Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 76611 

Section of OMB guidance Section in this part where 

supplemented What the supplementation clarifies 

(1) 2 CFR 182.225(a) .......... § 421.225 ............................ Whom in the USDA a recipient other than an individual must notify if an employee 

is convicted for a violation of a criminal drug statute in the workplace. 

(2) 2 CFR 182.300(b) .......... § 421.300 ............................ Whom in the USDA a recipient who is an individual must notify if he or she is convicted of a criminal drug offense resulting from a violation occurring during the 

conduct of any award activity. 

(3) 2 CFR 182.500 ............... § 421.500 ............................ Who in the USDA is authorized to determine that a recipient other than an individual is in violation of the requirements of 2 CFR part 182, as implemented by 

this part. 

(4) 2 CFR 182.505 ............... § 421.505 ............................ Who in the USDA is authorized to determine that a recipient who is an individual is 

in violation of the requirements of 2 CFR part 182, as implemented by this part. 

(c) Sections of the OMB guidance that 

this part does not supplement. For any 

section of OMB guidance in Subparts A 

through F of 2 CFR part 182 that is not 

listed in paragraph (b) of this section, 

USDA policies and procedures are the 

same as those in the OMB guidance. 

Subpart A—Purpose and Coverage 

[Reserved] 

Subpart B—Requirements for 

Recipients Other Than Individuals 

§ 421.225 Whom in the USDA does a 

recipient other than an individual notify 

about a criminal drug conviction? 

A recipient other than an individual 

that is required under 2 CFR 182.225(a) 

to notify Federal agencies about an 

employee’s conviction for a criminal 

drug offense must notify the awarding 

official for each USDA agency from 

which the recipient currently has an 

award. 

Subpart C—Requirements for 

Recipients Who Are Individuals 

§ 421.300 Whom in the USDA does a 

recipient who is an individual notify about 

a criminal drug conviction? 

A recipient who is an individual that 

is required under 2 CFR 182.300(b) to 

notify Federal agencies about a 

conviction for a criminal drug offense 

must notify the awarding official for 

each USDA agency from which the 

recipient currently has an award. 

Subpart D—Responsibilities of Agency 

Awarding Officials 

§ 421.400 What method do I use as an 

agency awarding official to obtain a 

recipient’s agreement to comply with the 

OMB guidance? 

To obtain a recipient’s agreement to 

comply with applicable requirements in 

the OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 182, 

you must include the following term or 

condition in the award: 

Drug-free workplace. You as the 

recipient must comply with drug-free 

workplace requirements in Subpart B 

(or Subpart C, if the recipient is an 

individual) of part 421, which adopts 

the Governmentwide implementation (2 

CFR part 182) of sec. 5152–5158 of the 

Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (Pub. 

L. 100–690, Title V, Subtitle D; 41 

U.S.C. 701–707). 

Subpart E—Violations of This Part and 

Consequences 

§ 421.500 Who in the USDA determines 

that a recipient other than an individual 

violated the requirements of this part? 

The Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary’s designee or designees are 

authorized to make the determination 

under 2 CFR 182.500. 

§ 421.505 Who in the USDA determines 

that a recipient who is an individual violated 

the requirements of this part? 

The Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary’s designee or designees are 

authorized to make the determination 

under 2 CFR 182.505. 

Title 7—Agriculture 

Chapter XXX—Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer, Department of Agriculture 

PART 3021—[REMOVED] 

■ 2. Remove Part 3021. 

Approved: October 26, 2011. 

Pearlie S. Reed, 

Assistant Secretary for Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31467 Filed 12–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–90–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

Interference With a Crewmember via 

Laser 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Interpretation. 

