|
|---|
|
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations; Clarifying the Exemption for Manufacture of Recreational Vehicles Publication: Federal Register Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Byline: Brian D. Montgomery Date: 16 November 2018 Subjects: American Government  , Recreational Vehicles
|
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 222 (Friday, November 16, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57677-57689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24950]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 3282
[Docket No. FR-5877-F-02]
RIN 2502-AJ33
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations;
Clarifying the Exemption for Manufacture of Recreational Vehicles
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rulemaking revises the exemption for the manufacture of
recreational vehicles to clarify which recreational vehicles qualify
for an exemption from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards and Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations.
HUD is adopting a recommendation of the Manufactured Housing Consensus
Committee (MHCC) but expanding the definition of recreational vehicle
and modifying it to require certification with the updated ANSI
standard, A119.5-15.
DATES:
Effective Date: January 15, 2019.
Incorporation by Reference: The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of
the Federal Register as of January 15, 2019.
Compliance Date: The Manufacturer's Notice requirement under this
rule applies to all covered units, beginning with the first unit to
leave production on January 15, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Teresa Payne, Acting Administrator,
Office of Manufactured Housing Programs, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 9164, Washington, DC
20410; telephone 202-402-5216. (This is not a toll-free number.)
Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service, toll-free, at 1-800-
877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. HUD's Regulatory Authority and the Recreational Vehicle Exemption
The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards
Act of 1974 (the Act) \1\ authorizes HUD, through its Office of
Manufactured Housing Programs (OMHP), to establish and amend the
Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (HUD Code)
and the Procedural and Enforcement regulations, codified at 24 CFR
parts 3280 and 3282, respectively. This authority authorizes HUD to
issue and enforce appropriate standards for the construction, design,
performance, and installation of manufactured homes--formerly known as
mobile homes--to ensure their quality, durability, affordability, and
safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See The National Manufactured Housing Construction and
Safety Standards Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, approved August 22,
1974, codified at 42 U.S.C. 5401-5426.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the HUD Code's inception in 1976, Recreational Vehicles (RVs)
have been largely exempted from the HUD Code. Self-propelled RVs are
statutorily exempted, and other classes of RVs over
[[Page 57678]]
which HUD maintains statutory jurisdiction have been exempted by
regulations codified at 24 CFR 3282.8(g).\2\ Over time, the RV
exemption has evolved. Since codifying its regulatory exemption in
1982, HUD has exempted RVs from both HUD's Manufactured Home
Construction and Safety Standards at 24 CFR part 3280 and its
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations at 24 CFR part
3282 if they are: Built on a single chassis; 400 square feet or less
when measured at their largest horizontal projections; self-propelled
or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and designed primarily
not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters
for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.\3\ In 1988, HUD
issued an interpretative bulletin to clarify the method for measuring a
unit to determine whether an RV qualified under the exemption.\4\ In
1997, HUD also allowed for small lofts to be excluded from the
exemption's square footage requirements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 41 FR 19846 (May 13, 1976).
\3\ See 47 FR 28091, June 29, 1982, codified at 24 CFR
3282.8(g).
\4\ HUD stated that ``measurements shall be taken on the
exterior of the home. The square footage includes all siding, corner
trim, including storage space, and area enclosed by windows, but not
the roofing overhang.'' Interpretative Bulletin A-1-88 (Oct. 5,
1988), available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=A188.pdf.
\5\ See Letter from HUD, dated August 1, 1997, available at
https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=loftletter.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Need for a Broader Exemption
Prior to this rulemaking, the RV exemption was roundly criticized
for not drawing a clear enough distinction between RVs, which are
designed for temporary, recreational use, and manufactured housing,
which is designed for permanent, year-round dwelling. This distinction
has become increasingly relevant, because RV manufacturers have begun
to produce larger products that include more features, such as porches
built on the chassis, and that resemble manufactured homes. These
additions have raised questions as to whether these features should be
included when measuring according to Interpretive Bulletin A-1-88 for
the purposes of exemption. This has increased the confusion over
whether HUD should regulate certain RVs because they meet the statutory
definition of a manufactured home or whether they should be exempted
based on their intended design for temporary, recreational use.\6\
Subsequently, HUD determined that some manufacturers were producing
Park Model Recreational Vehicles (PMRVs, also known as recreational
park trailers or RPTs) in excess of the RV exemption's 400-square-foot
threshold, which was based on a 1988 HUD Interpretative Bulletin
guidance on how to measure a unit. These PMRVs contained screened-in
porches built on the chassis and were advertised for all-season use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For example, in November 2012, the Recreation Vehicle
Industry Association (RVIA) issued a Standards News Bulletin to its
members. Citing past HUD guidance, RVIA announced its position that
in measuring the size and calculating the square footage of a
Recreation Park Trailer, manufacturers should apply the ``shadow
rule'' to determine what is included in the measurement, and they
should not include in their measurement: Roof overhangs, porches,
patios, decks, enclosed door entries, or loft areas with a ceiling
height of less than 5 feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address this issue, HUD issued memoranda in 2014 and 2015,
reiterating the method through which RVs should be measured to qualify
for the RV exemption.\7\ HUD also questioned whether it should exercise
regulatory authority over fifth-wheel travel trailers, some of which,
because they exceeded the 320 square foot threshold under the statutory
definition of ``manufactured home,'' are subject to HUD's Manufactured
Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home
Procedural and Enforcement regulations. From December 2-4, 2014, the
MHCC met and considered HUD's October 1, 2014, memorandum.\8\ After
discussion and debate, the MHCC voted to approve a recommendation that
HUD adopt language more clearly differentiating RVs from manufactured
housing and simplify its RV exemption.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See HUD, RV Exemption Under Manufactured Housing Act, Parts
I and II (Oct. 1, 2014 and Jan. 20, 2015), available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=rvmemo12015.pdf.
\8\ See The FACTS: HUD's Manufactured Housing Newsletter (Feb.
2015), available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=mhnewsletter11515.pdf.
\9\ MHCC proposed the following language: ``Recreational
vehicles are not subject to this part, part 3280. A recreational
vehicle is a factory built vehicular structure designed only for
recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent
occupancy, built and certified in accordance with NFPA 1192-2015 or
ANSI A119.5-09 consensus standards for recreational vehicles and not
certified as a manufactured home.'' Manufactured Housing Consensus
Committee, MHCC Proposed Changes (Received as of May 31, 2015), 5-6,
available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=changes53115.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. HUD's February 9, 2016, Proposed Rule; Expanding the RV Exemption
HUD issued a proposed rule on February 9, 2016, at 81 FR 6806, to
revise the definitions of ``Manufactured home'' at 24 CFR 3280.2 and
``Recreational vehicles'' at 24 CFR 3282.8(g), to clarify--and
effectively expand--the exemption of RVs from the HUD's Manufactured
Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home
Procedural and Enforcement regulations. The rule proposed to change the
definition of RVs by revising the four-part test used to determine
whether a structure qualifies for the RV exemption. Specifically, HUD's
rule proposed a definition focused on whether or not the structure is
certified as a manufactured home and whether it is constructed
according to two consensus RV standards: The ANSI A119.5 Park Model
Recreational Vehicle Standard and the NFPA 1192-15 Standard on
Recreational Vehicles.\10\ By incorporating by reference the ANSI
A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard, HUD's February 9,
2016, proposed rule would have allowed factory-constructed porches to
be added to RPTs/PMRVs in excess of the RV exemption's 400 square foot
threshold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ NFPA 1192-15 is available for review at http://www.nfpa.org/freeaccess. ANSI A119.5-15 is available for review at
www.rvia.org/?ESID=A119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. HUD's January 26, 2018, Document; Regulatory Review of
Manufactured Housing Rules
HUD issued a Federal Register document on January 26, 2018, at 83
FR 3635, entitled ``Regulatory Review of Manufactured Housing Rules,''
to solicit public comment on all of its current and pending
manufactured housing regulatory actions. Consistent with Executive
Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,'' and Executive Order 13777, entitled, ``Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda,'' and as part of the efforts of HUD's
Regulatory Reform Task Force, the document informed the public that HUD
was reviewing its existing and planned manufactured housing regulatory
actions to assess their actual and potential compliance costs and
reduce regulatory burden. HUD invited public comment to assist in
identifying regulations that may be outmoded, ineffective or
excessively burdensome and should be modified, streamlined, replaced or
repealed. Of the 156 unique comments that HUD received in response to
the document, fewer than 20 referenced the proposed RV rule, and all
expressed support for this rulemaking.
