[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 21, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81022-81028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25698]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 8360
[BLM_HQ_FRN_MO4500172968]
RIN 1004-AE89
Temporary Closure and Restriction Orders
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposes to modernize and
streamline how the agency notifies the public of temporary closure and
restriction orders; clarify that the BLM may issue temporary closure or
restriction orders to implement management responsibilities, avoid
conflicts among public land users, and ensure the privacy of Tribal
activities for traditional or cultural use; require that all orders
specify the date and time that a temporary closure or restriction
becomes effective and terminates; and make the penalties for violating
temporary closure and restriction orders consistent with current
statutory authority.
DATES: Please submit comments on this proposed rule on or before
January 22, 2024. The BLM is not obligated to consider comments
received after this date in making its decision on the final rule.
ADDRESSES:
Mail, personal, or messenger delivery: U.S. Department of the
Interior, Director (HQ-630), Bureau of Land Management, Room 5646, 1849
C St. NW, Washington, DC 20240, Attention: Regulatory Affairs: 1004-
AE89.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the
Searchbox, enter ``RIN 1004-AE89'' and click the ``Search'' button.
Follow the instructions at this website.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Oliver with the BLM Headquarters
Division of Recreation and Visitor Services at (801) 450-3134 or via
email at [email protected]. For questions relating to regulatory process
issues, email Brittney D. Rodrigues at: [email protected]. Individuals
in the United States who are deaf, blind, hard of hearing, or have a
speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United
States should use the relay services offered within their country to
make
[[Page 81023]]
international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States. In
compliance with the Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act
of 2023, please see the Abstract section in Docket No. BLM-2023-0007 on
https://www.regulations.gov for a summary of the proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
II. Public Comment Procedures
III. Background
IV. Discussion of the Proposed Rule
V. Procedural Matters
I. Executive Summary
The BLM proposes to modernize and streamline how the agency
notifies the public of temporary closure and restriction orders;
clarify that the BLM may issue temporary closure or restriction orders
to implement management responsibilities, avoid conflicts among public
land users, and ensure the privacy of Tribal activities for traditional
or cultural use; require that all orders specify the date and time that
a temporary closure or restriction becomes effective and terminates;
and make the penalties for violating temporary closure and restriction
orders consistent with current statutory authority.
The proposed revisions would allow the BLM to better notify the
public about the presence, nature, and scope of temporary closure and
restriction orders and would make the BLM's procedures for issuing
temporary closure and restriction orders more consistent with those of
the United States Forest Service (USFS) and the National Park Service
(NPS).
The requirement in 43 CFR 8364.1 to publish temporary closure and
restriction orders in the Federal Register frequently delays the BLM's
ability to issue such orders. The BLM's ability to expeditiously close
or restrict the use of public lands temporarily is also hampered by the
time it takes for an order to become effective after being signed by an
authorized officer. Because emergencies and unforeseen events on public
lands often require a more immediate response, any delay caused by the
current regulatory scheme can compromise the BLM's ability to carry out
its mission and protect the public. The proposed rule would enhance the
BLM's ability to adequately meet the public's expectation for the
protection of health, safety, property, and public land resources.
Importantly, the proposed rule would not itself close or restrict use
of any public land, nor would it require the BLM to issue any new or
additional closure or restriction orders.
II. Public Comment Procedures
If you wish to comment on this proposed rule, you may submit your
comments to the BLM by mail, personal or messenger delivery, or through
https://www.regulations.gov (see ADDRESSES, above). Please make your
comments on the proposed rule as specific as possible, confine them to
issues pertinent to the proposed rule, explain the reason for any
changes you recommend, and include any supporting documentation. Where
possible, your comments should reference the specific section or
paragraph of the proposal that you are addressing. The BLM is not
obligated to consider or include in the administrative record for the
final rule any comments received after the close of the comment period
(see DATES) or comments delivered to an address other than those listed
previously (see ADDRESSES). Comments, including names and street
addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the
address listed under ``ADDRESSES: Mail, personal or messenger
delivery'' during regular hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Eastern Time),
Monday through Friday, except holidays. Before including your address,
telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying
information in your comment, be advised that your entire comment--
including your personal identifying information--may be made publicly
available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold
from public review your personal identifying information, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
III. Background
The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) (43 U.S.C. 1701-
1787) establishes the agency's multiple use and sustained yield
mandate. In managing the public lands in accordance with FLPMA, the BLM
occasionally issues temporary closure and restriction orders under 43
CFR 8364.1 to protect persons, property, public lands, and resources.
