[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