compete primarily on the basis of price, product quality, technical service and the availability of high performance pigment grades. Since TiO2 is not a traded commodity, its pricing is largely a product of negotiation between suppliers and their respective customers. Although certain TiO2 grades are considered specialty pigments, the majority of our grades and substantially all of our production are considered commodity pigments with price and availability being the most significant competitive factors along with quality and customer service. During 2010, we had an estimated 14% share of worldwide TiO2 sales volume, and based on sales volumes, we believe we are the leading seller of TiO2 in several countries, including Germany.

Our principal competitors are E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., or Dupont; Millennium Inorganic Chemicals, Inc. (a subsidiary of National Titanium Dioxide Company Ltd.), or Cristal; Huntsman Corporation; Tronox Incorporated; and Sachtleben Chemie. The top five TiO2 producers account for approximately 63% of the world’s production capacity. The following chart shows our estimate of worldwide production capacity in 2010:

Worldwide Production Capacity – 2010

DuPont	23%
Cristal	14%
Kronos	10%
Huntsman	9%
Tronox	7%
Other	37%

DuPont has over one-half of total North American TiO2 production capacity and is our principal North American competitor. Tronox filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January 2009, and has continued to operate as a debtor-in-possession until February 2011, at which time it emerged from Chapter 11. It remains unclear to what extent Tronox will compete in the TiO2 industry at the conclusion of Tronox’s bankruptcy proceedings, which in part compensated for the shut down of Ti02 plants in France, the United States and China.

Over the past ten years, we and our competitors have increased industry capacity through debottlenecking projects. Although overall industry pigment demand is expected to be higher in 2011 as compared to 2010 as a result of improving worldwide economic conditions, we do not expect any significant efforts will be undertaken by us or our competitors to further increase capacity for the foreseeable future, other than through debottlenecking projects. If actual developments differ from our expectations, ours and the TiO2 industry’s performance could be unfavorably affected.

- 12 -

The TiO2 industry is characterized by high barriers to entry consisting of high capital costs, proprietary technology and significant lead times (typically three to five years in our experience) required to construct new facilities or expand existing capacity. In addition, we believe the suppliers of titanium-containing feedstock do not currently have the ability to supply the raw materials that would be required to operate any such new TiO2 production capacity until they have invested in additional infrastructure required to expand their own production capacity, which we believe will take a few years to complete. We are not aware of any TiO2 plants currently under construction and we believe it is unlikely any new plants will be constructed in Europe or North America in the foreseeable future.

Research and Development - We employ scientists, chemists, process engineers and technicians who are engaged in research and development, process technology and quality assurance activities in Leverkusen, Germany. These individuals have the responsibility for improving chloride and sulfate production processes, improving product quality and strengthening our competitive position by developing new applications. Our expenditures for these activities were approximately $12 million in each of 2008 and 2009 and $13 million in 2010. We expect to spend $18 million to $20 million on research and development in 2011.

We continually seek to improve the quality of our grades and have been successful at developing new grades for existing and new applications to meet the needs of our customers and increase product life cycles. Since 2005, we have added four new grades for plastics and coatings.

Patents, Trademarks, Trade Secrets and Other Intellectual Property Rights - We have a comprehensive intellectual property protection strategy that includes obtaining, maintaining and enforcing our patents, primarily in the United States, Canada and Europe. We also protect our trademark and trade secret rights and have entered into license agreements with third parties concerning various intellectual property matters. We have also from time to time been involved in disputes over intellectual property.

Patents. We have obtained patents and have numerous patent applications pending that cover our products and the technology used in the manufacture of our products. Our patent strategy is important to us and our continuing business activities. In addition to maintaining our patent portfolio, we seek patent protection for our technical developments, principally in the United States, Canada and Europe. U.S. Patents are generally in effect for 20 years from the date of filing. Our U.S. patent portfolio includes patents having remaining terms ranging from one year to 20 years.

Trademarks and Trade Secrets. Our trademarks, including Kronos®, are covered by issued and or pending registrations, including in Canada and the United States. We protect the marks that we use in connection with the products we manufacture and sell and have developed goodwill in connection with our long-term use of our trademarks. We conduct research activities in secret and we protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets through reasonable measures, including confidentiality agreements and security procedures. We rely upon unpatented proprietary knowledge and continuing technological innovation and other trade secrets to develop and maintain our competitive position. Our proprietary chloride production process is an important part of our technology and our business could be harmed if we fail to maintain confidentiality of our trade secrets used in this technology.

- 13 -

Employees - As of December 31, 2010, Kronos employed the following number of people:

Europe			2,000
Canada			400
United States (1)			40

Total			2,440

(1) Excludes employees of our Louisiana joint venture.

The employees at each of our production facilities are organized by labor unions. In Europe, our union employees are covered by master collective bargaining agreements for the chemical industry that are generally renewed annually. In Canada, our union employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement that expires in 2013.

Regulatory and Environmental Matters - Our operations and properties are governed by various environmental laws and regulations, which are complex, change frequently and have tended to become stricter over time. These environmental laws govern, among other things, the generation, storage, handling, use and transportation of hazardous materials; the emission and discharge of hazardous materials into the ground, air or water; and the health and safety of our employees. Certain of our operations are, or have been, engaged in the generation, storage, handling, manufacture or use of substances or compounds that may be considered toxic or hazardous within the meaning of applicable environmental laws and regulations. As with other companies engaged in similar businesses, certain of our past and current operations and products have the potential to cause environmental or other damage. We have implemented and continue to implement various policies and programs in an effort to minimize these risks. Our policy is to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations at all our facilities and to strive to improve our environmental performance. It is possible that future developments, such as stricter requirements in environmental laws and enforcement policies, could adversely affect our operations, including production, handling, use, storage, transportation, sale or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or require us to make capital and other expenditures to comply, and could adversely affect our consolidated financial position and results of operations or liquidity.

Our U.S. manufacturing operations are governed by federal, state and local environmental and worker health and safety laws and regulations. These include the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, (or “RCRA”), the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Toxic Substances Control (“TSCA”) Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, or CERCLA, as well as the state counterparts of these statutes. Some of these laws hold current or previous owners or operators of real property liable for the costs of cleaning up contamination, even if these owners or operators did not know of, and were not responsible for, such contamination. These laws also assess liability on any person who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances, regardless of whether the affected site is owned or operated by such person. Although we have not incurred and do not currently anticipate any material liabilities in connection with such environmental laws, we may be required to make expenditures for environmental remediation in the future.

While the laws regulating operations of industrial facilities in Europe vary from country to country, a common regulatory framework is provided by the European Union, or the EU. Germany and Belgium are members of the EU and follow its initiatives. Norway is not a member but generally patterns its environmental regulatory actions after the EU.

- 14 -

At our sulfate plant facilities in Germany, we recycle spent sulfuric acid either through contracts with third parties or at our own facilities. In addition, at our German locations we have a contract with a third-party to treat certain sulfate-process effluents. At our Norwegian plant, we ship spent acid to a third party location where it is used as a neutralization agent. These contracts may be terminated by either party after giving three or four years advance notice, depending on the contract.

From time to time, our facilities may be subject to environmental regulatory enforcement under U.S. and non-U.S. statutes. Typically we establish compliance programs to resolve these matters. Occasionally, we may pay penalties. To date such penalties have not involved amounts having a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. We believe that all of our facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws.

In December 2006, the EU approved Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals, or REACH, which took effect on June 1, 2007 and will be phased in over an 11-year period from the implementation date. Under REACH, companies that manufacture or import more than one ton of a chemical substance per year in the EU will be required to register such chemical substances in a central data base. REACH affects our European operations by imposing a testing, evaluation and registration program for many of the chemicals we use or produce in Europe. Under REACH, substances of very high concern may require authorization for further use and may also be restricted in the future, which could increase our production costs. We have established a REACH team that is working to identify and list all substances purchased, manufactured or imported by or for us in the EU. We spent $.5 million in 2008, $.7 million in 2009 and $2.6 million in 2010 on REACH compliance and we do not anticipate that future compliance costs will be material to us.

Our capital expenditures related to ongoing environmental compliance, protection and improvement programs in 2010 were $20 million and are currently expected to be approximately $21 million in 2011.

COMPONENT PRODUCTS SEGMENT - COMPX INTERNATIONAL INC.

Business Overview - Through our majority-controlled subsidiary, CompX, we manufacture components that are sold to a variety of industries including office furniture, recreational transportation (including performance boats), mailboxes, toolboxes, appliances, banking equipment, vending equipment and computer related equipment. Our products are principally designed for use in medium to high-end product applications, where design, quality and durability are valued by our customers.

Manufacturing, Operations and Products - We manufacture mechanical and electrical cabinet locks and other locking mechanisms for sale to the postal, office and institutional furniture, transportation, vending, tool storage, banking, general cabinetry and other industries. We believe we are a North American market leader in the manufacture and sale of cabinet locks and other locking mechanisms. Our security products are used in a variety of applications including ignition systems, mailboxes, file cabinets, desk drawers, tool storage cabinets, vending and gaming machines, high security medical cabinetry, electrical circuit panels, storage compartments, gas station security, bank bags and parking meters. These products include:

·	disc tumbler locks which provide moderate security and generally represent the lowest cost lock to produce;

pin tumbler locking mechanisms which are more costly to produce and are used in applications requiring higher levels of security, including our TuBar® and our KeSet® and System 64 high security systems, which allow the user to change the keying on a single lock 64 times without removing the lock from its enclosure; and

·	our innovative eLock electronic locks which provide stand alone or networked security and audit trail capability for drug storage and other valuables through the use of a proximity card, magnetic stripe or keypad credentials.

