Technical Standards for “Electronic, Computer, or Other Technologic Aids” Used in the Play of Class II Games, 46336-46361 [06-6787]

Agencies

• National Indian Gaming Commission

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 155 (Friday, August 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46336-46361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6787]



[[Page 46335]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part IV





National Indian Gaming Commission





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



25 CFR Part 547



Technical Standards for ``Electronic, Computer, or Other Technologic 
Aids'' Used in the Play of Class II Games; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 46336]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION

25 CFR Part 547

RIN 3141-AA29


Technical Standards for ``Electronic, Computer, or Other 
Technologic Aids'' Used in the Play of Class II Games

AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC or ``Commission'').

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The proposed rule would add a new part to the Commission's 
regulations establishing technical standards for Class II games--bingo, 
lotto, other games similar to bingo, pull tabs, or ``instant bingo''--
that are played primarily through ``electronic, computer, or other 
technologic aids.'' The proposed rule would also establish a process 
for assuring the integrity of such games and aids before their 
placement in a Class II tribal gaming operation. No such standards 
currently exist. The Commission proposes this action in order to assist 
tribal gaming regulatory authorities and operators in ensuring the 
integrity and security of Class II games and gaming revenue.

DATES: Submit comments on or before September 30, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to ``Comments on Technical Standards,'' 
National Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20005, Attn: Michael Gross, Senior Attorney. Comments may be 
transmitted by facsimile to 202-632-0045, but the original also must be 
mailed or submitted to the above address. Comments may be sent 
electronically, instead of by mail or fax, to techstds@nigc.gov. Please 
indicate ``Class II technical regulations'' in the subject line.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Gross, Senior Attorney, Office 
of General Counsel, telephone: 202.632.7003. This is not a toll free 
call.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2701-21 (``IGRA''), 
enacted by the Congress in 1988, establishes the National Indian Gaming 
Commission (``NIGC'' or ``Commission'') and sets out a comprehensive 
framework for the regulation of gaming on Indian lands. The Act 
establishes three classes of Indian gaming.
     ``Class I gaming'' means social games played solely for 
prizes of minimal value or traditional forms of Indian gaming played in 
connection with tribal ceremonies or celebrations. 25 U.S.C. 2703(6). 
Indian tribes regulate Class I gaming exclusively.
     ``Class II gaming'' means the game of chance commonly 
known as bingo, whether or not electronic, computer, or other 
technologic aids are used in connection therewith, including, if played 
in the same location, pull-tabs, lotto, punch boards, tip jars, instant 
bingo, and other games similar to bingo, as well as various non-house 
banked card games. 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(A). Specifically excluded from 
Class II gaming are banking card games such as blackjack, electronic or 
electromechanical facsimiles of any game of chance, and slot machines 
of any kind. 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(B). Indian tribes and the NIGC share 
regulatory authority over Class II gaming. Indian tribes can engage in 
Class II gaming without any state involvement.
     ``Class III gaming'' includes all forms of gaming that are 
not Class I gaming or Class II gaming. 25 U.S.C. 2703(8). Class III 
gaming thus includes all other games of chance, including lotteries and 
most forms of casino gaming, such as slot machines, roulette, and 
banking card games like blackjack. Class III gaming may be conducted 
lawfully only if the tribe and the state in which the tribe is located 
enter into a tribal-state compact for such gaming. Alternatively, a 
tribe may operate Class III gaming under gaming procedures issued by 
the Secretary of the Interior. Because of the compact requirement, 
states, Indian tribes, and the NIGC possess regulatory authority over 
Class III gaming. In addition, the United States Department of Justice 
and United States Attorneys possess exclusive criminal, and certain 
civil, jurisdiction over Class III gaming on Indian lands.
    The Commission has determined that it is in the best interests of 
Indian gaming to adopt technical standards that govern the 
implementation of electronic, computer, and other technologic aids used 
in the play of Class II games because no such standards currently 
exist. The technical standards seek to provide a means for tribal 
gaming regulatory authorities and tribal operators to ensure that the 
integrity of Class II games played with the use of electronic, 
computer, or other technologic aids is maintained; that the games and 
aids are secure; and that the games and aids are fully auditable, i.e. 
that they provide a means for the gaming authority and gaming operation 
to account for all gaming revenue.

Development of the Proposed Rule Through Consultation With Indian 
Tribes

    In recognition of tribal sovereignty and the fundamental importance 
of standards to the operation and regulation of gaming on Indian lands 
under IGRA, the Commission developed a policy and process for 
consultation with Indian tribes that would provide opportunity for 
early and meaningful tribal input regarding formulation of these 
proposed regulations.
    In particular, while initially advising tribes of the Commission's 
intention to develop standards, the Commission also actively consulted 
with tribes regarding formulation of the Commission's first-ever 
official Government-to-Government Tribal Consultation Policy. After 
several months of consultation with tribes, the Commission's official 
Tribal Consultation Policy was adopted and published in the Federal 
Register on March 31, 2004 (69 FR 16973). The Commission purposely 
established this policy in order to have consultation policy guidelines 
in place for meaningful pre-rulemaking tribal consultation on these 
standards and other planned Commission rulemaking initiatives.
    The Commission's official Tribal Consultation Policy expressly 
calls for the Commission, to the extent practicable and permitted by 
law, to engage in regular, timely, and meaningful government-to-
government consultation with Indian Tribes when formulating proposed 
new or revised administrative regulations that may substantially affect 
the operation or regulation of gaming on Indian lands. To fulfill this 
policy commitment, the Commission devised a three-part plan to afford 
tribes a reasonable and practicable opportunity to consult with the 
Commission and to provide early input in formulation of regulations, 
before they were published as proposed new rules in the Federal 
Register and the actual rule-making process began.
    First, the Commission endeavored to consult in person at least 
twice with each gaming tribe between May 2003 and March 2006 regarding 
development of these, and other, proposed regulations. During this time 
period, the Commission sent out over 500 separate invitations to 
individual tribes to consult with the Commission and provide input. 
Many tribes accepted and participated in separate government-to-
government consultation meetings with the Commission regarding the 
proposed regulations and other matters. While some tribes declined the 
Commission's invitations, between May 2003 and

[[Page 46337]]

