Posts Tagged ‘Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee’

HUD Secretary Ben Carson Surprise Appearance at Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee, Exclusive Quotes – Addressing Manufactured Home Industry

May 2nd, 2019 Comments off



HUD Secretary Ben Carson told the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) yesterday that manufactured housing “is a product which clearly fills a need that would otherwise go unmet.”


Secretary Carson made a surprise appearance that the MHCC meeting in Washington, D.C. yesterday.
Per informed sources, HUD’s Office of Manufactured Housing Programs (OMHP) staff requested Carson come by and address the group, which occurred at about 2:30 PM ET on 5.1.2019. The MHCC is part of the regulatory reform mandated by the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000.

Secretary Carson said that “HUD is a strong proponent of manufactured housing.”

• “Manufactured housing is one of our real priorities.”

• “We want to reduce regulatory barriers while maintaining quality, durability and safety” of manufactured housing.

• “Home ownership is the principal mechanism for the development of wealth in this country.”

• HUD is committed to “protecting the quality, durability, safety and AFFORDABILITY of manufactured housing,” emphasis on the word affordability has been added by MHProNews to stress a point that Carson made.

Each of these points Dr. Carson respectfully shared with attendees are ones made on MHLivingNews and/or here on MHProNews over the years.

But it is refreshing to hear HUD’s Secretary to repeatedly be making such positive comments. See his comments to the industry last year, when he pledged a “new era of cooperation” with the industry. The comments below were provided by HUD to MHProNews – and can be accessed via the linked text-image box below.


“A New Era of Cooperation and Coordination,” is Promised by HUD Secretary Carson, Saying “I Hear You”


For those who won’t be attending the MHI meeting in New Orleans, HUD has assured MHProNews that the full text of Carson’s address will be provided. So you can save time, travel and hassles – and read it all, right here on the Daily Business News on MHProNews for free, next week.

The photo at the top is from a HUD’s ManuFACTured Housing Newsletter dated March 2017. That’s significant, because facts matter. An industry blogger, regrettably known for mistaken or misleading statements, said recently asked and answered (incorrectly) this question. ‘When was the last such newsletter published?’ Our records indicate December 2015…” Wrong. Will said blogger print a correction?

Time will tell.


MHProNews Correction

Speaking of correction, fair is fair. MHProNews needs to adjust a mis-read of our own. We’ve previously stated that Amazon’s Alexa Fund, which co-ventured with Obvious Ventures in Plant Prefab in getting into factory-home building, had cited the new housing market figure of $330 billion a year here in the U.S. That statement indeed came from the same press release, but it was Obvious Ventures – which is de facto partnering with Amazon’s Alexa Fund in Plant Prefabs that cited that figure. Our apologies for the misstatement, which is hereby amended.



MHProNews correctly cited the quotes herein above, but later conflated Alexa and Obvious as to who said the $330 billion dollar comment. That said, both firms are involved in Plant Prefab. Rephrased, it was a nuanced point, that we are hereby correcting, per SPJ Code of Ethics standards.

While the point is nuanced, the essence of the facts we reported nevertheless remains the same and had the same source. Alexa Fund and Obvious Ventures see a $330 billion dollar new home market. HUD Secretary Carson sees manufactured housing in very positive terms.

There will be another upcoming report on Secretary Carson and manufactured housing. While there is work to do at HUD, it must be acknowledged that Carson is taking steps more routinely than his predecessors in raising the profile of the industry in a positive way.


Watch for another report about Carson and MHVille before this weekend, only here on the Daily Business News on MHProNews, where “We Provide, You Decide,” © ## (News, analysis, and commentary.)



To report a news tip, click the image above or send an email to – To help us spot your message in our volume of email, please put the words NEWS TIP in the subject line.

NOTICE: You can get our ‘read-hot’ industry-leading emailed headline news updates, at this link here. You can join the scores who follow us on Twitter at this link. Connect on LinkedIn here.

NOTICE 2: Readers have periodically reported that they are getting a better experience when reading MHProNews on the Microsoft Edge, or Apple Safari browser than with Google’s Chrome browser. Chrome reportedly manipulates the content of a page more than the other two browsers do.

(Related Reports are further below. Third-party images and content are provided under fair use guidelines.)

1) To sign up in seconds for our MH Industry leading emailed news updates, click here.


