Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 94 / Friday, May 15, 1998 / Notices 27113

seeks to accommodate foreign as well as

domestic interests, providing a balance

of interests compatible with foreign

source capital and management as well

as national needs for infrastructure and

services delivery. UNCITRAL will

consider, at its upcoming Plenary

session in June at the United Nations in

New York, a draft of six of the

approximately twelve chapters currently

planned for the Legislative Guide.

The proposed Legislative Guide will

include evolving methods by which

private and public financing and private

sector development and management

are employed for long-term

infrastructure projects, including buildand-operate (BOT and BOO) and other

models. Legislative options to facilitate

project design, development and

operation, as well as project country

regulation and off-shore payment

facilities will be considered for

inclusion in the Guide.

The Guide will seek to take into

account current developments in legal

issues involved in overseas project

finance, including those at the world

Bank, the Inter-American Development

Bank, and other international financial

institutions, as well as domestic

systems. New methods of obtaining

longer-term assurances not dependent

on recourse to governmental agencies

will be considered, including, for

example, long-term receivables

financing and special purpose

corporations. These mechanisms will

need to be balanced with appropriate

methods for project countries to ensure

delivery of services, utilities,

construction, etc. It is tentatively

proposed that the Guide be organized

into sections on general legislative

provisions; sector structure and

regulation; concessionaire selection;

project agreement terms and conclusion;

government support; construction

phase; operational phase; delays, defects

and failures to perform; duration,

extension or early termination;

governing laws; and settlement of

disputes. Additional sections may be

added or the present structure modified

after review. Initial drafts of the first six

chapters are now available for comment.

Comments on these drafts are

solicited from any member of the public

or any association or other entity that

would like the opportunity to do so.

Copies of the UNCITRAL draft

documents will be provided without

charge upon request to the office

indicated below. While preliminary

comments are welcome prior to June 1,

a summary of recommendations made

by various participating countries at the

Plenary session will be available from

the office indicated below after June 20,

1998 upon request, and comments made

after that date should take those

recommendations into account.

Please contact the Office of the

Assistant Legal Adviser for Private

International Law (L/PIL) for copies of

the relevant UNCITRAL documents at

2430 ‘‘E’’ Street, N.W., Suite 357 South

Building, Washington, D.C. 20037–2800,

or by fax to (202) 776–8482, or e-mail

at pildb@his.com, attention Jeffrey D.

Kovar. Documents can be provided by email if requested. For additional

information please call (202) 776–8420.

Any member of the public who wishes

to receive notice of any meetings of the

Advisory Committee on this topic

should so indicate; meetings of the

Advisory Committee are open to the

public.

Harold S. Burman,

Executive Director, Secretary of State’s

Advisory Committee on Private International

Law.

[FR Doc. 98–12938 Filed 5–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–08–M

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice #2818]

Shipping Coordinating Committee

Subcommittee on Safety of Life at Sea

and Associated Bodies Working Group

on Stability and Load Lines and on

Fishing Vessels Safety; Notice of

Meeting

The Working Group on Stability and

Load Lines and on Fishing Vessels

Safety of the Subcommittee on Safety of

Life at Sea will conduct an open

meeting at 9 a.m. on Monday, June 15,

1998, in room 6103, at U.S. Coast Guard

Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20593–0001. This

meeting will discuss the upcoming 42nd

Session of the Subcommittee on

stability and Load Lines and on Fishing

Vessels Safety (SLF) and associated

bodies of the International Maritime

Organization (IMO) which will be held

on February 8–12, 1999, at the IMO

Headquarters in London, England.

Items of discussion will include the

following:

a. Review of results from SLF 41,

b. Harmonization of damage stability

provisions in the IMO instruments,

c. Safety aspects of ships engaged in a

ballast water exchange,

d. Revision of the High Speed Craft

Code,

e. Development of the damage

consequence diagrams for inclusion

in damage control plan guidelines,

and

f. Upcoming requirements and future

actions with respect to Bulk Carrier

Safety—results of SOLAS

Conference and MSC 69.