March 2006 the Commission conducted over 300 separate government-to-
government consultation meetings with individual tribes and their 
leaders or representatives.
    Second, the Commission established a joint Federal-Tribal Advisory 
Committee on March 31, 2004, composed of both Commission and tribal 
representatives to assist the Commission in formulating these 
regulations. In January 2004, the Commission requested all gaming 
tribes across the country to nominate tribal representatives to serve 
on this Advisory Committee. From the tribal nominations received, the 
Commission selected the following seven tribal representatives on March 
31, 2004: Norm Des Rosiers, Gaming Commissioner, Viejas Band of 
Kumeyaay Indians; Joseph Carlini, Gaming Commission Executive Director, 
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians; Kenneth Ermatinger, Gaming 
Commission Executive Director, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa 
Indians of Michigan; Jamie Hummingbird, Gaming Commission Director, 
Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Mark Garrow, Gaming Commission Inspections 
Manager, St. Regis Mohawk Tribe; Melvin Daniels, General Manager, 
Muckleshoot Indian Bingo, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe; Charles Lombardo, 
Senior Vice-President for Gaming Operations, Seminole Tribe of Florida.
    To date, the Advisory Committee has held six (6) meetings: May 13, 
2004 in Washington, DC; August 2-3, 2004, Washington, DC; September 13-
14, 2004, Cherokee, North Carolina; December 1-3, 2004, Oklahoma City, 
Oklahoma; January 12-13, 2005, Palm Springs, California; and March 11, 
2005, Chicago, Illinois. During these committee meetings, all of which 
were open to the public, the committee discussed the various 
characteristics of Class II and Class III games of chance, their play, 
and related gaming technology and methods. In addition, the committee 
discussed, reviewed, critiqued and commented on 2 different, successive 
preliminary working drafts of the proposed Class II technical standards 
prepared by the Commission representatives on the Committee. The seven 
tribal committee representatives provided early tribal input and 
valuable insight, advice, and assistance to the Commission in 
developing each of the respective working drafts, as well as the 
current proposed regulations.
    The Commission's establishment of the joint Federal-Tribal advisory 
committee was the subject of a legal challenge while the Commission was 
preparing the proposed rule for publication. On March 10, 2005, nearly 
one year after the Commission established the committee, the 
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation and the 
Santa Rosa Rancheria Indian Community filed suit against the Commission 
alleging, among other things, that several of the committee members 
were not eligible to participate on the committee. Following a hearing 
in Federal court, at which the request for temporary restraining order 
was denied, the Commission determined that it should proceed to publish 
the proposed rule for comment while the legal standing of the committee 
was further litigated. The Commission also sought clarification from 
those tribes nominating the committee members concerning the member's 
role as an official representative of the tribe. As a result of this 
clarification, and, out of an abundance of caution, the Commission 
regretfully requested that two members of the Committee step down.
    The third component of the Commission's effort to consult with 
tribes during the pre-rulemaking formulation phase of these proposed 
regulations was to make the various preliminary working drafts of the 
proposed regulations available to all tribes and their leaders for 
review and comment, independent of the joint federal-tribal Advisory 
Committee. In particular, while these proposed regulations were being 
formulated, the first and second preliminary working drafts were mailed 
to each tribe and its leaders, inviting written comment. The drafts 
were also posted on the Commission's website for review and comment by 
all. Many tribes and members of the public submitted written comments 
on these respective working drafts. The tribal comments were shared 
with the members of the Advisory Committee for their review and 
carefully considered by the Commission in formulating these proposed 
regulations.
    In addition, the Gaming Standards Association, a casino-industry 
group comprised of game manufacturers and operators, and the National 
Indian Gaming Association, the largest Indian gaming trade group, 
assembled a meeting on December 16, 2004, in Las Vegas, Nevada, so that 
interested members of both organizations could review the technical 
standards and provide suggestions to the Commission. The Commission was 
invited, and it sent a staff member to listen to the discussion and to 
answer questions, if necessary.
    Beyond all of this, the Commission attended and addressed several 
different assemblies of tribal leaders and tribal gaming operators and 
regulators at meetings and conferences organized by state and regional 
tribal gaming associations, the National Indian Gaming Association, and 
the National Congress of American Indians between January 2003 and 
March 2005. At these meetings and conferences, the Commission advised 
tribal leaders of its intention and plan to develop these regulations 
and provided periodic updates regarding the progress and status of the 
regulations development. The Commission also made itself available at 
these meetings to answer any questions from tribal leaders regarding 
the proposed regulations or their formulation.
    Through each of these various means, the Commission actively 
endeavored to provide all tribes with a reasonable and practical 
opportunity over the past 26 months to meet and consult with the 
Commission on a government-to-government basis and provide early and 
meaningful tribal input regarding the formulation and implementation of 
these proposed regulations.

Purpose and Scope

    The proposed Part 547 applies to Class II games played primarily 
through electronic, computer, or other technologic aids, or 
modifications of such games and aids. It does not apply to live session 
bingo. Class II games played through such technologic aids are widely 
used in Indian gaming operations, yet no uniform standards exist to 
govern their implementation. The proposed rule seeks to remedy that 
absence and establish technical standards for such games and aids.
    Again, the technical standards seek to provide a means for tribal 
gaming regulatory authorities and tribal operators to ensure that the 
integrity of Class II games played with the use of electronic, 
computer, or other technologic aids, is maintained; that the games and 
aids are secure; and that the games and aids are fully auditable. In so 
doing, the technical standards are modeled, when appropriate, on 
similar standards from experienced gaming jurisdictions not only in 
North America but around the world. The requirements for game 
accounting meters, for example, are modeled on Nevada's requirements.
    There are, however, unique aspects of Class II gaming for which few 
models now exist, and none existed at the time the Commission began 
this project. Bingo, as IGRA defines it, is a multiple-player game in 
which players compete against one another to be the first to cover a 
predetermined pattern of

