Technical Standards for Electronic, Computer, or Other Technologic Aids Used in the Play of Class II Games, 60508-60523 [E7-20789]
Download as PDF
60508
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
physical connection to the computer
system when the authorized user
requires access to the system through
remote access; and
(v) The agents involved and
procedures performed to ensure the
remote access connection is
disconnected when the remote access is
no longer required.
(2) In the event of remote access, the
information technology employees shall
prepare a complete record of the access
to include:
(i) Name or identifier of the employee
authorizing access;
(ii) Name or identifier of the
authorized user accessing system;
(iii) Date, time, and duration of
access; and
(iv) Description of work performed in
adequate detail to include the old and
new version numbers, if applicable of
any software that was modified, and
details regarding any other changes
made to the system.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
Philip N. Hogen,
Chairman.
Norman H. DesRosiers,
Commissioner.
Cloyce V. Choney,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. E7–20778 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Part 547
RIN 3141–AA29
Technical Standards for Electronic,
Computer, or Other Technologic Aids
Used in the Play of Class II Games
National Indian Gaming
Commission, Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The proposed rule would add
a new part to the Commission’s
regulations establishing technical
standards for Class II games—bingo,
lotto, other games similar to bingo, pull
tabs, or ‘‘instant bingo’’—that are played
using ‘‘electronic, computer, or other
technologic aids.’’ The proposed rule
would also establish a process for
ensuring the integrity of such games and
aids before their placement in a Class II
tribal gaming operation. No such
standards currently exist. The
Commission proposes this action in
order to assist tribal gaming regulatory
authorities and operators in ensuring
the integrity and security of Class II
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
games and the accountability of gaming
revenue.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
December 10, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Mail comments to
‘‘Comments on Technical Standards,’’
National Indian Gaming Commission,
1441 L Street, NW., Washington, DC
20005, Attn: Michael Gross, Associate
General Counsel, General Law.
Comments may be transmitted by
facsimile to 202–632–7066, but the
original also must be mailed or
submitted to the above address.
Comments may be sent electronically,
instead of by mail or fax, to
technical_standards@nigc.gov. Please
indicate ‘‘Class II technical regulations’’
in the subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Gross, Associate General
Counsel, General Law, Office of General
Counsel, telephone: 202.632.7003. This
is not a toll free call.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25
U.S.C. 2701–21 (‘‘IGRA’’), enacted by
the Congress in 1988, establishes the
National Indian Gaming Commission
(‘‘NIGC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) and sets out
a comprehensive framework for the
regulation of gaming on Indian lands.
IGRA establishes three classes of Indian
gaming.
‘‘Class I gaming’’ means social games
played solely for prizes of minimal
value or traditional forms of Indian
gaming played in connection with tribal
ceremonies or celebrations. 25 U.S.C.
2703(6). Indian tribes regulate Class I
gaming exclusively.
‘‘Class II gaming’’ means the game of
chance commonly known as bingo,
whether or not electronic, computer, or
other technologic aids are used in
connection therewith, including, if
played in the same location, pull-tabs,
lotto, punch boards, tip jars, instant
bingo, and other games similar to bingo,
as well as various non-house-banked
card games. 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(A).
Specifically excluded from Class II
gaming are banking card games such as
blackjack, electronic or
electromechanical facsimiles of any
game of chance, and slot machines of
any kind. 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(B). Indian
tribes and the NIGC share regulatory
authority over Class II gaming. Indian
tribes can engage in Class II gaming
without any state involvement.
‘‘Class III gaming’’ includes all forms
of gaming that are not Class I gaming or
Class II gaming. 25 U.S.C. 2703(8). Class
III gaming thus includes all other games
of chance, including lotteries and most
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
forms of casino gaming, such as slot
machines, roulette, and banking card
games like blackjack. Class III gaming
may be conducted lawfully only if the
tribe and the state in which the tribe is
located enter into a tribal-state compact
for such gaming. Alternatively, a tribe
may operate Class III gaming under
gaming procedures issued by the
Secretary of the Interior. Because of the
compact requirement, states, Indian
tribes, and the NIGC possess regulatory
authority over Class III gaming. In
addition, the United States Department
of Justice possesses exclusive criminal,
and certain civil, jurisdiction over Class
III gaming on Indian lands.
The Commission has determined that
it is in the best interests of Indian
gaming to adopt technical standards that
govern the implementation of
electronic, computer, and other
technologic aids used in the play of
Class II games because no such
standards currently exist. The technical
standards seek to provide a means for
tribal gaming regulatory authorities and
tribal operators to ensure that the
integrity of Class II games played with
the use of electronic, computer, or other
technologic aids is maintained; that the
games and aids are secure; and that the
games and aids are fully auditable, i.e.
that they provide a means for the
gaming authority and gaming operation
to account for all gaming revenue.
Development of the Proposed Rule
The development of the proposed rule
began formally with the March 31, 2004,
appointment of an advisory committee
comprised of tribal government
representatives with substantial
experience and expertise in gaming
regulation and operations, the
Commission, and Commission staff.
Although the Commission initially
intended to develop one set of
regulations, this committee’s work
ultimately resulted in the Commission’s
publication of a proposed rule for Class
II classification standards, 71 FR 30238
(May 25, 2006), and a separate proposed
rule for Class II technical standards, 71
FR 46336 (August 11, 2006). A detailed
history of the advisory committee’s
work on the technical standards to that
point, its meetings, the Commission’s
consultations with Indian tribes, and the
contributions and participation of the
interested general public is published in
the preamble to that proposed rule. 71
FR 46336–46337.
The ultimate goal of that first set of
technical standards was as it is here—
to ensure the security and integrity of
Class II games played with technologic
aids and to ensure the auditability of the
gaming revenue that those games earn.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
It was also the intention of that first set
of technical standards to allow for
flexibility in the implementation of
technology and not to prohibit the use
of future technologies unforeseen and as
yet undeveloped.
Given the importance of the
regulations to the industry, the
Commission, which had initially set a
comment period of 45 days, reopened
the comment period for an additional 76
days, from November 15, 2006, through
January 31, 2007. 71 FR 71115
(December 8, 2006); 71 FR 76618
(December 21, 2006).
Public comments made it clear to the
Commission that the first set of
proposed technical standards fell short
of its goal of technological flexibility. In
particular, commenters stated that the
first set of proposed technical standards
would mandate particular
implementations of technology and that
some of those were not practical or
feasible. Commenters suggested that
rather than prescribe particular
implementations of technology, the
standards should describe the regulatory
outcomes that the Commission desires
and leave it to the manufacturers to
develop ways of meeting those
regulatory requirements.
At a December 5, 2006, advisory
committee meeting in Washington, DC,
the tribal representatives to the advisory
committee strongly seconded this
sentiment. The details of the solution,
however, were not immediately
apparent. Before providing further
advice to the Commission, the tribal
representatives wished to consult
further with other tribal representatives
and regulators, and with industry
representatives. They therefore
suggested that they assemble a working
group made up of representatives from
the Class II gaming industry—tribal
operators, tribal regulators, and
manufacturers alike—to assist it.
Accepting the fundamental premise that
the technical standards ought to be
descriptive rather than prescriptive, the
Commission agreed to allow the tribal
representatives to work independently
of the Commission to redraft the
technical standards. Subsequently, the
Commission withdrew the first
proposed technical standards. 72 FR
7360 (February 15, 2007).
The tribal representatives to the
advisory committee formed a working
group, which met at various times, in
person and telephonically, from the end
of 2006 through the middle of 2007 to
draft this new set of technical standards.
The Commission did not participate in
the establishment of this working group.
On some occasions, the tribal
representatives invited the participation
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
of Commission staff members to answer
questions and to provide explanation
about the Commission’s regulatory
goals. Commission staff participated in
this capacity during in-person meetings
on December 11–12, 2006, in Las Vegas,
Nevada, and June 5, 2007, in Dallas,
Texas.
The full advisory committee,
including the Commission, met to
discuss drafts of proposed technical
standards on February 22, 2007, in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 26,
2007, in Seattle, Washington, and May
22, 2007, in Bloomington, Minnesota.
All of these meetings were open to the
interested public.
The Commission is immensely
grateful to the tribal representatives on
the advisory committee and to those
who assisted the tribal representatives
for all of their hard work and for the
high-quality draft regulations that
resulted from their efforts. The proposed
rule is largely adopted from the final
draft of descriptive technical standards,
which was delivered to the Commission
by the tribal representatives to the
advisory committee on June 18, 2006.
There are places, of course, where the
Commission felt it could not accept the
draft’s recommendations and has
proposed rules more stringent than the
tribal representatives to the advisory
committee would have preferred. One
such area of disagreement concerns the
recall and tracking of alternative
displays.
It is a common practice for bingo
games played using electronic player
stations to provide alternative display of
game results above and beyond the
numbers marked and patterns obtained
on a bingo card. Most frequently, these
alternative displays take the form of
spinning reels such as one would find
on slot machines. A winning bingo
pattern, for example, might also be
displayed as a winning combination of
symbols on the reels. The Commission
regards such alternative displays as
perfectly permissible, provided that it is
the bingo game, and not the spinning
reels, that determine the player’s results.
The technical standards require a last
game recall function to be able to
display alternative results as well as the
actual game results, if a Class II gaming
system has a last game recall. The tribal
representatives to the advisory
committee have said that they regard the
requirement as both unnecessary, since
the alternative displays do not
determine game results, and beyond the
scope of the Commission’s authority.
The Commission, however, regards
recall of alternative displays as an
important part of safeguarding the
integrity of gaming, notwithstanding the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
60509
fact that alternate displays do not
determine, and are not relevant to, the
outcome of the game. The fact remains,
however, that the alternative displays
are the source of many patron disputes,
and providing for their automatic recall
provides to tribal gaming regulatory
authorities information essential to
resolving such disputes quickly,
completely, and fairly. Over and above
this, it is the Commission’s
understanding that many manufacturers
already include alternative displays in
their recall functions, or could easily do
so.
Purpose and Scope
The proposed part 547 applies to all
Class II games played using electronic,
computer, or other technologic aids, or
modifications of such games and aids.
Class II games played through such
technologic aids are widely used in
Indian gaming operations, yet no
uniform standards exist to govern their
implementation. The proposed rule
seeks to remedy that absence and create
a regulatory structure under which
tribal gaming regulatory authorities and
tribal operators are able to ensure the
integrity and security of Class II games
played with the use of electronic,
computer, or other technologic aids and
the auditability of gaming revenue.
There is a great variety in the
technologic aids used in the play of
Class II games and, therefore, a great
variety in the means used to play the
games. An operation may, for example,
play bingo using no aids at all. A caller
may select numbers using ping pong
balls taken from a hopper, and players
purchase paper cards from an employee
of the operation and mark them with an
inked dauber. Alternatively, numbers
may be selected randomly using an
electronic random number generator,
which in turn displays the selected
number on a display board. Instead of
paper, players may use electronic
handheld devices to monitor and mark
their cards. The handheld devices are
purchased and have cards loaded on
them at a point-of-sale retail terminal.
Still again, bingo may be
implemented electronically on clientserver architectures. A common
arrangement, but by no means the only
one possible, is to have client machines
on the casino floor as electronic player
stations. These display bingo cards,
allow the players to cover numbers
when drawn, and pay any prizes won.
The server, usually located off the floor,
draws random numbers and passes
them along data communications lines
to the client machines for game play.
Credits may be placed on the electronic
player station by inserting cash or
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
60510
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
electronically drawing down an account
separately established.
The challenge, then, for writing
technical standards is to address all of
the various ways that Class II games can
be played. Central to the proposed rule,
therefore, is the definition of ‘‘Class II
gaming system,’’ which refers to any
given collection of components used in
the play of a II game: ‘‘All components,
whether or not technologic aids in
electronic, computer, mechanical or
other technologic form, that function
together to aid the play of one or more
Class II games, including accounting
functions mandated by these
regulations.’’ The notion of the ‘‘gaming
system’’ thus encompasses bingo played
in all of the implementations described
above.
It is the ‘‘gaming system’’ that must
meet the technical standards of the
proposed part 547. Like the gaming
system itself, the standards are
conceived generally so that they may be
met by a gaming system, regardless of
the particular components that may
comprise it. For example, the proposed
rule does not refer to ‘‘bill validators,’’
an electronic device into which a patron
may insert a bill in order to place credits
on a gaming machine. Instead, proposed
part 547 describes ‘‘financial instrument
acceptors’’ and the standards they must
meet. ‘‘Financial instrument acceptor’’
is broad enough in meaning to
encompass not only ‘‘bill validator’’ but
also a cash drawer staffed by an
employee of the gaming operation.
Proposed part 547 provides minimum
standards for the security of the
‘‘acceptors’’ and of the money or
vouchers (generally, ‘‘financial
instruments’’) they accept.
Further, because of the breadth of
possible implementations for Class II
gaming systems, proposed part 547
requires that gaming equipment and
software used with Class II gaming
systems meet the requirements of the
part, but only those that are applicable
to the system as implemented. This is,
in short, a rule of construction of
common sense. For example, if a system
takes only cash and lacks the ability to
print or accept vouchers, then any
standards that apply to vouchers do not
apply.
All of that said, the proposed rule
deliberately provides only minimum
standards. Tribes and tribal gaming
regulatory authorities may add any
additional requirements, or more
stringent requirements, needed to suit
their particular circumstances.
In order to ensure compliance with
the technical standards, the proposed
rule borrows from the established
practices of tribal, state, and provincial
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
gaming jurisdictions across North
America. The proposed rule establishes,
as a necessary prerequisite to a gaming
system being offered to the public for
play in a Class II gaming operation,
review of the system by a qualified,
independent testing laboratory and
approval by the tribal gaming regulatory
authority.
Under the proposed rule, a tribe’s
gaming regulatory authority will require
all Class II gaming systems, or
modifications thereof, to be submitted to
a testing laboratory for review and
analysis. That submission includes a
working prototype of the gaming system
or modification, all pertinent software,
and anything else the testing laboratory
needs for its complete and thorough
review. In turn, the laboratory will
review whether the gaming system does
or does not meet the requirements of the
rule, as well as any additional
requirements adopted by the tribe’s
gaming regulatory authority. The
laboratory will provide a written report
of its analysis and conclusions to the
tribal gaming regulatory authority for
approval or disapproval of the gaming
system or modification. The tribal
gaming regulatory authority will retain
the report as long as the gaming system
or modification in question remains
available to the public for play.
The Commission understands that
existing Class II gaming systems likely
do not meet all of the requirements of
the proposed rule. In order to avoid the
potentially significant economic and
practical consequences of requiring
immediate compliance, the proposed
rule implements a five-year
‘‘grandfather period’’ for existing
gaming systems.
Existing gaming systems may be
grandfathered and exempt from
compliance with all of the requirements
of the proposed rule if they are put
through a similar review by a qualified
independent testing laboratory and
approved by a tribal gaming regulatory
authority. Specifically, in order to be
eligible for grandfathering, a gaming
system must be submitted to a testing
laboratory within 120 days of the
proposed part 547 becoming final. The
testing laboratory must review the
gaming system for compliance with a
specific, minimum set of
requirements—random number
generation, no reflexive or secondary
decision-making after random numbers
are drawn, the inability to change bingo
cards during the play of a game, and a
mechanism for verifying game software.
The laboratory must issue a report on
these issues to the tribal gaming
regulatory authority, which must make
a finding that the gaming system
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
qualifies for grandfather status. Once a
gaming system is qualified, the
manufacturer must label each player
interface on the system with its date of
manufacture and certify the same to the
tribal gaming regulatory authority. This
requirement effectively freezes the
number of grandfathered interfaces in
use.
This is not to say, however, that
grandfathered gaming systems must
remain entirely static. Tribal gaming
regulatory authorities may permit
modifications to gaming system
software or hardware that increases
compliance with the requirements of
proposed part 547, even if the
modifications do not make the system
wholly compliant. Tribal gaming
regulatory authorities may also
authorize modifications to gaming
system software that does not detract
from, compromise, or prejudice the
proper functioning, security or integrity
of the Class II gaming system and the
system’s overall compliance with the
requirements of proposed part 547.
