kscarbel2

Peterbilt Delivers its First Model 579 UltraLoft Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT) / July 9, 2018 Peterbilt has delivered the keys to the first owner of a new Model 579 UltraLoft after announcing the model earlier this year. Purchased for Oklahoma City-based Freymiller Trucking, the UltraLoft variant of Peterbilt’s flagship Model 579 features a high roof integral cab and sleeper design that prioritizes driver comfort. Designed for a better driver experience, the UltraLoft offers more room and storage than a typical 579 with a larger upper and lower bunk mattress and sleeping area and creature comforts such as a microwave and room for up to a 32-inch flat screen TV. The UltraLoft also features aerodynamic enhancements and reduced weight in order to improve overall efficiency. David Freymiller, president and CEO of Freymiller Trucking noted that his fleet was using the Peterbilt truck as a tool to retain and recruit drivers. “The Model 579 UltraLoft is a game changer as it takes it to a new level,” said Freymiller. “Our drivers are excited to take advantage of the increased space and premium cab design.” .

EPA Will Not Enforce 300-Unit Limit on Glider Kits through 2019 Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT) / July 9, 2018 The Environmental Protection Agency said it will not enforce for 2018 and 2019 a 300-unit production cap put in place on the manufacture of glider kits that do not comply with Phase 2 GHG emission rules. EPA said the action is being taken because it is working to finalize a proposed rule to repeal “certain emission requirements” on glider kits that were imposed under the Phase 2 rules, which were put in place in 2016. News of the enforcement loophole was broken by The New York Times one day after the resignation of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt on July 5. EPA Press Secretary Molly Block told HDT on July 9 that back in November, the agency proposed to “repeal certain emission requirements for gliders. This proposal also contemplated as alternatives or additional measures an extension of compliance deadlines, and raising the cap on the number of gliders allowed to be built by small manufacturers.” (Per Block, a “small” manufacturer is one defined as such by the Small Business Administration.) In July 2017, after Fitzgerald Glider Kits petitioned EPA to do so, the agency announced it intended to revisit the Phase 2 glider kit provisions. In November, the agency issued its official proposal to entirely repeal emission requirements for glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits. The repeal proposal came out only weeks before the 300-unit glider cap was to take effect on Jan. 1 of this year, which is the driving factor behind the newly announced enforcement pause. “The [Phase 2] requirements in question first took effect in January 2017, and limit the number of new glider vehicles that small manufacturers can produce and sell without being subject to additional requirements,” stated Block. “The limit took effect in two stages. In 2017, small manufacturers were limited to the number of gliders they built in their biggest production year between 2010 and 2014. In 2018, small manufacturers are limited to no more than 300 gliders" by the rule. She said EPA took into consideration “public comments received as well as engagement with stakeholders” before determining that “additional evaluation of a number of matters is required before it can take final action on one or more aspects of the [repeal] proposal." However, it should be noted that, per The Washington Post, a Sept. 11 letter to then-EPA chief Pruitt urged him not to revisit the rule, contending that glider kits “should not be used for circumventing purchase of currently certified powertrains.” The letter was signed by executives from Volvo Group North America, Cummins, and Navistar. The companies noted that they were joining the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association, the American Trucking Associations, and the Truck Rental and Leasing Association in supporting the Phase 2 mandate as written. “Until a final rule can be completed to bring regulatory certainty to glider manufacturers,” Block stated, “the agency is considering interim steps to reduce severe impacts on the industry. First, EPA is considering an extension of the compliance date, which would set a new effective date of Dec. 31, 2019. And, second, the agency is exercising its enforcement discretion in 2018 and 2019 for small manufacturers who limit production to the interim cap provided in 2017.” The decision to not enforce the existing Phase 2 limits on glider kits means that, for at least the next two years, a manufacturer may produce as many gliders as it did during its biggest production year between 2010 and 2014. .