[[Page 46338]]

numbers or other designations. In order to meet IGRA's statutory 
requirements, electronic bingo implementations must allow multiple 
players in different locations, whether in one facility or in more than 
one, to play a common game. Manufacturers, therefore, have implemented 
bingo on client-server architectures. A common arrangement, but by no 
means the only one possible, is to have client machines on the casino 
floor as electronic player stations. These display bingo cards, allow 
the players to cover numbers when drawn, and pay any prizes won. The 
server, usually located off the floor, draws random numbers and passes 
them, along data communications lines, to the client machines for game 
play. Such client-server arrangements are not common in other gaming 
jurisdictions, and they produce regulatory challenges with which most 
other gaming jurisdictions have not fully grappled.
    Chief among these challenges is securing games from unauthorized 
changes or tampering. In a stand-alone Class III slot machine, for 
example, the game software is typically located within the game cabinet 
itself, and there are many, well-established technical means for 
securing the software. In client-server implementations, by contrast, 
game software may be downloaded from the server to clients, or game 
software may exist simultaneously on clients and servers, with the 
clients acting as terminals receiving game information transmitted 
across data communication lines from the server. In either case, the 
well-established means of securing Class III game software may not be 
adequate.
    The proposed rule therefore implements minimum standards for 
mechanisms that can be used to verify the authenticity of game 
software, whether located on servers or clients or both, as well as 
minimum standards for when verification must occur and when, and by 
whom, games may be downloaded or changed. The proposed rule also 
provides general, minimum technical standards for servers, for clients, 
and standards common to both clients and servers, and it provides 
minimum standards for software storage media, money and credit 
handling, and data communications, all of which may require different 
treatment when using clients and servers rather than stand-alone games.
    That said, the proposed rule provides only minimum standards. 
Tribes and tribal gaming regulatory authorities may add any additional 
requirements, or more stringent requirements, needed to suit their 
particular circumstances. In addition, the proposed rule makes no 
attempt to foreclose the implementation of new technologies.
    In order to ensure compliance with the technical standards, the 
proposed rule borrows again from the established practices of tribal, 
state, and provincial gaming jurisdictions across North America. The 
proposed rule establishes, as a necessary prerequisite to a game and 
aid being offered to the public for play in a Class II gaming 
operation, a process of game submission by the manufacturer; review and 
analysis by a qualified, independent testing laboratory; and approval 
by the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
    Under the proposed rule, a tribe's gaming regulatory authority will 
require all Class II games and aids, or modifications of such games and 
aids, to be submitted by the manufacturer to a testing laboratory for 
review and analysis. That submission includes a working prototype of 
the game and aid, all pertinent software, and the complete 
documentation and description of all functions and components. In turn, 
the laboratory will certify that the game or aids do or do not meet the 
requirements of the proposed rule, as well as any additional 
requirements adopted by the tribe's gaming regulatory authority. The 
laboratory will provide a written certification and report of its 
analysis and conclusions to the tribal gaming regulatory authority for 
its approval or disapproval of the game or aid. The tribal gaming 
regulatory authority will retain the certification and report as long 
as the game remains available to the public for play on the casino 
floor. This will allow the commission to perform its regulatory 
oversight role.
    Finally, the Commission is cognizant of existing standards under 
the Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS), 25 CFR part 542, some of 
which address equipment or technical issues. The proposed rule and the 
MICS therefore have small areas of overlap. The Commission does not 
intend by the proposed rule to alter or repeal part 542, and relevant 
parts of the proposed rule so state.

Regulatory Matters

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule will not have a significant economic effect on a 
substantial number of small entities as defined under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. Indian tribes are not considered 
to be small entities for the purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This proposed rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule does not 
have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. This rule 
will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, 
individual industries, Federal, state or local government agencies or 
geographic regions and does not have a significant adverse effect on 
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the 
ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based 
enterprises. The Commission believes that the requirement for 
examination and testing by an independent testing lab will add only 
limited additional expense to Indian casinos operating Class II games 
and aids. The Commission has been informed that operations already do 
this as a matter of course. Likewise, the Commission does not 
anticipate significant additional costs for redesign and repurchase of 
Class II games and aids. Many manufacturers who sell Class II games and 
equipment are already building to similar standards for the machines 
they sell in Class III and non-Indian casino markets. Moreover, 
feedback from manufacturers to date indicates industry support for 
these standards.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    For these reasons as well, the Commission has determined that this 
proposed rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or 
tribal governments or on the private sector of more than $100 million 
per year. Thus, it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. The Commission has 
determined that this proposed rule may have a unique effect on tribal 
governments, as this rule applies to tribal governments, whenever they 
undertake the ownership, operation, regulation, or licensing of gaming 
facilities on Indian lands as defined by the Indian Gaming Regulatory 
Act. Thus, in accordance with section 203 of the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act, the Commission implemented a small government agency plan 
that provides tribal governments with adequate notice, opportunity for 
meaningful consultation, and information, advice, and education on 
compliance.
    Again, the Commission's plan included the formation of a tribal 
advisory committee and request for input from tribal leaders through

[[Page 46339]]

government-to-government consultations and through written comments to 
draft regulations that are provided to the tribes. Section 204(b) of 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act exempts from the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) meetings with tribal elected officials 
(or their designees) for the purpose of exchanging views, information, 
and advice concerning the implementation of intergovernmental 
responsibilities or administration. In selecting Committee members, 
consideration was placed on the applicant's experience in this area, as 
well as the size of the tribe the nominee represented, geographic 
location of the gaming operation, and the size and type of gaming 
conducted. The Commission attempted to assemble a committee that 
incorporated diversity and was representative of tribal gaming 
interests. The Commission will meet with the Advisory Committee to 
discuss the public comments that are received as a result of the 
publication of this proposed rule and make recommendations regarding 
the final rule. The Commission also plans to continue its policy of 
providing technical assistance, through its field offices, to tribes to 
assist in complying with issues raised by the proposed rule.

Takings

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the Commission has 
determined that this proposed rule does not have significant takings 
implications. A takings implication assessment is not required.