The need to temporarily close or restrict the use of public land often
arises in response to emergencies or unplanned events such as a flood
or fire, hazardous material incident, discovery of unexploded ordnance,
public health emergency, or change in public land use that creates a
public safety hazard. For example, the BLM issued temporary closure or
restriction orders to protect the public from unsafe conditions in a
community rock pit in Do[ntilde]a Ana County, New Mexico (88 FR 42984
(July 5, 2023)); close nine acres of public land near Rowley, Utah that
were inundated with a hydrochloric acid spill (79 FR 26265 (May 7,
2014)); and close a recreation site near Challis, Idaho to protect the
public from dangerous flooding and ice jams impacting the recreation
site (87 FR 25523 (April 29, 2022)). Occasionally, the BLM also
temporarily closes public land or restricts its uses to protect
resources, implement certain management activities, or avoid conflict
among visitor use activities. In such situations, the BLM may restrict
an area to certain types of travel to facilitate restoration or close
an area to public access to facilitate the preparation for and
occurrence of a special recreation event, such as the Burning Man
Project (88 FR 39863 (June 20, 2023)); the King of the Hammers off-road
race (87 FR 69300 (November 11, 2022)); the Reno Air Races (84 FR 31337
(July 1, 2019)); the Mint 400 off-road race in Las Vegas (88 FR 7994
February 7, 2023)); and the Desert Classic racecourse (87 FR 20457
(April 7, 2022)).
However, aspects of 43 CFR 8364.1--such as the requirement to
publish temporary closure and restriction orders in the Federal
Register and the absence of a provision authorizing the BLM to issue
temporary closure and restriction orders with immediate full force and
effect--can hinder the BLM's ability to respond effectively to
exigencies that arise on public lands. Streamlining and modernizing the
manner in which the BLM notifies the public about temporary closure and
restriction orders, as well as providing authorized officers with the
ability to issue such orders with immediate effectiveness, would allow
the BLM to better perform its mission to responsibly manage public
lands and protect public safety. Revising Sec. 8364.1 would also make
the BLM's closure and restriction authorities more consistent with
those of the USFS and the NPS (agencies with which BLM-administered
public lands often share a common boundary) and, in turn, would allow
the BLM to be a more effective cooperator with other federal and local
jurisdictions when responding to multijurisdictional emergency
incidents or unforeseen events.
Section 310 of FLPMA, which authorizes the Secretary to promulgate
regulations to carry out the purposes of that Act and other laws with
respect to public lands, provides authority for revising the BLM's
regulatory authority for closing and restricting the use of public
lands. Other statutes, such as the Archaeological Resources Protection
Act (16 U.S.C. 470aa-470mm), also authorize the Secretary to promulgate
[[Page 81024]]
regulations relating to closures and use restrictions in certain
contexts.
IV. Discussion of the Proposed Rule
As resource uses and demands for access to public lands have
increased, the need for the BLM to issue temporary closure and
restriction orders under 43 CFR 8364.1 to protect persons, property,
and public lands has also increased. However, current regulatory
requirements can hinder the BLM's ability to issue temporary closure
and restriction orders.
For example, the requirement to publish temporary closure and
restriction orders in the Federal Register frequently impedes the
agency from closing and restricting the use of public lands in a timely
fashion. As a result of these requirements, the window of opportunity
for the BLM to effectively respond to emergency incidents or unforeseen
events can pass before a closure or restriction order takes effect.
This hinders the agency's ability to prevent or reduce the risk to
public health or safety, property, or important resources. Although the
Federal Register may have been the most effective way to convey access
and use limitations when 43 CFR 8364.1 was promulgated in 1983, that is
less true today. The tools for a bureau to communicate its actions to
stakeholders and the public have become more numerous and direct, such
that publication of a Federal Register notice is no longer likely to be
the most effective way for the public to learn of a temporary closure
or restriction in an expedient fashion.
The proposed rule is intended to harmonize 43 CFR 8364.1 with that
reality by eliminating the need to publish temporary closure and
restriction orders issued under 43 CFR 8364.1 in the Federal Register.
Instead, the proposed rule would require the BLM to inform the public
about temporary closure and restriction orders by notifying local media
outlets and posting information about the closure or restriction on at
least one BLM-controlled, publicly available online communication
system. By relying on more current communication methods and
technologies, the BLM would be better positioned to serve the public
and maximize the number of stakeholders and visitors who are aware of
potential access and use limitations.