EPA gives glider builders a hall pass Trailer-Body Builders / July 7, 2018 Canned EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt on Friday got in a parting shot at Obama-era “regulatory overreach” in his last day in office, ordering the agency not to enforce an annual cap on glider kits. “The Agency is exercising its enforcement discretion in 2018 and 2019,” Molly Block, an agency spokeswoman, said in a statement reported originally by The New York Times. Related: A rough go for gliders in EPA review hearing Gliders, or new chassis into which refurbished older engines without modern emissions control systems can be installed, were deemed to be a substantial loophole in the decade-long EPA effort to greatly reduce emissions from heavy-duty commercial vehicles. Indeed, given the expense and troublesome nature of the mandated emissions controls, production of gliders has soared since 2010, going from going from just a few hundred per year to more than 10,000 in 2015. So, in the Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles (GHG 2) rule that took effect Jan. 1, 2017, EPA required that engines installed in new glider vehicles meet the emission standards applicable in the year of assembly. A “small business” exception was included in GHG2 to allow glider builders to assemble up to 300 non-compliant units per year through 2020. But last fall, following a lobbying effort and appeal by leading glider builder Fitzgerald Glider Kits, Pruitt determined that that gliders should not be regulated as “new motor vehicles” under the Clean Air Act. “Gliders not only provide a more affordable option for smaller owners and operators, but also serve as a key economic driver to numerous rural communities,” Pruitt said, and EPA proposed to repeal the emission standards and other requirements for glider vehicles. A subsequent public hearing on the matter, however, drew dozens of angry opponents compared to just a couple of supporters. “It’s well-known that gliders are purchased to save money, avoid maintenance costs … and skirt federal excise tax payments,” said Glen Kedzie, American Trucking Associations vice president of energy and environmental affairs council. He noted that ATA member fleets have paid $31,000 more on average per new truck since 2004 to comply with new emissions rules. And Susan Alt, senior vice president of public affairs, Volvo Group North America, cited EPA’s own testing which found that glider vehicles emit 43 times more NOx and 55 times more soot than today’s low-emission diesels. EPA estimates that gliders make up about 5% of the entire Class 8 market, but contribute about one-third of all NOx and particulates from the sector. “The current annual impact of glider emissions already grossly outweighs that of the VW diesel engine violations in the U.S. at their peak,” Alt said. “A repeal of the Phase 2 glider provisions makes a mockery of the massive investments we’ve made to develop low-emission compliant technology.” Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland said he was “baffled and confounded” as to why EPA would consider a repeal. He noted that Fitzgerald had failed to secure legislative relief, so the company’s owners then met directly with Pruitt. According to Raskin, Fitzgerald’s petition included new information on glider vehicle emissions which purported to show that gliders were less polluting than non-glider vehicles. But that “independent” study was bought and paid for by none other than Fitzgerald. “It is important to note that the study, run by Tennessee Tech University, has been criticized by experts for its poor and shoddy quality and has provoked serious ethical questions about the university’s academic independence and its cozy relationship with Fitzgerald,” he said. On the other side, glider builder and trucker Farrell “Dale” Clark Jr., president of D & B Trucks, said he fully supported the proposal, and he referenced the Fitzgerald-funded study. Clark stressed that the only new parts in a glider kit are the cab and the hood; the remaining parts of the truck are all used parts. He also noted an environmental benefit to the pro-glider case: “We really should be thanking our glider builders. We should be encouraging every trucker in this country to use a glider, or should I say a ‘recycled truck,’” Clark said. “This is exactly what we do in our business. We recycle old trucks, not only do we create hundreds of jobs, we save our trucking industry thousands of dollars.” Tennessee Tech later informed EPA that the agency should not use the university's study on glider kits in developing federal emissions regulations, and that the school was pursuing a peer review of the report and investigating claims of research misconduct.

Report: EPA won’t enforce glider emissions limits until end of next year James Jaillet, Commercial Carrier Journal (CCJ) / July 9, 2018 The U.S. EPA has said it will not enforce Obama-era emissions restrictions placed on glider kit manufacturers at least through the end of next year, giving glider kit builders like Fitzgerald Glider Kits a substantial victory in their fight against the regulations.Manufacturers like Fitzgerald will be limited in 2018 and 2019 to producing the number of vehicles they produced in 2017, which is well above the 300-a-year cap. Starting this year, glider kit manufacturers were limited to building 300 trucks a year that did not comply with the Phase 2 emissions regulations, finalized by the EPA in 2016. The EPA has a rule in the works to permanently repeal the glider-specific portions of the Phase 2 emissions standards, but the rule has not yet been made final, leaving glider kit builders caught in a regulatory limbo. The EPA proposed the rule in November 2017, just over a month before the 300-truck cap was slated to take effect, leaving the agency little time to finalize the repeal before Phase 2’s January 1 effective date. However, an EPA spokesperson has told CCJ the agency is “exercising its enforcement discretion” this year and next year and will not hold glider kit makers to the 300-a-year cap. Fitzgerald Glider Kits, the country’s largest builder of gliders, and others have fought the regs since they were proposed in 2015, arguing they would kill the glider kit industry. Demand for glider trucks, which are new truck bodies equipped with older, remanufactured engines and transmissions, has soared over the past decade, since they’re equipped with engines that do not use exhaust gas recirculation and do not require exhaust after-treatment. They’re also cheaper than new trucks. The 300-truck cap was meant to offer fleets and owner-operators an exemption from the regs, so that truck owners who wanted to equip glider kits with older engines could do so. But for builders who assemble and sell thousands of trucks a year, like Fitzgerald, the regs would have caused them to dramatically alter their businesses to stay alive. Receptive to these concerns, EPA under President Trump sought to overturn portions of the Phase 2 regulations that applied to glider kit makers. The move has been fought by major truck OEs like Volvo, Cummins and Daimler.

