46636 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

example, you may wish to discuss: (1) 

Whether we have organized the material 

to suit your needs; (2) whether the 

requirements of the rule are clear; or (3) 

whether there is something else we 

could do to make the rule easier to 

understand. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

The proposed rule does not meet the 

criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

12866. Therefore, the regulatory review 

procedures contained therein do not 

apply. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis 

It is hereby certified that the proposed 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The proposed 

rule imposes on the Federal 

Government a number of changes that 

Nacha has already adopted and imposed 

on private sector entities that utilize the 

ACH Network. The proposed rule does 

not impose any additional burdens, 

costs or impacts on any private sector 

entities, including any small entities. 

Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility 

analysis under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is 

not required. 

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 

1532 (Unfunded Mandates Act), 

requires that the agency prepare a 

budgetary impact statement before 

promulgating any rule likely to result in 

a Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. If a budgetary impact 

statement is required, section 205 of the 

Unfunded Mandates Act also requires 

the agency to identify and consider a 

reasonable number of regulatory 

alternatives before promulgating the 

rule. We have determined that the 

proposed rule will not result in 

expenditures by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. Accordingly, we have 

not prepared a budgetary impact 

statement or specifically addressed any 

regulatory alternatives. 

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 210 

Automated Clearing House, Electronic 

funds transfer, Financial institutions, 

Fraud, Incorporation by reference. 

Words of Issuance 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Fiscal Service proposes to 

amend 31 CFR part 210 as follows: 

PART 210—FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 

PARTICIPATION IN THE AUTOMATED 

CLEARING HOUSE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 210 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5525; 12 U.S.C. 391; 

31 U.S.C. 321, 3301, 3302, 3321, 3332, 3335, 

and 3720. 

■ 2. In § 210.2: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a) and the 

introductory text to paragraph (d); 

■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (d)(2) 

through (7) as paragraphs (d)(3) through 

(8); and 

■ c. Add new paragraph (d)(2). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 210.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(a) ACH Rules means the Operating 

Rules and the Operating Guidelines 

published by Nacha, a national 

association of regional member clearing 

house associations, ACH Operators, and 

participating financial institutions 

located in the United States. 

* * * * * 

(d) Applicable ACH Rules means the 

ACH Rules as published in ‘‘2021 Nacha 

Operating Rules & Guidelines: A 

Complete Guide to Rules Governing the 

ACH Network’’and Supplement #1– 

2021 (both incorporated by reference, 

see § 210.3(b)), except: 

* * * * * 

(2) Section 1.14 (governing the 

Participating DFI Contact registry); 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 210.3, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 210.3 Governing law. 

* * * * * 

(b) Incorporation by reference. Certain 

material is incorporated by reference 

into this part with the approval of the 

Director of the Federal Register under 5 

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To 

enforce any edition other than that 

specified in this section, the Bureau of 

Fiscal Service must publish a document 

in the Federal Register and the material 

must be available to the public. All 

approved material is available for 

inspection at the Bureau of the Fiscal 

Service, 401 14th Street SW, Room 

400A, Washington, DC 20227, and from 

the sources listed elsewhere in this 

paragraph. It is also available for 

inspection at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, email fr.inspection@

nara.gov or go to www.archives.gov/ 

federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

(1) Nacha, 2550 Wasser Terrace, Suite 

400, Herndon, Virginia 20171, tel. 703– 

561–1100, info@nacha.org. 

(i) 2021 Nacha Operating Rules & 

Guidelines, with an effective date on or 

before March 31, 2021. 

(ii) Supplement #1–2021 to the 2021 

Nacha Operating Rules & Guidelines. 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

David A. Lebryk, 

Fiscal Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17268 Filed 8–18–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2021–0637] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Ironman Michigan, 

Frankfort Harbor, MI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to establish a temporary safety zone for 

certain waters of Betsie Lake in 

Frankfort, MI. This action is necessary 

to provide for the safety of life on these 

navigable waters during the swim 

portion of an Ironman event on 

September 12, 2021. This proposed 

rulemaking would restrict usage by 

persons and vessels within the safety 

zone. At no time during the effective 

period may vessels transit the waters of 

Betsie Lake in the vicinity of a 

triangular shaped race course enclosed 

by the following three coordinates: 

44°37.88′ N, 86°13.82′ W to 44°37.83′ N, 

86°14.17′ W, to 44°37.54′ N, 86°13.67′ W 

then back to the starting point. The race 

course will be marked by buoys. These 

restrictions would apply to all vessels 

during the effective period unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

Lake Michigan (COTP) or a designated 

representative. We invite your 

comments on this proposed rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before September 3, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2021–0637 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https:// 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 46637 

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this proposed 

rulemaking, call or email Chief Petty 

Officer Jeromy Sherrill, Sector Lake 

Michigan Waterways Management 

Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 

414–747–7148, email 

Jeromy.N.Sherrill@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, Purpose, and Legal 

Basis 

On March 8, 2021, the Coast Guard 

was notified by the event sponsor of its 

intent to host Ironman Michigan in 

Frankfort, MI on September 12, 2021 

from 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. The swim 

area had not yet be finalized. On July 

23, 2021 the Coast Guard was notified 

of the finalized location of the swim 

portion of the event. The swim will 

begin near Frankfort Municipal Marina 

in Betsie Lake. The race course will be 

triangular shaped area enclosed by the 

following coordinates: 44°37.88′ N, 

86°13.82′ W to 44°37.83′ N, 86°14.17′ W, 

to 44°37.54′ N, 86°13.67′ W then back to 

the starting point. The race course will 

be marked by buoys. The COTP has 

determined that potential hazards 

associated with the triathlon would be 

a safety concern for anyone within the 

safety zone that is not participating in 

the triathlon. 

