UNITED STATES
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, 2017
Commission file number 1-640
NL INDUSTRIES, INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
New Jersey |
|
13-5267260 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
|
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
5430 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1700 Dallas, Texas 75240-2620 (Address of principal executive offices) 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 |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
No securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act.
Indicate by check mark:
If the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒
If the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒
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 and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ 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 ☐
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 ☐
Whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer |
|
☐ |
|
Accelerated filer |
|
☐ |
Non-accelerated filer |
|
☒ |
|
Smaller reporting company |
|
☐ |
Emerging growth company |
|
☐ |
|
|
|
|
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒
The aggregate market value of the 8.3 million shares of voting stock held by nonaffiliates of NL Industries, Inc. as of June 30, 2017 (the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently-completed second fiscal quarter) approximated $58.7 million.
As of February 28, 2018, 48,714,884 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.
ITEM 1. |
BUSINESS |
The Company
NL Industries, Inc. was organized as a New Jersey corporation in 1891. Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange, or the NYSE, under the symbol NL. References to “NL Industries,” “NL,” the “Company,” the “Registrant,” “we,” “our,” “us” and similar terms mean NL Industries, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliate, unless the context otherwise requires.
Our principal executive offices are located at Three Lincoln Center, 5430 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1700, Dallas, TX 75240. Our telephone number is (972) 233-1700. We maintain a website at www.nl-ind.com.
Business summary
We are primarily a holding company. We operate in the component products industry through our majority-owned subsidiary, CompX International Inc. (NYSE MKT: CIX). We operate in the chemicals industry through our noncontrolling interest in Kronos Worldwide, Inc. CompX and Kronos (NYSE: KRO); each file periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Organization
At December 31, 2017, Valhi, Inc. (NYSE: VHI) held approximately 83% of our outstanding common stock and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Contran Corporation held an aggregate of 93% of Valhi’s outstanding common stock. As discussed in Note 1 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, Lisa K. Simmons and Serena Simmons Connelly may be deemed to control Contran, Valhi, and us.
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 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 our businesses (such as Kronos’ TiO2 operations) |
|
• |
Customer and producer inventory levels |
|
• |
Unexpected or earlier-than-expected industry capacity expansion (such as the TiO2 industry) |
|
• |
Changes in raw material and other operating costs (such as energy, ore, zinc and brass costs) and our ability to pass those costs on to our customers or offset them with reductions in other operating costs |
|
• |
Changes in the availability of raw material (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 and component products) |
|
• |
Competitive products and substitute products |
|
• |
Price and product competition from low-cost manufacturing sources (such as China) |
- 2 -
|
• |
Potential consolidation of Kronos’ competitors |
|
• |
Potential consolidation of Kronos’ customers |
|
• |
The impact of pricing and production decisions |
|
• |
Competitive technology positions |
|
• |
Potential difficulties in integrating future acquisitions |
|
• |
Potential difficulties in upgrading or implementing new accounting and manufacturing software systems (such as Kronos’ enterprise resource planning system) |
|
• |
The introduction of trade barriers |
|
• |
Possible disruption of Kronos’ or CompX’s business, or increases in our cost of doing business resulting from terrorist activities or global conflicts |
|
• |
The impact of current or future government regulations (including employee healthcare benefit related regulations) |
|
• |
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 and the Canadian dollar), or possible disruptions to our business resulting from potential instability resulting from uncertainties associated with the euro or other currencies |
|
• |
Operating interruptions (including, but not limited to, labor disputes, leaks, natural disasters, fires, explosions, unscheduled or unplanned downtime, transportation interruptions and cyber attacks) |
|
• |
Decisions to sell operating assets other than in the ordinary course of business |
|
• |
Kronos’ ability to renew or refinance credit facilities |
|
• |
Our ability to maintain sufficient liquidity |
|
• |
The timing and amounts of insurance recoveries |
|
• |
The extent to which our subsidiaries or affiliates were to become unable to pay us dividends |
|
• |
Uncertainties associated with CompX’s development of new product features |
|
• |
The ultimate outcome of income tax audits, tax settlement initiatives or other tax matters, including future tax reform |
|
• |
Our ability to utilize income tax attributes or changes in income tax rates related to such attributes, the benefits of which may or may not have been recognized under the more-likely-than-not recognition criteria |
|
• |
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 former manufacturers of lead pigment and lead-based paint, including us, with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the use of such products) |
|
• |
The ultimate resolution of pending litigation (such as our lead pigment and environmental matters) |
|
• |
Possible future litigation. |
Should one or more of these risks materialize or if the consequences of such a 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 -
Operations and equity investment
Information regarding our operations and the companies conducting such operations is set forth below. Geographic financial information is included in Note 2 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Component Products CompX International Inc. - 87% owned at December 31, 2017 |
CompX manufactures engineered components that are sold to a variety of industries including recreational transportation (including boats), postal, office and institutional furniture, cabinetry, tool storage, healthcare, gas stations and vending equipment. CompX has three production facilities in the United States.
|
Chemicals Kronos Worldwide, Inc. - 30% owned at December 31, 2017 |
Kronos is a leading global producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide pigments, or TiO2, a base industrial product used in imparting whiteness, brightness, opacity and durability to a diverse range of customer applications and end-use markets, including coatings, plastics, paper, inks, food, cosmetics and other industrial and consumer “quality-of-life” products. Kronos has production facilities in Europe and North America. Sales of TiO2 represented about 94% of Kronos’ net sales in 2017, with sales of other products that are complementary to Kronos’ TiO2 business comprising the remainder. |
COMPONENT PRODUCTS - COMPX INTERNATIONAL INC.
Industry overview - Through our majority-owned subsidiary, CompX, we manufacture engineered components utilized in a variety of applications and industries. We manufacture mechanical and electrical cabinet locks and other locking mechanisms used in the recreational transportation, postal, office and institutional furniture, cabinetry, tool storage and healthcare applications. We also manufacture stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges, throttle controls and trim tabs for the recreational marine and other industries. We continuously seek to diversify into new markets and identify new applications and features for our products, which we believe provide a greater potential for higher rates of earnings growth as well as diversification of risk.
Manufacturing, operations and products - CompX’s Security Products business, with one manufacturing facility in South Carolina and one in Illinois shared with the Marine Components business, manufactures mechanical and electronic cabinet locks and other locking mechanisms 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, electronic circuit panels, storage compartments and gas station security. We believe that CompX is a North American market leader in the manufacture and sale of cabinet locks and other locking mechanisms. 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 KeSet® and System 64® (which each allow the user to change the keying on a single lock 64 times without removing the lock from its enclosure) TuBar® and Turbine™, and |
|
• |
our innovative CompX eLock® and Stealthlock® electrical 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. |
A substantial portion of CompX’s Security Products sales consists of products with specialized adaptations to an individual customer’s specifications, some of which are listed above. CompX also has a standardized product line suitable for many customers which is offered through a North American distribution network to locksmith and smaller original equipment manufacturer distributors via its STOCK LOCKS® distribution program.
- 4 -
CompX’s Marine Components business, with a facility in Wisconsin and a facility shared with the Security Products business in Illinois, manufactures and distributes stainless steel exhaust components, gauges, throttle controls, trim tabs, hardware and accessories primarily for performance and ski/wakeboard boats. CompX’s specialty Marine Components 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; |
|
• |
mechanical and electronic controls and throttles; |
|
• |
steering wheels and other billet aluminum accessories; and |
|
• |
dash panels, LED lighting, wire harnesses and other accessories. |
The following table sets forth the location, size and business operations for each of CompX’s operating facilities at December 31, 2017:
Facility Name |
|
Business Operations |
|
Location |
|
Size |
|
|
Owned Facilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National (1) |
|
SP |
|
Mauldin, SC |
|
|
198,000 |
|
Grayslake(1) |
|
SP/MC |
|
Grayslake, IL |
|
|
133,000 |
|
Custom(1) |
|
MC |
|
Neenah, WI |
|
|
95,000 |
|
Leased Facilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution Center |
|
SP/MC |
|
Rancho Cucamonga, CA |
|
|
11,500 |
|
SP – Security Products business
MC – Marine Components business
|
(1) |
ISO-9001 registered facilities |
We believe all of CompX’s facilities are well maintained and satisfactory for their intended purposes.
Raw materials - The primary raw materials used in CompX’s manufacturing processes are:
|
• |
zinc and brass (used in the Security Products business for the manufacture of locking mechanisms); and |
|
• |
stainless steel (used primarily in the Marine Components business for the manufacture of exhaust headers and pipes), aluminum (used for the manufacture of throttles and trim tabs), and other components. |
These raw materials are purchased from several suppliers, are readily available from numerous sources and accounted for approximately 11% of our total cost of sales for 2017. Total material costs, including purchased components, represented approximately 44% of our cost of sales in 2017.
CompX occasionally enters into short-term commodity-related raw material supply arrangements to mitigate the impact of future price increases in commodity-related raw materials, including zinc, brass and stainless steels. These arrangements generally provide for stated unit prices based upon specified purchase volumes, which help CompX to stabilize its commodity-related raw material costs to a certain extent. During 2016 and 2017, markets for the primary commodity-related raw materials used in the manufacture of CompX’s locking mechanisms, primarily zinc and brass, generally strengthened, resulting in price increases that exceeded general inflation rates. In the case of zinc, CompX’s purchases late in 2017 bore unit costs over 50% higher than those acquired two years earlier. Over that same period, the market for stainless steel, the primary raw material used for the manufacture of marine exhaust headers and pipes, remained relatively stable. While CompX expects the markets for its primary commodity-related raw materials to stabilize during 2018, CompX recognizes that strengthening economic conditions may exert upward price pressure on these and other manufacturing materials. When purchased on the spot market, each of these raw materials may be subject to sudden and unanticipated price increases. CompX generally seeks to mitigate the impact
- 5 -
of fluctuations in these raw material costs on its margins through improvements in production efficiencies or other operating cost reductions. In the event CompX is 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 CompX’s 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.
Patents and trademarks - CompX holds a number of patents relating to component products, certain of which we believe to be important to CompX and its continuing business activity. Patents generally have a term of 20 years, and CompX’s patents have remaining terms ranging from less than 1 year to 17 years at December 31, 2017.
CompX’s major trademarks and brand names in addition to CompX® include:
Security Products |
|
Marine Components |
||
CompX® Security Products™ |
|
Lockview® |
|
CompX Marine® |
National Cabinet Lock® |
|
System64® |
|
Custom Marine® |
Fort Lock® |
|
SlamCAM® |
|
Livorsi® Marine |
Timberline Lock® |
|
RegulatoR® |
|
Livorsi II® Marine |
Chicago Lock® |
|
CompXpress® |
|
CMI™ Industrial |
STOCK LOCKS® |
|
GEM® |
|
Custom Marine® Stainless Exhaust |
KeSet® |
|
|
|
The #1 Choice in Performance Boating® |
TuBar® |
|
|
|
Mega Rim® |
StealthLock® |
|
|
|
Race Rim® |
ACE® |
|
|
|
Vantage View® |
ACE® II |
|
|
|
GEN-X® |
CompX eLock® |
|
|
|
|
Sales, marketing and distribution - A majority of CompX’s component sales are direct to large OEM customers through our factory-based sales and marketing professionals supported by engineers working in concert with field salespeople and independent manufacturer’s representatives. We select manufacturer’s representatives based on special skills in certain markets or relationships with current or potential customers.
