Manufactured Home Tires, Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; and Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards

[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 18, 1998)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Pages 8330-8340]

From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[FR Doc No: 98-4038]

[[Page 8329]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI

Department of Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

Federal Highway Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

49 CFR Part 393

_______________________________________________________________________

Department of Housing and Urban Development

_______________________________________________________________________

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing

Commissioner

_______________________________________________________________________

24 CFR Part 3280

Manufactured Home Tires, Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe

Operation, and Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards;

Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 1998 /

Rules and Regulations

[[Page 8330]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR Part 393

[FHWA Docket No. MC-95-1; FHWA-97-2341]

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing

Commissioner

24 CFR Part 3280

[Docket No. FR-3943-F-02]

FHWA RIN 2125-AD41; HUD RIN 2502-AG54

Manufactured Home Tires, Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe

Operation; and Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards

AGENCIES: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT; Office of the

Assistant Secretary for Housing, Federal Housing Commissioner,

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

ACTION: Final rule and HUD interpretative bulletin.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FHWA and HUD are amending the Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Regulations and an interpretation of the Manufactured Home Construction

and Safety Standards concerning the transportation of manufactured

homes. The FHWA and HUD are reducing the amount of tire overloading

allowed (currently up to 50 percent above the tire manufacturer's load

rating) on tires used to transport manufactured homes. As a result of

this rulemaking the amount of the load on a manufactured home tire will

be reduced so that it cannot exceed the tire manufacturer's load rating

by more than 18 percent. Manufactured homes transported on tires

overloaded by 9 percent or more may not be operated at speeds exceeding

80 km/hr (50 mph). Eighteen-percent tire overloading will be allowed

for a two-year period. The two-year period will begin on November 16,

1998, effective date of this final rule. Because the agencies have

sufficient data indicating that overloading is potentially unsafe,

unless both agencies are persuaded that 18 percent overloading does not

pose a risk to the traveling public, or have an adverse impact on

safety or the ability of motor carriers to transport manufactured

homes, any overloading of tires beyond their design capacity will be

prohibited at the end of this two-year period.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date for this rule is November 16, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For FHWA: Mr. Larry W. Minor, Office

of Motor Carrier Research and Standards, HCS-10, (202) 366-4009; or Mr.

Charles E. Medalen, Office of the Chief Counsel, HCC-20, (202) 366-

1354, Federal Highway Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.,

(eastern time), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For HUD: Mr. David R. Williamson, Director, Office of Consumer and

Regulatory Affairs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451

Seventh Street, SW., Room 9158, Washington, DC 20410-8000. Telephones:

(voice) (202) 708-6401; (TTY) (202) 708-4594. Alternately, Mr. Richard

A. Mendlen, Office of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Manufactured

Housing and Standards Division, Department of Housing and Urban

Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 9152, Washington, DC 20410-

8000. Telephones: (voice) (202) 708-6423; (TTY) (202) 708-4594.

The phone numbers provided for further information are not toll-

free numbers.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On March 4, 1995, the President directed all agencies to remove

obsolete and unnecessary regulations, and to revise and improve the

remaining regulations. As part of HUD's and FHWA's review of their

respective regulations, each agency identified its regulations

applicable to the transportation of manufactured homes as inconsistent

with one another. In accordance with the President's directive to

improve regulations and the principles of Executive Order 12866 (which

directs agencies to avoid regulations that are inconsistent with

regulations of other agencies), HUD and the FHWA published a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to eliminate inconsistencies between their

regulations concerning the transportation of manufactured homes (61 FR

18014; April 23, 1996).

A. HUD Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards

The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards

Act of 1974 (Act), 42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq., authorizes the Secretary of

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to establish and amend the Federal

Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (the FMHCSS or the

Standards), 24 CFR Part 3280. Subpart J of the Standards covers the

general requirements for designing the manufactured home to fully

withstand the adverse effects of transportation shock and vibration

without damaging the integrated structure or its components.

One of its components is the running gear assembly which is defined

in 24 CFR 3280.902 to include the subsystem consisting of suspension

springs, axles, bearings, wheels, hubs, tires, and brakes, with their

related hardware. On December 7, 1976 (41 FR 53626), the Department of

Housing and Urban Development issued Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76

which permits the overloading of manufactured home tires by up to 50

percent.

B. FHWA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

The FHWA's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) are

based on a series of statutes starting with the Motor Carrier Act of

1935 and are codified at Subchapter B of Chapter III, Title 49 of the

Code of Federal Regulations. The FMCSRs provide requirements for the

operation of commercial motor vehicles in interstate commerce. The

FMCSRs define a commercial motor vehicle, in part, as any self-

propelled or towed vehicle used on public highways in interstate

commerce to transport passengers or property when the vehicle has a

gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating of 4,536

or more kilograms (10,001 or more pounds) (49 CFR 390.5). Under this

definition, a manufactured home transported in interstate commerce is

considered a commercial motor vehicle and is subject to the FMCSRs.

Section 393.75(f) of the FMCSRs prohibits the operation of

commercial motor vehicles on tires that carry a weight greater than

that specified in publications of certain standard-setting

organizations listed by the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration in 49 CFR 571.119 (S5.1(b)) unless:

(1) The vehicle is being operated under the terms of a special

permit issued by the State, and

(2) The vehicle is being operated at a reduced speed that is

appropriate to compensate for tire loading in excess of the

manufacturer's normal rated capacity.

Under the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP), the FHWA

provides financial assistance to States to enforce the FMCSRs or

compatible State regulations pertaining to commercial motor vehicle

safety (see 49 CFR part 350). State enforcement

[[Page 8331]]

officials have expressed concerns about the safety of certain practices

of carriers transporting manufactured homes. Their principal concern is

the movement of manufactured homes on overloaded tires. In certain

cases, vehicles with tires loaded 50 percent above their load ratings

are operated at highway speeds. These practices are inconsistent with

the FMCSRs.

II. Publication of the Proposed Rule

On April 23, 1996, the FHWA and HUD jointly published a notice of

proposed rulemaking to amend Sec. 393.75(f) and HUD's interpretative

bulletin concerning tire overloading (61 FR 18014). Because the

agencies have sufficient data indicating that overloading is

potentially unsafe, the agencies proposed limiting the overloading of

manufactured home tires to 18 percent now and phasing out the

overloading of manufactured home tires up to 18 percent within two

years. It was proposed that during the two-year period, both agencies

would review test and other technical data concerning the relative

performance of tires which are overloaded by 18 percent versus no tire

overloading. Any overloading of tires beyond their design capacity

would be prohibited after two years from the effective date of the

final rule unless both agencies are persuaded that 18 percent

overloading at a reduced speed of 80 kilometers per hour (km/hour) (50

miles per hour (mph)) does not pose a risk to the traveling public or

have an adverse impact on the safety or the ability of motor carriers

to transport manufactured homes.

