Greetings and welcome to the Oshkosh Corporation fiscal year 2010 first quarter financial results conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. (Operator instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host Mr Pat Davidson, Vice President of Investor Relations for Oshkosh Corporation. Thank you. Mr Davidson, you may begin.

Thank you Melissa. Good morning and thank you for joining us today. Earlier today, we published our first quarter results for fiscal 2010. A copy of the release is available on our Web site at www.oshkoshcorporation.com. Today’s call is being webcast and is accompanied by a slide presentation, which is also available on our Web site. The audio replay and slide presentation will be available on our Web site for approximately 12 months. Please refer now to slide 2of that presentation. Our remarks that follow including answers to your questions include statements that we believe to be forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks that could cause actual results to be materially different. Those risks include, among others matters that we have described in our Form 8K filed with the SEC this morning and other filings we make with the SEC. We disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements, which may not be updated until our next quarterly conference call, if at all. We completed the sale of our European fire apparatus business, BAI, in our first fiscal quarter. Results for BAI are presented as a discontinued operation. Also in the first quarter, we recorded pretax, non-cash impairment charges of $23.3 million related to goodwill and other long-lived assets at our mobile medical business in the fire & emergency segment. All sales, income and backlog figures that we discuss today refer to continuing operations and exclude the non-cash impairment charges unless otherwise stated. Presenting today for Oshkosh Corporation will be Bob Bohn, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Charlie Szews, President and Chief Operating Officer; and Dave Sagehorn, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Let’s begin by turning to slide 3 and I will turn it over to you Bob.

Thank you Pat. Good morning and thank you all for joining us today. We have started off on a high note with a very strong quarter led by our defense segment. As most of you know, we have been very busy building and delivering MRAP All Terrain Vehicles (M-ATV) for the United States government. Our employees working on this program have continued the strong track record of performance that we began in July of last year when we started shipping these vehicles to the Department of Defense ahead of schedule. I am proud to report that we exceeded the delivery requirements for each month during the quarter, October, November and even the holiday-filled December as we at Oshkosh Corporation flexed our operational muscle. For the quarter, our sales increased 83% to $2.43 billion leading to operating income of $349 million and earnings per share of $2.10. These very strong results were due to outstanding performance in our defense segment and improved performance in our access equipment segment, which was largely the result of the M-ATV production for our defense segment. Sales in many of our other business units were either flat or lower as the weak economy and tight credit conditions continued to impact our customers. Lower sales in these businesses were not a surprise to us and should not be a surprise to those of you who follow us, as we have been discussing our view of the impact of the weak economic conditions on our businesses for the past year and a half. We also continued to generate strong cash flow again this quarter allowing us to reduce our debt by $182.5 million. Please turn to slide 4 for an assessment of current conditions. Last quarter we told you that we felt we were well positioned to heading…

Thanks Bob, please turn with me to slide 5. After a strong production ramp up in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, we really hit our stride and delivered more than 2,300 M-ATV units and all required spare parts kits to our DoD customer during the first quarter of fiscal 2010. As you probably know by now, we set high delivery targets for our M-ATV program ramping up production to 1000 units per month by December 2009. We achieved that goal in mid December and our employees were still able to spend some quality time with their families over the holidays. According to Secretary of Defense, Gates, who visited Oshkosh in November, the hard work and incredible efforts of our employees in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania supported by our supply chain partners have allowed us to ramp up this program faster and more effectively than any other major defense programs since World War II. We view it as our mission to deliver these vehicles quickly to our men and women serving in Afghanistan. In addition to our strong performance in the M-ATV program, we continue to meet or exceed requirements for our other vehicle and aftermarket parts and service programs for the Army and Marine Corps. These are often referred to as our base business, which is generally true. But I can assure you that we do not take anything for granted and we work hard everyday to deliver in our so-called base business. It is this focus and dedication that will help us as we expect to ramp up FMTV production late in fiscal 2010 and early 2011 if the FMTV contract award is upheld. While the GAOs did not completely reject the protest launched by the two losing bidders for the FMTV contract, we were happy to learn just…