Changes such as new pay tables, new
game themes, and new alternative
displays fall within this latter category.
Finally, the Commission does not
intend for proposed part 547 to stand
alone. The advisory committee pointed
out, and the Commission agrees, that
many of the functions placed in the
technical standards proposed on August
11, 2006, and now withdrawn, are more
properly characterized as minimum
internal control standards for a gaming
operation. Accordingly, the Commission
is simultaneously publishing, as a
separate proposed rule, a set of
minimum internal control standards for
the play of bingo that is intended to be
applied in conjunction with the
standards set forth in this proposed rule.
In short, game manufacturers and tribal
gaming regulators must look to both sets
of rules for applicable standards for the
construction and operation of Class II
gaming systems.
The Commission intends as well that
these two parts be applied in
conjunction with a third proposed rule,
also published simultaneously,
governing the classification of bingo and
pull tabs and distinguishing these Class
II games played with technological aids
from Class III facsimiles of games of
chance. References in the proposed part
547 to ‘‘minimum internal control
standards’’ and ‘‘classification
standards’’ refer to these two other sets
of rules.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rule will not have a
significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities as
defined under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. Indian tribes
are not considered small entities for the
purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
It is not entirely clear whether the
proposed rule, considered separately
and apart from the Commission’s
proposed part 546, ‘‘Classification
Standards for Bingo * * * Using
‘Electronic, Computer, or Other
Technologic Aids’,’’ is a major rule
under 5 U.S.C. 804.2, the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. The NIGC has
commissioned an economic impact
study of the two proposals taken
together. The study makes clear that the
cost to the Indian gaming industry of
complying with the two proposed rules
will have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, at
least for the first 5 years after adoption.
Accordingly, the Commission treats the
proposed rule as a major rule. The
economic impact study is available for
review at the Commission’s Web site,
https://www.nigc.gov, or by request using
the addresses or telephone numbers,
above.
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. 658(1);
1502(1).
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, the Commission has determined
that this proposed rule does not have
significant takings implications. A
takings implication assessment is not
required.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order
12988, the Commission’s Office of
General Counsel has determined that
the proposed rule does not unduly
burden the judicial system and meets
the requirements of sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of the Order.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule requires
information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and is subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. The title, description, and
respondent categories are discussed
below, together with an estimate of the
annual information collection burden.
With respect to the following
collections of information, the
Commission invites comments on: (1)
Whether the proposed collections of
information are 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 collections of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of
information technology.
Title: Process for Certification of
Electronic, Computer, or other
Technologic Aids used in the play of
Class II games and process for
qualification of independent testing
laboratories, proposed 25 CFR 547.4.
Summary of information and
description of need: This provision in
the proposed rule establishes a process
for ensuring that electronic, computer,
or other technologic aids used with the
play of Class II gaming systems have
been reviewed and evaluated by a
qualified, independent testing
laboratory prior to their approval by a
tribal gaming regulatory authority and
their placement on the floor in a Class
II tribal gaming operation. The process
helps to ensure the proper functioning
of the equipment and the integrity,
fairness, and auditability of games
played.
The process requires a tribe’s gaming
regulatory authority to require that all
Class II gaming systems, or
modifications thereto, be submitted to a
qualified, independent testing
laboratory for review and analysis. That
submission includes a working
prototype of the game and aid, all
pertinent software, and complete
documentation and descriptions of all
functions and components. In turn, the
laboratory will determine that the
gaming system does or does not meet
the requirements of the rule and any
additional requirements adopted by the
tribe’s gaming regulatory authority. The
laboratory will provide a written report
of its analysis and conclusions to the
tribal gaming regulatory authority for its
approval or disapproval of the gaming
system or modification. The tribal
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
60511
gaming regulatory authority will retain
the laboratory report as long as the
gaming system or modification remains
available to the public for play.
This process is necessary to ensure
the security and integrity of Class II
gaming. Technical standards such as
those in the proposed rule are a
fundamental part of Class III gaming and
of non-Indian casino gaming throughout
North America. No uniform standards
exist for Class II gaming, however. The
implementation of such standards will
assist tribal gaming regulators in
ensuring that games are implemented
fairly, that all technologic aids are
secure and function properly, and that
the games and aids allow the tribe and
the operator to properly account for
gaming revenue.
This provision in the proposed rule
also contemplates an analogous process
for determining whether a Class II
gaming system is eligible for the fiveyear grandfather period made available
by the proposed rule. This process again
requires a tribe’s gaming regulatory
authority to require that a Class II
gaming system be submitted, within 120
days after the effective date of part 547,
to a qualified, independent testing
laboratory for review and analysis. The
submission must include a working
prototype of the game and aid, all
pertinent software, and complete
documentation and descriptions of all
functions and components. In turn, the
laboratory will determine that the
gaming system does or does not meet a
small set of certain specified
requirements of the proposed rule. The
laboratory will provide a written report
of its analysis and conclusions to the
tribal gaming regulatory authority for its
finding that the gaming system is or is
not eligible for grandfather status. Upon
a finding of eligibility, the tribal gaming
regulatory authority will issue a
certificate to that effect to the gaming
system manufacturer and a description
of the grandfathered game to the
Commission.
This process is necessary to ensure a
certain minimum integrity and security
for games while at the same time
avoiding potentially significant
economic and practical consequences of
requiring immediate and complete
compliance with the standards of the
proposed rule.
Finally, the proposed rule establishes
a process for testing laboratories to
apply for eligibility to provide testing
services under the proposed rule. The
testing laboratories must submit to
suitability determinations made by the
tribes they serve, and these
determinations include criminal
background checks for the laboratories’
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
60512
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
principals. These determinations are
made according to the same standards
used to license the primary management
officials and key employees of Indian
gaming operations under the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act. All of this
requires the submission by the
laboratory of corporate financial
information; qualifications of the
engineering staff; information (and
inspections) of the available engineering
facilities, and personal information for
principals, including tax returns,
bankruptcies and law suits, work
histories and references.
Given the essential role accorded to
laboratories in ensuring the integrity,
security, and auditability of Class II
games, this process is essential to
ensuring the competence, integrity, and
independence of the testing laboratories
and the suitability of their decision
makers, i.e. to ensure that undesirable
elements are kept out of gaming.
Respondents: The respondents are
independent testing laboratories,
developers and manufacturers of Class II
gaming systems, and Indian tribes. The
Commission estimates that there are
currently 20 such manufacturers, 5 such
laboratories, and 226 gaming tribes. The
frequency of responses to the
information collection requirement will
vary.
Information Collection Burden: In
order to qualify under the grandfather
provisions of the proposed rule, a
gaming system must be submitted to a
testing laboratory for review and
analysis during the first 120 days after
the effective date of the final rule. The
Commission estimates that there are
approximately 25 Class II gaming
systems in existence and that all will be
submitted during this period.
Following the initial 120-day period,
the frequency of submissions of new
gaming systems or of modifications to
existing gaming systems will be entirely
market driven. The Commission
anticipates approximately a 20%
turnover each year for the five-year
grandfather period. Consequently, there
should be approximately five
submissions of new gaming systems
each year.
Submissions of modifications are, as a
matter of course, a more common
practice. Software in particular
commonly goes through many iterations
in development and continues to be
improved and revised even after sale
and placement on a gaming operation’s
floor. That said, the submission of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
modifications tends to be sporadic, with
less frequent or occasional submissions
punctuated by fairly steady periods of
submissions when new systems or
modifications are introduced. The NIGC
anticipates there will be approximately
300 submissions of modifications and
thus 300 reports produced by testing
laboratories each year following the 120day period that begins with the effective
date of the final rule.
The preparation and submission of
supporting documentation by
manufacturers or a tribal gaming
operation (as opposed to gaming system
hardware and software per se) is an
information collection burden under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, as is the
preparation of reports by the test
laboratories or the preparation of a
grandfather certificate and explanation
of gaming system by a tribal gaming
regulatory authority.
It is the existing practice in the
gaming industry, both Indian and nonIndian alike, for the game manufacturer
to submit a gaming system to a testing
laboratory for review and analysis. The
proposed rule leaves open the
possibility that a tribal gaming
regulatory authority may require the
management of a gaming operation to
make a required submission. The
Commission anticipates, however, that
it will be the responsibility of the
gaming system manufacturers to make
the submissions to testing laboratories.
The amount of documentation
submitted by a manufacturer as part of
a submission of a gaming system and
the size of a laboratory report is a
function of the complexity of the
gaming system submitted for review.
Submission for minor modifications of
software or hardware that a
manufacturer has already submitted and
that a laboratory has previously
examined will be a matter of little time
both for manufacturer and laboratory,
while the submission and review of an
entirely new game platform will be time
consuming. The provision of a
grandfather certificate and a description
of a gaming systems component are
small matters as that information can be
taken directly from a testing laboratory’s
report.
The practice of submission and
review set out in the proposed rule,
however, is not new. It is already part
of the regulatory requirements in tribal,
state, and Canadian provincial gaming
jurisdictions throughout North America.
Manufacturers already have significant
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
compliance personnel and
infrastructure in place, and the very
existence of private, independent
laboratories is due to these
requirements.
Accordingly, based upon the
discussions with leading testing
laboratories and with manufacturers for
the Indian gaming and non-Indian
gaming markets, the NIGC estimates that
gathering and preparing documentation
for a submission of a single, complete
gaming system will require, on average,
8 hours for manufacturer’s employee.
Following examination and analysis,
NIGC estimates that writing a report for
a complete gaming system will require,
on average, 10 hours of a laboratory
engineer’s time. For the submission of
modifications to a gaming system, NIGC
estimates 4 hours for a manufacturer’s
employee. For the report on a
modification, NIGC estimates 5 hours
for a laboratory engineer.
Thus, the information collection
requirements will be a 200-hour burden
on manufacturers industry-wide during
the first 120 days after the final rule
becomes effective and a 1200-hour
burden industry-wide thereafter. The
information collection requirements
will be a 250-hour burden on
laboratories for the grandfather
submissions made during the first 120
days and a 1500-hour burden thereafter.
Next, the Commission anticipates that
tribal gaming regulatory authorities will
issue grandfather certificates to
manufacturers and send a description of
grandfathered systems to the
Commission for all of the approximately
25 existing gaming systems. The
preparation of these certificates and
descriptions will be a small matter as all
of the necessary information is
contained in the testing laboratory
reports and will take no more than 0.5
hours to prepare.
Finally, the proposed rule requires
tribal gaming regulatory authorities to
maintain laboratory reports as long as
the game system or modification at issue
is available for play. This, however, is
a ministerial function that involves little
more than filing, and occasionally
retrieving, the report. As this is already
common practice among tribal gaming
regulatory authorities, the Commission
estimates that 0.1 hours per report will
be dedicated to these tasks.
The following table summarizes the
annual hour burden:
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
60513
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Provision
Respondents
25 CFR 547.4
25 CFR 547.4
Laboratories
Manufacturers.
Tribal Gaming Operations.
Tribal Gaming regulatory Authorities.
25 CFR 547.4
25 CFR ..........
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
No. of respondents
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Hours per collection
Total annual hours
Collections,
day 121 forward, per
annum
Hours per collection
Total annual
hours
5
20
25
25
10
8
250
200
300
300
5
4
1500
1200
226
0
0
0
0
0
0
226
25
.5
12.5
The proposed rule also requires a
determination of suitability for each of
the approximately 5 testing laboratories.
The information required can be
substantial: Corporate financial
information; qualifications of the
engineering staff; information (and
inspections) of the engineering facilities
available, and personal information for
principals, including tax returns,
bankruptcies and lawsuits, work
histories and references.
However, the 5 existing testing
laboratories have already collected and
provided this information—multiple
times—in order to be licensed in Tribal
and non-Tribal gaming jurisdictions
nationwide. The Commission estimates
that the re-submission of such
information would take the necessary
laboratory employees 20 hours to
accomplish once. As the gaming tribes
typically use only one gaming
laboratory, the submission of suitability
determinations to 226 tribal gaming
regulatory authorities would total 4,520
hours.
The Commission believes, however,
that the hour burden is not likely to be
this high. The proposed rule permits a
tribal gaming regulatory authority to
rely upon a suitability determination
already made by another gaming
jurisdiction in the United States, rather
than require a new suitability
determination for a testing laboratory.
The existing testing laboratories are
already licensed in numerous
jurisdictions throughout the United
States, and the Commission believes
that approximately 90%—203 of 226—
of the tribal gaming authorities will
accept existing suitability
determinations from other jurisdictions.
The submission by a testing lab of an
existing suitability determination
amounts to the writing of a letter. The
NIGC estimates that the submission of
such letters will take the necessary
laboratory employees 0.5 hours to
accomplish once. As each of the gaming
tribes typically uses only one gaming
laboratory, the submission of suitability
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Collections,
1st 120 days
Jkt 214001
determinations of up to 203 tribal
gaming authorities would total 101.5
hours. For the remaining 10% or 23
tribal gaming regulatory authorities, the
submission burden on laboratories is 20
hours per tribe or 460 hours. If every
tribe requires annual re-licensing, the
subsequent annual hours burden on the
5 laboratories is 561.5 hours.
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, Attention: Desk Officer for
National Indian Gaming Commission,
725 17th St., NW., Washington DC,
20503, and (2) to Michael Gross,
Associate General Counsel, General
Law, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street, NW.,
Washington DC 20005.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Commission has determined that
this proposed rule does not constitute a
major federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment and that no detailed
statement is required pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et. seq).
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 547
Gambling, Indian-lands, Indian-tribal
government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Commission proposes to
amend 25 CFR Chapter III by adding
part 547 to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
300
0.1
30
PART 547—MINIMUM TECHNICAL
STANDARDS FOR GAMING
EQUIPMENT USED WITH THE PLAY
OF CLASS II GAMES.
Sec.
547.1 What is the purpose of this part?
547.2 How do these regulations affect State
jurisdiction?
547.3 What are the definitions for this part?
547.4 How do I comply with this part?
547.5 What are the rules of interpretation
and of general application for this part?
547.6 What are the minimum technical
standards for enrolling and enabling
Class II gaming system components?
547.7 What are the minimum technical
hardware standards applicable to Class II
gaming systems?
547.8 What are the minimum technical
software standards applicable to Class II
gaming systems?
547.9 What are the minimum technical
standards for Class II gaming system
accounting functions?
547.10 What are the minimum standards for
Class II gaming system critical events?
547.11 What are the minimum technical
standards for money and credit
handling?
547.12 What are the minimum technical
standards for downloading on a Class II
gaming system?
547.13 What are the minimum technical
standards for program storage media?
547.14 What are the minimum technical
standards for electronic random number
generation?
547.15 What are the minimum technical
standards for electronic data
communications between system
components?
547.16 What are the minimum standards for
game artwork, glass, and rules?
547.17 How does a gaming operation apply
for a variance from these standards?
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706(b).
§ 547.1
What is the purpose of this part?
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25
U.S.C. 2703(7)(A)(i), permits the use of
electronic, computer, or other
technologic aids in connection with the
play of Class II games. This part
establishes the minimum technical
standards governing the use of such
aids.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
60514
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
§ 547.2 How do these regulations affect
State jurisdiction?
Nothing in this part shall be
construed to grant to a State jurisdiction
in Class II gaming or to extend a State’s
jurisdiction in Class III gaming.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
§ 547.3
part?
What are the definitions for this
For the purposes of this part, the
following definitions apply:
Account Access Component, a
component within a Class II gaming
system that reads or recognizes account
access media and gives a patron the
ability to interact with their account.
Account Access Medium, a magnetic
stripe card or any other medium
inserted into, or otherwise made to
interact with, an account access
component in order to give a patron the
ability to interact with an account.
Audit Mode, the mode where it is
possible to view Class II gaming system
accounting functions, statistics, etc. and
perform non-player related functions.
Agent, an employee or other person
authorized by the gaming operation, as
approved and licensed by the tribal
gaming regulatory authority, designated
for certain decisions, tasks and actions
in the gaming operation.
Cancel Credit, an action initiated by
the Class II gaming system where some
or all of a player’s credits are removed
by an attendant and paid to the player.