This final rule adopts the approach of the proposed rule to
reinforce the distinction between manufactured housing, which HUD
regulates under its Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards
and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement
[[Page 57679]]
regulations; and other structures, which HUD will exempt from such
regulation. The rule takes into consideration the public comments
submitted in response to the February 9, 2016, proposed rule and the
January 26, 2018, Federal Register document. This final rule provides
that the requirements of 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282 do not apply to the
manufacture of a ``recreational vehicle'' as defined by this rule.
IV. Changes Made at the Final Rule Stage
After considering public comments received on the February 9, 2016,
proposed rule, and after further review, HUD makes the following
changes at the final rule stage.
1. In the final rule, HUD elects not to revise the definition of
``manufactured home,'' found at 24 CFR 3280.2, to ensure that the
regulatory definition of ``manufactured home'' tracks with its
statutory definition.
2. In Sec. 3282.15(b)(1), HUD removes the term ``factory built,''
in response to public comment. HUD agrees with commenters who stated
that some RV manufacturers do not produce their products in a factory,
but nevertheless should qualify for the exemption if they meet all
other exemption criteria.
3. In Sec. 3282.15(b)(1), HUD adds the term ``vehicle'' to the
definition of a recreational vehicle in response to public comment. HUD
agrees with commenters who stated that ``vehicle'' is also a term of
art used by state and local governments in regulating RVs.
4. In Sec. 3282.15(b)(3), HUD makes a technical correction to
remove the term ``Recreational Park Trailer Standard'' and replace it
with the term ``Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard,'' in response
to public comment and to reflect the standard's proper title.
5. In Sec. 3282.15(c), HUD makes several changes; to remove the
term ``Notice'' and replace it with the term ``Manufacturer's Notice''
for clarity; and to specify that in all cases where the exemption is
based on the unit being certified to the ANSI A-119.5-15 standard, the
Manufacturer's Notice must be provided to the consumer prior to the
completion of the sales transaction, as defined in this final rule.
Finally, HUD adds a definition of ``completion of sales transaction''
in this final rule, because the cross-reference to Sec. 3282.252(b),
in the proposed rule, was inapplicable.
V. Discussion of Public Comments Submitted on the Proposed Rule and
HUD's Responses
The public comment period for the February 9, 2016, proposed rule
closed on April 11, 2016. HUD received approximately 5,300 public
comments in response to the proposed rule. A wide variety of interested
entities submitted comments, including individuals, homeowners'
associations, industry groups, state and local governments, and trade
associations. At the outset, HUD notes that an overwhelming majority of
these public comments were based on a misunderstanding of the proposed
rule's intent and legal effect. This misunderstanding was propagated by
social media, which opined that the rule was intended to increase
regulation and restrict or prohibit consumer use of RVs and other types
of housing, such as tiny homes. HUD emphasizes that this rule does not
affect the use of RVs by consumers. Rather, this final rule clarifies
the exemption for RVs from HUD manufactured housing regulation.
This section of the preamble addresses significant issues raised in
the public comments, and organizes them into subject groups, with a
description of each group of comments followed by HUD's responses.
A. General Misunderstanding of the Proposed Rule
Comments: Commenters stated that the rule would prohibit full-time
RV living. Other commenters stated that the rule implied that HUD would
regulate consumer use of RVs. Commenters may have based this conclusion
on the proposed definition of ``recreational vehicle'' that includes a
criterion that a RV be designed only for recreational use. The
commenters stated that the criterion would deter full-time RV and tiny
home living while yielding no safety improvements.
Many commenters stated that individuals have a right to housing
choice, including where and how they live, so long as the housing they
choose is safe and contains necessities. Some commenters shared current
housing trends toward small homes to base their opposition to the rule.
Commenters stated that consumers, not HUD, should determine what
housing should be acceptable for full-time living. Commenters stated
that there is no harm in full-time RV living.
Commenters also stated that many people rely on full-time RV living
as an economic necessity, particularly in high-cost areas. Commenters
also stated that many people live full-time in RVs, Fifth-Wheel Travel
Trailers, or tiny homes, and have been doing so for years, particularly
in warm climates.
Some commenters stated that RVs are designed for full-time living
and that many RV parks encourage full-time RV living. Commenters also
stated that HUD should recognize the many benefits of full-time RV or
tiny home living, including but not necessarily limited to: Expanding
access to housing or home ownership, especially for people with limited
incomes, criminal records, or poor rental histories; homelessness
prevention; flexible housing for people who are elderly; ease of
evacuation from natural disasters or terrorism; and individual
freedom--to live where a person wants, to have pets, to avoid
environmental contaminants, to live mortgage-free, to have less to care
for, to live frugally, to practice environmental responsibility, or to
travel for enjoyment, work, or retirement. Commenters stated that HUD
should specifically incorporate language into the rule, stating that
full-time living in RVs remains legal. Commenters stated that HUD
should not adopt any recommendations from the MHCC, as its agenda is to
force people into manufactured homes.
Some commenters stated that because the rule would make it more
difficult for full-time RV users to maintain their lifestyle, a host of
detrimental secondary effects would result. For example, commenters
stated that the rule would worsen homelessness and undermine HUD's
mission by limiting the supply of affordable housing in the United
States. Commenters stated that this would disproportionately affect,
and effectively discriminate against, people who lack financial
resources or face economic hardship; e.g., people adapting to worsening
economic conditions, people with disabilities, students with
significant debt, veterans, senior citizens, and people who must travel
for their work (and their employers, including national parks).
Commenters stated that this would also disproportionately affect people
who live alone and people who want to live frugally or practice
environmentally responsible living. Commenters stated that the rule
would inhibit people from retiring, reduce people's financial
independence, force them into assisted living facilities, and force
them to choose between housing and other basic necessities, like food,
medicine, and utilities. Commenters stated that the rule would increase
burdens already faced by RV residents, including local restrictions on
parking, minimum size requirements, and zoning laws. Commenters stated
that in response to the rule, manufacturers will merely adjust the
square footage of RVs or change their marketing materials.
Commenters stated that the rule dictates the minimum square footage
of a home or requires modular homes to be
[[Page 57680]]
as stable as foundation-built homes. A commenter stated that HUD should
not base its RV exemption on Recreation Vehicle Industry Association
(RVIA) certification because doing so would have the effect of
excluding most sport utility RV trailers, including toy hauler sport
utility RV trailers, RV trailers with garage areas and the large number
of RV trailers with generators.
HUD Response: HUD respectfully disagrees with the various
fundamental premises and conclusions of these commenters about
secondary effects. Initially, as stated in this preamble, HUD is not
regulating use of manufactured homes or RVs. More specifically, how
individuals decide to use their manufactured home or RV unit after
purchase--and, in some cases, after receiving a Manufacturer's Notice
about the unit's compliance with RV standards--is beyond the scope of
this final rule. The regulation of use and occupancy of RVs is the
purview of state and local authorities, not HUD.
Because this rule does not prohibit or regulate the use of
manufactured homes or RVs, including tiny homes, the secondary
consequences described by certain commenters are moot, and HUD does not
believe that there exists a need to address them individually. HUD also
states that this rule does not dictate the minimum square footage of a
home, nor does it require modular homes to be ``as stable'' as
foundation-built homes. It also does not require manufacturers to
obtain RVIA certification to claim the RV exemption. HUD reiterates
that when it first codified the RV exemption in 1976, it unequivocally
stated that RVs were not designed to be used as permanent dwellings.
This final rule does not alter that underlying rationale for the
exemption. Moreover, as noted above, both the ANSI and NFPA standard
descriptions underscore the need to distinguish RVs from permanent
housing.
