Regulatory Review Schedule; Tribal Consultation, 18457-18467 [2011-7912]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Actions
Compliance
(i) If only light corrosion is found, remove
the corrosion and treat the main spar
cap angles with corrosion inhibitor;.
(ii) If cracks, intergranular exfoliation, or
moderate or severe corrosion is found,
replace the affected main spar cap angles in their entirety as a single piece.
Splicing of the main spar cap angles is
not permitted.
(6) Only install main spar cap angles that have
been inspected and are free of cracks, intergranular exfoliation, or moderate or severe
corrosion.
Procedures
Before further flight after each inspection required in paragraph (f)(4) of this AD. Continue with the repetitive inspections required
in paragraph (f)(4) of this AD.
Follow Burl’s Aircraft, LLC Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. 15AC06–08–10, dated June 8,
2010; and FAA Advisory Circular (AC)
43.13–1B, Change 1, Chapter 6. AC 43.13–
1B can be found at https://rgl.faa.gov/. Contact Burl’s Aircraft, LLC in paragraph (i) of
this AD for a replacement scheme and incorporate the replacement scheme.
As of the effective date of this AD ...................
Not applicable.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
(g)(1) The Manager, Anchorage Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
National Indian Gaming Commission
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Related Information
(h) For more information about this AD,
contact Eric Wright, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Anchorage ACO, 222 W. 7th Ave., #14,
Anchorage, Alaska 99513; telephone: (907)
271–2648; fax: (907) 271–6365; e-mail:
eric.wright@faa.gov.
(i) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Burl’s Aircraft, LLC, P.O.
Box 671487, Chugiak, Alaska 99567–1487;
telephone: (907) 688–3715; fax (907) 688–
5031; e-mail burl@biginalaska.com; Internet:
https://www.burlac.com. You may review
copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901
Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106.
For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March
28, 2011.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–7878 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
18457
Jkt 223001
25 CFR Chapter III
Regulatory Review Schedule; Tribal
Consultation
National Indian Gaming
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Regulatory Review
Schedule.
AGENCY:
On November 18, 2010, the
National Indian Gaming Commission
(NIGC) issued a Notice of Inquiry and
Notice of Consultation advising the
public that the NIGC was conducting a
comprehensive review of all regulations
promulgated to implement the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The
review identified in the Notice of
Inquiry and Notice of Consultation was
also prepared in order to submit the
NIGC’s Semi-Annual Regulatory Review
to the Federal Register in April 2011 as
set forth in Executive Order 12866
entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review’’ and the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq. The NIGC held
eight consultations during January and
February 2011 and invited written
comments to be submitted by February
12, 2011. Comments received and
transcripts of the consultations are
available on the NIGC Web site. The
NIGC reviewed all comments received
and created this comprehensive
regulatory review agenda schedule
based on the input received.
DATES: See Consultation Schedule for
Review, Section III under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below, for
a master schedule of dates, locations,
and subjects of consultation meetings.
See sections IV–VIII under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below for
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
dates and locations of consultations on
particular subjects.
ADDRESSES: Testimony and comments
sent by electronic mail or delivered by
hand are strongly encouraged.
Electronic submissions should be
directed to reg.review@nigc.gov. See File
Formats and Required Information for
Submitting Comments under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, section
IIC, below, for instructions. Submissions
delivered by hand should be brought to
the consultations. See Consultation
Schedule for Review, section III under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below, for
a master schedule of dates, locations,
and subjects of consultation meetings.
See sections IV–VIII under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below for
dates and locations of consultations on
particular subjects. Submissions sent by
regular mail should be addressed to Lael
Echo-Hawk, Counselor to the Chair,
National Indian Gaming Commission,
1441 L Street, NW., Suite 9100,
Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lael
Echo-Hawk, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Suite
9100, Washington, DC 20005.
Telephone: 202/632–7009; e-mail:
reg.review@nigc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
(IGRA or Act), Public Law 100–497, 25
U.S.C. 2701 et seq., was signed into law
on October 17, 1988. The purposes of
IGRA include providing a statutory
basis for the operation of gaming by
Indian Tribes as a means of promoting
tribal economic development, selfsufficiency, and strong tribal
governments; ensuring that the Indian
tribe is the primary beneficiary of the
gaming operation; and declaring that the
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
18458
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
establishment of independent federal
regulatory authority for gaming on
Indian lands, the establishment of
federal standards for gaming on Indian
lands, and the establishment of a
National Indian Gaming Commission
are necessary to meet congressional
concerns regarding gaming and to
protect such gaming as a means of
generating tribal revenue. 25 U.S.C.
2702.
The IGRA authorizes the NIGC to
promulgate such regulations and
guidelines as it deems appropriate to
implement the provisions of the Act. 25
U.S.C. 2706(b)(10). On November 12,
2010, the Commission issued a Notice of
Inquiry (NOI) requesting comment on
which of its regulations were most in
need of revision, in what order the
Commission should review its
regulations, and the process NIGC
should utilize to make revisions. The
Notice of Inquiry was published in the
Federal Register on November 18, 2010.
75 FR 70680.
As the Commission previously
explained, the regulatory review
facilitates effective implementation of
IGRA and coincides with Executive
Order 12866 entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ providing for
Federal entities to identify agency
statements of regulatory priorities and
additional information about the most
significant regulatory activities planned
for the coming year.
On January 18, 2011, President
Obama issued Executive Order 13563,
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review. Executive Order 13563 sets
forth the general principle that
regulatory systems ‘‘must identify and
use the best, most innovative, and least
burdensome tools for achieving
regulatory ends.’’ This Executive Order
further provides that agencies tailor
‘‘regulations to impose the least burden
on society, consistent with obtaining
regulatory objectives, taking into
account, among other things, and to the
extent practicable, the costs of
cumulative regulations[.]’’ Further,
agencies must ‘‘to the extent feasible,
specify performance objectives, rather
than specifying the behavior or manner
of compliance that regulated entities
must adopt[.]’’ In the spirit of this
Executive Order and Executive Order
13175 regarding consultation with
Indian Tribal Governments, the NIGC
provides this comprehensive regulatory
review agenda. The agenda is a product
of extensive tribal consultation and
extensive public comment.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
II. Process for Review
A. Groups
Based on both public comments and
tribal consultations, the Commission
has decided to organize its regulatory
review into five separate groupings. The
Commission will organize its
consultations with Tribes according to
these groupings. The regulations in each
group will be reviewed separately from
the regulations in the other groups, and
specific regulations in each group may
proceed through the regulatory review
process independently from the other
regulations in a particular group.
1. Group 1 will include a review of:
(a) A Buy Indian Act regulation;
(b) 25 CFR part 523—Review and
Approval of Existing Ordinances or
Resolutions;
(c) 25 CFR part 514—Fees;
(d) 25 CFR part 559—Facility License
Notifications, Renewals, and
Submissions; and
(e) 25 CFR part 542—Minimum
Internal Control Standards for Class III
Gaming.
2. Group 2 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 573—Enforcement;
and
(b) Regulations concerning
proceedings before the Commission,
including 25 CFR part 519—Service, 25
CFR part 524—Appeals, 25 CFR part
539—Appeals, and 25 CFR part 577—
Appeals Before the Commission.
3. Group 3 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 543—Minimum
Internal Control Standards for Class II
Gaming; and
(b) 25 CFR part 547—Minimum
Technical Standards for Gaming
Equipment Used with the Play of Class
II Games.
4. Group 4 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 556—Background
Investigations for Primary Management
Officials and Key Employees;
(b) 25 CFR part 558—Gaming Licenses
for Key Employees and Primary
Management Officials;
(c) 25 CFR part 556—Background
Investigations for Primary Management
Officials and Key Employees, ‘‘Pilot
Program.’’;
(d) 25 CFR part 571—Monitoring and
Investigations;
(e) 25 CFR part 531—Collateral
Agreements;
(f) 25 CFR part 537—Background
Investigations for Persons or Entities
With a Financial Interest in, or Having
Management Responsibility for, a
Management Contract; and
(g) 25 CFR part 502—Definitions.
5. Group 5 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 518—Self Regulation
of Class II Gaming;
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(b) A Sole Proprietary Interest
regulation; and
(c) 25 CFR part 542, Minimum
Internal Control Standards for Class III
Gaming.
B. Review Phases
Each group of regulations will be
addressed in the three phases listed
below. The purpose of the three phases
is to facilitate meaningful consultation
with Tribes, consistent with Executive
Order 13175, prior to promulgating any
revisions, amendments, or new rules.
While Tribal Advisory Committees
(TAC) have been utilized by the NIGC
in the past, NIGC received comments
from Tribes expressing their view that
the TAC process was not a substitute for
tribal consultation.
In response to comments received on
the NOI, the Commission has
established the tribal consultation
schedule below. The NIGC will attempt
to provide significant means for tribal
input through tribal consultation
meetings and broad, transparent
opportunities to submit written
comments at every phase before the
Notice of Final Rule is published.
1. Drafting Phase. Consistent with
Executive Order 13175, the Commission
will endeavor to include Tribes in the
drafting phase of any new or amended
rule. The purpose of the drafting phase
is to ensure tribal participation early in
the drafting of any rule with tribal
implications. The drafting phase will
begin with either a preliminary draft
based on previous comments received
by NIGC, preliminary proposed
amendments to a current regulation, or
preliminary proposals provided by
Tribes or tribal organizations. The
drafting phase will include tribal
consultation meetings and an
opportunity for the public to submit
written comments. Following
completion of the drafting phase, the
Commission anticipates that generally it
will proceed to issuing a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that will
be published in the Federal Register.
2. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Phase. The NIGC will draft a NPRM.
The Commission anticipates that a
preamble to a NPRM will summarize
comments received during the drafting
phase and include a discussion of the
substantive provisions of the proposed
rule. The Commission anticipates that
for any NPRM it will endeavor to
provide a public comment period of
approximately 60 days and will consult
with Tribes during that period on the
proposed rule. After the close of the
comment period, a Notice of Final Rule
will be prepared and published in the
Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
3. Notice of Final Rule Phase. The
Commission will draft a Final Rule
based on all comments received during
the NPRM phase. The preamble to the
final rule will summarize comments
received and include a discussion of the
substantive provisions of the final rule.
