kscarbel2

Daimler Trucks to Deliver 3D Printed Parts in Test Program Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT) / December 4, 2017 Daimler Trucks North America has announced will make its first delivery of plastic parts produced using 3D printing technology in the coming weeks as part of a pilot program. During the pilot phase of the 3D printed parts program, DTNA will release a controlled quantity of 3D printed parts and will invite feedback from customers and technicians that receive them. The company will collect data on the parts performance and assess potential future demand for 3D printed parts. DTNA sees 3D printing as an opportunity to better service customers, particularly those customers in need of parts that have been difficult to provide through traditional supply chain models, such as for older trucks or parts with low or intermittent demand. To print the parts, DTNA partnered with the 3D printing service bureau, Technology House, which has over 20 years of experience in additive manufacturing. The companies have made the first parts available to customers with Selective Laser Sintering. The SLS process refers to layering powder in a print chamber and then “selectively” melting a pattern with lasers before adding the next layer. The 3D printed parts have been validated to meet durability requirements and many will appear no different to the untrained eye, according to DTNA. During the pilot phase, only parts such as nameplates, map pockets, and plastic covers will be printed and delivered. Parts that are eligible for 3D printing are being stored in DTNA’s digital warehouse. This allows a part to be printed on demand with shorter lead times. Without the need to maintain tooling, these parts will remain available to customers when needed. On-demand 3D printing also removes the need of holding physical inventory. Currently, the order process takes 2-4 weeks, but once the program is fully launched, parts will be able to be shipped in just a few days, according to DTNA. This capability has the potential to increase uptime for our customers who may otherwise experience long wait times for a hard-to-find part. “Over the past five years, DTNA has made significant financial and intellectual investments in the supply chain network in order to deliver parts to our customers faster than ever before,” said Jay Johnson, general manager, aftermarket supply chain, Daimler Trucks North America. “What DTNA is launching today with 3D printing is only the beginning as we continue to develop this technology in our quest to be the benchmark for parts availability.”

EPA Proposal to Exempt Gliders from GHG Regs Draws Criticism in Hearing Deborah Lockridge, Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT) / December 4, 2017 Opponents of the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to roll back the glider kit portion of its greenhouse gas emissions regulations testified Monday that the agency is ignoring its own research and that excepting gliders will put truck and engine makers at a significant competitive disadvantage. A public hearing in Washington, D.C., Monday, was scheduled to gather comment on the EPA’s recent proposed rulemaking to eliminate provisions affecting glider kits within the Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards, which start to take effect in January. The Phase 2 rules as written would allow glider kits only for their original purpose, which was seen as reclaiming powertrains from wrecked trucks and reusing them in new bodies and chassis. But the EPA announced earlier this fall a proposal to drop the glider kit portion of the regulation. Rachel Muncrief, the heavy-duty program director for the International Council on Clean Transportation and a participant in Monday's hearing, called them “zombie trucks,” writing in a recent blog post, “Scott Pruitt’s EPA is bringing the oldest and dirtiest diesel engines back from the dead—but disguising them in a shiny new host body. How? In the form of the innocuous-sounding glider truck.” The EPA’s proposal to undo the glider kit portion of the GHG regs “would undermine investments made in the industry, encourage the use of older, less efficient technologies, and increase smog-forming pollution that harms public health,” said Pat Quinn, executive director of the Heavy Duty Fuel Efficiency Leadership Group. This “informal alliance” of companies involved in trucking, including Cummins, Eaton, FedEx, PepsiCo, Wabash National and Waste Management, supports the development of national fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emission regulations for heavy-duty vehicles. “Truck and engine manufacturers over the past 10 years have made enormous investments in sophisticated emission control technologies to comply with current emissions standards,” Quinn said. “If EPA’s proposed repeal of emission requirements for gliders has the anticipated effect of expanding glider production, truck and engine manufacturers will face a significant competitive disadvantage.” Dueling data Quinn was one of a number of speakers citing EPA’s own data. That data, he said, “suggests that gliders have become much more common since 2010, when the agency’s latest heavy duty NOx standard took effect, with ‘significantly over’ 10,000 vehicles in 2015. The agency’s data also indicate that ‘nearly all engines for recent glider production’ are MY 1998-2002 that are not equipped with exhaust gas re-circulation (EGR), which lowers NOx emissions. The re-use of these older powertrains in glider kits also produces elevated levels of PM emissions that significantly exceed current standards and currently certified OEM products. Based upon recent EPA data, glider vehicle NOx levels are four to 40 times higher than current powertrains and PM levels are 50 to 450 times higher.” Dave Cooke, senior vehicles analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists, also spoke at the hearing. In a blog post published before the hearing, he discussed the research being used in this rulemaking process. He criticized research submitted by Fitzgerald Trucks, the glider kit manufacturer reportedly behind the push to take glider kits out of the rule. “The tests were paid for by Fitzgerald and conducted using Fitzgerald’s equipment in Fitzgerald’s facilities,” Cooke said. “The results of the tests were incomplete and indicated that the work was sub-standard.” Among the shortcomings, he said, were that researchers did not use industry standard testing procedures; did not take samples of soot during testing but only “visually inspected” test probes; and did not test under “cold start” conditions when engines put out the most pollution. Meanwhile, he said, higher quality data was recently published from EPA testing. “According to the test results, it appears that these engines actually exceed the legal limits they were initially designed for. This means that the “special programming” of the engine Fitzgerald claims to do to the engines may result in greater fuel economy, but it means greater pollution, too,” Cooke writes. More concerns Quinn of the Heavy Duty Fuel Efficiency Leadership Group also emphasized the importance of national regulations, saying the group was concerned that repealing the glider provisions “could lead to an inconsistent patchwork of federal and state requirements, producing uncertainty for truck and engine manufacturers and fleets.” California, of course, would be the most likely state to implement its own rules, and if so, it could be followed by others. Indeed, the California Air Resources Board spoke at the hearing as well. “This illegal effort by EPA will open the floodgates to allow unlimited numbers of old and dirty trucks to pour onto our streets and highways masquerading as brand new clean trucks,” said Steve Cliff, CARB deputy executive officer. “The proposed repeal would legitimize the actions of the glider industry, which … has been blatantly circumventing emission control requirements and undermining the vast majority of businesses that play by the rules and clean up their trucks.” Cliff and others also said repealing the glider requirements would also be in violation of the federal Clean Air Act. Excluding glider vehicles from the definition of “new motor vehicle,” he said, is inconsistent with the fact that glider vehicles are being manufactured, marketed, and sold as “new” vehicles. The Diesel Technology Forum, which promotes “clean diesel,” issued a statement on the occasion of the hearing, noting that “the greatest benefits for the environment and for trucking customers lie in the adoption of the new generation of clean diesel technology, which would be slowed if the current requirements regarding glider vehicles were changed.” "Almost 3 million heavy-duty diesel commercial vehicles introduced in the U.S. from 2011 through 2016 are now on the road, powered by the latest generation clean diesel engines. These trucks have delivered important benefits in the form of cleaner air, fewer carbon dioxide emissions and dramatic fuel savings," said Allen Schaeffer, DTF executive director. "Over a five-year period, the newest generation commercial vehicles have saved 4.2 billion gallons of diesel fuel, and reduced 43 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), 21 million tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and 1.2 million tons of particulate matter (PM)." .