III. Analysis of Comments Received

The FHWA and HUD received 14 comments from a variety of

organizations and individuals. The commenters were: Advocates for

Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates); the Alabama Public Service

Commission (Alabama PSC); Association for Regulatory Reform (ARR);

Dilo, Inc.; Mr. Kevin Edens, a port-of-entry officer with the Colorado

Department of Revenue; Mr. Robert S. Evans, a truck driver; The

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear); Home Builders Company, Titan

Homes Division (Titan Homes); Jim Tim, Inc.; the Manufactured Housing

Institute (MHI); the New York Department of Transportation (New York

DOT); the North Carolina Manufactured Housing Institute (the North

Carolina MHI); Utah Department of Transportation (Utah DOT); and, the

Wisconsin Department of Transportation (Wisconsin DOT).

Eight commenters either supported the proposal as published,

supported the proposal with certain suggested changes, or offered

general comments about common industry practices for transporting

manufactured housing units. The remaining commenters opposed the

rulemaking. The issues raised by the commenters have been organized

into two general categories: comments in support of the proposed

changes; and, comments in opposition to the proposed changes.

A. Comments in Support of the Proposed Changes

The Alabama PSC, Dilo, Inc., Goodyear, Jim Tim, Inc., the MHI, New

York DOT, North Carolina MHI, and Utah DOT supported the proposal to

reduce the amount of tire overloading. Some of these commenters also

suggested certain changes to the proposal. The suggested changes to the

language to be used in the interpretative bulletin and 49 CFR 393.75

are discussed in a separate section in this notice.

The Alabama PSC stated that ``the safety of mobile home

transportation is poor and is getting worse.'' The Alabama PSC believes

regulations on mobile home transportation are necessary, and are in

need of revisions and improvements. The Alabama PSC supports the

reduction in the amount of overloading and ``the expansion of this

proceeding to include improvements in brake performance and enforcement

of standards on used tire conditions.'' The Alabama PSC stated:

Mobile home transportation is now a common experience, but the

safety of these movements is worsening. Improvements in the regulations

to stop excessive overloading of tires, to improve braking performance,

and to improve enforcement are even more critical with the recent

increase of the speed of the vehicles sharing the road with mobile

homes.

The Utah DOT stated:

We have long felt that the allowance for overloading of mobile/

manufactured home tires by 50% and up to 3,000 pounds was unsafe and

unwise. Our agents, at eight fixed facilities throughout the state have

diligently enforced the requirement, but have for years expressed

safety and operability concerns about the too liberal tire, axle and

braking system requirements for these behemoth loads. We do see a large

number of roadside tire changing which impede traffic flow and create

safety hazards and we wonder why more accidents and incidents have not

resulted.

The Utah DOT believes that allowing 18 percent overloading for a

two-year period is a good compromise and that the plan to study the

issue is reasonable.

The MHI, North Carolina MHI, and Jim Tim, Inc. were among industry

supporters of the proposed standards. The MHI stated that ``[i]t is the

consensus of MHI members that the proposed regulatory revisions should

be implemented, with key revisions recommended * * *.'' The MHI also

discussed its willingness to work with the FHWA and HUD during the two-

year period during which 18 percent overloading would be allowed. The

MHI stated:

Regarding the number of reported tire failures, discussed on page

18018 [61 FR 18018], industry believes that less than 25 percent of

reported tire failures can be attributed to tire overloading.

Therefore, during the two-year trial period for the 18-percent overload

rule, industry intends to gather data on the causes of tire failures,

to be shared with HUD and FHWA. Industry intends to provide test and

other technical data, in response to the request for information on

page 18021 [61 FR 18021], regarding the absence of information on this

subject. In this regard, MHI will explore with HUD officials the

possibility of conducting joint transportation studies under the

current partnership agreement for Action Item No. 25 of the National

Homeownership Strategy. Part of such studies should be the

establishment of a protocol to measure the level of safety on the

highways.

The MHI expressed concerns about the automatic expiration of the

two-year period for 18 percent tire overloading. The MHI stated:

It is generally conceded that current data pertinent to the

performance of manufactured home tires under varying conditions is

limited, outdated, and subject to a broad range of variables

insufficiently documented in a controlled environment. For this reason,

the industry supports the proposed two-year trial period, but the

industry further asserts that upon the submission of any tests and

other technical data by the industry and tire manufacturers during this

term, the term should be automatically extended beyond the two-year

expiration date now proposed while the agencies are reviewing them. In

other words, the industry submits that the proposed rule allowing for

the overloading of tires should not automatically expire at the end of

two years, provided tests and other technical data has been submitted

during such term for review by both agencies.

The North Carolina MHI stated:

We believe that these new regulations will mean that homes will be

moving slower, with reduced stress on larger,

[[Page 8332]]

stronger tires. Consequently, we believe that these new regulations

will mean safer highway driving conditions for other motorists, and

ensure more reliable delivery of our products to customers. That's a

win, win for everyone involved.

Jim Tim, Inc., a transporter of manufactured housing units,

believes that the proposed standards will ``create a safer situation,

due to the fact that this will make it mandatory for the factories to

increase the number of axles they install on a manufactured home.''

B. FHWA and HUD Response to Commenters Supporting the Rulemaking

In response to comments requesting that the FHWA and HUD expand the

scope of the rulemaking to address issues such as axle and braking

requirements, the agencies will work together to determine whether

there is a need for a rulemaking(s) on these issues.

Currently Subpart J of the Manufactured Home Construction and

Safety Standards requires that the braking systems on the manufactured

home and the towing vehicle must be capable of stopping the home

traveling at 32.2 km/hour (20 mph) in a distance of 12.2 meters (40

feet). The number of braking axles necessary to meet this performance

standard must be documented by engineering analysis, transportation

tests, or by acceptable documented transportation experience.

The HUD-approved Design Approval Primary Inspection Agencies

(DAPIAs) make the final determination of the adequacy of the

manufacturer's compliance with these sections of the HUD standards.

After discussion with the DAPIAs and other interested parties, HUD will

assess if further changes are needed to address the percentage of axles

that must be equipped with brakes.

With regard to the MHI's request that the agencies allow 18 percent

overloading of tires to continue beyond the proposed two-year period,

the FHWA and HUD believe the proposed automatic expiration date is

appropriate. The automatic expiration date will impose upon the

regulated industry and both Federal agencies a deadline that will force

all parties to move quickly toward the collection and analysis of

relevant data. The FHWA and HUD will work closely with the MHI and, if

warranted by technical data submitted well in advance of the expiration

date, consider publishing in the Federal Register a notice proposing

the extension of the current expiration date.

C. Comments in Opposition to the Proposed Changes

The Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates), Association

for Regulatory Reform (ARR), Kevin Edens, Robert Evans, Titan Homes,

and Wisconsin DOT opposed the proposed changes to the FMCSRs and the

interpretative bulletin. The opposition was divided among those who

supported the continuation of 50 percent tire overloading and those who

advocated no tire overloading.