Generally, the Commission anticipates
that final rules will become effective 45
days after publication.
C. File Formats and Required
Information for Submitting Comments
If submitting by electronic mail: send
to reg.review@nigc.gov a message
containing the name of the person
making the submission, his or her title
and organization (if the submission of
an organization), mailing address,
telephone number, fax number (if any),
and e-mail address. The document itself
must be sent as an attachment and must
be in a single file and in recent, if not
current, versions of: (1) Adobe Portable
Document File (PDF) format (preferred);
or (2) Microsoft Word file formats.
If submitting by print only: anyone
who is unable to submit a comment in
electronic form should submit an
original and two paper copies by hand
or by mail to the appropriate address
listed above. Use of surface mail is
strongly discouraged owing to the
uncertainty of timely delivery.
III. Consultation Schedule for Review
Subject to future changes, NIGC will
hold tribal consultations on the
following dates as set forth in more
detail below. The Commission has
attempted to schedule consultations in
every region and to hold those
18459
consultations either before or after other
events widely attended by tribal
officials. The purpose of scheduling
consultations in this manner is both to
encourage participation of tribal
officials and to conserve tribal resources
by reducing the amount of travel of
participants.
For additional information on
consultation locations and times, please
refer to the Web site of the National
Indian Gaming Commission, https://
www.nigc.gov. Please RSVP at
consultation.rsvp@nigc.gov.
Please note that the Commission
intends to post all written comments
received during the regulatory review
process on the Tribal Consultation Web
page of the NIGC Web site located at
https://www.nigc.gov.
Regulation
group(s)
Consultation date
Event
Location
Apr. 28, 2011 .........
Oklahoma Tribal Gaming Regulators Association
Spring Conference.
Tribal Self-Governance Conference ...........................
Southern Gaming Summit & Bingo World Conference.
Great Plains/Rocky Mountains/Midwest Tradeshow
& Conference.
ATNI Mid Year Conference ........................................
Indian Bingo and Class II Summit .............................
NCAI Mid Year Conference .......................................
CNIGA Membership Meeting .....................................
Northwest Indian Gaming Expo .................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest .................................
Choctaw Casino Resort, Durant, OK .........................
1
Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, CA ......................
Mississippi Coast Coliseum & Convention Ctr., Biloxi, MS.
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN ......
1
1
May 2, 2011 ...........
May 5, 2011 ...........
May 16, 2011 .........
May 20, 2011 .........
June 8, 2011 ..........
June 13, 2011 ........
June 21–22, 2011 ..
July 14–15, 2011 ...
July 20–21, 2011 ...
July 28–29, 2011 ...
Aug. 18–19, 2011 ..
Aug. 25–26, 2011 ..
Sept. 7–8, 2011 .....
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Sept. 15–16, 2011
Sept. 19–20, 2011
Sept. 29–30, 2011
Oct. 6–7, 2011 .......
Oct./Nov. 2011 .......
Nov. 3–4, 2011 ......
Nov. 14–15, 2011 ..
Nov. 17–18, 2011 ..
Nov. 30–Dec. 1,
2011.
Dec. 5–6, 2011 ......
Dec. 8–9, 2011 ......
Dec. 12–13, 2011 ..
Jan. 11–12, 2012 ...
Jan. 18–19, 2012 ...
Jan. 23–24, 2012 ...
Jan. 26–27, 2012 ...
Jan. 30–31, 2012 ...
Feb. 2–3, 2012 ......
Feb. 7–8, 2012 ......
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Coeur d’Alene Resort & Casino, Plummer, ID ..........
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN ......
Hyatt Regency, Milwaukee, WI ..................................
Harrah’s Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley Center, CA
Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA ............................
Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa Ana Pueblo,
NM.
DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC ....................
Tulsa, OK ...................................................................
Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale, AZ ................
Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND ...................................
1, 2
1,
2, 3,
3,
1, 2, 3,
1, 2, 3, 4,
3, 4,
2
4
4
4
5
5
3,
2, 3,
2,
2, 3,
5
5
5
5
NIGC Consultation—Northeast ..................................
Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Conference ...
NIGC Consultation—Southwest .................................
NIGC Consultation—United Tribes International
Powwow.
National Tribal Gaming Commissioner/Regulator Association Fall Meeting.
NIGC Regional Training .............................................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast ..................................
G2E—National ............................................................
USET Annual Meeting ................................................
NCAI Annual Conference ...........................................
NIGC Consultation—California ...................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest .................................
NIGC Consultation—Oklahoma .................................
Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino, Coarsegold, CA
2, 3, 4, 5
Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO .........................
Turning Stone Resort & Casino, Verona, NY ............
Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las Vegas, NV ....
Mississippi Choctaw, MS ...........................................
Portland, OR ...............................................................
Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, CA ......................
Fort McDowell Casino, Scottsdale, AZ ......................
Downstream Casino Resort, Miami, OK ....................
3, 4,
3,
3, 4,
3, 4,
3,
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
NIGC
Clearwater Casino Resort, Suquamish, WA ..............
Turtle Creek Casino & Hotel, Williamsburg, MI .........
DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC ....................
Wind Creek Casino, Atmore, AL ................................
Crowne Plaza, Billings, MT ........................................
Win-River Casino, Redding, CA .................................
7 Feathers Casino, Canyonville, OR .........................
Cherokee Hard Rock, Tulsa, OK ...............................
Isleta Hard Rock Casino Resort, Albuquerque, NM ..
Radisson Hotel, Rapid City, SD .................................
Consultation—Northwest ..................................
Consultation—Great Plains ..............................
Consultation—Northeast ..................................
Consultation—Eastern .....................................
Consultation—Great Plains ..............................
Consultation—California ...................................
Consultation—Northwest ..................................
Consultation—Oklahoma .................................
Consultation—Southwest .................................
Consultation—Great Plains ..............................
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
4,
4,
3,
4,
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
18460
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
IV. Group One: Part 514—Fees; Part
523—Review and Approval of Existing
Ordinances or Resolutions; Part 559—
Facility License Notifications,
Renewals, and Submissions; Part 542—
Class III Minimum Internal Controls;
Buy Indian Act
A. Part 514—Fees
1. Should the Commission consider
revising Part 514 to base fees on the
Tribe’s gaming operation’s fiscal year?
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider revising this Part to base fees
on the Tribe’s gaming operation’s fiscal
year. Some comments indicated that
this was a low priority. Other comments
were generally supportive of the
Commission considering this change,
noting that a calculation based on
audited financial statements for the
fiscal year would be more convenient.
Commentators did note that if the
Commission reviewed Part 514, any
amendments should provide for an
adequate transition period. Other
comments suggested that the
Commission consider a flexible
approach by which each tribe could
determine whether to calculate fees on
a fiscal or calendar year.
The Commission understands that it
may be difficult to calculate fees based
on the calendar year, which may lead to
frequent audit adjustments. The
Commission strives to be cognizant of
and sensitive to the practical issues
raised by any potential amendments to
this Part, including additional costs and
the need to provide for an adequate
transition period. However, the
Commission believes that review of the
Part is appropriate and has the potential
to reduce the number of audit
adjustments. The Commission will
review this Part during the Group One
period.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Should this Part define Gross Gaming
Revenue consistent with Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles for the
purposes of calculating the fees?
Additionally, the NOI asked whether
the Commission should consider adding
to Part 514 a definition of gross gaming
revenue consistent with the GAAP
definition of this term. Some public
comments suggested that a revision
would promote consistency and
uniformity. Other comments questioned
whether the NIGC could define gross
gaming revenue given that IGRA defines
the term.
The Commission believes that further
review of this regulation is appropriate.
An amendment consistent with IGRA
could promote consistency and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
uniformity, which may result in greater
efficiency. The Commission will review
this Part during the Group One period.
3. Should this Part include a section on
the fingerprinting processing fees?
The NOI asked whether the
Commission should consider amending
this Part to include fingerprint
processing fees and whether to provide
for a review of the costs on an annual
basis and adjust the fingerprint
processing fee accordingly.
Additionally, the NOI asked whether
the Commission should consider
providing that fees collected for
processing fingerprints should be
included in the total revenue collected
by the Commission that is subject to
statutory limitation. Comments
supported the inclusion of the
fingerprinting fees in the calculation of
gross revenues. Other comments
suggested that fingerprinting costs be
paid by those Tribes that use the service
rather than by the general fees paid by
Tribes. Other comments suggested that
the Commission provide a public
accounting of how the fees are
expended by the Commission. Some
comments suggested including the
fingerprinting fees as part of the annual
fees while other comments suggested
that the fees be separate from the annual
fees collected from Tribes. Those
commentators who recommended
keeping the fees separate explained that
the fingerprinting fees were generally an
expense paid by gaming commissions
rather than gaming operations. Other
Tribes suggested that the Commission
consider the revision if including
fingerprinting fees resulted in a lower
annual fee. Finally, several comments
suggested the issuance of a bulletin
instead of a regulation to address this
issue.
The Commission believes that further
review of this proposed regulation is
appropriate. Amendments to this Part
could provide greater clarity to the
process and potentially could result
greater efficiency and in cost savings.
This issue will be reviewed during the
Group One period.
4. Should the Commission consider a
late payment system in lieu of a Notice
of Violation for Tribes submitting their
fees to the NIGC late?
Finally, the NOI requested comment
on whether the Commission should
consider a late payment system in lieu
of a Notice of Violation (NOV) for
addressing fees submitted late to the
NIGC. Public comments uniformly
supported the Commission reviewing
this approach. Many commentators
observed that issuing a NOV is a serious
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
measure that may overly penalize Tribes
for late submission of their fees.