Thanks Charlie, good morning everyone. Please turn to slide 9. Consolidated net sales of $2.43 billion for the first fiscal quarter were up 83.2% compared with the same quarter of last year due to a more than tripling of sales in our Defense segment as a result of significant M-ATV volume and higher FHTV and parts and service sales. Operating income increased substantially to $349 million or 14.3% of sales. Operating income margins were aided by significantly improved margins in our Defense segment as well as improved performance in our Access Equipment segment mostly due to M-ATV production for Defense. Earnings per share from continuing operations for the quarter was $2.10 compared with a loss of $0.16 during the first quarter of fiscal 2009. Earnings per share for the quarter was impacted by the improved performance in our defense and access equipment segments. Operating expenses and intersegment profit elimination were above prior year levels due primarily to higher share-based compensation expense and higher intersegment profit eliminations related to intercompany M-ATV sales. As Bob mentioned, we reduced our debt by $182.5 million in the quarter. Since June of 2008, we have reduced our debt by more than $1.1 billion as a result of strong free cash flow and net proceeds of $358 million from our August 2009 equity offering. We also ended the quarter with cash of $858.1 million. A significant portion of this cash is related to the timing of payments for M-ATVs and will ultimately be used to pay suppliers as we continue to produce these units. Let us take a look at each of the segments in detail. Please turn to slide 10. Defense segment sales were $1.86 billion for the first fiscal quarter, an increase of 242% compared with last year’s first fiscal quarter due to M-ATV…

Thanks Dave. We just completed the first quarter of a new fiscal year at Oshkosh with very strong sales, earnings and debt reduction. We have a solid backlog in our Defense business allowing us to weather the economic storm affecting our construction equipment related businesses in the Access and the Commercial segments. We appear to have reached the bottom in many of our non-defense markets and are ready for the eventual turnaround with a more competitive cost structure and a continuing focus on delivering value to our customers. We expect that fiscal 2010 will be a very strong year for Oshkosh in terms of sales, operating income and earnings per share. It is our challenge to execute and we will because we have great people, great products and great opportunities to leverage our strength as we move into the new decade. We have said it before but it bears repeating. We believe that experience counts and it counts most when conditions are difficult as they have been over the past year or so. Our team at Oshkosh Corporation is working diligently and is ready to capitalize when market conditions improve. Thank you again for your continued interest and support in Oshkosh Corporation. With that, I will turn it back to Pat and the operator for questions. Again, thank you.

Thanks Bob. I would like to remind everyone to limit their questions to one plus a follow-up and please try to avoid questions with multiple subparts, as this makes it difficult to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to participate. After the follow-up, we ask that you get back in queue and ask additional questions. With that, I will turn it over to you Melissa to begin the question-and-answer period of this call.

Thank you. (Operator instructions) Gentlemen, our first question is from Chris Donahue of SunTrust Robinson Humphrey. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, good morning. Great quarter, guys.

Good morning, Chris.

Just a question on the FMTV program as we work through this protest, there has been some mention in the press about a proposed $750 million in funding for additional FMTVs in the overseas contingency operation fund, which would be a significant increase over what was in the baseline budget for FMTV. So at what point do you start to get concerned about your ability to ramp the production facilities, particularly if you are looking at significantly higher volume requirements in the first year of operations of the contract?

Chris, thanks for that question. We have plenty of production capacity by the time the FMTV production will start in the fall of 2010 assuming that the award to us is upheld. We will not be producing M-ATVs and volume will have significant capacity to deploy, I think the Army has seen what we are able to do with the M-ATV ramp up and I am sure they are very confident, just like we are that we could handle any production requirements that they give us.

We cannot wait to get the FMTV Chris because it will probably be the easiest truck we have ever filled.

Sounds great. So, at this point, I just want to make sure I do not forget to ask this part, the $750 million in the OCO would more than likely go to Oshkosh assuming the Army retains the contract with you guys.

We would believe so but obviously time has to bear out and we think this will be – we are going to be hearing soon, certainly the Army has the responsibility to respond back to GAO in the middle of February and we are poised to move forward. We started work on our E-coat facility, we are on schedule to deliver the E-coat equipment to our plants. We are building test vehicles who are really scheduled and ready to go.

Okay great, thanks again, good quarter guys.

Thank you. Our next question is from Andrew Obin with Merrill Lynch. Please proceed with your question.