Advocates expressed concern that the FHWA and HUD do not have

sufficient data to support allowing 18 percent overloading of the

tires. The AHAS stated:

Although Advocates recognizes that the goals of this rulemaking are

well-intentioned, the amendments as proposed fail to meet minimum

informal rulemaking burdens pursuant to the Administrative Procedure

Act and prevailing case law. Neither the FHWA nor HUD has marshalled

adequate evidence in the rulemaking record to justify the proposed

amendments and, further, they have argued a two-year trial period for

the use of overloaded manufactured home tires that unwarrantedly

experiments with the safety of the travelling public.

The agencies have not carried their burdens of supplying an

administrative record which properly ventilates the prime issue behind

their joint action, viz., whether overinflated tires on manufactured

homes present an unacceptable accident risk, whether in the past they

have resulted in untoward frequencies and numbers of crashes, and

whether both the operators of commercial vehicles transporting

manufactured homes as well as other members of the travelling public,

have been injured or killed by unacceptable industry practices.

[T]he FHWA/HUD proposal of an 18 percent overload ceiling is also

not supported by any data or information on what the expected rate of

failures may be despite the fact that this level of overloading is

lower than many of the excessive levels prevalent in the manufactured

home industry. Given the advent of increasingly higher speed limits

posted on both Interstate and other state arterial and collector

highways, it is evident that the agencies really have no capability of

accurately predicting the failure rates and the associated increased

probability of accidents of an 18 percent overload ceiling. Indeed

nothing in the preamble of this proposed rule nor in the docket file in

the offices of the FHWA indicate why the FHWA and HUD have selected 18

percent as a tolerable overloading level or, in fact, why any

overloading is acceptable. This need to justify why an 18 percent

figure was arrived at is especially acute given the assertion of the

preamble that because of concerns about the safety of the travelling

public on increasingly crowded highways, HUD has concluded that the

current overloading of manufactured home tires is no long[er]

defensible. Id. 18020 [61 FR 18020]. Yet, the preoccupation of the

agencies is not with the projected failure rates and consequent

accident risks of an 18 percent tire overload threshold, but with the

cost burdens to the industry that result from changing tire types and

axles in order to avoid the acute problem of excessive overloading,

sometimes 50 to 60 percent.

The ARR also expressed concerns that the FHWA and HUD do not have

sufficient data to support the proposed revisions to the FMCSRs and the

interpretative bulletin. However, the ARR opposed lowering the present

50-percent limit on tire overloading.

The ARR expressed concern about the economic impacts that the

rulemaking would have on consumers and small businesses. The ARR

stated:

ARR's members are primarily small to medium-sized manufacturers.

Due to their smaller size and correspondingly lower levels of

capitalization, such businesses are disproportionately affected by

excessive and/or inappropriate regulation and related compliance costs.

Indeed, in a federally-regulated industry such as manufactured housing,

the financial health of producers and other industry participants is

directly dependent upon sensible, practical and cost-effective

administrative standards.

Cost-effective regulation is also important for consumers. Although

manufactured housing now accounts for more than 30% of all new single-

family home starts, and the industry generates some $23 billion in

economic activity annually, manufactured home-buyers tend to be either

lower or middle-income families or persons living on a fixed income.

For such purchasers, the difference of only a few dollars in the final

sale price of a home (especially when compounded by higher taxes and

higher fees) could spell the difference between obtaining a mortgage

and not qualifying for financing. Accordingly, it is particularly

important, in the case of manufactured homes, for proposed rules to be

both objectively justifiable, in terms of their substance, and cost-

justifiable, in the sense that the rule returns more in benefits than

it costs, and does not unduly burden manufactured home purchasers.

[[Page 8333]]

[T]he rule change contemplated by the Joint Docket does not appear

to be justified by the minimal available data regarding the failures.

Moreover, the proposed change is substantive, rather than

interpretative, and would, in effect, convert the relevant portion of

the HUD Code from a performance standard to a prescriptive standard. In

addition, there is no concrete evidence to support the change sought by

the issuing agencies, and inadequate consideration has been given by

HUD to the cost impact of the rule upon manufactured home purchasers--

particularly when combined with the effects of other recent changes to

the standards.

Titan Homes opposed the rulemaking because it believes ``there is

no objective, empirical reason to make a change.'' Titan Homes stated:

The 50% rule has been in effect since 1976 and has worked to reduce

costs while not compromising the safety of the toter [towing unit] with

the manufactured home, or the other vehicles they interface on the

road. It has been my experience that the transporters of manufactured

housing have an exemplary safety record when compared with other types

of transporters and/or four wheeled vehicles. Your [FHWA and HUD's] own

statistics should verify these facts quite easily.

The Wisconsin DOT also opposed the proposed changes to the FMCSRs

and the interpretative bulletin. The Wisconsin DOT stated:

Although it is a two year study the major concern remains the safe

operation of the manufactured homes. Every effort should be made to use

tires whose manufactured weight rating is not exceeded. Although the

proposed weight limit increase does not seem to be large (18%), when

operated at reduced speeds, there is really no justification other than

the cost factor per unit.

Wisconsin oversize permits do not require reduced speeds to

transport manufactured homes; therefore, there is no real way to assure

operation at a reduced speed as proposed. Recent changes to federal and

state laws have increased speed limits; therefore creating the

possibility of these units being operated at higher speeds rather than

the lower speed, putting more stress on the tires.

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation has some real safety

concerns about the operation of these units on tires that are rated at

less than the weight of the unit.

D. FHWA and HUD Response to Commenters Opposed to the Rulemaking

In response to concerns expressed by AHAS and ARR regarding a lack

of data to support this rulemaking, the FHWA and HUD emphasize that

this more stringent standard, reducing the amount of permissible

overloading from 50 percent to 18 percent and establishing a speed

restriction of 80 km/hour (50 mph) when the tires are overloaded, was

developed based on technical data reviewed by the FHWA and HUD and

information provided by commenters which suggest that most tire

failures attributable, in whole or in part, to tire overloading are

associated with overloading in excess of 18 percent. Consequently, the

FHWA and HUD have concluded that tire failures attributed to

overloading will be substantially reduced when transporters of

manufactured homes are required to comply with the new restrictions.

As part of the effort to gather data on the number of reported

failures of new and used tires during the transportation of

manufactured homes, HUD obtained information from three companies which

transport large numbers of manufactured homes. The three companies

collectively transport more than 30 percent of the manufactured homes

produced in the United States and in the case of the largest

transporter, nearly 50,000 manufactured homes per year.

The three companies differed in the reported overall rate of tire

failure for shipment of manufactured homes. The failure rate for new

tires ranged from 4 percent to 7 percent. The used tire failure rate

was 9 percent. According to the MHI, roughly 55 percent of the tires

sold to manufactured housing producers in 1994 were used tires.

Since the data from one company represented a large share of the

market and transportation experience in a large number of States, HUD

believes that the company's failure rate of 7 percent is the most

representative of actual conditions. Therefore, the FHWA and HUD used a

failure rate of 7 percent for new tires and 9 percent for used tires

with an overall average failure rate of 8 percent in the notice of

proposed rulemaking. Since each section of a manufactured home usually

contains 6 tires, a tire will fail on about 40 percent of the sections

shipped each year. Multiple failures of tires are less common but are

known to occur.