- 15 -

A substantial portion of our security product sales consist of products with specialized adaptations to an individual customer’s specifications, some of which are listed above. We also have a standardized product line suitable for many customers, which is offered through a North American distribution network to lock distributors and smaller original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) via our STOCK LOCKS® distribution program.

We manufacture a complete line of precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support systems for use in applications such as file cabinets, desk drawers, computer related equipment, home appliances, tool storage cabinets, imaging equipment, automated teller machines and other applications. These products are manufactured to customer specifications and include:

·	our patented Integrated Slide Lock which allows a file cabinet manufacturer to reduce the possibility of multiple drawers being opened at the same time;

·	our patented adjustable Ball Lock which reduces the risk of heavily-filled drawers, such as auto mechanic toolboxes, from opening while in movement;

·	our Self-Closing Slide, which is designed to assist in closing a drawer and is used in applications such as bottom mount freezers;

articulating computer keyboard support arms (designed to attach to desks in the workplace and home office environments to alleviate possible user strains and stress and maximize usable workspace), along with our patented LeverLock keyboard arm, which is designed to make ergonomic adjustments to the keyboard arm easier;

·	CPU storage devices which minimize adverse effects of dust and moisture on desktop computers;

·	flat panel computer monitor support systems designed to support one to eight screens which can be adjusted for tilt, swing and rotation to enable achievement of the correct ergonomic position; and

·	complementary ergonomic accessories, such as ergonomic wrist rest aids and mouse pad supports.

We also manufacture and distribute stainless steel exhaust components, gauges, throttle controls, hardware and accessories primarily for performance boats. Our specialty marine component products are high precision components designed to operate within tight tolerances in the highly demanding marine environment. These products include:

·	original equipment and aftermarket stainless steel exhaust headers, exhaust pipes, mufflers and other exhaust components;

·	high performance gauges such as GPS speedometers and tachometers;

·	controls, throttles, steering wheels and other billet accessories; and

·	dash panels, LED lighting, rigging and other accessories.

- 16 -

Our Component Products Segment operated the following manufacturing facilities at December 31, 2010:

Security Products	Furniture Components	Marine Components
Mauldin, SC	Kitchener, Ontario	Neenah, WI
Grayslake, IL	Byron Center, MI	Grayslake, IL
	Taipei, Taiwan

We also lease a distribution facility located in California.

Raw Materials – Our primary raw materials are:

·	coiled steel (used in the furniture components business unit for the manufacture of precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support systems);

·	zinc and brass (used in the security products business unit for the manufacture of locking mechanisms);

·	stainless steel (used in the marine components business unit for the manufacture of exhaust headers and pipes and other components; and

·	plastic resins (used primarily in the furniture components business unit for injection molded plastics employed in the manufacturing of ergonomic computer support systems).

These raw materials are purchased from several suppliers, are readily available from numerous sources and accounted for approximately 17% of our total cost of sales for 2010.

We occasionally enter into supply arrangements for our commodity related raw materials to mitigate the short-term impact of future increases in raw material prices that are affected by commodity markets. While these arrangements do not necessarily commit us to a minimum volume of purchases, they generally provide for stated unit prices based upon achievement of specified purchase volumes, which helps us stabilize our commodity related raw material costs. Commodity related raw materials purchased outside of these arrangements are sometimes subject to unanticipated and sudden price increases. We generally seek to mitigate the impact of fluctuations in these raw material costs on our margins through improvements in production efficiencies or other operating cost reductions. In the event we are unable to offset raw material cost increases with other cost reductions, it may be difficult to recover those cost increases through increased product selling prices or raw material surcharges due to the competitive nature of the markets served by our products. Consequently, overall operating margins can be affected by commodity related raw material cost pressures. Commodity market prices are cyclical, reflecting overall economic trends, specific developments in consuming industries and speculative investor activities.

- 17 -

Patents and Trademarks – Our Component Products Segment holds a number of patents relating to its component products, certain of which are believed to be important to us and our continuing business activity. Patents generally have a term of 20 years, and our patents have remaining terms ranging from less than one year to 12 years at December 31, 2010. Our major trademarks and brand names include:

Furniture Components	Security Products	Marine Components
CompX Precision Slides®	CompX Security Products®	Custom Marine®
CompX Waterloo®	National Cabinet Lock®	Livorsi Marine®
CompX ErgonomX®	Fort Lock®	CMI Industrial Mufflers™
CompX DurISLide®	Timberline®	Custom Marine Stainless
Dynaslide®	Chicago Lock®	Exhaust™
Waterloo Furniture	STOCK LOCKS®	The #1 Choice in
Components Limited®	KeSet®	Performance Boating®
	TuBar®	Mega Rim™
	ACE II®	Race Rim™
	CompX eLock®	CompX Marine™
	Lockview® Software

Sales, Marketing and Distribution - A majority of our Component Products Segment sales are direct to large OEM customers through our factory-based sales and marketing professionals and with engineers working in concert with field salespeople and independent manufacturers' representatives. We select manufacturers' representatives based on special skills in certain markets or relationships with current or potential customers.

A significant portion of our Security Products sales are made through distributors. We have a significant North American market share of cabinet lock security product sales as a result of the locksmith distribution channel. We support our locksmith distributor sales with a line of standardized products used by the largest segments of the marketplace. These products are packaged and merchandised for easy availability and handling by distributors and end users.

A significant portion of our Furniture Component ergonomic product sales are made through value-added resellers and distributors. Value-added resellers generally provide services to end-customers in addition to those of a distributor, such as installation services or packaging our products with other products. We support our ergonomic value-added resellers by providing them with products that may be customized or packaged to meet their needs. We support our ergonomic distributor sales with a line of standardized products used by the largest segments of the marketplace. These products are packaged and merchandised for easy availability and handling by distributors and end users.

In 2010, our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 38% of our total sales; however, no one customer accounted for more than 10% of our sales. Of the 38% of total sales, 13% related to two security products customers, 12% related to five furniture components customers and 13% related to three customers in both of our security products and furniture components business units. Overall, our customer base is diverse and the loss of any single customer would not have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Competition – The markets in which we participate are highly competitive. We compete primarily on the basis of product design, including ergonomic and aesthetic factors, product quality and durability, price, on-time delivery, service and technical support. We focus our efforts on the middle and high-end segments of the market, where product design, quality, durability and service are valued by the customer. Our security products and furniture components business units compete against a number of domestic and foreign manufacturers. Our marine components business units competes with small domestic manufacturers and is minimally affected by foreign competitors.

- 18 -

International Operations - We have substantial operations and assets located outside the United States, principally Furniture Component operations in Canada and Taiwan. The majority of our 2010 non-U.S. sales are to customers located in Canada. These operations are subject to, among other things, currency exchange rate fluctuations. The Component Products Segment’s operating income has in the past been both favorably and unfavorably affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates. Political and economic uncertainties in certain of the countries in which we operate may expose us to risk of loss. We do not believe that there is currently any likelihood of material loss through political or economic instability, seizure, nationalization or a similar event. We cannot predict, however, whether events of this type in the future could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Regulatory and Environmental Matters - Our facilities are subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations relating to the use, storage, handling, generation, transportation, treatment, emission, discharge, disposal, remediation of and exposure to hazardous and non-hazardous substances, materials and wastes. We are also subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations relating to worker health and safety. We believe we are in substantial compliance with all such laws and regulations. To date, the costs of maintaining compliance with such laws and regulations have not significantly impacted our Component Products Segment’s results. We currently do not anticipate any significant costs or expenses relating to such matters; however, it is possible future laws and regulations may require us to incur significant additional expenditures.

Employees - As of December 31, 2010, CompX employed the following number of people:

United States			546
Canada(1)			208
Taiwan			74
Total			828

(1) Approximately 75% of our Canadian employees are represented by a labor union covered by a collective bargaining agreement that expires in January 2012, which provides for wage increases from 0% to 1% over the term of the contract.

We believe our labor relations are good at all of our facilities.

WASTE MANAGEMENT SEGMENT - WASTE CONTROL SPECIALISTS LLC

Business Overview – Our Waste Management Segment was formed in 1995, and in early 1997 we completed construction of the initial phase of our waste disposal facility in West Texas. The original facility was initially designed for the processing, treatment, storage and disposal of certain hazardous and toxic wastes. We received the first wastes for disposal in 1997. Subsequently, we expanded our authorizations to include the processing, treatment and storage of low-level radioactive waste (“LLRW”) and mixed LLRW and the disposal of certain types of exempt low-level radioactive wastes. Byproduct material includes uranium or thorium mill tailings as well as equipment, pipe and other materials used to handle and process the mill tailings. In May 2008, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("TCEQ") issued a byproduct materials disposal license to us. In January 2009, TCEQ issued a near-surface low-level and mixed LLRW disposal license to us. This license was signed in September 2009.

- 19 -

We currently operate our waste disposal facility on a relatively limited basis. We began construction of the byproduct facility infrastructure at our site in Andrews County, Texas in the third quarter of 2008, and this facility began disposal operations in October 2009. Construction of the LLRW site began in January 2011, and the facility is expected to be operational in late 2011.

Facility, Operations and Services - Our Waste Management Segment has permits from the TCEQ and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") to accept hazardous and toxic wastes governed by RCRA and TSCA. In October 2005, our RCRA permit was renewed for a new ten-year period. Likewise in December 2010, our five-year TSCA authorization was renewed for a new five-year period. Our RCRA permit and TSCA authorization are subject to additional renewals by the agencies assuming we remain in compliance with the provisions of the permits.