Michael Roeth, Fleet Owner / December 4, 2017 One of the really exciting things about the trucking industry is that we never seem to stand still. Even after a product is introduced the industry continues to work on improving and refining it. Since in 2013 when we published our original Confidence Report on 6x2 axles, we’ve seen the development of second and third generation products. The third generation is 6x2s with liftable pusher axles and automatic load-sensing/load shifting and traction control. This generation of product has turned out to be a good option for fleets expecting to carry less than 60,000 lbs. at least 30% of the time they are on the road. For fleets with diminishing or variable loads where the full carrying capacity of a tandem axle (up to 34,000 lb.) is not needed at all times, the liftable tandem axle 6x2 configuration may be a more cost-effective solution. The liftable tandem axle system has the drive axle in the rearward position. While operating in the up position, a liftable system performs like conventional 6x2 systems with one drive (live) axle and one free-rolling (dead) axle resulting in the same fuel economy benefits (2.5%) as the non-liftable tag axle systems. During the recent Run on Less fuel economy demonstration, Ploger’s Joel Morrow was driving a 2016 Volvo equipped with a 6x2 liftable axle. I talked to Joel recently to get his thoughts on 6x2 liftable axles. He told me that the time the axle was up exceeded his expectations, which resulted in more fuel savings than he thought he would see. He also believes that the spinning inertia of components have a bigger influence on efficiency than most think – think about these liftable wheel ends just hanging there, or smaller parts spinning in lower displacement engines. Another big savings came in the area of tires. When the axle is lifted, the tires are not on the ground so there’s no tread wear during those times. Overall Joel is pleased with the performance of the liftable 6x2 and the additional fuel economy it gives him. While I know that liftable 6x2 axles aren’t right for all applications, you might want to take a look at them especially if you operate at less than 60,000 lb. GCWR at least 30% of the time. .

Volvo's Susan Alt.....a picture speaks a thousand words.

EPA Urged Not to Repeal Rule Regulating Glider Truck Emissions Eric Miller, Transport Topics / December 4, 2017 Dozens of advocates on Dec. 4 urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency not to repeal a provision in the 2016 Obama administration Phase 2 greenhouse gas reduction rule to regulate emissions requirements for glider kits. In an EPA hearing, roughly 60 people testified that the estimated 10,000 glider kits currently in existence — trucks with new chassis but older remanufactured engines — were among the “oldest, dirtiest, deadliest” vehicles on U.S. highways. They represented trucking trade associations, health and environmental non-profits, private citizens, truck dealers and manufacturers. The EPA hearing was held in response to a proposed rule issued last month to repeal medium- and heavy-duty truck Phase 2 greenhouse gas emission and fuel efficiency standards for the glider industry. “The previous administration attempted to bend the rule of law and expand the reach of the federal government in a way that threatened to put an entire industry of specialized truck manufacturers out of business,” EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said in a recent statement. Pruitt said that 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. But virtually all of the commenters at the hearing blasted the repeal plan with pitches that ranged from detailing the effects of truck pollution to blunt accusations that Pruitt is more concerned with the health of the glider kit industry than the U.S. population. A decade ago, glider kits in the U.S. were mostly limited to vehicles that had been in an accident that left the body unrepairable, but the powertrain still intact, Rachel Muncrief, who directs the heavy-duty vehicles program for the International Council on Clean Transportation, told EPA officials. But in recent years sales of gliders have increased exponentially as a “deliberate attempt by glider kit manufacturers and assemblers to circumvent emissions control regulations,” Muncrief said. Susan Alt, senior vice president of public affairs for Volvo Group North America, said that these days most glider buyers are not small operators, but often medium and large fleets. “The EPA recently conducted comparison testing of late model glider vehicles with late model OEM products,” Alt told EPA officials. “EPA found that glider vehicles emitted 43 times more NOx and 55 times more soot in highway conditions compared to today’s low-emission diesel vehicles.” Glen Kedzie, vice president and energy & environmental counsel for American Trucking Associations, said that by EPA’s own admission, glider vehicles may account for as much as 33% of total NOx emissions from all heavy-duty on-highway vehicles by 2025 if left unchecked. ATA opposes a repeal of the glider provision, Kedzie said. “It is well-known that gliders are purchased to save money, avoid maintenance costs and weight penalties, skirt federal excise tax payments, elude the use of engine technologies that virtually eliminate NOx and PM emissions, and to avoid the installation of safety equipment in pre-2000 vehicles under the electronic logging device rule which goes into effect Dec. 18,” Kedzie told EPA officials. Luke Tonachel, Director of the Clean Vehicles and Fuels Project at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the repeal of the glider provision would “open a deadly, dirty truck loophole” that could lead to thousands of premature deaths. “This is astounding and dangerous,” Tonachel said. “Allowing this to occur, completely goes against EPA’s mission to safeguard public health by ensuring that we have clean air.” Patrick Quinn, executive director of the Heavy Duty Fuel Efficiency Leadership Group, said his organization is concerned that EPA’s decision to encourage the continued growth of the glider industry undermines the significant emissions reduction investments of many motor carriers. “EPA’s proposed repeal of emissions requirements for gliders has the anticipated effect of expanding glider production,” Quinn said. “Truck and engine manufacturers will face a significant competitive disadvantage.” “Here we have Scott Pruitt’s EPA trying to pull a fast one on us in plain sight,” said Molly Rauch, public health policy director for the New York City-based Moms Clean Air Force. “As moms who care about our children’s health, we say, ‘No.’ ” “This is just one part of an all-out assault on public health from EPA. This EPA is showing a support for dirty tailpipes and dirty smoke stacks.” “The consequences of reversing the common-sense 2016 standards are far from esoteric,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.). “I am baffled and confounded as to why the EPA would even consider repealing such an important, well-designed and effective public health rule. “I’m mystified as to why EPA would today consider reopening a loophole to allow outdated killer diesel engines to re-pollute our air in the form of glider vehicles. Where is the lobby for turning the clock back to more and more deadly air pollution?” .

