Facility License Standards, 59044-59050 [E7-20541]
Download as PDF
59044
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
separate building, in a separate wing of
a building, or in quarters at the blind
end of a corridor and includes adequate
space and equipment for all processing
steps up to, but not including, filling
into final containers; and
(B) Not conducting test procedures
that potentially involve the presence of
microorganisms other than the vaccine
strains or the use of tissue culture cell
lines other than primary cultures in
space used for processing live vaccine;
or
(ii) If manufacturing is conducted in
a multiproduct manufacturing building
or area, using procedural controls, and
where necessary, process containment.
Process containment is deemed to be
necessary unless procedural controls are
sufficient to prevent cross
contamination of other products and
other manufacturing areas within the
building. Process containment is a
system designed to mechanically isolate
equipment or an area that involves
manufacturing using live vaccine
organisms. All product, equipment, and
personnel movement between distinct
live vaccine processing areas and
between live vaccine processing areas
and other manufacturing areas, up to,
but not including, filling in final
containers, must be conducted under
conditions that will prevent cross
contamination of other products and
manufacturing areas within the
building, including the introduction of
live vaccine organisms into other areas.
In addition, written procedures and
effective processes must be in place to
adequately remove or decontaminate
live vaccine organisms from the
manufacturing area and equipment for
subsequent manufacture of other
products. Written procedures must be in
place for verification that processes to
remove or decontaminate live vaccine
organisms have been followed.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 30, 2007.
Randall W. Lutter,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E7–20609 Filed 10–17–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Parts 502, 522, 559 and 573
RIN 3141–AA23
Facility License Standards
National Indian Gaming
Commission (‘‘NIGC’’ or
‘‘Commission’’).
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
ACTION:
Proposed rules.
SUMMARY: The proposed rules add new
sections and a new part to the
Commission’s regulations in order to
ensure that each place, facility or
location where class II or class III
gaming will occur is located on Indian
lands eligible for gaming as required by
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The
rules are also intended to ensure that
gaming facilities are constructed,
maintained and operated in a manner
that adequately protects the
environment and the public health and
safety.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
December 3, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Comments can be mailed,
faxed, or e-mailed. Mail comments to
‘‘Comments on Facility Licensing
Standards,’’ National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20005, Attn: Jerrie
Moore, Legal Assistant. Comments may
be faxed to 202–632–7066 (not a tollfree number). Comments may be sent
electronically to
licensing_regulations@nigc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Penny J. Coleman, Acting General
Counsel, at (202) 632–7003; fax (202)
632–7066 (not toll-free numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 17, 1988, Congress
enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory
Act (‘‘IGRA’’ or ‘‘Act’’), 25 U.S.C. 2701–
21, creating the National Indian Gaming
Commission (‘‘NIGC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’)
and developing a comprehensive
framework for the regulation of gaming
on Indian lands. 25 U.S.C. 2702. The
NIGC was granted, among other things,
oversight and enforcement authority,
including the authority to monitor tribal
compliance with the Act, Commission
regulations, and tribal gaming
ordinances.
First, the IGRA allows gaming on
Indian lands pursuant to 25 U.S.C.
2703(4), although it contains a general
prohibition against gaming on lands
acquired into trust by the United States
for the benefit of the tribe after the Act’s
effective date of October 17, 1988,
unless one of several exceptions are
met. 25 U.S.C. 2719. The Commission
has jurisdiction only over gaming
operations on Indian lands and
therefore must establish that it has
jurisdiction as a prerequisite to its
monitoring, enforcement, and oversight
duties. 25 U.S.C. 2702(3).
Second, the NIGC needs to obtain
information on a tribe’s environmental
and public health and safety laws to
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
oversee the implementation of approved
tribal gaming ordinances. Before
opening a gaming operation, a tribe
must adopt an ordinance governing
gaming activities on its Indian lands. 25
U.S.C. 2710. The Act specifies a number
of mandatory provisions to be contained
in each tribal gaming ordinance and
subjects such ordinances to agency
review and the NIGC Chairman’s
approval. Id. Approval by the Chairman
is predicated on the inclusion of each of
the specified mandatory provisions in
the tribal gaming ordinance. Id. Among
these is a requirement that the
ordinance must contain a provision
ensuring that ‘‘the construction and
maintenance of the gaming operation,
and the operation of that gaming is
conducted in a manner that adequately
protects the environment and the public
health and safety.’’ 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(2)(E). Since 1993, when the
Commission became operational, the
Chairman has required each tribal
gaming ordinance submitted for
approval to include the express
environmental and public health and
safety statement set out in 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(2)(E).
The Commission recognizes that tribal
governments, as an incident of inherent
tribal sovereignty, have broad autonomy
and authority over internal tribal affairs,
including, in particular, matters
pertaining to tribal lands and the health
and welfare of the people and the
community. Moreover, the Commission
is aware that the principle of tribal selfdetermination is a cornerstone of federal
Indian law and policy and has remained
so for more than a quarter century.
The Commission believes that tribes
must have some form of basic laws in
the following environmental and public
health and safety areas: (1) Emergency
preparedness, including but not limited
to fire suppression, law enforcement
and security; (2) food and potable water;
(3) construction and maintenance; (4)
hazardous materials; and (5) sanitation
(both solid waste and wastewater).
Accordingly, in 2002, the Commission
issued an interpretive rule for
environment, public health, and safety.
67 FR 46,109 (Jul. 12, 2002)
(‘‘Interpretive Rule’’).
The NIGC has conducted many
environment and public health and
safety inspections since the issuance of
the Interpretive Rule and has worked
with a consultant to allow the agency to
gain expertise in this area. Through this
inspection process, the NIGC has
identified weaknesses in tribal laws or
enforcement thereof and has worked
with tribes to cure deficiencies.
The Commission respects the rights of
tribes to develop their own laws and be
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
governed by them. These rights must be
viewed in conjunction with the IGRA
mandate that the tribal governments and
the NIGC have a responsibility to the
gaming public and to gaming operation
employees to ensure that their
operations do not pose a risk to the
health or safety of the public or the
environment. 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E); 25
CFR part 580.
In the years since the adoption of the
Interpretive Rule, the Commission has
identified several deficiencies in it.
Namely, the Interpretive Rule does not
assist the Commission in identifying
what environmental and public health
and safety laws apply to each gaming
operation nor ensure that tribal gaming
regulatory authorities are enforcing
those laws. There is a need for a
submission to the Commission of a
certification by the tribe that it has
identified laws applicable to its gaming
operation and is in compliance with
them together with a document listing
those laws. A certification process
would help tribes and the Commission
to identify problem areas where laws are
needed so that the NIGC may offer
technical advice and encourage
adoption and enforcement of
appropriate laws. The new rules
proposed today would not replace the
Interpretive Rule but would work in
conjunction with it.
II. Development of the Proposed Rules
Through Consultation With Indian
Tribes
The Commission identified a need for
facility license standards to address
Indian lands and environmental and
public health and safety concerns in
2005. In accordance with its
government-to-government consultation
policy, 69 FR 16,973 (Mar. 31, 2004), the
Commission consulted with Indian
tribes so they could provide early and
meaningful input regarding formulation
of the proposed rules. Before it began
drafting the proposed rules, the
Commission advised tribes of its intent
to create standards and asked tribes for
comments and suggestions on licensing
regulations covering both Indian lands
and environmental and public health
and safety standards at consultation
sessions around the country beginning
in October of 2005.
Thereafter, the Commission prepared
draft facility licensing regulations
covering Indian lands and
environmental and public health and
safety standards. A copy of the draft
regulations was sent to leaders of all
gaming tribes for comment on May 12,
2006. The NIGC also posted the draft on
its Web site, https://www.nigc.gov, for
public comment. Fifty-six tribes
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
provided written comments. In
addition, between May 12, 2006, and
March 20, 2007, the Commission invited
309 tribes to meet with it in
consultation asking, among other
matters, for comment on the draft
regulations. While some tribes declined
the Commission’s invitations, the
Commission conducted over 53 separate
government-to-government consultation
meetings with individual tribes and
their leaders or representatives.
The comments and suggestions
received were carefully reviewed, and
as a result, the Commission decided to
redraft the regulations. Tribes
questioned the NIGC’s authority to issue
the regulations for tribes conducting
class III gaming and the NIGC’s
authority to issue regulations in this
area overall. Tribes also challenged the
first draft as unduly onerous and costly.
The first draft applied to open as well
as new gaming operations and required
tribes to submit a signed legal opinion
finding that the site was on IGRA Indian
lands; a certification that the gaming site
was on Indian lands; plat maps; copies
of trust deeds; copies of any court
decisions, settlement agreements,
Congressional acts, Executive Orders, or
Secretarial proclamations or decisions
affecting title or ownership of the land;
documentation on site ownership and
leasehold interests; and documentation
the site was located within reservation
boundaries or was within tribal
jurisdiction and the tribe exercised
governmental power over it. The first
draft had also required tribes to submit
the table of contents of each applicable
environmental and public health and
safety law. The Commission agreed that
the requirements to submit a signed
legal opinion on the Indian lands status
of gaming lands and the table of
contents for each applicable
environmental and public health and
safety law would be unduly
burdensome and expensive and
therefore removed them.