In November 1997, the Texas Department of State Health Services (“TDSHS”) issued a license to us for the treatment and storage, but not disposal, of low-level and mixed low-level radioactive wastes. In June 2007, the TDSHS regulatory authority for this license was transferred to TCEQ. The current provisions of this license generally enable us to accept such wastes for treatment and storage from U.S. commercial and federal generators, including the Department of Energy ("DOE") and other governmental agencies. We accepted the first shipments of such wastes in 1998. We have obtained additional authority to dispose of certain categories of LLRW, including naturally-occurring radioactive material ("NORM") and exempt-level materials (radioactive materials that do not exceed certain specified radioactive concentrations and are exempt from licensing). In May 2008, TCEQ issued us a license for the disposal of byproduct material and in September 2009 issued us a near-surface low-level and mixed LLRW disposal license.

Our waste disposal facility also serves as a staging and processing location for material that requires other forms of treatment prior to final disposal as mandated by the EPA or other regulatory bodies. Our 20,000 square foot treatment facility provides for waste treatment/stabilization, warehouse storage and treatment facilities for hazardous, toxic and mixed LLRW, drum to bulk, and bulk to drum materials handling and repackaging capabilities. Treatment operations involve processing wastes through one or more chemical or other treatment methods, depending upon the particular waste being disposed and regulatory and customer requirements. Chemical treatment uses chemical oxidation and reduction, chemical precipitation of heavy metals, hydrolysis and neutralization of acid and alkaline wastes, and results in the transformation of waste into inert materials through one or more of these chemical processes. Certain treatment processes involve technology which we may acquire, license or subcontract from third parties.

Once treated and stabilized, waste currently is either; (i) placed in our landfills, (ii) stored onsite in drums or other specialized containers or (iii) shipped to third-party facilities for final disposition. Only waste that meets certain specified regulatory requirements can be disposed of in our fully-lined landfills, which include leachate collection system.

We operate one waste management facility located on a 1,338-acre site in West Texas. The site is permitted for 5.4 million cubic yards of airspace landfill capacity for the disposal of RCRA, TSCA and LLRW and mixed LLRW wastes. We also own approximately 13,500 acres of additional land surrounding the permitted site, a small portion of which is located in New Mexico, which is available for future expansion. We believe our facility has superior geological characteristics which make it an environmentally-desirable location for this type of waste disposal. The facility is located in a relatively remote and arid section of West Texas. The possibility of leakage into any underground water table is considered highly remote because the ground is composed of Triassic red bed clay and we do not believe there are any underground aquifers or other usable sources of water below the site based in part on extensive drilling by the oil and gas industry and our own test wells. Pursuant to the requirements of WCS’ LLRW disposal license, the State of Texas, acting by and through the TCEQ, owns the real property for WCS’ licensed “compact waste disposal facility” and leases it back to WCS; and WCS owns the real property for its licensed “federal waste disposal facility”. The remainder of WCS permitted site, and the Texas portion of the surrounding land described above, is subject to the sale-leaseback transaction WCS entered into with the County of Andrews, Texas, as discussed in Note 9 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

- 20 -

Sales – Our Waste Management Segment’s target customers are industrial companies, including chemical, aerospace and electronics businesses and governmental agencies, including DOE, which generate hazardous, mixed low-level radioactive and other wastes. We employ our own salespeople to market our services to potential customers.

Competition - The hazardous waste industry (other than low-level and mixed LLRW) currently has excess industry capacity caused by a number of factors, including a relative decline in the number of environmental remediation projects generating hazardous wastes and efforts on the part of waste generators to reduce the volume of waste and/or manage waste onsite at their facilities. These factors have led to reduced demand and increased price pressure for non-radioactive hazardous waste management services. While we believe our broad range of permits for the treatment and storage of low-level and LLRW streams provide us certain competitive advantages, a key element of our long-term strategy is to provide "one-stop shopping" for hazardous, low-level and mixed LLRW. To offer this service we will have to complete construction of the facilities we have been licensed to operate.

Competition within the hazardous waste industry is diverse and based primarily on facility location/proximity to customers, pricing and customer service. We expect price competition to continue to be intense for RCRA- and TSCA-related wastes. With respect to our currently-permitted activities, our principal competitors are Energy Solutions, LLC, US Ecology Inc., and Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. These competitors are well established and have significantly greater resources than we do, which could be important factors to our potential customers. We believe we may have certain competitive advantages, including our environmentally-desirable location, broad level of local community support, a rail transportation network leading to our facility and our capability for future site expansion.

The low-level radioactive waste industry has very limited competition because; (i)commercial low-level waste disposal facilities can only be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) or states that have an agreement with NRC to assume portions of its regulatory authority (“Agreement States”), (ii) the facilities must be designed, constructed and operated to meet strict safety standards and (iii) the operator of the facility must extensively characterize the site on which the facility is located and analyze how the facility will perform for thousands of years into the future. Prior to the receipt of our license, there were only three low-level waste disposal facilities in the United States. None of the three disposal facilities accept Class B or C LLRW from generators located in states which do not have a formal agreement with the state in which the disposal facility is located (the “Compact System” or the “Compact”). We believe we will be very competitive due to the limited amount of competition and our “one-stop shopping” capabilities once our new facilities are constructed and in operation.

- 21 -

Regulatory and Environmental Matters - While the waste management industry has benefited from increased governmental regulation, it has also become subject to extensive and evolving regulation by federal, state and local authorities. The regulatory process requires waste management businesses to obtain and retain numerous operating permits covering various aspects of their operations, any of which could be subject to revocation, modification or denial. Regulations also allow public participation in the permitting process. Individuals as well as companies may oppose the granting of permits. In addition, governmental policies and the exercise of broad discretion by regulators are subject to change. It is possible our ability to obtain and retain permits on a timely basis could be impaired in the future. The loss of an individual permit or the failure to obtain a permit could have a significant impact on our Waste Management Segment’s future operating plans, financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, especially because we only operate one disposal site. For example, adverse decisions by governmental authorities on our permit applications could cause us to abandon projects, prematurely close our facility or restrict operations. Our RCRA permit and our license from TCEQ, as amended, expire in 2015, our TSCA authorization expires in 2015, our byproduct material disposal license expires in 2018 and our LLRW disposal license expires in 2024. Our LLRW processing license is under timely renewal and is currently being reviewed by TCEQ. Such permits, licenses and authorizations can be renewed subject to compliance with the requirements of the application process and approval by TCEQ or EPA, as applicable.

In May 2008, TCEQ issued us a license for the disposal of byproduct material. Byproduct material includes uranium or thorium mill tailings as well as equipment, pipe and other materials used to handle and process the mill tailings. We completed construction of the byproduct facility infrastructure at our site in Andrews County, Texas in the third quarter of 2009 and this facility began disposal operations in October 2009. In September 2009, TCEQ issued us a near-surface low-level and mixed LLRW disposal license. Construction of the LLRW site began in January 2011, and the facility is expected to be operational in late 2011.

From time to time federal, state and local authorities have proposed or adopted other types of laws and regulations for the waste management industry, including laws and regulations restricting or banning the interstate or intrastate shipment of certain waste, changing the regulatory agency issuing a license, imposing higher taxes on out-of-state waste shipments compared to in-state shipments, reclassifying certain categories of hazardous waste as non-hazardous and regulating disposal facilities as public utilities. Certain states have issued regulations that attempt to prevent waste generated within a particular Compact from being sent to disposal sites outside that Compact. The U.S. Congress has also considered legislation that would enable or facilitate such bans, restrictions, taxes and regulations. Due to the complex nature of industry regulation, implementation of existing or future laws and regulations by different levels of government could be inconsistent and difficult to foresee. While we attempt to monitor and anticipate regulatory, political and legal developments that affect the industry, we cannot assure you we will be able to do so. Nor can we predict the extent to which legislation or regulations that may be enacted, or any failure of legislation or regulations to be enacted, may affect our operations in the future.

The demand for certain hazardous waste services we intend to provide is dependent in large part upon the existence and enforcement of federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations governing the discharge of hazardous waste into the environment. We and the industry as a whole could be adversely affected to the extent such laws or regulations are amended or repealed or their enforcement is lessened.

Because of the high degree of public awareness of environmental issues, companies in the waste management business may be, in the normal course of their business, subject to judicial and administrative proceedings. Governmental agencies may seek to impose fines or revoke, deny renewal of, or modify any applicable operating permits or licenses. In addition, private parties and special interest groups could bring actions against us alleging, among other things, a violation of operating permits or opposition to new license authorizations.

- 22 -

Employees - At December 31, 2010, we had 144 employees. We believe our labor relations are good.

OTHER

NL Industries, Inc. - At December 31, 2010, NL owned 87% of CompX and 30% of Kronos. NL also owns 100% of EWI RE, Inc., an insurance brokerage and risk management services company and also holds certain marketable securities and other investments. See Note 16 to our Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Tremont LLC - Tremont is primarily a holding company through which we hold indirect ownership interests in Basic Management, Inc. ("BMI"), which provides utility services to, and owns property (the "BMI Complex") adjacent to, TIMET’s facility in Nevada, and The Landwell Company L.P. ("Landwell"), which is engaged in efforts to develop certain land holdings for commercial, industrial and residential purposes surrounding the BMI Complex.

In addition, we also own real property related to certain of our former business units.

Business Strategy - We routinely compare our liquidity requirements and alternative uses of capital against the estimated future cash flows to be received from our subsidiaries and unconsolidated affiliates, and the estimated sales value of those businesses. As a result, we have in the past, and may in the future, seek to raise additional capital, refinance or restructure indebtedness, repurchase indebtedness in the market or otherwise, modify our dividend policy, consider the sale of an interest in our subsidiaries, business units, marketable securities or other assets, or take a combination of these or other steps, to increase liquidity, reduce indebtedness and fund future activities, which have in the past and may in the future involve related companies. From time to time, we and our related entities consider restructuring ownership interests among our subsidiaries and related companies. We expect to continue this activity in the future.