There was also substantial variability among these three companies

concerning the causes of tire failure. One company indicated that

foreign objects were the cause of 99 percent of tire failures, while

the other companies indicated that substandard tires and tire

overloading were the chief causes of tire failure. The other companies

also noted that operating at excessive speed and other causes were less

significant factors in tire failure.

There are no separate data as to the rate of failure due to tire

overloading in relation to other factors, such as substandard tires,

improper inflation, excessive heat, etc. The risk of tire failure due

to overloading can be increased by operating the tire at reduced

inflation, the heat of the pavement, high speeds, mounting procedures

and other practices which, if combined, may virtually assure tire

failure. Hence, determining the percentage of failures attributable

solely to tire overloading is difficult.

Data from one tire recycler, however, indicated that up to 70

percent of tires which are damaged can be recycled and reused after

repair. This would suggest that foreign objects may have been the

principal cause of tire failure rather than blow-outs due to

overloading or other causes. The damage associated with blow-outs or

causes other than foreign objects is generally too extensive to be

repaired.

Based on the available information, the FHWA and HUD estimate that

25 percent of reported failures can be attributed partly to tire

overloading. The FHWA and HUD reduced this estimate by half to account

for failures due in part to aggravating factors, such as improper

inflation or mounting. At the time the NPRM was published, the agencies

assumed that 450,000 sections of manufactured homes would be shipped in

1996 and that the tire overloading would be responsible for at least

22,500 blowouts (450,000 shipments x 0.40 (factor for shipments with

at least one tire failure) x 0.125 (percentage attributable to tire

overloading)). The FHWA and HUD have increased the estimate of the

number of manufactured home shipments to 500,000 per year. As a result,

tire overloading is now believed to be responsible for at least 25,000

blow-outs.

The estimate of 500,000 shipments was derived by assuming an annual

estimate of 340,000 manufactured homes produced, with a 53 percent

distribution, or 180,200 shipments, of single sections and a 47 percent

distribution, or 319,600 shipments, of multiple sections. The total

number of shipments calculated in this manner is 499,800, or about

500,000. The actual 1997 projections are expected to be somewhat

higher.

[[Page 8334]]

The conflicting claims from State governments and manufacturers

concerning the incidence of tire failure varied from a conclusion that

it is a relatively uncommon occurrence (1-2 percent of trips) to an

estimate by one State official that many transporters are suffering

tire failures on most trips. None of the State agencies contacted while

the FHWA and HUD were developing the NPRM, and none of the commenters

responding to the NPRM, provided information indicating that tire

failures during the transportation of manufactured homes have resulted

in collisions between the transported unit and other vehicles, or

collisions between the manufactured housing unit and fixed objects.

However, the FHWA and HUD believe that the current level of tire

failures must be substantially reduced to prevent potential accidents.

With regard to Advocates' uncertainty about how the FHWA and HUD

selected the 18-percent overloading limit, this decision making process

was explained in the April 23, 1996, NPRM. Pages 18018 through 18020

discuss the regulatory options that the FHWA and HUD considered.

The FHWA and HUD examined the cost-effectiveness of four

alternatives in the NPRM that would substantially alleviate or

eliminate the problem of tire overloading. All of the alternatives used

the 3,000-pound-per-tire load limit in HUD's Interpretative Bulletin J-

1-76. The first two options involved limiting the amount of tire

overloading and would have the net effect of requiring the use of

specific upgraded tires corresponding to the amount of overloading. The

other options involved prohibiting tire overloading. Compliance with

the prohibition on overloading would have required the use of either

upgraded tires, or upgraded tires and an additional axle(s).

The first option involved limiting the amount of overloading to 18

percent which corresponds to the amount of overloading that would occur

if manufactured home transporters switched from 7-14.5, 8 ply tires

(Series D) to 8-14.5, 10 ply tires (Series E). The 8-14.5, 10 ply tires

have a load rating of 1,152 kg (2,540 pounds). The notice indicated

that this option would have resulted in an average wholesale cost

increase of approximately $60 per manufactured home.

The second option the agencies considered was to reduce the amount

of overloading to 8 percent which corresponds to the amount of

overloading if 8-14.5, 12 ply tires (Series F) are used. The 8-14.5, 12

ply tires have a load rating of 1,266 kg (2,790 pounds). This option

would have resulted in an average wholesale cost increase of $84 per

manufactured home transported.

The third option was the elimination of tire overloading.

Manufacturers could accomplish this by adding an axle and using 8-14.5,

10 ply tires (Series E). The average wholesale cost increase for this

option would have been $287 per manufactured home transported.

The fourth option was to eliminate overloading through the use of

9-14.5, 12 ply tires (Series E or F). These tires have a load rating of

1,334 kg and 1,465 kg (2,940 pounds and 3,230 pounds), respectively.

The average wholesale cost increase for this option was estimated to be

$265 per manufactured home transported.

The FHWA and HUD proposed using the first option because, based

upon the available information, it appeared to be the most cost

effective way to substantially reduce the number of tire failures.

After reviewing the public comments received in response to the NPRM,

the FHWA and HUD have concluded that the first option continues to

represent the most cost effective approach.

The FHWA and HUD disagree with Advocates' assertion that the

agencies have not fulfilled the requirements of the Administrative

Procedure Act. The agencies have reviewed information and data

currently available and comments from all interested parties. Because

FHWA and HUD have sufficient data indicating that overloading is

potentially unsafe, they are reducing the amount of tire overloading

allowed to 18 percent and phasing out overloading up to 18 percent

within two years unless both agencies are persuaded that the 18 percent

overloading is safe. The information contained in the rulemaking docket

supports the actions taken by the agencies. The interim 18-percent tire

overloading established through this process represents a reasonable

compromise among the possible alternatives. Furthermore, the period

during which 18 percent overloading will be permitted is limited to 2

years. Unless both agencies are persuaded that 18 percent overloading

does not pose a risk to the traveling public or adversely impact the

safe transportation of manufactured homes, overloading of tires would

be prohibited.

In response to the ARR's comments about the economic impact of this

rulemaking, HUD obtained its cost information directly from tire

suppliers and from the MHI Transportation Task Force which includes

transporters, manufacturers, and tire suppliers. The cost information

obtained from all sources was very similar and the FHWA and HUD believe

the cost information is reasonably accurate.

The number of additional tires and/or axles required to satisfy

this rule is a function of the size and weight of the home. Because of

this, manufacturers will have differing cost impacts. Also, some

manufacturers may already be using additional axles or upgraded tires,

so the cost impact may be negligible.

In order to obtain current information and to fully evaluate the

economic impact of this rule, HUD has examined a number of current

manufactured housing designs. The financial impact of the final rule

has been determined to be approximately $17 million per year. This

amounts to $50 for each of the approximately 340,000 manufactured homes

shipped each year. The FHWA and HUD do not consider this cost to be

unreasonable or to adversely affect low and moderate-income consumers'

ability to purchase manufactured homes.