The purpose of this rulemaking is to 

ensure the safety of person, vessels and 

the navigable waters of Betsie Lake, MI. 

The Coast Guard is proposing this 

rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 

70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary rule with an abridged 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 undertaking a thirty-day comment 

period with respect to this rule because 

the Coast Guard received details of the 

finalize swim area with insufficient time 

remaining to undergo a full thirty-day 

comment period. While it is 

impracticable to undergo a full thirtyday comment period and still protect 

the public from the hazards associated 

with these operations, the Coast Guard 

invites comments for the next fifteen 

days. 

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 of 

this rule would be impracticable for the 

same reason stated above—immediate 

action is needed to respond to the 

potential safety hazards associated with 

the triathlon. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The COTP is proposing to establish a 

safety zone from 5:00 a.m. through 11:00 

a.m. on September 12, 2021. The safety 

zone will cover all waters of Betsie Lake 

in the vicinity of a triangular shaped 

race course near Frankfort Municipal 

Marina in Frankfort, MI. The duration of 

the zone is intended to ensure the safety 

of vessels and these navigable waters 

before, during, and after the triathlon 

event. No vessels or person would be 

permitted to enter the safety zone 

without obtaining permission from the 

COTP or a designated representative. 

The regulatory text we are proposing 

appears at the end of this document. 

IV. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed 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 NPRM has not been designated a 

‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

the NPRM has not been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the characteristics of the 

safety zone. The safety zone created by 

this proposed rule will relatively small 

and is designed to minimize its impact 

on navigable waters. This proposed rule 

will prohibit entry into certain 

navigable waters of Betsie Lake in 

Frankfort, MI, and it is not anticipated 

to exceed 6 hours in duration. Thus, 

restrictions on vessel movement within 

that particular area are expected to be 

minimal. Moreover, under certain 

conditions vessels may still transit 

through the safety zone when permitted 

by the COTP. 

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 proposed rule would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

While some owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the safety 

zone may be small entities, for the 

reasons stated in section IV.A above, 

this proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on any 

vessel owner or operator. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule. If the 

rule would affect your small business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast 

Guard will not retaliate against small 

entities that question or complain about 

this proposed rule or any policy or 

action of the Coast Guard. 

C. Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
46638 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(Federalism), if it has a substantial 

direct effect on the States, on the 

relationship between the National 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it is consistent 

with the fundamental federalism 

principles and preemption requirements 

described in Executive Order 13132. 

Also, this proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175 (Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments) because it would not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

If you believe this proposed rule has 

implications for federalism or Indian 

tribes, please call or email the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination 

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 proposed 

rule involves a safety zone lasting 2.5 

hours that would prohibit entry within 

a relatively small portion of Sturgeon 

Bay. Normally such actions are 

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 

preliminary 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. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to 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. 

V. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We view public participation as 

essential to effective rulemaking, and 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period. 

Your comment can help shape the 

outcome of this rulemaking. If you 

submit a comment, please include the 

docket number for this rulemaking, 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. If your material 

cannot be submitted using https://

www.regulations.gov, call or email the 

person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to https://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

Documents mentioned in this NPRM 

as being available in the docket, and all 

public comments, will be in our online 

docket at https://www.regulations.gov 

and can be viewed by following that 

website’s instructions. Additionally, if 

you go to the online docket and sign up 

for email alerts, you will be notified 

when comments are posted or a final 

rule is published. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 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; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T09–0637 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T09–0637 Safety Zone; Ironman 

Michigan, Frankfort, MI 

(a) Location. All waters of Betsie Lake 

in the vicinity of a triangular shaped 

race course enclosed by the following 

three coordinates: 44°37.88′ N, 86°13.82′ 

W to 44°37.83′ N, 86°14.17′ W, to 44° 

37.54′ N, 86°13.67′ W then back to the 

starting point. 

(b) Enforcement Period. The safety 

zone described in paragraph (a) would 

be effective on September 12, 2021 from 

5:00 a.m. through 11:00 a.m. 

(c) Regulations. 

(1) In accordance with the general 

regulations in section § 165.23, entry 

into, transiting, or anchoring within this 

safety zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the COTP or a designated 

representative. 

(2) This safety zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the COTP or a designated 

representative. 

(3) The ‘‘designated representative’’ of 

the COTP is any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

who has been designated by the COTP 

to act on his or her behalf. 

(4) Persons and vessel operators 

desiring to enter or operate within the 

safety zone during the swim portion of 

the triathlon must contact the COTP or 

an on-scene representative to obtain 

permission to do so. The COTP or an 

on-scene representative may be 

contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel 

operators given permission to enter or 

operate in the safety zone must comply 

with all directions given to them by the 

COTP or an on-scene representative. 

Dated: August 10, 2021. 

D.P. Montoro, 

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

Port Lake Michigan. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17752 Filed 8–18–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1