Civil Justice Reform

    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of General 
Counsel has determined that the proposed rule does not unduly burden 
the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of the Order.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule requires information collection under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and is 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. The title, 
description, and respondent categories are discussed below, together 
with an estimate of the annual information collection burden.
    With respect to the following collection of information, the 
Commission invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for proper performance of its functions, 
including whether the information would have practical utility; (2) the 
accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the proposed 
collection of information, including the validity of the methodology 
and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 
clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize 
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including 
the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other 
forms of information technology.
    Title: Process for Certification of Electronic, Computer, or other 
Technologic Aids used in the play of Class II games, proposed 25 CFR 
547.4.
    Summary of information and description of need: This provision in 
the proposed rule establishes a process for assuring that electronic, 
computer, or other technologic aids used with the play of Class II 
games have been reviewed and evaluated by a qualified, independent 
testing laboratory prior to their approval by a tribal gaming 
regulatory authority and their placement on the floor in a Class II 
tribal gaming operation. The process helps to ensure the proper 
functioning of the equipment and the integrity, fairness, and 
auditability of games played.
    The process requires a tribe's gaming regulatory authority to 
require that all Class II games played primarily through electronic, 
computer, or other technologic aids, or modifications of such games and 
aids, be submitted by the manufacturer to a qualified, independent 
testing laboratory for review and analysis. That submission includes a 
working prototype of the game and aid, all pertinent software, and 
complete documentation and descriptions of all functions and 
components. In turn, the laboratory will certify that the game or aids 
do or do not meet the requirements of the proposed rule and any 
additional requirements adopted by the tribe's gaming regulatory 
authority. The laboratory will provide a written certification and 
report of its analysis and conclusions to the tribal gaming regulatory 
authority for its approval or disapproval of the game or aid.
    This process is necessary to ensure the fairness and integrity of 
Class II gaming. Technical standards such as those in the proposed rule 
are a fundamental part of Class III gaming and of non-Indian casino 
gaming throughout North America. No uniform standards exist for Class 
II gaming, however. The implementation of such standards will assist 
tribal gaming regulators in ensuring that games are implemented fairly, 
that all technologic aids are secure and function properly, and that 
the games and aids allow the tribe and the operator to properly account 
for gaming revenue.
    Respondents: The respondents are independent testing laboratories 
and developers and manufacturers of Class II games and technologic 
aids. The Commission estimates that there are 20 such manufacturers and 
5 such laboratories. The frequency of responses to the information 
collection requirement will vary.
    During the first 6 to 12 months after adoption of the proposed 
rule, all existing games or aids in Class II operations that fall 
within the rule must be submitted and reviewed if they are to continue 
in Class II operations. Following that period, the frequency of 
responses will be a function of the Class II market and the need or 
desire for new games and aids. Thus, the Commission estimates that the 
frequency of responses will range over an initial period of frequent 
submissions, settling down into infrequent and occasional submissions 
during periods when there are a few games, aids, or modifications 
brought to market, punctuated by fairly steady periods of submissions 
when new games and aids are introduced. The Commission estimates that 
submission will number approximately 150 during the first year after 
adoption and approximately 75 per year thereafter.
    Information Collection Burden: The preparation and submission of 
documentation supporting submissions by developers and manufacturers 
(as opposed to the game or aid hardware and software per se) is an 
information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act, as is 
the preparation of certifications and reports of analyses by the 
laboratories. The amount of documentation or size of a laboratory 
certification and report is a function of the complexity of the game, 
equipment, or software submitted for review. Minor modifications of 
software or hardware that a manufacturer has already submitted and that 
a laboratory has previously examined is a matter of little time both 
for manufacturer and laboratory, while the submission and review of an 
entirely new game platform is time consuming.
    The practice of submission and review set out in the proposed rule, 
however, is not new. It is already part of the regulatory requirements 
in tribal, state, and provincial gaming jurisdictions throughout North 
America and the world. Manufacturers already have significant 
compliance personnel and infrastructure in place, and the very 
existence of private, independent laboratories is due to these 
requirements.

[[Page 46340]]

    Accordingly, the Commission estimates that gathering and preparing 
documentation for a single submission requires, on average, eight hours 
of an employee's time for a manufacturer. The Commission also estimates 
that following examination and analysis, writing a report and 
certification requires, on average, 12.5 hours of an employee's time 
for a laboratory. The Commission estimates that the information 
collection requirements in the proposed rule will be a 1200-hour burden 
on manufacturers during the first year after adoption and a 600-hour 
burden thereafter. The Commission estimates that the information 
collection requirements in the proposed rule will be a 1875-hour burden 
on laboratories during the first year after adoption and a 940-hour 
burden thereafter. The following table summarizes:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                Collections,
             Provision                   Respondents       Number of   Collections,    Hours per   Total hours      year 2      Hours per       Total
                                                          respondents    1st year     collection                   forward     collection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25 CFR 546.4......................  Laboratories........            5           150         12.5          1875            75          12.5         937.5
Same..............................  Manufacturers.......           20           150          8            1200            75           8           600
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 
3507(d), the Commission has submitted a copy of this proposed rule to 
OMB for its review and approval of this information collection. 
Interested persons are requested to send comment regarding the burden, 
estimates, or any other aspect of the information collection, including 
suggestions for reducing the burden (1) directly to the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for 
National Indian Gaming Commission, 725 17th St. NW., Washington DC, 
20503, and (2) to Michael Gross, Senior Attorney, National Indian 
Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street NW., Washington DC 20005.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The Commission has determined that this proposed rule does not 
constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality 
of the human environment and that no detailed statement is required 
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et. seq).

List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 547

    Gambling, Indian-lands, Indian-tribal government, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Commission proposes 
to add new 25 CFR part 547 to read as follows:

PART 547--MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR GAMING EQUIPMENT USED 
WITH THE PLAY OF CLASS II GAMES

Sec.
547.1 What is the purpose of this part?
547.2 How do these regulations affect state jurisdiction?
547.3 What are the definitions for this part?
547.4 How do I comply with this part?
547.5 What are the rules of interpretation and of general 
application for this part?
547.6 What are the minimum technical standards applicable to 
servers?
547.7 What are the minimum technical hardware standards applicable 
to client machines used as Electronic Player Stations?
547.10 What are the minimum technical software standards applicable 
to client machines used as Electronic Player Stations?
547.11 What are the technical standards applicable to critical 
memory?
547.12 What are the minimum technical standards for meters?
547.13 What are the minimum standards for Electronic Player Station 
events?
547.14 What are the minimum technical standards for last game 
recall?
547.15 What are the minimum technical standards for money and credit 
handling?
547.16 What are the minimum technical standards applicable both to 
clients and servers or to client-server implementations generally?
547.17 What are the minimum technical standards for the Formal 
Application Configuration document and verification tool?
547.18 What are the minimum technical standards for downloading 
Class II game software, paytables, peripheral software or other 
Download Packages in client--server implementations?
547.19 What are the minimum technical standards for changing 
available Class II game software or paytables in client--server 
implementations?
547.20 What are the minimum technical standards for game program 
storage media?
547.21 What are the minimum technical standards for random number 
generation?
547.22 What are the minimum technical standards for data 
communications?
547.23 What are the minimum technical standards for encryption?
547.24 What are the minimum standards for game artwork, glass, and 
rules?
547.25 What are the minimum standards for interfacing to a casino 
monitoring system?
547.26 How does a gaming operation apply for a variance from these 
standards?

    Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706(b).


Sec.  547.1  What is the purpose of this part?

    The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(A)(i) permits 
the use of electronic, computer, or other technologic aids in 
connection with the play of Class II games. This part establishes the 
minimum technical standards governing the use of such aids.


Sec.  547.2  How do these regulations affect state jurisdiction?

    Nothing in this part shall be construed to grant to a state 
jurisdiction in Class II gaming or to extend a state's jurisdiction in 
Class III gaming.


Sec.  547.3  What are the definitions for this part?

    For the purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:
    Application, A computer program, or group of programs, that 
operates on a computer system, including game programs that run on a 
server or client.
    Attract Mode, The period of time on an electronic player station 
between one play finishing and the next play commencing, or another 
mode being entered, and displaying features of the game or games 
available for play.
    Audit Mode, The mode where it is possible to view Electronic Player 
Station meters, statistics, etc. and perform non-player related 
functions.
    Cancel Credit, An action at an Electronic Player Station where some 
or all of the monetary entitlements of the player are removed and paid 
to a player after overt action taken by an attendant.
    Cashless Account, A file, record, or other database item maintained 
on a computer system that contains account identification information 
and a current amount held within the account.
    Cashless Transaction, A moement of money to or from a cashless 
account--often to or from an Electronic Player Station.
    Cashless Wagering System, A system that securely maintains records 
of cashless accounts and caters for a wide range of account 
transactions, including open, close, PIN registration / modification / 
resetting, account identification / verification, deposits,

[[Page 46341]]

withdrawals, and transfers to and from Electronic Player Stations.
    Cashout Request, The mode where the Electronic Player Station 
dispenses coins, tokens, bills, vouchers, or their equivalents after 
the patron has pressed collect to redeem credits under a certain value.
    CD-ROM, A compact disk which contains fixed data or programs that 
can only be read by the equipment in which it is inserted.
    Chairman, The Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission 
pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
    Client, An computer, often an Electronic Player Station, that is 
controlled through local or wide area network by a master computer 
known as a server.
    Coin Validator, Equipment used to validate coins or tokens placed 
in an electronic player station.
    Commission, The National Indian Gaming Commission.
    Communication Protocol, A means or methodology for passing data and 
other messages between two or more computer components. Typical 
protocols enable means for communications to continue without loss or 
corruption of data in the case of errors over the medium with which the 
data is sent.
    Coupon, A voucher or ticket which enables transfer of promotional 
credits to an Electronic Player Station, whether cashable or playable 
only.
    CPU, The central processing unit of a computer.
    Critical Memory, Memory locations storing data specified in Sec.  
547.11(a) for an Electronic Player Station.
    Critical Memory Clear, The process a service technician goes 
through to reset the memory of an Electronic Player Station, which 
configures the Electronic Player Station into the `as new' state.
    Cycling, Calling the random number generator in order to advance 
its state rather than to obtain an output.
    Data-link Layer, The lowest level of logical, as opposed to 
physical, communication between two or more computer devices.
    Disable (Client), Action taken either by the client or via 
instruction from the server or other network computer system to disable 
play and acceptance and payment of coins, tokens, cash, vouchers, or 
credits, but still permitting maintenance or auditing functions.
    Discretionary access controls, The ability to be able to restrict 
access to computing objects such as files, peripherals, programs on the 
basis of the privileges associated with a user account Disruption, Any 
form of mis-operation, component failure, or interference to the Class 
II gaming equipment.
    Download Package, Approved data sent from a Download Server to a 
client or other component of the technologic aids used in the play of 
Class II games for such purposes as changing of the device software, 
loading or selecting a new paytable, changing configuration parameters 
such as tokenization, changing peripherals software or configuration, 
or requesting specific information from the device.
    Download Server, A computer device that delivers Download Packages 
or causes Download Packages to be actuated in a secure manner to 
technologic aids used in the play of Class II games.
    Electromagnetic Interference, The physical characteristic of an 
electronic device to emit electronic noise either into free air, onto 
the mains power lines, or communication cables.
    Electrostatic Discharge, Electrostatic Discharge (see Electrostatic 
interference).
    Electrostatic Interference, The physical property of being able to 
create electronic interference to a device by either discharging static 
electricity onto the surface of the unit or via a mains power or 
communication cable.
    Enable (client), An action taken to place the client, generally an 
Electronic Player Station, in a state where it can conduct gaming and 
money movement transactions.
    Entropy source, A hardware device or software algorithm designed to 
produce outputs derived from measures of ``truly'' random events, such 
as thermal noise.
    EPROM, Electrically Programmable Read Only Memory--a storage area 
which may be filled with data and information, which once written is 
not modifiable, and which is retained even if there is no power applied 
to the machine.
    Extensible Protocol, A communications protocol which contains a 
mechanism that can be used to negotiate extensions to the protocol--
sometimes called options.
    Fault, An event that when detected by an Electronic Player Station 
causes a discontinuance of game play or other machine functions.
    Fault Mode, A mode where the Electronic Player Station has disabled 
itself, preventing game play or other functions, as a result of a fault 
condition occurring on the Electronic Player Station.
    Flash Memory, A computer chip with a read-only memory that retains 
its data when the power is turned off and that can be electronically 
erased and reprogrammed without being removed from the circuit board.
    Flash ROM, A flash memory device which contains fixed data or 
programs that can be read but not written to by the gaming equipment in 
which it is inserted.
    Game Software, The operational program(s) which control the play, 
display and results of Class II games and played on gaming equipment.
    Gaming Equipment, All electrical and mechanical physical components 
making up the equipment on which Class II games are played.
    Hardware, See Gaming Equipment
    Hopper, A device used to store and dispense coins.
    Idle Mode, The period of time after the completion of the previous 
game, or before the very first game after a memory reset, until the 
player begins to select options for the next game.
    Initial seeding, Initializing the RNG state
    Logic Area, A locked area of gaming equipment that houses 
electronic components that have the potential to significantly 
influence the operation of the Electronic Player Station
    MAC Filter, An access point that can be configured with filters 
that accept or reject data on the basis of the sender's Media Access 
Control (MAC) address. All devices that participate in 802.11a, 802.11b 
and 802.11g Wireless networks have a unique (MAC) address. The MAC 
address is present in every frame transmitted over the Wireless 
network.
    Magnetic Interference, A magnetic field which has the potential to 
affect the operation of an electronic device.
    Master Meter, A meter whose value is reset only when a memory reset 
is performed. This meter represents the total of all updates since the 
last memory reset.
    Meter, A non-volatile variable storing Electronic Player Station 
audit, accounting, and game play information.
    Modification, A new version of existing hardware or software, often 
consisting of relatively minor or discreet changes, used with the play 
of Class II games.
    Non-cashable credit, Credits given by an operator to a patron as 
part of a promotion, placed on an electronic player station through a 
voucher or electronic transfer, and capable of activating play but not 
being cashed out.
    Non-writable storage media, A storage device which contains fixed 
data or programs that can be read, but not written to, by the gaming 
equipment in which it is inserted.
    Number of RNG states, The number of settings that the RNG state can 
take on

