Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indian Creek, Miami Beach, FL, 8168-8170 [2016-03262]

Download as PDF 8168 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Proposed Rules safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation: 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and 4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): ■ wgreen on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA– 2016–0464; Directorate Identifier 2015– NM–046–AD. (a) Comments Due Date We must receive comments by April 4, 2016. (b) Affected ADs None. (c) Applicability This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:30 Feb 17, 2016 Jkt 238001 (d) Subject Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks. (e) Reason This AD was prompted by the need for more restrictive airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to reduce the potential for significant failure conditions and consequent loss of controllability of the airplane. (f) Compliance Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. (g) Maintenance Program Revision (1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the certification maintenance requirements (CMR) specified in Fokker Services B.V. Engineering Report, Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS), ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance Requirements,’’ of Fokker Services B.V. Engineering Report SE–473, Issue 11, released January 19, 2015. (2) Do the applicable initial CMR inspection at the time specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (g)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable, as specified in Fokker Services B.V. Engineering ALS, ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance Requirements,’’ Fokker Services B.V. Engineering Report SE– 473, Issue 11, released January 19, 2015. If any discrepancy is found during any inspection, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency; or Fokker B.V. Service’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). Repair any discrepancy before further flight. (i) For CMR inspection 783100–CM–01: Within 1 year or 3,000 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, but not later than 12,000 flight hours after accomplishing MRB task 783100–00–04. (ii) For CMR inspection 783500–CM–01: Within 1 year or 3,000 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, but not later than 10,000 flight hours after accomplishing MRB task 783100–01–01. (h) No Alternative Inspections or Inspection Intervals After accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) and intervals, may be used, unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. (i) Other FAA AD Provisions The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1137; fax 425–227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD. (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Fokker Services B.V.’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. (j) Related Information (1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015–0027, dated February 20, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA– 2016–0464. (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88–6280–350; fax +31 (0)88–6280–111; email technicalservices@ fokker.com; Internet http:// www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 6, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2016–03136 Filed 2–17–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2015–0940] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indian Creek, Miami Beach, FL AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM Coast Guard, DHS. 18FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Proposed Rules ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that governs the 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0, at Miami Beach, FL. This proposed rule implements restrictions that allow the bridge to not open for vessels during peak vehicle traffic times. Bridge openings during peak vehicle traffic times cause major traffic jams that may be avoided without negatively impacting vessel traffic on the Indian Creek. Modifying the bridge operating schedule will reduce major vehicle traffic issues during rush hour times. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before April 18, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2015–0940 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email Mr. Rod Elkins with the Coast Guard; telephone 305–415– 6989, email rodney.j.elkins@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Table of Abbreviations wgreen on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive Order FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis On March 11th, 2015 the Miami Beach City Commission held a public meeting to discuss appropriate action for modifying the bridge operations. Additionally, the City conducted traffic studies and reviewed the bridge logs which showed a 45% increase in vehicular traffic from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. with no corresponding increase in vessel traffic during those time periods. Input from the public meeting and the traffic data was used to develop the proposed rule. That data will be included in the electronic docket for this proposed rulemaking. 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0, at Miami Beach, FL is a single leaf bascule bridge. It has a vertical clearance of 11 feet at mean high water in the closed position and a horizontal clearance of 50 feet. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:30 Feb 17, 2016 Jkt 238001 Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, the 63rd Street Bridge is required to open on signal for the passage of vessels. The City of Miami Beach and Miami Dade County determined that restricting bridge openings during peak traffic hours will significantly reduce traffic congestion. Based on this determination, the City of Miami Beach requested this action to alleviate additional traffic congestion created by bridge openings during peak hours. In addition to proposing a schedule that will allow for limited openings during the regular work week, the Coast Guard is proposing a regulation change that will apply during the annual boat show. Every year in mid-February the City of Miami Beach hosts the Yacht and Brokerage Show which creates unusually high vehicle and vessel traffic during the weeks before and after the show. The Coast Guard typically issues temporary deviations to the 63rd Street Bridge operations that help balance vessel and vehicle needs during those times. The Coast Guard proposes adopting the annual temporary deviation as part of this bridge regulation. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to add a new regulation for the operations of the 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek mile 4.0, at Miami Beach. The proposed regulation would implement three closure periods, which would allow the bridge to not open for vessels during morning and afternoon peak vehicle traffic times. The following schedule is proposed: (1) From Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. the bridge would only open on the hour and half hour; (2) from 7:10 a.m. to 9:55 a.m. and 4:05 p.m. to 6:59 p.m. Monday through Friday, the bridge would remain closed; and (3) from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. the seven days before and the four days following the City of Miami Beach Yacht and Brokerage Show the second week of February, the bridge would only open for ten minutes at the top of the hour. For federal holidays, weekends, and other times the bridge would continue to open for vessels on signal. These proposed changes will still allow vessels to pass through the bridge while taking into account the reasonable needs of other modes of transportation. IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes and E.O.s and we also discuss First Amendment rights of protestors. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 8169 A. Regulatory Planning and Review E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This regulatory action determination is based on the limited impact that it is anticipated to have on vessel traffic on the Indian Creek while taking into account the needs of vehicular traffic. Vessels that can transit under the bridge without an opening may do so. Other vessels can transit during non closure period times, and emergency vessels and tugs with tows can still request openings at any time. B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM 18FEP1 8170 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Proposed Rules compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. C. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.). wgreen on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132. Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:30 Feb 17, 2016 Jkt 238001 Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review, under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction. Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. V. Public Participation and Request for Comments We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http:// www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086). PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in our online docket at http:// www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site’s instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. ■ 2. Add § 117.293 to read as follows: § 117.293 Indian Creek. The draw of the 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek mile 4.0, at Miami Beach, shall open on signal except as follows: (a) From 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday except Federal holidays, the draw need open only on the hour and half-hour. (b) From 7:10 a.m. to 9:55 a.m. and 4:05 p.m. to 6:59 p.m., Monday through Friday except Federal holidays, the draw need not open for the passage of vessels. (c) In February of each year during the period seven days prior to the City of Miami Beach Yacht and Brokerage Show and the four days following the show, from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., the bridge need not open except for 10 minutes at the top of the hour. At all other times the bridge shall operate on its normal schedule. Dated: February 11, 2016. S.A. Buschman, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2016–03262 Filed 2–17–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM 18FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 32 (Thursday, February 18, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8168-8170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03262]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0940]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indian Creek, Miami Beach, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