Auto sector escapes big hits in Senate tax bill Eric Kulisch, Automotive News / December 4, 2017 WASHINGTON -- The auto industry fared better, on balance, in the tax bill that narrowly passed the Senate on Saturday than in the House version. Now the industry will try to hold onto those gains, or improve on them, as both chambers convene to craft a unified bill. Dealerships won a reprieve when last-minute language was inserted in the Senate legislation to preserve full deductibility of floorplan interest -- mirroring the House measure. The Senate is seeking to limit business interest deductibility to 30 percent of adjustable taxable income, and the original proposal would have included the traditional write-off of interest expense on vehicle inventories. Industry officials say retailers heavily rely on interest-only loans to buy products they can showcase to customers. The specialized financing and interest deduction enables dealerships, often small businesses, to keep down the cost of holding inventory. Family-owned franchise dealerships also would benefit from how the House treats the estate tax, which is levied on property when it transfers to heirs after an owner's death. Both chambers would immediately double the current exclusion, but the House would repeal the estate tax after 2014. For 2017, an individual can leave $5.49 million ($11 million for a married couple) to heirs and pay no federal estate tax, according to the IRS. Aside from industry-specific provisions, the private sector stands to win big with corporate tax rates set to be reduced from 35 to 20 percent, with the change going into effect immediately under the House plan and in 2019 under the Senate version. Republican Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Steve Daines of Montana held out until they got better terms for small business owners compared to large companies. Single proprietorships and other S corporations don't have income taxed at the corporate level but pass it through to themselves and pay the tax on their individual returns. Both proposals would lower the tax rate on individuals and then set thresholds on how much income would be treated as pass-through. The Senate bill allows a deduction for 23 percent of qualifying "pass-through" income, while the House bill caps the maximum rate at 25 percent and has special rules for income over that amount that effectively raises the tax rate. Automakers received good news when the Senate bill maintained the existing tax credit for consumers who purchase electric vehicles. Under current law, consumers who purchase plug-in EVs qualify for a federal tax credit of between $2,500 and $7,500, depending on the size of the vehicle battery. The credit phases out for each automaker when it reaches 200,000 vehicles sold, a level that never has been reached. Clean-energy proponents and automakers argue that the electric-drive sector still is getting on its feet and needs the credit to provide companies an incentive to invest. Most companies also will benefit from a phaseout of capital expenditure deductions, but less than Republicans originally proposed. Early plans called for an immediate write-off for new equipment as opposed to taking annual depreciations. Now, the plans would allow for equipment to be expensed over five years at 100 percent, but after that, the rate will gradually phase out over the next four years. The advantage of accelerated expensing is that it front-loads the benefits, creating greater return on investment. The limitations on business interest and capital expense deductions were necessary to help keep the tax bill within budget rules for not increasing the deficit more than $1.5 trillion over 10 years. Eliminating certain tax breaks could diminish the overall desirability of corporate tax reform for many businesses. That was especially true for dealerships before the floorplan financing exemption made it through, said Shaun Petersen, senior vice president of legal and government affairs for the National Independent Automobile Dealers Association. "One of the concerns that we have is that at the end of the day, [overall tax reform] may not be a net gain, and that's especially true if interest rates creep. You wouldn't be able to lower the rate enough if they take away that deduction, so you could end up paying more in taxes," he said. House and Senate leaders are expected this week to name their respective negotiating teams responsible for harmonizing the two tax bills.

Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill’s Request for ELD Delay Draws Rebuke Eleanor Lamb, Transport Topics / December 1, 2017 Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill published a letter Nov. 29 asking the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to delay the electronic logging device rule, a move that prompted a quick response from the trucking industry. The ELD rule mandates that commercial drivers who are required to record their hours of service do so with the devices. Hill said that “to immediately” require drivers to use ELDs “would place undue burdens on drivers and operators.” FMCSA divided ELD migration into three periods, beginning in 2016. Since February of that year, ELD manufacturers have been able to register and certify their devices with FMCSA, and motor carriers could elect to use ELDs listed on the agency’s website. However, Hill said that the government has not established guidance on the self-certifying process, forcing drivers to “fly blindly” as they research what products they are required to purchase. Jennifer Hall, general counsel and executive vice president of American Trucking Associations, wrote a letter of response to Hill on Dec. 1. In it, Hall expressed full confidence that ELD vendors are ready for the mandate, and FMCSA and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance have worked to make the transition as smooth as possible. For example, CVSA has announced that it will not place any drivers operating without an ELD out of service until April 1. Furthermore, the letter notes that the final ELD rule has been “on the books” for almost two years and has received bipartisan congressional support. “Your recommendation that FMCSA immediately delay the ELD implementation date is unnecessary,” Hall said in her letter. In his request, Hill also urged FMCSA to clarify certain guidelines before proceeding with the mandate. For example, he said the agency’s Plan and Procedures Manual lacks information on testing schedules and quality assurance programs. Also, he said FMCSA’s website states that e-mail and web services testing environments are “coming soon.” “This is particularly concerning considering the number of registered devices on the list currently who have yet to utilize these tools and the pressing compliance date,” Hill said. Furthermore, Hill stated that the technical specifications laid out in the ELD final rule are too complex and leave certain points open to interpretation. There also are no set testing standards that must be conducted prior to use, according to Hill. He said trucking is important to Indiana, noting that almost 200,000 of the nation’s 3.5 million truckers are estimated to live there. “As the deadline for compliance quickly nears, even a cursory perusal of industry trade publications provides clear evidence that many drivers and operators are completely unprepared for the proposed changes,” Hill said. “I urge your agency to put on hold the new requirements until you are able to develop guidelines that offer greater clarity to the individuals you expect to follow them.” In her letter, ATA’s Hall said, “Delaying the implementation date will reward non-compliance while punishing law-abiding drivers and carriers, is contrary to the rule of law, and would redirect FMCSA resources away from the agency’s obligation to carry out existing laws and pursue its mission of safety.”

VW bosses coached me to lie, jailed manager tells U.S. judge ahead of sentencing Bloomberg-Reuters / December 3, 2017 Volkswagen Group manager Oliver Schmidt, who is scheduled to be sentenced Thursday for violating U.S. environmental regulations, told a judge he was coached by company executives to lie about diesel emissions in a meeting with a U.S. regulator two years ago. Schmidt has been in custody since his arrest in January after pleading guilty on Aug. 4 to conspiracy and violating the U.S. Clean Air Act. He is scheduled to be sentenced by U.S. District Judge Sean Cox in Detroit federal court and faces up to seven years in prison. In a letter to the judge last week, Schmidt, former general manager of Volkswagen’s U.S. Environment and Engineering Office, said he first learned about the company’s emissions-testing evasion scheme in the summer of 2015. Schmidt said he was given "a script, or talking points" approved by VW management and "high-ranking lawyers" to follow when he met with a California environmental official, Alberto Ayala, on Aug. 5, 2015. "Regrettably, I agreed to follow it," Schmidt said. "In hindsight, I should have never agreed to meet with Dr. Ayala on that day. Or, better yet, I should have gone to that meeting, ignored the instructions given to me" and admitted "there was a defeat device in VW diesel engine vehicles and that VW had been cheating for almost a decade." Schmidt told the judge he feels "misused" by VW, Bild newspaper reported. "I must say that I feel misused by my own company in the diesel scandal or 'Dieselgate,' Schmidt wrote. VW spokesman Nicolai Laude declined to comment. Eight executives Schmidt, a 48-year-old German national, described himself as a small player in the automaker’s emission’s cheating scandal in February, when he asked a judge to release him from a maximum-security prison. His request was denied. In August, veteran VW engineer James Liang was sentenced to 40 months in prison for his role in helping VW to cheat U.S. emissions tests. Liang was the first person prosecuted in the scandal. Liang and Schmidt are among eight VW executives criminally charged for their alleged roles in the scheme. The charges followed VW’s admission in September 2015 that about 11 million diesel vehicles worldwide were fitted with so-called defeat devices that helped them pass emissions testing. An investigation is ongoing in Germany and against individuals in the U.S. After being informed of the existence of the emissions software in the summer of 2015, according to his guilty plea, Schmidt conspired with other executives to avoid disclosing "intentional cheating" by the automaker in a bid to seek regulatory approval for its model 2016 VW 2.0-liter diesels. The case is U.S. v. Schmidt, 16-cr-20394, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit).

The 1973-1975 2-stroke Honda CR250M "Elsinore" scared the heck out of me. Nothing else has since (including all-over-the-road Cruise-Liners), until the Huracan.