Thor Trucks to Launch New Entry in Battery-Electric Class 8 Market Transport Topics / July 9, 2018 Thor Trucks Inc., a startup not quite 2 years old, will manufacture electric-battery Class 8 trucks beginning next year, according to the Los Angeles-based company. At the same time, California has a new multimillion-dollar funding stream to proliferate such vehicles and encourage additional manufacturers to make them. Thor intends to market in 2019 the ET-1, a battery-electric Class 8 day cab that will have a 100-mile range and cost $150,000. Through savings — and not public subsidies — the truck will pay for itself in three to four years, according to the company, which also is exploring opportunities in China and Europe. Another Class 8 costing $250,000 with a 300-mile range is planned as part of Thor’s strategy of relying on contract manufacturing and alliances with existing suppliers instead of a factory of its own and vertical integration of key components. “We have established manufacturing agreements with two different manufacturing facilities in the Midwest, and that’s where we will be doing our series production,” Thor CEO and co-founder Dakota Semler said during a conference call hosted by investment firm Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. One of the agreements has been solidified; the other is in process, Semler said June 27 during the call. “And beyond that, there is obviously some engineering process that has to be done to integrate the trucks into those production lines,” he said. “But 2019 is very realistic to achieve our goals for production.” Thor is placing the majority of its focus on drayage, food and beverage delivery, and less-than-truckload fleets, Semler told Transport Topics. Meanwhile, Thor and other new manufacturers of alternative-power trucks stand to benefit from a portion of California’s $423 million share of the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust. The trust was established after VW’s use of software designed to cheat during emissions tests in 2.0- and 3.0-liter diesel vehicles, and funding is available to states where those cars ran. The California Air Resources Board announced it intends to use $90 million of California’s overall share to replace eligible Class 8 freight trucks and port drayage trucks with new zero-emission technologies. “While zero-emission Class 8 trucks are commercially available today, manufacturer diversity is limited. The focus of this funding is to support the market introduction of zero-emission trucks from a wide range of manufacturers that will be deploying trucks in the next five years,” according to the state’s plan. One industry executive said vast changes in trucking were at hand. “There are a lot of ideas coming out now that can help simplify the complexity in the marketplace,” said Gerry Mead, executive director of innovations for Phillips Industries. “When you look at electric trucks in general and you look at the operational cost for a trucking company, maintenance is a very large part of that, and you can lump in diesel fuel with that,” Mead said. “So if you have the ability to take a really large cost item and drastically cut it out of your [operation], obviously that improves your bottom line.” A Thor truck’s battery design is different in its layout and cooling process compared with most electric batteries, Thor co-founder and Chief Operating Officer Giordano Sordoni told TT. “These key engineering differences mean that Thor’s battery is one of the most energy-dense on the market, so much so that it is competitive on a shorthaul basis with diesel engines in terms of energy efficiency and cost,” Sordoni said. Thor is using cylindrical-shaped nickel, cobalt and manganese (NCM) batteries whose cost already is below $400 per kilowatt hour, Semler said. “The price tier that we have to get below, and we have a clear path to that, is $200 a kWh. The reality is there are very few people selling battery packs at that $200 kWh price range. So we have basically focused on trying to achieve that so that we could achieve a market-viable truck. And we expect to hit that in the early part of 2020.” Thor will warrant that its batteries operate for 2000 cycles, Semler said. “Two thousand cycles is just the period in which we warrant the pack to retain 80% of its original rated capacity.” Some fleets have agreed to purchase demonstration vehicles to use at Southern California ports. Drayage occurs in an area that is “pretty seeded with utility infrastructure so we don’t have too many issues there deploying charging systems,” Semler said. If needed, Thor will consult with fleets on the necessary charging infrastructure, which can run from $25,000 to $100,000, he said. “We all aim to be aggressive in this space in order to compete with diesel,” Semler said. All the traditional heavy-duty truck makers that sell in North America also are developing electrified vehicles in existing models. Plus Tesla Inc., and Nikola Motor Co. are readying new trucks for sale and tests, respectively, in 2019. Toyota Motor North America has a pilot project underway using a hydrogen-electric Class 8 truck at the Southern California ports. .