[[Page 8169]]


ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0, at Miami 
Beach, FL. This proposed rule implements restrictions that allow the 
bridge to not open for vessels during peak vehicle traffic times. 
Bridge openings during peak vehicle traffic times cause major traffic 
jams that may be avoided without negatively impacting vessel traffic on 
the Indian Creek. Modifying the bridge operating schedule will reduce 
major vehicle traffic issues during rush hour times.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before April 18, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2015-0940 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email Mr. Rod Elkins with the Coast Guard; telephone 305-
415-6989, email rodney.j.elkins@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive Order
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    On March 11th, 2015 the Miami Beach City Commission held a public 
meeting to discuss appropriate action for modifying the bridge 
operations. Additionally, the City conducted traffic studies and 
reviewed the bridge logs which showed a 45% increase in vehicular 
traffic from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. with no 
corresponding increase in vessel traffic during those time periods. 
Input from the public meeting and the traffic data was used to develop 
the proposed rule. That data will be included in the electronic docket 
for this proposed rulemaking.
    63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0, at Miami Beach, 
FL is a single leaf bascule bridge. It has a vertical clearance of 11 
feet at mean high water in the closed position and a horizontal 
clearance of 50 feet.
    Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, the 63rd Street Bridge 
is required to open on signal for the passage of vessels. The City of 
Miami Beach and Miami Dade County determined that restricting bridge 
openings during peak traffic hours will significantly reduce traffic 
congestion. Based on this determination, the City of Miami Beach 
requested this action to alleviate additional traffic congestion 
created by bridge openings during peak hours.
    In addition to proposing a schedule that will allow for limited 
openings during the regular work week, the Coast Guard is proposing a 
regulation change that will apply during the annual boat show. Every 
year in mid-February the City of Miami Beach hosts the Yacht and 
Brokerage Show which creates unusually high vehicle and vessel traffic 
during the weeks before and after the show. The Coast Guard typically 
issues temporary deviations to the 63rd Street Bridge operations that 
help balance vessel and vehicle needs during those times. The Coast 
Guard proposes adopting the annual temporary deviation as part of this 
bridge regulation.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to add a new regulation for the operations 
of the 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek mile 4.0, at Miami Beach. The 
proposed regulation would implement three closure periods, which would 
allow the bridge to not open for vessels during morning and afternoon 
peak vehicle traffic times. The following schedule is proposed: (1) 
From Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. the bridge would only 
open on the hour and half hour; (2) from 7:10 a.m. to 9:55 a.m. and 
4:05 p.m. to 6:59 p.m. Monday through Friday, the bridge would remain 
closed; and (3) from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. the seven days before and the 
four days following the City of Miami Beach Yacht and Brokerage Show 
the second week of February, the bridge would only open for ten minutes 
at the top of the hour. For federal holidays, weekends, and other times 
the bridge would continue to open for vessels on signal.
    These proposed changes will still allow vessels to pass through the 
bridge while taking into account the reasonable needs of other modes of 
transportation.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize 
our analyses based on these statutes and E.O.s and we also discuss 
First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and 
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is 
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. 
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not 
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited impact 
that it is anticipated to have on vessel traffic on the Indian Creek 
while taking into account the needs of vehicular traffic. Vessels that 
can transit under the bridge without an opening may do so. Other 
vessels can transit during non closure period times, and emergency 
vessels and tugs with tows can still request openings at any time.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of 
vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small entities, for the 
reasons stated in section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have 
a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect 
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you 
have questions concerning its provisions or options for

[[Page 8170]]

compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against 
small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or 
any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this 
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a 
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. 
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review, 
under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an 
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion 
determination are not required for this rule. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal 
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal 
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in 
our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by 
following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the 
online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when 
comments are posted or a final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  117.293 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.293  Indian Creek.

    The draw of the 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek mile 4.0, at Miami 
Beach, shall open on signal except as follows:
    (a) From 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday except Federal 
holidays, the draw need open only on the hour and half-hour.
    (b) From 7:10 a.m. to 9:55 a.m. and 4:05 p.m. to 6:59 p.m., Monday 
through Friday except Federal holidays, the draw need not open for the 
passage of vessels.
    (c) In February of each year during the period seven days prior to 
the City of Miami Beach Yacht and Brokerage Show and the four days 
following the show, from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., the bridge need not 
open except for 10 minutes at the top of the hour. At all other times 
the bridge shall operate on its normal schedule.

    Dated: February 11, 2016.
S.A. Buschman,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2016-03262 Filed 2-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P