Online systems have become widely used by government agencies in
the time since 43 CFR 8364.1 was initially promulgated, and new online
systems are already evolving that may soon supersede or supplant those
used today as the most effective means for informing public land users
about government actions. Language in the proposed rule is intended to
describe the communications systems in common use today, while at the
same time being sufficiently flexible to account for new systems and
rapidly emerging best practices in communications and public affairs
without needing to update the rule again in the near future.
In addition to the Federal Register publication requirement in 43
CFR 8364.1, the time it takes for an order to become effective after
being signed by an authorized officer also hampers the BLM's ability to
expeditiously issue temporary closure and restriction orders. Under 43
CFR 4.21(a), orders that temporarily close or restrict the use of BLM-
managed public lands are typically not effective during the 30-day
period in which a person may file an appeal of the decision before the
Department's Office of Hearings and Appeals. Emergencies and unforeseen
events on public lands often require a more immediate response,
however, and the delay in a closure or restriction order taking effect
can compromise the BLM's ability to carry out its mission and protect
the public. To adequately meet the public's expectation for the BLM to
protect health, safety, property, and resources, the agency needs the
ability to issue temporary closure or restriction orders that are
immediately effective, when necessary.
Under the proposed rule, BLM authorized officers would have
discretion to provide that orders issued under 43 CFR 8364.1 will
become effective upon issuance or at a date and time established in the
order. While this change would not negate someone's ability to appeal
an order under 43 CFR part 4, it would make the orders effective during
the time in which they are subject to appeal, which would allow the BLM
to begin enforcing temporary closure and restriction orders in a
timelier fashion, thus aiding the agency in protecting public lands,
resources, and public safety.
Notably, eliminating the Federal Register publication requirement
and authorizing the issuance of temporary closure and restriction
orders with immediate full force and effect would make 43 CFR 8364.1
more consistent with the NPS and USFS's closure and restriction
authorities. For example, USFS's closure authority at 36 CFR 261.50
does not have a Federal Register publication requirement. Instead, it
requires closure and restriction orders to be placed in the offices of
the Forest Supervisor and District Ranger who have jurisdiction over
the subject lands, and the relevant prohibitions to be displayed in
such locations and manner as to reasonably bring the prohibitions to
the attention of the public. NPS similarly does not need to publish
closure and restriction orders in the Federal Register in a wide
variety of situations, such as those related to emergency situations,
those that will not result in a significant alteration in the public
use pattern of a park area, and those that will not adversely affect a
park's natural, aesthetic, scenic, or cultural values. Moreover, both
USFS and NPS can issue closure and restriction orders with immediate
full force and effect. Eliminating the Federal Register publication
requirement and authorizing the issuance of temporary closure and
restriction orders with immediate full force and effect would allow the
BLM to better coordinate with other federal land management agencies
(as well as Tribal, state, and local government agencies), especially
in situations where the agencies manage land either adjacent to or in
proximity with each other.
The proposed rule would also effectuate other important changes
intended to clarify the nature and extent of the restrictions
temporarily being placed on the use of public lands. For example, the
proposed rule would require all temporary closure and restriction
orders issued under 43 CFR 8364.1 to state the date and time that a
closure or restriction would become effective, as well as the date and
time that the closure or restriction would terminate. The proposed rule
would also clarify the BLM's ability to exempt certain persons from
closure and restriction orders. Currently, 43 CFR 8364.1 provides that
the authorized officer may identify persons who are exempt from closure
or restriction orders. The proposed rule clarifies that specific groups
can also be exempt from closure or restriction orders, such as Tribal
members that may need to access an otherwise closed area for
traditional or cultural uses.
Additionally, the proposed rule would help clarify the broad range
of situations in which the BLM may issue temporary closure and
restriction orders. While the BLM may currently issue closure and
restriction orders to protect persons, property, and public lands and
resources, the proposed rule would reinforce that the BLM may issue
temporary closure and restriction orders to provide for implementation
of management responsibilities; avoid conflicts among public land
users; or ensure the privacy of Tribal activities for traditional or
cultural use. While implementing various resource
[[Page 81025]]
management strategies, it is sometimes necessary to exclude the public
from areas of the public lands for either implementation efficiency or
effectiveness. For instance, the BLM may need to exclude the public
from an area to facilitate construction, demolition, resource
monitoring, or invasive species control projects. Restricting access to
areas of public lands may also be necessary to avoid conflicts between
user groups, such as an off-road racecourse being closed to other uses
during the race, or to ensure privacy to Tribal members during
traditional or cultural uses. The proposed revisions to 43 CFR 8364.1
are intended to make clear that the temporary closure and restriction
orders are intended to achieve such purposes.