SUMMARY: On June 1, 2011, the Assistant 

Chief Counsel for Regulations, Federal 

Aviation Administration (‘‘FAA’’), 

issued an interpretation of 14 CFR 

91.11. Section 91.11 provides that ‘‘[n]o 

person may assault, threaten, 

intimidate, or interfere with a 

crewmember in the performance of the 

crewmember’s duties aboard an aircraft 

being operated.’’ The FAA is aware of 

an increasing number of incidents 

involving the use of lasers being 

directed toward aircraft operating on the 

ground or in the air. Such conduct has 

the potential to adversely affect safety 

by interfering with flight crewmembers 

in the performance of their duties. The 

FAA considers a situation in which a 

laser beam is aimed at an aircraft by a 

person on the ground or from any other 

location including from another aircraft 

so that it interferes with a crewmember 

in the performance of the crewmember’s 

duties as a violation of 14 CFR 91.11. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dean E. Griffith, Attorney, Regulations 

Division, Chief Counsel’s Office, AGC– 

220, Federal Aviation Administration, 

800 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC; telephone: (202) 267– 

3073; email: dean.griffith@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

published its June 1, 2011 interpretation 

of section 91.11 on its Web site, which 

is available to the public at: http:// 

www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/ 

news_story.cfm?newsId=12765. It is also 

available on the FAA’s Laser Incident 

Information and Reporting Web site: 

http://www.faa.gov/go/laserinfo. In 

addition, the FAA and the Department 

of Transportation have issued press 

releases with regard to publicizing the 

dangers of interfering with flight crew 

operations by using lasers directed at 

aircraft. With this notice published in 

the Federal Register, the FAA is again 

advising the public of the FAA’s June 1, 

2011 interpretation of section 91.11 in 

an effort to increase awareness that: (1) 

Directing laser beams towards aircraft 

operating on the ground or in the air so 

that it interferes with a crewmember in 

the performance of the crewmember’s 

duties is a violation of section 91.11; 

and, (2) persons violating section 91.11 

are subject to a substantial civil penalty. 


wreier-aviles on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with RULES
76612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

The text of the interpretation issued 

by the Assistant Chief Counsel for 

Regulations, FAA, on June 1, 2011, 

follows: 

This memorandum is in response to 

your request for legal interpretation on 

whether directing a laser at an aircraft 

from the ground could constitute 

interference with a crewmember under 

14 CFR 91.11. The FAA’s understanding 

of the plain language of § 91.11, and the 

purpose of the regulation, indicate that 

the answer to this question is ‘‘yes.’’ 

Section 91.11 establishes that ‘‘[n]o 

person may assault, threaten, 

intimidate, or interfere with a 

crewmember in the performance of the 

crewmember’s duties aboard an aircraft 

being operated.’’ 

This regulation was initially adopted 

in 1961 in reaction to increased 

hijackings of aircraft. See 26 FR 7009 

(Aug. 4, 1961). The FAA intended to 

‘‘provide additional controls over the 

conduct of passengers in order to avoid 

a serious threat to the safety of flights 

and persons aboard them.’’ Id. In a later 

amendment to the rule, the FAA stated 

that this section was ‘‘clearly intended 

to apply to passengers * * * and any 

other ‘person’ on board the aircraft.’’ 64 

FR 1076, 1077 (Jan. 7, 1999). 

Although the primary focus of the 

regulation, as explained in the 1999 

amendments to the rule, was persons on 

board the aircraft, the plain language of 

the regulation does not specify that the 

person interfering with a crewmember 

must be on board the aircraft. We note 

that the FAA has successfully invoked 

this section to assess a civil penalty 

against a pilot who walked up to a 

helicopter that was on the ground 

preparing for takeoff, reached into the 

helicopter and physically assaulted the 

pilot. See Adm’r v. Siegel, NTSB Order 

No. EA–3804 (Feb. 10, 1993), 1993 WL 

56200. Accordingly, the rule, and prior 

FAA interpretation, as evidenced by the 

Siegel case, support a finding that an 

individual does not need to be on board 

the aircraft to violate § 91.11. 

The FAA is aware of an increasing 

number of incidents of lasers being 

pointed at aircraft, a scenario that could 

not have been contemplated by the 

drafters of the initial rule. The FAA has 

recognized ‘‘that the exposure of air 

crews to laser illumination may cause 

hazardous effects (e.g., distraction, glare, 

afterimage flash blindness, and, in 

extreme circumstances, persistent or 

permanent visual impairment), which 

could adversely affect the ability of air 

crews to carry out their 

responsibilities.’’ FAA Advisory 

Circular 70–2 (Jan. 11, 2005). Distracting 

or impairing a crewmember’s vision 

during operation of an aircraft could 

reasonably be construed to constitute 

interference with a crewmember’s 

duties aboard an aircraft. 