To see a sample of our emailed news update, click here. To sign up for the factory-built home industry’s #1 headline news, click here or the graphic above.

2) To pro-vide a News Tips and/or Commentary, click the link to the left. Please note if comments are on-or-off the record, thank you.

3) Marketing, Web, Video, Consulting, Recruiting and Training Re-sources

SoheylaKovachDailyBusinessNewsMHProNewsMHLivingNewsSubmitted by Soheyla Kovach to the Daily Business News for Soheyla is a managing member of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and

Related Reports:

You can click on the image/text boxes to learn more about that topic.

“Lead, Follow … Or Get Out of The Way”

MHARR Calls on HUD Secretary to End Discriminatory And Exclusionary Zoning of HUD-Regulated Manufactured Homes

Newly Published Regional State Data Reflects Gainers, Losers in New Manufactured Homes Shipped

Warning – Number 1 Manufactured Housing State, Texas – Reports Month Over Month Rise, Year over Year Shipment Decline Continues


Skyline Champion (SKY) Hedge Fund Dumps Shares, Value Declines

New Investigation, Insider Trades, Hedge Fund Dumps Cavco Industries (CVCO)

Prosperity Now, Nonprofits Sustain John Oliver’s “Mobile Homes” Video in Their Reports






HUD Updates: Safety Precautions or Regulatory Overreach?

September 9th, 2017 Comments off


The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is preparing to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which would make updates to the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards, according to Occupational Health and Safety (OHS).

They state that the proposed rules have been adopted at the recommendation of the HUD Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC). This is in addition to another proposed rule that is currently under review, which will have a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published sometime in September.

According to the website, the proposed rule is based on the third set of MHCC recommendations to update and improve various aspects of the Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards,” according to OHS.

It would add new standards that would establish requirements for carbon monoxide detection, stairways, fire safety considerations for attached garages, and for draftstops when there is a usable space above and below the concealed space of a floor/ceiling assembly, and it also would establish requirements for venting systems to ensure that proper separation is maintained between the air intake and exhaust systems.”

MHARR responds

In a press release, linked here, the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) pointed out that even though these proposed rules may be “based on the third set of recommendations” by MHCC, those recommendations were subjected to editorial revisions” by HUD.


Featured image credit, Brady Homes.

MHARR also reminded industry members that in the past, those revisions have been used by HUD to significantly modify the MHCC recommendations.

MHARR has spoken out on more than one occasion about excessive regulations being created by HUD, including the recent issues regarding federal preemption on a number of issues including fire sprinklers, and a proposed Frost-Free Interpretive Bulletin.

MHARR will continue to carefully monitor the rulemaking process for this new round of manufactured housing standards to ensure that the program does not engage in its customary manipulations in violation of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000,” per MHARR. ## (News.)

(Image credits are as shown above, and when provided by third parties, are shared under fair use guidelines.)

JuliaGranowiczManufacturedHomeLivingNewsMHProNews-comSubmitted by Julia Granowicz to the Daily Business News for MHProNews.




HUD’s Over Regulation of Manufactured Housing, Industry, Consumer Impact

August 31st, 2017 Comments off

Featured image credit, Brady Homes.

The Department for Housing and Urban Development (HUD), has churned out more proposed new regulations for the manufactured housing industry, per a release from the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR).

In just the last month the Daily Business News reported on proposed new regulations for installation standards, and a “frost free” Interpretive Bulletin.

Now in HUDs latest edition of their Semi-Annual Regulatory Agenda (SRA), MHARR tells MHProNews , “it will soon issue a proposed rule that – as described by HUD –would “add new standards that would establish requirements for carbon monoxide detection, stairways, fire safety considerations for attached garages, and draftstops when there is a usable space above and below the concealed space of a floor/ceiling assembly.” 

In addition,” says MHARR, “the impending proposed rule, according to HUD, “would establish requirements for venting systems to ensure that proper separation is maintained between the air intake and exhaust systems.”

In the SRA, HUD says that the proposed rule “is based on the third set of recommendations” which are developed by the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC). However, they also say that those recommendations were subjected to “editorial revisions” by HUD.

MHARR pointed out that in the past this has meant significant modifications from the original recommendations of the MHCC.

And as Daily Business News readers know, HUD has at times rejected MHCC recommendations, and advanced their own.


Click here for industry professionals insights on the issue of removing Pam Danner from HUD.