Yes, just to confirm on the M-ATV in terms of how the program accounting works, so the margins in the quarter are (inaudible) it is not like we are going to reverse some of these gains in the second quarter, right, in the second calendar quarter going into May.

No, this is not a percentage of completion type program if that is what you are referring to.

So the margins – all I am saying is the margins are sustainable into the next quarter out.

What we said is we believe that we would have margins similar to the first quarter margins as long as we are producing at full rate production of the M-ATVs.

Okay and just to switch to access equipment in terms of thinking of the dynamic of the purchasing decisions by your customer base, the usual pattern is you order the stuff in the spring, so if things are down right now, does it mean that we have to pretty much now have to wait until 2011 for your customer base to make that decision?

I think you describe the order clearance kind of simplistically, it depends where we are in the cycle. If it is really a robust period of the cycle, our customers start ordering in June and July for the next spring. So, it really depends where you are since all the manufacturers have plenty of capacity right now, our customers understand that they can order later and the market is down pretty dramatically. So, what we would say is that customers can come in today and give us an order and we can quickly deliver. Having said all that, we would expect certainly in North America and Europe that we are looking at flattish to maybe modestly up in 2010 and we are not going to really see any significant improvement probably until 2011, some customers are talking about the second-half of calendar 2010 being better. I think that all said we really do not know where this is headed in terms of strong direction. So I think we are flattish to maybe up a little bit, other parts of the world we are seeing a little bit more growth.

But we could get earlier indication from your customer base during the summer. So we do not necessarily have to wait until the late fall to really figure out what has happened with our customer base, they could respond earlier.

They could but more likely than not. We are hoping 2011 would be a stronger year. Today we would not suggest that it is going to be so strong that they are going to be ordering in June, July. I think it is going to be the point of cycle where some are going to start talking to us in fourth calendar quarter about orders for the spring.

Great quarter, thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next question is from Alex Blanton with Ingalls & Snyder. Please proceed with your question. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: Thank you, can you hear me?

Yes, we hear you. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: Okay. First on the M-ATV, the incremental margins were obviously much higher than you had forecast. You had forecast that they will be in line with the average in the year that just passed which was 15.5%. Now, if I take $1.1 billion for M-ATV sales in the first quarter and assign a 17% margin to the rest of the business, that gives me an incremental margin on the M-ATV on the $1.1 billion of 19%, a little bit more than 19%, is that a reasonable number to use, 19%, 20% margin on the M-ATV business?

Alex, I think you are a little high. I think in general we said that obviously we had the improved results on M-ATV but we also mentioned improved performance on the FHTV as well as our parts and service business. So not all of it is attributable to the M-ATV programs. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: So you had 18.3% total.

Right. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: Is it roughly the same for both the M-ATV and the rest?

They are similar. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: Similar, okay, that is a very good clarification. Now, a couple of other minor points, on the Access Equipment – first, I wanted to ask you, everything that was shipped on the M-ATV order for the quarter, was that all recorded in sales actually or how many units were recorded in sales, I should say?

In our prepared remarks Alex we mentioned that just over 2,300 trucks were shipped and recorded in sales in the quarter. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: They were also recorded in sales because I understood at one point that not all of the shipments would be recorded as sales.

Any shipment to the joint program office was a sale. We had some shipments in the quarter ended September as well. So by the end of December, we were over 2,500 units shipped. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: Okay and finally on the Access Equipment you said base access equipment sales were down 60%, but if I take the number here for intercompany, subtract it out, the remainder is only down 46%/ What am I missing?

Yes Alex, we should probably clarify that, the 60% is for new equipment, the strength that the JLG based business including parts and service business, you are right, was down about 45%. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: New equipment, what do you mean?

New machinery, excluding parts and service. Alex Blanton - Ingalls & Snyder: Excluding the parts and service, okay, right, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from David Raso with ISI Group. Please proceed with your question.

Yes, I am not sure if this was just addressed but I have a clarification first and maybe I am just calculating incorrectly but the percentages in the backlog year over year looked to be incorrect except for the Defense which also gets calculated correctly. For example, just take the numbers as presented, the backlog is down and is at 26% year over year, not 40% as per the slide. So again, please verify if I am missing something before I ask my question

David in the prior year for JLG, we did not include military telehandlers in the backlog. So the 40% is an apples to apples.

