[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 250 (Monday, December 31, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67690-67695]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-32173]



[[Page 67689]]

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

Part VII





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration



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



49 CFR Part 393



Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Manufactured Home 
Tires; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 250 / Monday, December 31, 2001 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 67690]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 393

[Docket No. FMCSA-97-2341]


Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Manufactured 
Home Tires

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; denial of petitions for rulemaking and for 
extension of deadline.

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

SUMMARY: The FMCSA is amending its tire regulation to reflect the 
expiration of a provision allowing the overloading of tires used for 
the transportation of manufactured homes. The agency is also denying 
petitions from the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) for rulemaking 
and for an extension of the expiration date of the overloading 
provision, and from Multinational Legal Services, PLLC (Multinational 
Legal Services), for rescission of an earlier extension of the 
expiration date. Currently, tires used in the transportation of 
manufactured homes may be loaded up to 18 percent over the load rating 
marked on the sidewall of the tires, or in the absence of such a 
marking, 18 percent above the load rating specified in publications of 
certain organizations specializing in tires. The rule was scheduled to 
expire--thus prohibiting tire overloading--on November 21, 2000, unless 
extended by joint agreement of FMCSA and the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development (HUD). The expiration date was delayed until December 
31, 2001, to give the agency enough time to complete its review of the 
MHI's petition to allow 18-percent overloading on a permanent basis. 
Denial of all petitions means motor carriers are prohibited from 
transporting manufactured homes built on or after January 1, 2002, in 
interstate commerce on overloaded tires.

DATES: The effective date for this final rule is December 31, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Larry W. Minor, Office of Bus and 
Truck Standards and Operations, MC-PSV, (202) 366-4009, Federal Motor 
Carrier Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On February 18, 1998, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and 
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) jointly published 
a final rule amending, respectively, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations (FMCSRs) and an interpretation of the Manufactured Home 
Construction and Safety Standards (see 63 FR 8330). The FHWA and HUD 
actions reduced the amount of tire overloading allowed (at the time up 
to 50 percent above the tire manufacturer's load rating) on tires used 
to transport manufactured homes. As a result of the rulemaking, the 
maximum amount of loading on a manufactured home tire could not exceed 
the manufacturer's load rating by more than 18 percent. Manufactured 
homes transported on tires overloaded by 9 percent or more could not be 
operated at speeds exceeding 80 kilometers per hour (km/hr) (50 mph). 
The final rule allowed 18-percent overloading for a two-year period. 
The two-year period began on November 16, 1998, the effective date of 
the final rule, and was scheduled to end on November 20, 2000.
    In publishing the final rule and interpretative bulletin, the 
agencies indicated there was sufficient data to support the premise 
that overloading tires may be potentially unsafe. The agencies also 
indicated that unless both of them were persuaded by the end of the 
two-year period that 18-percent overloading did not pose a risk to the 
traveling public, or have an adverse impact on safety or the ability of 
motor carriers to transport manufactured homes, any overloading of 
tires beyond their design capacity would be prohibited.

MHI Petition for Rulemaking

    On August 7, 2000, the MHI filed a petition for rulemaking with the 
FMCSA and HUD to initiate a joint rulemaking to amend the agencies' 
rules concerning manufactured home tires to enable the manufactured 
home industry to continue to exceed the tire manufacturer's load rating 
by up to 18 percent, indefinitely. The MHI requested that (1) the FMCSA 
amend 49 CFR 393.75(g); and (2) HUD revise Interpretative Bulletin J-1-
76 to 24 CFR part 3260. MHI recognized that it would be difficult, if 
not impossible, for the FMCSA and HUD to act on the petition and, if 
granted, complete the rulemaking before November 20, 2000. Therefore, 
the MHI also petitioned the FMCSA and HUD to provide interim regulatory 
relief from the November 20, 2000, deadline until the agencies acted on 
the petition for rulemaking. A copy of the MHI's petition for 
rulemaking and request for an exemption are included in the docket 
referenced at the top of this document.