Cashless System, a system that
performs cashless transactions and
maintains records of those cashless
transactions.
Cashless Transaction, a movement of
funds electronically from one
component to another, often to or from
a patron deposit account.
CD–ROM, Compact Disc—Read Only
Memory.
Chairman, the Chairman of the
National Indian Gaming Commission
established by the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
Class II Game, the same as ‘‘class II
gaming’’ in 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(A).
Class II Gaming System, all
components, whether or not technologic
aids in electronic, computer,
mechanical, or other technologic form,
that function together to aid the play of
one or more Class II games, including
accounting functions mandated by these
regulations.
Commission, the National Indian
Gaming Commission.
Coupon, a financial instrument of
fixed wagering value, usually paper,
that can only be used to acquire noncashable credits through interaction
with a voucher system. This does not
include instruments such as printed
advertising material that cannot be
validated directly by a voucher system.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
Critical Memory, memory locations
storing data essential to the
functionality of the Class II gaming
system.
DLL, a Dynamic-Link Library file.
Download Package, approved data
sent to a component of a Class II gaming
system for such purposes as changing
the component software.
DVD, Digital Video Disk or Digital
Versatile Disk.
Electromagnetic Interference, the
physical characteristic of an electronic
component to emit electronic noise
either into free air, onto the power lines,
or onto communication cables.
Electrostatic Discharge, a single-event,
rapid transfer of electrostatic charge
between two objects, usually resulting
when two objects at different potentials
come into direct contact with each
other.
EPROM, Erasable Programmable Read
Only Memory—a storage area that may
be filled with data and information, that
once written is not modifiable, and that
is retained even if there is no power
applied to the machine.
Fault, an event that when detected by
a Class II gaming system causes a
discontinuance of game play or other
component functions.
Financial Instrument, any tangible
item of value tendered in Class II game
play, including, but not limited to, bills,
coins, vouchers and coupons.
Financial Instrument Acceptor, any
component that accepts financial
instruments.
Financial Instrument Dispenser, any
component that dispenses financial
instruments.
Financial Instrument Storage
Component, any component that stores
financial instruments.
Flash Memory, non-volatile memory
that retains its data when the power is
turned off and that can be electronically
erased and reprogrammed without being
removed from the circuit board.
Game Software, the operational
program or programs that govern the
play, display of results, and/or awarding
of prizes or credits for Class II games.
Gaming Equipment, all electronic,
electro-mechanical, mechanical, or
other physical components utilized in
the play of Class II games.
Hardware, gaming equipment.
Interruption, any form of misoperation, component failure, or
interference to the Class II gaming
equipment.
Modification, a revision to any
hardware or software used in a Class II
gaming system.
Non-cashable credit, credits given by
an operator to a patron; placed on a
Class II gaming system through a
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
coupon, cashless transaction or other
approved means; and capable of
activating play but not being converted
to cash.
Patron Deposit Account, an account
maintained on behalf of a patron, for the
purpose of depositing and withdrawing
cashable funds for the primary purpose
of interacting with a gaming activity.
Player Interface, any component or
components of a Class II gaming system,
including an electronic or technologic
aid (not limited to terminals, player
stations, handhelds, fixed units, etc.),
that directly enables player interaction
in a Class II game.
Prize Schedule, the set of prizes
available to players for achieving predesignated patterns in the Class II game.
Program Storage Media, an electronic
data storage component, such as a CDROM. EPROM, hard disk, or flash
memory on which software is stored
and from which software is read.
Progressive Prize, a prize that
increases by a selectable or predefined
amount based on play of a Class II game.
Random Number Generator (RNG), a
software module, hardware component
or combination of these designed to
produce outputs that are effectively
random.
Reflexive Software, any software that
has the ability to manipulate and/or
replace a randomly generated outcome
for the purpose of changing the results
of a Class II game.
Removable/Rewritable storage media,
program or data storage components
that can be removed from gaming
equipment and be written to, or
rewritten by, the gaming equipment or
by other equipment designed for that
purpose.
Server, a computer which controls
one or more applications or
environments within a Class II gaming
system.
Test/Diagnostics Mode, a mode on a
component that allows various tests to
be performed on the Class II gaming
system hardware and software.
Testing Laboratory, an organization
recognized by a tribal gaming regulatory
authority pursuant to § 547.4(f).
Tribal Gaming Regulatory Authority,
the entity authorized by tribal law to
regulate gaming conducted pursuant to
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
Voucher, a financial instrument of
fixed wagering value, usually paper,
that can only be used to acquire an
equivalent value of cashable credits or
cash through interaction with a voucher
system.
Voucher System, a component of the
Class II gaming system or an external
system that securely maintains records
of vouchers and coupons; validates
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
payment of vouchers; records successful
or failed payments of vouchers and
coupons; and controls the purging of
expired vouchers and coupons.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
§ 547.4
How do I comply with this part?
(a) Limited immediate compliance. By
120 days after the effective date of this
part, a tribal gaming regulatory authority
shall:
(1) Require that all Class II gaming
system software that affects the play of
the Class II game be submitted, together
with the signature verification required
by § 547.8(f), to a testing laboratory
recognized pursuant to paragraph (f) of
this section;
(2) Require that the testing laboratory
test the submission to the standards
established by § 547.8(b), § 547.14, the
minimum probability standards of
§ 547.5(c), and to any additional
standards adopted by the tribal gaming
regulatory authority;
(3) Require that the testing laboratory
provide the tribal gaming regulatory
authority with a formal written report
setting forth and certifying to the
findings and conclusions of the test;
(4) Make a finding, in the form of a
certificate provided to the supplier, that
the Class II gaming system qualifies for
grandfather status under the provisions
of this section, but only upon receipt of
a testing laboratory’s report that the
Class II gaming system is compliant
with § 547.8(b), § 547.8(f), the minimum
probability standards of § 547.5(c),
§ 547.14, and any other standards
adopted by the tribal gaming regulatory
authority. If the tribal gaming regulatory
authority does not issue the certificate,
or if the testing laboratory finds that the
Class II gaming system is not compliant
with § 547.8(b), § 547.8(f), the minimum
probability standards of § 547.5(c),
§ 547.14, or any other standards adopted
by the tribal gaming regulatory
authority, then the gaming system shall
immediately be removed from play and
not be utilized.
(5) Retain a copy of any testing
laboratory’s report so long as the Class
II gaming system that is the subject of
the report remains available to the
public for play;
(6) Retain a copy of any certificate of
grandfather status so long as the Class
II gaming system that is the subject of
the certificate remains available to the
public for play; and
(7) Require the supplier of any player
interface to designate with a
permanently affixed label each player
interface with an identifying number
and the date of manufacture or a
statement that the date of manufacture
was on or before the effective date of
this part. The tribal gaming regulatory
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
authority shall also require the supplier
to provide a written declaration or
affidavit affirming that the date of
manufacture was on or before the
effective date of this part.
(b) Grandfather provisions. All Class
II gaming systems manufactured or
placed in a tribal facility on or before
the effective date of this part and
certified pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section are grandfathered Class II
gaming systems for which the following
provisions apply:
(1) Grandfathered Class II gaming
systems may continue in operation for
a period of five years from the effective
date of this part.
(2) Subject to the limitations in any
applicable Commission regulations
governing the classification of games,
any grandfathered Class II gaming
system shall be available for use at any
tribal gaming facility subject to approval
by the tribal gaming regulatory authority
which shall transmit its notice of that
approval, identifying the grandfathered
components, to the NIGC.
(3) As permitted by the tribal gaming
regulatory authority, individual
hardware or software components may
be repaired or replaced to ensure proper
functioning, security, or integrity of the
grandfathered Class II gaming system.
(4) All modifications that affect the
play of a grandfathered Class II gaming
system must be approved pursuant to
paragraph (c) of this section, except for
the following:
(i) Any software modifications that
the tribal gaming regulatory authority
finds will maintain or advance the
system’s overall compliance with this
part or applicable provisions of
Commission regulations governing
minimum internal control standards,
after receiving a new testing laboratory
report that the modifications are
compliant with the standards
established by § 547.8(b), the minimum
probability requirements of § 547.5(c),
§ 547.14, and any other standards
adopted by the tribal gaming regulatory
authority;
(ii) Any hardware modifications that
the tribal gaming regulatory authority
finds will maintain or advance the
system’s overall compliance with this
part or applicable provisions of
Commission regulations governing
minimum internal control standards;
and
(iii) Any other modification to the
software of a grandfathered Class II
gaming system that the tribal gaming
regulatory authority finds will not
detract from, compromise or prejudice:
(A) The proper functioning, security,
or integrity of the Class II gaming
system, and
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
60515
(B) The gaming system’s overall
compliance with the requirements of
this part or applicable provisions of
Commission regulations governing
minimum internal control standards.
(iv) No such modification may be
implemented without the approval of
the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
The tribal gaming regulatory authority
shall maintain a record of the
modification so long as the Class II
gaming system that is the subject of the
modification remains available to the
public for play and shall make the
record available to the Commission
upon request. The Commission will
only make available for public review
records or portions of records subject to
release under the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552; the
Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a; or
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25
U.S.C. 2716(a).
(c) Submission, testing, and
approval—generally. Except as provided
in paragraphs (b) and (d) of this section,
no tribal gaming regulatory authority
shall permit in a tribal gaming operation
the use of any Class II gaming system,
or any associated cashless system or
voucher system or any modification
thereto, unless:
(1) The Class II gaming system,
cashless system, voucher payment
system, or modification has been
submitted to a testing laboratory;
(2) The testing laboratory tests the
submission to the standards established
by:
(i) This part;
(ii) Applicable provisions of
Commission regulations governing the
classification of games and minimum
internal controls; and
(iii) The tribal gaming regulatory
authority; and the testing laboratory
provides a formal written report to the
party making the submission, setting
forth and certifying to its findings and
conclusions; and
(3) Following receipt of the testing
laboratory’s report, the tribal gaming
regulatory authority makes a finding
that the Class II gaming system, cashless
system, or voucher system conforms to
the standards established by:
(i) This part;
(ii) Applicable provisions of
Commission regulations governing the
classification of games and minimum
internal controls; and
(iii) The tribal gaming regulatory
authority.
The tribal gaming regulatory authority
shall retain a copy of the testing
laboratory’s report so long as the Class
II gaming system, cashless system,
voucher system, or modification thereto
that is the subject of the report remains
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
60516
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
available to the public for play in its
gaming operation.
(d) Emergency hardware and software
changes. (1) A tribal gaming regulatory
authority, in its discretion, may permit
modified hardware or game software to
be made available for play without prior
laboratory review if the modified
hardware or game software is:
(i) Necessary to correct a problem
affecting the fairness, security, or
integrity of a game or accounting system
or any cashless system, or voucher
system; or
(ii) Unrelated to game play, an
accounting system, a cashless system, or
a voucher system.
(2) If a tribal gaming regulatory
authority authorizes modified game
software or hardware to be made
available for play or use without prior
laboratory review, the tribal gaming
regulatory authority shall thereafter
require the hardware or software
manufacturer to:
(i) Immediately advise other users of
the same hardware or software of the
importance and availability of the
update;
(ii) Immediately submit the new
hardware or software to a testing
laboratory for testing and verification of
compliance with this part and any
applicable provisions of Commission
regulations governing minimum internal
control standards; and
(iii) Immediately provide the tribal
gaming regulatory authority with a
software signature verification tool
meeting the requirements of § 547.8(f)
for any new software.
(3) If a tribal gaming regulatory
authority authorizes software or
hardware modification under this
paragraph, it shall maintain a record of
the modification and a copy of the
testing laboratory report so long as the
Class II gaming system that is the
subject of the modification remains
available to the public for play and shall
make the record available to the
Commission upon request. The
Commission will only make available
for public review records or portions of
records subject to release under the
Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
552; the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C.
552a; or the Indian Gaming Regulatory
Act, 25 U.S.C. 2716(a).
(e) Compliance by charitable gaming
operations. This part shall not apply to
charitable gaming operations, provided
that:
(1) The tribal government determines
that the organization sponsoring the
gaming operation is a charitable
organization;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
(2) All proceeds of the charitable
gaming operation are for the benefit of
the charitable organization;
(3) The tribal gaming regulatory
authority permits the charitable
organization to be exempt from this
part;
(4) The charitable gaming operation is
operated wholly by the charitable
organization’s employees or volunteers;
and
(5) The annual gross gaming revenue
of the charitable gaming operation does
not exceed $1,000,000.
(f) Testing laboratories. (1) A testing
laboratory may provide the
examination, testing, evaluating and
reporting functions required by this
section provided that:
(i) The testing laboratory
demonstrates its integrity,
independence and financial stability to
the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
(ii) The testing laboratory
demonstrates its technical skill and
capability to the tribal gaming
regulatory authority.
(iii) The testing laboratory is not
owned or operated by the tribe or tribal
gaming regulatory authority.
(iv) The tribal gaming regulatory
authority:
(A) Makes a suitability determination
of the testing laboratories no less
stringent than that required by
§ 533.6(b)(1)(ii) through (v) and 533.6(c)
of this chapter and based upon no less
information than that required by
§ 537.1 of this chapter, or
(B) Accepts, in its discretion, a
determination of suitability for the
testing laboratory made by any other
gaming regulatory jurisdiction in the
United States.
(v) After reviewing the suitability
determination and the information
provided by the testing laboratory, the
tribal gaming regulatory authority
determines that the testing laboratory is
qualified to test and evaluate Class II
gaming systems.
(2) The tribal gaming regulatory
authority shall:
(i) Maintain a record of all
determinations made pursuant to
paragraphs (f)(1)(iv) and (f)(1)(v) of this
section for a minimum of three years
and shall make the records available to
the Commission upon request. The
Commission will only make available
for public review records or portions of
records subject to release under the
Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
552; the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C.
552a; or the Indian Gaming Regulatory
Act, 25 U.S.C. 2716(a).
(ii) Place the testing laboratory under
a continuing obligation to notify it of
any adverse regulatory action in any
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
jurisdiction where the testing laboratory
conducts business.
(iii) Require the testing laboratory to
provide notice of any material changes
to the information provided to the tribal
gaming regulatory authority.
§ 547.5 What are the rules of interpretation
and of general application for this part?
(a) Minimum standards. A tribal
gaming regulatory authority may
establish and implement additional
technical standards that are as stringent
as, or more stringent than, those set out
in this part.
(b) Only applicable standards apply.
Gaming equipment and software used
with Class II gaming systems shall meet
all applicable requirements of this part
and applicable requirements of
Commission regulations governing the
classification of games and minimum
internal controls. For example, if a Class
II gaming system lacks the ability to
print or accept vouchers, then any
standards that govern vouchers do not
apply.
(c) Fairness. No Class II gaming
system shall cheat, mislead, or
disadvantage users. All prizes
advertised shall be available to win. No
progressive prize shall have a
probability of winning of less than 1 in
50,000,000. No other prize shall have a
probability of winning of less than 1 in
25,000,000.
(d) Approved equipment and software
only. All gaming equipment and
software used with Class II gaming
systems shall be identical in all respects
to a prototype reviewed and tested by a
testing laboratory and approved for use
by the tribal gaming regulatory authority
pursuant to § 547.4(a) through (c).
Unapproved software shall not be
loaded onto or stored on any program
storage medium used in a Class II
gaming system, except as provided in
§ 547.4(d).
(e) Proper functioning. All gaming
equipment and software used with Class
II gaming systems shall perform
according to the manufacturer’s design
and operating specifications.
(f) No Limitation of Technology. This
part should not be interpreted to limit
the use of technology or to preclude the
use of technology not specifically
referenced.
(g) Severability. If any provision of
this part is declared invalid by a court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision
shall not affect the remainder of this
part.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
§ 547.6 What are the minimum technical
standards for enrolling and enabling Class
II gaming system components?