We and other entities that may be deemed to be controlled by or affiliated with Mr. Harold C. Simmons routinely evaluate acquisitions of interests in, or combinations with, companies, including related companies, we perceive to be undervalued in the marketplace. These companies may or may not be engaged in businesses related to our current businesses. In some instances we actively manage the businesses we acquire with a focus on maximizing return-on-investment through cost reductions, capital expenditures, improved operating efficiencies, selective marketing to address market niches, disposition of marginal operations, use of leverage and redeployment of capital to more productive assets. In other instances, we have disposed of our interest in a company prior to gaining control. We intend to consider such activities in the future and may, in connection with such activities, consider issuing additional equity securities and increasing our indebtedness.

Website and Available Information – Our fiscal year ends December 31. We furnish our stockholders with annual reports containing audited financial statements. In addition, we file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy and information statements and other information with the SEC. Certain of our consolidated subsidiaries (Kronos, NL and CompX) also file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy and information statements and other information with the SEC. We also make our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments thereto, available free of charge through our website at www.valhi.net as soon as reasonably practical after they have been filed with the SEC. We also provide to anyone, without charge, copies of such documents upon written request. Requests should be directed to the attention of the Corporate Secretary at our address on the cover page of this Form 10-K.

- 23 -

Additional information, including our Audit Committee charter, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and our Corporate Governance Guidelines, can also be found on our website. Information contained on our website is not part of this Annual Report.

The general public may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. We are an electronic filer. The SEC maintains an Internet website at www.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers, such as us, that file electronically with the SEC.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Listed below are certain risk factors associated with us and our businesses. In addition to the potential effect of these risk factors discussed below, any risk factor which could result in reduced earnings or operating losses, or reduced liquidity, could in turn adversely affect our ability to service our liabilities or pay dividends on our common stock or adversely affect the quoted market prices for our securities.

Our assets consist primarily of investments in our operating subsidiaries, and we are dependent upon distributions from our subsidiaries to service our liabilities.

The majority of our operating cash flows are generated by our operating subsidiaries, and our ability to service liabilities and to pay dividends on our common stock depends to a large extent upon the cash dividends or other distributions we receive from our subsidiaries and affiliates. Our subsidiaries and affiliates are separate and distinct legal entities and they have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay such cash dividends or other distributions to us. In addition, the payment of dividends or other distributions from our subsidiaries could be subject to restrictions on, or taxation of, dividends or repatriation of earnings under applicable law, monetary transfer restrictions, currency exchange regulations in jurisdictions in which our subsidiaries operate or any other restrictions imposed by current or future agreements to which our subsidiaries may be a party, including debt instruments. Events beyond our control, including changes in general business and economic conditions, could adversely impact the ability of our subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions to us. If our subsidiaries were to become unable to make sufficient cash dividends or other distributions to us, our ability to service our liabilities and to pay dividends on our common stock could be adversely affected.

In addition, a significant portion of our assets consist of ownership interests in our subsidiaries and affiliates. If we were required to liquidate any of such securities in order to generate funds to satisfy our liabilities, we may be required to sell such securities at a time or times at which we would not be able to realize what we believe to be the long-term value of such assets.

Demand for, and prices of, certain of our products are influenced by changing market conditions for our products, which may result in reduced earnings or operating losses.

Approximately 90% of our Chemicals revenues are attributable to sales of TiO2. Pricing within the global TiO2 industry over the long term is cyclical and changes in economic conditions, especially in Western industrialized nations, can significantly impact our earnings and operating cash flows. Historically, the markets for many of our products have experienced alternating periods of increasing and decreasing demand. Relative changes in the selling prices for our products are one of the main factors that affect the level of our profitability. In periods of increasing demand, our selling prices and profit margins generally will tend to increase, while in periods of decreasing demand our selling prices and profit margins generally tend to decrease. In addition, pricing may affect customer inventory levels as customers may from time to time accelerate purchases of TiO2 in advance of anticipated price increases or defer purchases of TiO2 in advance of anticipated price decreases. Our ability to further increase capacity without additional investment in greenfield or brownfield capacity increases may be limited and as a result, our profitability may become even more dependent upon the selling prices of our products.

- 24 -

We sell several of our products in mature and highly-competitive industries and face price pressures in the markets in which we operate, which may result in reduced earnings or operating losses.

The global markets in which Kronos and CompX operate their businesses are highly competitive. Competition is based on a number of factors, such as price, product quality and service. Some of our competitors may be able to drive down prices for our products because their costs are lower than our costs. In addition, some of our competitors' financial, technological and other resources may be greater than our resources, and these competitors may be better able to withstand negative market conditions. Our competitors may be able to respond more quickly than we can to new or emerging technologies and changes in customer requirements. Further, consolidation of our competitors or customers in any of the industries in which we compete may result in reduced demand for our products or make it more difficult for us to compete with our competitors. In addition, in some of our businesses new competitors could emerge by modifying their existing production facilities so they could manufacture products that compete with our products. The occurrence of any of these events could result in reduced earnings or operating losses.

Higher costs or limited availability of our raw materials may reduce our earnings and decrease our liquidity. In addition, many of our raw material contracts contain fixed quantities we are required to purchase.

The number of sources for and availability of certain raw materials is specific to the particular geographical region in which a facility is located. For example, titanium-containing feedstocks suitable for use in our TiO2 facilities are available from a limited number of suppliers around the world. Political and economic instability in the countries from which we purchase our raw material supplies could adversely affect their availability. If our worldwide vendors were unable to meet their contractual obligations and we were unable to obtain necessary raw materials, we could incur higher costs for raw materials or may be required to reduce production levels. In addition, we may also experience higher operating costs such as energy costs, which could affect our profitability. We may not always be able to increase our selling prices to offset the impact of any higher costs or reduced production levels, which could reduce our earnings and decrease our liquidity.

We have long-term supply contracts that provide for our TiO2 feedstock requirements that currently expire through 2015, some of which we may be able to renew. We may not be successful in renewing these contracts or in obtaining long-term extensions to these contracts prior to expiration. The agreements require us to purchase certain minimum quantities of feedstock with minimum purchase commitments aggregating approximately $592 million at December 31, 2010. In addition, we have other long-term supply and service contracts that provide for various raw materials and services. These agreements require us to purchase certain minimum quantities or services with minimum purchase commitments aggregating approximately $132 million at December 31, 2010. Our commitments under these contracts could adversely affect our financial results if we significantly reduce our production and were unable to modify the contractual commitments.

- 25 -

We could incur significant costs related to legal and environmental remediation matters.

NL formerly manufactured lead pigments for use in paint. NL and others have been named as defendants in various legal proceedings seeking damages for personal injury, property damage and governmental expenditures allegedly caused by the use of lead-based paints. These lawsuits seek recovery under a variety of theories, including public and private nuisance, negligent product design, negligent failure to warn, strict liability, breach of warranty, conspiracy/concert of action, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, market share or risk contribution liability, intentional tort, fraud and misrepresentation, violations of state consumer protection statutes, supplier negligence and similar claims. The plaintiffs in these actions generally seek to impose on the defendants responsibility for lead paint abatement and health concerns associated with the use of lead-based paints, including damages for personal injury, contribution and/or indemnification for medical expenses, medical monitoring expenses and costs for educational programs. As with all legal proceedings, the outcome is uncertain. Any liability we might incur in the future could be material. See also Item 3 - “Legal Proceedings – Lead Pigment Litigation.”

Certain properties and facilities used in our former operations are the subject of civil litigation, administrative proceedings or investigations arising under various federal and state environmental laws. These proceedings seek cleanup costs, damages for personal injury or property damage and/or damages for injury to natural resources. Certain of these proceedings involve claims for substantial amounts. Environmental obligations are difficult to assess and estimate for numerous reasons, and we may incur costs for environmental remediation in the future in excess of amounts currently estimated. Any liability we might incur in the future could be material. See also Item 3 - “Legal Proceedings – Environmental Matters and Litigation.”

Our failure to enter into new markets with our current component products businesses could result in the continued significant impact of fluctuations in demand within the office furniture manufacturing industry on our operating results.

In an effort to reduce our component products business dependence on the office furniture market for certain products and to increase our participation in other markets, we have been devoting resources to identify new customers and develop new applications for our products in markets outside of the office furniture market, such as home appliances, toolboxes and server racks. Developing these new applications for our products involves substantial risk and uncertainties due to our limited experience with customers and applications in these markets as well as facing competitors who are already established in these markets. We may not be successful in developing new customers or applications for our products outside of the office furniture industry. Significant time may be required to develop new applications and uncertainty exists as to the extent to which we will face competition in this regard.

Our development of innovative features for current products is critical to sustaining and growing our Component Product Segment’s sales.

Historically, our component products business’ ability to provide value-added custom engineered products that address requirements of technology and space utilization has been a key element of our success. We spend a significant amount of time and effort to refine, improve and adapt our existing products for new customers and applications. Since expenditures for these types of activities are not considered research and development expense under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the amount of our research and development expenditures, which is not significant, is not indicative of the overall effort involved in the development of new product features. The introduction of new product features requires the coordination of the design, manufacturing and marketing of the new product features with current and potential customers. The ability to coordinate these activities with current and potential customers may be affected by factors beyond our control. While we will continue to emphasize the introduction of innovative new product features that target customer-specific opportunities, there can be no assurance that any new product features we introduce will achieve the same degree of success that we have achieved with our existing products. Introduction of new product features typically requires us to increase production volume on a timely basis while maintaining product quality. Manufacturers often encounter difficulties in increasing production volumes, including delays, quality control problems and shortages of qualified personnel or raw materials. As we attempt to introduce new product features in the future, there can be no assurance that we will be able to increase production volume without encountering these or other problems, which might negatively impact our financial condition or results of operations.

- 26 -

Failure to protect our intellectual property rights or claims by others that we infringe their intellectual property rights could substantially harm our business.