Members of the public may attend

this meeting up to the seating capacity

of the room. Interested persons may

seek information by writing: Mr. Paul

Cojeen, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters,

Commandant (G–MSE–2), Room 1308,

2100 Second Street, SW, Washington,

DC 20593–0001 or by calling (202) 267–

2988.

Dated: May 11, 1998.

Stephen M. Miller,

Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating

Committee.

[FR Doc. 98–12946 Filed 5–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–24–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

Negotiation of Sectoral Market

Opening Agreements

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice of negotiation of sectoral

market opening agreements, and of

goods and services that might be

affected by such negotiations.

SUMMARY: The United States is

participating in discussions with

member economies of the Asia Pacific

Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum

and negotiations with Members of the

World Trade Organization (WTO) to

enhance market opening in fifteen

sectors, including possible elimination,

modification or continuance of U.S.

tariffs and non-tariff measures, opening

of certain service sectors; and certain

other sectoral and structural issues.

Public comment is being sought on

issues associated with these discussions

and negotiations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jane C. Earley, Director, APEC Affairs,

Office of Asia Pacific and APEC, USTR

(202–395–6813).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In their

1996 Subic Bay Declaration, APEC

Leaders directed trade ministers to

identify sectors where ‘‘early voluntary

liberalization would have a positive

impact on trade, investment and

economic growth in the individual

APEC economies as well as the region.’’

In May 1997, APEC trade ministers

affirmed that APEC should continue to

act as a catalyst to promote the global

opening of markets, as it had with the

Information Technology Agreement.

They therefore directed officials to

conduct an intensive process for

selecting such sectors, for review and

final action by the time of the APEC
27114 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 94 / Friday, May 15, 1998 / Notices

ministers and leaders meetings in

November 1977. In selecting such

sectors, ministers instructed officials to

have regard for three factors: the

possibility of encompassing both tariff

and non-tariff issues, as well as

elements of facilitation and economic

and technical cooperation; ensuring the

fullest possible private sector input and

support; and consideration of ‘‘critical

mass’’ by developing initiatives

supported by significant groups of APEC

members, and where appropriate for

incorporation in the WTO.

In November 1997, APEC ministers

received information on over 40

potential sectors that had been proposed

and reviewed by officials. From this list,

ministers recommended 15 sectors to

APEC leaders for a program of early

liberalization. The proposals for

liberalization in these sectors are

described in detail in the Annex to this

notice.

Of the 15 selected sectors, ministers

identified nine for early action in 1998:

Environmental goods and services,

chemicals, energy, medical equipment,

forest products, fish and fish products,

toys, gems and jewelry, and conclusion

of a mutual recognition agreement on

telecommunications. In these nine

sectors, it was agreed that detailed

proposals defining parameters, such as

scope of product coverage, phasing of

liberalization, and measures covered

(i.e., tariffs and/or other measures)

would be completed by the date of the

APEC trade ministerial meeting in June

1998, with a view toward beginning

implementation, in the WTO context

where appropriate, in 1999. In addition,

ministers directed that work to develop

proposals proceed in six additional

sectors: oilseeds and oilseed products,

food, automotive, civil aircraft,

fertilizer, and natural and synthetic

rubber. In these sectors, officials were

directed to further develop proposals for

review and assessment by ministers at

the June trade ministers meeting, for

possible recommendation to leaders in

November 1998.

In accordance with this guidance,

APEC officials will work intensively in

1998 to complete plans for early

liberalization in the identified sectors.

APEC officials meetings are currently

scheduled for June, September and

November 1998 in Malaysia.