Commentators noted that a NOV can
cause a financial hardship to Tribes by
lowering a Tribe’s bond rating and
damage its business reputation. Some
comments recommended an automatic
additional percentage as a late payment
penalty or a development of a schedule
of fines or penalties based on passage of
time or the number late payments.
Tribes commented that NOVs should
continue to be utilized for frequent or
repeat violators in order to prevent
abuse of the system. Another
commentator suggested that an NOV
only be issued after a specified number
of missed payments or dollar amount, if
there is gross negligence, or the Tribe
has publicly stated its intention not to
pay the NIGC. This commentator
suggested that an NOV should be
considered only after negotiations with
the Tribes have failed. Many
commentators noted that any approach
should be flexible and include due
process so that a Tribe can cure any
purported late payment before the NIGC
issues either a ticket or NOV.
The Commission believes that further
review of the potential regulatory
amendment is appropriate. A NOV is a
serious action issued to address
significant violations of IGRA. A late
payment system may be appropriate to
address infrequent situations wherein a
tribe submits fees late to the NIGC. This
issue will be considered by the
Commission during the Group One
period.
B. Part 523—Review and Approval of
Existing Ordinances or Resolutions
Comments received in response to the
NOI suggest repealing this regulation as
obsolete. The regulation applies only to
gaming ordinances enacted by Tribes
prior to January 22, 1993, and not
submitted to the Chairwoman. During
the Group One period, the Commission
will consider repealing this Part.
C. Part 542—Class III Minimum Internal
Control Standards
The NOI requested comment
regarding Class III Minimum Internal
Control Standards (MICS). The public
was asked to comment on how this
issue should be addressed, particularly
in light of the decision in the Colorado
River Indian Tribes v. National Indian
Gaming Commission. Some comments
suggested that Part 542 should be
replaced by a set of recommended
guidelines. Comments explained that
many tribal gaming regulatory
authorities rely on Part 542 to set the
base of their minimum internal control
standards. Other comments explained
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
that some Tribes have adopted the
Federal rule verbatim. Some comments
stated that some Tribes have drafted
their own internal control standards.
Additionally, commentators noted that
some state compacts incorporate part
542 by reference. Some comments
explained that some Tribes amended
their gaming ordinance authorizing the
NIGC to regulate and enforce part 542 in
their gaming operations. Other
commentators explained that in
California, their state compacts have
been effectively revised to provide for
Federal oversight to the extent specified
in the agreements.
A number of Tribes commented that
the NIGC does not have the authority to
enforce Class III MICS. A majority of
Tribes that submitted comments
suggested that the NIGC issue MICS as
guidance. Some Tribes suggested
addressing the enforcement of Class III
MICS through the self-regulation
process. Other comments suggested
applying a different fee rate for those
Tribes that have amended their tribal
gaming ordinance such that the NIGC
can regulate and enforce Part 542. Some
Tribes recommended keeping the Class
III MICS in regulation form and
convening a new Tribal Advisory
Committee to update the current
regulation. Other Tribes recommended
repeal of Part 542. Many of the
comments received by NIGC stated that
this was a high priority.
Review of this Part is a high priority
of the Commission. NIGC recognizes
that this is a complex and important
issue that impacts Tribes differently
across the country. During the Group
One period, NIGC will continue to
evaluate and develop solutions for
addressing Class III MICS in a manner
consistent with IGRA that does not
create a regulatory void.
D. Part 559—Facility License
Notifications, Renewals, and
Submissions
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider revising this Part. Many Tribes
commented that the process by which
the regulation was adopted did not
allow sufficient time for meaningful
tribal consultation. Some commentators
stated that Environmental Public Health
and Safety (EPHS) matters and facility
licenses should be left to the authority
and jurisdiction of the Tribes. Some
Tribes stated that in addition to tribal
regulations and compact provisions,
other federal and tribal agencies already
regulate EPHS issues. Some comments
also recommended reviewing § 502.22—
‘‘Construction and maintenance of the
gaming facility, and the operation of
that gaming is conducted in a manner
which adequately protects the
environment and the public health and
safety’’ as part of this review.
Some comments questioned the
necessity of providing Indian lands
information considering that other
Federal agencies already have this
information and that requiring Tribes to
re-submit documentation was
duplicative and unnecessary. Some
comments stated that the 120-day notice
period was arbitrary and that NIGC
should have consulted on the time
frame before implementing the
regulation. Some commentators stated
that the regulation should provide some
flexibility regarding the 120-day notice
period. Some comments expressed
concern that the regulation could
potentially limit the authority of tribal
gaming commissions. Other comments
noted that the regulation helped raise
the importance of those issues at the
tribal level and benefited the Tribe.
Based on the many comments
requesting that this regulation be
18461
reviewed, the NIGC will use the Group
One period to review this Part and
§ 502.22 ‘‘Construction and maintenance
of the gaming facility, and the operation
of that gaming is conducted in a manner
which adequately protects the
environment and the public health and
safety.’’
E. Buy Indian Act Regulation
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider adopting a regulation which
would require the NIGC to give
preference to qualified Indian-owned
businesses when purchasing goods or
services as defined by the ‘‘Buy Indian
Act,’’ 25 U.S.C. 47. The Buy Indian Act
provides authority to set aside
procurement contracts for qualified
Indian-owned businesses. While many
comments support consideration of this
change, a number of comments
suggested that utilizing an internal
policy or process would be equally
effective.
The Commission believes that a
regulation on this issue may promote
long term and consistent application by
the agency. During the Group One
period, the Commission will review a
potential regulation.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will
hold tribal consultations on Group One
regulations on the following dates as set
forth in more detail below. The
Commission has attempted to schedule
consultations in every region and to
hold those consultations either before or
after other events widely attended by
tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner
is both to encourage participation of
tribal officials and to conserve tribal
resources by reducing the amount of
travel of participants.
GROUP 1
Date
Event
Apr. 28, 2011 .................
Oklahoma Tribal Gaming Regulators Association Spring
Conference.
Tribal Self-Governance Conference ...................................
Southern Gaming Summit & Bingo World Conference .....
May 2, 2011 ...................
May 5, 2011 ...................
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
May 16, 2011 .................
May 20, 2011 .................
June 21–22, 2011 ..........
July 14–15, 2011 ...........
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Location
Great Plains/Rocky Mountains/Midwest Tradeshow &
Conference.
ATNI Mid Year Conference ................................................
CNIGA Membership Meeting .............................................
Northwest Indian Gaming Expo .........................................
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Choctaw Casino Resort, Durant, OK.
Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, CA.
Mississippi Coast Coliseum & Convention Ctr., Biloxi,
MS.
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN.
Coeur d’Alene Resort & Casino, Plummer, ID.
Harrah’s Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley Center, CA.
Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
18462
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
V. Group Two: Part 573—Enforcement;
Proceedings Before the Commission,
Including Part 519—Service, Part 524—
Appeals [of disapproval of a gaming
ordinance, resolution or amendment],
Part 539—Appeals [of approval or
disapproval of a management contract
or amendment], and Part 577—Appeals
Before the Commission
A. Enforcement
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider promulgating a regulation
authorizing the withdrawal of an NOV
after it has been issued. Some Tribes
stated that because there was no
prohibition against withdrawing an
NOV, the regulation was unnecessary.
Other comments stated that while the
Chairwoman retains authority to
withdraw an NOV, a specific regulation
outlining the process and circumstances
for the withdrawal was appropriate.
Some comments stated that only the
entire Commission should withdraw an
NOV.
Many comments stated that the
issuance of an NOV can potentially have
serious negative economic impact on
the Tribe. These comments
recommended the NIGC institute a
compliance model before utilizing a
punitive approach. Such an approach
would provide for tribal regulatory
agencies to take enforcement action in
the first instance and provide a notice
and opportunity to cure before NIGC
action is taken. Tribes also
recommended that NOVs be
automatically expunged after a specified
number of years and removed from the
Web site or, in the alternative,
identifying information should be
removed from NOVs on the Web site.
The Commission agrees that under no
circumstance should an NOV be a
surprise to Tribes. This Commission
established Assistance, Compliance, and
Enforcement as its policy for regulating
Tribes and agrees that a regulation
identifying the process for ensuring
compliance would benefit the industry.
The Commission will be reviewing this
potential regulation during the Group 2
period.
B. Proceedings Before the Commission
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider more comprehensive and
detailed procedural rules for
proceedings before the Commission.
Some Tribes expressed a concern that a
more formal process may be more
burdensome, costly, and delay the
process for review. Other comments
recommended that more detail would
provide greater certainty for Tribes.
Some comments recommended that the
Chairwoman should be prohibited from
participating in appeals of agency
actions issued by the Chairwoman.
Those comments noted that the
underlying principle of these procedural
rules should be the guarantee of due
process. Many comments requested
concise, streamlined rules in order to
protect all parties and recommended
reviewing the appeals process utilized
by other federal agencies for guidance.
Included in the comments received by
Tribes regarding proceedings before the
Commission were a number of
comments requesting clarification on
submission and approval of gaming
ordinances and amendments. Some
Tribes expressed concern about the
length of time it takes for approval of an
ordinance and requested further clarity
on how the Commission contacts Tribes
if there are questions concerning a
proposed ordinance.
The Commission recognizes the
perception that the current process may
not provide clarity to Tribes when
appealing the Chairwoman’s actions.
The Commission will review these
regulations during the Group Two
period.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will
hold tribal consultations on Group Two
regulations on the following dates as set
forth in more detail below. The
Commission has attempted to schedule
consultations in every region and to
hold those consultations either before or
after other events widely attended by
tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner
is both to encourage participation of
tribal officials and to conserve tribal
resources by reducing the amount of
travel of participants.
GROUP 2
Date
Event
Location
Great Plains/Rocky Mountains/Midwest Tradeshow & Conference
May 20, 2011 ...........................
ATNI Mid Year Conference ...............................................................
June 8, 2011 ............................
Indian Bingo and Class II Summit ....................................................
June 21–22, 2011 ....................
CNIGA Membership Meeting ............................................................