Therefore, the FAA would consider a 

situation in which a laser beam, aimed 

at an aircraft by a person who is not on 

board the aircraft, interferes with a 

crewmember’s performance of his or her 

duties aboard the aircraft to be a 

violation of § 91.11. We note that this 

interpretation would apply equally to 

the similarly worded provisions of 

§§ 121.580, 125.328, 135.120. 

This response was prepared by Dean 

E. Griffith, Attorney in the Regulations 

Division of the Office of the Chief 

Counsel, and was coordinated with the 

Air Transportation, Flight Technologies 

and Procedures, and General Aviation 

and Commercial Divisions of Flight 

Standards Service. It was also 

coordinated with Airspace Services in 

the Air Traffic Organization’s Office of 

Mission Support Services. Please 

contact us at (202) 267–3073 if we can 

be of additional assistance. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 

30, 2011. 

Rebecca B. MacPherson, 

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31446 Filed 12–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Natural Resources Revenue 

30 CFR Parts 1206, 1210, 1218, 1220, 

1227, 1228, and 1243 

[Docket No. ONRR 2011–0016] 

RIN 1012–AA07 

Amendments to OMB Control Numbers 

and Certain Forms 

AGENCY: Office of Natural Resources 

Revenue, Interior. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: On May 19, 2010, the 

Secretary of the Interior separated the 

responsibilities previously performed by 

the former Minerals Management 

Service (MMS) and reassigned those 

responsibilities to three separate 

organizations. As part of this 

reorganization, the Secretary renamed 

MMS’s Minerals Revenue Management 

Program (MRM) the Office of Natural 

Resources Revenue (ONRR) and 

directed that ONRR transition to the 

Office of the Assistant Secretary— 

Policy, Management and Budget (PMB). 

This change required ONRR to 

reorganize its regulations and 

repromulgate them in chapter XII, title 

30 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR). This direct final rule amends the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) control numbers for information 

collection requirements, certain form 

numbers, and corresponding technical 

corrections to part and position titles, 

agency names, and acronyms listed in 

chapter XII of 30 CFR. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 8, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions on technical issues, contact 

Armand Southall, Regulatory Specialist, 

ONRR, telephone (303) 231–3221; or 

email armand.southall@onrr.gov. You 

may obtain a paper copy of this rule by 

contacting Mr. Southall by phone or 

email. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On May 19, 2010, by Secretarial Order 

No. 3299, the Secretary of the 

Department of the Interior (Secretary) 

announced the restructuring of MMS. 

On June 18, 2010, by Secretarial Order 

No. 3302, the Secretary announced the 

name change of MMS to the Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, 

and Enforcement (BOEMRE). By these 

orders, the Secretary separated the 

responsibilities previously performed by 

MMS and reassigned those 

responsibilities to three separate 

organizations: the Office of Natural 

Resources Revenue (ONRR); the Bureau 

of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM); 

and the Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement (BSEE). 

The ONRR is responsible for the former 

MRM royalty and revenue functions. 

II. Explanation of Proposed 

Amendments 

In this direct final rule, ONRR amends 

the approved OMB control numbers for 

information collection requests and 

certain form numbers listed in certain 

parts of title 30 CFR, chapter XII. This 

direct final rule does not make any 

substantive changes to the regulations or 

requirements in chapter XII. It merely 

amends ONRR’s OMB control and 

certain form numbers in the new 

chapter XII of 30 CFR and makes any 

necessary corresponding technical 

corrections to part and position titles, 

agency names, and acronyms. This rule 

will not have any effect on the rights, 

obligations, or interests of any affected 

parties. Thus, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), 

ONRR, for good cause, finds that notice 

and comment on this rule are 

unnecessary and contrary to the public 

interest. Additionally, because this 

document is a ‘‘rule[] of agency 

organization, procedure or practice’’ 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A), this document 


wreier-aviles on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with RULES