The Commission sent a revised draft
to leaders of all gaming tribes for
comment on March 21, 2007, and
posted the draft on its Web site, asking
for comments by May 15, 2007. NIGC
Press Release PR–63 06–2007. The
comment period deadline was
subsequently extended to May 30, 2007.
NIGC Press Release PR–65 08–2007. The
NIGC posted the initial request for
comments and the extension letter on its
Web site in order to obtain additional
public comment. In addition, the
Commission invited 273 tribes to meet
with it in consultation asking, among
other matters, for comment on the
regulations. While some tribes declined
the Commission’s invitations, between
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
59045
March 20, 2007, and July 31, 2007, the
Commission conducted over 60 separate
government-to-government consultation
meetings with individual tribes and
their leaders or representatives. Tribes
submitted 78 comments to the revised
draft.
Comments on the revised draft were
again carefully reviewed and considered
by the Commission in formulating these
proposed regulations. Tribes continued
to question the NIGC’s authority to issue
the regulations. The Commission,
however, continues to believe it has
authority to issue licensing standards,
determine whether a site constitutes
Indian lands, and ensure tribal
compliance with the environmental and
public health and safety provision of the
IGRA. The NIGC noted the continued
concern of many tribes regarding the
Indian lands submission burden and has
substantially lessened the burden in the
proposed rules published today as well
as limited the submission requirements
for this regulation to new gaming
operations. The NIGC has therefore
substantially reduced the Indian lands
collection while requiring tribes to
submit additional documentation if
necessary.
The second draft also required all
gaming tribes to amend their gaming
ordinances within two years of the
effective date of the regulations in order
to incorporate specific environmental
and public health and safety provisions
into their gaming ordinance. The NIGC
concurs with the commentators that the
ordinance amendment concept is
unnecessary and would prove unduly
burdensome and costly both to the
tribes and the agency and has removed
this provision.
Tribes also commented that
submission of a certification that the
tribe is in compliance with applicable
environmental and public health and
safety laws and a list of those laws was
burdensome and an infringement on
tribal sovereignty. The Commission
believes that the environmental and
public health and safety requirements
do not infringe on tribal sovereignty and
are not unduly onerous. The
requirements for environmental and
public health and safety certifications
and lists of laws appear to have been
misconstrued as the regulations do not
require tribes to adopt any specific laws
or send in all of their laws, but are
meant to keep the NIGC current on the
status of the tribes’ laws.
As of the date of publication, the
Commission has to date conducted over
113 separate government-to-government
consultation meetings with individual
tribes and their leaders or
representatives and received many
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
59046
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
written comments on its drafts. Through
these consultations, the Commission
actively endeavored to provide all tribes
with a reasonable and practical
opportunity to meet and consult with
the Commission on a government-togovernment basis and provide early and
meaningful tribal input regarding the
formulation and implementation of
these proposed rules.
III. Purpose and Scope
The proposed rules are intended to
ensure that each place, facility, or
location where class II or class III
gaming will occur is located on Indian
lands eligible for gaming under the
IGRA. The proposed rules are also
intended to assure that gaming facilities
are constructed, maintained, and
operated in a manner that adequately
protects the environment and public
health and safety. In addition, the
proposed rules will allow the
Commission to track the opening and
closing of tribal gaming facilities. Each
gaming place, facility, or location where
a tribe conducts, or intends to conduct,
class II or class III gaming pursuant to
the IGRA would be subject to the
proposed rules.
IV. Ordinance Submission
Requirements of 25 CFR Part 522
The IGRA requires that gaming be on
Indian lands eligible for gaming under
the Act and that a tribe include in its
ordinance a provision that
‘‘construction and maintenance of the
gaming facility, and the operation of
that gaming is conducted in a manner
which adequately protects the
environment and the public health and
safety.’’ 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E). The
addition of paragraph (i) to 25 CFR
522.2, concerning ordinance submission
requirements, directs that a tribe shall
provide any Indian lands or
environmental and public health and
safety documentation that the Chairman
requests at his or her discretion as
needed.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
V. Definitions for 25 CFR Part 502
The Commission proposes definitions
for terms not previously defined in its
regulations. These definitions would
have general application to all of the
NIGC regulations where the terms are
used.
In the proposed rule, the Commission
defines the term ‘‘facility license’’ to
clarify the term used in 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(1), which requires a tribe to
issue a separate license for each place,
facility, or location on Indian lands at
which class II or class III gaming is or
will be conducted.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
The Commission also proposes to
define the requirement in 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(2)(E) that a tribal gaming
ordinance must contain a provision
ensuring that ‘‘the construction and
maintenance of the gaming operation,
and the operation of that gaming is
conducted in a manner that adequately
protects the environment and the public
health and safety.’’ The Commission
clarifies that this term means a tribe has
identified and is enforcing laws
applicable to its gaming operations in
the areas of emergency preparedness,
food and potable water, construction
and maintenance, hazardous materials,
and sanitation.
VI. Facility License Notifications,
Renewals, and Submissions
Proposed 25 CFR part 559 sets forth
standards for renewal of gaming facility
licenses, standards for notification to
the Commission when a facility license
is renewed or terminated, and standards
for notification to the Commission prior
to the licensing and opening of new
gaming facilities.
A tribe would submit a notice to the
Chairman that it is considering issuing
a facility license to a new facility at least
one hundred and twenty (120) days
before opening. The notice would
contain the name, address, legal
description and tract number of the
property. Other information would be
required if the deed for the property is
not maintained by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Department of the Interior. In
that case, the tribe would submit a copy
of the deed and documentation of the
property’s ownership. Charitable events
lasting not more than one week would
be excluded from this requirement.
In addition, proposed part 559 would
require renewals of facility licenses at
least once every three years. A copy of
each facility license would be sent to
the Chairman within thirty days of
issuance, with a supporting certification
that the tribe has identified and enforces
applicable environmental and public
health and safety laws and a list of those
laws. The Chairman has discretion to
request additional Indian lands or
environmental and public health and
safety documentation as needed.
Further, a tribe would notify the
Chairman if a facility license is
terminated or not renewed, or if the
facility closes.
VII. Order of Temporary Closure
Proposed 25 CFR 573.6(a)(4) amends
the current regulation, which already
allows the Chairman to order temporary
closure of a facility when a gaming
facility operates without a license from
a tribe. The amendment would correct
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the faulty citation to be replaced with
the correct citation. The amended rule
would also allow the Chairman to issue
an order of temporary closure if a
gaming facility operates without a
facility license in violation of proposed
rule 25 CFR part 559.
Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rules 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. Moreover,
Indian tribes are not considered to be
small entities for the purposes of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
The proposed rules are not a major
rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. The rules do not have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more. The rules will not
cause a major increase in costs or prices
for consumers, individual industries,
Federal, state or local government
agencies or geographic regions and do
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.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Commission, as an independent
regulatory agency within the
Department of the Interior, is exempt
from compliance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502(1);
2 U.S.C. 658(1). Regardless, the
proposed rules do 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.
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, the Commission has determined
that the proposed rules do 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 rules do
not unduly burden the judicial system
and meet the requirements of sections
3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
National Environmental Policy Act
The Commission has determined that
the proposed rules do 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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposed rules require
information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and are 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: Indian Gaming Facility
Documentation and Certification,
proposed 25 CFR part 559.
Summary of information and
description of need:
The IGRA establishes that Indian
gaming may be conducted only on
Indian lands. 25 U.S.C. 2703(4),
2710(a)(1), 2710(b)(1), 2710(d)(1). The
IGRA further provides that the Indian
lands outside of a tribe’s reservation
boundaries as of the effective date of the
Act, October 17, 1988, must be held in
trust by the United States for the tribe
or tribal member(s) as of October 17,
1988. 25 U.S.C. 2719(a). If not, the site
must meet one of the exceptions from 25
U.S.C. 2719(b). To carry out its
regulatory requirements, the
Commission must know the status of
lands where tribal gaming is occurring.
Without the required showing that
gaming is conducted on ‘‘Indian lands,’’
it is unclear whether the NIGC or the
State exercises jurisdiction over the
gaming.
In addition, a September 2005 report
by the Office of Inspector General
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
(‘‘OIG’’) for the United States
Department of the Interior (‘‘DOI’’)
recommended that the NIGC establish a
process by which tribes that have taken
land into trust since 1988 certify the
lands’ status and establish and maintain
a database containing eligibility
information and/or lands
determinations for all Indian gaming
operations. The NIGC has established an
Indian lands database and seeks to
populate the database with information
on new gaming facilities. The data will
be utilized for internal reporting and
recordkeeping purposes; to determine
jurisdiction and legality of gaming; and
to respond to inquiries from other
government agencies and Congress
regarding where Indian gaming is
occurring and proposed. Any public
requests for information contained in
the database will be subject to the
Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
552, the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C.