(e) Player interface. The player
interface shall include a method or
means to:
(a) General requirements. Class II
(1) Display information to a player;
gaming systems shall provide a method
and
to:
(2) Allow the player to interact with
(1) Enroll and unenroll system
the Class II gaming system.
components;
(f) Account access components. A
(2) Enable and disable specific system Class II gaming system component that
components.
reads account access media shall be
(b) Specific requirements. Class II
located within a secure, locked or
gaming systems shall:
tamper-evident area or in a cabinet or
(1) Ensure that only enrolled and
housing which is of a robust
enabled system components participate
construction designed to resist
in gaming; and
determined illegal entry and to protect
(2) Ensure that the default condition
for components shall be unenrolled and internal components. In addition, the
account access component:
disabled.
(1) Shall be constructed so that
§ 547.7 What are the minimum technical
physical tampering leaves evidence of
hardware standards applicable to Class II
such tampering; and
gaming systems?
(2) Shall provide a method to enable
(a) General requirements. (1) The
the Class II gaming system to interpret
Class II gaming system shall operate in
and act upon valid or invalid input or
compliance with applicable regulations
error condition.
of the Federal Communications
(g) Financial instrument storage
Commission.
components. Any Class II gaming
(2) Prior to approval by the tribal
system components that store financial
gaming regulatory authority pursuant to
instruments and that are not operated
§ 547.4(d), the Class II gaming system
under the direct control of a gaming
shall have obtained from Underwriters’
operation employee or agent shall be
Laboratories, or its equivalent, relevant
located within a secure and locked area
certification(s) required for equipment
or in a locked cabinet or housing which
of its type, including but not limited to
is of a robust construction designed to
certifications for liquid spills,
resist determined illegal entry and to
electromagnetic interference, etc.
protect internal components.
(b) Printed circuit boards. (1) Printed
(h) Financial instrument acceptors. (1)
circuit boards that have the potential to
Any Class II gaming system components
affect the outcome or integrity of the
game, and are specially manufactured or that handle financial instruments and
that are not operated under the direct
proprietary and not off-the-shelf, shall
control of an agent shall:
display a unique identifier such as a
(i) Be located within a secure, locked
part number and/or revision number,
and tamper-evident area or in a locked
which shall be updated to reflect new
cabinet or housing which is of a robust
revisions or modifications of the board.
construction designed to resist
(2) Switches or jumpers on all circuit
determined illegal entry and to protect
boards that have the potential to affect
internal components;
the outcome or integrity of any game,
(ii) Be able to detect the entry of valid
progressive award, financial instrument,
or invalid financial instruments and to
cashless transaction, voucher
provide a method to enable the Class II
transaction, or accounting records shall
gaming system to interpret and act upon
be capable of being sealed.
valid or invalid input or error condition;
(c) Electrostatic discharge. Class II
and
gaming system components accessible
(iii) Be constructed to permit
to the public shall be constructed so that
communication with the Class II gaming
they exhibit immunity to human body
system of the accounting information
electrostatic discharges on areas
required by § 547.9(a) and by applicable
exposed to contact. Static discharges of
±15 kV for air discharges and ±7.5 kV for provisions of any Commission and tribal
gaming regulatory regulations governing
contact discharges may not cause
damage, or inhibit operation or integrity minimum internal control standards.
(2) Prior to completion of a valid
of the Class II gaming system.
financial instrument transaction by the
(d) Physical enclosures. Physical
Class II gaming system, no monetary
enclosures shall be of a robust
amount related to that instrument shall
construction designed to resist
be available for play. For example,
determined illegal entry. All
credits shall not be available for play
protuberances and attachments such as
buttons, identification plates, and labels until currency or coupon inserted into
an acceptor is secured in the storage
shall be sufficiently robust to avoid
component.
unauthorized removal.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
60517
(3) The monetary amount related to
all valid financial instrument
transactions by the Class II gaming
system shall be recorded as required by
§ 547.9(a) and the applicable provisions
of any Commission and tribal gaming
regulatory authority regulations
governing minimum internal control
standards.
(i) Financial instrument dispensers.
(1) Any Class II gaming system
components that dispense financial
instruments and that are not designed to
be operated under the direct control of
a gaming operation employee or agent
shall:
(i) Be located within a secure, locked
and tamper-evident area or in a locked
cabinet or housing which is of a robust
construction designed to resist
determined illegal entry and to protect
internal components;
(ii) Provide a method to enable the
Class II gaming system to interpret and
act upon valid or invalid input or error
condition; and
(iii) Be constructed to permit
communication with the Class II gaming
system of the accounting information
required by § 547.9(a) and by applicable
provisions of any Commission and tribal
gaming regulatory regulations governing
minimum internal control standards.
(2) The monetary amount related to
all valid financial instrument
transactions by the Class II gaming
system shall be recorded as required by
§ 547.9(a) and the applicable provisions
of any Commission and tribal gaming
regulatory authority regulations
governing minimum internal control
standards.
(j) Game Outcome Determination
Components. Any Class II gaming
system logic components that affect the
game outcome and that are not designed
to be operated under the direct control
of a gaming operation employee or agent
shall be located within a secure, locked
and tamper-evident area or in a locked
cabinet or housing which is of a robust
construction designed to resist
determined illegal entry and to protect
internal components. DIP switches or
jumpers that can affect the integrity of
the Class II gaming system must be
capable of being sealed by the tribal
gaming regulatory authority.
(k) Door access detection. All
components of the Class II gaming
system that are locked in order to meet
the requirements of this part shall
include a sensor or other methods to
monitor an open door. In addition:
(1) A door open sensor, and its
components or cables, shall be secure
against attempts to disable them or
interfere with their normal mode of
operation; and
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
60518
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(2) It shall not be possible to disable
a door open sensor, or access
components within, without first
properly opening the door.
(l) Separation of functions/no
limitations on technology. Nothing
herein shall prohibit the account access
component, financial instrument storage
component, financial instrument
acceptor, and financial instrument
dispenser from being included within
the same component, or separated into
individual components.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
§ 547.8 What are the minimum technical
software standards applicable to Class II
gaming systems?
This section provides general software
standards for Class II gaming systems for
the play of Class II games.
(a) Player interface displays. (1) If not
otherwise provided to the player, the
player interface shall display the
following:
(i) The purchase or wager amount;
(ii) Game results; and
(iii) Any player credit balance.
(2) Between plays of any game and
until the start of the next play, or until
the player selects a new game option
such as purchase or wager amount or
card selection, whichever is earlier, if
not otherwise provided to the player,
the player interface shall display:
(i) The total purchase or wager
amount and all prizes and total credits
won for the last game played;
(ii) The final results for the last game
played, including alternate displays of
results, if any; and
(iii) Any default purchase or wager
amount for the next play.
(b) Game initiation and play. (1) Each
game played on the Class II gaming
system shall follow and not deviate
from a constant set of rules for each
game provided to players pursuant to
§ 547.16. Any change in rules
constitutes a different game. There shall
be no automatic or undisclosed changes
of rules.
(2) For bingo games and games similar
to bingo, the Class II gaming system
shall not alter or allow to be altered the
card permutations or game rules used
for play of a Class II game unless
specifically chosen by the player prior
to commitment to participate in the
game. No duplicate cards shall be sold
for any common draw.
(3) No game play shall commence
and, no financial instrument or credit
shall be accepted on the affected player
interface, in the presence of any fault
condition that affects the outcome of the
game, open door, or while in test, audit,
or lock-up mode.
(4) The player must choose to
participate in the play of a game.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
(c) Audit Mode. (1) If an audit mode
is provided, the Class II gaming system
shall provide, for those components
actively involved in the audit:
(i) All accounting functions required
by § 547.9, by applicable provisions of
any Commission regulations governing
minimum internal control standards,
and by any internal controls adopted by
the tribe or tribal gaming regulatory
authority;
(ii) Display player interface
identification; and
(iii) Display software version or game
identification;
(2) Audit mode shall be accessible by
a secure method.
(3) Accounting function data shall be
accessible by an authorized person at
any time, except during a payout,
during a handpay, or during play.
(4) The Class II gaming system shall
disable credit acceptance on the affected
player interface while in audit mode,
except during credit acceptance testing.
(d) Last game recall. The last game
recall function shall:
(1) Be retrievable at all times, other
than when the recall component is
involved in the play of a game, upon the
operation of an external key-switch,
entry of an audit card, or a similar
method;
(2) Display the results of recalled
games as originally displayed or in text
representation, including alternate
display results implemented in video,
rather than electro-mechanical, form, if
any, so as to enable the tribal gaming
regulatory authority or operator to
clearly identify the game sequences and
results that occurred;
(3) Allow the Class II gaming system
component providing game recall, upon
return to normal game play mode, to
restore any affected display to the
positions, forms and values displayed
before access to the game recall
information; and
(4) Provide the following information
for the current and previous four games
played and shall display:
(i) Game start time, end time, and
date;
(ii) The total number of credits at the
start of play, less the purchase or wager
amount;
(iii) The purchase or wager amount;
(iv) The total number of credits at the
end of play; and
(v) The total number of credits won as
a result of the game recalled, and the
value in dollars and cents for
progressive prizes, if different.
(vi) For bingo games and games
similar to bingo only, also display:
(A) The card(s) used by the player;
(B) The identifier of the bingo game
played;
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(C) The numbers or other designations
drawn, in the order that they were
drawn;
(D) The numbers or other designations
and prize patterns covered on each card;
(E) All prizes won by the player,
including winning patterns and
alternate displays implemented in
video, rather than electro-mechanical
form, if any; and
(F) The unique identifier of the card
on which prizes were won;
(vii) For pull-tab games only, also
display:
(A) The result(s) of each pull-tab,
displayed in the same pattern as on the
tangible pull-tab;
(B) All prizes won by the player;
(C) The unique identifier of each pull
tab; and
(D) Any other information necessary
to fully reconstruct the current and four
previous plays.
(e) Voucher and credit transfer recall.
Notwithstanding the requirements of
any other section in this part, a Class II
gaming system shall have the capacity
to:
(1) Display the information specified
in § 547.11(b)(5)(ii) through (vi) for the
last five vouchers or coupons printed
and the last five vouchers or coupons
accepted; and
(2) Display a complete transaction
history for the last five cashless
transactions made and the last five
cashless transactions accepted.
(f) Software signature verification.
The manufacturer or developer of the
Class II gaming system must provide to
the testing laboratory and to the tribal
gaming regulatory authority an industrystandard methodology, acceptable to the
tribal gaming regulatory authority, for
verifying the Class II gaming system
game software. By way of illustration,
for game software stored on rewritable
media, such methodologies include
signature algorithms and hashing
formulas such as SHA–1.
(g) Test, diagnostic, and
demonstration modes. If test, diagnostic,
and/or demonstration modes are
provided, the Class II gaming system
shall, for those components actively
involved in the test, diagnostic, or
demonstration mode:
(1) Clearly indicate when that
component is in the test, diagnostic, or
demonstration mode;
(2) Not alter financial data on that
component other than temporary data;
(3) Only be available after entering a
specific mode;
(4) Disable credit acceptance and
payment unless credit acceptance or
payment is being tested; and
(5) Terminate all mode-specific
functions upon exiting a mode.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(h) Multi-game. If multiple games are
offered for player selection at the player
interface, the player interface shall:
(1) Provide a display of available
games;
(2) Provide the means of selecting
among them;
(3) Display the full amount of the
player’s credit balance;
(4) Identify the game selected or being
played; and
(5) Not force the play of a game after
its selection.
(i) Program interruption and
resumption. The Class II gaming system
software shall be designed so that upon
resumption following any interruption,
the system:
(1) Is able to return to a known state;
(2) Shall check for any fault condition
upon resumption;
(3) Shall verify the integrity of data
stored in critical memory;
(4) Shall return the purchase or wager
amount to the player in accordance with
the rules of the game; and
(5) Shall detect any change or
corruption in the Class II gaming system
software.
(j) Class II gaming system components
acting as progressive controllers. This
paragraph applies to progressive
controllers and components acting as
progressive controllers in Class II
gaming systems.
(1) Modification of progressive
parameters shall be conducted in a
secure manner approved by the tribal
gaming regulatory authority. Such
parameters may include:
(i) Increment value;
(ii) Secondary pool increment(s);
(iii) Reset amount(s);
(iv) Maximum value(s); and
(v) Identity of participating player
interfaces.
(2) The Class II gaming system
component or other progressive
controller shall provide a means of
creating a progressive balancing report
for each progressive link it controls. At
a minimum, that report shall provide
balancing of the changes of the
progressive amount, including
progressive prizes won, for all
participating player interfaces versus
current progressive amount(s), plus
progressive prizes. In addition, the
report shall account for, and not be
made inaccurate by, unusual events
such as:
(i) Class II gaming system critical
memory clears;
(ii) Modification, alteration, or
deletion of progressive prizes;
(iii) Offline equipment; or
(iv) Multiple site progressive prizes.
(k) Critical memory. (1) Critical
memory may be located anywhere
within the Class II gaming system.
Critical memory is any memory that
maintains any of the following data:
(i) Accounting data;
(ii) Current credits;
(iii) Configuration data;
(iv) Last game recall information
required by § 547.8(d);
(v) Game recall information for the
current game, if incomplete;
(vi) Software state (the last normal
state software was in before
interruption);
(vii) RNG seed(s), if necessary for
maintaining integrity;
(viii) Encryption keys, if necessary for
maintaining integrity;
(ix) Progressive prize parameters and
current values;
60519
(x) The five most recent financial
instruments accepted by type, excluding
coins and tokens;
(xi) The five most recent financial
instruments dispensed by type,
excluding coins and tokens; and
(xii) The five most recent cashless
transactions paid and the five most
recent cashless transactions accepted.
(2) Critical memory shall be
maintained using a methodology that
enables errors to be identified and acted
upon. All accounting and recall
functions shall be verified as necessary
to ensure their ongoing integrity.
(3) The validity of affected data stored
in critical memory shall be checked
after each of the following events:
(i) Every restart;
(ii) Each attendant paid win;
(iii) Each attendant paid progressive
win;
(iv) Each sensored door closure; and
(v) Every reconfiguration, download,
or change of prize schedule or
denomination requiring operator
intervention or action.
(l) Secured access. Class II gaming
systems that use a logon or other means
of secured access shall include a user
account lockout after a predetermined
number of consecutive failed attempts
to access system.
§ 547.9 What are the minimum technical
standards for Class II gaming system
accounting functions?
This section provides standards for
accounting functions used in Class II
gaming systems.
(a) Required accounting data. The
following minimum accounting data,
however named, shall be maintained by
the Class II gaming system.
Title
Description
(1) Amount In ............
The total value of all financial instruments and cashless transactions accepted by the Class II gaming system. Each type
of financial instrument accepted by the Class II gaming system shall be tracked independently, and as required by applicable requirements of any Commission and tribal gaming regulatory authority regulations governing minimum internal control standards.
The total value of all financial instruments and cashless transactions paid by the Class II gaming system, plus the total
value of attendant pay. Each type of financial instrument paid by the Class II Gaming System shall be tracked independently, and as required by applicable requirements of any Commission and tribal gaming regulatory authority regulations governing minimum internal control standards.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
(2) Amount Out ..........
(b) Accounting data storage. If the
Class II gaming system electronically
maintains accounting data:
(1) Accounting data shall be stored
with at least eight decimal digits.
(2) Credit balances shall have
sufficient digits to accommodate the
design of the game.
(3) Accounting data displayed to the
player may be incremented or
decremented using visual effects, but
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
the internal storage of this data shall be
immediately updated in full.
(4) Accounting data shall be updated
upon the occurrence of the relevant
accounting event.
(5) Modifications to accounting data
shall be recorded, including the identity
of the person(s) making the
modifications, and be reportable by the
Class II gaming system.
(c) Rollover. Accounting data that
rolls over to zero shall not corrupt data.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(d) Credit balance display and
function. (1) Any credit balance
maintained at the player interface shall
be prominently displayed at all times
except:
(i) In audit, configuration, recall and
test modes; or
(ii) Temporarily, during alternate
displays of game results.
(2) Progressive prizes may be added to
the player’s credit balance provided:
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
60520
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(i) The player credit balance is
maintained in dollars and cents;
(ii) The progressive accounting data is
incremented in number of credits; or
(iii) The prize in dollars and cents is
converted to player credits or
transferred to the player’s credit balance
in a manner that does not mislead the
player or cause accounting imbalances.