The MHARR release also said that, “If there were need for a further illustration of the urgent need for new leadership at the HUD manufactured housing program – with the re-assignment and replacement of the current Obama Administration holdover director” – the fact that the new proposed rule for manufactured housing was the only proposed rule for HUD in the entire SRA, is exactly that.

The full MHARR release is available for download here. The SRA is available for download here. ## (News, analysis.)

(Image credits are as shown above, and when provided by third parties, are shared under fair use guidelines.)

JuliaGranowiczManufacturedHomeLivingNewsMHProNews-comSubmitted by Julia Granowicz to the Daily Business News for MHProNews.




Retailers, Communities, Producers Warned – Another HUD Power Grab

June 27th, 2017 Comments off

In what the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) says is a violation of the Trump Administration’s Executive Orders issued January 20, 2017 to ease regulations, the HUD MH program published an interpretive bulletin (IB) in the Federal Register that will alter the standards for MH foundations in “freezing climates.”

Having first emerged in April, 2016, MHARR states this is another example of an “out of control… program Administrator who appears to be pursuing an individual agenda particularly targeting smaller industry businesses.” MHARR says not only does it fly in the face of recommendations of the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC), it will also unnecessarily increase the cost of manufactured homes to smaller producers as well as to lower income prospective consumers. MHARR adds it will continue to benefit revenue-driven HUD program contractors.

HUD Ignores Regulatory Freeze

(Mark Weiss, CEO MHARR, Credit: MHProNews)

Terming it another HUD power grab, MHARR says the IB violates the regulatory “freeze” order which directs all Federal regulatory heads to refrain from sending regulations to the Federal Register “until a department or agency head appointed or designated by the President after noon on January 20, 2017 reviews and approves the regulation.”

MHARR says the bulletin was issued under the name of General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing Genger Charles, an Obama holdover, and not an agency head. Additionally, the IB defies the Trump Administration Executive Order that requires a governmental agency to repeal two existing regulations for each new one it imposes, something HUD has clearly not done.

MHARR urges all program stakeholders to contact their congressional representatives and HUD officials to withdraw the IB. Comments on the proposal are due on or before August 21, 2017.

To down load the pdf click here. ##

(Image credits are as shown above, and when provided by third parties, are shared under fair use guidelines.)

Submitted by Matthew J. Silver to Daily Business News on MHProNews.

MHARR’s Mark Weiss takes on HUD: Production, Paperwork and Contractor Make-Work

October 24th, 2016 Comments off

Image credits: Teleread, MHARR and HUD logos, all used here under fair use guidelines.

All of this change – without the benefit of actual rulemaking (as required by the 2000 law) — was touted by HUD (and others), at the time, as a money-saver. But it has not worked out that way, – M. Mark Weiss

A news and analysis from M. Mark Weiss, President and CEO of the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR), digs into the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) manufactured housing program enforcement system.

First published in the October 2016 edition of The Journal, Weiss turns to data to show that the HUD system is overly dependent on paid contractors.


M. Mark Weiss.

MHARR, its fair to say, has been a consistent critic of a HUD manufactured housing program enforcement system that is overly dependent on paid contractors, and a contracting system that – in addition to being fundamentally non-competitive over its entire history — improperly allows contractors to perform inherently governmental functions and, worst of all, incentivizes contractors to find fault with the homes, plants and offices that they ‘audit,’” said Weiss.

While all this is bad enough, HUD, since 2010, has made matters far worse with its unilateral program of expanded in-plant regulation, which changed the entire focus and nature of that regulation.

From the very start, MHARR (alone) went on record objecting to this change as not only being in violation of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000, but also a make-work sop for the entrenched program monitoring contractor. And now there is specific data — ironically from the contractor itself — which confirms the fundamental “make-work” character of this program,” MHARR’s CEO said.

Weiss points to years of HUD related data.


Credit: HUD.

…let’s review the known – and indisputable – facts,” said Weiss.

Between 1998 and 2015, the production of HUD Code manufactured homes fell from 374,143 to 70,544 homes per year, a contraction of approximately 81 percent. Records of HUD’s contract spending before 2005 are not readily available, though, so we’ll focus on the period between 2005 and 2015. 

During that ten-year period, HUD Code production fell from 146,881 homes in 2005, to – again – 70,544 homes in 2015, or a contraction of just under 52 percent.  Now, one would think, during an extended period of declining production covering multiple contract terms, that the amounts budgeted (and paid) for contract “monitoring” services (as defined in the 2000 reform law) would have declined, roughly in proportion to the decline in production (adjusted for inflation).

