13. Some industries, most notably petroleum (Pemex), were able to secure higher weight
 limitations for vehicles hauling their goods.

14. Mexican carriers indicated three main reasons for not purchasing U.S. equipment: 1.
 U.S. equipment are not designed for the heavier loads common in Mexico, 2. U.S.
 equipment wears out faster on Mexico's rough roads, and 3. tariffs and restrictions
 against some imports.

15. Some weak controls remain on maximum rates and licensing. However, in practice,
 these do not appear to be binding or enforced.

16. The language of the agreement is somewhat vague in that it suggests that U.S. and
 Canadian firms may acquire shares of Mexican motor carriers which exclusively handle
 international cargos. The American Trucking Associations has pointed out that no such
 firms exist. However, U.S. and Canadian firms can effectively avoid this problem by
 acquiring carriers through foreign owned Mexican corporations.

17. If conviction would result in a 5 year sentence of more, no bond can be set.

18. This does not mean that carriers hauling perishables in one direction must haul
 perishables in the other to avoid travelling empty. Refrigerated and insulated vehicles
 can be used to haul non-perishables. Insulated tankers can carry vegetable oil and
 refrigerated vans can carry most types of dry freight. For example, only about half of
 the loads brought into Florida by carriers hauling produce from the state require
 temperature control (Beilock, MacDonald, and Powers). However, refrigerated freight
 normally commands a premium over dry freight and, as such, is preferred by carriers.

19. For example, Simga Alimentos, Mexico's premiere producer and distributor of processed
 meats, maintains a system of refrigerated warehouses throughout the country. In some
 cases, it leases space in facilities owned by its customers.