The MHI provided HUD and the FHWA with a copy of a report on the

life-cycle costs and benefits of various manufactured home

transportation systems. The report included an analysis of the benefits

and costs of upgrading the tires used in the transportation of

manufactured homes. A copy of the report, ``Manufactured Home

Transportation Systems Research,'' prepared by the Trucking Research

Institute under contract to the MHI, is included in the docket. The

report indicates that $3,207,634 in ``accident costs'' per year could

be saved by upgrading tires. The authors believe that tire failure

costs (e.g., repairing the flat tire and repairing other components

damaged as a result of the flat tire) would be reduced by $21,447,115

per year. Complications experienced by site installers would be reduced

and result in an additional savings of $2,866,500 per year. The total

benefits of upgrading tires were estimated to be $27,521,249.

The FHWA and HUD consider the estimates in the MHI's report to be

reasonable. The information was gathered from producers of manufactured

homes, transporters, axle manufacturers, axle and tire recyclers,

manufactured home retailers and site installers. The MHI estimates that

the rulemaking will save the industry and consumers more than $2.5

million per year while improving highway safety. A more detailed

discussion of the economic impact of this rulemaking is provided in

section VI of this document.

In response to the ARR's argument that the changes to

Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76 would convert the relevant portion of

HUD's regulations

[[Page 8335]]

from a performance-based standard to a prescriptive requirement, both

agencies disagree. The new requirements are performance-based in that

transporters of manufactured homes may use any type of manufactured

home tire as long as the amount of overloading does not exceed 18

percent. If the tires are loaded in excess of the manufacturers' load

ratings by 9 percent or more, the speed at which the manufactured home

may be transported is limited to 80 km/hour (50 mph). The FHWA and HUD

have established safety performance criteria and left to the discretion

of the manufacturers and transporters of manufactured homes the choice

of tire types and sizes, and the number of axles needed to meet the

performance criteria.

IV. Discussion of Additional Issues Raised by Commenters

A. Speed Restriction

The New York DOT expressed concerns about the proposed speed

restrictions for manufactured homes transported on tires overloaded by

9 percent or more of the load rating. The New York DOT stated:

Enforcement of a speed restriction on any vehicle with overloaded

tires would be difficult. Most law enforcement agencies have dedicated

staff for weight enforcement. This staff is a minor part of agency

manpower and is usually not involved in speed enforcement. The standard

officer on road patrol would not stop a manufactured home if it was

within the speed limit. If a manufactured home did reduce its speed to

less than 50 MPH, it would create a speed differential hazard,

especially on interstate highways. It is the speed differential, not

just the pure speed, which creates unsafe conditions.

Given the two above observations about speeds, please consider

them. That is, speed restrictions that are just set to be cautious may

be counter productive. Speed restrictions should be made only where

there is good data indicating real safety benefits outweighing their

costs.

The FHWA and HUD have concluded that the 80 km/hour (50 mph) speed

restriction proposed for 49 CFR 393.75 is necessary for cases in which

the amount of overloading is 9 percent or more of the load rating for

the tire. The FHWA and HUD have reviewed the Tire and Rim Association,

Inc., Year Book, an authoritative source concerning tire loading. The

Year Book indicates that the speed at which a tire is operated should

not exceed 80 km/hour (50 mph) for tires overloaded by up to 9 percent.

The Tire and Rim Year Book does not encourage the overloading of

tires but the recommended limitation of the speed to 80 km/hour (50

mph) suggests that the operation of the manufactured home at the

reduced speed will improve the safety of operation of manufactured

homes transported on overloaded tires. Based upon the agencies'

experience with the transportation of manufactured homes, the FHWA and

HUD have concluded that the 80 km/hour (50 mph) speed restriction is

necessary.

The FHWA and HUD are aware that many States have increased the

speed limits on their highways and that traffic may move at speeds up

to 120 km/hour (75 mph). Transporters of manufactured homes that

operate on such high-speed routes are strongly encouraged to select

tires and axles so that overloading is not necessary. The speed

restriction does not apply to the movement of all manufactured homes,

only those that are operated on tires overloaded by 9 percent or more.

B. Availability of 8-14.5 Tires

Only one tire manufacturer provided comments in response to the

NPRM. Goodyear stated:

The NPRM notes a 1994 letter from Goodyear to the Florida

Manufactured Housing Association which stated that for an expected

demand at that time of 2.4 million tires, Goodyear could only supply 20

% of that demand in the 8-14.5MH LR-E size. That situation has changed.

There is or will be enough capacity in the industry to supply the 8-

14.5MH LR-E [tires] by the time this rulemaking is issued as a final

rule with an effective date set for nine months thereafter.

Based upon the information provided by Goodyear, the FHWA and HUD

believe the supply of tires necessary to comply with the requirements

of this rule is presently, or soon will be, sufficient to meet the

needs of manufactured home producers and transporters. The agencies do

not expect that motor carriers will have difficulty obtaining the 8-

14.5 MH tires or that cost for such tires will escalate as a result of

the increased demand. However, the agencies believe that the 9-month

delay in the effective date will minimize the short-term economic

impact on the affected parties.

V. Discussion of Implementation Schedule and Final Rule

After reviewing all of the comments received in response to the

NPRM, the FHWA and HUD have determined that limiting the overloading of

manufactured home tires to 18 percent is the most cost-effective

approach to substantially reduce the number of tire failures attributed

to tire overloading. Shipments of manufactured homes continue to

increase and both agencies will work together to ensure highway safety

and prevent disruptions of the delivery of manufactured homes, and

adverse economic impacts on consumers and producers of manufactured

homes.

A. Implementation Schedule

Based upon the public comments and other information, the FHWA and

HUD are following the proposed phase-in schedule which will result in

the final rule and interpretative bulletin taking effect 9 months after

publication in the Federal Register. The purpose of the 9-month period

is to minimize the possibility of tire shortages and cost distortions

due to the changeover to higher load rated tires.

For the purposes of HUD requirements, the revised interpretative

bulletin is applicable to manufactured homes which are labeled on or

after the effective date. HUD's authority to prescribe construction

standards is limited to the first sale of the manufactured home. HUD

does not have the authority to prescribe how homes previously built and

certified to the HUD standards should be retrofitted with tires and

axles if they are subsequently moved after the first sale of the unit.

Also, since there is no current mechanism for the purchaser to complete

an engineering analysis or other acceptable method of complying with

the law, the FHWA and HUD believe that this final rule should be

mandatory only for homes manufactured on or after the effective date of

the final rule.

For the purposes of the FHWA's regulations, the tires on any

manufactured home, new or used, transported in interstate commerce on

or after the effective date of this rule must meet the requirements of

49 CFR 393.75.

B. Revisions to the Wording of the Final Rule and Interpretative

Bulletin

In response to the public comments, the FHWA and HUD are using

information from the latest edition (1997) of the Tire and Rim

Association, Inc. Year Book--the tire load limits for manufactured

(mobile) homes have not been changed from the 1994 Year Book used in

developing the proposed rule. The Year Book also provides that the load

and cold inflation pressure on the wheels and rims should not exceed

the manufacturer's recommendation even if the tire has been approved

for a higher loading. The FHWA and HUD agree with this recommendation

and this requirement has been included in the

[[Page 8336]]

amended Interpretative Bulletin and in 49 CFR 393.75.