Weiss says, “But that did not happen.  Budget justifications submitted by HUD to Congress each year between Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 and FY 2017, show that budgeted payments to the program-monitoring contractor remained effectively constant until FY 2010.

Weiss continued to point to the data cited in his article.

In 2008, with HUD Code production in free fall, the HUD program (through its then-Administrator) approached the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) with proposed changes to the in-plant regulatory system, including, among other things, the role of Primary Inspection Agencies (PIAs), the nature of the “inspections” and corresponding reports provided by PIAs, and the ‘monitoring’ of those activities by HUD, though the program’s one – and only – ‘monitoring’ contractor.  


As well-informed manfactured housing professionals know, part of the purpose of the HUD Code for manufactured homes is to establish a system that is performance-based and saves consumers money, without sacrificing on energy or safety features. To see the video still shown above, click here.

After fully debating this series of disconnected and disjointed HUD proposals, the Committee ultimately determined that it could not reach the consensus required by the 2000 reform law.  And the matter should have ended there, but did not,” Weiss said.

Contemporaneously with the de facto rejection of these proposals by the MHCC, the HUD program, without further consultation with the MHCC, began to develop and — by March 2010 – implement, the paper blizzard of “Standard Operating Procedures,” “guidelines,” “field guidance,” flow charts and other pseudo-regulatory mandates that changed the fundamental focus of the in-plant regulatory system to the review (and modification) of manufacturer ‘quality control’ systems.

Weiss cites that with expanded in-plant regulation came multiple new reports and paperwork by manufacturers, PIA’s, and the monitoring contractor, which then turned into multiple reviews of those reports, multiple layers of meetings and the use of “consultants” between manufacturers.

All of this change – without the benefit of actual rulemaking (as required by the 2000 law) — was touted by HUD (and others), at the time, as a money-saver,” said Weiss.

But it has not worked out that way.

Weiss points out that once the program of expanded in-plant regulation went into effect (in 2010) budgeted funding for the contractor – despite declining production, numbers of manufacturers, numbers of manufacturing plants and numbers of retailer locations – began to increase, and has increased at an accelerating rate ever since.

Naturally, in order to keep pace with these rising contract expenditures at a time of substantially-reduced industry production, and with a new $25 million five-year contract awarded to the contractor in 2013, HUD – in 2014 – raised the certification label fee for every new manufactured home by a record-setting 156 percent, claiming, incredulously, that despite significant, long-term industry production declines, the magnitude of its ‘responsibilities’ remained ‘unchanged,’” said Weiss.


Video report with prior HUD Code manufactured home program administrator, Bill Matchneer, JD, offers powerful insights separate from, but related to this issue, to see the video interview, click here or the image above.

While it has thus been obvious all along that this expanded in-plant regulation has been all about maintaining and increasing contractor billings, revenues and de facto authority in the face of a prolonged industry downturn, there is now direct evidence showing that this is little more than a “make-work” enterprise for the contractor, as MHARR has maintained.

Weiss cites that rather than a legitimate and bona fide inspection system, the HUD program of expanded in-plant regulation is a “paper chase,” with high, and rising, costs in return for little or no corresponding consumer benefits.

In MHARR’s view, with a new administration taking office in Washington in 2017, the industry and consumers have an opportunity to seek real and necessary change in the HUD enforcement system to reduce unnecessary costs and regulatory burdens through fundamental contract reform, while preserving consumer protection and the bedrock quality and affordability of today’s manufactured housing,” said Weiss. ##

(Editor’s Note: for more commentary from Weiss on HUD from earlier this year, click here.)

(Image credits are as shown above.)


RC Williams, for Daily Business News, MHProNews.

Submitted by RC Williams to the Daily Business News for MHProNews.


MHARR Braces for EPA’s New Formaldehyde Ruling

July 28th, 2016 Comments off

medium_density_fiberboard__mdf_123RF__credit postedDailyBusinessNewsMHProNewsThe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is prepared to publish the final rule for national formaldehyde standards for composite wood products like particle board, hardwood plywood and MDF board (medium-density fiberboard), as the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) tells MHProNews.

The final EPA standards are important for manufactured housing because the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) must revise its own MH standards to comply with the new directive.

