57352 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

Site name Location 

Shaw Air Force Base ...................................................................................................................... Sumter, SC. 

Southeast Alaska Acoustic Measurement Facility .......................................................................... Ketchikan, AK. 

Tin City Long Range Radar Site ..................................................................................................... Tin City, AK. 

Tinker Air Force Base ..................................................................................................................... Midwest City, OK. 

Travis Air Force Base ..................................................................................................................... Fairfield, CA. 

Tyndall Air Force Base .................................................................................................................... Bay County, FL. 

U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Center ..................................................................................... Natick, MA. 

Watervliet Arsenal ........................................................................................................................... Watervliet, NY. 

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base .................................................................................................... Dayton, OH. 

Part 2 

Aberdeen Proving Ground .............................................................................................................. Aberdeen, MD. 

Air Force Plant 42 ........................................................................................................................... Palmdale, CA. 

Camp Shelby ................................................................................................................................... Hattiesburg, MS. 

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station .................................................................................................. Cape Canaveral, FL. 

Dare County Range ........................................................................................................................ Manns Harbor, NC. 

Dyess Air Force Base ..................................................................................................................... Abilene, TX. 

Edwards Air Force Base ................................................................................................................. Edwards, CA. 

Eglin Air Force Base ....................................................................................................................... Valparaiso, FL. 

Ellsworth Air Force Base ................................................................................................................. Box Elder, SD. 

Fallon Range Complex ................................................................................................................... Fallon, NV. 

Fort Greely ...................................................................................................................................... Delta Junction, AK. 

Fort Huachuca ................................................................................................................................. Sierra Vista, AZ. 

Fort Irwin ......................................................................................................................................... San Bernardino County, CA. 

Fort Johnson ................................................................................................................................... Leesville, LA. 

Fort Liberty ...................................................................................................................................... Fayetteville, NC. 

Fort Wainwright ............................................................................................................................... Fairbanks, AK. 

Grand Forks Air Force Base ........................................................................................................... Grand Forks, ND. 

Hardwood Range ............................................................................................................................ Necehuenemedah, WI. 

Hill Air Force Base .......................................................................................................................... Ogden, UT. 

Iowa National Guard Joint Force Headquarters ............................................................................. Des Moines, IA. 

Lackland Air Force Base ................................................................................................................. San Antonio, TX. 

Laughlin Air Force Base ................................................................................................................. Del Rio, TX. 

Luke Air Force Base ....................................................................................................................... Glendale, AZ. 

Mountain Home Air Force Base ...................................................................................................... Mountain Home, ID. 

Naval Air Station Meridian .............................................................................................................. Meridian, MS. 

Naval Air Station Patuxent River .................................................................................................... Lexington Park, MD. 

Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake ......................................................................................... Ridgecrest, CA. 

Naval Base Kitsap—Keyport ........................................................................................................... Keyport, WA. 

Naval Base Ventura County—Point Mugu Operating Facility ........................................................ Point Mugu, CA. 

Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility Boardman .................................................................... Boardman, OR. 

Nellis Air Force Base ...................................................................................................................... Las Vegas, NV. 

Nevada Test and Training Range ................................................................................................... Tonopah, NV. 

Pacific Missile Range Facility .......................................................................................................... Kekaha, HI. 

Patrick Air Force Base .................................................................................................................... Cocoa Beach, FL. 

Tropic Regions Test Center ............................................................................................................ Wahiawa, HI. 

Utah Test and Training Range ....................................................................................................... Barro, UT. 

Vandenberg Air Force Base ........................................................................................................... Lompoc, CA. 

West Desert Test Center ................................................................................................................ Dugway, UT. 

White Sands Missile Range ............................................................................................................ White Sands Missile Range, NM. 

Yuma Proving Ground .................................................................................................................... Yuma, AZ. 

* * * * * 

Paul M. Rosen, 

Assistant Secretary for Investment Security. 

[FR Doc. 2023–17678 Filed 8–22–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AK–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2023–0700] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Lake Tahoe, Glenbrook, 

NV 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary security zone 

in the navigable waters of Lake Tahoe, 

Glenbrook, NV within the San Francisco 

Captain of the Port Zone. This moving 

security zone will encompass all 

navigable waters within 100 yards of the 

vessel carrying high-ranking 

government officials and their official 

party. The security zone is necessary to 

protect the harbors, ports, and 

waterfront facilities of Lake Tahoe 

during a visit by high-ranking 

government officials and their official 

party. Entry of vessels or persons into 

this zone is prohibited unless 

specifically authorized by the Captain of 

the Port San Francisco or a designated 

representative. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 57353 

DATES: This rule is effective without 

actual notice from August 23, 2023 

through August 27, 2023. For the 

purposes of enforcement, actual notice 

will be used from August 18, 2023, until 

August 23, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2023– 

0700 in the search box and click 

‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type 

column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related 

Material.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this rule, call 

or email LT William Harris, U.S. Coast 

Guard Sector San Francisco, Waterways 

Management Division; telephone 415– 

399–7443, email SFWaterways@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary rule without prior notice and 

opportunity to comment pursuant to 

authority under section 4(a) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 

U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because it is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. The Coast Guard was notified 

of the need of this security zone with 

less than two weeks’ notice and did not 

receive final details until August 16, 

2023. The high-ranking government 

official visit will occur before the 

completion of any comment period, 

thereby jeopardizing the security of the 

official and the harbors, ports, and 

waterfront facilities of Lake Tahoe. 