552a, and 25 U.S.C. 2716.
Proposed section 559.2 requires that a
tribe submit a notice to the NIGC at least
one hundred and twenty (120) days
before a new gaming facility will be
opened, alerting the agency that a
facility license is under consideration.
The notice will contain the name and
address of the property; the legal
description of the property; a copy of
any deeds or trust documents to the
property if not maintained by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of
the Interior (‘‘BIA’’), the tract number
for the property as assigned by the BIA
Land Title Records Offices (‘‘LTRO’’), or
a short explanation as to why no deed
exists; and documentation on the
property’s ownership if not maintained
by the BIA.
The notice and its information
provide necessary data without which
the NIGC is unable easily to identify the
site or to verify that a gaming site will
be on eligible Indian lands pursuant to
the IGRA and enter that information
into the agency’s Indian lands database.
First, the name and address of the
future facility are needed by the NIGC
in order to identify the site and are
needed for the agency’s Indian lands
database. Second, the NIGC is
constrained in its attempts to research
the gaming eligibility status of a site
under the IGRA without a legal
description and LTRO tract number.
Although many deeds and ownership
documentation are maintained at BIA
LTRO, without information from a tribe
regarding the address, legal description,
and tract number of where gaming is to
be conducted, the NIGC cannot reliably
or efficiently know which deeds to
request. Previous requests to the BIA
indicate that the BIA is often unable to
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
59047
assist the NIGC without a legal
description and tract number of the
land. The legal description and tract
number also allow the NIGC to work
with the BIA to verify, for example,
whether land is within or contiguous to
1988 reservation boundaries, is within
an Oklahoma former reservation, or is
within the last reservation boundaries
not in Oklahoma. See 25 U.S.C. 2703(4),
2719. Third, the NIGC is requesting that
tribes submit deeds not maintained by
the BIA. Tribes often operate their own
real estate offices and maintain their
trust deeds themselves. If no deed was
ever issued for the property, the tribe is
in the best position to explain why no
deed was issued. Moreover, if land is
owned in fee, the tribe should have
obtained a copy of the deed in the
course of developing the new project.
Documentation of ownership indicates
that the land is owned by the tribe or
a tribal member and is an indication of
jurisdiction. A tribe is required to have
jurisdiction and exercise governmental
power over its gaming lands. See 25
U.S.C. 2703(4), 2710(b)(1). The
Commission presumes that a tribe has
both jurisdiction and exercises
governmental power on its reservation
lands but needs to ensure this for all offreservation sites as they are threshold
requirements for tracts to be considered
Indian lands. 25 U.S.C. 2703(4), 2710,
and 2719.
Proposed part 559 also requires that
each gaming facility license be renewed
at least once every three years and that
a tribe must submit a copy of each new
facility license to the NIGC within 30
days of issuance. Supporting
documentation submitted with the new
facility license includes a tribal
certification that a tribe has identified
and enforces the environmental and
public health and safety laws applicable
to its gaming operation and a document
listing the applicable laws.
The NIGC requires the certification
and list of laws in order to identify what
environmental and public health and
safety standards apply to each gaming
operation and to ensure that tribal
gaming regulatory authorities are
enforcing the standards for the gaming
operations. The certification and list
would allow the Commission to rely on
a tribe’s assertion that it is in
compliance with applicable laws.
Respondents:
This information request is specific to
tribal governments that operate gaming
facilities and to tribal governments
considering opening new gaming
facilities in accordance with the IGRA.
The maximum number of potential
respondents is approximately 562, the
number of federally recognized Indian
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
59048
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
tribes. See Indian Entities Recognized
and Eligible To Receive Services From
the United States Bureau of Indian
Affairs, 72 FR 13,648 (Mar. 22, 2007).
Currently, approximately 226 tribes
operate approximately 419 gaming
facilities.
Information Collection Burden:
The proposed rules require tribes
opening new gaming facilities to submit:
(1) The facility name; (2) mailing
addresses, legal descriptions, and LTRO
tract numbers for the proposed gaming
site; and (3) copy of the trust deed(s)
and documentation on site ownership if
not maintained by the BIA. If a tribe
maintains its real property deeds
through contract with the BIA, it will
have ready access to the legal
description and LTRO tract number.
There could be some burden on the tribe
to learn the legal description of the
property. The legal description can be
obtained from the county recorder’s
office, through working with the BIA, or
from the tribe’s own realty office. There
would also be a minimal burden on the
tribe to locate a copy of a deed or to
write a brief explanation that no deed
was ever issued for the property in the
rare instances where this is so on tribal
reservation lands. Likewise, there would
be a burden on tribes to provide
documentation of ownership if not
maintained by the BIA. Such
documentation can be obtained from the
county recorder’s office or from the
tribe’s own realty office if contracted to
maintain such information. The NIGC
believes that providing a legal
description, LTRO tract number, trust
deed, or land ownership information
could require investment of time only.
This portion of the information request
will not be recurring and tribes will
only be required under this proposed
rule to comply with the information
request if they plan on opening a new
tribal facility. In general, the NIGC
believes tribes wishing to open gaming
establishments on fee lands would need
to obtain this information as part of the
normal course of business. Therefore,
the Indian lands portion of the rule
would add only limited additional
expense to Indian gaming operations.
The proposed rule further requires
submission at least once every three
years of: (1) A copy of each gaming site’s
facility license; and (2) a tribal
certification that it has identified and is
in compliance with applicable
environment and public health and
safety laws. The document listing the
applicable laws must be included with
the first submission only. After that, if
no changes are made to the list, the tribe
only needs to certify to the NIGC that no
substantial modifications were made to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
the list. The NIGC believes that there
will be minimal burden for a tribe to
identify the laws applicable to its
gaming operation. Tribes should already
be aware of and enforcing laws
applicable to their gaming operations so
the time and cost associated with a
certification and list of laws should be
minimal. One-time costs may be
incurred by tribal governments drafting
and adopting laws if there are none in
the identified areas.
Over the past year, the Commission
requested Indian lands information from
several tribes for existing facilities. The
information collection there was
substantially greater than that contained
in the proposed rule. The NIGC had
asked tribes to provide a legal
description, a copy of the trust deed, a
map of the property, documentation
from the BIA on its decision to take the
land into trust, and a legal analysis of
why each open tribal gaming site
qualified as Indian lands eligible for
gaming under the IGRA. Tribes reported
that the collection took approximately 4
hours if the information had already
been compiled. Tribes conducting
gaming on pre-IGRA trust lands
estimated 20 hours of response time and
tribes gaming under an exception in 25
U.S.C. 2719(b) estimated up to 80 hours
of response time with an average
estimated range of costs for each facility
of approximately $350 (20 hours ×
$17.50) to $1,400 (80 hours × $17.50).
The Commission expects that the most
of the response time and cost will be
eliminated under the current
information request as the NIGC is
requesting only name and address of the
property; the legal description of the
property; a copy of any deeds to the
property if not maintained by the BIA,
or a short explanation as to why no deed
exists; and documentation on the
property’s ownership if not maintained
by the BIA. The Commission estimates
that the hour burden will drop to 2
hours at a cost of $35 (2 × $17.50) under
the proposed rule if the BIA maintains
the deed and documentation of site
ownership, going up to 10 hours at a
cost of $175 (10 × $17.50) if the BIA
does not maintain such information.
The NIGC expects to work with the BIA
to establish a process for obtaining lands
information that is held by the BIA.
Additionally, under the proposed
rule, the Commission’s collection of
information on Indian lands would
require submission of information on
future facilities; it is unlikely that a tribe
would have to provide information on
more than one facility at a time or very
many times over the course of several
years.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The Commission has requested copies
of environmental and public health and
safety laws from many tribes in
preparation for inspections under the
Interpretive Rule, 67 FR 46,109 (Jul. 12,
2002), but has not asked tribes to report
the time required to provide the
information. This information collection
request is for a copy of each gaming
site’s facility license, a tribal
certification that it has identified and is
in compliance with applicable
environment and public health and
safety (‘‘EPHS’’) laws, and a document
listing the titles of those laws other than
federal laws.
The NIGC believes that there will be
minimal burden for a tribe to identify
the laws applicable to its gaming
operation, other than federal laws, in
the areas of emergency preparedness,
food and water, construction and
maintenance, hazardous materials, and
sanitation. Tribes should already be
aware of and enforcing laws applicable
to their gaming operations so time and
cost associated with a certification and
list of laws should be minimal. The
estimated hour burden of assembling
EPHS laws and creating a list is 3–8
hours, or approximately $52.50 (3 ×
17.50) to $140 (8 × $17.50) depending
on whether the tribe already maintains
such a list.