CompX relies on patent, trademark and trade secret laws in the United States and similar laws in other countries to establish and maintain intellectual property rights in our technology and designs. Despite these measures, any of our intellectual property rights could be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or misappropriated. Others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information, and in such cases we could not assert any trade secret rights against such parties. Further, there can be no assurance that any of our pending trademark or patent applications will be approved. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our intellectual property rights. In addition, the laws of certain countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Therefore, in certain jurisdictions, we may be unable to protect our technology and designs adequately against unauthorized third party use, which could adversely affect our competitive position.

Third parties may claim that we or our customers are infringing upon their intellectual property rights. Even if we believe that such claims are without merit, they can be time-consuming and costly to defend and distract CompX management’s and technical staff’s attention and resources. Claims of intellectual property infringement also might require us to redesign affected technology, enter into costly settlement or license agreements or pay costly damage awards, or face a temporary or permanent injunction prohibiting us from marketing or selling certain of our technology. If we cannot or do not license the infringed technology on reasonable pricing terms or at all, or substitute similar technology from another source, our business could be adversely impacted.

Our leverage may impair our financial condition or limit our ability to operate our businesses.

We have a significant amount of debt, primarily related to Kronos’ Senior Secured Notes and our loans from Snake River Sugar Company. Our level of debt could have important consequences to our stockholders and creditors, including:

making it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to our liabilities;

increasing our vulnerability to adverse general economic and industry conditions;

requiring that a portion of our cash flow from operations be used for the payment of interest on our debt, reducing our ability to use our cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, dividends on our common stock, acquisitions and general corporate requirements;

limiting our ability to obtain additional financing to fund future working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions or general corporate requirements;

limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industries in which we operate; and

placing us at a competitive disadvantage relative to other less leveraged competitors.

- 27 -

In addition to our indebtedness, we are party to various lease and other agreements pursuant to which we are committed to pay approximately $510.3 million in 2011. Our ability to make payments on and refinance our debt, and to fund planned capital expenditures, depends on our ability to generate cash flow. To some extent, this is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control. In addition, our ability to borrow additional funds under our subsidiaries’ credit facilities in the future will, in some instances, depend in part on our subsidiaries’ ability to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy certain financial covenants contained in the applicable credit agreements.

Our business may not generate sufficient cash flows from operating activities to allow us to pay our debts when they become due and to fund our other liquidity needs. As a result, we may need to refinance all or a portion of our debt before maturity. We may not be able to refinance any of our debt in a timely manner on favorable terms, if at all in the current credit markets. Any inability to generate sufficient cash flows or to refinance our debt on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

Global climate change legislation could negatively impact our financial results or limit our ability to operate our businesses.

We operate production facilities in several countries, and we believe all of our worldwide production facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws. In many of the countries in which we operate, legislation has been passed, or proposed legislation is being considered, to limit greenhouse gases through various means, including emissions permits and/or energy taxes. In several of our production facilities, we consume large amounts of energy, including electricity and natural gas. To date, the permit system in effect in the various countries in which we operate has not had a material adverse effect on our financial results. However, if greenhouse gas legislation were to be enacted in one or more countries, it could negatively impact our future results from operations through increased costs of production, particularly as it relates to our energy requirements. If such increased costs of production were to materialize, we may be unable to pass price increases onto our customers to compensate for increased production costs, which may decrease our liquidity, operating income and results of operations.

- 28 -

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

We along with our subsidiaries: Kronos, CompX, WCS and NL lease office space for our principal executive offices in Dallas, Texas. A list of operating facilities for each of our subsidiaries is described in the applicable business sections of Item 1 - "Business." We believe our facilities are generally adequate and suitable for their respective uses.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are involved in various legal proceedings. In addition to information included below, certain information called for by this Item is included in Note 17 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, which is incorporated herein by reference.

Lead Pigment Litigation - NL

NL’s former operations included the manufacture of lead pigments for use in paint and lead-based paint. NL, other former manufacturers of lead pigments for use in paint and lead-based paint (together, the “former pigment manufacturers”) and the Lead Industries Association (“LIA”), which discontinued business operations in 2002, have been named as defendants in various legal proceedings seeking damages for personal injury, property damage and governmental expenditures allegedly caused by the use of lead-based paints. Certain of these actions have been filed by or on behalf of states, counties, cities or their public housing authorities and school districts, and certain others have been asserted as class actions. These lawsuits seek recovery under a variety of theories, including public and private nuisance, negligent product design, negligent failure to warn, strict liability, breach of warranty, conspiracy/concert of action, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, market share or risk contribution liability, intentional tort, fraud and misrepresentation, violations of state consumer protection statutes, supplier negligence and similar claims.

The plaintiffs in these actions generally seek to impose on the defendants responsibility for lead paint abatement and health concerns associated with the use of lead-based paints, including damages for personal injury, contribution and/or indemnification for medical expenses, medical monitoring expenses and costs for educational programs. To the extent the plaintiffs seek compensatory or punitive damages in these actions, such damages are generally unspecified unless otherwise indicated below. In some cases, the damages are unspecified pursuant to the requirements of applicable state law. A number of cases are inactive or have been dismissed or withdrawn. Most of the remaining cases are in various pre-trial stages. Some are on appeal following dismissal or summary judgment rulings in favor of either the defendants or the plaintiffs. In addition, various other cases (in which we are not a defendant) are pending that seek recovery for injury allegedly caused by lead pigment and lead-based paint. Although we are not a defendant in these cases, the outcome of these cases may have an impact on cases that might be filed against us in the future.

We believe that these actions are without merit, and we intend to continue to deny all allegations of wrongdoing and liability and to defend against all actions vigorously. We have never settled any of the market share, risk contribution, intentional tort, fraud, nuisance, supplier negligence, breach of warranty, conspiracy, misrepresentation, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, or statutory cases nor have any final, non-appealable, adverse judgments have been entered against us.

- 29 -

We have not accrued any amounts for any of the pending lead pigment and lead-based paint litigation cases. Liability that may result, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated. In addition, new cases may continue to be filed against us. We cannot assure you that we will not incur liability in the future in respect of any of the pending or possible litigation in view of the inherent uncertainties involved in court and jury rulings. The resolution of any of these cases could result in recognition of a loss contingency accrual that could have a material adverse impact on our net income for the interim or annual period during which such liability is recognized, and a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial condition and liquidity.

In September 1999, an amended complaint was filed in Thomas v. Lead Industries Association, et al. (Circuit Court, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Case No. 99-CV-6411) adding as defendants the former pigment manufacturers to a suit originally filed against plaintiff's landlords. Plaintiff, a minor, alleged injuries purportedly caused by lead on the surfaces in homes in which he resided and sought compensatory and punitive damages. The case was tried in October 2007, and in November 2007 the jury returned a verdict in favor of all defendants. In April 2008, plaintiff filed an appeal, and in December 2010, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court. This decision concludes the case in NL’s favor.

In April 2000, NL was served with a complaint in County of Santa Clara v. Atlantic Richfield Company, et al. (Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, Case No. CV788657) brought against the former pigment manufacturers, the LIA and certain paint manufacturers. The County of Santa Clara seeks to recover compensatory damages for funds the plaintiffs have expended or will in the future expend for medical treatment, educational expenses, abatement or other costs due to exposure to, or potential exposure to, lead paint, disgorgement of profit, and punitive damages. Solano, Alameda, San Francisco, Monterey and San Mateo counties, the cities of San Francisco, Oakland, Los Angeles and San Diego, the Oakland and San Francisco unified school districts and housing authorities and the Oakland Redevelopment Agency have joined the case as plaintiffs. In January 2007, plaintiffs amended the complaint to drop all of the claims except for the public nuisance claim. In May 2008, the defendants filed a petition for review by the California Supreme Court, which was granted in July 2008. In July 2010, the California Supreme Court ruled that public entities could pursue this public nuisance case assisted by private counsel on a contingent fee basis after revising the respective retention agreements to conform with the requirements set forth in the Supreme Court’s opinion. The Supreme Court (1) clarified that the government attorneys overseeing the external, contingency fee counsel must, at a minimum, retain complete control over the course and conduct of the case; retain veto power over any decisions made by outside counsel; and be personally involved in overseeing the litigation and (2) remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

In June 2000, a complaint was filed in Illinois state court, Lewis, et al. v. Lead Industries Association, et al. (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, Chancery Division, Case No. 00CH09800). Plaintiffs seek to represent two classes, one consisting of minors between the ages of six months and six years who resided in housing in Illinois built before 1978, and another consisting of individuals between the ages of six and twenty years who lived in Illinois housing built before 1978 when they were between the ages of six months and six years and who had blood lead levels of 10 micrograms/deciliter or more. The complaint seeks damages jointly and severally from the former pigment manufacturers and the LIA to establish a medical screening fund for the first class to determine blood lead levels, a medical monitoring fund for the second class to detect the onset of latent diseases, and a fund for a public education campaign. In April 2008, the trial court judge certified a class of children whose blood lead levels were screened venously between August 1995 and February 2008 and who had incurred expenses associated with such screening. The case is proceeding in the trial court.