Okay, so you will provide the real state of the backlog with it.

Yes, 10-Q will have that information in it.

Okay. My question relates to profitability at Access especially speaking sequentially, sequentially, if you exclude the M-ATV activity it looks like the loss was reduced by over $30 million sequentially, can you provide a little more color on how much of that is lower bad debt sequentially, how much restructuring and maybe any other color you can provide. As you know, the sales for core access actually declined sequentially, so it was (inaudible) trying to get a read on how soon can this business go profitable if you can take out $30 million sequentially even on down revenues.

First off David, I think the $30 million is a little too high on that. We gave a range on the M-ATV margins, it is probably a little higher than you may be thinking there.

It is more like high single digits than mid.

Well, the worst thing high is your $35 million is high and having to sell – if you assume it is a lower number sequentially improvement, Dave, why don’t you –

Yes, I can run the numbers.

Okay we had a few things at play in the quarter sequentially. We had some better performance from a warranty standpoint. We had some inventory reserves that we took in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009 that did not recur this time. We did have better material performance.

Can you quantify any of these? I am just trying to understand the run rate of this business, how abnormal was the back part of fiscal ’09, did you have these costs which as you were already saying maybe already that they were coming back down, again the idea is when can I begin to model access at a profitable level at M-ATV?

There are a lot of items at play here, nothing really stands out as being the significant driver in terms of the performance. What we have said in the past is obviously we need to have sales above the 200 run rate a quarter to be profitable, but I think we are definitely well on our way towards improved profitability in this business.

Yes, Dave maybe you can clarify a little bit, in fiscal 2010 it is hard for us right now to envision us being profitable without the M-ATV.

For all of 2010 or every single quarter of 2010? I am just trying to get a feel --

Right now, for every quarter in 2010 it would be very difficult for us to be profitable unless the market pick up, as volumes start to improve, we are doing $300 million or more whatever in the quarter --

The run rate for revenues, we need at least $1.2 billion or more at a minimum to think of these core businesses as being profitable.

Yes, we cannot get real specific but it has got to go north from where it is now.

Okay, I appreciate it, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Walter Liptak with Barrington Research. Please proceed with your question.

Thanks, good morning guys, congratulations on a great quarter too. My question is on M-ATV, is it possible to break out the trucks’ sales as a percentage and part sales?

You mean out of the total M-ATV sales?

Yes, right.

The vast majority I think 90% plus was trucks in the quarter of the $1.1 billion.

Our big spare parts kits deliveries commence really in January, the other parts business growth that we had in the current quarter related to our TAK-4 independent suspension sales for other OEM MRAP vehicles.

Okay. Are margins on parts generally better than on trucks? So if your mix is improving in the next quarter, margins and military would be improving.

It depends on whether it is proprietary part or a third-party part, so it really does depend on the mix.

Okay thanks. I guess that was the follow-up to the second, any guidance on what you think you can get your debt load down to by year-end or a cash flow number for 2010?

We are obviously pleased with what we were able to deliver in the first quarter and expect that we will continue to reduce our debt through the remainder of the fiscal year but we are not going to provide a numerical number.

Okay, got it, thanks.

Thank you. Our next question is from Jerry Revich with Goldman Sachs. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning and thank you for getting the vehicles out ahead of schedule. I am wondering if you can talk about now that the M-ATVs have been out on the field, what kind of engineering enhancement changes are you seeing in the military requests, and if you cannot discuss specifics, can you please share the incremental content per unit that you might be seeing.

Jerry, right now we are building a base configuration and that is all we are going to be building probably for the duration here. Obviously there is always opportunities down the line to do retrofits or to insert technological improvements into the vehicles, but right now the Joint Program Office would really like to get these vehicles very quickly into theatre for the troops and to introduce a lot of changes at this point really slows that process up. So I think for the near term it is probably [ph] a base configuration.

Thanks Charlie and can you talk about the range of additional M-ATV vehicles that your customers are considering in that 4000 unit mix, we saw senate armed service committee request that seemed to point to a very high mix of M-ATVs and I am wondering if you are seeing similar signals.