Advice From the U.S. International

Trade Commission

On March 18, 1998, the United States

Trade Representative (USTR) requested,

pursuant to section 332(g) of the Tariff

Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g), that the

U.S., International Trade Commission

(USITC) provide advice concerning

trade liberalization among APEC

countries in the nine sectors listed

above. On March 25, the USITC

initiated an investigation, Inv. No. 332–

392, pursuant to section 332(g) of the

Tariff Act of 1930 and published a

notice requesting public comment and

providing notice of a public hearing in

connection with the investigation. (63

FR 15861, April 1, 1998). The notice

included a list of harmonized tariff

system (HTS) numbers that comprise

goods under consideration in the nine

sectors. The USITC’s report will include

(1) profiles of the industry sectors

(including a description of U.S. and

foreign sectors and their competitive

positions); (2) an assessment of patterns

of U.S. sector imports and exports to

APEC trading partners and other trading

partners; (3) summaries of U.S. and

foreign tariff rates and reported nontariff barriers affecting the sectors; and

(4) information about increased market

access opportunities resulting from

liberalization. The USITC plans to

transmit its report to USTR by June 16,

1998.

Public Comments

In conformity with the regulations of

the Trade Policy Staff Committee

(‘‘TPSC’’) (15 CFR Part 2003), the

Chairman of the TPSC invites written

comments from interested persons on

the desirability, the scope, and the

economic effects of these proposals for

sectoral liberalization. Comments in

particular are invited on: (a) Economic

costs and benefits to U.S. producers and

consumers of the removal of tariff

barriers to trade between and among

APEC economies in the above-listed

product and service sectors; (b)

economic effects and benefits to U.S.

producers and consumers of removal of

non-tariff barriers to trade between and

among APEC economies, and of other

aspects of the above-described

proposals, including their provisions for

economic and technical cooperation, (c)

existing barriers to trade in services

between and among APEC economies,

and economic costs and benefits to

removing such barriers; and (d) any

other measures of practice within these

sectors among APEC economies that

should be addressed in sectoral market

opening negotiations. In addition,

comments are invited on other aspects

of these sectoral market opening

initiatives, including the possible labor

and environmental effects.

Interested persons may submit written

comments, in five (5) typed copies or

less, no later than noon, June 15, 1998,

to Gloria Blue, Executive Secretary,

TPSC, Office of the U.S. Trade

Representative, Room 503, 600 17th

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20508.

Comments should state clearly the

position taken and should describe with

particularity the information supporting

that position. Any business confidential

material must be clearly marked as such

on the cover page (or letter) and

succeeding pages. Such submissions

must be accompanied by a nonconfidential summary thereof.

Non-confidential submissions will be

available for public inspection at the

USTR Reading Room, Room 101, Office

of the United States Trade

Representative, 600 Seventeenth Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C. An

appointment to review the file may be

made by calling Brenda Webb at 202–

395–6186. The Reading Room is open to

the public by appointment only from

9:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon and from 1:00

p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday.

Frederick L. Montgomery,

Chairman, Trade Policy Staff Committee.

Annex—Description of Sectoral Market

Opening Initiatives

Environmental Goods and Services:

Elimination of tariffs on environmental

goods and liberalization of trade in

environmental Services based on the

General Agreement on Trade in

Services, to be agreed by consensus by

June 1998, and to be bound in the WTO.

Implementation of commitments would

begin six months after the date on

which the agreement is concluded. A

proposal for addressing non-tariff

measures in APEC economies that

impede trade will be included. On

economic and technical cooperation,

economies are encouraged to develop

proposals for projects such as seminars

to achieve the objective of liberalizing

trade.

Medical Equipment. Tariffs would be

eliminated in a short period, e.g., 3

years. Proposed schedule and method of

implementation would be based on the

approach of the Information Technology

Agreement. Specific non-tariff measures

would be identified and addressed.

Economies would be prepared to

explore a program of technical

assistance in cooperation with the

private sector.

Forest Products. Includes pulp and

paper products (HS Chapters 47 and 48),

wood products (HS Chapter 44), printed

materials (HS Chapter 49); wood

furniture and pre-fabricated housing

(parts of HS Chapter 94), certain

vegetable and rattan mats and baskets

(parts of HS Chapter 46), and certain

rosin products (parts of HS Chapter 38).