- 30 -

In January and February 2007, NL was served with several complaints, the majority of which were filed in Circuit Court in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. In some cases, complaints have been filed elsewhere in Wisconsin. The plaintiffs are minor children who allege injuries purportedly caused by lead on the surfaces of the homes in which they reside. Plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages. The defendants in these cases include us, American Cyanamid Company, Armstrong Containers, Inc., E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Company, Millennium Holdings, LLC, Atlanta Richfield Company, The Sherwin-Williams Company, Conagra Foods, Inc. and the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services. In some cases, additional lead paint manufacturers and/or property owners are also defendants. Of the cases filed, five remain pending and four of the remaining cases have been removed to Federal court (Burton, Owens, B. Stokes, and Gibson). In June 2010, the defendant ARCO’s motion for summary judgment was granted in Gibson. In September 2010, NL filed motions for summary judgment based on constitutional grounds in the Clark and Gibson cases and the plaintiffs in the Stokes, Owens and Burton cases filed motions to strike NL’s constitutional defenses. In November 2010, Gibson was dismissed as to all defendants in a ruling holding that application of Wisconsin’s risk contribution doctrine deprived defendants of due process. In December 2010, the plaintiff appealed to the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. In light of the Gibson ruling and appeal, the Clark case in state court has been stayed and the parties have agreed to stay all discovery in the other three Federal cases (Burton, R. Owens, and B. Stokes).

In February 2010, NL was served with a complaint in Sifuentes v. American Cyanamid Company, et al. (United District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, Case No. 10-C-0075). The plaintiff in this case is a minor who alleges injuries purportedly caused by lead on the surface of the home in which he resided. The claims raised in this case are identical to those in the Wisconsin cases described above. Defendants include us, American Cyanamid Company, Armstrong Containers, Inc., E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Company, Atlanta Richfield Company and The Sherwin-Williams Company. In September 2010, the plaintiff filed a motion to strike NL’s constitutional defenses. In light of the Gibson ruling and appeal described above, the parties have agreed to stay all discovery pending a decision.

In February 2011, NL was served with an amended complaint in Allen, et al. v. American Cyanamid, et al. (United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, Case No. 11-C-55). The plaintiffs in this case are minors who allege injuries purportedly caused by lead on the surfaces of the homes in which they resided. The complaint alleges negligence and strict liability and seeks compensatory damages jointly and severally from us, American Cyanamid Company, Armstrong Containers, Inc., E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Company, Atlanta Richfield Company and The Sherwin-Williams Company. We intend to deny liability in this case and will defend vigorously against all claims.

In addition to the foregoing litigation, various legislation and administrative regulations have, from time to time, been proposed that seek to (a) impose various obligations on present and former manufacturers of lead pigment and lead-based paint with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the use of such products and (b) effectively overturn court decisions in which we and other pigment manufacturers have been successful. Examples of such proposed legislation include bills which would permit civil liability for damages on the basis of market share, rather than requiring plaintiffs to prove that the defendant’s product caused the alleged damage, and bills which would revive actions barred by the statute of limitations. While no legislation or regulations have been enacted to date that are expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity, the imposition of market share liability or other legislation could have such an effect.

- 31 -

Environmental Matters and Litigation

Our operations are governed by various environmental laws and regulations. Certain of our businesses are and have been engaged in the handling, manufacture or use of substances or compounds that may be considered toxic or hazardous within the meaning of applicable environmental laws and regulations. As with other companies engaged in similar businesses, certain of our past and current operations and products have the potential to cause environmental or other damage. We have implemented and continue to implement various policies and programs in an effort to minimize these risks. Our policy is to maintain compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations at all of our plants and to strive to improve environmental performance. From time to time, we may be subject to environmental regulatory enforcement under U.S. and non-U.S. statutes, the resolution of which typically involves the establishment of compliance programs. It is possible that future developments, such as stricter requirements of environmental laws and enforcement policies, could adversely affect our production, handling, use, storage, transportation, sale or disposal of such substances. We believe that all of our facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws.

Certain properties and facilities used in our former operations, including divested primary and secondary lead smelters and former mining locations, are the subject of civil litigation, administrative proceedings or investigations arising under federal and state environmental laws. Additionally, in connection with past operating practices, we are currently involved as a defendant, potentially responsible party (“PRP”) or both, pursuant to CERCLA, and similar state laws in various governmental and private actions associated with waste disposal sites, mining locations, and facilities we or our predecessors currently or previously owned, operated or were used by us or our subsidiaries, or their predecessors, certain of which are on the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) Superfund National Priorities List or similar state lists. These proceedings seek cleanup costs, damages for personal injury, property damage and/or damages for injury to natural resources. Certain of these proceedings involve claims for substantial amounts. Although we may be jointly and severally liable for these costs, in most cases we are only one of a number of PRPs who may also be jointly and severally liable, and among whom costs may be shared or allocated. In addition, we are also a party to a number of personal injury lawsuits filed in various jurisdictions alleging claims related to environmental conditions alleged to have resulted from our operations.

Environmental obligations are difficult to assess and estimate for numerous reasons including the:

·	complexity and differing interpretations of governmental regulations;

·	number of PRPs and their ability or willingness to fund such allocation of costs;

·	financial capabilities of the PRPs and the allocation of costs among them;

·	solvency of other PRPs;

·	multiplicity of possible solutions;

·	number of years of investigatory, remedial and monitoring activity required; and

·	number of years between former operations and notice of claims and lack of information and documents about the former operations.

- 32 -

In addition, the imposition of more stringent standards or requirements under environmental laws or regulations, new developments or changes regarding site cleanup costs or allocation of costs among PRPs, solvency of other PRPs, the results of future testing and analysis undertaken with respect to certain sites or a determination that we are potentially responsible for the release of hazardous substances at other sites, could cause our expenditures to exceed our current estimates. Because we may be jointly and severally liable for the total remediation cost at certain sites, the amount for which we are ultimately liable may exceed our accruals due to, among other things, the reallocation of costs among PRPs or the insolvency of one or more PRPs. We cannot assure you that actual costs will not exceed accrued amounts or the upper end of the range for sites for which estimates have been made, and we cannot assure you that costs will not be incurred for sites where no estimates presently can be made. Further, additional environmental matters may arise in the future. If we were to incur any future liability, this could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial statements, results of operations and liquidity.

We record liabilities related to environmental remediation obligations when estimated future expenditures are probable and reasonably estimable. We adjust our environmental accruals as further information becomes available to us or as circumstances change. Such further information or changed circumstances could include, among other things, new assertions of liability, revised expectations regarding the nature, timing and extent of any remediation required or revised estimates of the allocation of remediation costs among PRPs, and such further information or changed circumstances could result in an increase or reduction in our accrued environmental costs. We generally do not discount estimated future expenditures to their present value due to the uncertainty of the timing of the pay out. We recognize recoveries of remediation costs from other parties, if any, as assets when their receipt is deemed probable. At December 31, 2010, we have not recognized any receivables for recoveries.

We do not know and cannot estimate the exact time frame over which we will make payments for our accrued environmental costs. The timing of payments depends upon a number of factors including the timing of the actual remediation process; which in turn depends on factors outside of our control. At each balance sheet date, we estimate the amount of our accrued environmental costs which we expect to pay within the next twelve months, and we classify this estimate as a current liability. We classify the remaining accrued environmental costs as a noncurrent liability.

On a quarterly basis, we evaluate the potential range of our liability at sites where we have been named as a PRP or defendant, including sites for which our wholly-owned environmental management subsidiary, NL Environmental Management Services, Inc. (“EMS”) has contractually assumed our obligations. See Note 17 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. At December 31, 2010, NL had accrued approximately $40 million, related to approximately 50 sites, which are environmental matters that we believe are at the present time and/or in their current phase reasonably estimable. The upper end of the range of reasonably possible costs to us for sites for which we believe it is possible to estimate costs is approximately $73 million, including the amount currently accrued. We have not discounted these estimates to present value.

We believe that it is not possible to estimate the range of costs for certain sites. At December 31, 2010, there were approximately 5 sites for which NL is not currently able to estimate a range of costs. For these sites, generally the investigation is in the early stages, and we are unable to determine whether or not we actually had any association with the site, the nature of our responsibility, if any, for the contamination at the site and the extent of contamination at and cost to remediate the site. The timing and availability of information on these sites is dependent on events outside of our control, such as when the party alleging liability provides information to us. At certain of these previously inactive sites, we have received general and special notices of liability from the EPA and/or state agencies alleging that we, sometimes with other PRPs, are liable for past and future costs of remediating environmental contamination allegedly caused by former operations. These notifications may assert that we, along with any other alleged PRPs, are liable for past and/or future clean-up costs that could be material to us if we are ultimately found liable.

- 33 -

In February 2004, NL was served in Evans v. ASARCO (United States District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma, Case No. 04-CV-94EA(M)), an action on behalf of over two hundred individual plaintiffs, including owners of residential, commercial and government property in the town of Quapaw, Oklahoma, the mayor of the town of Quapaw, Oklahoma, and the School Board of Quapaw, Oklahoma. Plaintiffs allege causes of action in nuisance and seek a relocation program, property damages, including diminished property value damages, and punitive damages. NL answered the complaint and denied all of plaintiffs’ allegations. In August 2009, defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the case, which was partially granted in February 2010. In October 2010, we filed a motion for summary judgment and in November 2010, plaintiffs dismissed NL from the case with prejudice. This dismissal concludes the case in NL’s favor.

In January 2006, NL was served in Brown et al. v. NL Industries, Inc. et al. (Circuit Court Wayne County, Michigan, Case No. 06-602096 CZ). Plaintiffs, property owners and other past or present residents of the Krainz Woods Neighborhood of Wayne County, Michigan, allege causes of action in negligence, nuisance, trespass and under the Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act with respect to a lead smelting facility formerly operated by us and another defendant. Plaintiffs seek property damages, personal injury damages, loss of income and medical expense and medical monitoring costs. In October 2007, NL moved to dismiss several plaintiffs who failed to respond to discovery requests, and in February 2008, the motion was granted with respect to all such plaintiffs. In February 2008, the trial court entered a case management order pursuant to which the case will proceed as to eight of the plaintiffs’ claims, and the claims of the remaining plaintiffs have been stayed in the meantime. In April 2008, the other defendant in the case agreed to a settlement with the plaintiffs, and NL is the only remaining defendant. The claims of eight of the plaintiffs were tried in January and February 2010, and the jury returned a verdict in favor of five of the plaintiffs. The jury awarded $119,125 in economic and non-economic property damages and $220,000 in reimbursement of environmental assessment costs. At the conclusion of the trial, the judge instructed the plaintiffs’ counsel to select another eight plaintiffs whose claims will be tried in March 2011. NL does not believe that the facts and evidence support the verdict and damages awarded. NL continues to believe that the claims of the plaintiffs are without merit and are subject to certain defenses and counterclaims. NL intends to appeal any adverse judgment the court may enter against us and to continue to vigorously defend the matter.