In addition to sales to large OEM customers, a substantial portion of CompX’s 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.
We sell to a diverse customer base with only one customers representing 10% or more of our sales in 2017 (United States Postal Service representing 16%). Our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 44% of our sales in 2017.
Competition - The markets in which CompX participates are highly competitive. CompX competes primarily on the basis of product design, including space utilization and aesthetic factors, product quality and durability, price, on-time delivery, service and technical support. CompX focuses its efforts on the middle and high-end segments of the market, where product design, quality, durability and service are valued by the customer. The Security Products business competes against a number of U.S. and non-U.S. manufacturers. The Marine Components business competes with small U.S. manufacturers and is minimally affected by non-U.S. competitors.
- 6 -
Regulatory and environmental matters - CompX’s operations are subject to federal, state and local environmental 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 (“Environmental Laws”). CompX’s operations are also subject to federal, state and local regulations relating to worker health and safety. We believe that CompX is 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 results of operations. 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, 2017, CompX employed 520 people, all in the United States. We believe our labor relations are good at all of our facilities.
CHEMICALS - KRONOS WORLDWIDE, INC.
Business overview - Kronos is 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. Kronos, along with its distributors and agents, sells and provides technical services for its products to approximately 4,000 customers in 100 countries with the majority of sales in Europe, North America and Asia Pacific. We believe that Kronos has developed considerable expertise and efficiency in the manufacture, sale, shipment and service of its products in domestic and international markets.
TiO2 is a white inorganic pigment used in a wide range of products for its exceptional durability and its ability to impart whiteness, brightness and opacity. 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, Kronos believes that 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 together with TiO2 in a number of end-use markets. However, these products are not able to duplicate the opacity performance characteristics of TiO2 and Kronos believes that 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 has grown at a compound annual growth rate of approximately 3% since 1990. Per capita consumption of TiO2 in Western Europe and the United States far exceeds that in other areas of the world, and these regions are expected to continue to be the largest consumers of TiO2 on a per capita basis. We believe that Western Europe and North America currently account for approximately 20% and 17% of global TiO2 consumption, respectively. Markets for TiO2 are generally increasing in South America, Eastern Europe, the Asia Pacific region and China and we believe these are significant markets where we expect continued growth as economies in these regions continue to develop and quality-of-life products, including TiO2, experience greater demand.
- 7 -
Products and end-use markets - Kronos, including its predecessors, has produced and marketed TiO2 in North America and Europe, its primary markets, for over 100 years. We believe that Kronos is the largest producer of TiO2 in Europe with approximately one-half of its sales volumes attributable to markets in Europe. The table below shows Kronos’ market share for its significant markets, Europe and North America, for the last three years.
|
2015 |
|
2016 |
|
2017 |
||||||
Europe |
|
18 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
North America |
|
15 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
We believe that Kronos is the leading seller of TiO2 in several countries, including Germany, with an estimated 10% share of worldwide TiO2 sales volume in 2017. Overall, Kronos is one of the top six producers of TiO2 in the world.
Kronos offers its customers a broad portfolio of products that includes over 40 different TiO2 pigment grades under the Kronos® trademark, which provide a variety of performance properties to meet customers’ specific requirements. Kronos’ major customers include domestic and international paint, plastics, decorative laminate and paper manufacturers. Kronos ships TiO2 to customers in either a powder or slurry form via rail, truck and/or ocean carrier. Sales of its core TiO2 pigments represented approximately 94% of Kronos’ net sales in 2017. Kronos and its agents and distributors primarily sell its products in three major end-use markets: coatings, plastics and paper.
The following tables show Kronos’ approximate TiO2 sales volume by geographic region and end use for the year ended December 31, 2017:
Sales volumes percentages by geographic region |
|
Sales volumes percentages by end-use |
||||
Europe |
50 |
% |
|
Coatings |
58 |
% |
North America |
31 |
% |
|
Plastics |
30 |
% |
Asia Pacific |
9 |
% |
|
Other |
5 |
% |
Rest of World |
10 |
% |
|
Paper |
7 |
% |
Some of the principal applications for Kronos’ products include the following.
TiO2 for coatings - Kronos’ TiO2 is used to provide opacity, durability, tinting strength and brightness in industrial coatings, as well as coatings for commercial and residential 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. In general, the higher the opacity requirement of the coating, the greater the TiO2 content.
TiO2 for plastics - Kronos produces 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, packaging and agricultural films.
- 8 -
TiO2 for paper - Kronos’ 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 Kronos sells its TiO2 to all segments of the paper end-use market, its 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 plastic resin 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 - Kronos produces 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. Kronos’ 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.
Kronos produces 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. Kronos’ 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, Kronos’ 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).
Kronos’ TiO2 business is enhanced by the following three complementary businesses, which comprised approximately 6% of its net sales in 2017:
|
• |
Kronos owns and operates two ilmenite mines in Norway pursuant to a governmental concession with an unlimited term. Ilmenite is a raw material used directly as a feedstock by some sulfate-process TiO2 plants. We believe that Kronos has a significant competitive advantage because its mines supply the feedstock requirements for all of its European sulfate-process plants. Kronos also sells ilmenite ore to third-parties, some of whom are competitors, and Kronos sells an ilmenite-based specialty product to the oil and gas industry. The mines have estimated ilmenite reserves that are expected to last at least 50 years. |
|
• |
Kronos manufactures and sells 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 Kronos’ Ecochem division and are primarily used as treatment and conditioning agents for industrial effluents and municipal wastewater as well as for the manufacture of iron pigments, cement and agricultural products. |
|
• |
Kronos manufactures and sells 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. |
- 9 -
Manufacturing, operations and properties - Kronos produces 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. Manufacturers of many end-use applications can use either form, especially during periods of tight supply for TiO2. 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 2017, chloride process production facilities represented approximately 50% of industry capacity. The sulfate process is preferred for use in selected paper products, ceramics, rubber tires, man-made fibers, food products, pharmaceuticals 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 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 also has lower energy requirements and is less labor-intensive than the sulfate process, although the chloride process requires a higher-skilled labor force. 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. |
Kronos produced 576,000 metric tons of TiO2 in 2017, up from the 546,000 metric tons produced in 2016. Kronos’ production amounts include its share of the output produced by its TiO2 manufacturing joint-venture discussed below in “TiO2 Manufacturing Joint Venture.” Kronos’ average production capacity utilization rates were approximately 95% and 98% of capacity in 2015 and 2016, respectively, and at full practical capacity in 2017. Kronos’ production rates in the first quarter of 2015 were impacted by the implementation of certain productivity-enhancing improvement projects at other facilities, as well as necessary improvements to ensure continued compliance with its permit regulations, which resulted in longer-than-normal maintenance shutdowns in some instances.
Kronos operates facilities throughout North America and Europe, including the only sulfate process plant in North America and four TiO2 plants in Europe (one in each of Leverkusen, Germany; Nordenham, Germany; Langerbrugge, Belgium; and Fredrikstad, Norway). In North America, Kronos has 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.
Kronos’ production capacity has increased by approximately 6% over the past ten years due to debottlenecking programs, with only moderate capital expenditures. Kronos currently expects to operate its TiO2 plants at full practical capacity levels in 2018.
- 10 -
The following table presents the division of Kronos’ expected 2018 manufacturing capacity by plant location and type of manufacturing process:
|
|
|
|
% of capacity by TiO2 |
||||||
Facility |
|
Description |
|
Chloride |
|
Sulfate |
||||
Leverkusen, Germany (1) |
|
TiO2 production, chloride and sulfate process, co-products |
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
Nordenham, Germany |
|
TiO2 production, sulfate process, co-products |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Langerbrugge, Belgium |
|
TiO2 production, chloride process, co-products, titanium chemicals products |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Fredrikstad, Norway (2) |
|
TiO2 production, sulfate process, co-products |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Varennes, Canada |
|
TiO2 production, chloride and sulfate process, slurry facility, titanium chemicals products |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Lake Charles, LA, U.S. (3) |
|
TiO2 production, chloride process |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
74 |
% |
|
|
26 |
% |
(1) |
The Leverkusen facility is located within an extensive manufacturing complex owned by Bayer AG. Kronos owns the Leverkusen facility, which represents about one-third of its current TiO2 production capacity, but it leases 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. A majority-owned subsidiary of Bayer 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 2063. |
(3) |
Kronos operates the Lake Charles facility in a joint venture with Huntsman P&A Investments LLC (HPA) (formerly Tioxide Americas, LLC), a subsidiary of Huntsman Corporation and the amount indicated in the table above represents the share of TiO2 produced by the joint venture to which Kronos is entitled. See “TiO2 Manufacturing Joint Venture.” |
Kronos owns the land underlying all of its principal production facilities unless otherwise indicated in the table above.
Kronos also operates two ilmenite mines in Norway pursuant to a governmental concession with an unlimited term. In addition, Kronos operates a rutile slurry manufacturing plant in Lake Charles, Louisiana, which converts dry pigment manufactured for Kronos at the Lake Charles TiO2 facility into a slurry form that is then shipped to customers.
Kronos has various corporate and administrative offices located in the U.S., Germany, Norway, Canada, Belgium, France and the United Kingdom and various sales offices located in North America.
TiO2 Manufacturing Joint Venture - Kronos and HPA 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. Kronos and Venator share production from the plant equally pursuant to separate offtake agreements, unless we and Venator otherwise agree (such as in 2015, when we purchased approximately 52% of the production from the plant).
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 Kronos appoints and two of whom Venator appoints. Two general managers manage the operations of the joint venture acting under the direction of the supervisory committee. Kronos appoints one general manager and Venator appoints the other.
The joint venture is not consolidated in Kronos’ financial statements, because Kronos does not control it. Kronos accounts for our interest in the joint venture by the equity method. The joint venture operates on a break-even
- 11 -
basis and therefore Kronos does not have any equity in earnings of the joint venture. Kronos is required to purchase one half of the TiO2 produced by the joint venture. All costs and capital expenditures are shared equally with Venator with the exception of feedstock (purchased natural rutile ore or slag) and packaging costs for the pigment grades produced. Kronos’ share of net costs is reported as cost of sales as the TiO2 is sold.