GM: We'll make money on autonomous — and win Michael Wayland, Automotive News / December 4, 2017 In an industry caught in a storm of disruptive forces, General Motors has said for years that it wants to be the one doing the disrupting. It's now becoming clearer what that means. In a presentation to the investment community last week, GM said its business operations are slated to fundamentally change within two years with the launch of commercial, all-electric, autonomous vehicles at scale in 2019. At first, the fleet-based services would complement GM's core business. But over time, CEO Mary Barra and other executives see them possibly eclipsing its century-old business of building and selling vehicles. And even that's not the full extent of the disruption GM envisions. Kyle Vogt, CEO of GM's Cruise Automation self-driving vehicle unit, outlined a future in which GM not only builds a viable business around today's buzzwords of autonomy and mobility, but has such a "strong competitive advantage" that it forces some competitors out of the market. "This is a differentiated product," Vogt said during a rare appearance with GM's executive leadership team in San Francisco. "A company is developing it, and if you are sufficiently more advanced than others in the industry, they may not be able to compete." Vogt's comments echoed the message that team has articulated since it was formed nearly four years ago: It's no longer enough for GM to be merely competitive. It must be good enough to win. Last week's presentations by Barra and other GM executives marked the industry's most comprehensive plans to date for commercializing autonomous vehicles, and follow a similar presentation to investors on the company's strategy to turn electric vehicles into a profitable segment. President Dan Ammann said GM expects to deploy fleets of autonomous ride-sharing vehicles in "dense urban areas" by 2019. Revenue from the fleets, he said, is forecast to be in the billions soon after launch. The comments were the first public confirmations that GM plans to enter the transportation services market against the likes of Uber and even Lyft, which got a $500 million investment from GM last year and has Ammann on its board. CFO Chuck Stevens said GM's mobility services could be "potentially bigger" than its current core business, with better margins. GM didn't specify where the fleets will launch. The company is testing a third generation of self-driving vehicles based on the Chevrolet Bolt EV in San Francisco; Scottsdale, Ariz.; and Warren, Mich. It plans to begin testing in New York City next year. Ammann said GM expects to bring the cost of operating autonomous ride-sharing vehicles to less than $1 per mile by 2025 — a key to achieving profitable scale, he said. The current operating cost per mile in a city such as San Francisco is more than $3, Amman said, including paying the driver. "We see a pretty clear path on how we can do that," he told the investors, citing GM's plans for "Rideshare 2.0" with autonomous vehicles that eliminate the driver cost. Boosting GM's confidence with launching the fleets are advancements in its self-driving technologies and reductions in expenses, including a next-generation lidar that will cost about $10,000 — roughly half of the $20,000 or so the automaker is paying now, according to Vogt. That cost will be reduced to about $300 in the future, according to GM. GM plans to expand its work force developing autonomous vehicles to about 2,100 by 2018, up from 1,200 today and fewer than 100 in 2016, according to Vogt's presentation. GM must still persuade the investment community that it can back up its big talk. GM's shares closed down 0.7 percent to $42.79 on Friday, Dec. 1. In a report to investors Friday, Barclays analyst Brian Johnson noted some mumbling that GM was taking a play from Tesla Inc. by announcing broadly ambitious goals, even as others believe GM is well-positioned to deliver on its plans. "While we didn't receive 'hard' guidance for what the mobility business could be worth," Johnson wrote, "GM provided solid dimensions around the opportunity."

Larry Vellequette, Automotive News / December 2, 2017 Why not mimic Apple and focus on R&D and marketing? If I had a limitless amount of money, I know exactly what I'd do. I'd go to the world's automobile manufacturers and offer to buy their assembly plants. I would then produce their vehicles under contract and sell them back to those same companies at cost plus a tiny margin. Buying the plants today would put me way out front of where I believe the world's auto companies are headed. Seriously, how long before we get to the point where automakers no longer make autos? Yes, that sounds incredible, but it also feels inevitable. Manufacturing vehicles with consistently good quality might be the hardest thing this industry does. Just ask Tesla. Heck, ask Toyota. Any CEO will tell you that manufacturing without consistent quality can absolutely destroy a brand's image. If automakers could shed their manufacturing responsibilities, they could streamline operations down to little more than r&d, design and marketing. They would continue to be creators and masters of the look and feel of their vehicles, as well as their performance and positioning — thus their brand appeal. They'd essentially follow Apple's business model, which I hear works just fine. Super cost-efficient? Think about it. What if a car company outsourced its entire vehicle production operations to a secondary entity that would operate like an automotive version of Foxconn, Apple's gigantic manufacturing partner? Wouldn't that automaker be at a competitive advantage? Wouldn't it be rewarded in spades by the stock market? Ultimately, all traditional automakers would be pressured by investors to offload their costly, complicated manufacturing operations to an entity willing to run them on a cost-plus basis. It's already happening, albeit at a smaller scale. The services of the industry's best-known contract manufacturer, Magna, are in high demand, especially from premium brands. That relationship works because Magna is good at what it does, and automakers know and trust that fact. Now imagine the world's vehicle assembly in the hands of a single, super cost-efficient back-end manufacturer? That company could dictate common loading points across various designs, allowing the factories to be flexible enough to build similar-sized products for several manufacturers simultaneously. As robotics continue to advance, the cost structure of these factories would drop precipitously even as manufacturing complexity increased. This automotive Foxconn would have sufficient scale to make its own 3-D printed tooling, and eventually maybe even "print" its own automobiles. At that point, giant automotive factories would be unnecessary. Instead, you'd have localized printing centers where consumers would pick up the completely personalized automobiles that they had designed and paid for at their local dealer a few days before. A bite of the Apple Look at the future that's been forecast for the auto industry: autonomous cars with identical driving dynamics — all controlled by algorithm, so vehicles will no longer crash. A new ownership model will naturally follow autonomy and widespread electrification. Basically, what we'd have is a transportation collective. Unlike so many people, I remain deeply unconvinced that this apocalyptic automotive future is just over the horizon. While it may be technically possible to do all these things in the next 20 years, I don't believe humanity will change its habits that fast, if ever. But whether it happens or not, why does manufacturing need to remain a center of excellence for automakers? Why will today's companies continue to expend their energy and treasure on being the "handset provider," as Bob Lutz puts it? Why indeed? You ask: What will be left for carmakers to do if they don't make cars? Well, more or less what Apple does. So like Apple, leave the manufacturing to manufacturers. In fact, leave it to me. .