In June 2006, NL and several other PRPs received a Unilateral Administrative Order (“UAO”) from the EPA regarding a formerly-owned mine and milling facility located in Park Hills, Missouri. The Doe Run Company is the current owner of the site, which was purchased by a predecessor of Doe Run from us in approximately 1936. Doe Run is also named in the Order. In April 2008, the parties signed a definitive cost sharing agreement for sharing of the costs anticipated in connection with the order. In May 2008, the parties began work at the site as required by the UAO and in accordance with the cost sharing agreement.

In October 2006, NL entered into a consent decree in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, in which NL agreed to perform remedial design and remedial actions in Operating Unit 6 of the Waco Subsite of the Cherokee County Superfund Site. NL conducted milling activities on the portion of the site which it has agreed to remediate. NL is sharing responsibility with other PRPs as well as the EPA for remediating a tributary that drains the portions of the site in which the PRPs operated. NL has also reimbursed the EPA for a portion of its past and future response costs related to the site. In the last two quarters of 2009, NL was approached by state and federal natural resource trustees and have participated in preliminary discussions with respect to potential natural resource damage claims.

- 34 -

In June 2008, NL was served in Barton, et al. v. NL Industries, Inc., (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Case No.: 2:08-CV-12558). The plaintiffs in this case are additional property owners and other past or present residents of the Krainz Woods Neighborhood, and the claims raised in this case are identical to those in the Brown case described above. NL has denied liability in this case and will defend vigorously against all claims. Trial is scheduled to begin in August 2011.

In June 2008, NL received a Directive and Notice to Insurers from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“NJDEP”) regarding the Margaret’s Creek site in Old Bridge Township, New Jersey. NJDEP alleged that a waste hauler transported waste from one of NL’s former facilities for disposal at the site in the early 1970s. NJDEP has since referred the site to the EPA, and in November 2009, the EPA added the site to the National Priorities List under the name “Raritan Bay Slag Site.” NL is monitoring closely regarding the scope of the remedial activities that may be necessary at the site and the identification of parties who may have liability for the site.

In September 2008, NL received a Special Notice letter from the EPA for liability associated with the Tar Creek site and a demand for related past and relocation costs. NL responded with a good-faith offer to pay certain of the past costs and to complete limited work in the areas in which NL operated, but declined to pay for other past costs or any relocation costs. NL is involved in an ongoing dialogue with the EPA regarding a potential settlement with the EPA. In October 2008, NL received a claim from the State of Oklahoma for past, future and relocation costs in connection to the site. The state continues to monitor for a potential settlement between the EPA and NL and may subsequently attempt to pursue a separate settlement with NL.

In January 2009, NL was served in Brown, et al. v. NL Industries, Inc. et al. (Circuit Court Wayne County, Michigan, Case No. 09-002458 CE). This case involved identical claims to those raised in the Brown and Barton cases described above. In March 2010, the court dismissed the claims of all of the plaintiffs in this second Brown case and in April 2010, the court denied plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of the dismissal order. In May 2010, plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal in the case and in January 2011, the case was dismissed. This dismissal concludes the case in NL’s favor.

In June 2009, NL was served with a complaint in Consolidation Coal Company v. 3M Company, et al. (United States District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina, Civil Action No. 5:09-CV-00191-FL). The complaint seeks to recover against NL and roughly 170 other defendants under CERCLA for past and future response costs. The plaintiffs allege that NL’s former Albany operation allegedly sent three PCB-containing transformers to the Ward Transformer Superfund Site. NL has denied liability and will defend vigorously against all claims.

- 35 -

In June 2009, NL was served with a third-party complaint in New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Occidental Chemical Corp., et al. (L-009868-05, Superior Court of New Jersey, Essex County). NL is one of approximately 300 third-party defendants (with a potential expansion of the case to over 3,200 unnamed parties) that have been sued by third-party plaintiffs Maxus Energy Corporation and Tierra Solutions, Inc., in response to claims by the State of New Jersey against them seeking to recover past and future environmental cleanup costs of the State and to obtain funds to perform a natural resource damage assessment in connection with contamination in the Passaic River and adjacent waters and sediments (the “Newark Bay Complex”). NL was named in the third-party complaint based upon its ownership of one former operating site and purported connection to a former Superfund site (at which NL was a small PRP) alleged to have contributed to the contamination in the Newark Bay Complex. NL has denied liability and will defend vigorously against all of the claims. In October 2010, the third party defendants filed a motion to sever and stay the third-party action pending resolution of the State’s claims against the direct defendants and in December 2010, the judge denied the motion to sever and stay. However, the judge agreed to a phasing of the case to allow for trial on direct defendants liability and damages as the first and second phases of the case.

In July 2009, NL was served in Beets v. Blue Tee Corp. et al. (Oklahoma State Court, District of Ottawa County, Case No. CJ-09-298). The complaint alleges negligence, strict liability, nuisance, and attractive nuisance against NL, four other mining companies and a mobile home park. In the complaint, five minor plaintiffs seek damages for personal injuries as well as punitive damages. NL intends to deny liability and will defend vigorously against all claims. In August 2009, third-party defendant, the United States of America, removed the case to the Northern District of Oklahoma, where it was docketed as case No. 4:09-cv-546 and in September 2009, plaintiffs moved to return the case to the Oklahoma State Court, District of Ottawa County. In February 2010, the trial court granted plaintiffs’ motion to voluntarily dismiss with prejudice the claims of three of the five minor plaintiffs. Trial has been scheduled to begin in October 2011.

In August 2009, NL was served with a complaint in Raritan Baykeeper, Inc. d/b/a NY/NJ Baykeeper et al. v. NL Industries, Inc. et al. (United States District Court, District of New Jersey, Case No. 3:09-cv-04117). This is a citizen's suit filed by two local environmental groups pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Clean Water Act against NL, current owners, developers and state and local government entities. The complaint alleges that hazardous substances were and continue to be discharged from our former Sayreville, New Jersey property into the sediments of the adjacent Raritan River. The former Sayreville site is currently being remediated by owner/developer parties under the oversight of the NJDEP. The plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, imposition of civil penalties, and an award of costs. NL intends to defend vigorously against all of the claims. In December 2009, NL and other defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case. In May 2010, the court granted NL’s Motion to Dismiss. In June, 2010 plaintiffs filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the third circuit.

In January 2010, NL was served with an amended complaint in Los Angeles Unified School District v. Pozas Brothers Trucking Co., et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court, Central Civil West, LASC Case No. BC 391342). The complaint was filed against several defendants in connection to the alleged contamination of a 35 acre site in South Gate, California acquired by the plaintiff by eminent domain to construct a middle school and high school. The plaintiff alleges that The 1230 Corporation (f/k/a Pioneer Aluminum, Inc.) operated on a portion of property within the 35 acre site and is responsible for contamination caused by its operations and that NL is liable as an alleged successor to The 1230 Corporation, which is a subsidiary of NL. The plaintiff has brought claims for contribution, indemnity, and nuisance and is seeking past and future clean-up and other response costs. NL has denied liability will vigorously defend against all of the claims.

See also Item 1 “Regulatory and Environmental Matters.”

- 36 -

Other - We have also accrued approximately $1.9 million at December 31, 2010 for other environmental cleanup matters. This accrual is near the upper end of the range of our estimate of reasonably possible costs for such matters.

Insurance Coverage Claims.

We are involved in certain legal proceedings with a number of our former insurance carriers regarding the nature and extent of the carriers’ obligations to us under insurance policies with respect to certain lead pigment and asbestos lawsuits. In addition to information that is included below, we have included certain of the information called for by this Item in Note 17 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, and we are incorporating that information here by reference.

The issue of whether insurance coverage for defense costs or indemnity or both will be found to exist for our lead pigment and asbestos litigation depends upon a variety of factors and we cannot assure you that such insurance coverage will be available. We have not considered any potential insurance recoveries for lead pigment or asbestos litigation matters in determining related accruals.

We have agreements with two former insurance carriers pursuant to which the carriers reimburse us for a portion of our lead pigment litigation defense costs, and one carrier reimburses us for a portion of our asbestos litigation defense costs. We are not able to determine how much we will ultimately recover from these carriers for defense costs incurred by us because of certain issues that arise regarding which defense costs qualify for reimbursement. While we continue to seek additional insurance recoveries, we do not know if we will be successful in obtaining reimbursement for either defense costs or indemnity. We have not considered any additional potential insurance recoveries in determining accruals for lead pigment or asbestos litigation matters. Any additional insurance recoveries would be recognized when the receipt is probable and the amount is determinable.

We have settled insurance coverage claims concerning environmental claims with certain of our principal former carriers. We do not expect further material settlements relating to environmental remediation coverage.

ITEM 4. RESERVED

- 37 -

PART II

ITEM 5.

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

AND ISSUER PURCHASES OR EQUITY SECURITIES

Common Stock and Dividends - Our common stock is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange (symbol: VHI). As of March 4, 2011, there were approximately 2,500 holders of record of our common stock. The following table sets forth the high and low closing per share sales prices for our common stock and dividends for the periods indicated. On March 4, 2011 the closing price of our common stock was $24.27.