Once every three years, a tribe could
incur costs of hiring consultants,
attorneys, engineers, or inspectors to
certify compliance with applicable
EPHS laws, and this is estimated to be
$1,000 to $7,000 for inspection and
certification. One estimate was for a
series of inspectors over 3–5 days at a
total cost of $5,000–$7,000.
Potentially, a few tribes will have to
make significant changes to their
infrastructure before a certificate of
compliance can be issued. In such cases,
the costs may be estimated as ranging
from $40,000 to $250,000 and include
ongoing compliance costs in addition to
inspection costs. The wide range of
costs depends on whether a tribe has
already developed and identified
applicable EPHS laws and has an
ongoing program aimed at assuring the
public health and safety. The higher
cost estimates came from operations
with full-time EPHS employees and
represent the overall cost of the tribe’s
EPHS program rather than simply costs
associated with inspection and
certification. Operations with full-time
EPHS employees pay for them as part of
the overall cost of the tribe’s EPHS
program rather than as costs associated
with inspection and certification. The
costs associated with the customary and
usual business practice of maintaining
EPHS and fixing code violations are not
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
a direct result of a certification
requirement, but rather required already
by tribal laws, including the tribal
gaming ordinance, which requires a
tribe to construct, maintain, and operate
its gaming facilities in a manner that
protects the public pursuant to 25
U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E). The hour cost of
having the appropriate tribal entity
create a certification after the
inspections is estimated at 2 hours for
a cost of $35 (2 × $17.50).
Also, if a tribe does not have laws in
one of the enumerated areas, it may
require employment of an attorney or
other specialist to research other laws in
this area and may require the attorney
to draft tribal law if the tribe opts not
to adopt a uniform code or law of
another jurisdiction. The NIGC
estimates the cost for this as
approximately $5,000–$10,000.
The proposed rule also requires an
information collection if a facility
license is terminated or not renewed or
if a gaming place, facility, or location
closes. The NIGC believes the tribe will
create documentation for this through
governmental meeting minutes or
through a notification to the gaming
operation and need only forward a copy
of that information to the Commission.
The estimated hour burden of
forwarding this information to the
Commission is a half hour for
approximately $8.75 (.5 × $17.50).
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 comments 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, Attn: Desk Officer for the
National Indian Gaming Commission,
725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20503; and (2) to Penny J. Coleman,
Acting General Counsel, National Indian
Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street,
NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005
or via fax (202) 632–7066 (not a toll-free
number) or via e-mail at
licensing_regulations@nigc.gov.
Comments are due November 19, 2007.
amend its regulations at 25 CFR Chapter
III as follows:
PART 502—DEFINITIONS OF THIS
CHAPTER
1. The authority citation for part 502
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
2. Add new § 502.22 to read as
follows:
§ 502.22 Construction and maintenance of
the gaming facility, and the operation of
that gaming is conducted in a manner
which adequately protects the environment
and the public health and safety.
Construction and maintenance of the
gaming facility, and the operation of
that gaming is conducted in a manner
which adequately protects the
environment and the public health and
safety means a tribe has identified and
enforces laws, resolutions, codes,
policies or procedures applicable to
each gaming place, facility or location
that protect the environment and the
public health and safety, including
standards negotiated under a tribal-state
compact. Laws, resolutions, codes,
policies or procedures in this area shall
cover, at a minimum:
(a) Emergency preparedness,
including but not limited to fire
suppression, law enforcement, and
security;
(b) Food and potable water;
(c) Construction and maintenance;
(d) Hazardous materials;
(e) Sanitation (both solid waste and
wastewater); and
(f) Other environmental or public
health and safety standards adopted by
the tribe in light of climate, geography,
and other local conditions and
applicable to its gaming facilities, places
or locations.
3. Add new § 502.23 to read as
follows:
§ 502.23
Facility license.
Facility license means a separate
license issued by a tribe to each place,
facility, or location on Indian lands
where the tribe elects to allow class II
or III gaming.
PART 522—SUBMISSION OF GAMING
ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Parts 502,
522, 559, and 573
Gambling, Indians—lands, Indians—
tribal government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
4. The authority citation for part 522
continues to read as follows:
Text of the Proposed Rules
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Commission proposes to
§ 522.2
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706, 2710, 2712.
5. Add new paragraph (i) to § 522.2 to
read as follows:
Submission requirements.
(i) A tribe shall provide Indian lands
or environmental and public health and
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
59049
safety documentation that the Chairman
may in his or her discretion request as
needed.
6. Add new part 559 to read as
follows:
PART 559—FACILITY LICENSE
NOTIFICATIONS, RENEWALS, AND
SUBMISSIONS
Sec.
559.1 What is the scope and purpose of this
part?
559.2 When must a tribe notify the
Chairman that it is considering issuing a
new facility license?
559.3 How often must a facility license be
renewed?
559.4 When must a tribe submit a copy of
a facility license to the Chairman?
559.5 What must a tribe submit to the
Chairman with the copy of each facility
license that has been issued?
559.6 Does a tribe need to notify the
Chairman if a facility license is
terminated or not renewed or if a gaming
place, facility, or location closes?
559.7 May the Chairman request Indian
lands or environmental and public
health and safety documentation
regarding any gaming place, facility, or
location where gaming will occur?
559.8 May a tribe submit documents
required by this part electronically?
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2701, 2702(3),
2703(4), 2705, 2706, 2710 and 2719.
§ 559.1 What is the scope and purpose of
this part?
(a) The purpose of this part is to
ensure that each place, facility, or
location where class II or III gaming will
occur is located on Indian lands eligible
for gaming and that the construction
and maintenance of the gaming facility,
and the operation of that gaming is
conducted in a manner which
adequately protects the environment
and the public health and safety
pursuant to the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act.
(b) Each gaming place, facility, or
location conducting class II or III
gaming pursuant to the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act or on which a tribe
intends to conduct class II or III gaming
pursuant to the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act is subject to the
requirements of this part.
§ 559.2 When must a tribe notify the
Chairman that it is considering issuing a
new facility license?
(a) A tribe shall submit to the
Chairman a notice that a facility license
is under consideration for issuance at
least 120 days before opening any new
place, facility, or location on Indian
lands where class II or III gaming will
occur. The notice shall contain the
following:
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
59050
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 201 / Thursday, October 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(1) The name and address of the
property;
(2) A legal description of the property;
(3) The tract number for the property
as assigned by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Land Title and Records Offices;
(4) If not maintained by the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Department of the
Interior, a copy of the trust or other
deed(s) to the property or an
explanation as to why such
documentation does not exist; and
(5) If not maintained by the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Department of the
Interior, documentation of the
property’s ownership.
(b) A tribe does not need to submit to
the Chairman a notice that a facility
license is under consideration for
issuance for occasional charitable events
lasting not more than a week.
§ 559.3 How often must a facility license
be renewed?
At least once every three years, a tribe
shall issue a separate facility license to
each existing place, facility or location
on Indian lands where a tribe elects to
allow gaming.
§ 559.4 When must a tribe submit a copy
of a facility license to the Chairman?
A tribe must submit to the Chairman
a copy of each issued facility license
within 30 days of issuance.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
§ 559.5 What must a tribe submit to the
Chairman with the copy of each facility
license that has been issued?
(a) A tribe shall submit to the
Chairman with each facility license an
attestation certifying that by issuing the
facility license:
(1) The tribe has identified the
environmental and public health and
safety laws applicable to its gaming
operation;
(2) The tribe is in compliance with
those laws; and
(3) The tribe has ensured and is
ensuring that the construction and
maintenance of the gaming facility, and
the operation of that gaming is
conducted in a manner which
adequately protects the environment
and the public health and safety.
(b) A document listing all laws,
resolutions, codes, policies or
procedures identified by the tribe as
applicable to its gaming operations,
other than Federal laws, in the
following areas:
(1) Emergency preparedness,
including but not limited to fire
suppression, law enforcement, and
security;
(2) Food and potable water;
(3) Construction and maintenance;
(4) Hazardous materials;
(5) Sanitation (both solid waste and
wastewater); and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:52 Oct 17, 2007
Jkt 214001
(6) Other environmental or public
health and safety standards adopted by
the tribe in light of climate, geography,
and other local conditions and
applicable to its gaming facilities, places
or locations.
(c) After the first submission of a
document under paragraph (b) of this
section, upon reissuing a license to an
existing gaming place, facility, or
location, and in lieu of complying with
paragraph (b) of this section, a tribe may
certify to the Chairman that it has not
substantially modified its laws
protecting the environment and public
health and safety.
Dated: October 11, 2007.
Philip N. Hogen,
Chairman.
Cloyce V. Choney,
Commissioner.
Norman H. DesRosiers,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. E7–20541 Filed 10–17–07; 8:45 am]
§ 559.6 Does a tribe need to notify the
Chairman if a facility license is terminated
or not renewed or if a gaming place, facility,
or location closes?