B. Public Comments in Support of and Against the Rule
1. Comments in Support of the Rule
Comment: Some commenters stated that they agreed with MHCC's
recommendations that HUD should not apply HUD's Manufactured Home
Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural
and Enforcement regulations to RVs, PMRVs, or Fifth-Wheels, because
such structures are vehicles, not manufactured homes, and they are
designed and built for temporary recreational or seasonal camping
accommodation in accordance with widely accepted national standards.
Commenters also stated that HUD has no role regulating vehicles. Some
commenters stated that the number of people living full-time in RVs
constitute a small minority of RV consumers. Other commenters stated
that the rule will positively discourage full-time residential use,
protecting consumers and preserving the market for small, single-
section manufactured homes.
Some commenters stated that HUD's manufactured home regulations
were created to ensure minimum standards of safety, qualify, and
affordability in housing designed for permanent residential use--while
the market also demanded vehicles for recreational and seasonal use--
but that both manufactured homes and RVs evolved and grew larger over
time, making it more difficult to distinguish them. Several commenters
stated that dwellings should be classified based on their design
intent--i.e., whether they are for temporary or permanent use--and not
on their size. Some commenters stated that those who live full-time in
RVs constitute a small minority of all RV consumers.
Commenters also stated that the MHCC's RV definition is
appropriate, insofar as it reflects a broad consensus among
stakeholders, regulators, and Congress that regulating RVs is outside
the scope of HUD's housing mission and is not contemplated by the
National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act,
and it allows for RVs and manufactured homes to be more easily
distinguished. Commenters stated that HUD should not exercise
regulatory authority over RVs, because they are already extensively
regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation and state motor
vehicle and taxing authorities, and if HUD were to regulate them, it
would create conflicts. One commenter stated that the rule will
beneficially deter future requests for regulatory exemptions by
creating an important regulatory firewall between manufactured housing
and RVs. Other commenters stated that the rule serves to eliminate
regulatory uncertainty and the likelihood of congressional inquiries,
and litigation, by more broadly exempting RVs from HUD's regulations.
HUD Response: As stated in the proposed rule, HUD agrees with the
MHCC that the RV exemption should be applied based on the
manufacturer's design intent, and certification to a consensus-based RV
building standard. HUD notes that because some RVs meet the statutory
definition of manufactured home, and would otherwise fall within HUD's
regulatory jurisdiction, those units require a regulatory exemption to
avoid being covered under the Act and regulations.
Comment: Some commenters stated their support for the
Manufacturer's Notice requirement, because it serves to protect
consumers from an unregulated class of de facto homes by ensuring
consumers do not unintentionally purchase homes that are unsafe for
full-time living or that are actually less valuable than their retail
price. Commenters also stated that the Manufacturer's Notice provides
an objective basis for HUD to enforce its regulations in the event of
false certifications or misuse of the RV exemption.
HUD Response: HUD welcomes these perspectives and agrees that the
Manufacturer's Notice requirement is an important tool for ensuring
that consumers are aware to what standard and purpose the units they
are purchasing are built.
2. Comments Against the Rule
Comment: Many commenters stated their general opposition to the
rule. One commenter stated that rather than revising its RV exemption,
HUD should eliminate it entirely. Some commenters stated that the rule
is an example of government overreach, overregulation, or waste of
resources. Some expressed confusion regarding what problem the rule
addressed. Others stated that the rule was based on opinion, lacked
sufficient empirical justification, was disingenuous, was not
sufficiently considered, or was unclear.
Many commenters stated that the rule was contrary to law or public
policy. Some commenters stated that the rule is unconstitutional, e.g.,
due to federalism concerns or because it amounts to a regulatory
taking. Commenters also stated that the rule exceeds HUD's regulatory
authority, because only state or local governments should, and already
do, regulate use of RVs. Some commenters also stated that the rule
violates the Fair Housing Act. For these reasons, some commenters
stated that the rule would lead to litigation or consumer claims
against RV manufacturers.
Commenters also stated that the rule is vague, e.g., in terms of
what constitutes ``seasonal'' or ``permanent'' occupancy, and, because
of this, it is unenforceable, and it will require HUD to hire people to
enforce it. Commenters stated that it was unclear whether the rule
applied only to RVs that are permanently placed in a park or
campground, or also to those being used to travel the country.
Commenters stated that the rule will lead RV parks to evict residents
out of fear of legal
[[Page 57681]]
consequences. Commenters stated that some RV manufacturers have been
marketing their products for full-time living. One commenter stated
that if HUD will not issue a loan to purchase an RV, then it should not
be able to regulate RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should exempt from
its manufactured housing regulations altogether individuals who build
their own tiny homes.
HUD Response: As explained above, this rule does not regulate the
use of manufactured homes or RVs but serves to expand the exemption for
RVs, and to provide for a clear way of determining whether RVs that
meet the statutory definition of a ``manufactured home'' are exempt
from complying with HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards and Procedural and Enforcement regulations. The rule does not
address ``seasonal'' or ``permanent'' occupancy or distinguish between
RVs that are permanently placed in a park or campground and those being
used to travel the county. This rule should not be used by RV parks to
evict residents out of fear of legal consequences.
HUD's regulation applies to the design and manufacture of
manufactured homes and by way of this rulemaking allows for exemption
for manufacturers of RVs that meet the exemption criteria. HUD's rule
also helps to ensure that consumers are aware of the building standards
used to construct the unit and the design purpose of the unit that they
purchase. Both reference standards (ANSI A119.5 and NFPA 1192) contain
definitions that specify, for both an RV and PMRV, as applicable, that
the units are primarily designed to provide temporary living quarters.
Both the manufactured housing and RV industries have expressed
overwhelming support for this rule.
HUD reiterates that it is issuing this rule well within the bounds
of its regulatory authority, and the rule in no way encroaches upon or
violates the constitutional rights of individuals, businesses, or
states, and nothing in the rule violates any statute, including the
Fair Housing Act. HUD additionally notes that the rule could
potentially lessen the likelihood of litigation or consumer claims
against RV manufacturers, because the Manufacturer's Notice will
provide for greater transparency and consumer awareness before
transactions are complete.
Moreover, HUD states that the rule provides clear and commonly-used
standards by which RVs must be manufactured in order to qualify for the
exemption. Any fears regarding secondary market consequences on
consumers, RV parks, or insurance or housing financing are both
unfounded and well outside the scope of this rulemaking. HUD again
stresses that this rule clarifies the existing RV regulatory exemption
and does not affect the aforementioned markets.
Comment: A large number of commenters questioned HUD's intent in
proposing this rule. Some commenters stated that it was unclear what
problem HUD hopes to address with this change. Some commenters stated
that HUD should be required to demonstrate that full-time RV living is
harmful. Some commenters stated that HUD wants to limit the number of
RV dwellings or keep people from living in RVs full-time, e.g., in
order to reform trailer parks. Commenters stated that HUD wants to
incentivize people to live in public housing or other types of housing
to allow the government or industry to profit off poor or elderly
people and others. Commenters suggested that the rule might be the
result of lobbying by one or more industries that HUD improperly
favors, e.g., the mortgage or lending industry, home builders, the
manufactured home industry, the RV industry, mobile home manufacturers,
PMRV manufacturers, or realtors. Commenters stated that the rule is
HUD's attempt to penalize people who pay lower or no property taxes.
HUD Response: As HUD explained in the proposed rule, this rule is
appropriate, because exempting RVs from manufactured housing
regulations remains sound policy, and clearer standards are needed to
further that goal. The rule better differentiates RVs from manufactured
homes to ensure that HUD does not unnecessarily regulate RVs. HUD
received feedback from the manufactured housing and recreational
vehicle industries and the public stating that the existing exemption
had been difficult to apply, resulting in some RVs and PMRVs being
manufactured in excess of the RV exemption's 400-square-foot threshold
because of the addition of porches onto the chassis. As several
commenters noted, this rule reflects broad consensus among
stakeholders, regulators, and Congress that regulating RVs is outside
the scope of HUD's housing mission and not contemplated by the National
Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act; and the
revised rule allows for RVs and manufactured homes to be more readily
distinguished. The rule does not incentivize public housing, nor is it
an attempt to penalize individuals that pay lower or no property taxes.