The FHWA and HUD note that the MHI recommended that the FHWA

include in its regulations a definition of the term ``special permit.''

However, the FHWA and HUD have concluded that there is no readily

apparent need to define the term. The term is not used with regard to

the transportation of manufactured homes, and is only used in relation

to allowing overloading of tires on commercial motor vehicles other

than manufactured housing units. In addition, the States are

responsible for issuing permits for oversize and overweight vehicles.

The States have the latitude to establish permitting and other

requirements appropriate for the traffic conditions present in their

State. If the meaning of the term special permit becomes a significant

issue in the future, the FHWA will consider proposing a definition at

that time.

Both the interpretative bulletin and 49 CFR 393.75 reference 49 CFR

571.119, paragraph S5.1(b), which lists the Tire and Rim Association,

Inc., Year Book along with several technical references recognized in

other countries. Given the production of tires in other countries,

FHWA/HUD have concluded that the final rule should be consistent with

this section.

Finally, the FHWA has revised the regulatory language that is to be

included in 49 CFR 393.75(g). Section 393.75(g) now includes a clause

indicating that the FHWA and HUD will review industry and other data

submitted concerning this matter.

C. Changes to Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76 of the Manufactured

Housing Standards

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's authority to

issue interpretative bulletins is provided by 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and

5424. HUD has determined that the following changes should be made to

Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76:

1. Section C--``Axles'' is deleted in its entirety.

2. Section D--``Tires, Wheels, and Rims'' is revised in its

entirety to reflect the preceding discussions in the preamble.

D. Amendments to the FMCSRs

The FHWA is amending 49 CFR 393.75 to make the FMCSRs consistent

with HUD's amendments to Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76. Section

393.75(f)(1)(i) and (ii) have been redesignated as Sec. 393.75(f)(1)

and (2), respectively. The redesignated paragraphs would address all

commercial motor vehicles with the exception of manufactured homes.

Section 393.75(f)(2) establishes a speed restriction of 80 km/hour (50

mph) on commercial motor vehicles operated on overloaded tires.

Section 393.75(g) allows 18 percent overloading of manufactured

home tires for a period of two years after the effective date of the

final rule. Manufactured homes operating on tires overloaded by 9

percent or more would be restricted to a maximum speed of 80 km/hr (50

mph).

Tire pressure and inflation requirements currently found at

Sec. 393.75(f)(2) and (3), are included in a new paragraph,

Sec. 393.75(h).

VI. Cost Analysis of Regulation

The Administration's policy in Executive Order 12866, Regulatory

Planning and Review, provides that ``Agencies should assess costs and

benefits, both quantifiable and non-quantifiable and choose the

approach with the maximum net benefits.'' As discussed in the NPRM

(pages 18018 through 18020, and repeated, in part, in Section III, D of

this document), the FHWA and HUD estimated the costs of various

alternatives, ranging from 18 percent overloading to no tire

overloading, and estimated the cost per manufactured home transported

for each of the alternatives.

A. Examination of the ``Cost Impact'' of Upgraded Tires and Axles

HUD has obtained updated cost information for the various types of

tires used on manufactured homes. The cost estimates assume that each

transportable section uses 6 tires; the cost information is shown in

Table A:

Table A

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wholesale Wholesale

cost of 8- cost of 7- Increase in Total

Type of tire 14.5 10 ply 14.5 8 ply wholesale incremental

(Series E) (Series D) cost cost per

section

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEW......................................................... $43 $35 $8 $48

USED........................................................ 30 26 4 24

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As shown in Table A, the cost for upgraded tires is relatively

modest. It results in an average wholesale cost increase of

approximately $50 per manufactured home shipped. The determination of

the average cost per home is based on the usage patterns of new versus

used tires (45 percent new, 55 percent used); the relative percentage

of single section (53 percent) and multi-section (47 percent) homes;

and the use of 6 tires per section; and is calculated as follows:

(0.45)[$8 x 6 x (.53)+2 x $8 x 6(.47)]+

(0.55)[$6 x 6 x (.53)+2 x $6 x 6 x (.47)]=$51.15 or about $50.

B. Examination of Manufacturer Approved Designs

Manufactured home designs have substantially changed in the last

several years due to consumer demand, changes in the HUD construction

standards and the evolution of manufactured housing. For manufacturers

already using additional axles or upgraded tires, the cost impact of

this final rule would be reduced.

The information gathered at the time of preparation of the proposed

rule did not reflect these new designs. Accordingly, HUD has undertaken

a technical review of manufacturer design packages to see the changes

in weight due to heavier exterior coverings, additional framing and

shear wall requirement, and other changes.

Based upon a review of design packages, HUD has estimated that

approximately 25 percent of all homes produced were affected by the

1994 standards changes and that the increase in weight for those homes

was estimated at 5 percent. Therefore, there will be some manufacturers

which have already upgraded their transportation systems through the

addition of axles, upgraded tires or both.

Also, in reviewing the design packages, HUD has determined that

many manufacturers design their axles for weights substantially greater

than the actual gross weight of the home. For example, a manufacturer

may be using

[[Page 8337]]

4 axles when an engineering analysis of the design indicates that only

3 axles are actually needed. Engineering review of several packages

indicated that the decrease in the permissible level of tire

overloading would not necessarily require an additional axle, since the

number of axles is already in excess of what is required to handle the

dead load.

Furthermore, the use of 8-14.5 Series E tires with a load rating of

2,540 lbs. could even reduce manufacturer costs as the upgraded load

capacity of the tires may reduce the number of axles needed. In several

cases, the reduction in the number of axles would more than offset the

differential cost for upgraded tires, thus reducing the manufacturer's

overall cost. Manufacturers have indicated that they expect that the

use of upgraded tires would reduce the number of blowouts and the

expenses and damage to the home that might result.

The financial impact of the final rule has been determined to be

approximately $17 million per year. This amounts to $50 for each of the

approximately 340,000 manufactured homes shipped each year.

C. Examination of the Costs of Service Calls and Tire Failure

The research report submitted by the MHI indicates that

transporters reported an average of one tire failure for every 2.038

sections moved from the home manufacturer to the retailer. Site

installers reported an average of one tire failure for every 11.182

sections moved from retailer to home site. Using these tire failure

rates, and HUD's revised estimate of 500,000 shipments per year, there

are approximately 245,338 tire failures per year for movements between

the manufacturer and the retailer and 44,714 tire failures per year for

movements between the retailer and the home site. The authors of the

report believe that the tire failure rate could be reduced by \2/3\

(193,174) if the 8-14.5 MH tires are used. This does not, however, mean

that there are 193,174 failures caused by tire overloading.

A cost of $123.36 per failure was calculated. The decrease in the

transporters' costs could be more than $23 million per year based upon

the estimates in the MHI's report. Preventing tire blowouts would also

reduce site installation problems associated with damage to the running

gear and chassis. The benefits for reducing site installation problems

are estimated by the MHI to be $2.8 million.