Transport Topics / July 9, 2018 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has suspended through the end of 2019 a cap on the number of glider kits that a single builder may produce, the agency told Transport Topics July 9. The move lifts the current annual cap of 300 glider kits per manufacturer, a limit instituted during the Obama administration which EPA has proposed to repeal. After reviewing comments on that proposal submitted by stakeholders, the agency determined additional evaluation is needed before a final decision is made, said Molly Block, an EPA spokeswoman. She added that EPA is exercising its enforcement discretion this year and for 2019 as it relates to manufacturers of glider kits. “Until a final rule can be completed to bring regulatory certainty to glider manufacturers, the agency is considering interim steps to reduce severe impacts on the industry,” Block said. She noted that one option the agency is considering is extending to Dec. 31, 2019 the compliance date for the 300-unit limit. In November 2017, the agency proposed to repeal certain emissions requirements for gliders. As Block put it, the repeal proposal “contemplated as alternatives or additional measures an extension of compliance deadlines, and raising the cap on the number of gliders allowed to be built by small manufacturers.” The agency’s move, first published July 6 in The New York Times, essentially would allow glider companies to sell more than 300 vehicles annually while the agency crafts its glider rule repeal. The agency’s former administrator, Scott Pruitt, announced his resignation on July 5. Deputy administrator Andrew Wheeler took on the role of acting chief. At the start of 2017, small manufacturers were limited to the number of gliders they built in their biggest production year between 2010 and 2014. In 2018, those manufacturers were limited to no more than 300 gliders. EPA’s 2016 Phase 2 heavy-truck greenhouse gas emissions rule includes the limits to the number of gliders with engines that predate current emissions regulations that can be built by a company annually. The rule also requires certain gliders to be certified as emissions-compliant for the model year they are built. .

The Powerliner......one of my favorite COEs. And again, in a certain sense, it doesn't look particularly old. .

I hope that you're able to store your truck indoors Paul.

In a certain sense, the 110P doesn't look particularly old. .

I have to say, I rarely see any L8000 and L9000 trucks on the road today. Most were owned by the fleets (alike GMC Brigadiers), who purged them many years ago during their routine equipment upgrades. An evolved-forward HN80 could stand with any North American truck on the market today. Don't you agree Bob?

Liebherr, always an industry leader, offers a full range of front-discharge mixers. https://www.liebherr.com/en/usa/products/construction-machines/concrete-technology/conveyor-belts/conveyor-belts.html .

When you called the Mack brand sales person who sold you the truck, or any Mack brand distributor, what was the response?

Ford never sold the Louisville plant.....they re-purposed it. Sterling production took place in Canada..............http://www.fleetowner.com/mag/fleet_sterling_trucks_launched

Bob, they would likely produce a narrower version of the H62X cab for a conventional variant. For example, the narrow width Freightliner Century Class, Columbia and Coronado use the same cab platform as the wider full-width Argosy. The cab on the conventionals is 305mm (12 inches) narrower.

This reminds me of the Premium Coal (New York City?) LMUs that came on the market.......when, in the late 1980s or early 1990s? https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/27567-junkyard-trip/?page=2

Years ago, Marmon wanted me to be a distributor and showed me an interesting promotional film including their plant. I wish that I had a copy to share with everyone now.

And yet, Cummins, Dana, Paccar, Tenneco and WABCO have been posting new 52-week lows almost daily.