FMCSA and HUD Preliminary Responses to the MHI Petition

    On November 21, 2000, the FMCSA published a final rule delaying the 
termination date of the rule allowing overloading of manufactured home 
tires (65 FR 70218). The FMCSA indicated that it had met with officials 
from HUD to discuss the MHI's request. Both agencies believed that 
MHI's petition and its supporting documentation warranted a thorough 
review, but because relevant staff were otherwise committed, neither 
was able to complete such an analysis before November 20, 2000, the 
termination date established by the 1998 final rule. On November 21, 
2000, HUD amended Interpretative Bulletin J-1-76 to remove a paragraph 
that referenced the November 20, 2000, termination date.

Multinational Legal Services Petition

    On January 16, 2001, Multinational Legal Services filed a petition 
with the FMCSA and HUD requesting that the FMCSA and HUD rescind their 
regulatory actions relating to overloading of manufactured home tires. 
A copy of Multinational Legal Services' petition is included in the 
docket referenced at the beginning of this document. Multinational 
Legal Services argued that the FMCSA and HUD actions delaying the 
termination date are contrary to both Federal law and the public 
interest. Multinational Legal Services claimed that the FMCSA violated 
5 U.S.C. 553(b) by publishing the final rule without prior notice and 
request for public comment. It said the agencies could have requested 
public comment when the MHI submitted its preliminary data on July 7, 
2000. Multinational Legal Services argued that the ``good cause'' 
exception to the requirement for requesting public comment prior to 
issuing a final rule should not apply in this case.
    In addition, Multinational Legal Services asserted that the delay 
in the termination date was issued in violation of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, 110 
Stat. 775) which requires that Federal agencies use standards 
established by voluntary consensus standards organizations unless the 
adoption of the voluntary standards would be impractical or 
inconsistent with law.

[[Page 67691]]

FMCSA Notice of Intent To Deny the Petitions for Rulemaking

    On April 20, 2001 (66 FR 20345), the FMCSA published a notice 
announcing the agency's intent to deny MHI's and Multinational Legal 
Services' petitions for rulemaking. The agency explained that the data 
submitted by MHI in August, 2000, did not provide an adequate basis on 
which to allow continued 18-percent overloading of tires. FMCSA 
requested comments from all interested parties, and encouraged 
commenters to discuss any of the specific issues mentioned in the 
notice, as well as other issues they believed to be relevant.

Discussion of Comments

    The FMCSA received eight comments in response to its notice of 
intent to deny the petitions. The commenters were: the California 
Manufactured Housing Institute; Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. 
(Fleetwood); Greenball Corporation (Greenball); the Manufactured 
Housing Institute (MHI); Mobile Home Materials, Inc.; Multinational 
Business Services, Inc. (Multinational Business Services); the Oregon 
Manufactured Housing Association; and TJT, Inc.
    The California Manufactured Housing Institute, Fleetwood, MHI, the 
Oregon Manufactured Housing Association, and TJT, Inc. opposed the 
FMCSA's proposal to deny MHI's petition to allow overloading of tires 
on a permanent basis. Greenball, Mobile Home Materials, and 
Multinational Business Services supported the FMCSA's proposal. A 
discussion of the major issues raised by the commenters appears below, 
followed by the FMCSA's response.

Comments Opposed to FMCSA's Proposal

    TJT, Inc. indicated that it supported the February 18, 1998 final 
rule that established a schedule for phasing out the practice of 
overloading of tires used in the transportation of manufactured homes. 
However, TJT believes that MHI's data concerning tire failure rates 
justify a rule to allow 18 percent overloading on a permanent basis.

    We believe that the imposition of this rule revision was 
necessary and well thought out, and implementation has been 
relatively uneventful. However, it would seem that we have now 
reached the point of rapidly diminishing return[s]. If this rule is 
allowed to ``sunset,'' and allowable tire loading is further reduced 
to 100 percent of the sidewall rating, transport of the homes would 
require either the use of an ``F'' rated tire, which is 
substantially more expensive and currently unavailable in quantity, 
or the addition of more axles. Many home sections currently use five 
and six axles to meet the tire loading requirements. Addition of 
even more axles would severely impact the ability to turn the unit, 
and would place greater strain on all of the running gear components 
when turning, increasing the potential for failure. Reducing the 
length of each section and increasing the number of sections is an 
option that, while making it possible to meet further load 
restrictions safely, would greatly add to the cost.