The proposed rule would update the penalty provision in 43 CFR
8364.1. The year after the current regulation was promulgated, Congress
passed the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (98 Stat. 1995) (18 U.S.C.
3571), which identifies criminal penalties that supersede the fines set
in the FLPMA at 43 U.S.C. 1743. The proposed rule would amend 43 CFR
8364.1 to be consistent with current statutory authorities. Moreover,
the elastic nature of the proposed rule language would make it unlikely
that the BLM would need to amend the regulation if Congress updates 18
U.S.C. 3571 with new fines in the future.
Finally, the proposed rule would clarify that closure and
restriction orders issued under Sec. 8364.1 are ``temporary'' in
nature. However, this clarification would not change how or when the
BLM would implement closures or restrictions, nor would it limit or
impede the BLM's ability to issue orders that remain in effect for the
duration of the activity, situation, or unforeseen event that the
closure or restriction order responds to or addresses. In other words,
the term ``temporary'' should be understood in relation to the
underlying condition for which the BLM determines that a closure or
restriction is warranted; it would not impose any specific time
limitations on a closure or restriction order issued under Sec.
8364.1. Instead, a temporary closure or restriction order would
generally remain in effect until the situation it is addressing has
ended or abated, it expires by its own terms, or the BLM issues a
superseding decision, which can include incorporating the terms of a
closure or restriction order into a resource management plan in
accordance with the regulations at 43 CFR part 1600.
Importantly, the proposed rule would not itself close or restrict
the use of any specific public land, nor would it require the BLM to
issue any new or additional temporary closure and restriction orders.
The proposed rule would merely modernize and streamline the procedures
governing how the BLM issues temporary closure and restriction orders,
providing the public with better clarity about the scope of these
orders and when they are effective. Under the proposed rule, the BLM
would continue to establish closures and use restrictions after other
management strategies and alternatives have been explored, including,
but not limited to, increased law enforcement, cooperative efforts with
local governments, engineering, education, and outreach.
The proposed rule would not impact the public's ability to provide
feedback on temporary closures and restrictions. In its current form,
43 CFR 8364.1 requires that closure and restriction orders be published
in the Federal Register, but the provision does not require that the
public have an opportunity to provide feedback on these closures and
restrictions prior to their implementation. To the degree that the
public receives an opportunity to provide feedback on proposed closures
and restrictions, that opportunity stems from other authorities, such
as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the John D. Dingell,
Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act of 2019 (Dingell Act),
and the regulations implementing the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act of 1980. That would still be the case under the
proposed rule, which would neither require the BLM to seek public
feedback on proposed closures and restrictions nor modify any separate
statutory or regulatory provisions that do impose such requirements.
For example, even though the proposed rule would eliminate the Federal
Register publication requirement in 43 CFR 8364.1, the BLM may still
need to publish a Federal Register notice and provide the public with
an opportunity to comment in accordance with section 4103 of the
Dingell Act (16 U.S.C. 7913) if proposing to close public lands to
hunting, fishing, or recreational shooting.
The proposed rule would not affect how the BLM complies with NEPA
and other statutory obligations when issuing closure or restriction
orders. While most temporary closure and restriction orders are
unlikely to have significant effects on the quality of the human
environment, the BLM would continue to ensure that individual closure
and restriction orders satisfy NEPA's requirements.
The proposed rule would not diminish or eliminate the public's
opportunity to challenge the issuance of temporary closure or
restriction orders, which would remain subject to appeal to the
Department of the Interior's Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) in accordance
with 43 CFR part 4 or challenge in Federal court. The proposed rule
would merely provide that the BLM may issue temporary closure and
restriction orders with immediate full force and effect and that such
orders would remain in effect pending a decision on administrative
appeal unless a stay is granted by the IBLA.
V. Procedural Matters
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51725, October 4, 1993), as
amended by E.O. 14094, provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
will review all significant rules. The OIRA has determined that this
proposed rule is not significant.
E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 11, 2011) reaffirms the principles
of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the Nation's regulatory
system to promote predictability, reduce uncertainty, and use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory
ends. The E.O. directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the
public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent
with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that
regulations must be based on the best available science and that the
rule making process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. The BLM has developed this proposed rule in a manner
consistent with these requirements.