FCA, Hyundai in talks over tech partnership, Marchionne says Reuters-Bloomberg / December 2, 2017 ARESE, Italy -- Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is in talks with Hyundai Motor about a technical partnership, but there are no merger talks between the two, FCA CEO Sergio Marchionne said. FCA is often the subject of merger speculation, especially after its unsuccessful 2015 attempt to tie up with larger U.S. rival GM, with reports of interest from China's Great Wall and Hyundai. "We already buy components from [Hyundai] .... let's see if we can agree on other points, especially for the development of transmissions and hydrogen," Marchionne told journalists on Saturday, adding there was "nothing to announce for the moment." Asked whether this collaboration could turn into a merger, Marchionne said: "I don't believe so." Marchionne is a vocal proponent of automaker consolidation. Cooperation on hydrogen propulsion would come as rival plug-in electric vehicles emerge as the dominant technology in the emerging post-fossil fuel era. The 65-year-old chief executive, whose mandate ends in April 2019, is working on a new business plan to 2022, which he said should be presented in the second quarter of next year. As part of that strategy and to simplify its portfolio, FCA is working on separating two of its three components businesses. Spin-offs Marchionne said the spin-offs of Magneti Marelli, which makes components for lighting, engines, electronics, suspension and exhausts, and robotics maker Comau would be separate operations, "especially given Comau's potential development in artificial intelligence or robotics." "Whether it happens as a spin-off or a distribution to shareholders, or whether we will raise some money in the process -- all things to be discussed with the board, we haven’t made up our mind," he said. These discussions include a potential listing for either company as happened with other units FCA spun off in the past, such as tractor maker CNH Industrial or luxury sports-car maker Ferrari, which are quoted in Milan and New York. Marchionne said he would like to complete the separations by the end of 2018. The transaction could help boost FCA's finances at a time when it is aiming to become cash-positive by the end of next year. A separation of castings firm Teksid, the smallest of FCA's parts makers, was not on the table, Marchionne said. Boosting Alfa Marchionne was speaking after a presentation on Alfa’s planned Formula One return at the Alfa Romeo Museum in Arese, near Milan. A spinoff of the Alfa Romeo and Maserati brands is too remote to be discussed at the moment and would not happen "for many years," he said, while highlighting the importance of motor racing in Alfa’s development. A return to F1 could help polish the marque’s image as it seeks to rebuild an upscale reputation. Marchionne has invested billions of dollars to develop new vehicles after the Alfa line-up shrank and sales collapsed in the last decade. F1’s global appeal will bring wider exposure after previous attempts to expand beyond Europe were delayed. Asked about possible fines over diesel emissions, Marchionne said he did not believe there was any legal base in recent allegations raised by French authorities. He said separate discussions with U.S. authorities were ongoing and he expects "there will be a cost but it will be something manageable." Marchionne, who met with U.S. Vice President Mike Pence and other officials at the White House this week to discuss NAFTA concerns, said he doesn’t see Donald Trump’s administration leaving the North America Free Trade Agreement. “They want to find a solution that somehow re-establishes the American interest being more important,” he said. “They think they gave up too much at the table and they want some of it back. The question is how much and when.” He confirmed Fiat Chrysler’s financial targets for 2018, including an increase in operating profit to about 9 billion euros ($10.7 billion) and the elimination of debt.

Senate passes big cuts for richest Americans The Guardian / December 2, 2017 Bill passed in early hours of Saturday will benefit big businesses and the wealthy, and give Donald Trump his first major legislative victory Senate Republicans have passed the most sweeping overhaul of the US tax code in three decades, a significant step that moves Donald Trump closer to achieving the first major legislative victory of his presidency. The Senate passed their tax plan in a 51-49 vote early Saturday morning after a frantic rewrite of the legislation. Senator Bob Corker was the sole Republican to vote against the bill, which would bestow huge benefits on US corporations and the wealthiest Americans. The House of Representatives passed its own tax reform bill last month and now a final bill will be passed to Trump. “We think this is a great day for the country,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, at a celebratory press conference after the vote. Trump tweeted his thanks to McConnell and said he was looking forward to signing the bill before Christmas. The vote marked a significant feat for Republicans, who suffered a series of embarrassing blows earlier this year by failing on multiple occasions to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act amid opposition within their own party. Trump and Republicans in Washington subsequently staked their political fortunes on the hope that tax reform would not suffer the same fate as healthcare. House speaker Paul Ryan said: “For the first time since 1986, both the House and the Senate have passed a major overhaul of our nation’s tax code. Now we will move quickly to a conference committee so we can get a final bill to President Trump’s desk.” The rush to pass the bill before the end of the week sparked outcry from Democrats, who said it would be impossible to fully digest the legislation before voting began. Lawmakers receieved the nearly 500-page bill, some of it handwritten, hours before they voted on the sprawling tax plan that will affect nearly every US business and taxpayer. “I defy any member of the Senate to stand here, take an oath that they have read this and understand what in the world it means to businesses and families and individuals,” said Senator Dick Durbin, the minority whip from Illinois, holding up page notes scribbled in the margin. After closing debate, the Senate began the tedious process of a vote-a-rama, in which senators can offer an endless series of amendments. At midnight, vice-president Mike Pence arrived in the chamber to break a tie on an amendment offered by senator Ted Cruz that allows parents to start savings accounts to fund tuition at private and religious K-12 schools known as 529 plans. The provision prevailed. Earlier on Friday, McConnell emerged, smiling, from a meeting with colleagues, to announce that his party had secured the votes necessary to pass the legislation. “We have the votes,” McConnell told reporters on his way to the Senate floor. He said a final vote was expected later in the day. The House of Representatives passed its own tax reform legislation earlier this month. When the Senate passes its version, the two bills will be reconciled, presenting further hurdles in the coming weeks. Republicans have contended the $1.4tn package of tax cuts enclosed in their plan would in effect pay for itself through growth. That belief, however, was complicated by a series of independent projections that found it would not. The nonpartisan joint committee on taxation projected that the plan would add $1tn to the federal deficit over the next 10 years – even after factoring in the economic growth the bill is projected to generate. And on Friday, The independent TaxPolicyCenter released similar findings, predicting that the Senate bill would add $1.2tn to the federal deficit over the next decade after accounting for increased economic growth. McConnell parried criticism that the bill would not offset the costs, predicting that the plan would produce much larger growth than the analyses have found. “I’m totally confident this is a revenue-neutral bill,” McConnell told reporters. “I think this will be a revenue producer.” Senate Republicans are using a vehicle known as “budget reconciliation” to pass the tax plan using a simple-majority vote, leaving them room for only two defections. Faced with competing concerns, leadership spent the night locked in negotiations with members over the legislation’s impact on the federal deficit, healthcare and certain businesses. On Friday morning, Senate Republicans regained momentum after three key holdouts announced their support for the tax overhaul in exchange for a series of changes to the legislation. Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, said she would vote in favor of the legislation, ensuring that Pence would not be needed to break a tie. Republican senators Corker and Jeff Flake had sought to extract an agreement that would scale back some of the tax cuts in the event the economic growth projections were not met. On Thursday, they unexpectedly held court on the Senate floor, after learning that a mechanism they created to limit the impact on the national debt was not compliant with the Senate’s budget rules. The tense show-down led Republicans scrambling to find a way to offset the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars. But ultimately, the plans were rejected by Senate leadership, Cruz told reporters, after he and a number of others objected. “That proposal did not carry the day,” Cruz said. “Those $350bn in tax increases are not in the bill ... and larding the bill up with new tax increases would have been going the wrong direction.” Flake on Friday announced that he would support the bill despite his concerns, saying in a statement that he had secured two priorities: the elimination of an $85bn “expensing budget gimmick” and a “firm commitment” from the leadership and administration that Congress would enact permanent protections for immigrants brought to the country illegally as children. Meanwhile, Corker said he would not support the plan. “This is yet another tough vote,” Corker said in a statement. “But at the end of the day, I am not able to cast aside my fiscal concerns and vote for legislation that I believe, based on the information I currently have, could deepen the debt burden on future generations,” he added. Key to winning over the Republican senators Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Steve Daines of Montana was an agreement to expand tax cuts for millions of businesses known as “pass-through entities”. The plan will now allow owners of these companies to deduct 23% of their business income, up 17.4%. Democrats, who were excluded from the process of drafting the tax plan, have remained united in their opposition, attacking the legislation as a giveaway to corporate America and the wealthy. “In the waning hours, this bill is tilting further towards businesses and away from families,” said Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, in a floor speech on Friday. “Every time the choice is between corporations and families, the Republicans choose corporations.” Trump has called for a tax bill to reach his desk by the end of the year, vowing to deliver a “big, beautiful Christmas present” to Americans. “A vote to cut taxes is a vote to put America first again. We want to do that,” Trump said on Wednesday.