    TJT believes the 18-percent overloading currently allowed is 
achieving the desired result of reduced tire failure and the 
accompanying benefits of lessened traffic obstruction, transporter 
downtime, and transit damage. TJT states:

    To further restrict tire loading would be counter productive, in 
that any further potential reductions in tire failure would be 
minimal, and offset by major cost implications and the possible 
creation of additional safety risks. The rule, as it currently 
exists should be extended indefinitely or made permanent.

    MHI argues that FMCSA's observations and conclusions ``gloss over'' 
the existence and the significance of the data MHI presented with its 
petition. MHI stated:

    By focusing just upon the data gleaned from the study of the 53 
shipments, showing individual wheel weights and possible causes of 
tire failure, FMCSA suggests the existence of a correlation between 
tire overloading and tire failure and, more importantly, between 
tire overloading and unreasonable risks to the traveling public and 
the safe transportation of the manufactured homes. MHI has never 
accepted the validity of either correlation. The litmus test is 
whether tire failures that manufactured housing transporters have 
experienced have resulted in accidents involving property damage or 
personal injury. Only if they have is there a need to engage in the 
second inquiry, whether the tire failures causing the accidents are 
the result of tire overloading.

    MHI believes that the FMCSA was unrealistic to have expected them 
to ``scientifically authenticate'' the percentage of tire failures 
attributable to 18-percent overloading. MHI also argues that FMCSA does 
not address the potential effects that denial of the petition would 
have on the manufactured housing industry. They believe the potential 
effects are material and stem from denying the petition without 
allowing sufficient time for a transition to upgraded tires.

Comments in Support of FMCSA's Proposal

    Mobile Home Materials believed the FMCSA should not allow 
overloading of tires and that the new tires necessary to comply with 
the prohibition on overloading would be available in sufficient 
quantity. Mobile Home Materials stated:

    With regard to availability of the 8-14.5 F12 (2,790 lbs carry 
capacity) or equivalent tire: This tire is made from the same molds 
as the 8-14.5 E10 tire. This was not the case for the change from 7-
14.5 D8 to 8-14.5 E10 tires in 1998. There is adequate capacity for 
there to be no disruption in supply to the industry for a January 1, 
2002 implementation date if you issue a final ruling by August 2001. 
The additional cost to the industry will be significantly less than 
the change from the 50 percent overload to the current [18-percent] 
overload.

    Greenball stated:

    We are supporting the denial of the petitions concerning the 
overloading of mobile home tires of 118 [percent]. We have developed 
a tire for the industry that has a load carrying capacity of 3070 
lbs at normal highway speeds. This tire is the same size as the 
industry is currently using but in a LRG rating. We feel this tire 
will perform to the standards set forth and will thus eliminate the 
need to overload the units as is now being done.

FMCSA Response to Comments

MHI Petition

    The FMCSA has carefully considered the views of the commenters in 
favor of MHI's petition but continues to believe that there is no basis 
for allowing the manufactured home industry to continue its practice of 
overloading tires. None of the commenters' arguments negate the fact 
that exceeding tire manufacturers' load ratings reduces significantly 
the margin of safety between the maximum load that the tires are 
designed to support under normal circumstances (e.g., normal inflation 
pressures, operating speeds and temperatures, etc.), and the maximum 
load the tires can withstand before they fail. There is no technical 
reason for allowing such operating practices when tires of greater load 
carrying capacity could be purchased by the producers of manufactured 
homes, but would not be purchased by most of these producers until the 
Federal government mandates the use of such tires.
    As for MHI's argument that FMCSA had unrealistic expectations about 
the data submitted with their petition, we never indicated that we were 
in search of scientifically flawless data. We recognize the realities 
of data collection and analysis in the real world in general, and in 
the transportation industry in particular. However, data should be of 
such quality and quantity that a statistically meaningful analysis 
could be conducted. This was not the case for the data submitted by 
MHI.
    As we indicated in our notice of intent to deny MHI's petition, 
data from