The proposal has four components:

elimination of tariffs on theses products

in the 2000–2004 timeframe; a study of
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 94 / Friday, May 15, 1998 / Notices 27115

non-tariff barriers and other trade

distorting policies which may impeded

market access in these products;

development and adoption of

performance-based building standards;

and, development of economic and

technical assistance measures designed

to enable members to develop their

industries and to achieve early trade

liberation in these industries.

Fish and Fish Products. The objective

of the proposal would be to eliminate

tariffs no later than December 31, 2005.

Tariffs currently applied at 20% or less

would be phased out more quickly.

There would also be flexibility for

economies to phase out tariffs over a

longer period on a limited number of

products. Officials would be directed to

present a plan for eliminating non-tariff

measures for approval at the APEC’s

November 1998 Trade Ministerial

meeting, with the objective of

eliminating non-tariff measures no later

than December 31, 2007. APEC

economies would recommit to

elimination of WorldTrade Organization

(WTO)-inconsistent subsidies and

sanitary and phytosanitary measures, of

which there would also be studies, and

commit to some of many suggested

ecotech proposal. An annual report to

Ministers would also be done within

APEC on fisheries management

cooperation in the Pacific Ocean, and

adjacent regions.

Toys. The proposal is for progressive

reduction of tariffs on targeted, toys,

beginning from 1998 and completed by

a date to be determined by participating

economies (2000, and no later than

2005). It would comment to

identification of existing technical,

regulatory, and other unnecessary nontariff measures by the end of 1998 and

to consultation on actions and a

scheduled for elimination of NOMS by

the end of 1999. Progressive elimination

of all identified non-tariff measures

would be determined, preferably by

2000 and no later than 2005.

Gems and Jewelry. This proposal

would reduce tariffs to 0–5% by 2005

on products in HTS Chapter 71m, which

includes pearls, diamonds, precious

stones, silver, gold, platinum, ‘‘fine’’

jewelry, silverware made of silver and

silver plate, gold articles, imitation

jewelry, and commemorative coins. The

proposal would also address non-tariff

measures in the same time period and

include economic and technical

cooperation on education and training.

Mutual Recognition Agreement for

Telecommunications servicers. Proposes

that interested APEC economies work to

implement an Agreement for Mutual

Recognition of Test Results and

Certifications, and to complete work on

a Mutual Recognition Agreement and

Phase Agreements by June 1998.

Chemicals. This is a proposal for tariff

liberalization, starting with a

commitment to bring tariffs into

conformity with rates established in the

Uruguay Round Chemical Tariff

Harmonization Agreement (CTHA) in

two tranches: starting from applied

rates, by 2001 for tariffs up to and

including 10%, and by 2004 for tariffs

over 10%, and to bring these rates in the

WTO. Requests for longer staging would

be considered for sensitive products.

Once a critical mass has committed to

the CTHA, further tariff liberalization

would be undertaken starting with

subsectors (e.g., fertilizer, cosmetics)

where there is interest in moving ahead

on an expedited basis. This process

would lead to the eventual elimination

of all chemical tariffs. Participants

would initiate a work program on nontariff measures. They would also

compile a list of customs and regulatory

barriers faced by chemical exporters to

give to APEC’s Committee on Customs

Procedures for simplifying and

harmonizing customs procedures and

facilitating trade. The proposal would

also task APEC’s Investment Experts

Group to undertake a review of

investment policy and practices with

respect to the chemical industry, which

would be used to derive a list of

liberalization options that could be

selected either for individual action

plans, or for collective action. It would

additionally encourage economies to

participate in international work already

ongoing on chemical standards and

testing. In cooperation with the private

sector, it would develop a program of

economic and technical assistance,

including but not limited to workshops,

seminars, and training activities.