Rather than being directed at individuals, the rule is directed at
manufacturers of manufactured housing and RVs.
Comment: Several industry commenters disagreed with HUD's inclusion
of a Manufacturer's Notice as part of the RV exception. Some commenters
stated their opposition to the Manufacturer's Notice requirement,
noting, for example, that the MHCC did not recommend the Manufacturer's
Notice, and that the RVIA certifies 95 percent of PMRVs and 98 percent
of other RVs, requiring them to contain permanent seals of ANSI and
NFPA certification respectively, with the same or similar information.
Commenters stated that if HUD lacks regulatory authority over these
classes of vehicles, then it should not prescribe or enforce the
Manufacturer's Notice requirement, because it would lead to improper
regulation beyond the scope of HUD's statutory authority.
Commenters stated that HUD should follow the example of state
regulations and incorporate broader references to the ANSI and NFPA
standards, e.g., ``the latest edition of . . .'' rather than specific
editions, to avoid having to issue a new rule each time a standard is
updated, typically every three years. A commenter stated that HUD's
reference to the ANSI standard in Sec. 3282.15(b)(3) should be
corrected to read: ``. . . or ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational
Vehicle Standard.''
HUD Response: The Manufacturer's Notice requirement was not part of
the recreational vehicle definition recommended by MHCC for purposes of
revising the RV exemption. However, HUD added the notice requirement as
a means of ensuring that consumers are aware of the distinctions among
the products available to them on the market. This is especially true
because products that qualify for the RV exemption from HUD's
Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations nevertheless
still fall under HUD's statutory jurisdiction. HUD retains the
reference to specific editions of the ANSI and NFPA standards because
it must do so under the Federal Register's rules for incorporation by
reference of publications, found at 1 CFR part 51. HUD corrects the
reference to ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard
in every place where it is mentioned.
HUD acknowledges that the Manufacturer's Notice prescribed by this
final rule is similar in content to the one issued by RVIA to its PMRV
members; however, it also emphasizes two distinctions. First, HUD's
[[Page 57682]]
requirement for a Manufacturer's Notice applies to all RVs built and
certified to the ANSI A119.5-15 standard and seeking an exemption from
HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, not just RVs
certified by RVIA. Additionally, HUD's Manufacturer's Notice, which is
required to be placed more conspicuously than the RVIA seal or made
available prior to the completion of the sales transaction, serves to
inform consumers directly about the standard to which the prospective
unit was built, and the purpose for which it was designed. While the
RVIA seal contains similar language, the purposes of the RVIA seal and
the Notice are substantially different. RVIA's seal signifies a
voluntary certification by an RVIA PMRV member to the ANSI A119.5
standard. The Manufacturer's Notice is specifically designed to ensure
that consumers are aware to what standard and purpose their prospective
units are built.
Comment: Many commenters stated that the rule will have a
detrimental impact on various segments of the market, the economy,
industry or consumers. Commenters stated that the rule would make it
difficult for people to obtain loans or insurance for RVs. Commenters
stated that the rule would drive up RV costs, because manufacturers
would need to build them to higher standards for full-time living or
obtain additional certifications. Commenters stated that the rule would
permit manufacturers to create inferior products and disclaim them with
the Manufacturer's Notice prescribed by the rule.
Commenters stated that by deterring full-time RV living, the rule
would also have a negative impact on local economies and the United
States and state and local tourist industries, particularly in warmer
climates. Commenters similarly stated that the rule will have a
detrimental impact on various segments of the market, the economy,
industry or consumers, including manufacturers, the RV industry, RV
parks, campgrounds. Commenters stated that the rule would force people
to choose renting over home ownership, which would have the secondary
effect of causing rent prices to increase.
HUD Response: As already stated, this rule allows manufacturers to
choose the standard(s) to which they produce their products, so that
their design intent is properly reflected in the information they
provide to consumers, whether the product is manufactured housing
designed as a primary residence or permanent dwelling and regulated
under HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, or is an RV
designed for recreational use, and not as a primary residence or
permanent dwelling and exempt from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction
and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and
Enforcement regulations by way of its conformance to NFPA or ANSI
standards. Because the rule has no impact on consumer use, the question
of its impact on the economy, tourism, or the rental market is outside
the scope of this rulemaking. The issues HUD seeks to clarify in
publishing this rule are to: (1) Identify which manufacturing standards
apply to what structures; and (2) enhance consumer knowledge and
confidence in their purchases.
Comment: Some commenters stated that the rule would lead state or
local governments to adopt changes reflecting HUD's interpretation that
RVs are not designed for full-time living, which would ultimately lead
them to prohibit full-time RV living. Commenters stated that such
entities often incorporate the language of HUD's rule, verbatim, into
their laws and ordinances. Commenters stated that the rule will lead
HUD and state or local jurisdictions to question the legality of other
types of alternative structures, such as tree homes and container
homes.
HUD Response: HUD has made it very clear, in this rulemaking and
elsewhere, including the HUD website and program materials, that the
intent of HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and
its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, including
the revised RV exemption under this rule, is to regulate the
manufacture and installation of manufactured housing and to exempt RVs
from such HUD regulation.
C. Comments in Response to HUD's Questions
1. Public Comments in Response to HUD's First Set of Questions
Comment: In response to HUD's first set of questions,\11\
commenters provided no specific evidence that the rule would result in
additional costs to PMRV manufacturers. Commenters further stated that
RVIA members produce nearly 95 percent of all PMRVs sold in the United
States. Commenters stated that as a condition of membership, RVIA
member manufacturers must agree to: (1) Build units in compliance with
ANSI A119.5; (2) self-certify compliance with ANSI A119.5; display
RVIA's ANSI compliance seal for PMRVs, which states ``This park model
RV is designed for temporary recreational, camping, or seasonal use.
Manufacturer certifies compliance with park model RV standard--ANSI
A119.5.'' Commenters stated that RVIA conducts 6 or 7 unannounced
annual compliance inspections at each member's plant(s). Commenters
stated that in 2015, 3,600 PMRV units were manufactured, and while
approximately 180 of those may not meet the ANSI A119.5 standard, they
nevertheless may still be in compliance, due to state and local
building codes and campground regulations. Commenters stated that
third-party agencies offer ANSI A119.5 inspections and seals to non-
RVIA members and product liability laws strongly favor ANSI A119.5
compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ What if any costs beyond the Notice requirements for
recreational vehicle manufacturers seeking an ANSI A119.5 exception
would be imposed on recreational vehicle manufacturers as a result
of the implementation of this proposed rule? Are PMRVs that meet
HUD's statutory and regulatory definitions of ``manufactured homes''
currently being constructed outside the scope of ANSI A119.5? If so,
how many units are being built? What would be the costs of requiring
these manufacturers to build to ANSI A119.5 in order to take
advantage of the exemption? Would it be more efficient and
advantageous for HUD to exercise direct regulatory oversight over
this portion of the industry? What would be the costs and benefits
of doing so?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters stated that HUD's Office of Manufactured Housing is
charged with regulating the manufactured housing industry, which
provides permanent housing, and not the RV industry, which provides
temporary accommodations for recreational and seasonal use. Commenters
stated that if HUD were to regulate any RVs, it would waste scarce
resources appropriated by Congress for the regulation of manufactured
housing.
HUD Response: HUD appreciates these comments and believes that they
support the final rule in its current form. Consistent with these
comments, HUD has decided to clarify the definition of the RV exemption
so that PMRVs may take advantage of a clearer and simpler RV exemption
if they would otherwise technically fall within the statutory
definition of manufactured home.
2. Public Comments in Response to HUD's Second Set of Questions
Comment: In response to HUD's second set of questions,\12\
commenters
[[Page 57683]]
stated that HUD should not require certification of RVs built to the
NFPA 1192 standard in order to exempt them from HUD's manufactured
housing standards. Commenters stated that RV trailer types built to the
NFPA 1192 standard, including travel trailers, Fifth-wheels, and
folding camping trailers, are vehicles and not manufactured homes.