Rules for Administrative Review of
Agency Decisions
A tribe must notify the Chairman
within 30 days if a facility license is
terminated or not renewed or if a
gaming place, facility, or location closes
or reopens.
§ 559.7 May the Chairman request Indian
lands or environmental and public health
and safety documentation regarding any
gaming place, facility, or location where
gaming will occur?
A tribe shall provide Indian lands or
environmental and public health and
safety documentation that the Chairman
may in his or her discretion request as
needed.
§ 559.8 May a tribe submit documents
required by this part electronically?
Yes. Tribes wishing to submit
documents electronically should contact
the Commission for guidance on
acceptable document formats and means
of transmission.
PART 573—ENFORCEMENT
7. The authority citation for part 573
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2705(a)(1), 2706,
2713, 2715.
8. Amend § 573.6 by revising
paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
§ 573.6
Order of temporary closure.
(a) * * *
*
*
*
*
(4) A gaming operation operates for
business without a license from a tribe,
in violation of part 522 or part 559 of
this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION
29 CFR Part 4003
RIN 1212–AB15
Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation (PBGC) proposes amending
its regulation on Administrative Review
of Agency Decisions (29 CFR part 4003)
to clarify that the agency’s Appeals
Board may refer certain categories of
appeals to other PBGC departments for
a written response and to remove
determinations under section 4022A of
the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) from the
scope of part 4003. The proposed
amendments also include minor
clarifying and technical changes to the
rules for administrative review of
agency decisions.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before December 17, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
1212–AB15, may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web
site instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: reg.comments@pbgc.gov.
• Fax: 202–326–4224.
• Mail or Hand Delivery: Legislative
and Regulatory Department, Pension
Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005–
4026.
All submissions must include the
Regulatory Information Number for this
rulemaking (1212–AB15). Comments
received, including personal
information provided, will be posted to
https://www.pbgc.gov. Copies of
comments may also be obtained by
writing to Disclosure Division, Office of
the General Counsel, Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20005–4026, or
E:\FR\FM\18OCP1.SGM
18OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 201 (Thursday, October 18, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59044-59050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20541]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Parts 502, 522, 559 and 573
RIN 3141-AA23
Facility License Standards
AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission (``NIGC'' or ``Commission'').
ACTION: Proposed rules.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed rules add new sections and a new part to the
Commission's regulations in order to ensure that each place, facility
or location where class II or class III gaming will occur is located on
Indian lands eligible for gaming as required by the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act. The rules are also intended to ensure that gaming
facilities are constructed, maintained and operated in a manner that
adequately protects the environment and the public health and safety.
DATES: Submit comments on or before December 3, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Comments can be mailed, faxed, or e-mailed. Mail comments to
``Comments on Facility Licensing Standards,'' National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, Attn: Jerrie
Moore, Legal Assistant. Comments may be faxed to 202-632-7066 (not a
toll-free number). Comments may be sent electronically to licensing_
regulations@nigc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Penny J. Coleman, Acting General
Counsel, at (202) 632-7003; fax (202) 632-7066 (not toll-free numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 17, 1988, Congress enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory
Act (``IGRA'' or ``Act''), 25 U.S.C. 2701-21, creating the National
Indian Gaming Commission (``NIGC'' or ``Commission'') and developing a
comprehensive framework for the regulation of gaming on Indian lands.
25 U.S.C. 2702. The NIGC was granted, among other things, oversight and
enforcement authority, including the authority to monitor tribal
compliance with the Act, Commission regulations, and tribal gaming
ordinances.
First, the IGRA allows gaming on Indian lands pursuant to 25 U.S.C.
2703(4), although it contains a general prohibition against gaming on
lands acquired into trust by the United States for the benefit of the
tribe after the Act's effective date of October 17, 1988, unless one of
several exceptions are met. 25 U.S.C. 2719. The Commission has
jurisdiction only over gaming operations on Indian lands and therefore
must establish that it has jurisdiction as a prerequisite to its
monitoring, enforcement, and oversight duties. 25 U.S.C. 2702(3).
Second, the NIGC needs to obtain information on a tribe's
environmental and public health and safety laws to oversee the
implementation of approved tribal gaming ordinances. Before opening a
gaming operation, a tribe must adopt an ordinance governing gaming
activities on its Indian lands. 25 U.S.C. 2710. The Act specifies a
number of mandatory provisions to be contained in each tribal gaming
ordinance and subjects such ordinances to agency review and the NIGC
Chairman's approval. Id. Approval by the Chairman is predicated on the
inclusion of each of the specified mandatory provisions in the tribal
gaming ordinance. Id. Among these is a requirement that the ordinance
must contain a provision ensuring that ``the construction and
maintenance of the gaming operation, and the operation of that gaming
is conducted in a manner that adequately protects the environment and
the public health and safety.'' 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E). Since 1993,
when the Commission became operational, the Chairman has required each
tribal gaming ordinance submitted for approval to include the express
environmental and public health and safety statement set out in 25
U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E).
The Commission recognizes that tribal governments, as an incident
of inherent tribal sovereignty, have broad autonomy and authority over
internal tribal affairs, including, in particular, matters pertaining
to tribal lands and the health and welfare of the people and the
community. Moreover, the Commission is aware that the principle of
tribal self-determination is a cornerstone of federal Indian law and
policy and has remained so for more than a quarter century.
The Commission believes that tribes must have some form of basic
laws in the following environmental and public health and safety areas:
(1) Emergency preparedness, including but not limited to fire
suppression, law enforcement and security; (2) food and potable water;
(3) construction and maintenance; (4) hazardous materials; and (5)
sanitation (both solid waste and wastewater). Accordingly, in 2002, the
Commission issued an interpretive rule for environment, public health,
and safety. 67 FR 46,109 (Jul. 12, 2002) (``Interpretive Rule'').
The NIGC has conducted many environment and public health and
safety inspections since the issuance of the Interpretive Rule and has
worked with a consultant to allow the agency to gain expertise in this
area. Through this inspection process, the NIGC has identified
weaknesses in tribal laws or enforcement thereof and has worked with
tribes to cure deficiencies.
The Commission respects the rights of tribes to develop their own
laws and be
[[Page 59045]]
governed by them. These rights must be viewed in conjunction with the
IGRA mandate that the tribal governments and the NIGC have a
responsibility to the gaming public and to gaming operation employees
to ensure that their operations do not pose a risk to the health or
safety of the public or the environment. 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E); 25
CFR part 580.
In the years since the adoption of the Interpretive Rule, the
Commission has identified several deficiencies in it. Namely, the
Interpretive Rule does not assist the Commission in identifying what
environmental and public health and safety laws apply to each gaming
operation nor ensure that tribal gaming regulatory authorities are
enforcing those laws. There is a need for a submission to the
Commission of a certification by the tribe that it has identified laws
applicable to its gaming operation and is in compliance with them
together with a document listing those laws. A certification process
would help tribes and the Commission to identify problem areas where
laws are needed so that the NIGC may offer technical advice and
encourage adoption and enforcement of appropriate laws. The new rules
proposed today would not replace the Interpretive Rule but would work
in conjunction with it.
II. Development of the Proposed Rules Through Consultation With Indian
Tribes
The Commission identified a need for facility license standards to
address Indian lands and environmental and public health and safety
concerns in 2005. In accordance with its government-to-government
consultation policy, 69 FR 16,973 (Mar. 31, 2004), the Commission
consulted with Indian tribes so they could provide early and meaningful
input regarding formulation of the proposed rules. Before it began
drafting the proposed rules, the Commission advised tribes of its
intent to create standards and asked tribes for comments and
suggestions on licensing regulations covering both Indian lands and
environmental and public health and safety standards at consultation
sessions around the country beginning in October of 2005.
Thereafter, the Commission prepared draft facility licensing
regulations covering Indian lands and environmental and public health
and safety standards. A copy of the draft regulations was sent to
leaders of all gaming tribes for comment on May 12, 2006. The NIGC also
posted the draft on its Web site, https://www.nigc.gov, for public
comment. Fifty-six tribes provided written comments. In addition,
between May 12, 2006, and March 20, 2007, the Commission invited 309
tribes to meet with it in consultation asking, among other matters, for
comment on the draft regulations. While some tribes declined the
Commission's invitations, the Commission conducted over 53 separate
government-to-government consultation meetings with individual tribes
and their leaders or representatives.