[[Page 46342]]

before returning to the initial state. Also called RNG cycle.
    Par Sheet, An information sheet supplied by the equipment or game 
manufacturer detailing the mathematics and probabilities of a game.
    Paytable, The set of prizes available to players for achieving 
certain outcomes or patterns in the game on offer.
    Play of a game, A sequence of actions in the Electronic Player 
Station initiated by a player through a wagering of credits and 
terminated when all credits wagered have been lost or all winnings have 
been transferred to the Electronic Player Station's total wins meter 
and the player's credit meter.
    Printed Circuit Board, The piece of board used to connect together 
electronic components in a certain manner using tracks and holes to 
route the signals.
    Programmable Logic Device, An electronically configurable 
integrated circuit, usually used for hardware control purposes.
    Progressive Jackpot, An incremental prize that increases by a 
defined amount, each time a game is played on one of a group of 
interconnected electronic player stations.
    RAM, Random Access Memory.
    Random, Passing recognized statistical tests for randomness.
    Random Number Generator (RNG), A software module, hardware device 
or combination of these designed to produce outputs that are random.
    Removable/Rewritable storage media, Program or data storage devices 
that can be removed from the Class II gaming equipment and written to, 
or rewritten by the gaming equipment or by other equipment designed for 
that purpose.
    Re-seeding, Modifying the state of an RNG using external inputs
    Residual Credits, Credits remaining which are less than the value 
of one coin or token.
    RNG algorithm, The coded instructions which step an RNG's state 
through its cycle and calculate the next output.
    RNG cycle, The number of settings that the RNG state can take on 
before returning to the initial state.
    RNG state, RNGs (other than entropy sources) produce outputs by an 
algorithm which modifies one or more variables through a long sequence. 
These variables constitute the RNG state.
    ROM, Read Only Memory.
    Scaling algorithm, The coded instructions which map an random 
number generator output onto a range desired by a caller.
    Server, A master computer station which controls multiple clients 
via a local or wide area network.
    Setup Mode, The initial stage of configuration mode where a 
technician can enter Electronic Player Station related data.
    SSID, Service Set Identifier. An alphanumeric string maintained by 
the Wireless Access Point that identifies the name of the specific 
Wireless network. An end station uses the SSID to distinguish between 
multiple wireless networks and to determine what authentication method 
and credentials it should use to gain a connection.
    System Account, A user account available on the server, usually 
secured by a username and password, that provides access to the 
operating system and resident software.
    Test/Diagnostics Mode, A mode on an electronic player station that 
allows various tests to be performed on its hardware and software.
    Testing Laboratory, An organization recognized by the Commission as 
suitable for evaluation of submitted gaming equipment and software for 
compliance with this part and part 546 of this chapter.
    Touch Screen, A video monitor with a special surface that can 
activate the Electronic Player Station by the touching of the screen's 
surface.
    Voucher Payment System, A system that securely maintains records of 
payment vouchers generated by Electronic Player Stations, validates and 
records successful or failed payments of vouchers by Electronic Player 
Stations, kiosks or cashier stations, and controls the purging of 
expired vouchers.
    WEP, Wired Equivalent Privacy. An early security standard intended 
to protect wireless traffic from unauthorized access and modification. 
WEP has fundamental design flaws and will not protect a Wireless 
network. Automatic tools that compromise WEP security on a busy network 
within a few hours are available.
    Wireless Access Point, A device that sends and receives wireless 
radio signals to and from wireless devices, rebroadcasting these 
signals to and from the Local Area Network to which the Wireless Access 
Point is connected.
    Wireless communication network, A system of multiple computer 
devices which communicate with each other by broadcasting their 
messages through the air without using a physical medium such as a wire 
or cable.
    WPA, Wi-Fi Protected Access. A security standard that overcomes 
some of the known problems with WEP. WPA uses stronger encryption and 
provides for user authentication. However, like WEP, WPA will not 
protect a wireless network. Other security standards (e.g. WPA2) are 
available and under development by various standards bodies.


Sec.  547.4  How do I comply with this part?