Commenters stated that vehicles should not need certification to escape
classification by HUD as housing, especially since well-established law
in all 50 states, and the U.S. Department of Transportation, already
classify RVs as vehicles and not manufactured homes. Commenters stated
that the Manufacturer's Notice requirement would be redundant, because
RVIA members comprise 98 percent of the industry, and as a condition of
membership, RVIA member manufacturers must agree to: (1) Build units in
compliance with NPFA 1192; (2) self-certify compliance with NPFA 1192.
Commenters stated that most local and campground regulations require
NFPA 1192 compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In what manner, if any, should HUD ensure that recreational
vehicles conforming to NFPA 1192-2015 be certified to be exempt from
the provisions of HUD's Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement
Regulations? For example, should HUD require that a Notice of
certification be provided in each such recreational vehicle built to
NFPA 1192-15 similar to the Notice being proposed for PMRVs or
should other methods be considered such as a label to be exempt from
HUD's regulations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD Response: HUD appreciates these responses and believes that
they support the final rule in its current form. Consistent with these
comments, HUD elects not to require a Manufacturer's Notice for RVs to
be exempted from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement
regulations on the grounds that they are built to the NFPA 1192-15
standard.
3. Public Comments in Response to HUD's Third Set of Questions
Comment: In response to HUD's third set of questions,\13\
commenters stated that HUD should not regulate Fifth-wheels or any
other type of RV. Commenters stated that even deeming a Fifth-wheel
camper ``not for full-time occupancy'' would be inappropriate, because
Fifth-wheels are already regulated as vehicles and not as housing.
Commenters stated that the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), the U.S. Department of Transportation, and all
50 states define and regulate Fifth-wheel RVs as motor vehicles,
regardless of how long people spend in them, and on the clear
understanding that they are not permanent housing. Commenters stated
that NHTSA, which administers the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards (FMVSS), requires Fifth-wheel manufacturers to register as
vehicle manufacturers, and subjects them to the same vehicle recall
requirements as cars, trucks, and buses. Commenters stated that states
require Fifth-wheel vehicles to comply with maximum vehicle dimensions,
titling and registration requirements, taxation, tag statutes, and
licensed vehicle manufacturers and dealer requirements. Commenters
stated that since HUD last updated the RV definition for purposes of
the exemption, most states have increased maximum vehicle widths to 8.5
feet and maximum lengths to more than 45 feet, yielding combination
vehicle lengths of more than 65 feet. Commenters stated that Fifth-
wheels do not become manufactured homes simply because industry created
larger versions of them, nor because states increased the maximum
allowable size of vehicles. Commenters stated that regulation of Fifth-
wheel trailers or other classes of vehicles is clearly not a logical
outgrowth of the proposed rule, because the proposed rule nowhere
defines Fifth-wheel trailers; nor does it offer any justification or
cost-benefit analysis relating to regulation of Fifth-wheel trailers as
housing; nor does it describe or detail specific regulations that would
apply to Fifth-wheel trailers; nor does it offer any rationale for
treating Fifth-wheel trailers differently from other RVs. Commenters
stated that if HUD were to regulate Fifth-wheel trailers, it would be
an example of mission creep or ``bait-and-switch.'' One commenter, on
the contrary, stated that Fifth-wheel trailers should be distinguished,
because they are recreational camp trailers and not RVs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ As described in the preamble to this proposed rule, HUD has
not exercised regulatory oversight over Fifth Wheel Recreational
Vehicles that might meet the statutory and regulatory definitions of
``manufactured home.'' This proposed rule proposes to except Fifth
Wheel Recreational Vehicles from regulatory oversight. Should HUD
take a different approach and begin exercising regulatory oversight
of these units that meet the statutory and regulatory definitions of
``manufactured home?'' What are the costs and benefits of bringing
these units within HUD oversight? Should HUD exercise any regulatory
authority over Fifth Wheelers or other forms of recreational
vehicles?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD Response: HUD appreciates these responses and believes that
they support the final rule in its current form. Consistent with these
comments, HUD elects not to exercise direct regulatory oversight over
Fifth-wheel trailers and instead to allow them to take advantage of a
bright-line RV exemption if they would otherwise technically fall
within the statutory definition of manufactured home.
D. Public Comments Offering Recommendations
Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should affirmatively state in
the rule that it does not regulate RVs and revise the regulatory text
and preamble to state that HUD's definition of RV is for the express
purpose of exempting RVs from manufactured home requirements and, in
effect, any regulation by HUD. Commenters stated that HUD should make
explicit that its Office of Manufactured Housing Programs has no
authority to regulate consumer use of RVs. Commenters stated that HUD
should affirmatively specify that RVs may be used as a primary
residence or for permanent occupancy. Commenters stated that HUD should
specifically define RVs as permanent dwellings. Commenters stated that
HUD should make explicit that the rule is not intended and should not
be interpreted to involve HUD in the regulation of consumer use,
particularly if HUD's intent is only to develop and enforce
manufactured housing standards. Commenters stated that HUD should state
that the rule cannot be used by any entity to impede people from living
in small dwellings, whether RVs or not. A commenter stated that HUD
should not regulate any structure that can hitch up to a pickup truck
or be driven independently. Commenters stated that HUD should focus on
the issue of RVs exceeding 400 square feet, e.g., by ensuring that
patio roofs, screened-in porches, and other outdoor areas or slide-outs
are not counted as living space or by increasing the RV exemption size
to 460 square feet. Commenters stated that if HUD requires a sharper
distinction between RVs and manufactured homes, it should clarify
differences between foundations and leveling techniques, e.g., if a
home has wheels, it should be classified as a vehicle, and if has a
foundation, it should be classified as a manufactured home. Some
commenters stated that dwelling classification should only be done by
local authorities, and it should take into account differences in local
climates. Some commenters stated that dwellings should be classified
based on square footage per inhabitant. Some commenters stated that if
the problem with RVs is poor construction, then HUD should set
guidelines and conduct inspections, e.g., regulate the RV industry
more, and not less.
Commenters stated that HUD should not include in the definition of
``recreational vehicle'' that it is a non-permanent dwelling or
otherwise reference the duration a user dwells within an RV. Commenters
stated that
[[Page 57684]]
HUD should specifically strike from its RV definition at 24 CFR
3282.15(b)(2): Subparagraph (2) in its entirety, or ``. . . only for
recreational use . . .'' or ``. . . Designed only for recreational use
and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy . . .'' \14\
Commenters stated that HUD should clarify the rule's effects on all
structures, including RVs, mobile homes, mobile trailers, mobile tiny
homes, and fixed tiny homes less than 400 square feet in size.
Commenters stated that HUD should better distinguish PMRVs from other
classes of RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should require PMRVs to meet
standards rather than be exempted from them. Commenters stated that HUD
should use frequency of moves, or movability, to distinguish RVs from
manufactured housing. A commenter stated that HUD should specifically
exempt RVs that remain stationary for seven or fewer consecutive
months, regardless of whether an individual resides in them full-time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 24 CFR 3282.15(b) reads in part: ``Definition. A
Recreational Vehicle is: . . . (2) Designed only for recreational
use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy . .
.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD Response: As stated above, HUD takes the opportunity in this
final rule to emphasize that while it possesses statutory authority to
regulate the manufacture of certain RVs that meet the statutory
definition of manufactured home, it nevertheless believes that
exercising such authority is currently unnecessary. HUD believes that
the non-permanent design intent of RVs favors that they be exempt from
such regulation, even in cases where they fall within the statutory
definition of ``manufactured home.'' Accordingly, HUD takes this
opportunity to state that while it possesses statutory authority to
regulate the manufacture of certain types of RV, it declines to do so
by clarifying--and effectively broadening--the RV exemption and by
requiring PMRV manufacturers claiming the exemption to notify consumers
as to the standards their unit is built to, as well as the unit's
design and appropriate use. HUD also believes it would be inappropriate
to use other criteria recommended by commenters, such as movability, to
distinguish exempted RVs from regulated manufactured homes. Because
ANSI A119.5-15 sets forth a maximum size of 400 square feet, excluding
porches, size will continue to be a factor in defining the exemption
for a Park Model RV. HUD reiterates that its goal is to establish a
broad, easily applied exemption for purposes of its own regulatory
activities. HUD maintains statutory jurisdiction over the manufacture
and installation of all structures falling within the statutory
definition of ``manufactured home,'' but it elects not to regulate all
structures that qualify for the RV exemption. However, HUD's OMHP will
continue to regulate those structures that do not qualify for the RV
exemption from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement
regulations. As stated above, HUD has no authority to dictate how its
rule is used by other entities, including state and local governments,
to formulate or interpret their own rules.