We do not want to speak for our customer but certainly we have heard and read reports that there could be additional M-ATVs in the mix here. We have also heard that there could be additional MRAP 1 vehicles in the mix, the quantities are still I think pretty tightly held and are under consideration. So we do not really have a lot more we can tell you than that.

When would you need to receive additional M-ATV orders to keep your suppliers producing on schedule?

Well, quickly.

Is that a three-month lead time relative to how much order visibility you have, is that a reasonable way of thinking about it?

No, I think generally lead times in certain of the larger components are longer than that.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Steve Volkmann with Jefferies & Company. Please proceed with your question. Steve Volkmann - Jefferies & Company: Good morning guys, just a couple of quick follow-ups and I apologize if I missed it somewhere but you talked about Access Equipment getting to the point where you are increasing your production because inventory levels are low, have you told us how much you underproduced by and I guess I am just trying to figure out how much it could be up just on the absence of inventory liquidation [ph].

We underproduced in our first fiscal quarter to retail by about 15%. Steve Volkmann - Jefferies & Company: Okay. So is it okay to think about volumes potentially being up 15% on a flat end-market environment or is that not right?

It is not going to translate to sales. What it could do is improve absorption. Steve Volkmann - Jefferies & Company: Okay, great. Then just related or unrelated maybe, how should I think about the cash flow as you ramp down, assuming you ramp down on M-ATV and then ramp up on FMTV, will there be a big cash liquidation on M-ATV or is that not right?

We did end the quarter with a significant amount of cash on the balance sheet and that largely will be used to pay suppliers under the M-ATV program as we go through the year here. On the FMTV in terms of the ramp up on that, we would be seeking to have a similar program with performance based payments on that program and in the event that we were able to achieve that we should not see overall significant working capital drain. Steve Volkmann - Jefferies & Company: Okay, great, thanks for that.

Thank you. Our next question is from Steve Barger with Keybanc Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Given the level of – this is a JLG question, given the level of relatively new machines out there in the channel, are your conversations with customers or dealers suggesting that the order draught could extend well into 2010 or kind of how they are thinking about the utilization rate and pricing out there right now?

No I think they are all still concerned. From what we can gather, most of our customers are still in the, like you said earlier, looking at sort of flattish kind of purchases with 2009, here and there you will find some opportunities for some modest growth with some of our customer base but there is nothing really robust going on in North America or Europe right now. I think all of our customer base is hoping that by the time we came to the second half of calendar 2010 that there is going to be a pick-up in the market. I think as a general world economy we would all hope that. So we are right there with our customer base hoping but there is nothing that tells us that can confirm that this is going to happen.

Okay and M-ATV question, we have read that there could be some headroom in the additional 4,000 units, are you hearing anything similar from your contacts in the DoD or the customer and do you think that could result in the break in the supply chain if they try and figure out what the demand is going to be in Afghanistan as they get the vehicles in the theatre.

I think that – obviously they could go higher than 4,000, they could buy less than 4,000, we are not privy to those discussions. It is very much going to be lead by the commanders (inaudible) that are on the ground seeing what the demands are. We still need to get a lot of troops there. The commanders need to see the capability of the M-ATV in theater and I think all of those things are ultimately – and then the commanders are going to need to see how the nature of the conflict changes with more troops on the ground. So all of that will determine the demand, and I think it is premature for really any of us to ascertain what that demand will be.

Okay thanks.

Thanks Steve.

Thank you. Our next question is from Jamie Cook with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning and congratulations. Just the first question, can you guys quantify what the benefit was for material costs in the quarter and with segments saw the biggest benefit and how we think about material costs, what you are sort of assuming for the year is my first question, then I have a follow-up?

To start with, the biggest benefit of material cost was clearly on our Defense segment. It does not come close to anywhere else was very significant, largely related to M-ATV. We certainly had a lot of savings on the M-ATV program in terms of material cost but they translated into the rest of our Defense business as well because as we increased our volumes on similar components, we started to get a bleeding effect into the rest of our heavy businesses I suppose. Overall, we have got a really strong supply chain team. They are very focused on delivering value, so I do think we saw benefits pretty much across the company as well and we are in the hope that benefits will continue – we cannot deliver all we did this past quarter on a continuing basis but we did see benefits really across the company as well.