The BLM reviewed the proposed requirements and has determined that
the proposed rule does not meet any of the E.O. 12866 criteria of
significance. The OIRA has also concluded that the proposed rule is not
a significant regulatory action. Therefore, the proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action, and the BLM is not required to submit a
regulatory impact analysis to OMB for review.
The BLM reviewed the requirements of the proposed rule and
determined that it would not adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal
[[Page 81026]]
governments or communities. For more detailed information, see the
Economic and Threshold analysis prepared for this proposed rule. This
analysis has been posted in the docket for the proposed rule on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the
Searchbox, enter ``RIN 1004-AE89'', click the ``Search'' button, open
the Docket Folder, and look under Supporting Documents.
Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (E.O. 12898)
E.O. 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) requires that, to the
extent practicable and permitted by law, each Federal agency must make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission. E.O. 12898
provides that each Federal agency conduct its programs, policies, and
activities that substantially affect human health or the environment in
a manner that ensures that such programs, policies, and activities do
not have the effect of excluding persons (including populations) from
participation in, denying persons (including populations) the benefits
of, or subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination
under such programs, policies, and activities because of their race,
color, or national origin. This proposed rule would amend the process
the BLM uses to issue temporary closure and restriction orders. The
proposed rule change is not expected to have an effect on any
particular population. Therefore, this proposed rule is not expected to
negatively impact any community and is not expected to cause any
disproportionately high or adverse impacts to minority or low-income
communities.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires that
Federal agencies prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for rules
subject to the notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 500 et seq.), if the rule would
have a significant economic impact, whether detrimental or beneficial,
on a substantial number of small entities. See 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
Congress enacted the RFA to ensure that government regulations do not
unnecessarily or disproportionately burden small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions,
and small not-for-profit enterprises. Based on the available
information, we conclude that the proposed rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, neither a final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis nor a Small
Entity Compliance Guide is required.
Congressional Review Act
This proposed rule is not a major rule under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This proposed
rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
(b) Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), agencies must prepare a written statement about benefits and
costs prior to issuing a proposed or final rule that may result in
aggregate expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, or by
the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.
This proposed rule is not subject to the requirements under the
UMRA. The proposed rule does not contain a federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector in any
one year. The proposed rule would not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. A statement containing the information required by
the UMRA is not required.
Takings (E.O. 12630)
This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630. Section 2(a) of
E.O. 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) identifies policies that do not
have takings implications, such as those that abolish regulations,
discontinue governmental programs, or modify regulations in a manner
that lessens interference with the use of private property. The
proposed rule would not interfere with private property and does not
have takings implications under E.O. 12630. Accordingly, a takings
implication assessment is not required.
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in section 1 of E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
4, 1999), this proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact
statement. The proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects
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. A federalism summary impact statement
is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This proposed rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 5, 1996). Specifically, this proposed rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175 and Departmental Policy)
The Department of the Interior (DOI) strives to strengthen its
government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes through a
commitment to consultation with Indian Tribes and recognition of their
right to self-governance and Tribal sovereignty.
In accordance with E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), the
BLM has evaluated this proposed rulemaking and determined that it would
not have substantial direct effects on Federally recognized Indian
Tribes. Nevertheless, on a government-to-government basis we initiated
consultation with Tribal governments that wish to discuss the proposed
rule.
On March 22, 2023, the BLM sent a letter to Federally recognized
Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations notifying them about the
BLM's intent to pursue this proposed rulemaking. In that letter, the
BLM invited the Tribes and Corporations to engage in government-to-
government consultation. We look forward to continuing close
interaction with Tribal leaders throughout this proposed rulemaking
process.
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and
a submission to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required.
[[Page 81027]]
National Environmental Policy Act
The BLM intends to apply the Departmental categorical exclusion at
43 CFR 46.210(i) to comply with NEPA. This categorical exclusion covers
policies, directives, regulations, and guidelines that are of an
administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature or
whose environmental effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural
to lend themselves to meaningful analysis and will later be subject to
the NEPA process, either collectively or case-by-case. The BLM plans to
document the applicability of the categorical exclusion concurrently
with development of the final rule.