July 14–15, 2011 ......................
Aug. 18–19, 2011 .....................
Aug. 25–26, 2011 .....................
Northwest Indian Gaming Expo ........................................................
Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Conference ..........................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
Sept. 7–8, 2011 ........................
Sept. 15–16, 2011 ....................
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
May 16, 2011 ...........................
NIGC Consultation—United Tribes International Powwow ...............
National Tribal Gaming Commissioner/Regulator Association Fall
Meeting.
VI. Group Three: Part 543—Minimum
Internal Control Standards for Class II
Gaming; Part 547—Minimum Technical
Standards for Gaming Equipment Used
with the Play of Class II Games
The NOI also requested comment on
the Class II Minimum Internal Control
Standards (MICS) and Minimum
Technical Standards. Specifically, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
NOI requested comment on how to
proceed with revisions to these Parts.
While the Technical Standards were
revised in 2008, the NOI noted that
Tribes had requested additional
updates.
The Commission received many
comments requesting the review and
update of both the Class II MICS and
Class II Technical Standards. Comments
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior
Lake, MN.
Coeur d’Alene Resort & Casino Plummer,
ID.
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior
Lake, MN.
Harrah’s Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley
Center, CA.
Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
Tulsa, OK.
Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale,
AZ.
Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino,
Coarsegold, CA.
emphasized the importance of Class II
gaming and the need to ensure that the
regulations address changes in
technology. Some comments
recommended a Tribal Advisory
Committee be formed with
representation from a broad group of
interests, including Tribes,
manufacturers, and testing laboratories.
Other comments suggested the
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
regulations be revised utilizing a
negotiated rulemaking process. Finally,
some commentators stated that
electronic gambling machines are public
health hazards and that the technical
standards should distinguish between
harmful and less harmful games. These
comments stated that NIGC should
require the industry to demonstrate that
Class II games are in fact safe.
Based on the comments received, the
Commission anticipates that it will
review this Part during the Group Three
period. Class II MICS and Technical
Standards are important to both Tribes
and the public.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will
hold tribal consultations on Group
Three regulations on the following dates
as set forth in more detail below. The
18463
Commission has attempted to schedule
consultations in every region and to
hold those consultations either before or
after other events widely attended by
tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner
is both to encourage participation of
tribal officials and to conserve tribal
resources by reducing the amount of
travel of participants.
GROUP 3
Date
Event
Location
June 8, 2011 ............................
Indian Bingo and Class II Summit ....................................................
June 13, 2011 ..........................
June 21–22, 2011 ....................
NCAI Mid Year Conference ..............................................................
CNIGA Membership Meeting ............................................................
July 14–15, 2011 ......................
July 20–21, 2011 ......................
Northwest Indian Gaming Expo ........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
July 28–29, 2011 ......................
Aug. 18–19, 2011 .....................
Aug. 25–26, 2011 .....................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast .........................................................
Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Conference ..........................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
Sept. 7–8, 2011 ........................
Sept. 15–16, 2011 ....................
Sept. 19–20, 2011 ....................
Sept. 29–30, 2011 ....................
NIGC Consultation—United Tribes International Powwow ...............
National Tribal Gaming Commissioner/Regulator Association Fall
Meeting.
NIGC Regional Training ....................................................................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast .........................................................
Oct. 6–7, 2011 ..........................
G2E—National ..................................................................................
Oct./Nov. 2011 .........................
Nov. 3–4, 2011 .........................
Jan. 11–12, 2012 .....................
Jan. 18–19, 2012 .....................
Jan. 23–24, 2012 .....................
Jan. 26–27, 2012 .....................
Jan. 30–31, 2012 .....................
Feb. 2–3, 2012 .........................
USET Annual Meeting ......................................................................
NCAI Annual Conference ..................................................................
NIGC Consultation—Eastern ............................................................
NIGC Consultation—Great Plains .....................................................
NIGC Consultation—California .........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Northwest ........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Oklahoma ........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
Feb. 7–8, 2012 .........................
NIGC Consultation—Great Plains .....................................................
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior
Lake, MN.
Hyatt Regency, Milwaukee, WI.
Harrah’s Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley
Center, CA.
Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa
Ana Pueblo, NM.
DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
Tulsa, OK.
Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale,
AZ.
Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino,
Coarsegold, CA.
Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO.
Turning Stone Resort & Casino, Verona,
NY.
Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las
Vegas, NV.
Mississippi Choctaw, MS.
Portland, OR.
Wind Creek Casino, Atmore, AL.
Crowne Plaza, Billings, MT.
Win-River Casino, Redding, CA.
7 Feathers Casino, Canyonville, OR.
Cherokee Hard Rock, Tulsa, OK.
Isleta Hard Rock Casino Resort, Albuquerque, NM.
Radisson Hotel, Rapid City, SD.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
VII. Group Four: Part 556—Background
Investigations for Primary Management
Officials and Key Employees; Part
558—Gaming Licenses for Key
Employees and Primary Management
Officials; Part 556—Formalizing the
‘‘Pilot Program’’; Part 571—Monitoring
and Investigations; Part 531—Collateral
Agreements; Part 537—Background
Investigations for Persons or Entities
With a Financial Interest in, or Having
Management Responsibility for, a
Management Contract; and Part 502—
Definitions
A. Background Investigations and Pilot
Program
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider formalizing through regulation
a long-standing ‘‘pilot program’’ under
which participating Tribes provide
NIGC with concise information
pertaining to employees licensed or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
denied a license in lieu of the process
outlined in Part 556. Comments were
submitted supporting the Commission’s
consideration of amending the
regulation to incorporate the pilot
program. One Tribe stated that the pilot
program should be formalized so long as
no changes are made to the current
program. Some Tribes commented that
most Tribes already participate in the
program.
Additionally, the NOI requested
comment on whether the NIGC should
process fingerprint cards for nonprimary management officials or nonkey employees. Many comments
supported increased access to
fingerprint and background information
for additional employees but expressed
that this not be mandated by the NIGC.
Some commentators requested that this
should include vendors and contractors
as well. Additionally, many comments
requested that the NIGC provide tribal
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
gaming commissions access to licensing
information via an online database or
expansion of the TBIS database.
The Commission agrees that the ‘‘pilot
program’’ is widely participated in by a
large number of gaming Tribes and that
access to background information is
important to shield Tribes from
organized crime and other corrupting
influences. Based on the comments
received, the Commission intends to
review these regulations during the
Group Four period.
B. Management Contracts
1. Collateral Agreements
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider approving collateral
agreements to a management contract.
Some comments asserted that collateral
agreements are outside the scope of
NIGC authority and requiring
submission and approval of those
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
18464
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
agreements would second-guess tribal
business decisions. One commentator
stated that the NIGC should not expand
authority over non-management
business relationships of the Tribe.
Additionally, some comments expressed
concern that requiring the approval of
non-management collateral agreements
would affect their relationships with
current or potential business partners,
discourage private investment in Indian
Country, and potentially call into
question the validity of previously
executed agreements. These
commentators recommended the NIGC
only review and approve those
agreements containing management
provisions. Another commentator
suggested that the review and approval
of collateral agreements would greatly
reduce the risks to both Tribes and
would-be management contractors, thus
reducing overreaching by third parties.
Other comments supported the review
and approval of collateral agreements by
the NIGC. Those Tribes stated that it is
the NIGC’s trust responsibility to ensure
that such agreements do not violate the
sole proprietary interest provisions of
IGRA. Other Tribes suggested that the
NIGC be available to review and
approve collateral agreements solely at
the request of the Tribe. One
commentator suggested drafting a
regulation that specifies the maximum
amount of revenue that could be
included in collateral agreements.
Based on the comments received in
response to the NOI, the Commission
intends to review this regulation during
the Group Four period.
2. Background Information for Persons
or Entities With a Financial Interest in,
or Having Management Responsibility
for, a Management Contract
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider amending this regulation to
specify that a contractor should be
required to submit background
information when the contract is only
for Class III gaming. Some Tribes stated
that the NIGC has no authority over
Class III gaming and thus no authority
over Class III management contractors.
Other Tribes stated that IGRA
specifically grants the NIGC the
authority to complete background
investigations on Class II and Class III
management contractors. One Tribe
stated that because background
investigations are a requirement of the
tribal-state compact, requiring an
additional background investigation is
duplicative, burdensome, and
overreaching. Other comments
recommended that in addition to the
clarification, the NIGC should clarify
submission requirements for Class II
and Class III background investigations
and streamline the background
investigation process to allow for
expedited review of individuals and
entities holding a gaming license in
other tribal and state jurisdictions.
The Commission agrees that this issue
has been the point of confusion for
Tribes and the public. The Commission
intends to review this regulation during
the Group Four period.
C. Inspection and Access to Records
The NOI requested comment on
whether there was a need to clarify
Commission access to records located
off-site, including at sites maintained or
owned by third parties. One comment
stated that this section should be
revised to explicitly deny the NIGC
access to Class III records. Some
comments stated that the NIGC has the
right to access all records of the Tribal
gaming enterprise, regardless of
location. Other comments stated that
NIGC should only request records
within its statutory authority. Another
comment suggested that the regulation
be amended to require Tribes to
maintain all records on site.
The Commission acknowledges the
need to clarify Commission access to
records located off-site, including at
sites maintained and owned by third
parties. The Commission intends to
review this regulation during the Group
Four period.
D. Definitions—Net Revenues—
management fee
The NOI asked whether the
Commission should consider whether
the definition of Net revenues—
management fee should be defined to be
consistent with the General Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP) when
determining the management fee. Many
comments stated that if this definition
was amended, it would need to be
consistent with the statutory definition
of Net Revenue contained in IGRA, 25
U.S.C. 2703(9). Other comments stated
that it should be defined consistent with
industry standards such as GAAP. One
comment noted that a clearer definition
would have hastened the resolution of
a dispute with their state over the
definition of net win and net revenue.