Okay, but I mean is there any way to think about – when I think about the margin improvement, I guess my concern is we are sort of eluding that margins in the Defense business you can say at least you are producing he M-ATV which is (inaudible) and then we could get more orders on top of that, I am just trying to figure out how big the material cost benefit was because it seems like that should have a head win as we progress throughout the year, I guess that is my concern. And then just follow-up Charlie, how are you guys thinking about tire 4 communicating to your customers and are they talking at all about (inaudible)?

Okay, let me – on the pre-buy for tire 4, I do not see any significant discussion or any discussion about pre-buy for tire 4.

Have you communicated the cost increase, are they aware of it yet.

No, we have not communicated yet.

Okay, and then Charlie, I am just trying to get comfortable with material costs now becoming more of a head wind and did that possibly dilute the margin?

Let us put this, when we put together a budget for material cost, certainly we tried to read the (inaudible) what could happen to steel costs and commodity costs as the year progresses. Right now, our estimates are tracking forward very closely. So we expect some really modest slight increases whatever you want to call it as the year progresses in our base kind of commodity cost but nothing real significant. That is not going to be a big head wind in any of our segments as the year progresses, at least that is our perspective of what is going to happen. And the material costs that we have achieved on the M-ATV and some of these Defense programs, I think we are going to sustain them, we will certainly sustain them through the production of the M-ATV.

Okay and just to be clear because on the Defense side I am not so familiar, do you have inflation indexes on the – on M-ATVs if they were to increase, do you have to take the hit or do you get to pass that along.

We have to take the hit.

You have to take the hit. Okay, great, I can follow-up offline, congratulations.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Robert McCarthy of Robert W Baird. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning everybody, can you hear me?

Yes.

Great. The first thing I wanted to ask you about is this somewhat cryptic remark that is included in your prepared remarks Charlie, in talking about the GAO in the protest on the FMTV, you made a comment you would not be surprised to see increased instances of Defense programs put up within the future. Is this your way of letting the market know that FHTV is likely to fall into that category as well?

Likely is a strong word, certainly with acquisition reform and the discussion that is going on in DC that is always a possibility that the FHTV could go off for a bid and Marine program could go off for a bid. What is unique on the FMTV this was really a program that was very logical to go off for a bid. The customer owned the technical data package. They own the intellectual property around the FMTV. There are some pretty well documented difficulties with that program over the last 20 years. Last year, there were a couple of thousand vehicles behind schedule on deliveries and obviously the government got a big cost decrease. So that one was pretty right for bid. Where they proceed, we do not know, it is a possibility.

Timing, remember when the current contract expires.

The contract itself Rob goes through October of 2011 with deliveries through September of 2012 I think.

Okay, right. And then you have got a little bit of risk in your own internal forecast created by apparently ordered delays from the national waste haulers, could you talk about your conviction that it is not a reaction, the current events and cash flow considerations in that you really will see the orders.

To make it really simple, we saw the orders in January, so I think that we are okay.

Thanks Charlie, good luck.

Thank you. Our next question is from Ann Duignan from JP Morgan. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning guys, can you hear me okay?

Yes clearly.

Okay. Most of my questions on MRAP on Defense business have been answered but I am just curious, Obama last night was very adamant that things are going to wind down quickly in Iraq. Are there any opportunities, more opportunities for you than you currently have from retrofitting other products or adopting products that are currently in Iraq or Afghanistan beyond the (inaudible)?

We are involved in a number of competitions globally, so I think that there is some international competitions that could create some volume. When there is ultimately a pull out of troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq, there is going to be a whole period of recapping the fleets that are brought out of Iraq and Afghanistan, so I think all of that will sustain some strong business for someone in over a period of time and certainly will compete for all of that.

Which opportunities should we watch more closely? Which ones do you think have the greatest potential for you?

I prefer not to signal to a competitor exactly what we are going to be doing in competing and going forward but obviously we look to everyone else who looks to see in how we can serve the Army and the Marine Corps the best.

One other question, you mentioned something I just wanted to make sure I understand correctly, you mentioned something I think that telehandlers were down more than arial work platforms in the quarter, can you just expand on that a little bit, is there any end markets in particular that drove that or did I just pick it up wrong?