[[Page 67692]]

the industry indicates that in 1999, the manufactured housing industry 
shipped 122,926 single-section and 225,745 multi-section homes for a 
total of 582,498 sections transported. However, the MHI provided data 
concerning on-the-road performance, including the amount of tire 
loading, for only 53 shipments of manufactured homes. Therefore, any 
inferences made from MHI's data would be based on a sample size of 
approximately 0.0091 percent [100 x (53/582,498)] of all shipments 
transported in 1999. The agency continues to believe this sample size 
is entirely too small to make any valid judgment about the on-the-road 
performance of tires overloaded by 18 percent.
    Some commenters supported continued tire overloading because they 
claimed it has not been shown to contribute to accidents, injuries, or 
fatalities. The lack of such evidence is not surprising--the causes of 
accidents are often hard to determine--but the absence of accident data 
does not, in and of itself, serve as proof that there have not been 
accidents attributable in whole, or in part, to tire overloading. FMCSA 
does not believe that regulatory action should necessarily be 
foreclosed by the lack of specific accident-causation data. Tire 
failures can and do lead to secondary accidents by blocking part of the 
roadway or shoulder, disrupting traffic flow, or even creating the 
conditions for a severe crash if an inattentive driver fails to 
recognize that a vehicle just ahead has slowed dramatically or stopped. 
There is no reason to believe that tire failures on manufactured homes 
could not cause similar events. The agency's mission is to prevent or 
reduce accidents. Regularly loading tires beyond the maximum weight 
limit designated by the manufacturer is almost by definition a likely 
cause of tire failure. And a reduction in tire failures--whatever the 
cause of those failures--is likely to prevent accidents in the long 
run.
    The April 23, 1996, notice of proposed rulemaking requested public 
comments concerning the costs and benefits associated with the rule to 
end the practice of overloading tires used in the transportation of 
manufactured homes (61 FR 18014). The comments were considered and 
appropriate revisions to the estimates were included in the preamble 
for the February 18, 1998, final rule setting conditions for phasing 
out the overloading of tires. The analysis demonstrated that the 
benefits of the rule exceed the costs (see 63 FR 8330). Neither the MHI 
nor any of the other commenters responding to the April 20, 2001, 
notice of intent provided a detailed analysis to refute the analysis 
presented in the preamble of the final rule, or identified deficiencies 
in the methodology used to generate the estimates.
    Some of the commenters suggested that the industry needed at least 
six months' warning of any final decision to prohibit tire overloading. 
FMCSA announced its preliminary intent to do so on April 20, 2001, and 
explained its reasoning in detail. FMCSA encouraged commenters to 
``discuss any of the specific issues mentioned'' in that document and 
said that ``[d]epending on the comments received, the agency will issue 
a notice denying the MHI's and Multinational's petitions.'' While the 
notice of intent to deny MHI's petition was not a definitive response 
to the petition, it was a clear indication that we did not intend to 
initiate a rulemaking to allow tire overloading after the December 31, 
2001, expiration date unless the industry could present evidence 
clearly demonstrating the safety of 18-percent overloading or arguments 
casting significant doubt upon the agency's reasoning.

Multinational Legal Services' Petition To Rescind the November 21, 
2000, Final Rule

    With regard to Multinational Legal Services' petition to rescind 
the November 21, 2000, final rule extending the deadline for compliance 
with the prohibition on tire overloading, none of the commenters 
discussed the issues raised in that petition.
    We continue to believe that the period between MHI's submission of 
its August 7, 2000, petition for rulemaking, and the November 20, 2000, 
expiration date for the overloading provision was not long enough to 
allow the agency, occupied with a wide variety of prior commitments, to 
prepare a notice that discussed the issues in meaningful detail, review 
the public comments submitted, and issue a final decision. Our actions 
were necessary and consistent with the requirements of the 
Administrative Procedure Act given the impracticability of publishing a 
notice requesting public comments on the MHI petition prior to the 
expiration date.
    We also continue to believe that our actions concerning overloaded 
tires are not inconsistent with the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995, or the Office of Management and Budget's 
Circular No. A-119, which provides executive direction to Federal 
agencies in implementing the statutory requirements. We did not 
establish a government-unique standard for the design of manufactured 
home tires, or a government-unique standard concerning the use of such 
tires. Furthermore, our actions did not ignore a private sector 
``consensus standard'' as defined in OMB's Circular No. A-119.
    We carefully examined the Tire and Rim Association's ``Year 
Book''--the only private-sector publication that appears to be relevant 
to the current debate--and determined that it is not a consensus 
standard applicable to overloaded manufactured home tires. The Tire and 
Rim Association publication provides information on interchangeability 
standards for tires and rims--the ability to replace components, parts, 
or equipment of one manufacturer with those of another, without losing 
function or suitability. Furthermore, the organization disclaimed all 
responsibility or involvement with respect to the use or performance of 
any tire. Since the only private-sector standard we are aware of is not 
a consensus standard applicable to overloaded manufactured home tires, 
we did not violate the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
of 1995.