Raw materials - The primary raw materials used in chloride process TiO2 are titanium-containing feedstock (purchased natural rutile ore or 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. Kronos purchases chloride process grade slag from Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium Limited under a long-term supply contract that automatically renews at the end of 2018 for successive two-year renewal periods, unless terminated before December 31, 2018. Kronos also purchase upgraded slag from Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium Limited under a long-term supply contract that expires at the end of 2019. Kronos purchases natural rutile ore primarily from Iluka Resources, Limited under a contract which expires in 2018. In the past Kronos has been, and it expects that it will continue to be, successful in obtaining short-term and long-term extensions to these and other existing supply contracts prior to their expiration. Kronos expects the raw materials purchased under these contracts, and contracts that Kronos may enter into, will meet its 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, Kronos operates two rock ilmenite mines in Norway, which provided all of the feedstock for Kronos’ European sulfate process TiO2 plants in 2017. Kronos expects ilmenite production from its mines to meet Kronos’ European sulfate process feedstock requirements for the foreseeable future. For Kronos’ Canadian sulfate process plant, Kronos purchases sulfate grade slag primarily from Rio Tinto Fer et Titane Inc. under a supply contract that renews annually, subject to termination upon twelve months written notice. Kronos expects the raw materials purchased under these contracts, and contracts that it may enter into, to meet Kronos’ sulfate process feedstock requirements over the next several years.
Many of Kronos’ raw material contracts contain fixed quantities Kronos is required to purchase, or specify a range of quantities within which Kronos is required to purchase. The pricing under these agreements is generally negotiated quarterly.
The following table summarizes Kronos’ raw materials purchased or mined in 2017.
Production process/raw material |
|
Raw materials |
|
|
(In thousands of metric tons) |
Chloride process plants: |
|
|
Purchased slag or rutile ore |
|
535 |
Sulfate process plants: |
|
|
Ilmenite ore mined and used internally |
|
360 |
Purchased slag |
|
27 |
Sales and marketing - Kronos’ 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 Kronos’ customers, the purchasing decisions are often made by customers’ senior management. Kronos works to maintain close relationships with the key decision makers, through in-depth and frequent in-person meetings. Kronos endeavors to extend these commercial and technical relationships to multiple levels within its customers’ organization by using its direct sales force and technical service group to accomplish this objective. Kronos believes this has helped build customer loyalty to Kronos and strengthen its competitive position. Close cooperation and strong customer relationships enable Kronos to stay closely attuned to trends in its customers’ businesses. Where appropriate, Kronos works in conjunction with customers to solve formulation or application problems by modifying specific product
- 12 -
properties or developing new pigment grades. Kronos also focuses its sales and marketing efforts on those geographic and end-use market businesses where Kronos believes it can realize higher selling prices. This focus includes continuously reviewing and optimizing customer and product portfolios.
Kronos’ marketing strategy is also aimed at working directly with customers to monitor the success of its 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 its customers. Kronos’ marketing staff closely coordinates with its sales force and technical specialists to ensure that the needs of its customers are met, and to help develop and commercialize new grades where appropriate.
Kronos sells a majority of its products through its direct sales force operating from five sales offices in Europe and two sales offices in North America. Kronos also utilizes sales agents and distributors who are authorized to sell its products in specific geographic areas. In Europe, Kronos’ sales efforts are conducted primarily through its direct sales force and its sales agents. Kronos’ agents do not sell any TiO2 products other than KRONOS® brand products. In North America, Kronos’ sales are made primarily through its direct sales force and supported by a network of distributors. In export markets, where we have increased our marketing efforts over the last several years, our sales are made through our direct sales force, sales agents and distributors. In addition to its direct sales force and sales agents, many of Kronos’ sales agents also act as distributors to service its customers in all regions. Kronos offers customer and technical service to the customers who purchase its products through distributors as well as to its larger customers serviced by its direct sales force.
Kronos sells to a diverse customer base and no single customer comprised more than 10% of Kronos’ sales in 2017. Kronos’ largest ten customers accounted for approximately 34% of sales in 2017.
Neither Kronos’ business as a whole nor any of its 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. With certain exceptions, Kronos has historically operated its production facilities at near full capacity rates throughout the entire year, which among other things helps to minimize its per-unit production costs. As a result, Kronos normally will build inventories during the first and fourth quarters of each year, in order to maximize product availability during the higher demand periods normally experienced in the second and third quarters.
Competition - The TiO2 industry is highly competitive. Kronos competes 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. Price and availability are the most significant competitive factors along with quality and customer service for the majority of our product grades. Increasingly, we are focused on providing pigments that are differentiated to meet specific customer requests and specialty grades that are differentiated from our competitor’s products. During 2017, Kronos had an estimated 10% share of worldwide TiO2 sales volume, and based on sales volumes, we believe that Kronos is the leading seller of TiO2 in several countries, including Germany.
Kronos’ principal competitors are The Chemours Company, or Chemours; Cristal Global; Venator Materials PLC (formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary, and now a majority-owned subsidiary, of Huntsman Corporation); Tronox Incorporated; and Lomon Billions. The top six TiO2 producers (i.e. Kronos and our five principal competitors) account for approximately 66% of the world’s production capacity. Chemours added a new 200,000 metric ton capacity line at its plant in Mexico which commenced production in the second quarter of 2016. In 2016, Venator announced it was closing its sulfate process facility in South Africa, reducing its overall capacity by 25,000 metric tons. In 2017, one of Venator’s European sulfate plants, which has a capacity of 130,000 metric tons, operated at significantly reduced rates due to a fire at the facility.
- 13 -
The following chart shows Kronos’ estimate of worldwide production capacity in 2017:
Worldwide production capacity |
|
||
Chemours |
|
18 |
% |
Cristal |
|
13 |
% |
Venator |
|
10 |
% |
Lomon Billions |
|
9 |
% |
Kronos |
|
9 |
% |
Tronox |
|
7 |
% |
Other |
|
34 |
% |
Chemours has over one-half of total North American TiO2 production capacity and is Kronos’ principal North American competitor. In February 2017, Tronox announced a definitive agreement to acquire the TiO2 assets of Cristal, but in December 2017 the U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint challenging the merger. Tronox has indicated it intends to vigorously defend against such action.
Over the past ten years, Kronos and its competitors have increased industry capacity through debottlenecking projects, which in part compensated for the shutdown of various TiO2 plants throughout the world. Although overall industry demand is expected to remain strong in 2018 as a result of improving worldwide economic conditions, we do not expect any other significant efforts will be undertaken by us or our principal competitors to further increase capacity for the foreseeable future, other than through debottlenecking projects. If actual developments differ from our expectations, the TiO2 industry’s performance and that of our own could be unfavorably affected.
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 to expand existing capacity. Kronos believes it is unlikely any new TiO2 plants will be constructed in Europe or North America in the foreseeable future.
Research and development - Kronos employs 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 Kronos’ chloride and sulfate production processes, improving product quality and strengthening Kronos’ competitive position by developing new applications. Kronos’ expenditures for these activities were approximately $16 million in 2015, $13 million in 2016 and $20 million in 2017. Kronos expects to spend approximately $19 million on research and development in 2018.
Kronos continually seeks to improve the quality of its grades and has been successful at developing new grades for existing and new applications to meet the needs of its customers and increase product life cycles. Since the beginning of 2013, Kronos has added five new grades for pigments and other applications.
Patents, trademarks, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights - Kronos has a comprehensive intellectual property protection strategy that includes obtaining, maintaining and enforcing its patents, primarily in the United States, Canada and Europe. Kronos also protects its trademark and trade secret rights and has entered into license agreements with third parties concerning various intellectual property matters. Kronos has also from time to time been involved in disputes over intellectual property.
Patents - Kronos has obtained patents and has numerous patent applications pending that cover its products and the technology used in the manufacture of its products. Kronos’ patent strategy is important to Kronos and its continuing business activities. In addition to maintaining its patent portfolio, Kronos seeks patent protection for its 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. Kronos’ U.S. patent portfolio includes patents having remaining terms ranging from four years to 20 years.
Trademarks and trade secrets - Kronos’ trademarks, including KRONOS®, are covered by issued and/or pending registrations, including in Canada and the United States. Kronos protects the trademarks that it uses in connection with the products it manufactures and sells and has developed goodwill in connection with its long-term
- 14 -
use of Kronos’ trademarks. Kronos conducts research activities in secret and Kronos protects the confidentiality of its trade secrets through reasonable measures, including confidentiality agreements and security procedures, including data security. Kronos relies upon unpatented proprietary knowledge and continuing technological innovation and other trade secrets to develop and maintain its competitive position. Kronos’ proprietary chloride production process is an important part of Kronos’ technology and its business could be harmed if it fails to maintain confidentiality of its trade secrets used in this technology.
Employees - As of December 31, 2017, Kronos employed the following number of people:
Europe |
|
1,835 |
|
Canada |
|
360 |
|
United States (1) |
|
50 |
|
Total |
|
2,245 |
|
(1) |
Excludes employees of Kronos’ Louisiana joint venture. |
Certain employees at each of Kronos’ production facilities are organized by labor unions. In Europe, Kronos’ union employees are covered by master collective bargaining agreements for the chemical industry that are generally renewed annually. In Canada, Kronos’ union employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement that expires in June 2018. At December 31, 2017, approximately 86% of Kronos’ worldwide workforce is organized under collective bargaining agreements. It is possible that there could be future work stoppages or other labor disruptions that could materially and adversely affect Kronos’ business, results of operations, financial position or liquidity.
Regulatory and environmental matters - Kronos’ 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 employees. Certain of Kronos’ 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 Kronos’ past and current operations and products have the potential to cause environmental or other damage. Kronos has implemented and continues to implement various policies and programs in an effort to minimize these risks. Kronos’ policy is to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations at all of its facilities and to strive to improve environmental performance. It is possible that future developments, such as stricter requirements in environmental laws and enforcement policies, could adversely affect Kronos’ operations, including production, handling, use, storage, transportation, sale or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or require Kronos to make capital and other expenditures to comply, and could adversely affect its consolidated financial position and results of operations or liquidity.
Kronos’ 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 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 Kronos has not incurred and does not currently anticipate any material liabilities in connection with such environmental laws, it 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.
- 15 -
At Kronos’ sulfate plant facilities in Germany, it recycles spent sulfuric acid either through contracts with third parties or at its own facilities. In addition, at Kronos’ German locations it has a contract with a third party to treat certain sulfate-process effluents. At its Norwegian plant, Kronos ships 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, Kronos’ facilities may be subject to environmental regulatory enforcement under U.S. and non-U.S. statutes. Typically Kronos establishes compliance programs to resolve these matters. Occasionally, Kronos may pay penalties. To date such penalties have not involved amounts having a material adverse effect on Kronos’ consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. We believe that all of Kronos’ facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws.