The comments and suggestions received were carefully reviewed, and
as a result, the Commission decided to redraft the regulations. Tribes
questioned the NIGC's authority to issue the regulations for tribes
conducting class III gaming and the NIGC's authority to issue
regulations in this area overall. Tribes also challenged the first
draft as unduly onerous and costly. The first draft applied to open as
well as new gaming operations and required tribes to submit a signed
legal opinion finding that the site was on IGRA Indian lands; a
certification that the gaming site was on Indian lands; plat maps;
copies of trust deeds; copies of any court decisions, settlement
agreements, Congressional acts, Executive Orders, or Secretarial
proclamations or decisions affecting title or ownership of the land;
documentation on site ownership and leasehold interests; and
documentation the site was located within reservation boundaries or was
within tribal jurisdiction and the tribe exercised governmental power
over it. The first draft had also required tribes to submit the table
of contents of each applicable environmental and public health and
safety law. The Commission agreed that the requirements to submit a
signed legal opinion on the Indian lands status of gaming lands and the
table of contents for each applicable environmental and public health
and safety law would be unduly burdensome and expensive and therefore
removed them.
The Commission sent a revised draft to leaders of all gaming tribes
for comment on March 21, 2007, and posted the draft on its Web site,
asking for comments by May 15, 2007. NIGC Press Release PR-63 06-2007.
The comment period deadline was subsequently extended to May 30, 2007.
NIGC Press Release PR-65 08-2007. The NIGC posted the initial request
for comments and the extension letter on its Web site in order to
obtain additional public comment. In addition, the Commission invited
273 tribes to meet with it in consultation asking, among other matters,
for comment on the regulations. While some tribes declined the
Commission's invitations, between March 20, 2007, and July 31, 2007,
the Commission conducted over 60 separate government-to-government
consultation meetings with individual tribes and their leaders or
representatives. Tribes submitted 78 comments to the revised draft.
Comments on the revised draft were again carefully reviewed and
considered by the Commission in formulating these proposed regulations.
Tribes continued to question the NIGC's authority to issue the
regulations. The Commission, however, continues to believe it has
authority to issue licensing standards, determine whether a site
constitutes Indian lands, and ensure tribal compliance with the
environmental and public health and safety provision of the IGRA. The
NIGC noted the continued concern of many tribes regarding the Indian
lands submission burden and has substantially lessened the burden in
the proposed rules published today as well as limited the submission
requirements for this regulation to new gaming operations. The NIGC has
therefore substantially reduced the Indian lands collection while
requiring tribes to submit additional documentation if necessary.
The second draft also required all gaming tribes to amend their
gaming ordinances within two years of the effective date of the
regulations in order to incorporate specific environmental and public
health and safety provisions into their gaming ordinance. The NIGC
concurs with the commentators that the ordinance amendment concept is
unnecessary and would prove unduly burdensome and costly both to the
tribes and the agency and has removed this provision.
Tribes also commented that submission of a certification that the
tribe is in compliance with applicable environmental and public health
and safety laws and a list of those laws was burdensome and an
infringement on tribal sovereignty. The Commission believes that the
environmental and public health and safety requirements do not infringe
on tribal sovereignty and are not unduly onerous. The requirements for
environmental and public health and safety certifications and lists of
laws appear to have been misconstrued as the regulations do not require
tribes to adopt any specific laws or send in all of their laws, but are
meant to keep the NIGC current on the status of the tribes' laws.
As of the date of publication, the Commission has to date conducted
over 113 separate government-to-government consultation meetings with
individual tribes and their leaders or representatives and received
many
[[Page 59046]]
written comments on its drafts. Through these consultations, the
Commission actively endeavored to provide all tribes with a reasonable
and practical opportunity 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
rules.
III. Purpose and Scope
The proposed rules are intended to ensure that each place,
facility, or location where class II or class III gaming will occur is
located on Indian lands eligible for gaming under the IGRA. The
proposed rules are also intended to assure that gaming facilities are
constructed, maintained, and operated in a manner that adequately
protects the environment and public health and safety. In addition, the
proposed rules will allow the Commission to track the opening and
closing of tribal gaming facilities. Each gaming place, facility, or
location where a tribe conducts, or intends to conduct, class II or
class III gaming pursuant to the IGRA would be subject to the proposed
rules.
IV. Ordinance Submission Requirements of 25 CFR Part 522
The IGRA requires that gaming be on Indian lands eligible for
gaming under the Act and that a tribe include in its ordinance a
provision that ``construction and maintenance of the gaming facility,
and the operation of that gaming is conducted in a manner which
adequately protects the environment and the public health and safety.''
25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(E). The addition of paragraph (i) to 25 CFR 522.2,
concerning ordinance submission requirements, directs that a tribe
shall provide any Indian lands or environmental and public health and
safety documentation that the Chairman requests at his or her
discretion as needed.
V. Definitions for 25 CFR Part 502
The Commission proposes definitions for terms not previously
defined in its regulations. These definitions would have general
application to all of the NIGC regulations where the terms are used.
In the proposed rule, the Commission defines the term ``facility
license'' to clarify the term used in 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(1), which
requires a tribe to issue a separate license for each place, facility,
or location on Indian lands at which class II or class III gaming is or
will be conducted.
The Commission also proposes to define the requirement in 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(2)(E) that a tribal gaming ordinance must contain a provision
ensuring that ``the construction and maintenance of the gaming
operation, and the operation of that gaming is conducted in a manner
that adequately protects the environment and the public health and
safety.'' The Commission clarifies that this term means a tribe has
identified and is enforcing laws applicable to its gaming operations in
the areas of emergency preparedness, food and potable water,
construction and maintenance, hazardous materials, and sanitation.
VI. Facility License Notifications, Renewals, and Submissions
Proposed 25 CFR part 559 sets forth standards for renewal of gaming
facility licenses, standards for notification to the Commission when a
facility license is renewed or terminated, and standards for
notification to the Commission prior to the licensing and opening of
new gaming facilities.
A tribe would submit a notice to the Chairman that it is
considering issuing a facility license to a new facility at least one
hundred and twenty (120) days before opening. The notice would contain
the name, address, legal description and tract number of the property.
Other information would be required if the deed for the property is not
maintained by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior.
In that case, the tribe would submit a copy of the deed and
documentation of the property's ownership. Charitable events lasting
not more than one week would be excluded from this requirement.
In addition, proposed part 559 would require renewals of facility
licenses at least once every three years. A copy of each facility
license would be sent to the Chairman within thirty days of issuance,
with a supporting certification that the tribe has identified and
enforces applicable environmental and public health and safety laws and
a list of those laws. The Chairman has discretion to request additional
Indian lands or environmental and public health and safety
documentation as needed. Further, a tribe would notify the Chairman if
a facility license is terminated or not renewed, or if the facility
closes.
VII. Order of Temporary Closure
Proposed 25 CFR 573.6(a)(4) amends the current regulation, which
already allows the Chairman to order temporary closure of a facility
when a gaming facility operates without a license from a tribe. The
amendment would correct the faulty citation to be replaced with the
correct citation. The amended rule would also allow the Chairman to
issue an order of temporary closure if a gaming facility operates
without a facility license in violation of proposed rule 25 CFR part
559.
Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rules 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. Moreover, Indian tribes are not
considered to be small entities for the purposes of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The proposed rules are not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The rules do not
have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. The rules
will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, state or local government agencies or
geographic regions and do 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.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Commission, as an independent regulatory agency within the
Department of the Interior, is exempt from compliance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502(1); 2 U.S.C. 658(1). Regardless, the
proposed rules do 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.
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the Commission has
determined that the proposed rules do 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 rules do not unduly burden the
judicial system and meet the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order.
[[Page 59047]]
National Environmental Policy Act
The Commission has determined that the proposed rules do 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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposed rules require information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and are
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: Indian Gaming Facility Documentation and Certification,
proposed 25 CFR part 559.
Summary of information and description of need:
The IGRA establishes that Indian gaming may be conducted only on
Indian lands. 25 U.S.C. 2703(4), 2710(a)(1), 2710(b)(1), 2710(d)(1).
The IGRA further provides that the Indian lands outside of a tribe's
reservation boundaries as of the effective date of the Act, October 17,
1988, must be held in trust by the United States for the tribe or
tribal member(s) as of October 17, 1988. 25 U.S.C. 2719(a). If not, the
site must meet one of the exceptions from 25 U.S.C. 2719(b). To carry
out its regulatory requirements, the Commission must know the status of
lands where tribal gaming is occurring. Without the required showing
that gaming is conducted on ``Indian lands,'' it is unclear whether the
NIGC or the State exercises jurisdiction over the gaming.
In addition, a September 2005 report by the Office of Inspector
General (``OIG'') for the United States Department of the Interior
(``DOI'') recommended that the NIGC establish a process by which tribes
that have taken land into trust since 1988 certify the lands' status
and establish and maintain a database containing eligibility
information and/or lands determinations for all Indian gaming
operations. The NIGC has established an Indian lands database and seeks
to populate the database with information on new gaming facilities. The
data will be utilized for internal reporting and recordkeeping
purposes; to determine jurisdiction and legality of gaming; and to
respond to inquiries from other government agencies and Congress
regarding where Indian gaming is occurring and proposed. Any public
requests for information contained in the database will be subject to
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, the Privacy Act of 1974,
5 U.S.C. 552a, and 25 U.S.C. 2716.
Proposed section 559.2 requires that a tribe submit a notice to the
NIGC at least one hundred and twenty (120) days before a new gaming
facility will be opened, alerting the agency that a facility license is
under consideration. The notice will contain the name and address of
the property; the legal description of the property; a copy of any
deeds or trust documents to the property if not maintained by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior (``BIA''), the
tract number for the property as assigned by the BIA Land Title Records
Offices (``LTRO''), or a short explanation as to why no deed exists;
and documentation on the property's ownership if not maintained by the
BIA.