No, you picked it up right. The last several quarters our AWPs have been down on a year-over-year percentage basis more than telehandlers. You saw the telehandlers turned down earlier. I guess one way you can look at it is that maybe the rate of decline in AWPs is leveling off, it has caught up but one quarter I do not know that we can read a lot into that. It is just something that was different from the last several quarters.

That was more that arial work platforms leveled off as opposed to some things (inaudible) further in telehandlers, is that way to read it?

I think so but obviously we will have to continue to watch it over the next few quarters.

Okay, I appreciate that. That’s it, I think any other details I will ask offline. Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Charlie Brady with BMO Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.

Thanks. With M-ATV with regards the recent parts order, $325 million or so parts order it essentially stocked the shelf, would you anticipate similar orders down the road sort of fill the shelves, obviously if stuff breaks you have to get more in there down the road but the initial fill or is that kind of done with these orders?

No, Charlie, it really depends if there are additional M-ATV production increase --

Given what has been awarded, the 6,619 that has been awarded already, assuming 4,000 out of it for now, would you anticipate more on that business that has been awarded?

I don’t know, could be but we really don’t know.

Okay and then a second question on the JLG business, you commented that you are going to focus on working capital, I guess I am just curious, you have given away inventory levels have been taken down and costs have already been taken out of that business, how much more really is there left to deal with that business given what has already been done over the past 12 months?

It is going to be tougher to squeeze additional working capital out of that business Charlie, but we want to make sure that we maintain the focus that we have had on working capital in that business over the past year to year and a half and again I don’t think it will be significant but there probably are still a few opportunities out there.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Ben Elias from Sterne, Agee & Leach. Please proceed with your question.

Melissa, this will be our last question as well please. Thanks.

Yes sir. Ben Elias - Sterne, Agee & Leach: Thanks Pat. As usual, you cut me off last time but – my question is I read in the earnings release you did say the strong defense business was because of the M-ATV and you did disclose it was about 2,300 vehicles and about $1.1 billion. You also said that there were some strong FHTV business and some spare parts and services, now how many vehicles was that? What delivery order are we sort of looking at and what do we expect for the rest of the year because when I look at the schedule of the either the contract wins or delivery orders, it is sort of open ended on the (inaudible) and the FHTVs and there is not a lot that we can figure out that is for your second and third as well as fourth fiscal quarter this year besides the M-ATVs, so how do we go about building what order it is going to look like for the rest of the year?

Ben, if you look at the non M-ATV business in the first fiscal quarter, it was up about 40% year over year. I do not think we are going to be able to sustain those levels of improvements throughout the rest of the year but we do not have specific numbers that we are going to point you to. Ben Elias - Sterne, Agee & Leach: Okay, second question is, I know I am the last person on the call here today, is regarding the cost containment strategies, you have been reducing cost across the other businesses, the commercial businesses, can you quantify to what extent you have lowered the breakeven points, what percentage of volume are you going from 50% to say 25% and then how do we think about that moving forward?

We have not provided that level of detail. What we did say last year is that we had identified $200 million of cost reductions let’s say roughly, we have dialed back on that somewhat as we have restored wage rates and eliminated fall outs [ph] at a number of our businesses and then with the ramp-up in defense, we are spending a little more than we were last year but overall I think we are still capturing a decent portion of that especially in those segments that have been more challenged in regards to the market conditions that they are facing. Ben Elias - Sterne, Agee & Leach: Okay and the last one, what percentage of the M-ATV do you (inaudible) at the access equipment facilities?

In terms from a dollar standpoint it is somewhere in between the 35% and 45% of the total contract value.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen, we are out of time for questions at this time. I would like to turn the floor back over to management for closing comments.

Okay. Thank you for your continued interest and support in our great company. We are going to continue to work hard. Charlie and his team on the M-ATV, these vehicles are critically needed as 30,000 additional troops go to Afghanistan. The early reports on this vehicle we are getting back are very good. We are going to continue to focus on paying down debt and to controlling our cost and we are ready to start building the FMTV when the light goes back on. Come join us next week at our Annual Shareholders Meeting, hopefully it gets up to 9 or 10 degrees. Thank you for your continued interest. Have a great day. Thank you Melissa.

This concludes today’s teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.