Energy. This proposal includes certain

primary energy commodities, electricity,

energy products, technologies, services,

and equipment. It would progressively

remove tariffs on coal and gas and

energy-related equipment by 2005, and

identify and address existing technical,

regulatory, and other non-tariff barriers,

including standards and certification. It

would establish a work program to

identify and remove barriers to trade in

services, to commence March 1998.

Additionally it would review work of

the APEC’s Group of Experts on

Government Procurement (GPEG) on

principles of transparency in

government procurement and work with

GPEG in any areas where the generic

elements and principles of transparency

need to be developed to ensure full

transparency in this sector. Finally, it

would extend the investment

facilitation work of APEC’s Energy

Working Group and develop a linked

database on mining and energy-related

investment opportunities, and reduce

costs through cooperation on energy

standards between 1998 and 2000.

Autos. This proposal calls for a four

part work program aimed at establishing

a more integrated and competitive auto

industry in the region: (1) Standards

harmonization, including obtaining

APEC endorsement of the ‘‘global

agreement’’ on automotive standards; (2)

identification of customs issues and

barriers, and development of steps to

address them; (3) development of an

economic and technical cooperation

program; and (4) establishment of a

regional dialogue of automotive issues,

which would discuss trade and

investment policy issues, and develop

means of addressing them. Industry

would participate in parts of the

dialogue.

Food. The proposal calls for tariff

reductions on a number of 4-digit H.T.S.

categories in three food subsectors (fresh

fruits and vegetables, processed foods

and beverages) and other trade

facilitation and ecotech activities, as

well as market research studies. The

proposal calls for tariff reductions on

more than 50 H.T.S. 4-digit categories in

three food subsectors: (1) fresh fruits

and vegetables; (2) processed foods; and

(3) beverages. The initiative proposes a

reduction in tariff and other non-tariff

measures from 1999 to 2004 to bring

applied tariffs to 5% or less by 2004

with the aim of eliminating all tariffs in

these subsectors by 1010/2020. An

annex contains some additional H.T.S.

categories of food products for possible

future consideration.

Oilseeds and Oilseed Products.

During the Uruguay Round, the United

States proposed a ‘‘level playing field’’

initiative on oilseeds and oilseed

products. The APEC proposal, which is

jointly sponsored by the United States,

Canada and Malaysia, exactly tracks this

Uruguay Round initiative. The proposal

covers basic oilseeds in H.S. 1201,

1203–1207 (e.g., soybeans, rapeseed,

sunflowerseed, cottonseed), meals and

vegetable oils derived from those

rapeseed oil, safflower oil) and soy

protein concentrates and isolates. There

would be no exceptions on product

coverage. The proposal calls for

elimination of tariffs, non-tariff

measures, export subsidies and other

trade-distorting policies on all products

by 2002, allowing for limited flexibility

for extended staging on a product-byproduct, economy-by-economy basis

that would be agreed to by consensus of

participants.

Rubber. The proposal would establish

details for gradual reductions and/or
27116 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 94 / Friday, May 15, 1998 / Notices

elimination of tariff and non-tariff

measures. It would also call for

economic and technical cooperation to

cooperate in the development of

domestic industries in rubber-producing

economies through the transfer of

production and manufacturing

technology in order to reduce the risk of

price fluctuations.

Civil Aircraft. All tariffs would be

eliminated in two equal cuts on January

1, 1999 and January 1, 2000 and bound

in WTO Schedules at zero.

Commitments by non-WTO members

could be made on an autonomous basis

until WTO accession is complete. There

would also be commitments by APEC

economies to eliminate all customs

duties and other charges of any kind

levied on civil aircraft and related

products and services (e.g.,

manufacture, repair, maintenance, etc.).

Fertilizer. This is a proposal to

eliminate tariffs by 2002 and bind them

in the WTO. It would also call for, by

January 1, 2000, collective

implementation of national

transportation regulations governing the

shipment of sulfur and fertilizers in

accordance with the International

Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, and

encourage the development of technical

assistance projects that would facilitate

trade liberalization in this sector.