Another comment stated that the 2008
regulatory change to the definition of
Net revenue does not comply with IGRA
and needs to be revised to ensure it is
consistent with the statutory definition.
Based on the comments that the
definition could be clearer and that
there may be some benefit to a
definition consistent with GAAP, the
Commission intends to review this
definition during Group Four
consultation and comment period.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will
hold tribal consultations on Group Four
regulations on the following dates as set
forth in more detail below. The
Commission has attempted to schedule
consultations in every region and to
hold those consultations either before or
after other events widely attended by
tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner
is both to encourage participation of
tribal officials and to conserve tribal
resources by reducing the amount of
travel of participants.
GROUP 4
Event
Location
June 8, 2011 ............................
Indian Bingo and Class II Summit ....................................................
June 13, 2011 ..........................
June 21–22, 2011 ....................
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Date
NCAI Mid Year Conference ..............................................................
CNIGA Membership Meeting ............................................................
July 14–15, 2011 ......................
July 20–21, 2011 ......................
Northwest Indian Gaming Expo ........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
July 28–29, 2011 ......................
Aug. 18–19, 2011 .....................
Aug. 25–26, 2011 .....................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast .........................................................
Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Conference ..........................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
Sept. 7–8, 2011 ........................
NIGC Consultation—United Tribes International Powwow ...............
Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior
Lake, MN.
Hyatt Regency, Milwaukee, WI.
Harrah’s Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley
Center, CA.
Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa
Ana Pueblo, NM.
DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
Tulsa, OK.
Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale,
AZ.
Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
18465
GROUP 4
Date
Event
Location
Sept. 15–16, 2011 ....................
Sept. 19–20, 2011 ....................
Oct. 6–7, 2011 ..........................
National Tribal Gaming Commissioner/Regulator Association Fall
Meeting.
NIGC Regional Training ....................................................................
G2E—National ..................................................................................
Oct./Nov. 2011 .........................
USET Annual Meeting ......................................................................
Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino,
Coarsegold, CA.
Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO.
Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las
Vegas, NV.
Mississippi Choctaw, MS.
VIII. Group Five: Part 518—Self
Regulation of Class II Gaming;
proposed new Sole Proprietary Interest
regulation; and implementation
through regulation of Class III MICS
options
successfully. Due to the interest
expressed in revising this regulation, the
Commission intends to review this
regulation during the Group Five
period.
A. Self Regulation of Class II Gaming
The NOI requested comments on
whether the Commission should
consider a regulation defining sole
proprietary interest and providing a
process through which a Tribe may
request the NIGC to conduct a review
and make a determination. Many Tribes
and other interested parties have
approached the NIGC requesting a
determination regarding whether a
single agreement, or a combination of
agreements, violate IGRA’s sole
proprietary interest requirement. The
comments received in response to the
NOI reflect the complexity of this issue.
Some comments state that the
Commission should promulgate a
regulation that would provide for
review only at the request of a tribe.
Other comments state that the
percentages contained in IGRA serve to
define what percentage might violate
the Act’s sole proprietary interest
provision. One tribe suggested that if
Sole Proprietary Interest is to be
defined, then so should Primary
Beneficiary. Some comments stated that
a clear definition of sole proprietary
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider amending the process for
obtaining a self-regulation certification.
The Commission has heard that the
administrative burden of completing the
process significantly outweighs the
benefits obtained from self regulation.
Comments received from the NOI state
that this regulation is not performing the
function set forth in IGRA. Comments
stated that the submission requirements
are duplicative and unduly burdensome
and the petition and annual reporting
requirement undermine the purpose of
self-regulating. One comment
recommended that high standards
should be maintained, and the benefits
and recognition for self regulating
Tribes should be higher. A Tribe noted
that self regulation is a hallmark of
tribal sovereignty.
The Commission agrees that this
regulation is under-utilized by Tribes.
Of over 220 gaming Tribes, only two
Tribes have gone through the selfregulation certification process
B. Sole Proprietary Interest
interest may provide stability and access
to financing. Other comments suggested
that a definition might limit tribal
access to capital. Some comments
suggested that this determination be
best left to the courts to decide.
The Commission acknowledges the
comments regarding defining Sole
Proprietary Interest through a
regulation. Given the importance of this
issue and IGRA’s mandate that Tribes
maintain the sole proprietary interest,
the Commission intends to review this
issue during the Group Five period.
C. Class III MICS Implementation
Based on the comments received
during the Group One period, the
Commision will address
implementation of changes to Class III
MICS during the Group Five period.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will
hold tribal consultations on Group Five
regulations on the following dates as set
forth in more detail below. The
Commission has attempted to schedule
consultations in every region and to
hold those consultations either before or
after other events widely attended by
tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner
is both to encourage participation of
tribal officials and to conserve tribal
resources by reducing the amount of
travel of participants.
GROUP 5
Event
Location
July 14–15, 2011 ......................
July 20–21, 2011 ......................
Northwest Indian Gaming Expo ........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
July 28–29, 2011 ......................
Aug. 18–19, 2011 .....................
Aug. 25–26, 2011 .....................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast .........................................................
Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Conference ..........................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
Sept. 7–8, 2011 ........................
Sept. 15–16, 2011 ....................
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Date
Sept. 19–20, 2011 ....................
Sept. 29–30, 2011 ....................
NIGC Consultation—United Tribes International Powwow ...............
National Tribal Gaming Commissioner/Regulator Association Fall
Meeting.
NIGC Regional Training ....................................................................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast .........................................................
Oct. 6–7, 2011 ..........................
G2E—National ..................................................................................
Oct./Nov. 2011 .........................
Nov. 3–4, 2011 .........................
Nov. 14–15, 2011 .....................
Nov. 17–18, 2011 .....................
USET Annual Meeting ......................................................................
NCAI Annual Conference ..................................................................
NIGC Consultation—California .........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Southwest ........................................................
Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa
Ana Pueblo, NM.
DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
Tulsa, OK.
Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale,
AZ.
Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino,
Coarsegold, CA.
Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO.
Turning Stone Resort & Casino, Verona,
NY.
Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las
Vegas, NV.
Mississippi Choctaw, MS.
Portland, OR.
Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, CA.
Fort McDowell Casino, Scottsdale, AZ.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
18466
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
GROUP 5
Date
Event
Location
Nov. 30–Dec. 1, 2011 ..............
Dec. 5–6, 2011 .........................
NIGC Consultation—Oklahoma ........................................................
NIGC Consultation—Northwest ........................................................
Dec. 8–9, 2011 .........................
NIGC Consultation—Great Plains .....................................................
Dec. 12–13, 2011 .....................
NIGC Consultation—Northeast .........................................................
Downstream Casino Resort, Miami, OK.
Clearwater Casino Resort, Suquamish,
WA.
Turtle Creek Casino & Hotel, Williamsburg, MI.
DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
IX. Regulations That the Commission
Does Not Anticipate Revising
A. Part 502—Net Revenues—Allowable
Uses.
The NOI requested comment on
whether the Commission should
consider a definition for the term Net
Revenues—allowable uses. Many Tribes
commented that this approach would
intrude on tribal sovereignty, that tribal
budgeting is an inherent tribal
governmental function, and that such an
approach could interfere with internal
tribal matters. Further, tribal
commentators noted that IGRA has a
clear definition of Net Revenues and
asserted that the NIGC does not have
authority to change this definition. An
accounting firm commented that no
single formulaic approach should be
applied to all Tribes. A few comments
from the public stated that if NIGC were
to promulgate a definition it should
only do so after extensive review,
consultation, and comment. Some
comments supported promulgation of a
definition, arguing that doing so could
ensure Tribes consider the financial
integrity of the gaming operation before
funding other tribal programs.
After review of all the comments
submitted, the Commission does not
anticipate promulgating a definition of
net revenues—allowable uses at this
time. The Commission acknowledges
the concerns articulated by the public
and will examine alternatives consistent
with IGRA that minimize intrusions on
tribal sovereignty and internal tribal
matters.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Part 502—Management Contract
Definition
The NOI also requested comment on
whether to expand the definition of
Management Contract to include
contracts that pay a fee based on a
percentage of gaming revenues. The
comments received from the public
expressed concern that an expanded
definition would inappropriately inhibit
the ability of Tribes to enter into
contracts, increase the administrative
burden on the NIGC, and infringe upon
tribal sovereignty. The public also
commented that an expanded definition
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
may be counter to IGRA’s purpose of
promoting tribal economic
development, self-sufficiency, and
strong tribal governments. Finally, many
commentators noted that only contracts
containing actual management
provisions should be subject to the
management contract approval process.
Regarding whether the Commission
should consider promulgating a
definition of acceptable compensation
to a manager contractor, some Tribes
commented that it would be beneficial
for the Commission to consider issuing
guidance on compensation and the
upper limits on management fees. Some
Tribes commented that a definition
would intrude on business decisions of
the Tribe. Another Tribe noted that
amending the definition to establish a
maximum fee might be appropriate, if
enforced only against the company, not
the Tribe. However, most comments
suggested that NIGC should not revise
this definition.
The Commission notes that IGRA
establishes a maximum fee for
management contractors. Based on a
review of the public’s comments, the
Commission does not anticipate
expanding the definition at this time.
The Commission acknowledges the
concerns articulated by the public and
will examine alternatives consistent
with IGRA that minimize intrusions on
tribal sovereignty and promote the
purposes of IGRA.
C. Part 533—Approval of Management
Contracts
The NOI sought comment on whether
to consider amending the trustee
standard in Part 533 by adding two
grounds for possible disapproval in
§ 533.6(b). One potential basis for
disapproval would be because the
management contract was not submitted
in accordance with the submission
requirements of 25 CFR part 533. The
second potential basis for disapproval
would be because the management
contract does not contain the regulatory
requirements for approval pursuant to
25 CFR part 531. Many comments
received from Tribes were generally
supportive of the Commission reviewing
this part of the regulation. Some Tribes
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
commented that if the Commission
reviewed this part of the regulation and
ultimately amended it as described, it
could result in the disapproval of a
management contract for technical
reasons that could have been easily
remedied.