Jason Cannon, Commercial Carrier Journal (CCJ) / July 5, 2018 North American Class 8 truck orders topped 41,800 units last month according to FTR, 140 percent above last year and the highest June order total on record. Heavy truck orders have exceeded 40,000 units in four of the six months this year. The rate at which fleets are ordering trucks has put a strain on the supply chain, and FTR Vice President of Commercial Vehicles Don Ake says OEMs have struggled to keep production on pace with demand. “There is an enormous demand for trucks due to burgeoning freight growth and extremely tight industry capacity,” he says. “However, supply is severely constrained because OEM suppliers cannot provide the needed parts and components required to build more trucks fast enough. This bottleneck is causing fleets to get more orders in the backlog in hopes of getting more trucks as soon as they are available.” The backlogs are being moved out further, which is pushing fleets to get orders in sooner rather than later so they can find a build slot, Ake says. “Fleets are desperate for more equipment, but trucks are in short supply due to the supplier constraints. This is creating a surge in orders as fleets react to this unusual situation,” he adds. “If OEMs were producing at capacity, the truck build this year could have been as high as 360,000 units.” North American Class 8 orders for the past twelve months have now totaled 411,000 units, which Ake notes indicates “there are some excess orders in the backlog.”

More Allegations Made in Repeal of Proposed Glider Kit Restrictions Under GHG Phase 2 Deborah Lockridge, Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT) / July 5, 2018 Several members of Congress have asked the inspector general of the Environmental Protection Agency to look into allegations that there was improper contact between Volvo Group, the Truck & Engine Manufacturers Association, and the EPA regarding the agency’s regulation of glider kits under its Greenhouse Gas Phase 2 rules. In October 2016, EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued the final GHG/Fuel Efficiency Phase 2 rule. Among other things, this rule required engines in new “glider” vehicles to meet the emissions standards for the year the vehicle was assembled, rather than the year the engine was manufactured. A glider vehicle is a truck that uses an older powertrain but has new body parts. The original intent of glider kits was to allow truck owners to repair vehicles that had been in a crash. But in recent years, owner-operators and fleets increasingly used them to avoid not only the higher cost of brand-new trucks, but also the maintenance headaches of engines required to use aftertreatment under newer emissions rules. In July 2017, after Fitzgerald Glider Kits petitioned the agency to do so, EPA announced it intended to revisit those glider kit provisions. In November, it issued the official proposal. This proposal to allow a glider kit loophole to the GHG/fuel economy regulations has drawn criticism from environmental groups, truck and engine makers, the American Trucking Associations, some large fleets such as FedEx and PepsiCo, two former EPA administrators, some state attorneys general, and some Democratic senators, among others. The repeal proposal has yet to become a final rule. It's unclear at this point how the resignation of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt may affect this process, although in general, changes in agency administrators often slow down rulemaking processes. Just How Polluting Are Glider Kits, Anyway? One of the key issues in this whole debate appears to be efforts to prove just how polluting (or not) glider kits are. A Tennessee Technical University study that was funded by Fitzgerald Glider Kits apparently played a key role in the agency’s decision to revisit the rule. That study appeared to show that glider kits would not have as significant an environmental impact as previously argued by the EPA’s own study. However, the university later disavowed the study pending a review of the validity of the research. Now, two Congressional letters point to the agency’s own research into glider kits as suspect. They allege that Volvo Group had undue influence with some employees at the agency, provided glider kits for testing, and that the testing was done without the approval or knowledge of agency leadership. That testing found that glider vehicle NOx levels are four to 40 times higher than current powertrains and particulate matter levels are 50 to 450 times higher. “The EPA would purportedly run the emissions testing according to specifications provided by [Volvo]…. At the very least, the EPA’s testing methods were highly questionable and should not be recognized,” said a letter from Brian Babin (R-TX), James Comer (R-KY), Steve King (R-IA), and Bill Posey (R-FL). Another letter to the IG came from Greg Gianforte (R-MT), chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy, and Environment. It raised similar concerns, saying, “collaboration between agency employees and a regulated entity to potentially sway the outcome of NVFEL tests in order to disadvantage a competitor compromises the EPA’s integrity and allows a handful of agency staff and one company the opportunity to manipulate the regulatory process.” Volvo denies any wrongdoing in the matter. "Like most of the trucking industry, the Volvo Group for several years now has argued that the improper use of glider kits is bad for the environment and unfair to manufacturers who have invested in the latest environmental controls,” said a Volvo Group spokesman in response to HDT’s request for comment. “All our communication and cooperation with the EPA on this issue has been an entirely appropriate part of a broad trucking industry advocacy effort – we did nothing improper." The letters also asked the IG to look into the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association for a potential lobbying violation, because the lobbyist was once a senior employee of the EPA and was instrumental in the drafting of the Phase 2 rule, yet “communicated and influenced the EPA less than 10 months from his departure.” .