Additionally, it is impracticable to 

publish an NPRM because the visit is 

scheduled to occur on August 18–27, 

2023, and we must establish this 

security zone by those dates. We lack 

sufficient time to solicit public 

comments and review the prior to 

issuing a final action. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Delaying the effective date 

would be impracticable because 

immediate action is needed to provide 

for the protection of high-ranking 

government officials, security of the 

harbors, ports, and waterfront facilities, 

and mitigation of potential subversive 

acts. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule 

under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70051 and 

70124. The Captain of the Port (COTP) 

has determined that the high-ranking 

government officials and their official 

party plan to visit various locations 

throughout the Lake Tahoe area and will 

transit the lake by boat, necessitating a 

moving security zone. The navigable 

waters of Lake Tahoe are in the San 

Francisco COTP zone. This rule is 

needed to ensure the safety of highranking government officials and their 

official party. 

IV. Discussion of the Rule 

This rule establishes a moving 

security zone from August 18 through 

27, 2023. The moving security zone will 

cover all navigable waters of Lake 

Tahoe, from surface to bottom, within 

100 yards of the vessel carrying highranking government officials and their 

official party. This zone will be in effect 

from 12:01 a.m. on August 18, 2023, 

until 11:59 p.m. on August 27, 2023, 

and enforced as necessary during that 

period. 

The duration of this zone is intended 

to protect the harbors, ports, and 

waterfront facilities during the highranking government officials’ visit to the 

local area and to ensure the safety of the 

official party. No vessel or person will 

be permitted to enter the security zone 

except for authorized support vessels, 

aircraft, and support personnel, or other 

vessels authorized by the COTP or a 

designated representative. 

V. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on a number of these statutes and 

Executive orders, and we discuss First 

Amendment rights of protestors. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 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. 

This rule has not been designated a 

‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as 

amended by Executive Order 14094 

(Modernizing Regulatory Review). 

Accordingly, this rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB). 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the size, location, and 

duration of the security zone. The effect 

of this rule will not be significant 

because local waterway users will be 

notified by on-scene enforcement to 

ensure the security zone will result in 

minimal impact. Additionally, vessel 

traffic will be able to pass safely around 

the area of the security zone. The 

entities most likely to be affected are 

pleasure craft engaged in recreational 

activities. The rule will allow vessels to 

seek permission to enter the zone by 

contacting the COTP or the COTP’s 

designated representative through the 

Command Post at telephone (202) 604– 

8857 or by VHF Marine Radio channel 

21A. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 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 rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

While some owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the security 

zone may be small entities, for the 

reasons stated in section V.A above, this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on any vessel owner 

or operator. 

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 rule. If the rule 

would affect your small business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
57354 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The 

Coast Guard will not retaliate against 

small entities that question or complain 

about this rule or any policy or action 

of the Coast Guard. 

C. Collection of Information 

This rule will not call for a new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 

Governments 

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 rule under that Order and 

have determined that it is consistent 

with the fundamental federalism 

principles and preemption requirements 

described in Executive Order 13132. 

Also, this rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does 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. 

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 rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated 

implementing instructions, and 

Environmental Planning COMDTINST 

5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

determined that this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves a 

temporary moving security zone of 

limited duration in effect over a period 

of ten days. It is categorically excluded 

from further review under paragraph 

L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS 

Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, 

Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental 

Consideration supporting this 

determination is available in the docket. 

For instructions on locating the docket, 

see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to call or email 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. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T11–138 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T11–138 Security Zone: Lake Tahoe, 

Glenbrook, NV. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

security zone: (1) All waters within 100 

yards of the vessel carrying high ranking 

government officials and members of 

their official party when transiting Lake 

Tahoe. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, designated representative 

means a Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, including a Coast Guard 

coxswain, petty officer, or other officer 

operating a Coast Guard vessel, and a 

Federal, State, or local officer 

designated by or assisting the Captain of 

the Port (COTP) San Francisco in the 

enforcement of the security zone. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general 

security zone regulations in subpart D of 

this part, you may not enter the security 

zone described in paragraph (a) of this 

section unless authorized by the COTP 

or a designated representative. 

(2) The security zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the COTP or a designated 

representative. 

(3) To seek permission to enter, 

contact the COTP or the COTP’s 

designated representative through the 

Command Post at telephone (202) 604– 

8857 or by VHF Marine Radio channel 

21A. Those in the security zone must 

comply with all lawful orders or 

directions given to them by the COTP or 

the COTP’s designated representative. 

(d) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced, when necessary, from 

12:01 a.m. on August 18, 2023, until 

11:59 p.m. on August 27, 2023. 

Dated: August 17, 2023. 

Taylor Q. Lam, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector San Francisco. 

[FR Doc. 2023–18168 Filed 8–22–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2023–0699] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Lake Tahoe, Glenbrook, 

NV 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary security zone 

in the navigable waters of Lake Tahoe, 

Glenbrook, NV within the San Francisco 

Captain of the Port Zone. The security 

zone is along the Lake Tahoe shoreline 

from approximately 200 yards from 

shore in the Glenbrook area. The 

security zone is necessary to protect the 

harbors, ports, and waterfront facilities 

of Lake Tahoe during a visit by highranking government officials and their 

official party. Entry of vessels or persons 

into this zone is prohibited unless 

specifically authorized by the Captain of 

the Port San Francisco or a designated 

representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective without 

actual notice from August 23, 2023 

through August 27, 2023. For the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1