    (a) Effective date. In order that manufacturers and operators have 
time to bring games and aids into compliance, this part shall be 
effective 6 months following publication of the final rule in the 
Federal Register. Upon application by a tribal gaming regulatory 
authority, the Chairman may extend the effective date for one or more 
additional periods of 6 months for good cause shown.
    (b) Submission, testing, and approval. Except as provided in 
paragraph (d) of this section, no tribe shall offer for play or use in 
a tribal gaming operation any gaming equipment, game software, or 
modification of gaming equipment or game software unless:
    (1) The gaming equipment, game software, or modification has been 
submitted to a testing laboratory recognized by the Commission pursuant 
to Sec.  546.9(f) of this chapter.
    (2) The submission conforms to the requirements of paragraph (c) of 
this section.
    (3) The testing laboratory tests the submission to the standards 
established by this part, and to any additional standards adopted by 
the tribal gaming regulatory authority, and provides a formal written 
report to the party making the submission, setting forth and certifying 
to its findings and conclusions. And
    (4) Following receipt of the laboratory's report, the tribal gaming 
regulatory authority makes a finding that the gaming equipment, game 
software, or modification conforms to the standards established by this 
part, and to any additional standards adopted by the tribal gaming 
regulatory authority. The tribal gaming regulatory authority shall 
retain a copy of the laboratory's report so long as the gaming 
equipment, game software, or modification that is the subject of the 
report remains available to the public for play in its gaming 
operation.
    (c) Submission requirements. Submissions to testing laboratories 
required by Sec.  547.4(b) shall include the following:
    (1) A complete, comprehensive, and technically accurate description 
and explanation in both technical and lay language of the manner in 
which equipment operates. Documentation of client--server 
implementations shall identify:
    (i) The amount of time that the storage of the game records and 
significant event required to be kept by Sec.  547.6(d)

[[Page 46343]]

through (e) may be maintained without causing a degradation in 
performance;
    (ii) The maximum number of enrollable client machines; and
    (iii) The number of client machines constituting a high or maximum 
load and whose collective operation will produce a degradation in 
system performance.
    (2) All source code:
    (i) Complete and able to be compiled, with resultant object code 
identical to that submitted for evaluation;
    (ii) If applicable, a resolution of differences in compiled 
software versions by the addition of `date' and `time' stamps or other 
such compiler variations;
    (iii) If redundant sections of code exist, documentation of the 
areas of code that are redundant; and
    (iv) If code is made redundant via a dynamically settable 
parameter, documentation of each such parameter, the means of setting 
or resetting it, and all default states.
    (3) The necessary compilers and development environment to enable 
the software to be independently compiled and tested.
    (4) A copy of all executable software, including data and graphic 
information, and a copy of all source code for programs submitted on 
electronically readable, unalterable media including, if requested, a 
method of:
    (i) Examining the source code;
    (ii) Conducting computer-aided searches within the source code;
    (iii) Comparing two different versions of the source code and 
examining the differences between the two versions; and
    (iv) Verifying that the executable software that is to be used for 
testing has been compiled from the source code versions submitted.
    (5) Prototype equipment including all hardware and software 
components, and if the submitted equipment is a client-server 
configuration:
    (i) A server fully loaded and configured (production mode) with the 
application to be used in production; and
    (ii) At least two clients or Electronic Player Stations, fully 
loaded and configured (production mode) with the application to be used 
in production;
    (iii) The communications equipment to link the server and clients; 
and
    (iv) If the equipment is to link to external systems such as a 
casino monitoring system, the hardware and software that enable the 
interface.
    (6) A Formal Application Configuration (FAC) document meeting the 
requirements of Sec.  547.17(a) and an FAC verification tool meeting 
the requirements of Sec.  547.17(b) through (g).
    (7) A par sheet or mathematical analysis of each game for each 
paytable submitted.
    (8) A copy of all graphical images displayed on the equipment or 
used in the game, including rules, instructions, and paytables. All 
artwork supplied shall be identified by a part number and the name or 
logo of the manufacturer. Successive versions of artwork shall be 
numbered sequentially.
    (9) Any other information, documentation, software, or equipment 
deemed necessary by the testing laboratory.
    (d) Emergency hardware and software changes. (1) Notwithstanding 
the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, a tribal gaming 
regulatory authority may permit modified hardware or game software to 
be made available for play without prior laboratory review if, in its 
discretion, the modified hardware or game software is:
    (i) Necessary to correct a problem affecting the fairness, 
security, or integrity of a game; or
    (ii) Unrelated to game play.
    (2) If a tribal gaming regulatory authority authorizes modified 
game software or hardware to be made available for play or use without 
prior laboratory review, the tribal gaming regulatory authority shall 
require the hardware or software manufacturer to:
    (i) Immediately advise other users of the same hardware or software 
of the importance and availability of the update;
    (ii) Immediately submit, pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 
(c) of this section, the new hardware or software to a test laboratory 
for testing and verification;
    (iii) Provide the tribal gaming regulatory authority a temporary 
Formal Application Configuration meeting the requirements of Sec.  
547.17 for any new software.


Sec.  547.5  What are the rules of interpretation and of general 
application for this part?

    (a) Minimum standards. A tribal gaming regulatory authority may 
establish and implement additional technical standards that are as 
stringent as, or more stringent than those set out in this part.
    (b) Only applicable standards apply. Gaming equipment and software 
used with play of Class II games shall meet all applicable requirements 
of this part. For example, if an Electronic Player Station lacks a 
hopper or the ability to print or accept vouchers, then the standards 
that govern those things do not apply.
    (c) Fairness. No gaming equipment or software used with the play of 
Class II games shall cheat, mislead, or disadvantage users.
    (d) Approved equipment and software only. All gaming equipment and 
software used with the play of Class II games shall be identical in all 
respects to a prototype reviewed and tested by a recognized gaming 
laboratory and approved for use by the tribal gaming regulatory 
authority pursuant to Sec.  547.4(b) or (d). Unapproved software shall 
not be loaded onto or stored on any program storage medium used with 
the play of Class II games.
    (e) Proper functioning. All gaming equipment and software used with 
the play of Class II games shall perform according to the 
manufacturer's design and operating specifications.


Sec.  547.6  What are the minimum technical standards applicable to 
servers?