The MHI also estimates that using upgraded tires would result in a

reduction in damage claims (i.e., transportation shock and vibration

damage to the manufactured home structure caused by tire failures) and

traffic congestion caused when manufactured homes break down. Those

benefits are estimated to be approximately $4.3 million and $5.2

million, respectively.

In the FHWA and HUD's joint NPRM the agencies estimated (based upon

450,000 shipments per year) the number of tire failures caused by tire

overloading is at least 22,500. The agencies used a failure rate of 7

percent for new tires and 9 percent for used tires with an overall

average failure rate of 8 percent. The agencies estimated that a tire

will fail on about 40 percent of the sections shipped each year. Using

current figures on the number of manufactured home shipments, the FHWA

and HUD estimate that tire overloading causes approximately 25,000 tire

blowouts per year. This represents a conservative estimate.

In a number of cases, the tire failure is corrected by the

transporter and therefore, the associated costs are included in the per

mile cost or other charges assessed by the transporters. Where the

manufacturer has to send service personnel, the data obtained from

manufactured home service managers indicates that the average repair

cost is $180.

If 25 percent of the tire blowouts require road site service, the

costs to manufacturers would be approximately $1.1 million to 1.3

million per year. Therefore, the total estimated costs of tire failures

caused by overloading is more than $36 million per year and it is

likely that much of this cost, disruption of transportation and even

damage to the home can be abated through the use of upgraded tires.

Other potential benefits from the adoption of this final rule

include increased safety on the nation's highways and a decreased

likelihood of accidents, injuries, and property damage losses resulting

from tire failures. In addition, the FHWA and HUD expect benefits in

the form of reduced insurance costs, more on-time deliveries and

reduced likelihood of injuries that can occur because of changing blown

tires.

In summary, it is expected that there will be substantial cost

savings by reducing the number of tire failures through the use of

upgraded tires and axles. While there are some manufacturers that may

have to increase the number of axles, a review of manufactured home

designs indicates that existing number of axles in the approved designs

may be adequate, despite the reduction in tire overloading.

Other manufacturers may actually reduce their overall costs by

using upgraded tires in conjunction with fewer axles. Finally, this

reduction in tire overloading will increase highway safety, and the

final rule provides the maximum benefits at the least additional cost

of all of the alternatives included in the proposed rule.

VII. Rulemaking Analysis and Notices

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The FHWA and HUD have determined that this action is a significant

regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 because

it involves a significant amount of public interest. In addition, the

FHWA has determined that this action is significant within the meaning

of Department of Transportation regulatory policies and procedures.

This action has undergone a formal review by the Office of Management

and Budget. Any changes to the rule resulting from this review are

available for public inspection in the docket referenced at the

beginning of this document.

This rule establishes tire loading limitations for manufactured

homes transported in interstate commerce and eliminates the

inconsistency between the FHWA and HUD requirements for manufactured

homes. The FHWA and HUD have evaluated the economic impact of the

changes to the regulatory requirements concerning the safe

transportation of manufactured homes and determined that the standard

is reasonable, appropriate, and the least costly and intrusive approach

for the resolution of this issue (see section VII of this notice). The

financial impact of the final rule has been determined to be

approximately $17 million per year. This amounts to $50 for each of the

approximately 340,000 manufactured homes shipped each year. The total

economic benefits are estimated to be more than $36 million per year.

Therefore, the FHWA and HUD estimate that the final rule has a net

benefit of approximately $19 million per year. Other options examined

by the FHWA would have significant increases in the costs while

providing only a marginal increase in the estimated benefits.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-

612), the FHWA and HUD have evaluated the potential effects of this

final rule on small entities and determined that the proposed standard

is reasonable, appropriate, and the least costly and

[[Page 8338]]

intrusive approach for the resolution of this issue. The FHWA and HUD

certify that this rulemaking does not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities.

The FHWA and HUD obtained cost information directly from tire

suppliers and from the MHI Task Force which includes transporters,

manufacturers, and tire suppliers. The cost information obtained from

all sources was very similar and the FHWA and HUD believe the data are

reasonably accurate.

The number of additional tires and/or axles required to satisfy

this rule is a function of the size and weight of the manufactured

home. Because of this, manufacturers will have differing cost impacts.

Also, some manufacturers may already be using additional axles or

upgraded tires thereby greatly reducing the costs.

Based upon the information reviewed by the FHWA and HUD, and the

information provided by commenters, the agencies do not believe the

costs per manufactured home for small entities to comply with this rule

will be significantly greater than the costs per manufactured home for

larger manufacturers and transporters. Therefore, the costs per

manufactured home for small entities to comply with this rule are not

expected to exceed $50.

A small manufacturer, for example, producing 5 manufactured homes

per week, would have to spend approximately $250 per week or $13,000

annually. However, most, if not all, of the costs would be factored

into the prices of the manufactured homes produced. If all of the costs

are factored into the manufactured homes produced, the price for a new

manufactured home would increase by approximately $50, plus any

additional mark-up by the manufacturers and retailers.

The FHWA and HUD note that the AAR stated that it believes ``the

action contemplated by the NPRM could cost consumers $600 per home or

more.'' The FHWA and HUD have carefully reviewed the estimates of the

economic impact of this rulemaking and the information provided by

other commenters to the docket and believe the AAR's estimate of the

impact on small entities and consumers is far in excess of the cost

estimates presented by the MHI. According to the MHI, its members

produce 65 percent of the manufactured homes built each year in the

United States. The MHI indicated that approximately 339,601

manufactured homes were produced by 92 member companies in 285 plants.

The FHWA and HUD believe the experiences of the MHI's members provide a

sound basis for estimating the costs for small entities and consumers

and consider the estimates presented by the FHWA and HUD in the final

rule to be consistent with the MHI's.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)

The FHWA has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the

principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, Federalism,

and determined that this final rule does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Under this rule, certain commercial motor vehicles will be prohibited

from traveling at speeds exceeding 80 km/hour (50 mph), but the FHWA

does not believe this requirement preempts State law nor does the

agency believe this requirement will significantly affect the States'

ability to discharge traditional State governmental functions. The FHWA

also notes that several State agencies commented to the docket in

support of this rulemaking.

The General Counsel of HUD, as the Designated Official under

Section 6(a) of Executive Order 12612, has determined that the policies

contained in this final rule are covered by section 604(d) of the

National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of

1974, which provides: ``Whenever a Federal manufactured home

construction and safety standard established under this title is in

effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any

authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect

to any manufactured home covered, any standard regarding construction

or safety applicable to the same aspect of performance of such

manufactured home which is not identical to the Federal manufactured

home construction and safety standard.''

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding

intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do

not apply to this program.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor

Carrier Safety)

Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks

This rule will not pose an environmental health risk or safety risk

to children.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

This rule does not impose a Federal mandate that will result in the

expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year (2

U.S.C. 1532).

Paperwork Reduction Act

The proposal in this document does not contain information

collection requirements [44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.].

National Environmental Policy Act

The FHWA has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and

determined that this action would not have any effect on the quality of

the environment.