The notice and its information provide necessary data without which
the NIGC is unable easily to identify the site or to verify that a
gaming site will be on eligible Indian lands pursuant to the IGRA and
enter that information into the agency's Indian lands database.
First, the name and address of the future facility are needed by
the NIGC in order to identify the site and are needed for the agency's
Indian lands database. Second, the NIGC is constrained in its attempts
to research the gaming eligibility status of a site under the IGRA
without a legal description and LTRO tract number. Although many deeds
and ownership documentation are maintained at BIA LTRO, without
information from a tribe regarding the address, legal description, and
tract number of where gaming is to be conducted, the NIGC cannot
reliably or efficiently know which deeds to request. Previous requests
to the BIA indicate that the BIA is often unable to assist the NIGC
without a legal description and tract number of the land. The legal
description and tract number also allow the NIGC to work with the BIA
to verify, for example, whether land is within or contiguous to 1988
reservation boundaries, is within an Oklahoma former reservation, or is
within the last reservation boundaries not in Oklahoma. See 25 U.S.C.
2703(4), 2719. Third, the NIGC is requesting that tribes submit deeds
not maintained by the BIA. Tribes often operate their own real estate
offices and maintain their trust deeds themselves. If no deed was ever
issued for the property, the tribe is in the best position to explain
why no deed was issued. Moreover, if land is owned in fee, the tribe
should have obtained a copy of the deed in the course of developing the
new project. Documentation of ownership indicates that the land is
owned by the tribe or a tribal member and is an indication of
jurisdiction. A tribe is required to have jurisdiction and exercise
governmental power over its gaming lands. See 25 U.S.C. 2703(4),
2710(b)(1). The Commission presumes that a tribe has both jurisdiction
and exercises governmental power on its reservation lands but needs to
ensure this for all off-reservation sites as they are threshold
requirements for tracts to be considered Indian lands. 25 U.S.C.
2703(4), 2710, and 2719.
Proposed part 559 also requires that each gaming facility license
be renewed at least once every three years and that a tribe must submit
a copy of each new facility license to the NIGC within 30 days of
issuance. Supporting documentation submitted with the new facility
license includes a tribal certification that a tribe has identified and
enforces the environmental and public health and safety laws applicable
to its gaming operation and a document listing the applicable laws.
The NIGC requires the certification and list of laws in order to
identify what environmental and public health and safety standards
apply to each gaming operation and to ensure that tribal gaming
regulatory authorities are enforcing the standards for the gaming
operations. The certification and list would allow the Commission to
rely on a tribe's assertion that it is in compliance with applicable
laws.
Respondents:
This information request is specific to tribal governments that
operate gaming facilities and to tribal governments considering opening
new gaming facilities in accordance with the IGRA. The maximum number
of potential respondents is approximately 562, the number of federally
recognized Indian
[[Page 59048]]
tribes. See Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services
From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, 72 FR 13,648 (Mar. 22,
2007). Currently, approximately 226 tribes operate approximately 419
gaming facilities.
Information Collection Burden:
The proposed rules require tribes opening new gaming facilities to
submit: (1) The facility name; (2) mailing addresses, legal
descriptions, and LTRO tract numbers for the proposed gaming site; and
(3) copy of the trust deed(s) and documentation on site ownership if
not maintained by the BIA. If a tribe maintains its real property deeds
through contract with the BIA, it will have ready access to the legal
description and LTRO tract number. There could be some burden on the
tribe to learn the legal description of the property. The legal
description can be obtained from the county recorder's office, through
working with the BIA, or from the tribe's own realty office. There
would also be a minimal burden on the tribe to locate a copy of a deed
or to write a brief explanation that no deed was ever issued for the
property in the rare instances where this is so on tribal reservation
lands. Likewise, there would be a burden on tribes to provide
documentation of ownership if not maintained by the BIA. Such
documentation can be obtained from the county recorder's office or from
the tribe's own realty office if contracted to maintain such
information. The NIGC believes that providing a legal description, LTRO
tract number, trust deed, or land ownership information could require
investment of time only. This portion of the information request will
not be recurring and tribes will only be required under this proposed
rule to comply with the information request if they plan on opening a
new tribal facility. In general, the NIGC believes tribes wishing to
open gaming establishments on fee lands would need to obtain this
information as part of the normal course of business. Therefore, the
Indian lands portion of the rule would add only limited additional
expense to Indian gaming operations.
The proposed rule further requires submission at least once every
three years of: (1) A copy of each gaming site's facility license; and
(2) a tribal certification that it has identified and is in compliance
with applicable environment and public health and safety laws. The
document listing the applicable laws must be included with the first
submission only. After that, if no changes are made to the list, the
tribe only needs to certify to the NIGC that no substantial
modifications were made to the list. The NIGC believes that there will
be minimal burden for a tribe to identify the laws applicable to its
gaming operation. Tribes should already be aware of and enforcing laws
applicable to their gaming operations so the time and cost associated
with a certification and list of laws should be minimal. One-time costs
may be incurred by tribal governments drafting and adopting laws if
there are none in the identified areas.
Over the past year, the Commission requested Indian lands
information from several tribes for existing facilities. The
information collection there was substantially greater than that
contained in the proposed rule. The NIGC had asked tribes to provide a
legal description, a copy of the trust deed, a map of the property,
documentation from the BIA on its decision to take the land into trust,
and a legal analysis of why each open tribal gaming site qualified as
Indian lands eligible for gaming under the IGRA. Tribes reported that
the collection took approximately 4 hours if the information had
already been compiled. Tribes conducting gaming on pre-IGRA trust lands
estimated 20 hours of response time and tribes gaming under an
exception in 25 U.S.C. 2719(b) estimated up to 80 hours of response
time with an average estimated range of costs for each facility of
approximately $350 (20 hours x $17.50) to $1,400 (80 hours x $17.50).
The Commission expects that the most of the response time and cost will
be eliminated under the current information request as the NIGC is
requesting only name and address of the property; the legal description
of the property; a copy of any deeds to the property if not maintained
by the BIA, or a short explanation as to why no deed exists; and
documentation on the property's ownership if not maintained by the BIA.
The Commission estimates that the hour burden will drop to 2 hours at a
cost of $35 (2 x $17.50) under the proposed rule if the BIA maintains
the deed and documentation of site ownership, going up to 10 hours at a
cost of $175 (10 x $17.50) if the BIA does not maintain such
information. The NIGC expects to work with the BIA to establish a
process for obtaining lands information that is held by the BIA.
Additionally, under the proposed rule, the Commission's collection
of information on Indian lands would require submission of information
on future facilities; it is unlikely that a tribe would have to provide
information on more than one facility at a time or very many times over
the course of several years.
The Commission has requested copies of environmental and public
health and safety laws from many tribes in preparation for inspections
under the Interpretive Rule, 67 FR 46,109 (Jul. 12, 2002), but has not
asked tribes to report the time required to provide the information.
This information collection request is for a copy of each gaming site's
facility license, a tribal certification that it has identified and is
in compliance with applicable environment and public health and safety
(``EPHS'') laws, and a document listing the titles of those laws other
than federal laws.
The NIGC believes that there will be minimal burden for a tribe to
identify the laws applicable to its gaming operation, other than
federal laws, in the areas of emergency preparedness, food and water,
construction and maintenance, hazardous materials, and sanitation.
Tribes should already be aware of and enforcing laws applicable to
their gaming operations so time and cost associated with a
certification and list of laws should be minimal. The estimated hour
burden of assembling EPHS laws and creating a list is 3-8 hours, or
approximately $52.50 (3 x 17.50) to $140 (8 x $17.50) depending on
whether the tribe already maintains such a list.
Once every three years, a tribe could incur costs of hiring
consultants, attorneys, engineers, or inspectors to certify compliance
with applicable EPHS laws, and this is estimated to be $1,000 to $7,000
for inspection and certification. One estimate was for a series of
inspectors over 3-5 days at a total cost of $5,000-$7,000.
Potentially, a few tribes will have to make significant changes to
their infrastructure before a certificate of compliance can be issued.