MHI's Petition for Postponement of the December 31, 2001, Deadline

    On October 10, 2001, MHI petitioned the FMCSA to extend the 
deadline for compliance with the prohibition on tire overloading until 
180 days after the date the agency publishes its decision on MHI's 
August 7, 2000, petition. They argued that it is virtually impossible 
for the manufactured housing industry to fully comply with the rule by 
January 1, 2002, if the agency denies the petition to allow 18-percent 
overloading on a permanent basis. A copy of the petition is in the 
docket referenced at the beginning of this notice.
    In addition, MHI noted that ``[p]rior to the 118 Percent Rule, the 
provisions of 49 CFR 393.75(f) were applicable to the movement of 
manufactured homes. In the event the 118 Percent Rule is sunsetted, the 
provisions of 49 CFR 393.75(f) will again be applicable.''
    The Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) 
and Multinational Business Services submitted comments to the docket in 
response to MHI's petition for postponement of the January 1, 2002, 
deadline.
    MHARR supports MHI's petition because it believes Congress has 
given HUD primary jurisdiction over the construction of manufactured 
housing and HUD had not participated in FMCSA's notice-and-comment 
proceedings concerning MHI's petition to allow 18-percent overloading 
on a permanent basis. MHARR stated that

[[Page 67693]]

manufacturers would be left with two conflicting tire loading standards 
if the FMCSA does not extend the deadline and that no action should be 
taken without HUD's full participation.
    Multinational Business Services submitted comments in opposition to 
the MHI's October 10, 2001, petition. Multinational Business Services 
argues that the MHI's petition indicates a willful disregard for 
Federal regulatory deadlines. Multinational Business Services believes 
MHI has been provided with ample time to comply with the regulation and 
that MHI is responsible for overlooking the plain meaning of the 
notices terminating tire overloading.

FMCSA Response to MHI's October 10, 2001, Petition

    The FMCSA has reviewed MHI's petition and the comments of MHARR and 
Multinational Business Services and determined that Sec. 393.75(g) 
should not be amended to provide an additional 180 days from the date 
of publication of the agency's final decision on MHI's August 7, 2000, 
petition for the industry to comply with the prohibition on the 
overloading of tires. The agency agrees with Multinational Business 
Services that MHI has been provided ample time to comply with the rule 
and that MHI should have recognized the meaning of the FMCSA's Federal 
Register notices in response to the August 7, 2000, petition for 
rulemaking.
    MHI pointed out that Sec. 393.75(f) would still allow tire 
overloading at the option of each State, even if Sec. 393.75(g) were 
sunsetted. It was not the intention of FMCSA and HUD that the general 
provision concerning tire loading for commercial motor vehicles be 
applicable to tire loading for manufactured homes after the expiration 
date. While the regulatory language adopted in the February 18, 1998, 
final rule did not express our intent as clearly as we intended, the 
preamble to the rulemaking was explicit. The Summary section of the 
February 18, 1998, final rule states:

    Because the agencies have sufficient data indicating that 
overloading is potentially unsafe, unless both agencies are 
persuaded that 18 percent overloading does not pose a risk to the 
traveling public, or have an adverse impact on safety or the ability 
of motor carriers to transport manufactured homes, any overloading 
of tires beyond their design capacity will be prohibited at the end 
of this two-year period [63 FR 8330, emphasis added].