A Finding of No Significant Impact with respect to the environment

was prepared for the proposed rule in accordance with HUD regulations

in 24 CFR part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Because the proposed rule is adopted

by this final rule without significant change, the initial Finding of

No Significant Impact remains applicable, and is available for public

inspection between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays in the office of

the Rules Docket Clerk at the above address.

Regulation Identification Numbers

A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each

regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.

The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda

in April and October of each year. The RINs contained in the heading of

this document can be used to cross reference this action with the

Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects

24 CFR Part 3280

Fire prevention, Housing standards, Manufactured homes.

49 CFR Part 393

Highway safety, Highways and roads, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle

safety.

In consideration of the forgoing, the Department of Housing and

Urban Development, under 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), is amending Interpretative

Bulletin J-1-76, and the Department of Transportation, Federal Highway

Administration is amending title 49, Code of Federal Regulations,

Chapter III, part 393 as follows:

[[Page 8339]]

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Note: HUD Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76 does not and the

amendments to it will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

1. HUD Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76 is amended by removing and

reserving Section C and by revising Section D, as follows:

Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76, Transportation--Subpart J of Part

3280

* * * * *

C. [Reserved]

D. Section 3280.904(b)(8)--Tires, Wheels, and Rims

[This Section D is effective November 16, 1998.] Manufactured homes

that are labeled on or after the effective date must comply with this

Section D. This provision will expire November 20, 2000, unless

extended by mutual consent of the Federal Highway Administration and

HUD during any subsequent rulemaking.]

Tires and rims shall be sized and fitted to axles in accordance

with the gross axle weight rating determined by the manufactured home

manufacturer. The permissible tire loading may be increased up to a

maximum of 18 percent over the rated load capacity of the manufactured

home tire marked on the sidewall of the tire or increased up to a

maximum of 18 percent over the rated load capacity specified for the

tire in any of the publications of any of the organizations listed in

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119 (49 CFR 571.119,

S5.1(b)).

Used tires may also be sized in accordance with the above criteria

whenever the tread depth is at least \2/32\ of an inch as determined by

a tread wear indicator. The determination as to whether a particular

used tire is acceptable shall also include a visual inspection of

thermal and structural defects (e.g., dry rotting, excessive tire

sidewall splitting, etc.). Wheels and rims shall be sized in accordance

with the tire manufacturer's recommendations as suitable for use with

the tires selected.

The load and cold inflation pressure imposed on the rim or wheel

must not exceed the rim and wheel manufacturer's instructions even if

the tire has been approved for a higher load or inflation. Tire cold

inflation pressure limitations and the inflation pressure measurement

correction for heat shall be as specified in 49 CFR 393.75(h).

* * * * *

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR CHAPTER III

PART 393--PARTS AND ACCESSORIES NECESSARY FOR SAFE OPERATION

2. The authority citation at the end of Sec. 393.75 is removed and

the authority citation for 49 CFR Part 393 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Section 1041(b) of Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914,

1993 (1991), 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31502; 49 CFR 1.48.

3. Section 393.5 is amended by adding the definitions of

``manufactured home,'' ``length of a manufactured home,'' and ``width

of a manufactured home,'' placing them in alphabetical order, to read

as follows:

Sec. 393.5 Definitions.

* * * * *

Length of a manufactured home. The largest exterior length in the

traveling mode, including any projections which contain interior space.

Length does not include bay windows, roof projections, overhangs, or

eaves under which there is no interior space, nor does it include

drawbars, couplings or hitches.

* * * * *

Manufactured home means a structure, transportable in one or more

sections, which in the traveling mode, is eight body feet or more in

width or forty body feet or more in length, or, when erected on site,

is three hundred twenty or more square feet, and which is built on a

permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without

a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and

includes the plumbing, heating, air-conditioning, and electrical

systems contained therein. Calculations used to determine the number of

square feet in a structure will be based on the structure's exterior

dimensions measured at the largest horizontal projections when erected

on site. These dimensions will include all expandable rooms, cabinets,

and other projections containing interior space, but do not include bay

windows. This term includes all structures which meet the above

requirements except the size requirements and with respect to which the

manufacturer voluntarily files a certification pursuant to 24 CFR

3282.13 and complies with the standards set forth in 24 CFR part 3280.

* * * * *

Width of a manufactured home. The largest exterior width in the

traveling mode, including any projections which contain interior space.

Width does not include bay windows, roof projections, overhangs, or

eaves under which there is no interior space.

4. Section 393.75 is amended by revising paragraph (f), and by

adding paragraphs (g) and (h) to read as follows:

Sec. 393.75 Tires.

* * * * *

(f) Tire loading restrictions. With the exception of manufactured

homes, no motor vehicle shall be operated with tires that carry a

weight greater than that marked on the sidewall of the tire or, in the

absence of such a marking, a weight greater than that specified for the

tires in any of the publications of any of the organizations listed in

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119 (49 CFR 571.119, S5.1(b))

unless:

(1) The vehicle is being operated under the terms of a special

permit issued by the State; and

(2) The vehicle is being operated at a reduced speed to compensate

for the tire loading in excess of the manufacturer's rated capacity for

the tire. In no case shall the speed exceed 80 km/hr (50 mph).

(g) Tire loading restrictions for manufactured homes. Effective

November 16, 1998, tires used for the transportation of manufactured

homes (i.e., tires marked or labeled 7-14.5MH and 8-14.5MH) may be

loaded up to 18 percent over the load rating marked on the sidewall of

the tire or, in the absence of such a marking, 18 percent over the load

rating specified in any of the publications of any of the organizations

listed in FMVSS No. 119 (49 CFR 571.119, S5.1(b)). Manufactured homes

which are labeled (24 CFR 3282.7(r)) on or after November 16, 1998

shall comply with this section. Manufactured homes transported on tires

overloaded by 9 percent or more must not be operated at speeds

exceeding 80 km/hr (50 mph). This provision will expire November 20,

2000 unless extended by mutual consent of the FHWA and the Department

of Housing and Urban Development after review of appropriate tests or

other data submitted by the industry or other interested parties.

(h) Tire inflation pressure. (1) No motor vehicle shall be operated

on a tire which has a cold inflation pressure less than that specified

for the load being carried.

(2) If the inflation pressure of the tire has been increased by

heat because of the recent operation of the vehicle, the cold inflation

pressure shall be estimated by subtracting the inflation buildup factor

shown in Table 1 from the measured inflation pressure.

[[Page 8340]]

Table 1.--Inflation Pressure Measurement Correction for Heat

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minimum inflation pressure buildup

Average speed of vehicle in the ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

previous hour Tires with 1,814 kg (4,000 lbs.) maximum load Tires with over 1,814 kg

rating or less (4,000 lbs.) load rating

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

66-88.5 km/hr (41-55 mph)........ 34.5 kPa (5 psi)............................. 103.4 kPa (15 psi).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Issued on: February 11, 1998.

Kenneth R. Wykle,

Federal Highway Administrator.

Nicolas P. Retsinas,

Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 98-4038 Filed 2-17-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-22-P