Kronos’ capital expenditures related to ongoing environmental compliance, protection and improvement programs, including capital expenditures which are primarily focused on increased operating efficiency but also result in improved environmental protection such as lower emissions from its manufacturing facilities, were $16.1 million in 2017 and are currently expected to be approximately $26 million in 2018.
Other
In addition to our 87% ownership of CompX and our 30% ownership of Kronos at December 31, 2017, we also own 100% of EWI RE, Inc., an insurance brokerage and risk management services company. We also hold certain marketable securities and other investments. See Notes 5 and 16 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Regulatory and environmental matters - We discuss regulatory and environmental matters in the respective business sections contained elsewhere herein and in Item 3 - “Legal Proceedings.” In addition, the information included in Note 17 to our Consolidated Financial Statements under the captions “Lead pigment litigation” and “Environmental matters and litigation” is incorporated herein by reference.
Insurance - We maintain insurance for our businesses and operations, with customary levels of coverage, deductibles and limits. See also Item 3 – “Legal Proceedings – Insurance coverage claims” and Note 13 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Business strategy - We routinely compare our liquidity requirements and alternative uses of capital against the estimated future cash flows we expect to receive from our subsidiaries and affiliates. As a result of this process, we have in the past and may in the future seek to raise additional capital, incur debt, repurchase indebtedness in the market, modify our dividend policies, consider the sale of our interests in our subsidiaries, affiliates, business, marketable securities or other assets, or take a combination of these and other steps, to increase liquidity, reduce indebtedness and fund future activities. Such activities have in the past and may in the future involve related companies. From time to time, we also evaluate the restructuring of ownership interests among our respective subsidiaries and related companies.
We and other entities that may be affiliated with Contran routinely evaluate acquisitions of interests in, or combinations with, companies, including related companies, perceived by management 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 have actively managed the businesses acquired 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 the acquired 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.
Available information - Our fiscal year ends December 31. We furnish our shareholders 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. Our consolidated subsidiary (CompX) and our significant equity method investee (Kronos) also file annual, quarterly, and current reports, proxy and information statements and other information with the SEC. We also make our annual report 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.nl-ind.com
- 16 -
as soon as reasonably practicable after they have been filed with the SEC. We also provide to anyone, without charge, copies of such documents upon written request. Such requests should be directed to the attention of the Corporate Secretary at our address on the cover page of this Form 10-K.
Additional information, including our Audit Committee charter, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and our Corporate Governance Guidelines can 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 about the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. We are an electronic filer and the SEC maintains an internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov.
ITEM 1A. |
RISK FACTORS |
Listed below are certain risk factors associated with us and our businesses. See also certain risk factors discussed in Item 7 – “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates.” In addition to the potential effect of these risk factors, 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.
We could incur significant costs related to legal and environmental matters.
We formerly manufactured lead pigments for use in paint. We 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 litigation, administrative proceedings or investigations arising under various environmental laws. These proceedings seek cleanup costs, personal injury or property damages and/or damages for injury to natural resources. Some 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.”
- 17 -
Our assets consist primarily of investments in our operating subsidiaries and affiliates, and we are dependent upon distributions from our subsidiaries and affiliates.
The majority of our operating cash flows are generated by our operating subsidiaries and affiliates, and our ability to service liabilities and to pay dividends on our common stock (to the extent such dividends are declared by our board of directors) 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 and affiliates could be subject to restrictions under applicable law, monetary transfer restrictions, currency exchange regulations in jurisdictions in which our subsidiaries and affiliates operate or any other restrictions imposed by current or future agreements to which our subsidiaries and affiliates 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 and affiliates to pay dividends or make other distributions to us. If our subsidiaries and affiliates 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 (if declared) 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 actual value of such assets.
We operate in mature and highly competitive markets, resulting in pricing pressure and the need to continuously reduce costs.
Many of the markets CompX serves are highly competitive, with a number of competitors offering similar products. CompX focuses efforts on the middle and high-end business of the market where we feel that we can compete due to the importance of product design, quality and durability to the customer. However, our ability to effectively compete is impacted by a number of factors. The occurrence of any of these factors could result in reduced earnings or operating losses.
|
• |
Competitors may be able to drive down prices for our products because their costs are lower than our costs, especially products sourced from Asia. |
|
• |
Competitors’ financial, technological and other resources may be greater than our resources, which may enable them to more effectively withstand changes in market conditions. |
|
• |
Competitors may be able to respond more quickly than we can to new or emerging technologies and changes in customer requirements. |
|
• |
Consolidation of our competitors or customers in any of the markets in which we compete may result in reduced demand for our products. |
|
• |
A reduction of our market share with one or more of our key customers, or a reduction in one or more of our key customers’ market share for their end-use products, may reduce demand for our products. |
|
• |
New competitors could emerge by modifying their existing production facilities to manufacture products that compete with our products. |
|
• |
We may not be able to sustain a cost structure that enables us to be competitive. |
|
• |
Customers may no longer value our product design, quality or durability over the lower cost products of our competitors. |
Our development of innovative features for our current component products is critical to sustaining and growing our sales.
Historically, CompX’s ability to provide value-added custom engineered component products that address requirements of technology and space utilization has been a key element of its success. CompX spends 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
- 18 -
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 CompX’s control. While we will continue to emphasize the introduction of innovative new product features that target customer-specific opportunities, we do not know if any new product features CompX introduces will achieve the same degree of success that it has achieved with its 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 CompX attempts to introduce new product features in the future, we do not know if CompX will be able to increase production volumes without encountering these or other problems, which might negatively impact our financial condition or results of operations.
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, we do not know if 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 our 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.
Higher costs or limited availability of our raw materials may reduce our earnings and decrease our liquidity.
Certain raw materials used in CompX’s products are commodities that are subject to significant fluctuations in price in response to world-wide supply and demand as well as speculative investor activity. Zinc and brass are the principal raw materials used in the manufacture of security products. Stainless steel tubing is the major raw material used in the manufacture of marine exhaust systems. These raw materials are purchased from several suppliers and are generally readily available from numerous sources. CompX occasionally enters into short-term raw material supply arrangements to mitigate the impact of future increases in commodity-related raw material costs. Materials purchased outside of these arrangements are sometimes subject to unanticipated and sudden price increases. Should our vendors not be able to meet their contractual obligations or should we otherwise be unable to obtain necessary raw materials, we may incur higher costs for raw materials or may be required to reduce production levels, either of which may decrease our liquidity or negatively impact our financial condition or results of operations as we may be unable to offset the higher costs with increases in our selling prices or reductions in other operating costs.
For Kronos, 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 Kronos’ TiO2 facilities are available from a limited number of suppliers around the world. Political and economic instability in the countries from which Kronos purchases its raw material supplies could adversely affect their availability. If Kronos’ worldwide vendors were unable to meet their contractual obligations and Kronos was unable to obtain necessary raw materials, Kronos could incur higher costs for raw materials or may be required to reduce production levels. Kronos experienced significantly higher ore costs in 2012 which carried over into 2013. Kronos has seen moderation in the purchase cost of third-party feedstock ore since 2013 through the first half of 2017; however, the cost of third-party feedstock ore Kronos procured in the last half of 2017 is slightly higher as compared
- 19 -
to the first half of 2017. Kronos may also experience higher operating costs such as energy costs, which could affect its profitability. Kronos may not always be able to increase its selling prices to offset the impact of any higher costs or reduced production levels, which could reduce Kronos’ earnings and decrease its liquidity.
Kronos has long-term supply contracts that provide for its TiO2 feedstock requirements that currently expire through 2019. While Kronos believes it will be able to renew these contracts, there can be no assurance Kronos will be successful in renewing them or in obtaining long-term extensions to them prior to expiration. Kronos’ current agreements (including those entered into through January 2018) require Kronos to purchase certain minimum quantities of feedstock with minimum purchase commitments aggregating approximately $383 million in years subsequent to December 31, 2017. In addition, Kronos has other long-term supply and service contracts that provide for various raw materials and services. These agreements require Kronos to purchase certain minimum quantities or services with minimum purchase commitments aggregating approximately $131 million at December 31, 2017. Kronos’ commitments under these contracts could adversely affect Kronos’ financial results if it significantly reduces its production and were unable to modify the contractual commitments.
Demand for, and prices of, certain of Kronos’ products are influenced by changing market conditions for its products, which may result in reduced earnings or in operating losses.
Kronos’ sales and profitability is largely dependent on the TiO2 industry. In 2017, 94% of Kronos’ sales were attributable to sales of TiO2. TiO2 is used in many “quality of life” products for which demand historically has been linked to global, regional and local gross domestic product and discretionary spending, which can be negatively impacted by regional and world events or economic conditions. Such events are likely to cause a decrease in demand for our products and, as a result, may have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
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 Kronos’ earnings and operating cash flows. Historically, the markets for many of Kronos’ products have experienced alternating periods of increasing and decreasing demand. Relative changes in the selling prices for Kronos’ products are one of the main factors that affect the level of Kronos’ profitability. In periods of increasing demand, Kronos’ selling prices and profit margins generally will tend to increase, while in periods of decreasing demand Kronos’ 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. Kronos’ ability to further increase capacity without additional investment in greenfield or brownfield capacity increases may be limited and as a result, Kronos’ profitability may become even more dependent upon the selling prices of its products.
The TiO2 industry is concentrated and highly competitive and Kronos faces price pressures in the markets in which it operates, which may result in reduced earnings or operating losses.
The global market in which Kronos operates its business is concentrated with the top six TiO2 producers accounting for approximately two-thirds of the world’s production capacity and is highly competitive. Competition is based on a number of factors, such as price, product quality and service. Some of Kronos’ competitors may be able to drive down prices for Kronos’ products if their costs are lower than Kronos’ costs. In addition, some of Kronos’ competitors’ financial, technological and other resources may be greater than Kronos’ resources and such competitors may be better able to withstand changes in market conditions. Kronos’ competitors may be able to respond more quickly than it can to new or emerging technologies and changes in customer requirements. Further, consolidation of Kronos’ competitors or customers may result in reduced demand for Kronos’ products or make it more difficult for it to compete with its competitors. The occurrence of any of these events could result in reduced earnings or operating losses.
- 20 -
Kronos’ leverage may impair our financial condition.
