Implementation of MHI Act of 2000
May 19, 2003
The table below, courtesy of the Manufactured Housing Institute, shows compliance
by the states with the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000.
* - Write in who pays to fund the program (i.e.: industry, government, other (identify)
1 - In process of regulating
2 - Stated in survey but not verified
3 - Has consumer complaint process
The table below, courtesy of the Manufactured Housing Institute, shows compliance
by the states with the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000.
| STATES | STATE LAW | INSTALL RQMTS |
INSTALL STANDARDS |
LICENSE | TRAINING /CERTIFIED | PERCENT INSPECTION REQUIRED | TRAINING OF INSPECTORS | PROGRAM FUNDED BY* | DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM | ||||||||||||
| Yes | No | In Process | Yes | No | MFG | ANSI | ENGR | STATE | OTHER | Yes | No | Yes | No | % | None | Yes | No | Yes | No | ||
| ALABAMA | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | 1 | |||||||||||
| ALASKA | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ARIZONA | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ARKANSAS | X | X | X | X | X | ? | X | ||||||||||||||
| CALIFORNIA | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | X | ||||||||||
| COLORADO | X | X | X | X | X | up to 100% | industry | X | |||||||||||||
| CONNECTICUT | |||||||||||||||||||||
| DELAWARE | |||||||||||||||||||||
| FLORIDA | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | 2 | ||||||||||||
| GEORGIA | X | X | X | X | X | App. A | X | X | X | industry | 2 | ||||||||||
| HAWAII | |||||||||||||||||||||
| IDAHO | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | X | ||||||||||||
| ILLINOIS | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | industry | 3 | ||||||||||||
| INDIANA | X | X | X | X | industry | X | |||||||||||||||
| IOWA | X | X | X | X | X | X | industry | X | |||||||||||||
| KANSAS | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||||||||||
| KENTUCKY | X | X | X | X | X | X | up to 50% | industry | 3 | ||||||||||||
| LOUISIANA | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||||||||||
| MAINE | X | X | X | X | X | industry | 3 | ||||||||||||||
| MARYLAND | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MASSACHUSETTS | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MICHIGAN | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | industry | 3 | |||||||||||
| MINNESOTA | X | X | X | X | X | industry | 3 | ||||||||||||||
| MISSISSIPPI | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MISSOURI | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ? | X | ||||||||||||
| MONTANA | X | X | X | X | X | ? | X | ||||||||||||||
| NEBRASKA | |||||||||||||||||||||
| NEVADA | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | X | |||||||||||
| NEW HAMPSHIRE | X | X | X | X | X | App. C | X | X | X | industry | X | ||||||||||
| NEW JERSEY | |||||||||||||||||||||
| NEW MEXICO | |||||||||||||||||||||
| NEW YORK | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | X | ||||||||||
| NORTH CAROLINA | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | 3 | |||||||||||
| NORTH DAKOTA | X | X | X | X | X | X | 2 | ||||||||||||||
| OHIO | |||||||||||||||||||||
| OKLAHOMA | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | industry | 3 | ||||||||||
| OREGON | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry/state | 3 | |||||||||||||
| PENNSYLVANIA | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | industry | 3 | ||||||||||||
| RHODE ISLAND | |||||||||||||||||||||
| SOUTH CAROLINA | X | X | X | X | X | X | industry | X | |||||||||||||
| SOUTH DAKOTA | |||||||||||||||||||||
| TENNESSEE | |||||||||||||||||||||
| TEXAS | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | up to 25% | industry | X | ||||||||||
| UTAH | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | X | |||||||||||
| VERMONT | |||||||||||||||||||||
| VIRGINIA | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | X | industry | 2 | ||||||||||||
| WASHINGTON | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 100% | industry | X | |||||||||||
| WEST VIRGINIA | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 10% | industry/state | 2 | |||||||||||
| WISCONSIN | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ? | X | |||||||||||
| WYOMING | |||||||||||||||||||||
* - Write in who pays to fund the program (i.e.: industry, government, other (identify)
1 - In process of regulating
2 - Stated in survey but not verified
3 - Has consumer complaint process