The agency clearly indicated that the expiration date was to be the 
deadline for the industry to discontinue the practice of overloading 
tires. By codifying all of the overloading rules applicable to 
manufactured homes in Sec. 393.75(g), the agency narrowed the scope of 
Sec. 393.75(f) to effectively exclude manufactured homes.
    This final rule makes a technical amendment to the rule only for 
the purpose of clarifying the applicability of the requirements for 
homes built before and after December 31, 2001, now that we have 
reached the expiration date for the tire overloading provision. Section 
393.75(f) has been amended slightly to ensure that it will remain 
inapplicable to manufactured homes, and Sec. 393.75(g)(2) clearly bars 
tire overloading for manufactured homes labeled on or after January 1, 
2002.
    With regard to MHARR comments, FMCSA agrees that while HUD has 
primary authority over the construction of manufactured housing, FMCSA 
has primary authority over highway transportation by commercial motor 
vehicle. Therefore, FMCSA's action of today will effectively end any 
permissibility of overloading.
    FMCSA worked closely with HUD in conjunction with issuing the 1998 
final rule, and the November 21, 2000, extension of the compliance 
date. We notified HUD prior to our publication of the April 20, 2001, 
notice of intent to deny the petitions and we notified the agency prior 
to the publication of this final rule. Section 393.75(g) explicitly 
states that the 18-percent overloading provision will expire unless 
extended by mutual consent of the FMCSA and the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development.

FMCSA Decision

    For the reasons given above, the FMCSA is denying MHI's August 7, 
2000, and October 10, 2001, petitions, and Multinational Legal 
Services' January 16, 2001, petition. The agency has worked with HUD to 
require the manufactured housing industry to alter its practice of 
overloading tires by up to 50 percent above the tire manufacturer's 
load rating. The agencies have reduced the amount of overloading to 18 
percent presently, and through the denial of the MHI's petitions, 
transporters of manufactured homes must discontinue the practice of 
overloading tires.

Rulemaking Analysis and Notices

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)), an 
agency may waive the normal notice and comment requirements if it 
finds, for good cause, that they are impracticable, unnecessary, or 
contrary to the public interest.
    In this case, additional notice and comment are unnecessary. We 
jointly completed a rulemaking with HUD in 1998 that established the 
process for phasing out the overloading of tires. The process included 
a two-year period during which the industry could gather data and other 
information to support its contention that overloading tires by 18 
percent was not potentially unsafe. The industry submitted a petition 
on August 7, 2000, requesting that the agencies allow 18-percent 
overloading on a permanent basis. Although we were under no obligation 
to respond to the petition given the short amount of time between its 
submission and the November 20, 2000, expiration date, we extended the 
expiration date until December 31, 2001, and subsequently published a 
notice requesting public comment on the petition. Our notice requesting 
public comment included a detailed discussion of (1) the operational 
data submitted by MHI in August 2000; (2) the inadequacy of that data 
as a justification for continued tire-overloading after the expiration 
date of the current rule; (3) our intent to deny MHI's petition to make 
overloading permanent; and (4) our response to the petition from 
Multinational Legal Services for rescission of the extension of the 
original expiration date from November 20, 2000, to December 31, 2001. 
This final rule is a technical amendment to 49 CFR 393.75(f) and (g) to 
reflect the expiration of the provision allowing 18-percent overloading 
on December 31, 2001. The final rule does include a substantive change 
to the rule.
    For the same reasons, the FMCSA finds, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3), that there is good cause for making the final rule effective 
upon publication. The final rule is a technical amendment to reflect 
the December 31, 2001, expiration date, and to clarify the 
applicability of the rules to the transportation of manufactured homes 
built before and after the December 31, 2001, expiration date. The 
final rule does not change the substance of the rule.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The FMCSA has determined that this action is not a significant 
regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 or within 
the meaning of Department of Transportation regulatory policies and 
procedures. The final rule amends Sec. 393.75 to clarify the 
applicability of the rules to the transportation of manufactured homes 
built before and after the December 31, 2001, deadline for compliance.