The Commission does not anticipate
amending Part 533 at this time. NIGC
will continue to assist Tribes and
potential management companies with
the regulatory process set forth in IGRA
and Part 533 to ensure full compliance
with IGRA.
X. Other Regulations or Policies
A. Tribal Advisory Committee
The NOI requested comment on
whether a policy or regulation should be
developed identifying when a Tribal
Advisory Committee (TAC) will be
formed to provide input and advice to
the NIGC, and if so, how the Committee
members should be selected.
Additionally, the NOI asked if cost
should be a factor when considering
whether to form a TAC.
In response to this request, Tribes
commented that while TACs can be an
effective way to communicate with
Tribes, a TAC is not a substitute for
tribal consultation as set forth in
Executive Order 13175. Commentators
indicated that cost is a valid
consideration and that the expense of
proceeding with a TAC is justified only
if all views are considered by the
Commission. Tribes also commented
that the rules governing TACs can be
unclear, resulting in confusion and
uncertainty about the TAC process.
Commentators also noted that the use of
TAC has the potential to unnecessarily
extend the time it takes to draft a rule.
Other comments received in response
to the NOI noted that a TAC has the
potential to provide useful input and
perspective to the Commission
particularly on topics that broadly
impact Indian gaming. Additionally,
comments advised that a TAC should be
flexible in order to meet the specific
needs of the NIGC and the Tribes. Tribes
advised the NIGC to create a policy that
is flexible and allows TACs to be
utilized on a case-by-case basis.
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules
The Commission recognizes the
concern expressed in comments
regarding the use of TACs. Additionally,
the Commission also recognizes the
potential benefit of a TAC, particularly
when addressing a complex or technical
regulation. While the Commission
agrees with those comments suggesting
a regulation may not be necessary, the
Commission will consider drafting a
policy guiding the development of a
TAC, member selection, and meeting
rules. The Commission anticipates that
a TAC policy will be developed during
2011. The process for developing a TAC
policy will be consistent with the
NIGC’s Tribal Consultation policy.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Communication Policy
The NOI asked whether the NIGC
should consider developing a regulation
or include as part of a regulation a
process for determining how it
communicates with Tribes. The NOI
noted that NIGC communicates directly
with the Tribal Gaming Regulatory
Agency (TGRA) or Tribal Gaming
Commission (TGC) as well as directly
with the tribal government. The NOI
asked whether the NIGC should
consider promulgating a regulation or
policy establishing a default method of
communication unless otherwise
directed by tribal resolution.
Many comments recommended that
the Commission should not consider
adopting a universal standard for
communicating with Tribes. Tribes
noted the variety in government
structures and methods used by Tribes
when taking official action. However,
Tribes also noted the need for more
effective communication with all
affected parties, including the elected
government officials, TGC, TGRA and
the gaming operation. While the
Commission agrees with those
comments suggesting a regulation may
not be necessary, the Commission will
consider drafting a policy guiding how
the Commission communicates with
Tribes, their gaming regulatory bodies,
and the gaming operation. This
Commission anticipates that a policy
will be developed over the course of the
regulatory review process outlined
above. The process for developing a
Communication policy will be
consistent with NIGC’s Tribal
Consultation policy.
C. Other Regulations
During this review process, the
Commission attempted to identify those
regulations identified by Tribes and/or
the Commission in most need of review.
However, the Commission reserves the
right to review other regulations if
needed throughout this review process.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:37 Apr 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
Review of regulations not specifically
identified in this Notice will be
reviewed utilizing the process described
in Section IIB of this Notice.
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706(b)(10); E.O.
13175.
Dated: March 30, 2011, Washington, DC.
Tracie L. Stevens,
Chairwoman.
Steffani A. Cochran,
Vice-Chairwoman.
Daniel J. Little,
Associate Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2011–7912 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Part 104
RIN 1219–AB73
Pattern of Violations
Mine Safety and Health
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
comment period.
AGENCY:
The Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) is extending
the comment period on the proposed
rule addressing Pattern of Violations
(POV). This extension gives commenters
additional time to review and comment
on the proposed rule.
DATES: All comments must be received
or postmarked by midnight Eastern
Daylight Savings Time on April 18,
2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of
the following methods. Comments must
be identified with ‘‘RIN 1219–AB73’’ in
the subject line of the message.
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Electronic mail: zzMSHAcomments@dol.gov.
• Facsimile: 202–693–9441.
• Regular Mail or Courier: MSHA,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and
Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard,
Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209–
3939. Courier must sign in at the
receptionist’s desk on the 21st floor.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roslyn B. Fontaine, Chief, Regulatory
Development Division, Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances,
MSHA, at fontaine.roslyn@dol.gov (email); 202–693–9440 (voice); or 202–
693–9441 (facsimile).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18467
Availability of Information
View Public Comments: MSHA will
post all comments on the Internet
without change, including any personal
information provided. Access comments
electronically at https://www.msha.gov/
REGS/Comments/2011-2255/POV.asp or
at https://www.regulations.gov. Review
comments in person at MSHA, Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances,
at the address in the ADDRESSES section
above.
E-mail notification: To subscribe to
receive e-mail notification when the
Agency publishes rulemaking
documents in the Federal Register, go
to: https://www.msha.gov/subscriptions/
subscribe.aspx.
Extension of Comment Period and
Request for Comments
On February 2, 2011 (76 FR 5719),
MSHA published a proposed rule on
Pattern of Violations (POV). In response
to requests from interested parties,
MSHA is extending the comment period
from April 4, 2011, to April 18, 2011.
MSHA solicits comments from the
mining community on all aspects of the
proposed rule. The proposed rule is
available on MSHA’s Web site at
https://www.msha.gov/REGS/FEDREG/
PROPOSED/2011PROP/2011-2255.pdf.
Dated: March 30, 2011.
Joseph A. Main,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety
and Health.
[FR Doc. 2011–7975 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–43–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 938
[SATS No. PA–156–FOR; Docket ID: OSM
2010–0004]
Pennsylvania Regulatory Program
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the
public comment period.
AGENCY:
We are reopening the public
comment period related to an
amendment to the Pennsylvania
regulatory program (the ‘‘Pennsylvania
program’’) under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA or the Act). The amendment is
in response to fourteen required
program amendments and the remining
financial guarantee program. The
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM
04APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18457-18467]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7912]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Chapter III
Regulatory Review Schedule; Tribal Consultation
AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Regulatory Review Schedule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 18, 2010, the National Indian Gaming Commission
(NIGC) issued a Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Consultation advising
the public that the NIGC was conducting a comprehensive review of all
regulations promulgated to implement the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
(IGRA). The review identified in the Notice of Inquiry and Notice of
Consultation was also prepared in order to submit the NIGC's Semi-
Annual Regulatory Review to the Federal Register in April 2011 as set
forth in Executive Order 12866 entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq. The
NIGC held eight consultations during January and February 2011 and
invited written comments to be submitted by February 12, 2011. Comments
received and transcripts of the consultations are available on the NIGC
Web site. The NIGC reviewed all comments received and created this
comprehensive regulatory review agenda schedule based on the input
received.
DATES: See Consultation Schedule for Review, Section III under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below, for a master schedule of dates,
locations, and subjects of consultation meetings. See sections IV-VIII
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below for dates and locations of
consultations on particular subjects.
ADDRESSES: Testimony and comments sent by electronic mail or delivered
by hand are strongly encouraged. Electronic submissions should be
directed to reg.review@nigc.gov. See File Formats and Required
Information for Submitting Comments under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION,
section IIC, below, for instructions. Submissions delivered by hand
should be brought to the consultations. See Consultation Schedule for
Review, section III under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below, for a master
schedule of dates, locations, and subjects of consultation meetings.
See sections IV-VIII under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below for dates
and locations of consultations on particular subjects. Submissions sent
by regular mail should be addressed to Lael Echo-Hawk, Counselor to the
Chair, National Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Suite
9100, Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lael Echo-Hawk, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005.
Telephone: 202/632-7009; e-mail: reg.review@nigc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA or Act), Public Law 100-497,
25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq., was signed into law on October 17, 1988. The
purposes of IGRA include providing a statutory basis for the operation
of gaming by Indian Tribes as a means of promoting tribal economic
development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments; ensuring
that the Indian tribe is the primary beneficiary of the gaming
operation; and declaring that the
[[Page 18458]]
establishment of independent federal regulatory authority for gaming on
Indian lands, the establishment of federal standards for gaming on
Indian lands, and the establishment of a National Indian Gaming
Commission are necessary to meet congressional concerns regarding
gaming and to protect such gaming as a means of generating tribal
revenue. 25 U.S.C. 2702.
The IGRA authorizes the NIGC to promulgate such regulations and
guidelines as it deems appropriate to implement the provisions of the
Act. 25 U.S.C. 2706(b)(10). On November 12, 2010, the Commission issued
a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) requesting comment on which of its
regulations were most in need of revision, in what order the Commission
should review its regulations, and the process NIGC should utilize to
make revisions. The Notice of Inquiry was published in the Federal
Register on November 18, 2010. 75 FR 70680.
As the Commission previously explained, the regulatory review
facilitates effective implementation of IGRA and coincides with
Executive Order 12866 entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review''
providing for Federal entities to identify agency statements of
regulatory priorities and additional information about the most
significant regulatory activities planned for the coming year.
On January 18, 2011, President Obama issued Executive Order 13563,
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Executive Order 13563 sets
forth the general principle that regulatory systems ``must identify and
use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving
regulatory ends.'' This Executive Order further provides that agencies
tailor ``regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent
with obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other
things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative
regulations[.]'' Further, agencies must ``to the extent feasible,
specify performance objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or
manner of compliance that regulated entities must adopt[.]'' In the
spirit of this Executive Order and Executive Order 13175 regarding
consultation with Indian Tribal Governments, the NIGC provides this
comprehensive regulatory review agenda. The agenda is a product of
extensive tribal consultation and extensive public comment.