(3) If the player credit balance
displays in credits, but the actual
balance includes fractional credits, the
Class II gaming system shall display the
fractional credit when the player credit
balance drops below one credit.
§ 547.10 What are the minimum standards
for Class II gaming system critical events?
This section provides standards for
events such as system critical faults,
deactivation, door open or other
changes of states, and lockup within the
Class II gaming system.
(a) Fault events. (1) The following
events are to be treated as described
below:
Events
Definition and action to be taken
(i) Component fault .........................
Reported when a fault on a component is detected. When possible, this event message should indicate
what the nature of the fault is.
Reported when a financial instrument acceptor or dispenser includes storage, and it becomes full. This
event message should indicate what financial storage component is full.
Reported when a financial instrument dispenser is empty. The event message should indicate which financial output component is affected, and whether it is empty.
Reported when an occurrence on a financial component results in a known fault state.
Some critical memory error has occurred. When a non-correctable critical memory error has occurred, the
data on the Class II gaming system component can no longer be considered reliable. Accordingly, any
game play on the affected component shall cease immediately, and an appropriate message shall be
displayed, if possible.
If applicable; when communications with a progressive controller component is in a known fault state.
(ii) Financial storage component full
(iii) Financial output component
empty.
(iv) Financial component fault .........
(v) Critical memory error .................
(vi) Progressive communication
fault.
(vii) Program storage medium fault
The software has failed its own internal security check or the medium itself has some fault. Any game play
on the affected component shall cease immediately, and an appropriate message shall be displayed, if
possible.
(2) The occurrence of any event
identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section shall be recorded.
(3) Upon clearing any event identified
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the
Class II gaming system shall:
(i) Record that the fault condition has
been cleared;
(ii) Ensure the integrity of all related
accounting data; and
(iii) In the case of a malfunction,
return a player’s purchase or wager
according to the rules of the game.
(b) Door open/close events. (1) In
addition to the requirements of
paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the Class
II gaming system shall perform the
following for any component affected by
any sensored door open event:
(i) Indicate that the state of a sensored
door changes from closed to open or
opened to closed;
(ii) Disable all financial instrument
acceptance, unless a test mode is
entered;
(iii) Disable game play on the affected
player interface;
(iv) Disable player inputs on the
affected player interface, unless test
mode is entered; and
(v) Disable all financial instrument
disbursement, unless a test mode is
entered.
(2) The Class II gaming system may
return the component to a ready to play
state when all sensored doors are
closed.
(c) Non-fault events. The following
non-fault events are to be treated as
described below, if applicable:
Event
Definition and action to be taken
(1) Player interface power off during play.
(2) Player interface power on .........
(3) Financial instrument storage
component container/stacker removed.
This condition is reported by the affected component(s) to indicate power has been lost during game play.
This condition is reported by the affected component(s) to indicate it has been turned on.
This condition is reported when a financial instrument storage container has been removed. The event
message should indicate which storage container was removed.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
§ 547.11 What are the minimum technical
standards for money and credit handling?
This section provides standards for
money and credit handling by a Class II
gaming system.
(a) Credit acceptance, generally. (1)
Upon any credit acceptance, the Class II
gaming system shall register the correct
number of credits on the player’s credit
balance.
(2) The Class II gaming system shall
reject financial instruments deemed
invalid.
(b) Credit redemption, generally. (1)
For cashable credits on a player
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
interface, players shall be allowed to
cash out and/or redeem those credits at
the player interface except when that
player interface is:
(i) Involved in the play of a game;
(ii) In audit mode, recall mode or any
test mode;
(iii) Detecting any sensored door open
condition;
(iv) Updating the player credit
balance or total win accounting data; or
(v) Displaying a fault condition that
would prevent cash-out or credit
redemption. In this case a fault
indication shall be displayed.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(2) For cashable credits not on a
player interface, the player shall be
allowed to cash out and/or redeem those
credits at any time.
(3) A Class II gaming system shall not
automatically pay an award subject to
mandatory tax reporting or withholding.
(4) Credit redemption by voucher or
coupon shall conform to the following:
(i) A Class II gaming system may
redeem credits by issuing a voucher or
coupon when it communicates with a
voucher system that validates the
voucher or coupon.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(ii) A Class II gaming system that
redeems credits by issuing vouchers and
coupons shall either:
(A) Maintain an electronic record of
all information required by paragraphs
(b)(5)(ii) through (vi) of this section; or
(B) Generate two identical copies of
each voucher or coupon issued, one to
be provided to the player and the other
to be retained within the machine for
audit purposes.
(5) Valid vouchers and coupons shall
contain the following:
(i) Gaming operation name and
location;
(ii) The identification number of the
Class II gaming system component or
the player interface number, as
applicable;
(iii) Date and time of issuance;
(iv) Alpha and numeric dollar
amount;
(v) A sequence number;
(vi) A validation number that:
(A) Is produced by a means
specifically designed to prevent
repetition of validation numbers; and
(B) Has some form of checkcode or
other form of information redundancy to
prevent prediction of subsequent
validation numbers without knowledge
of the checkcode algorithm and
parameters;
(vii) For machine-readable vouchers
and coupons, a bar code or other form
of machine readable representation of
the validation number, which shall have
enough redundancy and error checking
to ensure that 99.9% of all misreads are
flagged as errors;
(viii) Transaction type or other
method of differentiating voucher and
coupon types; and
(ix) Expiration period or date.
(6) Transfers from an account may not
exceed the balance of that account.
(7) For Class II gaming systems not
using dollars and cents accounting and
not having odd cents accounting, the
Class II gaming system shall reject any
transfers from voucher payment systems
or cashless systems that are not even
multiples of the Class II gaming system
denomination.
(8) Voucher redemption systems shall
include the ability to report
redemptions per redemption location or
user.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
§ 547.12 What are the minimum technical
standards for downloading on a Class II
gaming system?
This section provides standards for
downloading on a Class II gaming
system.
(a) Downloads. (1) Downloads are an
acceptable means of transporting
approved content, including but not
limited to software, files, data, and prize
schedules.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
(2) Downloads of software, games,
prize schedules, or other download
packages shall be conducted only as
authorized by the tribal gaming
regulatory authority.
(3) Downloads shall use secure
methodologies that will deliver the
download data without alteration or
modification, in accordance with
§ 547.15(a).
(4) Downloads conducted during
operational periods shall be performed
in a manner that will not affect game
play.
(5) Downloads shall not affect the
integrity of accounting data.
(6) The Class II gaming system or the
tribal gaming regulatory authority shall
log each download of any download
package. Each log record shall contain
as a minimum:
(i) The time and date of the initiation
of the download;
(ii) The time and date of the
completion of the download;
(iii) The Class II gaming system
components to which software was
downloaded;
(iv) The version(s) of download
package and any software downloaded.
Logging of the unique software signature
will satisfy this requirement;
(v) The outcome of any software
verification following the download
(success or failure); and
(vi) The name and identification
number, or other unique identifier, of
any individual(s) conducting or
scheduling a download.
(b) Verifying downloads. Following
download of any game software, the
Class II gaming system shall verify the
downloaded software using a software
signature verification method that meets
the requirements of § 547.8(f). The tribal
gaming regulatory authority shall
confirm the verification.
§ 547.13 What are the minimum technical
standards for program storage media?
This section provides minimum
standards for removable, (re-)writable,
and non-writable storage media in Class
II gaming systems.
(a) Removable program storage media.
All removable program storage media
shall maintain an internal checksum or
signature of its contents. Verification of
this checksum or signature is to be
performed after every restart. If the
verification fails, the affected Class II
gaming system component(s) shall lock
up and enter a fault state.
(b) Non-rewritable program storage
media. (1) All EPROMs and
Programmable Logic Devices (PLDs) that
have erasure windows shall be fitted
with covers over their erasure windows.
(2) All unused areas of EPROMs shall
be written with the inverse of the erased
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
60521
state (e.g., zero bits (00 hex) for most
EPROMs), random data, or repeats of the
program data.
(3) Flash memory storage components
intended to have the same logical
function as ROM, i.e. not to be
dynamically written, shall be writeprotected or otherwise protected from
unauthorized modification.
(4) The write cycle shall be closed or
finished for all CD-ROMs such that it is
not possible to write any further data to
the CD.
(5) Write protected hard disks are
permitted if the means of enabling the
write protect is easily viewable and can
be sealed in place.
(c) Writable and rewritable program
storage media. (1) Writable and
rewritable program storage, such as hard
disk drives, Flash memory, writable CDROMs, and writable DVDs, may be used
provided that the software stored
thereon may be verified using the
mechanism provided pursuant to
§ 547.8(f).
(2) Program storage shall be structured
so there is a verifiable separation of
fixed data (e.g. program, fixed
parameters, DLLs) and variable data.
(d) Identification of program storage
media. (1) All program storage media
that is not re-writable in circuit, (e.g.
EPROM, CD–ROM) shall be uniquely
identified, displaying:
(i) Manufacturer;
(ii) Program identifier;
(iii) Program version number(s); and
(iv) Location information, if critical
(e.g. socket position 3 on the printed
circuit board).
§ 547.14 What are the minimum technical
standards for electronic random number
generation?
This section provides minimum
standards for electronic RNGs in Class
II gaming systems.
(a) Properties. (1) All RNGs shall
produce output having the following
properties:
(i) Statistical randomness;
(ii) Unpredictability; and
(iii) Non-repeatability.
(b) Statistical Randomness. (1)
Numbers produced by an RNG shall be
statistically random individually and in
the permutations and combinations
used in the application under the rules
of the game. For example, if a bingo
game with 75 objects with numbers or
other designations has a progressive
winning pattern of the five numbers or
other designations on the bottom of the
card and the winning of this prize is
defined to be the five numbers or other
designations are matched in the first
five objects drawn, the likelihood of
each of the 75C5 combinations are to be
verified to be statistically equal.
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
60522
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(2) Numbers produced by an RNG
shall pass the statistical tests for
randomness to a 99% confidence level,
which may include:
(i) Chi-square test;
(ii) Equi-distribution (frequency) test;
(iii) Gap test;
(iv) Poker test;
(v) Coupon collector’s test;
(vi) Permutation test;
(vii) Run test (patterns of occurrences
shall not be recurrent);
(viii) Spectral test;
(ix) Serial correlation test potency and
degree of serial correlation (outcomes
shall be independent from the previous
game); and
(x) Test on subsequences.
(c) Unpredictability. (1) It shall not be
feasible to predict future outputs of an
RNG, even if the algorithm and the past
sequence of outputs are known.
(2) Unpredictability shall be ensured
by re-seeding or by continuously cycling
the RNG, and by providing a sufficient
number of RNG states for the
applications supported.
(3) Re-seeding may be used where the
re-seeding input is at least as
statistically random as, and
independent of, the output of the RNG
being re-seeded.
(d) Non-repeatability. The RNG shall
not be initialized to reproduce the same
output stream that it has produced
before, nor shall any two instances of an
RNG produce the same stream as each
other. This property shall be ensured by
initial seeding that comes from:
(1) A source of ‘‘true’’ randomness,
such as a hardware random noise
generator; or
(2) A combination of timestamps,
parameters unique to a Class II gaming
system, previous RNG outputs, or other,
similar method.
(e) General requirements. (1) Software
that calls an RNG to derive game
outcome events shall immediately use
the output returned in accordance with
the game rules.
(2) The use of multiple RNGs is
permitted as long as they operate in
accordance with this section.
(3) RNG outputs shall not be
arbitrarily discarded or selected.
(4) Where a sequence of outputs is
required, the whole of the sequence in
the order generated shall be used in
accordance with the game rules.
(5) The Class II gaming system shall
neither adjust the RNG process or game
outcomes based on the history of prizes
obtained in previous games nor make
any reflexive or secondary decision that
affects the results shown to the player
or game outcome. Nothing in this
paragraph shall prohibit the use of
alternative displays.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
(f) Scaling algorithms and scaled
numbers. An RNG that provides output
scaled to given ranges shall:
(1) Be independent and uniform over
the range;
(2) Provide numbers scaled to the
ranges required by game rules, and
notwithstanding the requirements of
paragraph (e)(3) of this section, may
discard numbers that do not map
uniformly onto the required range but
shall use the first number in sequence
which does map correctly to the range;
(3) Be capable of producing every
possible outcome of a game according to
its rules; and
(4) Use an unbiased algorithm. A
scaling algorithm is considered to be
unbiased if the measured bias is no
greater than 1 in 100 million.
§ 547.15 What are the minimum technical
standards for electronic data
communications between system
components?
This section provides minimum
standards for electronic data
communications with gaming
equipment or components used with
Class II gaming systems.
(a) Sensitive data. Communication of
sensitive data shall be secure from
eavesdropping, access, tampering,
intrusion or alteration unauthorized by
the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
Sensitive data shall include, but not be
limited to:
(1) RNG seeds and outcomes;
(2) Encryption keys, where the
implementation chosen requires
transmission of keys;
(3) PINs;
(4) Passwords;
(5) Financial instrument transactions;
(6) Transfers of funds;
(7) Player tracking information;
(8) Download Packages; and
(9) Any information that affects game
outcome.
(b) Wireless communications. (1)
Wireless access points shall not be
accessible to the general public.
(2) Open or unsecured wireless
communications are prohibited.
(3) Wireless communications shall be
secured using a methodology that makes
eavesdropping, access, tampering,
intrusion or alteration impractical. By
way of illustration, such methodologies
include encryption, frequency hopping,
and code division multiplex access (as
in cell phone technology).
(c) Methodologies shall be used that
will ensure the reliable transfer of data
and provide a reasonable ability to
detect and act upon any corruption of
the data.
(d) Class II gaming systems shall
record detectable, unauthorized access
or intrusion attempts.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(e) Remote communications shall only
be allowed if authorized by the tribal
gaming regulatory authority. Class II
gaming systems shall have the ability to
enable or disable remote access, and the
default state shall be set to disabled.
(f) Failure of data communications
shall not affect the integrity of critical
memory.
(g) The Class II gaming system shall
log the establishment, loss, and reestablishment of data communications
between sensitive Class II gaming
system components.
§ 547.16 What are the minimum standards
for game artwork, glass, and rules?
This section provides standards for
the display of game artwork, the
displays on belly or top glass, and the
display and disclosure of game rules,
whether in physical or electronic form.
(a) Rules, instructions, and prize
schedules, generally. The following
shall at all times be displayed or made
readily available to the player upon
request:
(1) Game name, rules, and options
such as the purchase or wager amount
stated clearly and unambiguously;
(2) Denomination;
(3) Instructions for play on, and use
of, the player interface, including the
functions of all buttons; and
(4) A prize schedule or other
explanation, sufficient to allow a player
to determine the correctness of all prizes
awarded, including;
(i) The range and values obtainable for
any variable prize;
(ii) Whether the value of a prize
depends on the purchase or wager
amount; and
(iii) The means of division of any
pari-mutuel prizes; but
(iv) For bingo and games similar to
bingo, the prize schedule or other
explanation need not state that subsets
of winning patterns are not awarded as
additional prizes (e.g. five in a row does
not also pay three in a row or four in
a row), unless there are exceptions,
which shall be clearly stated.
(b) Disclaimers. The Class II gaming
system shall continually display:
(1) ‘‘Malfunctions void all prizes and
plays’’ or equivalent; and
(2) ‘‘Actual Prizes Determined by
Bingo [or other applicable Class II game]
Play. Other Displays for Entertainment
Only.’’ or equivalent.
§ 547.17 How does a gaming operation
apply for a variance from these standards?
(a) Tribal Gaming Regulatory
Authority approval. (1) A tribal gaming
regulatory authority may approve a
variance from the requirements of this
part if it has determined that the
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS2
variance will achieve a level of security
and integrity sufficient to accomplish
the purpose of the standard it is to
replace.
(2) For each enumerated standard for
which the tribal gaming regulatory
authority approves a variance, it shall
submit to the Chairman within 30 days,
a detailed report, which shall include
the following:
(i) An explanation of how the
variance achieves a level of security and
integrity sufficient to accomplish the
purpose of the standard it is to replace;
and
(ii) The variance as granted and the
record on which it is based.