As of December 31, 2017, Kronos had consolidated debt of approximately $474.5 million, which relates primarily to Senior Notes issued in September 2017. Kronos’ level of debt could have important consequences to its stockholders (including us) and creditors, including:
|
• |
making it more difficult for Kronos to satisfy its obligations with respect to its liabilities; |
|
• |
increasing its vulnerability to adverse general economic and industry conditions; |
|
• |
requiring that a portion of Kronos’ cash flows from operations be used for the payment of interest on its debt, which reduces its ability to use cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, dividends on its common stock, acquisitions or general corporate requirements; |
|
• |
limiting the ability of Kronos’ subsidiaries to pay dividends to Kronos; |
|
• |
limiting its ability to obtain additional financing to fund future working capital, capital expenditures, dividends on its common stock, acquisitions or general corporate requirements; |
|
• |
limiting its flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in Kronos’ business and the industry in which it operates; and |
|
• |
placing it at a competitive disadvantage relative to other less leveraged competitors. |
Indebtedness outstanding under Kronos’ revolving North American credit facility and revolving European credit facility accrues interest at variable rates. To the extent market interest rates rise, the cost of Kronos’ debt would increase, adversely affecting Kronos’ financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In addition to Kronos’ indebtedness, at December 31, 2017, Kronos is party to various lease and other agreements (including feedstock ore purchase contracts and other long-term supply and service contracts as discussed above) pursuant to which, along with its indebtedness, Kronos is committed to pay approximately $433 million in 2018. Kronos’ ability to make payments on and refinance its debt and to fund planned capital expenditures depends on Kronos’ future ability to generate cash flow. To some extent, this is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond Kronos’ control. In addition, Kronos’ ability to borrow funds under its revolving credit facilities in the future will, in some instances, depend in part on its ability to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy certain financial covenants contained in the applicable credit agreement.
Kronos’ business may not generate cash flows from operating activities sufficient to enable Kronos to pay its debts when they become due and to fund other liquidity needs. As a result, Kronos may need to refinance all or a portion of its debt before maturity. Kronos may not be able to refinance any of its 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 Kronos’ debt on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition.
Global climate change legislation could negatively impact our financial results or limit our ability to operate our businesses.
CompX operates production facilities in the United States and Kronos operates production facilities in several countries in North America and Europe. We believe that all production facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws. 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 production facilities, Kronos consumes large amounts of energy, primarily electricity and natural gas. To date the climate change legislation in effect has not had a material adverse effect on our financial results. However, if further 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 or our need to obtain emissions permits. 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, income from operations and results of operations.
- 21 -
Technology failures or cyber security breaches could have a material adverse effect on our operations.
We rely on information technology systems to manage, process and analyze data, as well as to facilitate the manufacture and distribution of our products to and from our plants. We receive, process and ship orders, manage the billing of and collections from our customers, and manage the accounting for and payment to our vendors. Although we have systems and procedures in place to protect our information technology systems, there can be no assurance that such systems and procedures would be sufficiently effective. Therefore, any of our information technology systems may be susceptible to outages, disruptions or destruction as well as cybersecurity breaches or attacks, resulting in a disruption of our business operations, injury to people, harm to the environment or our assets, and/or the inability to access our information technology systems. If any of these events were to occur, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.
ITEM 1B. |
UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS |
None
ITEM 2. |
PROPERTIES |
Our principal executive offices are located in an office building located at 5430 LBJ Freeway, Dallas, Texas, 75240-2620. The principal properties used in the operations of our subsidiaries and affiliates, including certain risks and uncertainties related thereto, are described in the applicable business sections of Item 1 – “Business.” We believe that our facilities are generally adequate and suitable for our respective uses.
ITEM 3. |
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS |
We are involved in various legal proceedings. 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.
Lead pigment litigation
Our former operations included the manufacture of lead pigments for use in paint and lead-based paint. We, 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. 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 or a trial verdict in favor of either the defendants or the plaintiffs.
- 22 -
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. Other than with respect to the Santa Clara case discussed below, we do not believe it is probable that we have incurred any liability with respect to all of the lead pigment litigation cases to which we are a party, and with respect to all such lead pigment litigation cases to which we are a party, including the Santa Clara case, we believe liability to us that may result, if any, in this regard cannot be reasonably estimated, because:
|
• |
we have never settled any of the market share, intentional tort, fraud, nuisance, supplier negligence, breach of warranty, conspiracy, misrepresentation, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, or statutory cases, |
|
• |
no final, non-appealable adverse verdicts have ever been entered against us (subject to the final outcome of the Santa Clara case discussed below), and |
|
• |
we have never ultimately been found liable with respect to any such litigation matters, including over 100 cases over a twenty-year period for which we were previously a party and for which we have been dismissed without any finding of liability (subject to the final outcome of the Santa Clara case discussed below). |
Accordingly, we have not accrued any amounts for any of the pending lead pigment and lead-based paint litigation cases filed by or on behalf of states, counties, cities or their public housing authorities and school districts, or those asserted as class actions. In addition, we have determined that liability to us which may result, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time because there is no prior history of a loss of this nature on which an estimate could be made and there is no substantive information available upon which an estimate could be based. In one of these lead pigment cases, in April 2000 we were 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. 1-00-CV-788657) brought by a number of California government entities against the former pigment manufacturers, the LIA and certain paint manufacturers. The County of Santa Clara sought to recover compensatory damages for funds the plaintiffs had expended or would 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. In July 2003, the trial judge granted defendants’ motion to dismiss all remaining claims. Plaintiffs appealed and the intermediate appellate court reinstated public nuisance, negligence, strict liability, and fraud claims in March 2006. A fourth amended complaint was filed in March 2011 on behalf of The People of California by the County Attorneys of Alameda, Ventura, Solano, San Mateo, Los Angeles and Santa Clara, and the City Attorneys of San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland. That complaint alleged that the presence of lead paint created a public nuisance in each of the prosecuting jurisdictions and sought its abatement. In July and August 2013, the case was tried. In January 2014, the trial court judge issued a judgment finding us, The Sherwin Williams Company and ConAgra Grocery Products Company jointly and severally liable for the abatement of lead paint in pre-1980 homes, and ordered the defendants to pay an aggregate $1.15 billion to the people of the State of California to fund such abatement. The trial court’s judgment also found that to the extent any abatement funds remained unspent after four years, such funds were to be returned to the defendants. In February 2014, we filed a motion for a new trial, and in March 2014 the trial court denied the motion. Subsequently in March 2014, we filed a notice of appeal with the Sixth District Court of Appeal for the State of California. On November 14, 2017, the Sixth District Court of Appeal issued its opinion, upholding the trial court’s judgment, except that it reversed the portion of the judgment requiring abatement of homes built between 1951 and 1980, which significantly reduced the number of homes subject to the abatement order. In addition, the appellate court ordered the case be remanded to the trial court to recalculate the amount of the abatement fund, to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of investigating and remediating pre-1951 homes, and to hold an evidentiary hearing to appoint a suitable receiver. In addition, the appellate court found that NL and the other defendants had the right to seek recovery from liable parties that contributed to a hazardous condition at a particular property. Subsequently, NL and the other defendants filed a Petition with the California Supreme Court seeking its review of a number of issues. On February 14, 2018, the California Supreme Court denied such petition. NL and the other defendants have indicated they intend to file an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking its review of two federal issues in the trial court’s original judgment. Review by the U.S. Supreme Court is discretionary, and there can be no assurance that the U.S. Supreme Court would agree to hear any such appeal that NL and the other defendants would file, or if they would agree to hear any such appeal, that the U.S. Supreme Court would rule in favor of NL and the other defendants. NL and the other defendants intend to seek a stay of the case in the trial court, pending its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Granting of such a stay by the appellate court is discretionary. If no such stay is issued, the remand to the trial court would proceed, and under such remand the trial court would, among other things, (i) assign
- 23 -
a new judge to the case (the original judge has retired), (ii) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund, excluding remediation of homes built between 1951 and 1980, (iii) hold an evidentiary hearing to appoint a suitable receiver for the abatement fund and (iv) enter an order setting forth its rulings on these issues. NL believes any party will have a right to appeal any of these new decisions made by the trial court from the remand of the case.
The Santa Clara case is unusual in that this is the second time that an adverse verdict in the lead pigment litigation has been entered against NL (the first adverse verdict against NL was ultimately overturned on appeal). Given the appellate court’s November 2017 ruling, and the denial of an appeal by the California Supreme Court, we have concluded that the likelihood of a loss in this case has reached a standard of “probable” as contemplated by ASC 450. However, we have also concluded that the amount of such loss cannot be reasonably estimated at this time (nor can a range of loss be reasonably estimated) because, among other things:
|
• |
The appellate court has remanded the case back to the trial court to recalculate the total amount of the abatement, limiting the abatement to pre-1951 homes. Until the trial court has completed such recalculation, NL and the other defendants have no basis to estimate a liability; |
|
• |
The appellate court upheld NL’s and the other defendants’ right to seek contribution from other liable parties (e.g. property owners who have violated the applicable housing code) on a house-by-house basis. The method by which the trial court would undertake to determine such house-by-house responsibility, and the outcome of such a house-by-house determination, is not presently known; |
|
• |
Participation in any abatement program by each homeowner is voluntary, and each homeowner would need to consent to allowing someone to come into the home to undertake any inspection and abatement, as well as consent to the nature, timing and extent of any abatement. The original trial court’s judgment unrealistically assumed 100% participation by the affected homeowners. Actual participation rates are likely to be less than 100% (the ultimate extent of participation is not presently known); |
|
• |
The remedy ordered by the trial court is an abatement fund. The trial court ordered that any funds unspent after four years are to be returned to the defendants (this provision of the trial court’s original judgment was not overturned by the appellate court). As noted above, the actual number of homes which would participate in any abatement, and the nature, timing and extent of any such abatement, is not presently known; and |
|
• |
NL and the other two defendants are jointly and severally liable for the abatement, and NL does not believe any individual defendant would be 100% responsible for the cost of any abatement. |
Accordingly, the total ultimate amount of any abatement fund, and NL’s share of any abatement is not presently known. For all of the reasons noted above, NL has concluded that the amount of loss for this matter cannot be reasonably estimated at this time (nor can any reasonable range of loss be estimated). However, as with any legal proceeding, there is no assurance that any appeal would be successful, and it is reasonably possible, based on the outcome of the appeals process and the remand proceedings in the trial court, that NL may in the future incur some liability resulting in the recognition of a loss contingency accrual that could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial position and liquidity.
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. In March 2012, the trial court judge decertified the class. In June 2012, the trial court judge granted plaintiffs the right to appeal his decertification order, and in August 2012 the appellate court granted plaintiffs permission to appeal. In March 2013, the appellate court agreed with the trial court’s rationale regarding legislative requirements to screen children’s blood lead levels and remanded the case for further proceedings in the trial court. In July 2013, plaintiffs moved to vacate the decertification. In October 2013, the judge denied plaintiffs’ motion to
- 24 -
vacate the decertification of the class. In March 2014, plaintiffs filed a new class certification motion. In April 2015, a class was certified consisting of parents or legal guardians of children who lived in certain “high risk” areas in Illinois between August 18, 1995 and February 19, 2008, and incurred an expense or liability for having their children’s blood lead levels tested.
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.
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. In the future, if new information regarding such matters becomes available to us (such as a final, non-appealable adverse verdict against us or otherwise ultimately being found liable with respect to such matters), at that time we would consider such information in evaluating any remaining cases then-pending against us as to whether it might then have become probable we have incurred liability with respect to these matters, and whether such liability, if any, could have become reasonably estimable. The resolution of any of these cases could result in the 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.