The proposed rule is procedural and administrative in nature. The
proposed rule would not be self-executing and would not result in
access being prohibited or use being restricted on any specific public
lands. The proposed rule also would not limit or reduce any current
public participation opportunities. The proposed rule would merely
streamline the administrative process through which the BLM issues and
publicizes temporary closure and restriction orders in an effort to
enhance the agency's ability to respond to emergencies, unforeseen
events, and other management exigencies. Because the proposed rule is
administrative and procedural in nature and would not result in any on-
the-ground changes or other environmental effects, it satisfies the
first prong of the categorical exclusion at 43 CFR 46.210(i).
The proposed rule also satisfies the second prong of 43 CFR
46.210(i). Because the proposed rule would not result in access being
prohibited or use being restricted on any specific public lands, the
environmental effects that may flow from the procedural changes being
proposed are entirely speculative or conjectural at this time and do
not lend themselves to meaningful analysis. Moreover, any environmental
effects associated with future orders would be subject to the NEPA
process on a case-by-case basis. Accordingly, reliance on the second
prong of the categorical exclusion at 43 CFR 46.210(i) is also
appropriate.
The BLM has determined, as a preliminary matter, that the proposed
rule does not involve any of the extraordinary circumstances listed in
43 CFR 46.215 that would require further analysis under the NEPA.
Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
This proposed rule is not a significant energy action under E.O.
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). Section 4(b) of E.O. 13211 defines a
``significant energy action'' as ``any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to
lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including
notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices
of proposed rulemaking: (1) (i) that is a significant regulatory action
under E.O. 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy; or (2) that is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action.''
The BLM reviewed the proposed rule and determined that it is not a
significant energy action as defined by E.O. 13211. A Statement of
Energy Effects is not required.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by E.O.s 12866 (section 1(b)(12)), 12988 (section
3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and by the Presidential
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This
means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use common, everyday words and clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you believe that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the proposed rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of
the sections or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or
sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables
would be useful, etc.
Authors
The principal authors of this proposed rule are Kevin Oliver, Cory
Roegner, Russell Scofield, and David Jeppesen, Recreation and Visitor
Services Division; Rebecca Moore, Branch of Decision Support; Heather
Feeney, Division of Public Affairs; Jon Young, Office of Law
Enforcement and Security; Kyle W. Moorman Division of Regulatory
Affairs; and Darrin King, Division of Regulatory Affairs, and assisted
by the Office of the Solicitor, Ryan Sklar.
List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 8360
Penalties, Public lands, Recreation and recreation areas.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Bureau of Land
Management proposes to amend 43 CFR part 8360 as follows:
PART 8360--VISITOR SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 8360 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 470aaa, et seq.; 670, et seq.; 877, et
seq.; 1241, et seq.; and 1281c; and 43 U.S.C. 315a and 1701 et seq.
0
2. Revise Sec. 8364.1 to read as follows:
Sec. 8364.1 Temporary closure and restriction orders.
(a) The authorized officer may issue an order to temporarily close
or restrict the use of designated public lands to protect persons,
property, public lands, or resources; provide for implementation of
management responsibilities; avoid conflict among public land users; or
ensure the privacy of Tribal activities for traditional or cultural
use.
(b) Each order shall:
(1) Identify the public lands, roads, trails, or waterways that are
closed to entry or restricted as to use;
(2) Specify the uses that are restricted;
(3) Specify the date and time that the closure or restriction order
will become effective and the date and time the order will terminate;
(4) Identify any persons or groups who are exempt from the closure
or restrictions;
(5) Be posted in a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Office having
jurisdiction over the public lands, roads, trails, or waterways to
which the order applies;
(6) Be posted at places near or within the area to which the
closure or restriction applies, in such manner and location as is
reasonable to bring prohibitions to the attention of users; and
(7) Include a statement that includes the reasons for the closure
or restriction.
(c) When issuing closure or restriction orders pursuant to this
section, the authorized officer shall provide public notice:
(1) By notifying local media outlets; and
(2) Posting information on at least one BLM-controlled, publicly
available online communication system.
(d) Orders issued pursuant to this section shall be effective upon
issuance or a date and time established in the order and shall remain
in effect during the time in which it may be appealed to
[[Page 81028]]
the Office of Hearings and Appeals under part 4 of this title. If
appealed, such orders shall remain in effect pending the decision on
appeal unless a stay is granted.
(e) Any person who violates a temporary closure or restriction
order may be tried before a United States magistrate and fined in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3571, imprisoned no more than 12 months under
43 U.S.C. 1733(a) and Sec. 8360.0-7, or both.
Steven H. Feldgus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
[FR Doc. 2023-25698 Filed 11-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-30-P