Comment: Some commenters recommended that HUD amend the definition
of ``recreational vehicle'' in order to exempt recreational vehicles
beyond those that are factory-built.
HUD Response: HUD appreciates these comments and upon further
consideration agrees that some non-factory-built RVs should qualify for
the exemption, if they were manufactured in non-factory facilities and
still meet all of the remaining exemption requirements. Accordingly,
HUD removes the term ``factory built'' from the definition of
``recreational vehicle.''
Comment: Commenters stated that for accuracy and clarity, HUD
should amend the definition of ``recreational vehicle'' by substituting
the word ``vehicle'' for ``vehicular structure,'' on the grounds that
states and municipalities classify RVs as vehicles--and RV
manufacturers and dealers as ``vehicle'' manufacturers and dealers--for
purposes of regulation and taxation.
HUD Response: HUD appreciates these comments and agrees that
``vehicle'' is an equally appropriate and widely-recognized term.
Accordingly, HUD is including both the terms ``vehicle'' and
``vehicular structure'' in the definition of a ``recreational
vehicle.''
Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should make null and void
existing manufactured housing regulations for snow load and roof slope.
HUD Response: This comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Comment: Commenters stated that it was unclear whether the rule
applied only prospectively, or also retrospectively. Commenters stated
that HUD should ``grandfather'' older products or have a delayed
compliance date of two years after this rule's publication.
HUD Response: Because this rulemaking only affects the manufacture
of RVs, providing a clause ``grandfathering'' older products would have
no effect. Similarly, because the only new requirement imposed by the
rule is the inclusion of a printed Manufacturer's Notice in certain
units, HUD finds that there is no need for a delayed compliance date.
As HUD states in the preamble, the Manufacturer's Notice requirement
under this rule applies to all covered units, beginning with the first
unit to leave production on the 60-day effective date. This provides
manufacturers with sufficient notice to identify which units require
the Manufacturer's Notice and include the Notice in those units prior
to their leaving production.
Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should disclose all who
participated in the formulation of the proposed rule.
HUD Response: As discussed above, HUD formulated its proposed rule
based on a recommendation by the Manufactured Housing Consensus
Committee (MHCC). MHCC members are appointed by the HUD Secretary based
on selection procedures published by the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) or successor organization as modified by the Act. The
MHCC has 21 members at any given time, with seven members in each of
the following categories: (1) Producers or retailers of manufactured
housing; (2) users, representing consumer interests, such as consumer
organizations, recognized consumer leaders, and owners who are
residents of manufactured homes; and (3) general interest and public
official members, three of whom must be public officials. All MHCC
meetings are announced in the Federal Register and are open to the
public. In this final rulemaking, HUD further takes into account public
comment received on the proposed rule.
E. Public Comments Regarding Other Issues
``Tiny home,'' while not formally defined, generally refers to a
type of home that is compact (usually below 400 square feet), on
wheels, and intended for permanent residence. These tiny homes are
gaining popularity even though most are built by do-it-yourself
builders and do not conform to any established building code or
construction standard for safety. The majority of these homes are built
and occupied in ways that do not meet construction standards for
recreational vehicles (RVs), which are designed for use as temporary
living quarters for non-commercial, recreational and/or camping use.
They also do not meet construction standards for a manufactured home,
which is a
[[Page 57685]]
structure, transportable in one or more sections, which in the
traveling mode is 8 body feet or more in width or 40 body feet or more
in length or which when erected on-site is 320 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 in the structure
``except that such terms shall include any structure which meets all
the requirements of this paragraph except the size requirements and
with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a
certification required by the Secretary and complies with the standards
established under this title.'' 42 U.S.C. Section 5402(6). Sizes of
tiny homes can range from around 80-500 square feet in floor area.
Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should investigate and support
the burgeoning ``tiny home'' movement, especially as a potential
solution to the problem of homelessness. Commenters stated that tiny
homes should not be classified as RVs, and HUD should better
distinguish tiny homes from RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should set
standards for or regulate tiny homes, even if they fall outside the
current scope of regulation for manufactured housing or do not fall
within the RV exemption. Commenters stated that HUD should define tiny
homes as permanent dwellings. Commenters stated that HUD should
regulate tiny homes as manufactured housing. Commenters stated that
MHCC should define tiny homes as manufactured homes.
One commenter stated that HUD should broaden the definition of
manufactured housing to include tiny homes, including those that are
under 400 square feet, those that are built by manufacturers, and those
that are built by so-called ``do-it-your-selfers,'' assuming that they
meet or exceed ANSI standards, other than square footage, and are built
on a trailer frame, a foundation, a boat, or piers. Commenters stated
that such tiny homes are fit for year-round use, and should be
recognized as such, particularly if they are insulated and include
heating and cooling systems. Commenters stated that HUD regulation of
tiny homes would make it easier for states and municipalities to
recognize tiny homes as legitimate year-round, permanent dwellings, and
it would make it easier for tiny house owners to obtain insurance
policies.
Commenters stated that there are currently no safety, construction,
or energy efficiency standards specifically and uniformly being applied
to tiny homes. Commenters stated that the National Organization of
Alternative Housing (NOAH) already encourages the tiny home industry to
self-regulate using various standards, e.g., National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NTSHA), NFPA 1192-2015, NFPA 70/National
Electrical Code (NEC), and American Tiny House Association (ATHA).
Commenters stated that tiny homes are designed more for full-time or
permanent living than RVs, that they are often built to code with
durable materials, that they typically exceed RV standards like ANSI
and NFPA, that they are typically smaller than manufactured homes,
e.g., less than 250 square feet, and that they have their own
standards. One commenter cited to NOAH as one viable standard.
Commenters stated that cities like Austin, Texas, Nashville, Tennessee,
Olympia, Washington, Ithaca, New York, and Portland, Oregon, use tiny
homes as an important tool to combat homelessness, e.g., by
establishing tiny home shelters.
A commenter stated that HUD should create a new and separate
exemption for tiny homes, to define them in a fashion similar to the
definition of RV under the prior exemption at 24 CFR 3282.8; e.g., with
a maximum dimension of between 240 and 320 square feet, built on a
single chassis, and permanently towable by a light-duty truck. The
commenter stated that most tiny homes are no larger than 28 by 8 feet
and built on a single chassis. The commenter stated that this exemption
would not apply to larger PMRVs, but it would provide a safe harbor for
innovation. The commenter stated that the proposed rule's reliance on
permanent versus recreational design intent is unnecessarily vague and
discourages the use of energy-efficient insulation.
HUD Response: As stated above, HUD currently regulates as
manufactured housing only those structures that are built on a
permanent chassis and that ``in traveling mode, [are] eight body feet
or more in width or forty body feet or more in length or, when erected
on site, [are] three hundred twenty or more square feet.'' Accordingly,
HUD lacks jurisdiction to regulate any tiny home that is less than
eight body feet in width, 40 body feet in length, or 320 square feet,
or any tiny home that is built on a foundation without a permanent
chassis. While this statutorily precludes HUD from regulating many tiny
homes, manufacturers can voluntarily opt-in to regulation by HUD (See
42 U.S.C. 5402(6)).
That said, HUD is considering whether it should develop Federal
Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards to allow
manufactured homes with reduced dimensions and design requirements to
be built to a national preemptive HUD standard. Additionally, the
International Code Council (ICC) has recently considered a ``tiny house
appendix,'' which is incorporated into the 2018 International
Residential Code. HUD will consider other appropriate measures,
including potential rulemaking related to tiny homes, as it receives
new information.
Comment: Many commenters stated their concern that the rule could
have negative consequences for the tiny home community. Commenters
stated that the rule would have the effect of banning tiny homes.
Commenters stated that HUD should not regulate tiny homes at all.