Since the new standards require more restrictive emissions criteria as well as higher costs for composite wood products used in all homes, MHARR says the existing HUD formaldehyde standards should be repealed, as should the red formaldehyde currently mandated by HUD. The removal of these two current standards would save money for the industry and consumers.

MHARR says that HUD will likely initiate its own rulemaking to reflect the new EPA requirements, at which time MHARR will thoroughly review the EPA final rule as well as HUD’s rulemaking process. It should be noted also that in accordance with the requirements of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000, HUD must present this matter to the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee for its consideration. ##

(Photo credit: 123RF–medium-density fiberboard sample)

matthew-silver-daily-business-news-mhpronews-comArticle submitted by Matthew J Silver to Daily Business News-MHProNews.

MHI and MHARR Respond Differently to DOE’s Proposed Energy Standards

June 20th, 2016 Comments off

dept_of_energy__u_s__their_creditIn response to the Department of Energy’s proposed rules on energy standards for manufactured housing in the Federal Register, the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) says it worked closely with the DOE to try and avoid excessive costs to consumers that will outweigh benefits.

The DOE based their recommendations on the Manufactured Housing Working Group:

The MH Working Group’s recommendations were based on the 2015 edition of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), the impact of the IECC on the purchase price of manufactured housing, total lifecycle construction and operating costs, factory design and construction techniques unique to manufactured housing, and the current construction and safety standards set forth by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.”

MHI further says that these regulatory efforts should be in keeping with HUD’s role as the prime regulator of manufactured housing, and “to ensure that these regulations are consistent with the HUD Code. MHI plans to submit written comments during the written comment period. The Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) will also be evaluating the impact of the rule on MH.

Meanwhile, the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) says the proposed rule will add thousands to the cost of MH, depriving many in the moderate to lower-income housing market away of potential homeownership, as well as harming smaller players in the MH industry.

The rule began in 2011 with a selective leak of the proposed rule to the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), the industry’s largest trade organization, and others of interest, until the Office of Management and Budget demanded they re-start the rulemaking process.

The fresh start became an alleged collusion between MHI, the Department of Energy and other special interests to ram a proposed rule through an obscure committee while the DOE “awarded multiple lucrative contracts to MHI-connected ‘research’ entities to, among other, things, tout DOE manufactured housing energy regulation and break-down industry opposition to any ultimate DOE rule.”

MHARR says the DOE then provided a copy of the proposed rule in advance of the official publication date to MHI in an attempt to possibly soften opposition to the rule.

MHARR says the rule offers a solution to a non-existent problem: According to the U. S. Census Bureau, manufactured homes are already energy efficient, comparable, and sometimes lower in energy use, than site built homes.

According to DOE Manufactured Housing Working Group data, the rule would add an average of at least $2,226 to the price of a single-section MH, while adding $3,109 retail to the price of a multi-section home.

MHARR says, however, the cost will likely be closer to $4,000 for a single-section and $6,000 for a multi-section MH, although these do not include testing, enforcement or any compliance costs, and basically amount to a regressive tax that hurts those at the lower end of the economic spectrum, the very demographic affordable, manufactured homes are designed to help.

The DOE would basically impose energy measures on manufactured homes that are already available as options homebuyers can choose from, or not, measures that are not even mandated for million dollar site-built homes in most states.

MHARR says in addition to consumers, the greatest negative jolt will be on smaller HUD Code businesses who do not have the cushion to absorb the up front impact of the proposal.

MHARR says: “Thus, the industry’s largest corporate conglomerates – and their national representative MHI – have not only ‘gone along’ with DOE, but appear to have worked publicly and behind the scenes to advance government action that will disproportionately harm smaller competitors. This, together with a level of industry domination that either does – or will — exceed half the national manufactured housing market, raises antitrust questions that should and will be explored further.”

The DOE did not offer to allow the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) the opportunity to consider the proposed rule or the ramifications of its cost.

MHARR has subsequently filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests because of the closed door collaboration of MHI, Dow and other parties; and seeks documents that show DOE payments to MHI-connected entities and individuals.

MHARR will submit comments to the DOE before Aug. 16, when discussion is closed; and if there are not substantive changes to the rule, MHARR says it may seek legal action.