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 and common law. Additionally, in connection with past operating practices, we are currently involved as a defendant, potentially responsible party (PRP) or both, pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (CERCLA), and similar state laws in various governmental and private actions associated with waste disposal sites, mining locations, and facilities that we or our predecessors, our subsidiaries or their predecessors currently or previously owned, operated or used, 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 or 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.
- 25 -
Obligations associated with environmental remediation and related matters 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, |
|
• |
uncertainty over the extent, if any, to which our former operations might have contributed to the conditions allegedly giving rise to such personal injury, property damage, natural resource and related claims, and |
|
• |
number of years between former operations and notice of claims and lack of information and documents about the former operations. |
In addition, the imposition of more stringent standards or requirements under environmental laws or regulations, new developments or changes regarding site cleanup costs or the 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. 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 and related 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 and related matters (including costs associated with damages for personal injury or property damage and/or damages for injury to natural resources) when estimated future expenditures are probable and reasonably estimable. We adjust such accruals as further information becomes available to us or as circumstances change. Unless the amounts and timing of such estimated future expenditures are fixed and reasonably determinable, we generally do not discount estimated future expenditures to their present value due to the uncertainty of the timing of the payout. We recognize recoveries of costs from other parties, if any, as assets when their receipt is deemed probable. At December 31, 2016 and 2017, 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 and related costs. The timing of payments depends upon a number of factors, including but not limited to 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 and related 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 for environmental remediation and related costs 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. At December 31, 2017, we had accrued approximately $112 million related to approximately 39 sites associated with remediation and related 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 remediation and related matters for which we believe it is possible to estimate costs is approximately $154 million, including the amount currently accrued.
We believe that it is not reasonably possible to estimate the range of costs for certain sites. At December 31, 2017, there were approximately 5 sites for which we are not currently able to reasonably 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
- 26 -
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. As further information becomes available to us for any of these sites, which would allow us to estimate a range of costs, we would at that time adjust our accruals. Any such adjustment could result in the recognition of an accrual that would have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements, results of operations and liquidity.
In June 2006, we 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 and in May 2008, the parties began work at the site as required by the UAO and in accordance with the cost sharing agreement. In the fourth quarter of 2010, NL reached its capped payment obligation under the cost sharing agreement with Doe Run. In the fourth quarter of 2013, Doe Run completed the remainder of the construction work. A Removal Action Report and Post-Removal Site Control plan were submitted to the EPA by Doe Run in 2016. In March 2017, EPA approved the Removal Action Report and Post-Removal Site Control submitted by Doe Run but requested an amendment, which Doe Run submitted in July 2017, and which completes the remediation obligations under the Order.
In June 2008, we 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 our former facilities for disposal at the site in the early 1970s. NJDEP 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.” In 2012, EPA notified NL of its potential liability at this site. In May 2013, EPA issued its Record of Decision for the site. In June 2013, NL filed a contribution suit under CERCLA and the New Jersey Spill Act titled NL Industries, Inc. v. Old Bridge Township, et al. (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-03493-MAS-TJB) against the current owner, Old Bridge Township, and several federal and state entities NL alleges designed and operated the site and who have significant potential liability as compared to NL which is alleged to have been a potential source of material placed at the site by others. NL’s suit also names certain former NL customers of the former NL facility alleged to be the source of some of the materials. In January 2014, EPA issued a UAO to NL for clean-up of the site based on the EPA’s preferred remedy set forth in the Record of Decision. NL is in discussions with EPA about NL’s performance of a defined amount of the work at the site and is otherwise taking actions necessary to respond to the UAO. If these discussions and actions are unsuccessful, NL will defend vigorously against all claims while continuing to seek contribution from other PRPs. In March 2017, in a parallel lawsuit initiated by NL in State court against the State of New Jersey, which has significant potential liability as compared to NL, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the State of New Jersey had not waived its immunity under the Spill Act for its pre-1977 conduct. In August 2017, NL filed an amended complaint in the State court alleging post-1977 conduct by the State that led to contamination. In September 2017, the State filed its answer and counterclaims. NL has denied liability on the State’s counterclaims and intends to continue to seek contribution from the State.
In September 2008, we received a Special Notice letter from the EPA for liability associated with the Tar Creek Superfund site in Ottawa County, Oklahoma (Tar Creek) and a demand for related past and future costs. We responded with a good-faith offer to pay certain of the EPA’s past costs and to complete limited work in the areas in which we operated. In October 2008, we received a claim from the State of Oklahoma for past, future and relocation costs in connection with the site. In November 2015, the United States Department of Justice lodged with the federal court a fully-executed consent decree between the United States, the State of Oklahoma and NL that resolves the claims of the United States and the State of Oklahoma for past and future cleanup costs at Tar Creek. In September 2017, the federal court approved the cash out consent decree.
In August 2009, we were 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. We have denied liability and will defend vigorously against all claims.
- 27 -
In June 2011, we were served in ASARCO LLC v. NL Industries, Inc., et al. (United States District Court, Western District of Missouri, Case No. 4:11-cv-00138-DGK). The plaintiff brought this CERCLA contribution action against several defendants to recover a portion of the amount it paid in settlement with the U.S. Government during its Chapter 11 bankruptcy in relation to the Tar Creek site, the Cherokee County Superfund Site in southeast Kansas, the Oronogo-Duenweg Lead Mining Belt Superfund Site in Jasper County, Missouri and the Newton County Mine Tailing Site in Newton County, Missouri. We have denied liability and will defend vigorously against all of the claims. In the second quarter of 2012, NL filed a motion to stay the case. In the first quarter of 2013, NL’s motion was granted and the court entered an indefinite stay. In the first quarter of 2015, Asarco was granted permission to seek an interlocutory appeal of that stay order. In March 2015, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Asarco’s request for an interlocutory appeal of the stay order and the trial court’s indefinite stay remains in place.
In September 2011, we were served in ASARCO LLC v. NL Industries, Inc., et al. (United States District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Case No. 4:11-cv-00864). The plaintiff brought this CERCLA contribution action against several defendants to recover a portion of the amount it paid in settlement with the U.S. Government during its Chapter 11 bankruptcy in relation to the Southeast Missouri Mining District. In May 2015, the trial court on its own motion entered an indefinite stay of the litigation. In June 2015, Asarco filed an appeal of the stay in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. NL has moved to dismiss that appeal as improperly filed. In October 2015, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals granted NL’s motion to dismiss Asarco’s appeal and the trial court’s indefinite stay remains in place.
In July 2012, we were served in EPEC Polymers, Inc., v. NL Industries, Inc., (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case 3:12-cv-03842-PGS-TJB). The plaintiff, a landowner of property located across the Raritan River from our former Sayreville, New Jersey operation, claims that contaminants from NL’s former Sayreville operation came to be located on its land. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages and alleges, among other things, trespass, private nuisance, negligence, strict liability, and claims under CERCLA and the New Jersey Spill Act. In April 2016, the case was stayed and administratively terminated pending court-ordered mediation. In October 2017, the parties informed the court that further mediation would not be fruitful. The case was reopened in December 2017. We will continue to deny liability and defend vigorously against all of the claims.
In March 2013, NL received Special Notice from EPA for Operable Unit 1, residential area, at the Big River Mine Tailings Superfund Site in St. Francois County, Missouri. The site encompasses approximately eight former mine and mill areas, only one of which is associated with former NL operations, as well as adjacent residential areas. NL initiated a dialog with EPA regarding a potential settlement for this operable unit.
In September 2013, EPA issued to NL and 34 other PRPs general notice of potential liability and a demand for payment of past costs and performance of a Remedial Design for the Gowanus Canal Superfund Site in Brooklyn, New York. In March 2014, EPA issued a UAO to NL and approximately 27 other PRPs for performance of the Remedial Design at the site. EPA contends that NL is liable as the alleged successor to the Doehler Die Casting Company, and therefore responsible for any potential contamination at the Site resulting from Doehler’s ownership/operation of a warehouse and a die casting plant it owned 90 years ago. NL believes that it has no liability at the Site. NL is currently in discussions with EPA regarding a de minimis settlement and is otherwise taking actions necessary to respond to the UAO. If these discussions are unsuccessful, NL will continue to deny liability and will defend vigorously against all of the claims.
In June 2016, NL and one other party received special notice from EPA for Operable Unit 2 of the Madison County Mines Superfund Site near Fredericktown, Missouri. The Site includes several mining properties in Madison County, Missouri. Operable Unit 2 is a former cobalt mine and refinery that is now owned by another mining company. In the special notice, EPA requested that NL and the other mining company agree to perform a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study for Operable Unit 2. NL initiated a dialog with EPA regarding the special notice.
- 28 -
In February 2017, the United States lodged a consent decree in United States v. NL Industries, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of New York, Case No. 17-cv-124). The consent decree between NL and EPA is one of several consent decrees that will together resolve all private and government claims related to the NL Industries, Inc. Superfund Site in Depew, New York (“Depew Site”). In 2007, we completed the remediation of one area of the Depew Site under an Administrative Order on Consent. EPA later cleaned up another part of the site. In 2010, we filed a lawsuit, captioned NL Industries, Inc. v. ACF Industries, Inc. (United States District Court, Western District of New York, No. 10-cv-1989), seeking contribution from other responsible parties that contributed to the contamination at the site. In 2016, with all cleanups complete, NL, EPA, and the defendant responsible parties negotiated a global settlement. The consent decrees for this global settlement resolve all government and private party claims relating to the site, including those set forth in our lawsuit. In July 2017, the District Court entered the Consent Decree and NL paid the settlement amount to the United States. NL’s obligation at the Site are now complete.
In August 2017, we were served in Refined Metals Corporation v. NL Industries, Inc., (United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Case 1:17-cv-2565). This is a CERCLA and state law contribution action brought by the current owner of a former secondary lead smelting facility located in Beech Grove, Indiana. We intend to deny liability and will defend vigorously against all claims.
Other litigation
In addition to the matters described above, we and our affiliates are also involved in various other environmental, contractual, product liability, patent (or intellectual property), employment and other claims and disputes incidental to present and former businesses. In certain cases, we have insurance coverage for these items, although we do not expect additional material insurance coverage for environmental matters. We currently believe that the disposition of all of these various other claims and disputes (including asbestos-related claims), individually or in the aggregate, should not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity beyond the accruals already provided.
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. 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. 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.
We have agreements with certain of our former insurance carriers pursuant to which the carriers reimburse us for a portion of our future lead pigment litigation defense costs, and one such carrier reimburses us for a portion of our future 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. Accordingly, we recognize insurance recoveries in income only when receipt of the recovery is probable and we are able to reasonably estimate the amount of the recovery. See Note 13 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
We have settled insurance coverage claims concerning environmental claims with certain of our principal former insurance carriers. We do not expect further material settlements relating to environmental remediation coverage.