Commenters stated that by requiring compliance with either ANSI/NFPA
standards or HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards
and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, HUD
would extinguish the community of small-scale hobbyist and small-
business builders of tiny homes, which would in turn kill innovation in
construction and manufacturing--particularly given that the exemption
as stated in the proposed rule only applies to factory-built
structures. Commenters stated that by restricting the tiny home
movement, the rule would allow other countries to gain tiny home
advantages over the United States.
HUD Response: As already discussed, it is neither HUD's intention
nor goal with this rule to regulate temporary, recreational structures
in the form of RVs. At the same time, HUD is cognizant of the increased
popularity of so-called ``tiny homes,'' many of which are purported to
be built to the ANSI A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle standard.
HUD believes that consumers should be fully aware of the construction
standard used to build a particular product at the time of purchase. If
a tiny home is a ``manufactured home'' as defined by statute, then it
can be regulated as manufactured housing, unless it also falls within
HUD's regulatory exemption for recreational vehicles as provided by
this final rule. If a tiny home is not a ``manufactured home'' as
defined by statute, then HUD does not have authority to regulate its
construction under its Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement
regulations. It is also important that the general public be aware that
HUD regulates manufacturers
[[Page 57686]]
of manufactured homes, as defined by statute.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
This rulemaking incorporates by reference ANSI A119.5-15 and NFPA
1192-15 consensus standards for Recreational Vehicles. The Recreation
Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) sponsors and is accredited to
manage the ANSI A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard, which
is designed specifically for PMRVs. According to the RVIA, ``[m]embers
of the engineering profession and others associated with the design,
manufacture, and inspection of Park Model Recreational Vehicles have
been aware of the need for a standard providing for healthful and safe,
portable, seasonal housing, arranged and equipped to assure suitable
living conditions. They have also recognized that because of conditions
of transport, size, and use, existing standards for permanent buildings
and recreational vehicles are not completely applicable to Park Model
RVs. It is with these factors in mind that this standard has been
developed.'' \15\ Specifically, the ANSI A119.5-15 standard covers fire
and life safety criteria and plumbing for PMRVs considered necessary to
provide a reasonable level of protection from loss of life from fire
and explosion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See RVIA, Standard for Park Model Recreational Vehicles,
http://www.rvia.org/UniPop.cfm?v=2&OID=6772&CC=7040.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) develops and
maintains the NFPA 1192 Standard on Recreational Vehicles. According to
NFPA, ``Those members of the engineering profession and others
associated with the design, manufacturing, and inspection of
recreational vehicles have been aware of the need for uniform technical
standards leading to the proper use of this special type of equipment.
They also have recognized that, because of conditions of transport,
size, and use, existing standards for motor vehicles or permanent
buildings are not completely applicable to recreational vehicles.''
\16\ The NFPA 1192-15 standard provides the minimum construction
standards considered necessary to protect against loss of life from
fire and explosion for non-Park Model Recreational Vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards?mode=code&code=1192.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorporated standards have the same force and effect as 24 CFR
part 3282, except that whenever reference standards and 24 CFR part
3282 are inconsistent, the requirements of 24 CFR part 3282 prevail to
the extent of the inconsistency. The Department will enforce the listed
editions of incorporated material. Where two or more incorporated
standards are equivalent in application, the manufacturer may use
either standard.
HUD has worked with both organizations to ensure that both ANSI
A119.5-15 and NFPA 1192-15 are available via read-only, electronic
access. NFPA 1192-15 is available at http://www.nfpa.org/freeaccess.
ANSI A119.5-15 is available for review at www.rvia.org/?ESID=A119.
Additionally, interested parties have access to the standards through
their normal course of business.
VII. Findings and Certifications
Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563
Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), a
determination must be made whether a regulatory action is significant
and, therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the order.
Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review)
directs executive agencies to analyze regulations that are outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify,
streamline, expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been
learned. Executive Order 13563 also directs that, where relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives, and to the extent
permitted by law, agencies are to identify and consider regulatory
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of
choice for the public.
This rule is a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and was formally
reviewed by the OMB. This rule revises the definition of recreational
vehicle to clarify the types of recreational vehicles exempted from 24
CFR parts 3280 and 3282. In the past, both consumers and manufacturers
of recreational vehicles have questioned whether certain recreational
vehicles are subject to HUD's Construction and Safety Standards,
codified in 24 CFR part 3280 (the HUD Code), and HUD's Manufactured
Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, codified in 24 CFR part
3282. This rule will provide that a recreational vehicle is exempted
from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its
Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations if the unit is
built in conformance with either NFPA 1192-15, Standard on Recreational
Vehicles, or ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard.
Executive Order 13771 and Executive Order 13777
Under the leadership of Secretary Carson, HUD has undertaken an
effort, consistent with Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339), entitled
``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,'' to identify
and eliminate or streamline regulations that are wasteful, inefficient
or unnecessary. In furtherance of this objective, the Secretary has
also led HUD's implementation of Executive Order 13777 (82 FR 12285),
entitled ``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda.'' Executive Order
13777 reaffirms the rulemaking principles of Executive Order 13771 by
directing each agency to establish a Regulatory Reform Task Force to
evaluate existing regulations to identify those that merit repeal,
replacement, modification, are outdated, unnecessary, or are
ineffective, eliminate or inhibit job creation, impose costs that
exceed benefits, or derive from or implement Executive Orders that have
been rescinded or significantly modified. This final rule is considered
an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated
cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic
analysis.
Summary of Benefits and Costs of Final Rule
Exemption Criteria
Under this rule, self-propelled RVs qualify for the RV exemption,
insofar as they meet all three RV exemption criteria by definition. For
towable RVs, however, the standard for the RV exemption is clarified to
provide that the RV must be designed, built, and certified in
accordance with one of two national standards: NFPA 1192-15, Standard
for Recreational Vehicles; or ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational
Vehicle Standard. These standards are already being used by the
Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) in its standards,
inspection, and self-certification process. HUD concludes that the
exemption criteria for towable RVs impose negligible costs on the
market of RV manufacturers and consumers.
As far as benefits of the new exemption criteria on the market are
concerned, the rule provides regulatory clarity to both RV
manufacturers and consumers. HUD's Office of Manufactured Housing
receives approximately 4-6 complaints per year
[[Page 57687]]
on the topic of RVs. In reviewing these complaints, HUD has determined
that some come from manufacturers questioning whether a competitor's RV
product is exempt from HUD's manufactured housing regulations. These
manufacturers may be unsure of the scope of the exemption and feel that
the RV in question meets the statutory definition of manufactured
housing and does not satisfy the existing RV exemption. Complaints also
have been submitted by consumers, who experience difficulty in
determining whether their RVs meet the statutory definition of
manufactured housing and are suitable for full-time living. This final
rule provides both manufacturers and consumers additional clarity to
make informed decisions without additional help from HUD.
Manufacturer's Notice
The Manufacturer's Notice, required for an ANSI-certified PMRVs to
be exempt from HUD manufactured housing regulation, imposes a
negligible or nonexistent burden on industry and provides informational
benefit to consumers. RVIA already requires a seal to be affixed to
PMRVs meeting the ANSI standard. RVIA's own statement in support of
this rule indicates that there will be no additional cost as a result
of this notice. RVIA's current seal does not satisfy HUD's standard for
the Manufacturer's Notice, however, which provides specific
requirements regarding the content and prominence of the notice and
which requires the notice to be prominently displayed in the unit and
delivered to the consumer before the sale transaction is complete,
regardless of whether the transaction occurs online or in person.
Nevertheless, HUD's Manufacturer's Notice requirement is not
burdensome. A PMRV manufacturer could satisfy this requirement with at
most two printed sheets of paper per PMRV: One in the kitchen, and one
delivered to the consumer before the transaction. These sheets could be
identical for every PMRV and would not need to be modified between
sales. In the case of an online transaction, the seller could deliver
the notice to the purchaser by email or include the notice as a
document in the transaction process and leave the notice in the
kitchen.