(3) In the event that the tribal gaming
regulatory authority or the tribe’s
government chooses to submit a
variance request directly to the
Chairman for joint government to
government review, the tribal gaming
regulatory authority or tribal
government may do so without the
approval requirement set forth in
paragraph (a) (1) of this section.
(b) Chairman Review. (1) The
Chairman may approve or object to a
variance granted by a tribal gaming
regulatory authority.
(2) Any objection by the Chairman
shall be in written form with an
explanation why the variance as
approved by the tribal gaming
regulatory authority does not provide a
level of security or integrity sufficient to
accomplish the purpose of the standard
it is to replace.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:47 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
(3) If the Chairman fails to approve or
object in writing within 60 days after
the date of receipt of a complete
submission, the variance shall be
considered approved by the Chairman.
The Chairman and the tribal gaming
regulatory authority may, by agreement,
extend this deadline an additional 60
days.
(4) No variance may be implemented
until approved by the tribal gaming
regulatory authority pursuant to
paragraph (a)(1) of this section or the
Chairman has approved pursuant to
paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(c) Commission Review. (1) Should
the tribal gaming regulatory authority
elect to maintain its approval after
written objection by the Chairman, the
tribal gaming regulatory authority shall
be entitled to an appeal to the full
Commission in accordance with the
following process:
(i) Within 60 days of receiving an
objection, the tribal gaming regulatory
authority shall file a written notice of
appeal with the Commission which may
include a request for an oral hearing or
it may request that the matter be
decided upon written submissions.
(ii) Within 10 days after filing a notice
of appeal the tribal gaming regulatory
authority shall file a supplemental
statement specifying the reasons why
the tribal gaming regulatory authority
believes the Chairman’s objection
should be reviewed, and shall include
supporting documentation, if any.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
60523
(iii) Failure to file an appeal or submit
the supplemental statement within the
time provided by this section shall
result in a waiver of the opportunity for
an appeal.
(iv) If an oral hearing is requested it
shall take place within 30 days of the
notice of appeal and a record shall be
made.
(v) If the tribal gaming regulatory
authority requests that the appeal be
decided on the basis of written
submission, the Commission shall issue
a written decision within 30 days of
receiving the supplemental statement
(vi) The Commission shall issue a
decision within 30 days of the oral
hearing. The Commission shall uphold
the objection of the Chairman, only if,
upon de novo review of the record upon
which the Chairman’s decision is based,
the Commission determines that the
variance approved by the tribal gaming
regulatory authority does not achieve a
level of security and integrity sufficient
to accomplish the purpose of the
standard it is to replace.
(vii) The Commission’s decision shall
constitute final agency action.
Dated: October 17, 2007.
Philip N. Hogen,
Chairman
Cloyce V. Choney,
Vice Chairman
Norman H. DesRosiers
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. E7–20789 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
E:\FR\FM\24OCP2.SGM
24OCP2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 24, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60508-60523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20789]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Part 547
RIN 3141-AA29
Technical Standards for Electronic, Computer, or Other
Technologic Aids Used in the Play of Class II Games
AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission, Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed rule would add a new part to the Commission's
regulations establishing technical standards for Class II games--bingo,
lotto, other games similar to bingo, pull tabs, or ``instant bingo''--
that are played using ``electronic, computer, or other technologic
aids.'' The proposed rule would also establish a process for ensuring
the integrity of such games and aids before their placement in a Class
II tribal gaming operation. No such standards currently exist. The
Commission proposes this action in order to assist tribal gaming
regulatory authorities and operators in ensuring the integrity and
security of Class II games and the accountability of gaming revenue.
DATES: Submit comments on or before December 10, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Mail comments to ``Comments on Technical Standards,''
National Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Washington, DC
20005, Attn: Michael Gross, Associate General Counsel, General Law.
Comments may be transmitted by facsimile to 202-632-7066, but the
original also must be mailed or submitted to the above address.
Comments may be sent electronically, instead of by mail or fax, to
technical_standards@nigc.gov. Please indicate ``Class II technical
regulations'' in the subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Gross, Associate General
Counsel, General Law, Office of General Counsel, telephone:
202.632.7003. This is not a toll free call.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2701-21 (``IGRA''),
enacted by the Congress in 1988, establishes the National Indian Gaming
Commission (``NIGC'' or ``Commission'') and sets out a comprehensive
framework for the regulation of gaming on Indian lands. IGRA
establishes three classes of Indian gaming.
``Class I gaming'' means social games played solely for prizes of
minimal value or traditional forms of Indian gaming played in
connection with tribal ceremonies or celebrations. 25 U.S.C. 2703(6).
Indian tribes regulate Class I gaming exclusively.
``Class II gaming'' means the game of chance commonly known as
bingo, whether or not electronic, computer, or other technologic aids
are used in connection therewith, including, if played in the same
location, pull-tabs, lotto, punch boards, tip jars, instant bingo, and
other games similar to bingo, as well as various non-house-banked card
games. 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(A). Specifically excluded from Class II gaming
are banking card games such as blackjack, electronic or
electromechanical facsimiles of any game of chance, and slot machines
of any kind. 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(B). Indian tribes and the NIGC share
regulatory authority over Class II gaming. Indian tribes can engage in
Class II gaming without any state involvement.
``Class III gaming'' includes all forms of gaming that are not
Class I gaming or Class II gaming. 25 U.S.C. 2703(8). Class III gaming
thus includes all other games of chance, including lotteries and most
forms of casino gaming, such as slot machines, roulette, and banking
card games like blackjack. Class III gaming may be conducted lawfully
only if the tribe and the state in which the tribe is located enter
into a tribal-state compact for such gaming. Alternatively, a tribe may
operate Class III gaming under gaming procedures issued by the
Secretary of the Interior. Because of the compact requirement, states,
Indian tribes, and the NIGC possess regulatory authority over Class III
gaming. In addition, the United States Department of Justice possesses
exclusive criminal, and certain civil, jurisdiction over Class III
gaming on Indian lands.
The Commission has determined that it is in the best interests of
Indian gaming to adopt technical standards that govern the
implementation of electronic, computer, and other technologic aids used
in the play of Class II games because no such standards currently
exist. The technical standards seek to provide a means for tribal
gaming regulatory authorities and tribal operators to ensure that the
integrity of Class II games played with the use of electronic,
computer, or other technologic aids is maintained; that the games and
aids are secure; and that the games and aids are fully auditable, i.e.
that they provide a means for the gaming authority and gaming operation
to account for all gaming revenue.
Development of the Proposed Rule
The development of the proposed rule began formally with the March
31, 2004, appointment of an advisory committee comprised of tribal
government representatives with substantial experience and expertise in
gaming regulation and operations, the Commission, and Commission staff.
Although the Commission initially intended to develop one set of
regulations, this committee's work ultimately resulted in the
Commission's publication of a proposed rule for Class II classification
standards, 71 FR 30238 (May 25, 2006), and a separate proposed rule for
Class II technical standards, 71 FR 46336 (August 11, 2006). A detailed
history of the advisory committee's work on the technical standards to
that point, its meetings, the Commission's consultations with Indian
tribes, and the contributions and participation of the interested
general public is published in the preamble to that proposed rule. 71
FR 46336-46337.
The ultimate goal of that first set of technical standards was as
it is here--to ensure the security and integrity of Class II games
played with technologic aids and to ensure the auditability of the
gaming revenue that those games earn.
[[Page 60509]]
It was also the intention of that first set of technical standards to
allow for flexibility in the implementation of technology and not to
prohibit the use of future technologies unforeseen and as yet
undeveloped.
Given the importance of the regulations to the industry, the
Commission, which had initially set a comment period of 45 days,
reopened the comment period for an additional 76 days, from November
15, 2006, through January 31, 2007. 71 FR 71115 (December 8, 2006); 71
FR 76618 (December 21, 2006).
Public comments made it clear to the Commission that the first set
of proposed technical standards fell short of its goal of technological
flexibility. In particular, commenters stated that the first set of
proposed technical standards would mandate particular implementations
of technology and that some of those were not practical or feasible.
Commenters suggested that rather than prescribe particular
implementations of technology, the standards should describe the
regulatory outcomes that the Commission desires and leave it to the
manufacturers to develop ways of meeting those regulatory requirements.
At a December 5, 2006, advisory committee meeting in Washington,
DC, the tribal representatives to the advisory committee strongly
seconded this sentiment. The details of the solution, however, were not
immediately apparent. Before providing further advice to the
Commission, the tribal representatives wished to consult further with
other tribal representatives and regulators, and with industry
representatives. They therefore suggested that they assemble a working
group made up of representatives from the Class II gaming industry--
tribal operators, tribal regulators, and manufacturers alike--to assist
it. Accepting the fundamental premise that the technical standards
ought to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, the Commission agreed
to allow the tribal representatives to work independently of the
Commission to redraft the technical standards. Subsequently, the
Commission withdrew the first proposed technical standards. 72 FR 7360
(February 15, 2007).
The tribal representatives to the advisory committee formed a
working group, which met at various times, in person and
telephonically, from the end of 2006 through the middle of 2007 to
draft this new set of technical standards. The Commission did not
participate in the establishment of this working group. On some
occasions, the tribal representatives invited the participation of
Commission staff members to answer questions and to provide explanation
about the Commission's regulatory goals. Commission staff participated
in this capacity during in-person meetings on December 11-12, 2006, in
Las Vegas, Nevada, and June 5, 2007, in Dallas, Texas.
The full advisory committee, including the Commission, met to
discuss drafts of proposed technical standards on February 22, 2007, in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 26, 2007, in Seattle, Washington, and
May 22, 2007, in Bloomington, Minnesota. All of these meetings were
open to the interested public.
The Commission is immensely grateful to the tribal representatives
on the advisory committee and to those who assisted the tribal
representatives for all of their hard work and for the high-quality
draft regulations that resulted from their efforts. The proposed rule
is largely adopted from the final draft of descriptive technical
standards, which was delivered to the Commission by the tribal
representatives to the advisory committee on June 18, 2006.
There are places, of course, where the Commission felt it could not
accept the draft's recommendations and has proposed rules more
stringent than the tribal representatives to the advisory committee
would have preferred. One such area of disagreement concerns the recall
and tracking of alternative displays.
It is a common practice for bingo games played using electronic
player stations to provide alternative display of game results above
and beyond the numbers marked and patterns obtained on a bingo card.
Most frequently, these alternative displays take the form of spinning
reels such as one would find on slot machines. A winning bingo pattern,
for example, might also be displayed as a winning combination of
symbols on the reels. The Commission regards such alternative displays
as perfectly permissible, provided that it is the bingo game, and not
the spinning reels, that determine the player's results.
The technical standards require a last game recall function to be
able to display alternative results as well as the actual game results,
if a Class II gaming system has a last game recall. The tribal
representatives to the advisory committee have said that they regard
the requirement as both unnecessary, since the alternative displays do
not determine game results, and beyond the scope of the Commission's
authority.
The Commission, however, regards recall of alternative displays as
an important part of safeguarding the integrity of gaming,
notwithstanding the fact that alternate displays do not determine, and
are not relevant to, the outcome of the game. The fact remains,
however, that the alternative displays are the source of many patron
disputes, and providing for their automatic recall provides to tribal
gaming regulatory authorities information essential to resolving such
disputes quickly, completely, and fairly. Over and above this, it is
the Commission's understanding that many manufacturers already include
alternative displays in their recall functions, or could easily do so.
Purpose and Scope
The proposed part 547 applies to all Class II games played using
electronic, computer, or other technologic aids, or modifications of
such games and aids. Class II games played through such technologic
aids are widely used in Indian gaming operations, yet no uniform
standards exist to govern their implementation. The proposed rule seeks
to remedy that absence and create a regulatory structure under which
tribal gaming regulatory authorities and tribal operators are able to
ensure the integrity and security of Class II games played with the use
of electronic, computer, or other technologic aids and the auditability
of gaming revenue.
There is a great variety in the technologic aids used in the play
of Class II games and, therefore, a great variety in the means used to
play the games. An operation may, for example, play bingo using no aids
at all. A caller may select numbers using ping pong balls taken from a
hopper, and players purchase paper cards from an employee of the
operation and mark them with an inked dauber. Alternatively, numbers
may be selected randomly using an electronic random number generator,
which in turn displays the selected number on a display board. Instead
of paper, players may use electronic handheld devices to monitor and
mark their cards. The handheld devices are purchased and have cards
loaded on them at a point-of-sale retail terminal.
Still again, bingo may be implemented electronically on client-
server architectures. A common arrangement, but by no means the only
one possible, is to have client machines on the casino floor as
electronic player stations. These display bingo cards, allow the
players to cover numbers when drawn, and pay any prizes won. The
server, usually located off the floor, draws random numbers and passes
them along data communications lines to the client machines for game
play. Credits may be placed on the electronic player station by
inserting cash or
[[Page 60510]]
electronically drawing down an account separately established.
The challenge, then, for writing technical standards is to address
all of the various ways that Class II games can be played. Central to
the proposed rule, therefore, is the definition of ``Class II gaming
system,'' which refers to any given collection of components used in
the play of a II game: ``All components, whether or not technologic
aids in electronic, computer, mechanical or other technologic form,
that function together to aid the play of one or more Class II games,
including accounting functions mandated by these regulations.'' The
notion of the ``gaming system'' thus encompasses bingo played in all of
the implementations described above.
It is the ``gaming system'' that must meet the technical standards
of the proposed part 547. Like the gaming system itself, the standards
are conceived generally so that they may be met by a gaming system,
regardless of the particular components that may comprise it. For
example, the proposed rule does not refer to ``bill validators,'' an
electronic device into which a patron may insert a bill in order to
place credits on a gaming machine. Instead, proposed part 547 describes
``financial instrument acceptors'' and the standards they must meet.
``Financial instrument acceptor'' is broad enough in meaning to
encompass not only ``bill validator'' but also a cash drawer staffed by
an employee of the gaming operation. Proposed part 547 provides minimum
standards for the security of the ``acceptors'' and of the money or
vouchers (generally, ``financial instruments'') they accept.
Further, because of the breadth of possible implementations for
Class II gaming systems, proposed part 547 requires that gaming
equipment and software used with Class II gaming systems meet the
requirements of the part, but only those that are applicable to the
system as implemented. This is, in short, a rule of construction of
common sense. For example, if a system takes only cash and lacks the
ability to print or accept vouchers, then any standards that apply to
vouchers do not apply.
All of that said, the proposed rule deliberately provides only
minimum standards. Tribes and tribal gaming regulatory authorities may
add any additional requirements, or more stringent requirements, needed
to suit their particular circumstances.
In order to ensure compliance with the technical standards, the
proposed rule borrows from the established practices of tribal, state,
and provincial gaming jurisdictions across North America. The proposed
rule establishes, as a necessary prerequisite to a gaming system being
offered to the public for play in a Class II gaming operation, review
of the system by a qualified, independent testing laboratory and
approval by the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
Under the proposed rule, a tribe's gaming regulatory authority will
require all Class II gaming systems, or modifications thereof, to be
submitted to a testing laboratory for review and analysis. That
submission includes a working prototype of the gaming system or
modification, all pertinent software, and anything else the testing
laboratory needs for its complete and thorough review. In turn, the
laboratory will review whether the gaming system does or does not meet
the requirements of the rule, as well as any additional requirements
adopted by the tribe's gaming regulatory authority. The laboratory will
provide a written report of its analysis and conclusions to the tribal
gaming regulatory authority for approval or disapproval of the gaming
system or modification. The tribal gaming regulatory authority will
retain the report as long as the gaming system or modification in
question remains available to the public for play.
The Commission understands that existing Class II gaming systems
likely do not meet all of the requirements of the proposed rule. In
order to avoid the potentially significant economic and practical
consequences of requiring immediate compliance, the proposed rule
implements a five-year ``grandfather period'' for existing gaming
systems.
Existing gaming systems may be grandfathered and exempt from
compliance with all of the requirements of the proposed rule if they
are put through a similar review by a qualified independent testing
laboratory and approved by a tribal gaming regulatory authority.