For the DOE proposal in the Federal Register, please click here. For the link to MHARR’s full statement to MHProNews, please click here. The full download of the NAHB’s priced out study – which reflects the numbers of prospective home buyers lost per each $1000 in price increase – is found in the article linked here##

(Image credit: U. S. Department of Energy)

matthew-silver-daily-business-news-mhpronews-comArticle submitted by Matthew J Silver to Daily Business News-MHProNews.

MHARR Criticizes Danner, HUD for Violating the MH Improvement Act of 2000

April 21st, 2016 Comments off

mharr logoThe Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) tells MHProNews a letter from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to David A. Tompos, president of NTA in Nappanee, IN indicates HUD has hired SEBA Professional Services, LLC to review installation manuals for manufactured homes (MH). The review will be based on the design review process used by the Institute for Building Technology and Safety (IBTS). After review the report will be distributed to the appropriate DAPIA.

A second letter, to manufactured housing stakeholders, from Pamela Beck Danner, Administrator of the Manufactured Housing Programs at HUD, addresses complying with Installation Standards when installing foundation systems in freezing climates. She writes there have been issues with current instructions, and until HUD can complete an assessment of the manuals, and issue definite guidelines, she offers three different options as “interim guidance” to maintain long-lasting stability: conventional footings below the frost line depth; Frost Free Foundations; and Frost Protected Shallow Foundations.

 MHARR responded with a letter to Ms. Danner accusing her of needlessly increasing regulatory compliance costs for MH businesses and consumers while lining the pockets of program contractors. MHARR says her actions also violate the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 which requires review by the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC).

MHARR states for Frost Free Foundations Ms. Danner says to hire a soils engineer or geotechnical engineer to determine if the soil can be made non-frost susceptible, which would add to the expense of the home, about which HUD has said nothing.

Noting that “guidance” directives from HUD often evolve into mandates, circumventing procedural protections, again without the required input of the MHCC, MHARR says the memorandum also violates the primacy of state authority in the interpretation and construction of installation standards adopted pursuant to state law. Increasing the cost of MH makes it less competitive with other types of housing.

In regard to HUD’s unilateral hiring of SEBA to conduct reviews of installation manuals, MHARR asks what are the manuals being reviewed for, what are the qualifications of SEBA to conduct such a review, under what authority is that review being conducted, and what are the justifications for the review?.

MHARR’s insists that these actions run contrary to the 2000 Act and need to be considered by the MHCC as required by law. ##

MHCC set to Meet May 25, 2016 via Teleconference

April 19th, 2016 Comments off

HUD logoMHProNews has learned from amazonaws the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) will sponsor a teleconference meeting on Wed., May 25, 2016 from 1 PM to 4 PM Eastern Daylight Time.

A public meeting, citizens wanting to comment are encouraged to register in advance, and the MHCC will strive to include citizen comments within the time constraints of the meeting agenda.

In addition to approving the minutes from the Jan. 19, 2016 meeting, Technical Systems Subcommittee, NFPA 70-2014, the agenda will focus on consideration of replacing Subpart I

of 24 CFR 3280 with incorporation by reference of applicable provisions of NFPA 70,

National Electrical Code-2014. MHCC will also review submitted proposed amendments to NFPA 70, National Electrical Code.

The MHCC is an advisory committee, and can only make recommendations to HUD. ##

(Image credit: Department of Housing and Urban Development)

matthew-silver-daily-business-news-mhpronews-comArticle submitted by Matthew J. Silver to Daily Business News-MHProNews.

MHARR Presses MH Administrator to Retract New On-site Rule

February 4th, 2016 Comments off

mharr logoFollowing MHProNews‘ post Jan. 28, 2016 regarding the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform’s criticism of HUD for increasing the inspection of on-site manufactured homes, which also increases the cost to the consumer, the Sept. 8, 2015 rule is set to take effect March 7, 2016.

Presented during the Louisville Manufactured Housing Show at a Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) meeting in Jan., not one member of the MHCC voted in favor of it.

MHARR says combined with the current AC regulations, the new on-site measures would add “unnecessary on-site procedures and mandates so extensive and costly that they would destroy the ability of manufacturers and retailers to affordably provide consumers with features and amenities they clearly want.”

To this end, MHARR has written a letter to the manufactured housing program Administrator Pamela Danner. The letter is downloaded here.


(Image credit: Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform)

matthew-silver-daily-business-news-mhpronews-comArticle submitted by Matthew J. Silver to Daily Business News-MHProNews.