ITEM 4. |
MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES |
Not applicable
- 29 -
ITEM 5. |
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS |
Our common stock is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: NL). As of February 28, 2018, there were approximately 1,900 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 for the periods indicated, according to Bloomberg, and cash dividends paid during such periods. On February 28, 2018 the closing price of our common stock was $8.05 per share.
|
High |
|
Low |
|
Cash |
||||||
Year ended December 31, 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
$ |
3.04 |
|
|
$ |
1.93 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Second Quarter |
|
3.39 |
|
|
|
2.16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Third Quarter |
|
5.90 |
|
|
|
2.28 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
9.50 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Year ended December 31, 2017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
$ |
8.75 |
|
|
$ |
5.40 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Second Quarter |
|
10.60 |
|
|
|
6.25 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Third Quarter |
|
9.40 |
|
|
|
7.10 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
15.35 |
|
|
|
9.50 |
|
|
|
- |
|
January 1, 2018 through February 28, 2018 |
|
14.45 |
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Prior to 2015, after considering our results of operations, financial conditions and cash requirements for our businesses, our Board of Directors suspended our regular quarterly dividend. The declaration and payment of future dividends, and the amount thereof, is discretionary and is dependent upon these 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 might be paid. There are currently no contractual restrictions on the amount of dividends which we may pay.
- 30 -
Set forth below is a table and 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, 2012 through December 31, 2017. The graph shows the value at December 31 of each year assuming an original investment of $100 at December 31, 2012 and the reinvestment of dividends.
|
December 31, |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
2012 |
|
2013 |
|
2014 |
|
2015 |
|
2016 |
|
2017 |
|
||||||
NL common stock |
$ |
100 |
|
$ |
102 |
|
$ |
78 |
|
$ |
28 |
|
$ |
74 |
|
$ |
130 |
|
S&P 500 Composite Stock Price Index |
|
100 |
|
|
132 |
|
|
151 |
|
|
153 |
|
|
171 |
|
|
208 |
|
S&P 500 Industrial Conglomerates Index |
|
100 |
|
|
141 |
|
|
143 |
|
|
167 |
|
|
182 |
|
|
166 |
|
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, 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 shareholders, pursuant to which an aggregate of 200,000 shares of our common stock can be awarded to members of our board of directors. At December 31, 2017, 154,000 shares are available for award under this plan. See Note 15 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
- 31 -
The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and Item 7 - “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
2013 |
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2015 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2017 |
|
|||||
|
(In millions, except per share data) |
|
|||||||||||||||||
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS DATA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
$ |
92.0 |
|
|
$ |
103.8 |
|
|
$ |
109.0 |
|
|
$ |
108.9 |
|
|
$ |
112.0 |
|
Income from component products operations |
$ |
9.3 |
|
|
$ |
13.6 |
|
|
$ |
14.0 |
|
|
$ |
15.6 |
|
|
$ |
15.2 |
|
Equity in earnings (losses) of Kronos |
$ |
(31.0 |
) |
|
$ |
30.2 |
|
|
$ |
(52.8 |
) |
|
$ |
13.2 |
|
|
$ |
107.8 |
|
Net income (loss) |
$ |
(54.5 |
) |
|
$ |
29.6 |
|
|
$ |
(22.7 |
) |
|
$ |
16.7 |
|
|
$ |
117.8 |
|
Net income (loss) attributable to NL stockholders |
$ |
(55.3 |
) |
|
$ |
28.5 |
|
|
$ |
(23.9 |
) |
|
$ |
15.3 |
|
|
$ |
116.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE DATA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to NL stockholders |
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
0.59 |
|
|
$ |
(0.49 |
) |
|
$ |
0.31 |
|
|
$ |
2.38 |
|
Cash dividends per share |
$ |
0.50 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
48,672 |
|
|
|
48,679 |
|
|
|
48,688 |
|
|
|
48,701 |
|
|
|
48,711 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE SHEET DATA (at year end): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
$ |
682.0 |
|
|
$ |
496.2 |
|
|
$ |
349.3 |
|
|
$ |
385.0 |
|
|
$ |
551.6 |
|
Long-term debt, including current maturities |
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
NL stockholders' equity |
|
355.4 |
|
|
|
237.0 |
|
|
|
150.0 |
|
|
|
177.9 |
|
|
|
335.3 |
|
Total equity |
|
369.0 |
|
|
|
251.5 |
|
|
|
165.3 |
|
|
|
194.3 |
|
|
|
353.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOW DATA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
$ |
14.9 |
|
|
$ |
23.6 |
|
|
$ |
27.6 |
|
|
$ |
27.7 |
|
|
$ |
18.6 |
|
Investing activities |
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
(4.3 |
) |
|
|
(30.6 |
) |
|
|
(13.6 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
(43.3 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
- 32 -
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Business overview
We are primarily a holding company. We operate in the component products industry through our majority-owned subsidiary, CompX International Inc. We also own a noncontrolling interest in Kronos Worldwide, Inc. Both CompX (NYSE MKT: CIX) and Kronos (NYSE: KRO) file periodic reports with the SEC.
CompX is a leading manufacturer of engineered components utilized in a variety of applications and industries. Through its Security Products operations, CompX manufactures mechanical and electronic cabinet locks and other locking mechanisms used in recreational transportation, postal, office and institutional furniture, cabinetry, tool storage and healthcare applications. CompX also manufactures stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges, throttle controls, and trim tabs for the recreational marine and other industries through its Marine Components operations.
We account for our 30% non-controlling interest in Kronos by the equity method. Kronos is a leading global producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide pigments. TiO2 is used for a variety of manufacturing applications including coatings, plastics, paper and other industrial products.
Net income (loss) overview
Our net income attributable to NL stockholders was $116.1 million, or $2.38 per share, in 2017 compared to a net income of $15.3 million, or $.31 per share, in 2016 and net loss of $23.9 million, or $.49 per share, in 2015.
As more fully described below, the increase in our earnings per share from 2016 to 2017 is primarily due to the net effects of:
|
• |
equity in earnings from Kronos in 2017 of $107.8 million compared to $13.2 million in 2016, |
|
• |
lower income from operations attributable to CompX in 2017 of $.4 million, |
|
• |
lower environmental remediation and related costs of $1.8 million in 2017, |
|
• |
higher interest and dividend income in 2017 of $1.8 million, and |
|
• |
a non-cash deferred income tax benefit of $37.5 million recognized in 2017 related to the revaluation of our net deferred income tax liability resulting from the reduction in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate enacted into law on December 22, 2017. |
As more fully described below, the increase in our earnings per share from 2015 to 2016 is primarily due to the net effects of:
|
• |
equity in earnings from Kronos in 2016 of $13.2 million compared to equity in losses from Kronos in 2015 of $52.8 million, |
|
• |
lower insurance recoveries in 2016 of $3.3 million primarily related to an insurance recovery settlement for certain past lead pigment litigation defense costs we recognized in 2015, |
|
• |
higher income from operations attributable to CompX in 2016 of $1.6 million, |
|
• |
lower litigation fees and related costs of $1.3 million in 2016, and |
|
• |
higher environmental remediation and related costs of $.8 million in 2016. |
Our 2017 net income per share attributable to NL stockholders includes:
|
• |
income of $.77 per share related to a non-cash deferred income tax benefit related to the revaluation of our net deferred income tax liability resulting from the reduction in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate enacted into law on December 22, 2017, |
|
• |
income of $.01 per share, net of income taxes, related to insurance recoveries we recognized , and |
- 33 -
|
▪ |
income of $.76 per share related to Kronos’ non-cash deferred income tax benefit recognized as the result of the reversal of its deferred income tax asset valuation allowances associated with its German and Belgian operations, mostly recognized in the second quarter, |
|
▪ |
income of $.08 per share related to Kronos’ fourth quarter non-cash deferred income tax benefit recognized as the result of the reversal of its deferred income tax asset valuation allowance related to certain U.S. deferred income tax assets of one of its non-U.S. subsidiaries (which subsidiary is treated as a dual resident for U.S. income tax purposes), |
|
▪ |
loss of $.31 per share related to Kronos’ fourth quarter provisional current income tax expense as a result of a change in the 2017 Tax Act for the one-time repatriation tax imposed on the post-1986 undistributed earnings of Kronos’ non-U.S. subsidiaries, |
|
▪ |
income of $.05 per share related to Kronos’ income tax benefit related to the execution and finalization of an Advance Pricing Agreement between the Canada and Germany, mostly recognized in the third quarter (which includes an $8.6 million non-cash income tax benefit as a result of a net decrease in Kronos’ reserve for uncertain tax positions), |
|
▪ |
loss of $.02 per share related to Kronos’ fourth quarter provisional non-cash deferred income tax expense related to a change in its conclusions regarding its permanent reinvestment assertion with respect to the post-1986 undistributed earnings of Kronos’ European subsidiaries, and |
|
▪ |
loss of $.02 per share related to Kronos’ third quarter loss on prepayment of debt. |
Our 2016 net income per share attributable to NL stockholders includes:
|
• |
income of $.01 per share, net of income taxes, related to insurance recoveries we recognized, and |
|
• |
income or loss, net of income taxes, included in our equity in earnings of Kronos: |
|
▪ |
income of $.01 per share related to Kronos’ insurance settlement gains, |
|
▪ |
income of $.01 per share related to Kronos’ current income tax benefit related to the execution and finalization of an Advance Pricing Agreement between the U.S. and Canada, |
|
▪ |
income of $.01 per share related to Kronos’ recognition of a net deferred income tax benefit as the result of a net decrease in its deferred income tax asset valuation allowance related to its German and Belgian operations, and |
|
▪ |
loss of $.01 per share related to a net increase in Kronos’ reserve for uncertain tax positions. |
Our 2015 net loss per share attributable to NL stockholders includes:
|
• |
income of $.06 per share related to a net reduction of our reserve for uncertain tax positions, |
|
• |
income of $.05 per share, net of income taxes, related to insurance recoveries we recognized, and |
|
• |
loss, net of income taxes, included in our equity in losses of Kronos: |
|
▪ |
loss of $.65 per share related to Kronos’ recognition of a deferred income tax asset valuation allowance related to its German and Belgian operations, |
|
▪ |
loss of $.07 per share related to certain workforce reduction charges recognized by Kronos, and |
|
▪ |
loss of $.03 per share related to Kronos’ recognition of an other-than-temporary impairment charge in a marketable equity security. |
Outlook
We currently expect our net income attributable to NL stockholders in 2018 to be lower than 2017 primarily due to lower equity in earnings from Kronos, higher litigation and related costs in 2018 and to a lesser extent lower income from operations attributable to CompX.