	High		Low		Cash dividends paid

Year ended December 31, 2009

First Quarter	$	15.48	$	7.83	$	.10
Second Quarter		11.71		7.07		.10
Third Quarter		14.53		6.14		.10
Fourth Quarter		14.99		9.01		.10

Year ended December 31, 2010

First Quarter	$	19.81	$	14.42	$	.10
Second Quarter		32.20		12.34		.10
Third Quarter		20.30		11.49		.10
Fourth Quarter		24.96		19.04		.10

First Quarter 2011 through March 4	$	24.27	$	19.76	$	.10

We paid regular quarterly cash dividends of $.10 per share during 2009 and 2010. In February 2011, our board of directors declared a first quarter 2011 dividend of $.10 per share, to be paid on March 31, 2011 to stockholders of record as of March 14, 2011. However, declaration and payment of future dividends, and the amount thereof, is discretionary and is dependent upon our results of operations, financial condition, cash requirements for our businesses, contractual requirements and restrictions and other factors deemed relevant by our Board of Directors. The amount and timing of past dividends is not necessarily indicative of the amount or timing of any future dividends which we might pay.

Performance Graph - Set forth below is a line graph comparing the yearly change in our cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock against the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price Index and the S&P 500 Industrial Conglomerates Index for the period from December 31, 2005 through December 31, 2010. The graph shows the value at December 31 of each year assuming an original investment of $100 at December 31, 2005, and assumes the reinvestment of our regular quarterly cash dividends in shares of our stock and the sale of the TIMET shares distributed in March of 2007 in our special dividend with the proceeds also reinvested in our stock.

- 38 -

	December 31,
	2005		2006		2007		2008		2009		2010

Valhi common stock	$	100	$	143	$	201	$	138	$	187	$	303
S&P 500 Composite Stock Price Index		100		116		122		77		97		112
S&P 500 Industrial Conglomerates Index		100		109		113		55		61		72

The information contained in the performance graph shall not be deemed “soliciting material” or “filed” with the SEC, or subject to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, as amended, except to the extent we specifically request that the material be treated as soliciting material or specifically incorporate this performance graph by reference into a document filed under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.

Equity Compensation Plan Information – We have an equity compensation plan, which was approved by our stockholders, which provides for the discretionary grant to our employees and directors of, among other things, options to purchase our common stock and stock awards. We had no stock options outstanding at of December 31, 2010 and approximately 4.0 million shares of our common stock were available for future grants or issuance. We do not have any equity compensation plans that were not approved by our stockholders. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Treasury Stock Purchases - In March 2005, our board of directors authorized the repurchase of up to 5.0 million shares of our common stock in open market transactions, including block purchases, or in privately negotiated transactions, which may include transactions with our affiliates. In November 2006, our board of directors authorized the repurchase of an additional 5.0 million shares. We may purchase the stock from time to time as market conditions permit. The stock repurchase program does not include specific price targets or timetables and may be suspended at any time. Depending on market conditions, we could terminate the program prior to completion. We will use our cash on hand to acquire the shares. Repurchased shares will be retired and cancelled or may be added to our treasury stock and used for employee benefit plans, future acquisitions or other corporate purposes. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

In December 2010, our consolidated subsidiary Kronos purchased shares of our common stock in open market transactions. Under Delaware Corporation Law, 100% (and not the proportionate interest) of a parent company's shares held by a majority-owned subsidiary of the parent is considered to be treasury stock for voting purposes. The following table discloses certain information regarding the shares of our common stock purchased by Kronos in December 2010 (the only treasury stock purchases during the fourth quarter of 2010). Kronos’ purchases of our common stock did not reduce the number of shares Valhi may purchase under our publicly announced repurchase plans discussed above.

- 39 -

Period	Total number of shares purchased		Average price paid per share, including commissions		Total number of shares purchased as part of a publicly-announced plan		Maximum number of shares that may yet be purchased under the publicly-announced plan at end of period

December 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010		121,273	$	22.18		- 0 -		4,006,600

- 40 -

ITEM 6.

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following selected financial data has been derived from our audited Consolidated Financial Statements. The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes and Item 7 - "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations."

	Years ended December 31,
	2006			2007			2008			2009			2010
	(In millions, except per share data)

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS DATA:
Net sales:
Chemicals	$	1,279.5		$	1,310.3		$	1,316.9		$	1,142.0		$	1,449.7
Component products		190.1			177.7			165.5			116.1			135.3
Waste management		11.8			4.2			2.9			14.0			7.7

Total net sales	$	1,481.4		$	1,492.2		$	1,485.3		$	1,272.1		$	1,592.7

Operating income (loss):
Chemicals	$	138.1		$	88.6		$	52.0		$	(10.6	)	$	183.2
Component products		20.6			16.0			5.5			(4.0	)		9.4
Waste management		(9.5	)		(14.1	)		(21.5	)		(27.0	)		(30.8	)

Total operating income (loss)	$	149.2		$	90.5		$	36.0		$	(41.6	)	$	161.8


Equity in earnings of TIMET	$	101.1		$	26.9		$	-		$	-		$	-

Net income (loss)	$	153.7		$	(49.2	)	$	4.9		$	(38.1	)	$	63.8

Net income(loss) attributable to Valhi stockholders	$	141.7		$	(45.7	)	$	(.8	)	$	(34.2	)	$	50.3

DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE DATA:
Net income (loss)attributable to Valhi stockholders	$	1.20		$	(.40	)	$	(.01	)	$	(.30	)	$	.42

Cash dividends	$	.40		$	.40		$	.40		$	.40		$	.40

Weighted average common shares Outstanding		116.5			114.7			114.4			114.3			114.3

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOW DATA:
Cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities	$	86.3		$	63.5		$	(24.0	)	$	76.0		$	122.1
Investing activities		(89.5	)		(65.4	)		(60.0	)		(44.5	)		(93.0	)
Financing activities		(87.6	)		(56.1	)		(12.9	)		(4.7	)		228.6

BALANCE SHEET DATA (at year end):
Total assets (1)	$	2,804.7		$	2,603.0		$	2,389.4		$	2,410.3		$	2,714.3
Long-term debt		785.3			889.8			911.0			988.4			922.9
Valhi stockholders’ equity (1)(2)		866.8			618.4			468.8			428.7			541.8
Total equity (1)(2)		990.5			708.9			542.1			498.4			818.2

(1)	We adopted the asset and liability recognition provisions of Accounting Standard Codification (“ASC”) Topic 715 as of December 31, 2006 and the measurement date provisions of the Topic as of December 31, 2007. See Note 11 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

(2)	We adopted the uncertain tax position provisions of ASC Topic 740 as of January 1, 2007. See Note 12 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

- 41 -

ITEM 7.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Business Overview

We are primarily a holding company. We operate through our wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiaries, including NL Industries, Inc., Kronos Worldwide, Inc., CompX International, Inc., Tremont LLC and Waste Control Specialists LLC (“WCS”). Kronos (NYSE: KRO), NL (NYSE: NL) and CompX (NYSE Amex: CIX) each file periodic reports with the SEC.

We have three consolidated operating segments:

Chemicals – Our chemicals segment is operated through our majority control of Kronos. Kronos is leading global producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide pigments (“TiO2”), a base industrial product used in a diverse range of customer applications and end-use markets, including coatings, plastics, paper, food, cosmetics, inks, textile fibers, rubber, pharmaceuticals, glass, ceramics and other industrial and consumer markets.

Component Products – We operate in the component products industry through our majority control of CompX. CompX is a leading global manufacturer of security products, precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support systems used in the office furniture, transportation, tool storage and a variety of other industries. CompX also manufactures stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges and throttle controls for the performance boat industry.

Waste Management – WCS is our subsidiary which operates a West Texas facility for the processing, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous, toxic and certain types of low-level radioactive waste. WCS obtained a byproduct disposal license in 2008 and began disposal operations at this facility in October 2009. In January 2009 WCS received a low-level radioactive waste disposal license, which was signed in September 2009. Construction of the low-level radioactive waste facility began in January 2011, and the facility is expected to be operational in late 2011.

- 42 -

Income (Loss) From Operations Overview

Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010 –

We reported net income attributable to Valhi stockholders of $50.3 million or $.42 per diluted share in 2010 compared to a net loss attributable to Valhi stockholders of $34.2 million or $.30 per diluted share in 2009.

Our diluted earnings per share increased from 2009 to 2010 primarily due to the net effects of:

operating income from our Chemicals and Component Products Segments in 2010 as compared to operating losses in 2009;

a non-cash deferred income tax benefit recognized in the first quarter of 2010;

litigation settlement and contract termination expense in 2010;

lower litigation settlement gains in 2010;

an income tax charge related to the reserve to uncertain tax positions in 2010 compared to a benefit in 2009;

higher insurance recoveries in 2010; and

· a gain on the sale of a business in 2009.

Our net income attributable to Valhi stockholders in 2010 includes:

a non-cash deferred income tax benefit of $.21 per diluted share recognized by Kronos related to a European Court ruling that resulted in the favorable resolution of certain German income tax issues;

insurance recoveries of $.09 per diluted share;

a litigation settlement gain of $.03 per diluted share;

a charge of $.04 per diluted share related to a net increase in our reserve for uncertain tax positions; and

a charge of $.16 per diluted share related to a litigation settlement and contract termination.

Our net loss attributable to Valhi stockholders in 2009 includes:

a gain of $.07 per diluted share as a result of a litigation settlement;

a gain of $.04 per diluted share gain from the sale of a business;

a gain of $.05 per diluted share as a result of the second close of a litigation settlement;

income of $.02 per diluted share related to certain insurance recoveries we recognized; and

income of $.11 per diluted share, related to a net decrease in our reserve for uncertain tax positions.

- 43 -