Senate Passes Sweeping Revision of U.S. Tax Code The Wall Street Journal / December 2, 2017 Republican-backed plan lowers corporate rate to 20% and reduces individual rates WASHINGTON—The Senate passed sweeping revisions to the U.S. tax code past midnight Saturday after Republicans navigated a thicket of internal divisions over deficits and other issues to place their imprint on the economy. The bill, which included about $1.4 trillion in tax cuts, would lower the corporate rate to 20% from 35%, reshape international business tax rules and temporarily lower individual taxes. It also touched other Republican goals, including opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling and repealing the mandate that individuals purchase health insurance, which would punch a sizable hole in the 2010 Affordable Care Act. But some objectives, such as repealing the alternative minimum tax, fell by the wayside in last-minute wrangling. “In the end it all came together and we’re pretty excited about what we’ve been able to accomplish for the American people,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said in an interview Friday. “We’ve got a corporate rate at 20% that we think makes us competitive in the world again and provided substantial middle-income tax relief.” The bill passed 51-49, with all but one Republican voting for it and all Democrats voting against. The sole Republican, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, stated his opposition before the vote, citing worries it would expand budget deficits. The bill’s ultimate passage would mark a legislative victory for President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans. Mr. Trump has made the tax overhaul a centerpiece of his economic policy goals, focusing on a rewrite of business taxes, which he has argued make the U.S. uncompetitive internationally. The bill could also give lawmakers something to campaign on in the 2018 midterm elections. Democrats blasted the bill, calling it an unacceptable giveaway to corporations and the wealthy. They also criticized last-minute Republican adjustments and waved handwritten amendments around the Senate floor to show how hastily the changes were being made. “A flurry of last-minute changes will stuff even more money into the pockets of the wealthy and the biggest corporations while raising taxes on millions in the middle class,” Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the chamber’s Democratic leader, said. The House and Senate still need to reconcile competing versions of the tax plan, something GOP leaders hope to do by Christmas. The House and Senate bills overlap in many ways, and lawmakers expressed optimism about getting a final deal done. “The bills are not all that different,” Mr. McConnell said. “We tried to move ours somewhat in the House direction.” Senate Republicans called their bill an economic booster shot, their best chance to create faster sustained growth and higher wages. But it comes with risks. Congress’s own nonpartisan analysis found that the economic benefits would be modest and fade over time. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the tax cuts wouldn’t pay for themselves, as Republicans promised. Instead the analysis found they would increase deficits by $1 trillion over a decade, even after accounting for economic growth. Investors, for now, are more excited about the prospect of lower corporate taxes than about the risks associated with larger government deficits. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 673.60 points for the week, or 2.9%, to 24231.59. Yields on 10-year Treasury notes, which might be expected to rise if bond investors were worried about deficits, remain comfortably low, below 2.5%. Senators began voting on amendments late Friday night and that continued into early Saturday. They defeated, 29-71, an attempt by Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) and Mike Lee (R., Utah) to expand the child tax credit for low-income families, which would have been paid for by setting the corporate tax rate at 20.94%. Vice President Mike Pence broke a tie in favor of a proposal from Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) to allow the use of 529 savings accounts to pay for elementary and secondary school costs, including private-school tuition. Saturday’s vote came after a week of long hours and frantic rewriting and deal-making. The GOP tax effort wobbled late Thursday after the Joint Committee on Taxation analysis raised the concerns of budget hawks about deficits. An attempt to add deficit countermeasures in the bill failed to clear parliamentary rules. Mr. McConnell and his team salvaged the measure with a series of last-minute deals to sway wavering senators. Sens. Steve Daines (R., Mont.) and Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) won bigger tax breaks for pass-through businesses such as partnerships and S corporations. Sen. Jeff Flake (R., Ariz.) secured more aggressive depreciation rules to encourage business investment after 2022. Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine) scored a $10,000 deduction for property taxes, an expanded but temporary deduction for people with large medical expenses, and a promise of future bipartisan health-care legislation to mitigate the effects of repealing the individual health-insurance mandate. “This bill will provide much-needed tax relief and simplification for lower- and middle-income families, while spurring the creation of good jobs and greater economic growth,” Ms. Collins said. To help pay for some of those changes, Republicans increased a new tax on companies’ stockpiled foreign profits to 14.5% for cash and 7.5% for illiquid assets, from 10% and 5% in a previous version. Senate Republicans abandoned other goals. They preserved the alternative minimum tax instead of repealing it. They backed off a plan to abolish the estate tax. They retained seven tax brackets instead of collapsing them into three as planned. And after years of warning about the rising national debt and promising a tax overhaul that would be revenue-neutral, they chose to proceed despite warnings the measure would add to deficits in the long run. Lawmakers released the final changes—moving around hundreds of billions of dollars—a few hours before the last vote, and there was no updated analysis of the bill’s impact on taxpayers and the economy as Republicans moved toward voting on it. “The Republicans have managed to take a bad bill and make it worse. It was chock-full of special-interest giveaways before tonight,” Mr. Schumer said. The bill would overhaul much of the U.S. tax system in ways that tax experts are only beginning to understand. Mr. Trump and some Republicans set the 20% corporate tax rate as an immovable objective and despite some occasional doubts, the GOP stuck with it. That is a win for domestic retailers and manufacturers who have spent years building the political case for a lower tax rate. Pass-through firms, which pay their business taxes through individual returns rather than corporate returns, won major concessions. They would get a 23% deduction from individual rates. More than half of U.S. business income goes to pass-throughs, and more than half of that goes to the top 1% of households. Tax analysts said this deduction opens new and unprecedented avenues for tax avoidance, with individuals likely seeking to declare as much of their income as possible as lower-taxed business profits. Even in a bill that provides sizable tax cuts to many, some taxpayers are set to lose. The bill would prevent individuals from deducting state and local income taxes. That is likely to raise federal taxes on upper-middle-class wage earners in high-tax states, such as California, Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey and New York. They are all represented by Democrats in the Senate. The standard deduction would be nearly doubled and the child tax credit would rise, while personal exemptions would be repealed. For many households, that combination would modestly increase the amount of earnings that aren’t subject to income tax. The bill also would push millions of households out of itemizing deductions. That would reduce the incentive to deduct mortgage interest and charitable contributions. But nonprofits, home builders and real-estate agents were unable to sway Republicans to reverse course on the measure. Debt-reliant businesses would lose, too, under a provision that limits interest deductions to 30% of income. Republicans said those changes were necessary to lower the rate and make other changes that would encourage investment in the U.S. “The reforms that we make in this bill allow American companies to compete and win against those other countries around the world,” Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.) said.