Specifically, in order to be eligible for grandfathering, a gaming
system must be submitted to a testing laboratory within 120 days of the
proposed part 547 becoming final. The testing laboratory must review
the gaming system for compliance with a specific, minimum set of
requirements--random number generation, no reflexive or secondary
decision-making after random numbers are drawn, the inability to change
bingo cards during the play of a game, and a mechanism for verifying
game software. The laboratory must issue a report on these issues to
the tribal gaming regulatory authority, which must make a finding that
the gaming system qualifies for grandfather status. Once a gaming
system is qualified, the manufacturer must label each player interface
on the system with its date of manufacture and certify the same to the
tribal gaming regulatory authority. This requirement effectively
freezes the number of grandfathered interfaces in use.
This is not to say, however, that grandfathered gaming systems must
remain entirely static. Tribal gaming regulatory authorities may permit
modifications to gaming system software or hardware that increases
compliance with the requirements of proposed part 547, even if the
modifications do not make the system wholly compliant. Tribal gaming
regulatory authorities may also authorize modifications to gaming
system software that does not detract from, compromise, or prejudice
the proper functioning, security or integrity of the Class II gaming
system and the system's overall compliance with the requirements of
proposed part 547. Changes such as new pay tables, new game themes, and
new alternative displays fall within this latter category.
Finally, the Commission does not intend for proposed part 547 to
stand alone. The advisory committee pointed out, and the Commission
agrees, that many of the functions placed in the technical standards
proposed on August 11, 2006, and now withdrawn, are more properly
characterized as minimum internal control standards for a gaming
operation. Accordingly, the Commission is simultaneously publishing, as
a separate proposed rule, a set of minimum internal control standards
for the play of bingo that is intended to be applied in conjunction
with the standards set forth in this proposed rule. In short, game
manufacturers and tribal gaming regulators must look to both sets of
rules for applicable standards for the construction and operation of
Class II gaming systems.
The Commission intends as well that these two parts be applied in
conjunction with a third proposed rule, also published simultaneously,
governing the classification of bingo and pull tabs and distinguishing
these Class II games played with technological aids from Class III
facsimiles of games of chance. References in the proposed part 547 to
``minimum internal control standards'' and ``classification standards''
refer to these two other sets of rules.
[[Page 60511]]
Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rule will not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities as defined under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. Indian tribes are not considered
small entities for the purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
It is not entirely clear whether the proposed rule, considered
separately and apart from the Commission's proposed part 546,
``Classification Standards for Bingo * * * Using `Electronic, Computer,
or Other Technologic Aids','' is a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.2, the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The NIGC has
commissioned an economic impact study of the two proposals taken
together. The study makes clear that the cost to the Indian gaming
industry of complying with the two proposed rules will have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more, at least for the first 5
years after adoption. Accordingly, the Commission treats the proposed
rule as a major rule. The economic impact study is available for review
at the Commission's Web site, https://www.nigc.gov, or by request using
the addresses or telephone numbers, above.
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. 658(1); 1502(1).
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the Commission has
determined that this proposed rule does not have significant takings
implications. A takings implication assessment is not required.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Commission's Office
of General Counsel has determined that the proposed rule does not
unduly burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule requires information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and is
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. The title,
description, and respondent categories are discussed below, together
with an estimate of the annual information collection burden.
With respect to the following collections of information, the
Commission invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collections of
information are 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
collections of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other
forms of information technology.
Title: Process for Certification of Electronic, Computer, or other
Technologic Aids used in the play of Class II games and process for
qualification of independent testing laboratories, proposed 25 CFR
547.4.
Summary of information and description of need: This provision in
the proposed rule establishes a process for ensuring that electronic,
computer, or other technologic aids used with the play of Class II
gaming systems have been reviewed and evaluated by a qualified,
independent testing laboratory prior to their approval by a tribal
gaming regulatory authority and their placement on the floor in a Class
II tribal gaming operation. The process helps to ensure the proper
functioning of the equipment and the integrity, fairness, and
auditability of games played.
The process requires a tribe's gaming regulatory authority to
require that all Class II gaming systems, or modifications thereto, be
submitted to a qualified, independent testing laboratory for review and
analysis. That submission includes a working prototype of the game and
aid, all pertinent software, and complete documentation and
descriptions of all functions and components. In turn, the laboratory
will determine that the gaming system does or does not meet the
requirements of the rule and any additional requirements adopted by the
tribe's gaming regulatory authority. The laboratory will provide a
written report of its analysis and conclusions to the tribal gaming
regulatory authority for its approval or disapproval of the gaming
system or modification. The tribal gaming regulatory authority will
retain the laboratory report as long as the gaming system or
modification remains available to the public for play.
This process is necessary to ensure the security and integrity of
Class II gaming. Technical standards such as those in the proposed rule
are a fundamental part of Class III gaming and of non-Indian casino
gaming throughout North America. No uniform standards exist for Class
II gaming, however. The implementation of such standards will assist
tribal gaming regulators in ensuring that games are implemented fairly,
that all technologic aids are secure and function properly, and that
the games and aids allow the tribe and the operator to properly account
for gaming revenue.
This provision in the proposed rule also contemplates an analogous
process for determining whether a Class II gaming system is eligible
for the five-year grandfather period made available by the proposed
rule. This process again requires a tribe's gaming regulatory authority
to require that a Class II gaming system be submitted, within 120 days
after the effective date of part 547, to a qualified, independent
testing laboratory for review and analysis. The submission must include
a working prototype of the game and aid, all pertinent software, and
complete documentation and descriptions of all functions and
components. In turn, the laboratory will determine that the gaming
system does or does not meet a small set of certain specified
requirements of the proposed rule. The laboratory will provide a
written report of its analysis and conclusions to the tribal gaming
regulatory authority for its finding that the gaming system is or is
not eligible for grandfather status. Upon a finding of eligibility, the
tribal gaming regulatory authority will issue a certificate to that
effect to the gaming system manufacturer and a description of the
grandfathered game to the Commission.
This process is necessary to ensure a certain minimum integrity and
security for games while at the same time avoiding potentially
significant economic and practical consequences of requiring immediate
and complete compliance with the standards of the proposed rule.
Finally, the proposed rule establishes a process for testing
laboratories to apply for eligibility to provide testing services under
the proposed rule. The testing laboratories must submit to suitability
determinations made by the tribes they serve, and these determinations
include criminal background checks for the laboratories'
[[Page 60512]]
principals. These determinations are made according to the same
standards used to license the primary management officials and key
employees of Indian gaming operations under the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act. All of this requires the submission by the laboratory
of corporate financial information; qualifications of the engineering
staff; information (and inspections) of the available engineering
facilities, and personal information for principals, including tax
returns, bankruptcies and law suits, work histories and references.
Given the essential role accorded to laboratories in ensuring the
integrity, security, and auditability of Class II games, this process
is essential to ensuring the competence, integrity, and independence of
the testing laboratories and the suitability of their decision makers,
i.e. to ensure that undesirable elements are kept out of gaming.
Respondents: The respondents are independent testing laboratories,
developers and manufacturers of Class II gaming systems, and Indian
tribes. The Commission estimates that there are currently 20 such
manufacturers, 5 such laboratories, and 226 gaming tribes. The
frequency of responses to the information collection requirement will
vary.
Information Collection Burden: In order to qualify under the
grandfather provisions of the proposed rule, a gaming system must be
submitted to a testing laboratory for review and analysis during the
first 120 days after the effective date of the final rule. The
Commission estimates that there are approximately 25 Class II gaming
systems in existence and that all will be submitted during this period.
Following the initial 120-day period, the frequency of submissions
of new gaming systems or of modifications to existing gaming systems
will be entirely market driven. The Commission anticipates
approximately a 20% turnover each year for the five-year grandfather
period. Consequently, there should be approximately five submissions of
new gaming systems each year.
Submissions of modifications are, as a matter of course, a more
common practice. Software in particular commonly goes through many
iterations in development and continues to be improved and revised even
after sale and placement on a gaming operation's floor. That said, the
submission of modifications tends to be sporadic, with less frequent or
occasional submissions punctuated by fairly steady periods of
submissions when new systems or modifications are introduced. The NIGC
anticipates there will be approximately 300 submissions of
modifications and thus 300 reports produced by testing laboratories
each year following the 120-day period that begins with the effective
date of the final rule.
The preparation and submission of supporting documentation by
manufacturers or a tribal gaming operation (as opposed to gaming system
hardware and software per se) is an information collection burden under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, as is the preparation of reports by the
test laboratories or the preparation of a grandfather certificate and
explanation of gaming system by a tribal gaming regulatory authority.
It is the existing practice in the gaming industry, both Indian and
non-Indian alike, for the game manufacturer to submit a gaming system
to a testing laboratory for review and analysis. The proposed rule
leaves open the possibility that a tribal gaming regulatory authority
may require the management of a gaming operation to make a required
submission. The Commission anticipates, however, that it will be the
responsibility of the gaming system manufacturers to make the
submissions to testing laboratories.
The amount of documentation submitted by a manufacturer as part of
a submission of a gaming system and the size of a laboratory report is
a function of the complexity of the gaming system submitted for review.
Submission for minor modifications of software or hardware that a
manufacturer has already submitted and that a laboratory has previously
examined will be a matter of little time both for manufacturer and
laboratory, while the submission and review of an entirely new game
platform will be time consuming. The provision of a grandfather
certificate and a description of a gaming systems component are small
matters as that information can be taken directly from a testing
laboratory's report.
The practice of submission and review set out in the proposed rule,
however, is not new. It is already part of the regulatory requirements
in tribal, state, and Canadian provincial gaming jurisdictions
throughout North America. Manufacturers already have significant
compliance personnel and infrastructure in place, and the very
existence of private, independent laboratories is due to these
requirements.
Accordingly, based upon the discussions with leading testing
laboratories and with manufacturers for the Indian gaming and non-
Indian gaming markets, the NIGC estimates that gathering and preparing
documentation for a submission of a single, complete gaming system will
require, on average, 8 hours for manufacturer's employee. Following
examination and analysis, NIGC estimates that writing a report for a
complete gaming system will require, on average, 10 hours of a
laboratory engineer's time. For the submission of modifications to a
gaming system, NIGC estimates 4 hours for a manufacturer's employee.
For the report on a modification, NIGC estimates 5 hours for a
laboratory engineer.
Thus, the information collection requirements will be a 200-hour
burden on manufacturers industry-wide during the first 120 days after
the final rule becomes effective and a 1200-hour burden industry-wide
thereafter. The information collection requirements will be a 250-hour
burden on laboratories for the grandfather submissions made during the
first 120 days and a 1500-hour burden thereafter.
Next, the Commission anticipates that tribal gaming regulatory
authorities will issue grandfather certificates to manufacturers and
send a description of grandfathered systems to the Commission for all
of the approximately 25 existing gaming systems. The preparation of
these certificates and descriptions will be a small matter as all of
the necessary information is contained in the testing laboratory
reports and will take no more than 0.5 hours to prepare.
Finally, the proposed rule requires tribal gaming regulatory
authorities to maintain laboratory reports as long as the game system
or modification at issue is available for play. This, however, is a
ministerial function that involves little more than filing, and
occasionally retrieving, the report. As this is already common practice
among tribal gaming regulatory authorities, the Commission estimates
that 0.1 hours per report will be dedicated to these tasks.
The following table summarizes the annual hour burden:
[[Page 60513]]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collections,
No. of Collections, Hours per Total day 121 Hours per Total
Provision Respondents respondents 1st 120 days collection annual forward, per collection annual
hours annum hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25 CFR 547.4............. Laboratories......... 5 25 10 250 300 5 1500
25 CFR 547.4............. Manufacturers........ 20 25 8 200 300 4 1200
25 CFR 547.4............. Tribal Gaming 226 0 0 0 0 0 0
Operations.
25 CFR................... Tribal Gaming 226 25 .5 12.5 300 0.1 30
regulatory
Authorities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule also requires a determination of suitability for
each of the approximately 5 testing laboratories. The information
required can be substantial: Corporate financial information;
qualifications of the engineering staff; information (and inspections)
of the engineering facilities available, and personal information for
principals, including tax returns, bankruptcies and lawsuits, work
histories and references.
However, the 5 existing testing laboratories have already collected
and provided this information--multiple times--in order to be licensed
in Tribal and non-Tribal gaming jurisdictions nationwide. The
Commission estimates that the re-submission of such information would
take the necessary laboratory employees 20 hours to accomplish once. As
the gaming tribes typically use only one gaming laboratory, the
submission of suitability determinations to 226 tribal gaming
regulatory authorities would total 4,520 hours.
The Commission believes, however, that the hour burden is not
likely to be this high. The proposed rule permits a tribal gaming
regulatory authority to rely upon a suitability determination already
made by another gaming jurisdiction in the United States, rather than
require a new suitability determination for a testing laboratory. The
existing testing laboratories are already licensed in numerous
jurisdictions throughout the United States, and the Commission believes
that approximately 90%--203 of 226--of the tribal gaming authorities
will accept existing suitability determinations from other
jurisdictions. The submission by a testing lab of an existing
suitability determination amounts to the writing of a letter. The NIGC
estimates that the submission of such letters will take the necessary
laboratory employees 0.5 hours to accomplish once. As each of the
gaming tribes typically uses only one gaming laboratory, the submission
of suitability determinations of up to 203 tribal gaming authorities
would total 101.5 hours. For the remaining 10% or 23 tribal gaming
regulatory authorities, the submission burden on laboratories is 20
hours per tribe or 460 hours. If every tribe requires annual re-
licensing, the subsequent annual hours burden on the 5 laboratories is
561.5 hours.
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, Attention: Desk Officer for
National Indian Gaming Commission, 725 17th St., NW., Washington DC,
20503, and (2) to Michael Gross, Associate General Counsel, General
Law, National Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Washington
DC 20005.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Commission has determined that this proposed rule does not
constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment and that no detailed statement is required
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321 et. seq).
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 547
Gambling, Indian-lands, Indian-tribal government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Commission proposes
to amend 25 CFR Chapter III by adding part 547 to read as follows:
PART 547--MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR GAMING EQUIPMENT USED
WITH THE PLAY OF CLASS II GAMES.
Sec.
547.1 What is the purpose of this part?
547.2 How do these regulations affect State jurisdiction?
547.3 What are the definitions for this part?
547.4 How do I comply with this part?
547.5 What are the rules of interpretation and of general
application for this part?
547.6 What are the minimum technical standards for enrolling and
enabling Class II gaming system components?
547.7 What are the minimum technical hardware standards applicable
to Class II gaming systems?
547.8 What are the minimum technical software standards applicable
to Class II gaming systems?
547.9 What are the minimum technical standards for Class II gaming
system accounting functions?
547.10 What are the minimum standards for Class II gaming system
critical events?
547.11 What are the minimum technical standards for money and credit
handling?
547.12 What are the minimum technical standards for downloading on a
Class II gaming system?
547.13 What are the minimum technical standards for program storage
media?
547.14 What are the minimum technical standards for electronic
random number generation?
547.15 What are the minimum technical standards for electronic data
communications between system components?
547.16 What are the minimum standards for game artwork, glass, and
rules?
547.17 How does a gaming operation apply for a variance from these
standards?
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706(b).
Sec. 547.1 What is the purpose of this part?
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2703(7)(A)(i), permits
the use of electronic, computer, or other technologic aids in
connection with the play of Class II games. This part establishes the
minimum technical standards governing the use of such aids.
[[Page 60514]]
Sec. 547.2 How do these regulations affect State jurisdiction?
Nothing in this part shall be construed to grant to a State
jurisdiction in Class II gaming or to extend a State's jurisdiction in
Class III gaming.
Sec. 547.3 What are the definitions for this part?
For the purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:
Account Access Component, a component within a Class II gaming
system that reads or recognizes account access media and gives a patron
the ability to interact with their account.
Account Access Medium, a magnetic stripe card or any other medium
inserted into, or otherwise made to interact with, an account access
component in order to give a patron the ability to interact with an
account.
Audit Mode, the mode where it is possible to view Class II gaming
system accounting functions, statistics, etc. and perform non-player
related functions.