II. Process for Review
A. Groups
Based on both public comments and tribal consultations, the
Commission has decided to organize its regulatory review into five
separate groupings. The Commission will organize its consultations with
Tribes according to these groupings. The regulations in each group will
be reviewed separately from the regulations in the other groups, and
specific regulations in each group may proceed through the regulatory
review process independently from the other regulations in a particular
group.
1. Group 1 will include a review of:
(a) A Buy Indian Act regulation;
(b) 25 CFR part 523--Review and Approval of Existing Ordinances or
Resolutions;
(c) 25 CFR part 514--Fees;
(d) 25 CFR part 559--Facility License Notifications, Renewals, and
Submissions; and
(e) 25 CFR part 542--Minimum Internal Control Standards for Class
III Gaming.
2. Group 2 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 573--Enforcement; and
(b) Regulations concerning proceedings before the Commission,
including 25 CFR part 519--Service, 25 CFR part 524--Appeals, 25 CFR
part 539--Appeals, and 25 CFR part 577--Appeals Before the Commission.
3. Group 3 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 543--Minimum Internal Control Standards for Class
II Gaming; and
(b) 25 CFR part 547--Minimum Technical Standards for Gaming
Equipment Used with the Play of Class II Games.
4. Group 4 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 556--Background Investigations for Primary
Management Officials and Key Employees;
(b) 25 CFR part 558--Gaming Licenses for Key Employees and Primary
Management Officials;
(c) 25 CFR part 556--Background Investigations for Primary
Management Officials and Key Employees, ``Pilot Program.'';
(d) 25 CFR part 571--Monitoring and Investigations;
(e) 25 CFR part 531--Collateral Agreements;
(f) 25 CFR part 537--Background Investigations for Persons or
Entities With a Financial Interest in, or Having Management
Responsibility for, a Management Contract; and
(g) 25 CFR part 502--Definitions.
5. Group 5 will include a review of:
(a) 25 CFR part 518--Self Regulation of Class II Gaming;
(b) A Sole Proprietary Interest regulation; and
(c) 25 CFR part 542, Minimum Internal Control Standards for Class
III Gaming.
B. Review Phases
Each group of regulations will be addressed in the three phases
listed below. The purpose of the three phases is to facilitate
meaningful consultation with Tribes, consistent with Executive Order
13175, prior to promulgating any revisions, amendments, or new rules.
While Tribal Advisory Committees (TAC) have been utilized by the NIGC
in the past, NIGC received comments from Tribes expressing their view
that the TAC process was not a substitute for tribal consultation.
In response to comments received on the NOI, the Commission has
established the tribal consultation schedule below. The NIGC will
attempt to provide significant means for tribal input through tribal
consultation meetings and broad, transparent opportunities to submit
written comments at every phase before the Notice of Final Rule is
published.
1. Drafting Phase. Consistent with Executive Order 13175, the
Commission will endeavor to include Tribes in the drafting phase of any
new or amended rule. The purpose of the drafting phase is to ensure
tribal participation early in the drafting of any rule with tribal
implications. The drafting phase will begin with either a preliminary
draft based on previous comments received by NIGC, preliminary proposed
amendments to a current regulation, or preliminary proposals provided
by Tribes or tribal organizations. The drafting phase will include
tribal consultation meetings and an opportunity for the public to
submit written comments. Following completion of the drafting phase,
the Commission anticipates that generally it will proceed to issuing a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that will be published in the
Federal Register.
2. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Phase. The NIGC will draft a NPRM.
The Commission anticipates that a preamble to a NPRM will summarize
comments received during the drafting phase and include a discussion of
the substantive provisions of the proposed rule. The Commission
anticipates that for any NPRM it will endeavor to provide a public
comment period of approximately 60 days and will consult with Tribes
during that period on the proposed rule. After the close of the comment
period, a Notice of Final Rule will be prepared and published in the
Federal Register.
[[Page 18459]]
3. Notice of Final Rule Phase. The Commission will draft a Final
Rule based on all comments received during the NPRM phase. The preamble
to the final rule will summarize comments received and include a
discussion of the substantive provisions of the final rule. Generally,
the Commission anticipates that final rules will become effective 45
days after publication.
C. File Formats and Required Information for Submitting Comments
If submitting by electronic mail: send to reg.review@nigc.gov a
message containing the name of the person making the submission, his or
her title and organization (if the submission of an organization),
mailing address, telephone number, fax number (if any), and e-mail
address. The document itself must be sent as an attachment and must be
in a single file and in recent, if not current, versions of: (1) Adobe
Portable Document File (PDF) format (preferred); or (2) Microsoft Word
file formats.
If submitting by print only: anyone who is unable to submit a
comment in electronic form should submit an original and two paper
copies by hand or by mail to the appropriate address listed above. Use
of surface mail is strongly discouraged owing to the uncertainty of
timely delivery.
III. Consultation Schedule for Review
Subject to future changes, NIGC will hold tribal consultations on
the following dates as set forth in more detail below. The Commission
has attempted to schedule consultations in every region and to hold
those consultations either before or after other events widely attended
by tribal officials. The purpose of scheduling consultations in this
manner is both to encourage participation of tribal officials and to
conserve tribal resources by reducing the amount of travel of
participants.
For additional information on consultation locations and times,
please refer to the Web site of the National Indian Gaming Commission,
https://www.nigc.gov. Please RSVP at consultation.rsvp@nigc.gov.
Please note that the Commission intends to post all written
comments received during the regulatory review process on the Tribal
Consultation Web page of the NIGC Web site located at https://www.nigc.gov.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Consultation date Event Location group(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apr. 28, 2011.............. Oklahoma Tribal Gaming Regulators Choctaw Casino Resort, Durant, OK. 1
Association Spring Conference.
May 2, 2011................ Tribal Self-Governance Conference. Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, 1
CA.
May 5, 2011................ Southern Gaming Summit & Bingo Mississippi Coast Coliseum & 1
World Conference. Convention Ctr., Biloxi, MS.
May 16, 2011............... Great Plains/Rocky Mountains/ Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, 1, 2
Midwest Tradeshow & Conference. Prior Lake, MN.
May 20, 2011............... ATNI Mid Year Conference.......... Coeur d'Alene Resort & Casino, 1, 2
Plummer, ID.
June 8, 2011............... Indian Bingo and Class II Summit.. Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, 2, 3, 4
Prior Lake, MN.
June 13, 2011.............. NCAI Mid Year Conference.......... Hyatt Regency, Milwaukee, WI...... 3, 4
June 21-22, 2011........... CNIGA Membership Meeting.......... Harrah's Rincon Hotel & Casino, 1, 2, 3, 4
Valley Center, CA.
July 14-15, 2011........... Northwest Indian Gaming Expo...... Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA 1, 2, 3, 4,
5
July 20-21, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Southwest...... Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa 3, 4, 5
Ana Pueblo, NM.
July 28-29, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Northeast...... DOI South Auditorium, Washington, 3, 4, 5
DC.
Aug. 18-19, 2011........... Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Tulsa, OK......................... 2, 3, 4, 5
Conference.
Aug. 25-26, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Southwest...... Wild Horse Resort Casino, 2, 3, 5
Scottsdale, AZ.
Sept. 7-8, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--United Tribes Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND...... 2, 3, 4, 5
International Powwow.
Sept. 15-16, 2011.......... National Tribal Gaming Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino, 2, 3, 4, 5
Commissioner/Regulator Coarsegold, CA.
Association Fall Meeting.
Sept. 19-20, 2011.......... NIGC Regional Training............ Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO 3, 4, 5
Sept. 29-30, 2011.......... NIGC Consultation--Northeast...... Turning Stone Resort & Casino, 3, 5
Verona, NY.
Oct. 6-7, 2011............. G2E--National..................... Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., 3, 4, 5
Las Vegas, NV.
Oct./Nov. 2011............. USET Annual Meeting............... Mississippi Choctaw, MS........... 3, 4, 5
Nov. 3-4, 2011............. NCAI Annual Conference............ Portland, OR...................... 3, 5
Nov. 14-15, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--California..... Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, 5
CA.
Nov. 17-18, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Southwest...... Fort McDowell Casino, Scottsdale, 5
AZ.
Nov. 30-Dec. 1, 2011....... NIGC Consultation--Oklahoma....... Downstream Casino Resort, Miami, 5
OK.
Dec. 5-6, 2011............. NIGC Consultation--Northwest...... Clearwater Casino Resort, 5
Suquamish, WA.
Dec. 8-9, 2011............. NIGC Consultation--Great Plains... Turtle Creek Casino & Hotel, 5
Williamsburg, MI.
Dec. 12-13, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Northeast...... DOI South Auditorium, Washington, 5
DC.
Jan. 11-12, 2012........... NIGC Consultation--Eastern........ Wind Creek Casino, Atmore, AL..... 3
Jan. 18-19, 2012........... NIGC Consultation--Great Plains... Crowne Plaza, Billings, MT........ 3
Jan. 23-24, 2012........... NIGC Consultation--California..... Win-River Casino, Redding, CA..... 3
Jan. 26-27, 2012........... NIGC Consultation--Northwest...... 7 Feathers Casino, Canyonville, OR 3
Jan. 30-31, 2012........... NIGC Consultation--Oklahoma....... Cherokee Hard Rock, Tulsa, OK..... 3
Feb. 2-3, 2012............. NIGC Consultation--Southwest...... Isleta Hard Rock Casino Resort, 3
Albuquerque, NM.
Feb. 7-8, 2012............. NIGC Consultation--Great Plains... Radisson Hotel, Rapid City, SD.... 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18460]]
IV. Group One: Part 514--Fees; Part 523--Review and Approval of
Existing Ordinances or Resolutions; Part 559--Facility License
Notifications, Renewals, and Submissions; Part 542--Class III Minimum
Internal Controls; Buy Indian Act
A. Part 514--Fees
1. Should the Commission consider revising Part 514 to base fees on the
Tribe's gaming operation's fiscal year?