December 2017 Nynehead Book Newsletter http://preview.mailerlite.com/a2h1o2/772499082798172106/d4h4/

Scania Group Press Release / December 1, 2017 Digital rear-view mirrors on trucks can replace conventional mirrors, reduce blind spots and improve visibility, according to a recently completed research project. This is a first — a digital camera mirror system that could completely replace conventional rear view mirrors on trucks. Rear-view mirrors have not evolved a great deal since they became necessary in the 1960s as a result of the increasing number of highways worldwide. Now things could be set to change as a new solution has been developed for truck manufacturers thanks to RISE, Scania and Stoneridge Electronics AB. Along with Scania vehicle ergonomist Hanna Staf and technicians from Stoneridge Electronics, Azra Habibovic, project leader at the Swedish research institute RISE Viktoria, has created a digital rear-view mirror system prototype that represents a clear step forward. The prototype includes cameras mounted near the upper front corners of the exterior of the cab. Displays on the inside of the cab show the rear view in real time. The driver’s direct vision is improved By replacing conventional rear-view mirrors with digital ones, the driver’s direct vision is improved. “Traditional rear-view mirrors typically block drivers field of vision, by replacing them with digital systems it enables drivers to detect pedestrians and cyclists much easier – a typical problem at urban intersections and roundabouts,” says Habibovic. The prototype provides a larger field of view and reduces blind spots, making the driver more aware of potential hazards around their trucks. Furthermore, Habibovic explains: “The automatic panning of the main view is especially useful for following the trailer end when turning or reversing. It eliminates the need for body and head movements to increase the field of view, which is usually the case when using conventional mirrors.” Better visibility when door windows are dirty Another advantage is that the prototype provides better visibility when door windows are dirty. During adverse weather conditions, it can be a challenge for truck drivers to spot objects in conventional mirrors. In addition to safety, the digital rear-view system offers reduced air-drag, and enhanced night-time viewing is also possible through an inbuilt infra-red system. “Replacing conventional mirrors with digital systems creates a unique opportunity to improve drivers’ visibility and night vision,” says Staf. This improves safety while creating a more comfortable driver environment. .

Renault Trucks Press Release / December 1, 2017 Welcome aboard! Patrice Roeser, Product Manager Construction is presenting you the main assets of the Renault Trucks K Range. .

Eric Miller, Transport Topics / November 30, 2017 For the first time, beginning Jan. 1, truck drivers being administered random pre-employment and post-accident drug tests will be screened for four additional synthetic opioids, the highly addictive drugs that likely will require medical experts to consider prescriptions that balance pain mitigation with safety performance. While indications are that most of the private drug-testing labs are ready to conduct the four additional Department of Transportation-mandated tests, the new requirement likely will slow down the process for medical review officers to screen an increasing number of positive test results, according to Barry Sample, senior director of science and technology for Quest Diagnostics, a leading U.S. drug test provider. Testing for hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxymorphone and oxycodone could result in drivers — even with prescriptions for the pain killers — failing their tests and those positive test results being referred to a medical review officer to determine if a driver should be allowed to get behind the wheel. The primary responsibility of a medical review officer is to verify if an employee has an alternative medical explanation for a lab-confirmed positive test result. A lab sends all test results, positive or negative, to an MRO, Sample said. “We fully expect to have more laboratory positives,” Sample told Transport Topics. “And, I would expect there will be more medical review officer positives as well. There will be additional specimens that screen positive that in the past would have been verified negatives. So those will have a longer turnaround time.” Abigail Potter, manager, safety and occupational health policy at American Trucking Associations said, “If someone gets dinged as positive, an MRO reviews it, and if the MRO finds that the person had a legitimate prescription under the controlled substance act, then it will most likely be marked negative. “But someone who has a valid prescription for one of these drugs may not be considered medically qualified by the medical review officer. He might be able to pass a DOT test, but he may not be medically certified to drive.” She added, “These are very potent drugs, and some of them have addiction qualities similar to heroin. They are very, very dangerous. We as an industry are focused on preventing these drugs being used by drivers.” The DOT final rule, announced Nov. 9, would continue to make medical review officers the ultimate decision-makers of whether a driver, with or without a legal opioid prescription, is fit to drive. If the driver with a prescription for an opioid passes the drug test but still is not deemed fit to drive, the medical review officer can still forward a “safety concern” letter to the driver’s employer, but only after a five-day waiting period, Sample said. The waiting period would allow the driver’s physician to further discuss the matter with the officer. During the comment period for the proposed rule earlier this year, several commenters expressed concerns that adding the opioid tests will increase circumstances in which drivers innocently using opioids would be unfairly treated as drug abusers, with consequent positive tests harming their careers. In response, DOT said it added language in the final rule to prohibit an MRO from denying a legitimate explanation based on whether the officer thinks the prescribing physician should not have prescribed the medication to the driver. Yet, the agency said in its final rule that it’s important to note that when there is a valid concern about whether the employee can continue performing safely, the prescribing physician still may be asked to reconsider the employee’s use of the prescription. And, even when a prescription is legitimate, the MRO can forward a “safety concern” letter to the driver’s employer. Sample said the odds of failing an opioid test with a valid prescription are “very dependent” on the pattern of use, dosage, frequency of use and an individual’s metabolism. The detection window for the new opioid tests is shorter than for many other drugs, Sample said. “We generally say that most drugs on the [opioid] urine screen will be able to detect use within the last 72 hours,” he added. Sample said opioids are sedating, may cause decreased reaction time and increase sleepiness. “But, for some individuals, they may actually be more effective in carrying out their duties if they are not debilitated by pain,” he said. “So it’s somewhat of a balancing act in trying to ensure that the individual is being treated for their pain, but might impact their ability to work.”