Agent, an employee or other person authorized by the gaming
operation, as approved and licensed by the tribal gaming regulatory
authority, designated for certain decisions, tasks and actions in the
gaming operation.
Cancel Credit, an action initiated by the Class II gaming system
where some or all of a player's credits are removed by an attendant and
paid to the player.
Cashless System, a system that performs cashless transactions and
maintains records of those cashless transactions.
Cashless Transaction, a movement of funds electronically from one
component to another, often to or from a patron deposit account.
CD-ROM, Compact Disc--Read Only Memory.
Chairman, the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission
established by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
Class II Game, the same as ``class II gaming'' in 25 U.S.C.
2703(7)(A).
Class II Gaming System, all components, whether or not technologic
aids in electronic, computer, mechanical, or other technologic form,
that function together to aid the play of one or more Class II games,
including accounting functions mandated by these regulations.
Commission, the National Indian Gaming Commission.
Coupon, a financial instrument of fixed wagering value, usually
paper, that can only be used to acquire non-cashable credits through
interaction with a voucher system. This does not include instruments
such as printed advertising material that cannot be validated directly
by a voucher system.
Critical Memory, memory locations storing data essential to the
functionality of the Class II gaming system.
DLL, a Dynamic-Link Library file.
Download Package, approved data sent to a component of a Class II
gaming system for such purposes as changing the component software.
DVD, Digital Video Disk or Digital Versatile Disk.
Electromagnetic Interference, the physical characteristic of an
electronic component to emit electronic noise either into free air,
onto the power lines, or onto communication cables.
Electrostatic Discharge, a single-event, rapid transfer of
electrostatic charge between two objects, usually resulting when two
objects at different potentials come into direct contact with each
other.
EPROM, Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory--a storage area that
may be filled with data and information, that once written is not
modifiable, and that is retained even if there is no power applied to
the machine.
Fault, an event that when detected by a Class II gaming system
causes a discontinuance of game play or other component functions.
Financial Instrument, any tangible item of value tendered in Class
II game play, including, but not limited to, bills, coins, vouchers and
coupons.
Financial Instrument Acceptor, any component that accepts financial
instruments.
Financial Instrument Dispenser, any component that dispenses
financial instruments.
Financial Instrument Storage Component, any component that stores
financial instruments.
Flash Memory, non-volatile memory that retains its data when the
power is turned off and that can be electronically erased and
reprogrammed without being removed from the circuit board.
Game Software, the operational program or programs that govern the
play, display of results, and/or awarding of prizes or credits for
Class II games.
Gaming Equipment, all electronic, electro-mechanical, mechanical,
or other physical components utilized in the play of Class II games.
Hardware, gaming equipment.
Interruption, any form of mis-operation, component failure, or
interference to the Class II gaming equipment.
Modification, a revision to any hardware or software used in a
Class II gaming system.
Non-cashable credit, credits given by an operator to a patron;
placed on a Class II gaming system through a coupon, cashless
transaction or other approved means; and capable of activating play but
not being converted to cash.
Patron Deposit Account, an account maintained on behalf of a
patron, for the purpose of depositing and withdrawing cashable funds
for the primary purpose of interacting with a gaming activity.
Player Interface, any component or components of a Class II gaming
system, including an electronic or technologic aid (not limited to
terminals, player stations, handhelds, fixed units, etc.), that
directly enables player interaction in a Class II game.
Prize Schedule, the set of prizes available to players for
achieving pre-designated patterns in the Class II game.
Program Storage Media, an electronic data storage component, such
as a CD-ROM. EPROM, hard disk, or flash memory on which software is
stored and from which software is read.
Progressive Prize, a prize that increases by a selectable or
predefined amount based on play of a Class II game.
Random Number Generator (RNG), a software module, hardware
component or combination of these designed to produce outputs that are
effectively random.
Reflexive Software, any software that has the ability to manipulate
and/or replace a randomly generated outcome for the purpose of changing
the results of a Class II game.
Removable/Rewritable storage media, program or data storage
components that can be removed from gaming equipment and be written to,
or rewritten by, the gaming equipment or by other equipment designed
for that purpose.
Server, a computer which controls one or more applications or
environments within a Class II gaming system.
Test/Diagnostics Mode, a mode on a component that allows various
tests to be performed on the Class II gaming system hardware and
software.
Testing Laboratory, an organization recognized by a tribal gaming
regulatory authority pursuant to Sec. 547.4(f).
Tribal Gaming Regulatory Authority, the entity authorized by tribal
law to regulate gaming conducted pursuant to the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act.
Voucher, a financial instrument of fixed wagering value, usually
paper, that can only be used to acquire an equivalent value of cashable
credits or cash through interaction with a voucher system.
Voucher System, a component of the Class II gaming system or an
external system that securely maintains records of vouchers and
coupons; validates
[[Page 60515]]
payment of vouchers; records successful or failed payments of vouchers
and coupons; and controls the purging of expired vouchers and coupons.
Sec. 547.4 How do I comply with this part?
(a) Limited immediate compliance. By 120 days after the effective
date of this part, a tribal gaming regulatory authority shall:
(1) Require that all Class II gaming system software that affects
the play of the Class II game be submitted, together with the signature
verification required by Sec. 547.8(f), to a testing laboratory
recognized pursuant to paragraph (f) of this section;
(2) Require that the testing laboratory test the submission to the
standards established by Sec. 547.8(b), Sec. 547.14, the minimum
probability standards of Sec. 547.5(c), and to any additional
standards adopted by the tribal gaming regulatory authority;
(3) Require that the testing laboratory provide the tribal gaming
regulatory authority with a formal written report setting forth and
certifying to the findings and conclusions of the test;
(4) Make a finding, in the form of a certificate provided to the
supplier, that the Class II gaming system qualifies for grandfather
status under the provisions of this section, but only upon receipt of a
testing laboratory's report that the Class II gaming system is
compliant with Sec. 547.8(b), Sec. 547.8(f), the minimum probability
standards of Sec. 547.5(c), Sec. 547.14, and any other standards
adopted by the tribal gaming regulatory authority. If the tribal gaming
regulatory authority does not issue the certificate, or if the testing
laboratory finds that the Class II gaming system is not compliant with
Sec. 547.8(b), Sec. 547.8(f), the minimum probability standards of
Sec. 547.5(c), Sec. 547.14, or any other standards adopted by the
tribal gaming regulatory authority, then the gaming system shall
immediately be removed from play and not be utilized.
(5) Retain a copy of any testing laboratory's report so long as the
Class II gaming system that is the subject of the report remains
available to the public for play;
(6) Retain a copy of any certificate of grandfather status so long
as the Class II gaming system that is the subject of the certificate
remains available to the public for play; and
(7) Require the supplier of any player interface to designate with
a permanently affixed label each player interface with an identifying
number and the date of manufacture or a statement that the date of
manufacture was on or before the effective date of this part. The
tribal gaming regulatory authority shall also require the supplier to
provide a written declaration or affidavit affirming that the date of
manufacture was on or before the effective date of this part.
(b) Grandfather provisions. All Class II gaming systems
manufactured or placed in a tribal facility on or before the effective
date of this part and certified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this
section are grandfathered Class II gaming systems for which the
following provisions apply:
(1) Grandfathered Class II gaming systems may continue in operation
for a period of five years from the effective date of this part.
(2) Subject to the limitations in any applicable Commission
regulations governing the classification of games, any grandfathered
Class II gaming system shall be available for use at any tribal gaming
facility subject to approval by the tribal gaming regulatory authority
which shall transmit its notice of that approval, identifying the
grandfathered components, to the NIGC.
(3) As permitted by the tribal gaming regulatory authority,
individual hardware or software components may be repaired or replaced
to ensure proper functioning, security, or integrity of the
grandfathered Class II gaming system.
(4) All modifications that affect the play of a grandfathered Class
II gaming system must be approved pursuant to paragraph (c) of this
section, except for the following:
(i) Any software modifications that the tribal gaming regulatory
authority finds will maintain or advance the system's overall
compliance with this part or applicable provisions of Commission
regulations governing minimum internal control standards, after
receiving a new testing laboratory report that the modifications are
compliant with the standards established by Sec. 547.8(b), the minimum
probability requirements of Sec. 547.5(c), Sec. 547.14, and any other
standards adopted by the tribal gaming regulatory authority;
(ii) Any hardware modifications that the tribal gaming regulatory
authority finds will maintain or advance the system's overall
compliance with this part or applicable provisions of Commission
regulations governing minimum internal control standards; and
(iii) Any other modification to the software of a grandfathered
Class II gaming system that the tribal gaming regulatory authority
finds will not detract from, compromise or prejudice:
(A) The proper functioning, security, or integrity of the Class II
gaming system, and
(B) The gaming system's overall compliance with the requirements of
this part or applicable provisions of Commission regulations governing
minimum internal control standards.
(iv) No such modification may be implemented without the approval
of the tribal gaming regulatory authority. The tribal gaming regulatory
authority shall maintain a record of the modification so long as the
Class II gaming system that is the subject of the modification remains
available to the public for play and shall make the record available to
the Commission upon request. The Commission will only make available
for public review records or portions of records subject to release
under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552; the Privacy Act of
1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a; or the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C.
2716(a).
(c) Submission, testing, and approval--generally. Except as
provided in paragraphs (b) and (d) of this section, no tribal gaming
regulatory authority shall permit in a tribal gaming operation the use
of any Class II gaming system, or any associated cashless system or
voucher system or any modification thereto, unless:
(1) The Class II gaming system, cashless system, voucher payment
system, or modification has been submitted to a testing laboratory;
(2) The testing laboratory tests the submission to the standards
established by:
(i) This part;
(ii) Applicable provisions of Commission regulations governing the
classification of games and minimum internal controls; and
(iii) The tribal gaming regulatory authority; and the testing
laboratory provides a formal written report to the party making the
submission, setting forth and certifying to its findings and
conclusions; and
(3) Following receipt of the testing laboratory's report, the
tribal gaming regulatory authority makes a finding that the Class II
gaming system, cashless system, or voucher system conforms to the
standards established by:
(i) This part;
(ii) Applicable provisions of Commission regulations governing the
classification of games and minimum internal controls; and
(iii) The tribal gaming regulatory authority.
The tribal gaming regulatory authority shall retain a copy of the
testing laboratory's report so long as the Class II gaming system,
cashless system, voucher system, or modification thereto that is the
subject of the report remains
[[Page 60516]]
available to the public for play in its gaming operation.
(d) Emergency hardware and software changes. (1) A tribal gaming
regulatory authority, in its discretion, may permit modified hardware
or game software to be made available for play without prior laboratory
review if the modified hardware or game software is:
(i) Necessary to correct a problem affecting the fairness,
security, or integrity of a game or accounting system or any cashless
system, or voucher system; or
(ii) Unrelated to game play, an accounting system, a cashless
system, or a voucher system.
(2) If a tribal gaming regulatory authority authorizes modified
game software or hardware to be made available for play or use without
prior laboratory review, the tribal gaming regulatory authority shall
thereafter require the hardware or software manufacturer to:
(i) Immediately advise other users of the same hardware or software
of the importance and availability of the update;
(ii) Immediately submit the new hardware or software to a testing
laboratory for testing and verification of compliance with this part
and any applicable provisions of Commission regulations governing
minimum internal control standards; and
(iii) Immediately provide the tribal gaming regulatory authority
with a software signature verification tool meeting the requirements of
Sec. 547.8(f) for any new software.
(3) If a tribal gaming regulatory authority authorizes software or
hardware modification under this paragraph, it shall maintain a record
of the modification and a copy of the testing laboratory report so long
as the Class II gaming system that is the subject of the modification
remains available to the public for play and shall make the record
available to the Commission upon request. The Commission will only make
available for public review records or portions of records subject to
release under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552; the Privacy
Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a; or the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25
U.S.C. 2716(a).
(e) Compliance by charitable gaming operations. This part shall not
apply to charitable gaming operations, provided that:
(1) The tribal government determines that the organization
sponsoring the gaming operation is a charitable organization;
(2) All proceeds of the charitable gaming operation are for the
benefit of the charitable organization;
(3) The tribal gaming regulatory authority permits the charitable
organization to be exempt from this part;
(4) The charitable gaming operation is operated wholly by the
charitable organization's employees or volunteers; and
(5) The annual gross gaming revenue of the charitable gaming
operation does not exceed $1,000,000.
(f) Testing laboratories. (1) A testing laboratory may provide the
examination, testing, evaluating and reporting functions required by
this section provided that:
(i) The testing laboratory demonstrates its integrity, independence
and financial stability to the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
(ii) The testing laboratory demonstrates its technical skill and
capability to the tribal gaming regulatory authority.
(iii) The testing laboratory is not owned or operated by the tribe
or tribal gaming regulatory authority.
(iv) The tribal gaming regulatory authority:
(A) Makes a suitability determination of the testing laboratories
no less stringent than that required by Sec. 533.6(b)(1)(ii) through
(v) and 533.6(c) of this chapter and based upon no less information
than that required by Sec. 537.1 of this chapter, or
(B) Accepts, in its discretion, a determination of suitability for
the testing laboratory made by any other gaming regulatory jurisdiction
in the United States.
(v) After reviewing the suitability determination and the
information provided by the testing laboratory, the tribal gaming
regulatory authority determines that the testing laboratory is
qualified to test and evaluate Class II gaming systems.
(2) The tribal gaming regulatory authority shall:
(i) Maintain a record of all determinations made pursuant to
paragraphs (f)(1)(iv) and (f)(1)(v) of this section for a minimum of
three years and shall make the records available to the Commission upon
request. The Commission will only make available for public review
records or portions of records subject to release under the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552; the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a;
or the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. 2716(a).
(ii) Place the testing laboratory under a continuing obligation to
notify it of any adverse regulatory action in any jurisdiction where
the testing laboratory conducts business.
(iii) Require the testing laboratory to provide notice of any
material changes to the information provided to the tribal gaming
regulatory authority.
Sec. 547.5 What are the rules of interpretation and of general
application for this part?
(a) Minimum standards. A tribal gaming regulatory authority may
establish and implement additional technical standards that are as
stringent as, or more stringent than, those set out in this part.
(b) Only applicable standards apply. Gaming equipment and software
used with Class II gaming systems shall meet all applicable
requirements of this part and applicable requirements of Commission
regulations governing the classification of games and minimum internal
controls. For example, if a Class II gaming system lacks the ability to
print or accept vouchers, then any standards that govern vouchers do
not apply.
(c) Fairness. No Class II gaming system shall cheat, mislead, or
disadvantage users. All prizes advertised shall be available to win. No
progressive prize shall have a probability of winning of less than 1 in
50,000,000. No other prize shall have a probability of winning of less
than 1 in 25,000,000.
(d) Approved equipment and software only. All gaming equipment and
software used with Class II gaming systems shall be identical in all
respects to a prototype reviewed and tested by a testing laboratory and
approved for use by the tribal gaming regulatory authority pursuant to
Sec. 547.4(a) through (c). Unapproved software shall not be loaded
onto or stored on any program storage medium used in a Class II gaming
system, except as provided in Sec. 547.4(d).
(e) Proper functioning. All gaming equipment and software used with
Class II gaming systems shall perform according to the manufacturer's
design and operating specifications.
(f) No Limitation of Technology. This part should not be
interpreted to limit the use of technology or to preclude the use of
technology not specifically referenced.
(g) Severability. If any provision of this part is declared invalid
by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect
the remainder of this part.
[[Page 60517]]
Sec. 547.6 What are the minimum technical standards for enrolling and
enabling Class II gaming system components?
(a) General requirements. Class II gaming systems shall provide a
method to:
(1) Enroll and unenroll system components;
(2) Enable and disable specific system components.
(b) Specific requirements. Class II gaming systems shall:
(1) Ensure that only enrolled and enabled system components
participate in gaming; and
(2) Ensure that the default condition for components shall be
unenrolled and disabled.
Sec. 547.7 What are the minimum technical hardware standards
applicable to Class II gaming systems?
(a) General requirements. (1) The Class II gaming system shall
operate in compliance with applicable regulations of the Federal
Communications Commissi