Bob, the "transformer" look was JMC's idea for the JMC-badged version of the old model. And it's not too bad looking, even if not exactly our taste. The H62X is a serious new world class performer at home in Turkey, China, Western Europe and..........if needed, North America. Now, imagine that truck in a conventional cab version with a hood (bonnet).

Attractive truck. Need some more angle views and close-ups. .

EPA's Pruitt resigns amid swirl of scandals Eric Kulisch, Automotive News / July 5, 2018 WASHINGTON — Embattled EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who led the charge to scale back Obama-era fuel economy standards for light vehicles, resigned following months of damaging revelations about his conduct in office and allegations of ethical lapses. President Donald Trump, who had repeatedly affirmed his support for Pruitt but expressed concern about the swirling scandals involving alleged conflicts of interest and abuses of his position, announced the move in a Twitter message Thursday afternoon. "I have accepted the resignation of Scott Pruitt as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency," Trump wrote. "Within the Agency Scott has done an outstanding job, and I will always be thankful to him for this." His deputy, Andrew Wheeler, now takes over as acting administrator. "I have no doubt that Andy will continue on with our great and lasting EPA agenda," Trump said. Pruitt was aggressive on the deregulatory front. He worked to undo at least a dozen environmental regulations promulgated by his immediate predecessors, claiming they went beyond the letter of the law and didn't sufficiently account for economic costs to industry. Critics say Pruitt, a vocal skeptic of human influence on climate change, was pushing rulemakings based on ideology and favoritism toward businesses, while ignoring scientific evidence that the emissions and other rules were effective. "It would be hard to point to someone who has been less friendly to the environment than Scott Pruitt, and who has been less aware of the tremendous impact of rolling back the tremendous progress that was made in a negotiated set of standards with industry," said Jason Levine, executive director at the Center for Auto Safety. Pruitt sided with automakers on April 1, saying the Obama EPA's goals for nearly doubling fleetwide fuel economy were too aggressive. His decision to reopen a feasibility review of 2022-25 model year standards was partly based on the perceived need for more recent data on sales trends, fuel prices, and the cost and availability of advanced powertrains and other technologies. A proposal to scale back the fuel efficiency standards is currently under review by the White House. It is unclear whether the resignation will upset the administration's timetable for a decision, or whether the agency will take action to rescind California's waiver to set air quality rules stricter than federal ones. Under a 2011 agreement, the EPA, safety agency NHTSA, California and automakers are currently following the same program, although some technical inconsistencies between EPA and NHTSA remain. California and a dozen states that have adopted its standards have threatened legal action to preserve their rights. The Senate's April 12 confirmation of Wheeler as EPA deputy administrator, however, lessens the chance of an administration shift on corporate average fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards. Wheeler faced stiff opposition from Senate Democrats who questioned his environmental commitment after working as a lobbyist for the coal industry and a staff member for Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., who openly opposes scientific consensus that greenhouse gases from human activity are to blame for global warming. During his confirmation, Wheeler questioned the extent of man's impact on the climate. Pruitt has been under constant fire for months over allegations of conflicts of interest, wasteful spending and improper use of authority. There are at least a dozen federal investigations into his behavior. The charges, first turned up in media investigations, include a sweetheart apartment rental from the wife of an energy lobbyist whose firm does business before the EPA; excessive spending on travel and security; ignoring White House instructions not to give raises to favored employees; using his staff to find work for his wife and handle personal business; reassigning or demoting aides who questioned whether certain decisions complied with laws and regulations; cozy relationships with and rewards for industry lobbyists; and asking his security team to use emergency sirens to get through Washington traffic for appointments. A number of Pruitt aides and communications officers have resigned this year as scrutiny increased over his spending habits and conflicts of interest. Last month, the EPA announced the resignation of Pruitt's senior legal counsel prior to her scheduled testimony before a House panel investigating allegations of ethics violations by Pruitt. His scheduler, Milan Hupp, who acknowledged to House investigators that Pruitt directed her to carry out personal errands for him, also resigned. .

You’re exactly right Bob. And for that reason, VW and Ford trucks were at one time produced in the same plant, the successful Volkswagen-Ford Autolatina joint venture, to reduce costs and enhance profitability. https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/35895-from-lt-to-worker-volkswagen’s-versatile-long-lasting-“lt”-cab/?tab=comments#comment-247242