Indiana Wants ELD Rule Delayed David Cullen, Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT) / November 30, 2017 In an 11th-hour request, the attorney general of Indiana has proposed that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration delay implementation of the electronic logging device rule set for Dec. 18 — less than 3 weeks from today. While numerous attempts to halt or delay the rollout of the ELD rule have been made in federal courts and on Capitol Hill, this request marks the first time a state official — and in this case, a very high-ranking official in a top trucking state — has advocated taking such action. Attorney General Curtis T. Hill Jr. (R) stated in a Nov. 29 letter to FMCSA Chief Counsel Randi Hutchison that a delay was needed because to “immediately begin requiring drivers to use ELDs exclusively (except, as the new rule allows, for those with on-board recording devices installed before Dec. 18, 2017) would place undue burdens on drivers and operators.” His chief concern is that there is no government or third-party verification in place for the ELD device self-certification process FMCSA has suppliers using in order to be registered with the agency. “With manufacturers of ELDs currently responsible for ‘self-certifying’ their compliance with government standards — with no effective procedures seemingly yet developed to provide oversight over such ‘self-certifying’ — drivers and operators are left without any way of ascertaining which brands and models of devices ultimately will pass muster,” wrote Hill. “They must ‘fly blindly’ into investing in products they are being required to purchase.” He then argued in detail that several crucial issues may result from the device certification and registration protocol now in place, including but not limited to the following: “Certain steps outlined in the Plan and Procedures Manual are ‘not required to be completed’ because they cannot be completed. The actual data transfer has not and cannot be trialed with a safety official — and the Web Services Portal as of this writing is not fully operational. Manufacturers are left with a statement that data transfer via email, USB and Bluetooth can still be tested in the manufacturers’ testing environments and if the required output file can be generated per the technical specifications in that manner and environment that it ‘will work in FMCSA Web Services.’ “Further, manufacturers are to rely on the most recent version of the manual published to the website; yet the most recent version, Version 2.0, remains incomplete, including but not limited to, suggested testing schedules and quality assurance programs. FMCSA’s website continues to maintain that the email and web services testing environments are ‘coming soon.’ This is particularly concerning considering the number of registered devices on the list currently who have yet to utilize these tools and the pressing compliance date of Dec. 18, 2017.” “Even if a particular ELD appears on the list of registered ELDs, it is still possible for the device to not ultimately be compliant or conform to the required technical specifications of the ELD Rule — which could result in significant harm to the consumer as the device would likely already be deployed at the time non-compliance would be discovered and countless resources wasted.” “While a driver will be permitted to use paper logs temporarily if a device is found to be non-compliant, it has been reported that the motor carrier will only have eight (8) days from notification to replace the noncompliant device with a compliant one. If the problem is widespread throughout a large fleet, the FMCSA has suggested it would be ‘flexible’ but has provided no further guidance. This could have a detrimental effect on smaller carrier companies should the device they select run afoul of guidelines. In fact, the costs associated with such an occurrence have the potential to put some carriers out of business and negatively impact competition and interstate commerce.” “Compliance with the ELD rule will only be determined by individual enforcement personnel’s interpretation of the data after it has successfully transferred through FMCSA’s systems. It remains unclear whether any guidelines or regulations have been developed and/or implemented for said interpretation and whether or not a particular device will even be able to transmit the data successfully. This will inevitably lead to a great deal of ambiguity and differing interpretations. FMCSA has stated that some but not all enforcement agencies will be utilizing Electronic Record of Duty Status Systems (ERODS) to determine compliance with federal regulations. FMCSA is ultimately not providing the manufacturers with access to that platform to test their devices to date. It has been reported in the industry that some larger manufacturers believe the only way to truly test compliance would be through use of ERODS or through the use of further technical resources and information – none of which are yet available or promised.” “The technical specifications as laid out in the ELD final rule are extremely complex and can be interpreted differently by individual manufacturers, who are the entities certifying compliance, yet the testing procedures laid out by FMCSA are not binding on said entities. Further, there is no set manner of testing that must be conducted, much less passed, before deployment of a particular device to consumers.” “Consumers may assume that if a device is certified and registered that it bears the approval of FMCSA and is in fact compliant with the ELD Rule. They may purchase a particular device on that premise. However, there is no guarantee or way to verify that the device is actually compliant with the said technical specifications until said compliance is called into question.” In closing, Hill requested that FMCSA hold off on implementing the ELD rule until the agency can “develop guidelines that offer greater clarity to the individuals you expect to follow them.” In a Nov. 30 press release, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association said it applauds the request made by the Indiana attorney general. "This request from a state agency is a prime example how states are beginning to understand the reality of this broadly written mandate and its negative consequences," said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of OOIDA. "Law enforcement is simply not ready for this. “Most small-business truckers can ill afford to make these purchases only to learn later that their ELD is non-compliant," he added. "Yet they are required to do so or risk violation." In confirming to HDT that the agency has received Attorney General Hill’s letter and is reviewing its contents, FMCSA Director of External Affairs Sharon Worthy noted that “FMCSA is operating under a statutorily designated deadline for ELD implementation.” In other words, don’t expect the request from Indiana to trigger any stay on the roll out of the mandate.

How Ford plans to market the gasoline-electric F-150 Keith Naughton, Bloomberg / November 30, 2017 DETROIT -- People who buy F-150s don’t much care about fuel economy. It ranks No. 28 on their list of priorities, way below pickup essentials like durability and reliability, even the roominess of the cab. And yet Ford Motor Co. is plowing ahead anyway with a gasoline-electric version of the crazy-popular truck, the best-selling vehicle in the U.S. since the Reagan administration. To coax devotees into the greener future, the company won’t be stressing the benefits of cutting back on carbon-dioxide emissions or the costs of tanking up. Instead, the marketing will go something like this: The battery in the hybrid F-150 not only feeds the electric motor, it’s a mobile generator that can keep the beer cool at a tailgate party, charge your miter saw and run the coffee maker on a camping trip. “It still may be a hard sell,” said Michelle Krebs, an analyst at Autotrader, “but they’ve got to have this in their lineup.” That’s in part because of tough federal regulations. The hybrid F-150 was greenlighted in 2014, three years after the Obama administration set a target for automakers to achieve an average of 54.5 miles per gallon in their lines eight years from now. The expectation that President Donald Trump will ease regulations hasn’t reduced the industry’s interest in electrification. But Ford’s playing catch up in the race to put electric vehicles and autonomous technology on the road. Investors have punished the company for lagging electric carmaker Tesla Inc., whose market value is higher, and crosstown rival General Motors, which introduced the Chevy Bolt electric for the 2017 model year. Ford is up less than 1 percent so far this year, while Tesla has risen 49 percent and GM has gained 29 percent. So Ford is spending $4.5 billion to field 13 electric and hybrid models by 2020, including a gas-electric Mustang. The company has the most “pricing power” in its best sellers to cover electric propulsion costs, said Hau Thai-Tang, the product-development chief who has led the move to electrify the lineup. There’s risk, of course, in Ford messing with its trucks. The F-series will bring in about $41 billion in revenue this year -- and the vast majority of the company’s profits. But there’s no way Ford can meet the federal mandate without boosting the trucks’ fuel efficiency. The most recent data show that about 2,500 of the pickups are purchased in the U.S. every single day. Offering a hybrid version will be “kind of like trying to sell beer to a teetotaler,” said John Wolkonowicz, an auto analyst and former Ford product planner who once worked on the F-series. This is where the battery-advantage marketing plan kicks in. The company came up with it after researchers spent a year on an anthropological mission, embedding for thousands of hours with hundreds of F-150 owners. “We immersed ourselves in their lives,” said Nadia Preston, the research team’s project leader. “That meant going camping with them, tailgating, going to rodeos, even spending the night.” They were looking for what CEO Jim Hackett calls “bungee-cord solutions” -- workarounds for tasks the F-150 couldn’t perform. They found owners often in need of portable power. Electric motivation “We would see our customers just literally buying generators from Home Depot and strapping them down in their truck beds,” Thai-Tang said. There was the welder in Texas who lugged his generator in and out of the bed whenever he needed it for work. Then there was the builder in Denver who didn’t own one, relying on a jumble of extension cords that he stretched to an outlet to operate his saw. “He told us, ‘Access to power in any shape or form would absolutely help me do my job,” ’ Preston said. Ford won’t say how many hybrid F-150s it plans to make, nor how much more expensive they are to build, though analysts estimate adding electric power tacks on at least $5,000 to the cost of a vehicle. In any event, the company will still sell hundreds of thousands of traditional pickups, including the new Super Duty Limited 4X4, which when topped out with all the extras will cost around $100,000. Needing motivation At this point, “you would need some motivation to invest in an electric pickup,” said Xavier Mosquet, a senior partner at Boston Consulting Group, who just authored a study that found pickups were least likely to be swept up in the electrification trend. “Unless you think the generator itself has value.” The idea at Ford is that hybrid trucks will catch on, following a path similar to turbo-boosted V-6 engines that were first offered on the F-150 seven years ago when anything less than a V-8 was considered wimpy. Today, the smaller engines account for almost two-thirds of sales. The company has courted F-150 controversy before, when it it outfitted the truck and its larger sibling, the Super Duty, with aluminum body panels that lopped hundreds of pounds off the weight of the rigs -- part of the effort to lower gas consumption. GM responded with attack ads accusing Ford trucks of going soft. But the aluminum F-Series trucks gained market share and are driving profits upward. “The F-150 is so important to Ford, they have to maintain leadership by offering every powertrain option,” said Krebs, the Autotrader analyst. “I don’t expect it initially to be a big percentage of sales, but the timing is right.”