In such cases, the costs may be estimated as ranging from $40,000 to
$250,000 and include ongoing compliance costs in addition to inspection
costs. The wide range of costs depends on whether a tribe has already
developed and identified applicable EPHS laws and has an ongoing
program aimed at assuring the public health and safety. The higher cost
estimates came from operations with full-time EPHS employees and
represent the overall cost of the tribe's EPHS program rather than
simply costs associated with inspection and certification. Operations
with full-time EPHS employees pay for them as part of the overall cost
of the tribe's EPHS program rather than as costs associated with
inspection and certification. The costs associated with the customary
and usual business practice of maintaining EPHS and fixing code
violations are not
[[Page 59049]]
a direct result of a certification requirement, but rather required
already by tribal laws, including the tribal gaming ordinance, which
requires a tribe to construct, maintain, and operate its gaming
facilities in a manner that protects the public pursuant to 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(2)(E). The hour cost of having the appropriate tribal entity
create a certification after the inspections is estimated at 2 hours
for a cost of $35 (2 x $17.50).
Also, if a tribe does not have laws in one of the enumerated areas,
it may require employment of an attorney or other specialist to
research other laws in this area and may require the attorney to draft
tribal law if the tribe opts not to adopt a uniform code or law of
another jurisdiction. The NIGC estimates the cost for this as
approximately $5,000-$10,000.
The proposed rule also requires an information collection if a
facility license is terminated or not renewed or if a gaming place,
facility, or location closes. The NIGC believes the tribe will create
documentation for this through governmental meeting minutes or through
a notification to the gaming operation and need only forward a copy of
that information to the Commission. The estimated hour burden of
forwarding this information to the Commission is a half hour for
approximately $8.75 (.5 x $17.50).
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 comments 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, Attn: Desk Officer for the
National Indian Gaming Commission, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20503; and (2) to Penny J. Coleman, Acting General Counsel, National
Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Suite 9100, Washington,
DC 20005 or via fax (202) 632-7066 (not a toll-free number) or via e-
mail at licensing_regulations@nigc.gov. Comments are due November 19,
2007.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Parts 502, 522, 559, and 573
Gambling, Indians--lands, Indians--tribal government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Text of the Proposed Rules
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Commission proposes
to amend its regulations at 25 CFR Chapter III as follows:
PART 502--DEFINITIONS OF THIS CHAPTER
1. The authority citation for part 502 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
2. Add new Sec. 502.22 to read as follows:
Sec. 502.22 Construction and maintenance of the gaming facility, and
the operation of that gaming is conducted in a manner which adequately
protects the environment and the public health and safety.
Construction and maintenance of the gaming facility, and the
operation of that gaming is conducted in a manner which adequately
protects the environment and the public health and safety means a tribe
has identified and enforces laws, resolutions, codes, policies or
procedures applicable to each gaming place, facility or location that
protect the environment and the public health and safety, including
standards negotiated under a tribal-state compact. Laws, resolutions,
codes, policies or procedures in this area shall cover, at a minimum:
(a) Emergency preparedness, including but not limited to fire
suppression, law enforcement, and security;
(b) Food and potable water;
(c) Construction and maintenance;
(d) Hazardous materials;
(e) Sanitation (both solid waste and wastewater); and
(f) Other environmental or public health and safety standards
adopted by the tribe in light of climate, geography, and other local
conditions and applicable to its gaming facilities, places or
locations.
3. Add new Sec. 502.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 502.23 Facility license.
Facility license means a separate license issued by a tribe to each
place, facility, or location on Indian lands where the tribe elects to
allow class II or III gaming.
PART 522--SUBMISSION OF GAMING ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION
4. The authority citation for part 522 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706, 2710, 2712.
5. Add new paragraph (i) to Sec. 522.2 to read as follows:
Sec. 522.2 Submission requirements.
(i) A tribe shall provide Indian lands or environmental and public
health and safety documentation that the Chairman may in his or her
discretion request as needed.
6. Add new part 559 to read as follows:
PART 559--FACILITY LICENSE NOTIFICATIONS, RENEWALS, AND SUBMISSIONS
Sec.
559.1 What is the scope and purpose of this part?
559.2 When must a tribe notify the Chairman that it is considering
issuing a new facility license?
559.3 How often must a facility license be renewed?
559.4 When must a tribe submit a copy of a facility license to the
Chairman?
559.5 What must a tribe submit to the Chairman with the copy of each
facility license that has been issued?
559.6 Does a tribe need to notify the Chairman if a facility license
is terminated or not renewed or if a gaming place, facility, or
location closes?
559.7 May the Chairman request Indian lands or environmental and
public health and safety documentation regarding any gaming place,
facility, or location where gaming will occur?
559.8 May a tribe submit documents required by this part
electronically?
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2701, 2702(3), 2703(4), 2705, 2706, 2710
and 2719.
Sec. 559.1 What is the scope and purpose of this part?
(a) The purpose of this part is to ensure that each place,
facility, or location where class II or III gaming will occur is
located on Indian lands eligible for gaming and that the construction
and maintenance of the gaming facility, and the operation of that
gaming is conducted in a manner which adequately protects the
environment and the public health and safety pursuant to the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act.
(b) Each gaming place, facility, or location conducting class II or
III gaming pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act or on which a
tribe intends to conduct class II or III gaming pursuant to the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act is subject to the requirements of this part.
Sec. 559.2 When must a tribe notify the Chairman that it is
considering issuing a new facility license?
(a) A tribe shall submit to the Chairman a notice that a facility
license is under consideration for issuance at least 120 days before
opening any new place, facility, or location on Indian lands where
class II or III gaming will occur. The notice shall contain the
following:
[[Page 59050]]
(1) The name and address of the property;
(2) A legal description of the property;
(3) The tract number for the property as assigned by the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Land Title and Records Offices;
(4) If not maintained by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department
of the Interior, a copy of the trust or other deed(s) to the property
or an explanation as to why such documentation does not exist; and
(5) If not maintained by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department
of the Interior, documentation of the property's ownership.
(b) A tribe does not need to submit to the Chairman a notice that a
facility license is under consideration for issuance for occasional
charitable events lasting not more than a week.
Sec. 559.3 How often must a facility license be renewed?
At least once every three years, a tribe shall issue a separate
facility license to each existing place, facility or location on Indian
lands where a tribe elects to allow gaming.
Sec. 559.4 When must a tribe submit a copy of a facility license to
the Chairman?
A tribe must submit to the Chairman a copy of each issued facility
license within 30 days of issuance.
Sec. 559.5 What must a tribe submit to the Chairman with the copy of
each facility license that has been issued?
(a) A tribe shall submit to the Chairman with each facility license
an attestation certifying that by issuing the facility license:
(1) The tribe has identified the environmental and public health
and safety laws applicable to its gaming operation;
(2) The tribe is in compliance with those laws; and
(3) The tribe has ensured and is ensuring that the construction and
maintenance of the gaming facility, and the operation of that gaming is
conducted in a manner which adequately protects the environment and the
public health and safety.
(b) A document listing all laws, resolutions, codes, policies or
procedures identified by the tribe as applicable to its gaming
operations, other than Federal laws, in the following areas:
(1) Emergency preparedness, including but not limited to fire
suppression, law enforcement, and security;
(2) Food and potable water;
(3) Construction and maintenance;
(4) Hazardous materials;
(5) Sanitation (both solid waste and wastewater); and
(6) Other environmental or public health and safety standards
adopted by the tribe in light of climate, geography, and other local
conditions and applicable to its gaming facilities, places or
locations.
(c) After the first submission of a document under paragraph (b) of
this section, upon reissuing a license to an existing gaming place,
facility, or location, and in lieu of complying with paragraph (b) of
this section, a tribe may certify to the Chairman that it has not
substantially modified its laws protecting the environment and public
health and safety.
Sec. 559.6 Does a tribe need to notify the Chairman if a facility
license is terminated or not renewed or if a gaming place, facility, or
location closes?
A tribe must notify the Chairman within 30 days if a facility
license is terminated or not renewed or if a gaming place, facility, or
location closes or reopens.
Sec. 559.7 May the Chairman request Indian lands or environmental and
public health and safety documentation regarding any gaming place,
facility, or location where gaming will occur?
A tribe shall provide Indian lands or environmental and public
health and safety documentation that the Chairman may in his or her
discretion request as needed.
Sec. 559.8 May a tribe submit documents required by this part
electronically?
Yes. Tribes wishing to submit documents electronically should
contact the Commission for guidance on acceptable document formats and
means of transmission.
PART 573--ENFORCEMENT
7. The authority citation for part 573 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2705(a)(1), 2706, 2713, 2715.
8. Amend Sec. 573.6 by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 573.6 Order of temporary closure.
(a) * * *
* * * * *
(4) A gaming operation operates for business without a license from
a tribe, in violation of part 522 or part 559 of this chapter.
* * * * *
Dated: October 11, 2007.
Philip N. Hogen,
Chairman.
Cloyce V. Choney,
Commissioner.
Norman H. DesRosiers,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. E7-20541 Filed 10-17-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565-01-P