    This section provides standards applicable to all servers used with 
play of Class II games.
    (a) General requirements. (1) Servers shall authenticate all 
communications as coming from an enrolled client machine.
    (2) Servers shall only process gaming transactions from games 
approved by the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
    (3) Servers shall be able to enroll and un-enroll client machines 
for gaming.
    (4) Servers shall be able to enable and disable specific client 
machines for gaming.
    (5) Servers shall ensure that only enrolled, enabled client 
machines participate in gaming.
    (6) The default condition for new client machines shall be un-
enrolled and disabled.
    (b) Physical security. Servers shall be housed in a secure, 
dedicated room or in a secure locked cabinet. Access shall be 
restricted to persons authorized by the tribal gaming regulatory 
authority. Servers located on the casino floor shall also meet the 
applicable requirements of Sec.  547.7.
    (c) Logical/Software security. Nothing in this section shall be 
construed to alter, repeal or limit the applicability of Sec.  
542.16(a) of this chapter. Servers used in the play of Class II games 
shall also meet the following requirements:
    (1) Servers shall use operating systems that have discretionary 
access controls and shall be configured so that access controls are 
used to prevent unauthorized access to the operating system, programs, 
data, and peripherals.
    (2) Servers shall be configured so that audit trails are maintained 
for login/authentication successes and failures. The following 
information shall be recorded, if supported:
    (i) Date and time of the login attempt;

[[Page 46344]]

    (ii) Username supplied; and
    (iii) Success or failure.
    (3) Logins using system accounts (e.g. administrator, root, etc.) 
shall be restricted to the console. Notwithstanding this, logins using 
system accounts may be made away from the console for the purpose of 
remote support, provided that such remote access meets the requirements 
of paragraph (c)(9) of this section.
    (4) Generic user accounts are prohibited.
    (5) Accounts shall be restricted to authorized personnel, as 
specified by the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
    (6) Account passwords shall only be transmitted in encrypted or 
hashed form meeting the requirements of Sec.  547.23(b) through (c).
    (7) Application passwords shall be stored in an encrypted or hashed 
form meeting the requirements of Sec.  547.23(b) through (c).
    (8) Only software essential to the operation of the server shall be 
loaded onto the server.
    (9) Remote access to enable dynamic debugging may be permitted by 
the tribal gaming regulatory authority pursuant to Sec.  542.16(e) of 
this chapter. To support this facility, servers shall:
    (i) Provide a mechanism to enable and disable remote access, which 
shall be disabled by default; and
    (ii) Log all successful and unsuccessful attempts at remote access. 
Nothing in this requirement shall be construed to alter, repeal, or 
limit the applicability of Sec.  542.16(e)(1) of this chapter.
    (d) Game record information. The server shall store the following 
records for each game played:
    (1) Client ID;
    (2) Game start time and date;
    (3) Game identifier (version);
    (4) Game end time;
    (5) Total amount bet by all participants in game;
    (6) Total amount won by all participants in game; and
    (7) Final game result, including progressive prizes awarded and, 
for bingo, game number and numbers or designations drawn, in the order 
drawn.
    (e) Significant events. The server shall store the following 
significant events:
    (1) Server shutdown;
    (2) Server startup;
    (3) Gaming application startup;
    (4) Gaming application shutdown;
    (5) Client enrolled;
    (6) Client un-enrolled;
    (7) Client enabled;
    (8) Client disabled;
    (9) Client tamper detection;
    (10) Client signature check and result;
    (11) Client application restart;
    (12) Client application download;
    (13) Server parameter change;
    (14) Client parameter change;
    (15) Game created;
    (16) Game enable;
    (17) Game disable;
    (18) Game deleted;
    (19) Any instance of an aborted game.;
    (20) Large (jackpot) win;
    (21) Large win (jackpot) approved/rejected;
    (22) Progressive parameter change;
    (23) Progressive created;
    (24) Progressive enabled;
    (25) Progressive disabled;
    (26) Progressive deleted;
    (27) Progressive win;
    (28) Progressive win approved/rejected;
    (29) Client doors open;
    (30) Client doors closed;
    (31) Client hopper refill;
    (32) Client hand-pay;
    (33) Data-link level connection between client and server broken. 
This requirement does not refer to temporary perturbations of 
communications where ``temporary'' means a disruption of less than 10 
seconds; and
    (34) Data-link level connection between client and server is 
established.
    (f) Storage requirements. Game records, significant events, and 
remote access logs shall be maintained for a period of one year from 
the date the games are played.
    (g) Alternate storage requirements. Game records, significant 
events, and remote access logs may be kept in an archived manner, on 
the server or elsewhere, provided that the information reconciles 
across all forms of replicated storage and that the information can be 
produced within 24 hours upon request. In any event, game records and 
significant events for the previous 72 hours shall be immediately 
accessible.
    (h) Servers acting as progressive controllers. This paragraph (h) 
applies to progressive controllers, or servers acting as progressive 
controllers, used with the play of Class II games.
    (1) Modification of progressive jackpot parameters shall be secure. 
Such parameters include, at a minimum:
    (i) Increment value;
    (ii) Secondary pool increment(s);
    (iii) Reset amount(s);
    (iv) Maximum value(s); and
    (v) Identity of participating Electronic Player Stations.
    (2) No parameters shall be modified for an active progressive 
jackpot unless the jackpot has been won, or as otherwise authorized by 
the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
    (3) If the tribal gaming regulatory authority authorizes 
modification before a progressive jackpot is won, the server or 
controller shall:
    (i) Halt the operation of the progressive jackpot(s);
    (ii) Allow the parameter modifications; and then
    (iii) Restart the progressive jackpot(s).
    (4) No progressive jackpot shall be returned to its reset amount 
before it is won except as authorized by the tribal gaming regulatory 
authority. In any event, no progressive jackpot shall be reset before 
it is won unless the accumulated jackpot amount is transferred to 
another active progressive jackpot.
    (5) The server or other progressive controller shall provide a 
means of creating a progressive balancing report for each progressive 
it controls. At a minimum, that report shall provide balancing of the 
changes in coin-in meters for all participating Electronic Player 
Stations versus current progressive jackpot amount(s), plus progressive 
jackpots won. In addition, the report shall account for, and not be 
made inaccurate by, unusual events such as:
    (i) Electronic Player Station critical memory clears;
    (ii) Modification, alteration, or deletion of progressive jackpots.
    (iii) Offline equipment; or
    (iv) Multiple site jackpots.


Sec.  547.7  What are the minimum technical hardware standards 
appl