[[Page 67694]]

Although the 1998 final rule establishing the current requirements was 
a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) does not consider this 
amendment of the final rule to be a significant action.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The original rule did not have a 
significant effect on a substantial number of small entities, and this 
rule simply amends Sec. 393.75 to reflect the expiration of the 
provision allowing 18-percent overloading on December 31, 2001.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. It has been determined 
that this rulemaking does not have a substantial direct effect on 
States, nor would it limit the policy-making discretion of the States. 
Nothing in this document preempts any State law or regulation.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor 
Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 
regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and 
activities do not apply to this program.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule does not impose an unfunded Federal mandate, as defined 
by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532 et seq.) 
that will result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more in any one year.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they 
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. The FMCSA has 
determined that this action does not affect any requirements under the 
PRA.

National Environmental Policy Act

    FMCSA is a new administration within the Department of 
Transportation (DOT). We are striving to meet all of the statutory and 
executive branch requirements on rulemaking. The FMCSA is currently 
developing an agency order that will comply with all statutory and 
regulatory policies under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). We expect the draft FMCSA Order to appear in 
the Federal Register for public comment in the near future. The 
framework of the FMCSA Order is consistent with and reflects the 
procedures for considering environmental impacts under DOT Order 
5610.1C. The FMCSA analyzed this final rule under the NEPA and DOT 
Order 5610.1C. Since the final rule only clarifies the existing rule to 
reflect the expiration of the tire-overloading provision in 49 CFR 
393.75(g), we believe it would be among the type of regulations that 
would be categorically excluded from any environmental assessment.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This action meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    We have analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not 
concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    We have analyzed this action under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. This action is not a significant energy action 
within the meaning of section 4(b) of the Executive Order because it is 
not economically significant and will not have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 393

    Highway safety, Highways and roads, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle 
safety.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the FMCSA amends title 
49, Code of Federal Regulations, chapter III, part 393 as follows:

PART 393--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 393 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Sec. 1041(b) of Public Law 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 
1993 (1991); 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31502; 49 CFR 1.73.

    2. Amend Sec. 393.75 to revise paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 393.75  Tires.

* * * * *
    (f) Tire loading restrictions (except on manufactured homes). No 
motor vehicle (except manufactured homes, which are governed by 
paragraph (g) of this section) shall be operated with tires that carry 
a weight greater than that marked on the sidewall of the tire or, in 
the absence of such a marking, a weight greater than that specified for 
the tires in any of the publications of any of the organizations listed 
in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119 (49 CFR 571.119, 
S5.1(b)) unless:
    (1) The vehicle is being operated under the terms of a special 
permit issued by the State; and
    (2) The vehicle is being operated at a reduced speed to compensate 
for the tire loading in excess of the manufacturer's rated capacity for 
the tire. In no case shall the speed exceed 80 km/hr (50 mph).
    (g)(1) Tire loading restrictions for manufactured homes built 
before January 1, 2002. Manufactured homes that are labeled pursuant to 
24 CFR 3282.362(c)(2)(i) before January 1, 2002, must not be 
transported on tires that are loaded more than 18 percent over the load 
rating marked on the sidewall of the tire or, in the absence of such a 
marking, more than 18 percent over the load rating specified in any of 
the publications of any of the organizations listed in FMVSS No. 119 
(49 CFR 571.119, S5.1(b)). Manufactured homes labeled before January 1, 
2002, transported on tires overloaded by 9 percent or more must not be 
operated at speeds exceeding 80 km/hr (50 mph).
    (2) Tire loading restrictions for manufactured homes built on or 
after January 1, 2002. Manufactured homes that are labeled pursuant to 
24 CFR 3282.362(c)(2)(i) on or after January 1, 2002, must not be 
transported on tires loaded beyond the load rating marked on the 
sidewall of the tire or, in the absence of such a marking, the load

[[Page 67695]]

rating specified in any of the publications of any of the organizations 
listed in FMVSS No. 119 (49 CFR 571.119, S5.1(b)).

    Issued on: December 26, 2001.
Julie Anna Cirillo,
Assistant Administrator, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-32173 Filed 12-27-01; 1:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P