[FR Doc. 98–12908 Filed 5–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–98–3811]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1990–

1993 Bentley Continental R Passenger

Cars Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1990–1993

Bentley Continental R passenger cars are

eligible for importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt

by the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) of a petition

for a decision that 1990–1993 Bentley

Continental R passenger cars that were

not originally manufactured to comply

with all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards are eligible for

importation into the United States

because (1) they are substantially

similar to vehicles that were originally

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States and that were

certified by their manufacturer as

complying with the safety standards,

and (2) they are capable of being readily

altered to conform to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments

on the petition is June 15, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket number and notice number,

and be submitted to: Docket

Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh St., SW, Washington, DC

20590. [Docket hours are from 10 am to

5 pm]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle

Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–

5306).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a

motor vehicle that was not originally

manufactured to conform to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards shall be refused admission

into the United States unless NHTSA

has decided that the motor vehicle is

substantially similar to a motor vehicle

originally manufactured for importation

into and sale in the United States,

certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of

the same model year as the model of the

motor vehicle to be compared, and is

capable of being readily altered to

conform to all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

Petitions for eligibility decisions may

be submitted by either manufacturers or

importers who have registered with

NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR Part 592. As

specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA

publishes notice in the Federal Register

of each petition that it receives, and

affords interested persons an

opportunity to comment on the petition.

At the close of the comment period,

NHTSA decides, on the basis of the

petition and any comments that it has

received, whether the vehicle is eligible

for importation. The agency then

publishes this decision in the Federal

Register.

Champagne Imports of Lansdale,

Pennsylvania (‘‘Champagne’’)

(Registered Importer 90–009) has

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1990–1993 Bentley Continental R

passenger cars are eligible for

importation into the United States. The

vehicles which Champagne believes are

substantially similar are 1990–1993

Bentley Continental R passenger cars

that were manufactured for importation

into, and sale in, the United States and

certified by their manufacturer as

conforming to all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared non-U.S. certified 1990–1993

Bentley Continental R passenger cars to

their U.S. certified counterparts, and

found the vehicles to be substantially

similar with respect to compliance with

most Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

Champagne submitted information

with its petition intended to

demonstrate that non-U.S. certified

1990–1993 Bentley Continental R

passenger cars, as originally

manufactured, conform to many Federal

motor vehicle safety standards in the

same manner as their U.S. certified

counterparts, or are capable of being

readily altered to conform to those

standards.

Specifically, the petitioner claims that

non-U.S. certified 1990–1993 Bentley

Continental R passenger cars are

identical to their U.S. certified

counterparts with respect to compliance

with Standards Nos. 102 Transmission

Shift Lever Sequence . . . ., 103

Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104

Windshield Wiping and Washing

Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake Systems,

106 Brake Hoses, 109 New Pneumatic

Tires, 113 Hood Latch Systems, 116

Brake Fluid, 124 Accelerator Control

Systems, 201 Occupant Protection in

Interior Impact, 202 Head Restraints,

204 Steering Control Rearward

Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials,

206 Door Locks and Door Retention

Components, 207 Seating Systems, 209

Seat Belt Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt

Assembly Anchorages, 212 Windshield

Retention, 216 Roof Crush Resistance,

219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, and 302

Flammability of Interior Materials.

Petitioner also contends that the

vehicles are capable of being readily

altered to meet the following standards,

in the manner indicated:

Standard No. 101 Controls and

Displays: (a) substitution of a lens

marked ‘‘Brake’’ for a lens with a

noncomplying symbol on the brake

failure indicator lamp; (b) installation of

a seat belt warning lamp that displays

the appropriate symbol; (c) recalibration

of the speedometer/odometer from

kilometers to miles per hour.

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment: (a)

installation of U.S.-model headlamp

assemblies that incorporate headlamps

with DOT markings; (b) installation of

U.S.-model front and rear sidemarker/

reflector assemblies; (c) installation of

U.S.-model taillamp assemblies.

Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and

Rims: installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirror:

replacement of the passenger side