Critical accounting policies and estimates
The accompanying “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” is based upon our Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reported period. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to
- 34 -
the recoverability of long-lived assets, pension and other postretirement benefit obligations and the underlying actuarial assumptions related thereto, the realization of deferred income tax assets and accruals for litigation, income tax and other contingencies. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. Actual results may differ significantly from previously-estimated amounts under different assumptions or conditions.
The following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements:
|
• |
Investments - We own investments in Valhi, Inc. that we account for as marketable securities carried at fair value or that we account for under the equity method. For these investments, we evaluate the fair value at each balance sheet date. We use quoted market prices, Level 1 inputs as defined in Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 820-10-35, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, to determine fair value for certain of our marketable debt securities and publicly traded investees. We record an impairment charge when we believe an investment has experienced an other-than-temporary decline in fair value below its cost basis (for marketable securities) or below its carrying value (for equity method investees). In this regard, as of December 31, 2017 the market value of our marketable security investment exceeded our cost basis. See Note 5 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. At December 31, 2017, the $25.77 per share quoted market price of our investment in Kronos (our only equity method investee) significantly exceeded its per share net carrying value by approximately 300%. |
|
• |
Long-lived assets - We assess property and equipment for impairment only when circumstances (as specified in ASC 360-10-35, Property, Plant, and Equipment) indicate an impairment may exist. Our determination is based upon, among other things, our estimates of the amount of future net cash flows to be generated by the long-lived asset (Level 3 inputs) and our estimates of the current fair value of the asset. Significant judgment is required in estimating such cash flows. Adverse changes in such estimates of future net cash flows or estimates of fair value could result in an inability to recover the carrying value of the long-lived asset, thereby possibly requiring an impairment charge to be recognized in the future. We do not assess our property and equipment for impairment unless certain impairment indicators specified in ASC Topic 360-10-35 are present. We did not evaluate any long-lived assets for impairment during 2017 because no such impairment indicators were present. |
|
• |
Goodwill - Our net goodwill totaled $27.2 million at December 31, 2017. We perform a goodwill impairment test annually in the third quarter of each year. Goodwill is also evaluated for impairment at other times whenever an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. All of our net goodwill at December 31, 2017 is related to CompX’s security products reporting unit. One of the requirements for the permitted use of a qualitative assessment is that a quantitative assessment must be performed periodically (2016 was most recent quantitative assessment), and we used the qualitative assessment of ASC 350-20-35 for our 2017 annual impairment test. We determined it was not necessary to perform the quantitative goodwill impairment test, as we concluded it is more-likely-than-not that the fair value of CompX’s Security Products reporting unit exceeded its carrying amount. See Note 7 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. Considerable management judgment is necessary to evaluate the qualitative impact of events and circumstances on the fair value of a reporting unit. Events and circumstances considered in our impairment evaluations, such as historical profits and stability of the markets served, are consistent with factors utilized with our internal projections and operating plan. However, future events and circumstances could result in materially different findings which could result in the recognition of a material goodwill impairment. |
|
• |
Benefit plans - We maintain various defined benefit pension plans and postretirement benefits other than pensions (OPEB). The amounts recognized as defined benefit pension and OPEB expenses and the reported amounts of pension asset and accrued pension and OPEB costs are actuarially determined based on several assumptions, including discount rates, expected rates of returns on plan assets, expected health care trend rates and expected mortality. Variances from these actuarially assumed rates will result in increases or decreases, as applicable, in the recognized pension and OPEB obligations, pension and OPEB expenses and funding requirements. These assumptions are more fully described below under the heading “Assumptions on defined benefit pension plans and OPEB plans.” |
- 35 -
We record a reserve for uncertain tax positions in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 740, Income Taxes, for tax positions where we believe it is more-likely-than-not our position will not prevail with the applicable tax authorities. It is possible that in the future we may change our assessment regarding the probability that our tax positions will prevail that would require an adjustment to the amount of our reserve for uncertain tax positions that could either increase or decrease, as applicable, reported net income in the period the change in assessment was made.
|
• |
Contingencies - We record accruals for environmental, legal and other contingencies and commitments when estimated future expenditures associated with such contingencies become probable, and the amounts can be reasonably estimated. However, new information may become available, or circumstances (such as applicable laws and regulations) may change, thereby resulting in an increase or decrease in the amount required to be accrued for such matters (and therefore a decrease or increase in reported net income in the period of such change). |
Income from operations of CompX and Kronos is impacted by certain significant judgments and estimates, as summarized below:
|
• |
Chemicals (Kronos) - allowance for doubtful accounts, impairment of equity method investments, long-lived assets, defined benefit pension and OPEB plans, loss accruals and income taxes, and |
|
• |
Component products (CompX) - impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets, loss accruals and income taxes. |
In addition, general corporate and other items are impacted by the significant judgments and estimates for impairment of marketable securities and equity method investments, defined benefit pension and OPEB plans, deferred income tax asset valuation allowances and loss accruals.
Income (loss) from operations
The following table shows the components of our income (loss) from operations.
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
2015 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2015-16 |
|
|
2016-17 |
|
|
|||||
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
CompX |
$ |
14.0 |
|
|
$ |
15.6 |
|
|
$ |
15.2 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
% |
|
(2 |
) |
% |
Insurance recoveries |
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
Other income, net |
|
.1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
.2 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
n/m |
|
|
|
Corporate expense |
|
(17.5 |
) |
|
|
(17.0 |
) |
|
|
(14.9 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
Income (loss) from operations |
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
$ |
(1.0 |
) |
|
$ |
.9 |
|
|
|
(467 |
) |
% |
|
(188 |
) |
% |
- 36 -
The following table shows the components of our income (loss) before income taxes exclusive of our income (loss) from operations.
|
Year ended December 31, |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
2015 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2015-16 |
|
|
2016-17 |
|
|
|||||
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
Equity in earnings (losses) of Kronos |
$ |
(52.8 |
) |
|
$ |
13.2 |
|
|
$ |
107.8 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
% |
|
718 |
|
% |
Interest and dividend income |
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
Interest expense |
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
CompX International Inc.
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
2015 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2015-16 |
|
|
2016-17 |
|
|
|||||
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
Net sales |
$ |
109.0 |
|
|
$ |
108.9 |
|
|
$ |
112.0 |
|
|
|
- |
|
% |
|
3 |
|
% |
Cost of sales |
|
75.6 |
|
|
|
73.7 |
|
|
|
77.2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Gross margin |
|
33.4 |
|
|
|
35.2 |
|
|
|
34.8 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Operating costs and expenses |
|
19.4 |
|
|
|
19.6 |
|
|
|
19.6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
Income from operations |
$ |
14.0 |
|
|
$ |
15.6 |
|
|
$ |
15.2 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of net sales: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
69 |
|
% |
|
68 |
|
% |
|
69 |
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin |
|
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses |
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
13 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales - Net sales increased approximately $3.1 million in 2017 compared to 2016 primarily due to higher Security Products sales volumes to government security, electronic lock and other markets, partially offset by a decrease in sales of security products to an original equipment manufacturer of recreational transportation products. Marine Components also contributed with higher sales, primarily to the waterski/wakeboard boat market. Relative changes in selling prices did not have a material impact on net sales comparisons.
Net sales for 2016 were comparable to 2015 because our Security Products segment was able to substantially replace revenue for a government security end-user project which did not recur in 2016 with a new project with the same customer. Marine Components also contributed with higher sales to the waterski/wakeboard boat market. Relative changes in selling prices did not have a material impact on net sales comparisons.
Cost of sales and gross margin – Cost of sales increased from 2016 to 2017 primarily due to increased sales volumes for CompX’s Security Products and Marine Components businesses, and to a lesser extent higher raw material prices (mostly zinc and brass) and increased employee medical costs. Gross margin dollars in 2017 were comparable to 2016. As a percentage of sales, gross margin for 2017 decreased compared to 2016 due primarily to unfavorable relative changes in customer and product mix, higher raw material prices and increased employee medical costs in CompX’s Security Products business, as well as higher manufacturing costs for the CompX’s Marine Components business.
Cost of sales for 2016 was down from 2015 on comparable sales, resulting in an increase in gross margin. As a percentage of sales, gross margin for 2016 was favorable to 2015 due primarily to higher variable margins resulting from favorable customer and product mix for each of CompX’s Security Products and Marine Components businesses.
Operating costs and expenses - Operating costs and expenses consist primarily of sales and administrative-related personnel costs, sales commissions and advertising expenses directly related to product sales and administrative costs relating to CompX’s businesses and its corporate management activities, as well as gains and losses on plant, property and equipment. Operating costs and expenses were comparable in 2015, 2016 and 2017 on an absolute basis and as a percentage of sales.
- 37 -
Income from operations - As a percentage of net sales, income from operations decreased slightly from 2016 to 2017 while income from operations increased slightly from 2015 to 2016. Operating margins were primarily impacted by the factors impacting cost of sales, gross margin and operating costs discussed above.
General – CompX’s profitability primarily depends on our ability to utilize our production capacity effectively, which is affected by, among other things, the demand for our products and our ability to control our manufacturing costs, primarily comprised of labor costs and materials. The materials used in our products consist of purchased components and raw materials some of which are subject to fluctuations in the commodity markets such as zinc, brass and stainless steel. Total material costs represented approximately 44% of our cost of sales in 2017, with commodity-related raw materials accounting for approximately 11% of our cost of sales. During 2016 and 2017, markets for the primary commodity-related raw materials used in the manufacture of our locking mechanisms, primarily zinc and brass, generally strengthened, resulting in price increases that exceeded general inflation rates. In the case of zinc, our purchases late in 2017 bore unit costs over 50% higher than those acquired two years earlier. The rapid rise in prices for zinc and brass increased our 2017 aggregate purchase cost for these materials by approximately $0.5 million. Over that same period, the market for stainless steel, the primary raw material used for the manufacture of marine exhaust headers and pipes, remained relatively stable. While we expect the markets for our primary commodity-related raw materials to stabilize during 2018, we recognize that anticipated strengthening economic conditions may exert upward price pressure on these and other manufacturing materials.
CompX occasionally enters into short-term commodity-related raw material supply arrangements to mitigate the impact of future increases in commodity-related raw material costs. See Item 1 - “Business- Raw Materials.”
Results by reporting unit
The key performance indicator for CompX’s reporting units is the level of their income from operations (see discussion below).
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
2015 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2015-16 |
|
|
2016-17 |
|
|
|||||
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
Net sales: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security Products |
$ |
95.6 |
|
|
$ |
94.7 |
|
|
$ |
96.6 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
% |
|
2 |
|
% |
Marine Components |
|
13.4 |
|
|
|
14.2 |
|
|
|
15.4 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
Total net sales |
$ |
109.0 |
|
|
$ |
108.9 |
|
|
$ |
112.0 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security Products |
$ |
29.9 |
|
|
$ |
31.2 |
|
|
$ |
31.1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
Marine Components |
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
Total gross margin |
$ |