RVIA data show that about 4,000 PMRVs are sold each year by 22
manufacturers. The costs of ensuring that a notice is printed, included
within a sales packet, and left in the PMRV kitchen are negligible. A
simple calculation is that 22 quality managers, one at each PMRV
manufacturer, will prepare a manufacturer's notice and include it in
their manufacturer information and sales packet, spending up to one
hour in the process. A Bureau of Labor Statistics estimate for a
quality manager (Managers--All other) mean wage is $54.41 as of May
2017. A loaded wage may be double that. In this scenario, 22 quality
managers might incur a cost of $2,394, if this task took them a full
hour each year. Printing 8,000 sheets of paper at $0.10 each, a
conservative estimate, would yield an additional cost of $800.
Conclusion
This rule can be considered deregulatory, as it imposes only de
minimis new costs and creates potential cost savings for consumers and
manufacturers by providing additional clarity to inform production and
purchasing of RVs. In practice, HUD has not exercised regulatory
oversight over RV manufacturers and only seeks to update its
regulations to conform to its existing practices. The new exemption
criteria are less exacting than the existing criteria, and possibly
than industry self-regulation as well. The requirement for a
Manufacturer's Notice in the case of PMRVs comes at negligible cost,
estimated conservatively at less than $4,000 per year for the entire RV
industry. This cost will be easily outweighed by the regulatory clarity
that the exemption provides to the RV industry and consumers.
Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
It is HUD's position that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule is intended to clarify and effectively expand the RV
exemption and ensure that RV manufacturers have a clear understanding
of which units qualify to be exempt. In addition to benefiting the
consumer by providing clarity regarding the manufactured housing
standards used to construct the unit, this rule would reduce the
paperwork burden and costs of construction delays on RV manufacturers.
As noted above, there are 22 manufacturers. The small business size
standard is 1,000 employees for NAICS Code 336211. Pursuant to the
small business size standard, 14 of the 22 manufacturers are small. The
final rule would apply to all of them. However, the economic impact
will not be significant. This rule's notice requirement, the
Manufacturer's Notice in question, may be produced and displayed within
a unit at $1.00 expense for each unit to the manufacturer. The average
small business will need to prepare an estimated 300 notices per year.
As such, a small business may incur $150 in additional costs. Easing
the process for RV certification assists manufacturers, while the
Manufacturer's Notice requirement supports achievement of the goal of
ensuring a clear distinction between RV structures and residential
manufactured housing. Accordingly, the undersigned certifies that this
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and
tribal governments and the private sector. This rule does not impose
any federal mandates on any state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector within the meaning of the UMRA.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements contained in this
regulation have been approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned OMB Control Number 2502-NEW.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information, unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
In its proposed rule, HUD estimated the burden of information
collection in the rule and solicited public comments on that estimate.
HUD received several public comments regarding the information
collection estimate. One comment stated that HUD's proposed information
collection was accurate and necessary to carry out the purposes of the
proposed rule. Several others, as part of a letter writing campaign,
stated that HUD's proposed collection would not enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected. HUD considered
the comments and concludes that the Manufacturer's Notice provides
important information to prospective purchases of Park Model RVs that
may otherwise be uninformed about the design of Park Model RVs for
[[Page 57688]]
recreational use and temporary occupancy. HUD did not receive any
comments from OMB. In this final rule, HUD is updating its information
collection analysis based on current RV industry data. Specifically,
HUD has confirmed that the number of RV manufacturers that build and
ship Park Model RV's, in accordance with ANSI-A119.5-15, total
approximately 22 manufacturers. HUD has also updated the burden
estimate necessary for each affected manufacturer to provide 2 copies
of the manufacturer's notice (see Sec. 3282.15(c)).
Environmental Impact
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the
environment was made at the proposed rule stage in accordance with HUD
regulations in 24 CFR part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). That
FONSI remains applicable to this final rule and is available for public
inspection during regular business hours in the Regulations Division,
Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to
security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an
appointment to review the FONSI by calling the Regulations Division at
202-402-3055 (this is not a toll-free number).
Federalism Impact
Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency
from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule
either (1) imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and
local governments and is not required by statute, or (2) the rule
preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and
funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order. This rule
does not have federalism implications and does not impose substantial
direct compliance costs on state and local governments or preempt state
law within the meaning of the Executive Order.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for the
Manufactured Housing Program is 14.171.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 3282
Administrative practice and procedure, Consumer protection,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Investigations, Manufactured homes, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD amends
part 3282 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 3282--MANUFACTURED HOME PROCEDURAL AND ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 3282 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2461; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 5403, and 5424.
Sec. 3282.8 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 3282.8, remove and reserve paragraph (g).
0
3. Add Sec. 3282.15 to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 3282.15 Exemption for recreational vehicles
(a) Exemption. A recreational vehicle that meets the requirements
of this section is exempt from 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282.
(b) Definition. A recreational vehicle is:
(1) A vehicle or vehicular structure not certified as a
manufactured home;
(2) Designed only for recreational use and not as a primary
residence or for permanent occupancy; and is either:
(i) Built and certified in accordance with either NFPA 1192
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 3282.16) or ANSI A119.5
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 3282.16) as provided by paragraph
(c) of this section; or
(ii) Any vehicle which is self-propelled.
(c) Notice and certification requirements. In order for the
exemption to apply to an ANSI A119.5-15 certified recreational vehicle,
a Manufacturer's Notice must be delivered to the consumer prior to the
completion of the sales transaction. The Manufacturer's Notice must
also be prominently displayed in a temporary manner in the kitchen
(i.e., countertop or exposed cabinet face). The Manufacturer's Notice
must meet the following requirements:
(1) Title of Manufacturer's Notice. The title of the Manufacturer's
Notice shall be ``*****MANUFACTURER'S NOTICE*****'' which shall be
legible and typed using bold letters at least 1 inch in size.
(2) Content of Notice. The content of the Manufacturer's Notice
text shall be as follows:
The Manufacturer of this unit certifies that it is a Park Model
Recreational Vehicle designed only for recreational use, and not for
use as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy. The manufacturer
of this unit further certifies that this unit has been built in
accordance with the ANSI A119.5-15 consensus standard for Park Model
Recreational Vehicles.
(3) Text of Notice. The text of the Manufacturer's Notice, aside
from the Manufacturer's Notice's title shall be legible and typed using
letters at least \1/2\ inch in size.
(4) Removal of Manufacturer's Notice. The Manufacturer's Notice
shall not be removed by any party until the entire sales transaction
has been completed.
(5) Completion of sales transaction. A sales transaction with a
Park Model Recreational Vehicle purchaser is considered completed when
all the goods and services that the dealer agreed to provide at the
time the contract was formed have been provided. Completion of a retail
sale will be at the time the dealer completes installation of the Park
Model Recreational Vehicle, if the dealer has agreed to provide the
installation, or at the time the dealer delivers the recreational
vehicle to a transporter, if the dealer has not agreed to transport or
install the Park Model Recreational Vehicle. The sale is also complete
upon delivery to the site if the dealer has not agreed to provide
installation as completion of sale.
0
4. Add Sec. 3282.16 to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 3282.16 Incorporation by reference
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that
specified in this section, the Department must publish a document in
the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public.
All approved material is available for inspection at the Office of
Manufactured Housing Programs, Manufactured Housing and Construction
Standards Division, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street SW, Room B-133, Washington, DC 20410, 202-402-5216, and
is available from the sources listed below. Copies of incorporated
standards that are not available from their producer organizations may
be obtained from the Office of Manufactured Housing Programs. These
standards are also available for inspection at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA). For more information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to
http://
[[Page 57689]]
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
(b) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch
Park, Quincy, MA 02169, telephone number 800-344-3555, website http://www.nfpa.org.
(1) NFPA 1192, Standard on Recreational Vehicles, 2015 Edition,
issued August 14, 2014, IBR approved for Sec. 3282.15(b).
(2) [Reserved]
(c) Recreational Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA), 1896 Preston
White Drive, Reston, VA 20191, telephone number 703-620-6003, website
http://www.rvia.org.
(1) ANSI A119.5: Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard, 2015
Edition, ANSI-approved April 7, 2015, IBR approved for Sec.
3282.15(b).
(2) [Reserved]
Dated: November 8, 2018.
Brian D. Montgomery,
Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2018-24950 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P