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
revising this Part to base fees on the Tribe's gaming operation's
fiscal year. Some comments indicated that this was a low priority.
Other comments were generally supportive of the Commission considering
this change, noting that a calculation based on audited financial
statements for the fiscal year would be more convenient. Commentators
did note that if the Commission reviewed Part 514, any amendments
should provide for an adequate transition period. Other comments
suggested that the Commission consider a flexible approach by which
each tribe could determine whether to calculate fees on a fiscal or
calendar year.
The Commission understands that it may be difficult to calculate
fees based on the calendar year, which may lead to frequent audit
adjustments. The Commission strives to be cognizant of and sensitive to
the practical issues raised by any potential amendments to this Part,
including additional costs and the need to provide for an adequate
transition period. However, the Commission believes that review of the
Part is appropriate and has the potential to reduce the number of audit
adjustments. The Commission will review this Part during the Group One
period.
2. Should this Part define Gross Gaming Revenue consistent with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for the purposes of
calculating the fees?
Additionally, the NOI asked whether the Commission should consider
adding to Part 514 a definition of gross gaming revenue consistent with
the GAAP definition of this term. Some public comments suggested that a
revision would promote consistency and uniformity. Other comments
questioned whether the NIGC could define gross gaming revenue given
that IGRA defines the term.
The Commission believes that further review of this regulation is
appropriate. An amendment consistent with IGRA could promote
consistency and uniformity, which may result in greater efficiency. The
Commission will review this Part during the Group One period.
3. Should this Part include a section on the fingerprinting processing
fees?
The NOI asked whether the Commission should consider amending this
Part to include fingerprint processing fees and whether to provide for
a review of the costs on an annual basis and adjust the fingerprint
processing fee accordingly. Additionally, the NOI asked whether the
Commission should consider providing that fees collected for processing
fingerprints should be included in the total revenue collected by the
Commission that is subject to statutory limitation. Comments supported
the inclusion of the fingerprinting fees in the calculation of gross
revenues. Other comments suggested that fingerprinting costs be paid by
those Tribes that use the service rather than by the general fees paid
by Tribes. Other comments suggested that the Commission provide a
public accounting of how the fees are expended by the Commission. Some
comments suggested including the fingerprinting fees as part of the
annual fees while other comments suggested that the fees be separate
from the annual fees collected from Tribes. Those commentators who
recommended keeping the fees separate explained that the fingerprinting
fees were generally an expense paid by gaming commissions rather than
gaming operations. Other Tribes suggested that the Commission consider
the revision if including fingerprinting fees resulted in a lower
annual fee. Finally, several comments suggested the issuance of a
bulletin instead of a regulation to address this issue.
The Commission believes that further review of this proposed
regulation is appropriate. Amendments to this Part could provide
greater clarity to the process and potentially could result greater
efficiency and in cost savings. This issue will be reviewed during the
Group One period.
4. Should the Commission consider a late payment system in lieu of a
Notice of Violation for Tribes submitting their fees to the NIGC late?
Finally, the NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should
consider a late payment system in lieu of a Notice of Violation (NOV)
for addressing fees submitted late to the NIGC. Public comments
uniformly supported the Commission reviewing this approach. Many
commentators observed that issuing a NOV is a serious measure that may
overly penalize Tribes for late submission of their fees. Commentators
noted that a NOV can cause a financial hardship to Tribes by lowering a
Tribe's bond rating and damage its business reputation. Some comments
recommended an automatic additional percentage as a late payment
penalty or a development of a schedule of fines or penalties based on
passage of time or the number late payments. Tribes commented that NOVs
should continue to be utilized for frequent or repeat violators in
order to prevent abuse of the system. Another commentator suggested
that an NOV only be issued after a specified number of missed payments
or dollar amount, if there is gross negligence, or the Tribe has
publicly stated its intention not to pay the NIGC. This commentator
suggested that an NOV should be considered only after negotiations with
the Tribes have failed. Many commentators noted that any approach
should be flexible and include due process so that a Tribe can cure any
purported late payment before the NIGC issues either a ticket or NOV.
The Commission believes that further review of the potential
regulatory amendment is appropriate. A NOV is a serious action issued
to address significant violations of IGRA. A late payment system may be
appropriate to address infrequent situations wherein a tribe submits
fees late to the NIGC. This issue will be considered by the Commission
during the Group One period.
B. Part 523--Review and Approval of Existing Ordinances or Resolutions
Comments received in response to the NOI suggest repealing this
regulation as obsolete. The regulation applies only to gaming
ordinances enacted by Tribes prior to January 22, 1993, and not
submitted to the Chairwoman. During the Group One period, the
Commission will consider repealing this Part.
C. Part 542--Class III Minimum Internal Control Standards
The NOI requested comment regarding Class III Minimum Internal
Control Standards (MICS). The public was asked to comment on how this
issue should be addressed, particularly in light of the decision in the
Colorado River Indian Tribes v. National Indian Gaming Commission. Some
comments suggested that Part 542 should be replaced by a set of
recommended guidelines. Comments explained that many tribal gaming
regulatory authorities rely on Part 542 to set the base of their
minimum internal control standards. Other comments explained
[[Page 18461]]
that some Tribes have adopted the Federal rule verbatim. Some comments
stated that some Tribes have drafted their own internal control
standards. Additionally, commentators noted that some state compacts
incorporate part 542 by reference. Some comments explained that some
Tribes amended their gaming ordinance authorizing the NIGC to regulate
and enforce part 542 in their gaming operations. Other commentators
explained that in California, their state compacts have been
effectively revised to provide for Federal oversight to the extent
specified in the agreements.
A number of Tribes commented that the NIGC does not have the
authority to enforce Class III MICS. A majority of Tribes that
submitted comments suggested that the NIGC issue MICS as guidance. Some
Tribes suggested addressing the enforcement of Class III MICS through
the self-regulation process. Other comments suggested applying a
different fee rate for those Tribes that have amended their tribal
gaming ordinance such that the NIGC can regulate and enforce Part 542.
Some Tribes recommended keeping the Class III MICS in regulation form
and convening a new Tribal Advisory Committee to update the current
regulation. Other Tribes recommended repeal of Part 542. Many of the
comments received by NIGC stated that this was a high priority.
Review of this Part is a high priority of the Commission. NIGC
recognizes that this is a complex and important issue that impacts
Tribes differently across the country. During the Group One period,
NIGC will continue to evaluate and develop solutions for addressing
Class III MICS in a manner consistent with IGRA that does not create a
regulatory void.
D. Part 559--Facility License Notifications, Renewals, and Submissions
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
revising this Part. Many Tribes commented that the process by which the
regulation was adopted did not allow sufficient time for meaningful
tribal consultation. Some commentators stated that Environmental Public
Health and Safety (EPHS) matters and facility licenses should be left
to the authority and jurisdiction of the Tribes. Some Tribes stated
that in addition to tribal regulations and compact provisions, other
federal and tribal agencies already regulate EPHS issues. Some comments
also recommended reviewing Sec. 502.22--``Construction and maintenance
of the gaming facility, and the operation of that gaming is conducted
in a manner which adequately protects the environment and the public
health and safety'' as part of this review.
Some comments questioned the necessity of providing Indian lands
information considering that other Federal agencies already have this
information and that requiring Tribes to re-submit documentation was
duplicative and unnecessary. Some comments stated that the 120-day
notice period was arbitrary and that NIGC should have consulted on the
time frame before implementing the regulation. Some commentators stated
that the regulation should provide some flexibility regarding the 120-
day notice period. Some comments expressed concern that the regulation
could potentially limit the authority of tribal gaming commissions.
Other comments noted that the regulation helped raise the importance of
those issues at the tribal level and benefited the Tribe.
Based on the many comments requesting that this regulation be
reviewed, the NIGC will use the Group One period to review this Part
and Sec. 502.22 ``Construction and maintenance of the gaming facility,
and the operation of that gaming is conducted in a manner which
adequately protects the environment and the public health and safety.''
E. Buy Indian Act Regulation
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
adopting a regulation which would require the NIGC to give preference
to qualified Indian-owned businesses when purchasing goods or services
as defined by the ``Buy Indian Act,'' 25 U.S.C. 47. The Buy Indian Act
provides authority to set aside procurement contracts for qualified
Indian-owned businesses. While many comments support consideration of
this change, a number of comments suggested that utilizing an internal
policy or process would be equally effective.
The Commission believes that a regulation on this issue may promote
long term and consistent application by the agency. During the Group
One period, the Commission will review a potential regulation.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will hold tribal consultations on
Group One regulations on the following dates as set forth in more
detail below. The Commission has attempted to schedule consultations in
every region and to hold those consultations either before or after
other events widely attended by tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner is both to encourage
participation of tribal officials and to conserve tribal resources by
reducing the amount of travel of participants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GROUP 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apr. 28, 2011...................... Oklahoma Tribal Gaming Regulators Choctaw Casino Resort, Durant, OK.
Association Spring Conference.
May 2, 2011........................ Tribal Self-Governance Conference.... Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, CA.
May 5, 2011........................ Southern Gaming Summit & Bingo World Mississippi Coast Coliseum &
Conference. Convention Ctr., Biloxi, MS.
May 16, 2011....................... Great Plains/Rocky Mountains/Midwest Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior
Tradeshow & Conference. Lake, MN.
May 20, 2011....................... ATNI Mid Year Conference............. Coeur d'Alene Resort & Casino,
Plummer, ID.
June 21-22, 2011................... CNIGA Membership Meeting............. Harrah's Rincon Hotel & Casino,
Valley Center, CA.
July 14-15, 2011................... Northwest Indian Gaming Expo......... Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18462]]
V. Group Two: Part 573--Enforcement; Proceedings Before the Commission,
Including Part 519--Service, Part 524--Appeals [of disapproval of a
gaming ordinance, resolution or amendment], Part 539--Appeals [of
approval or disapproval of a management contract or amendment], and
Part 577--Appeals Before the Commission
A. Enforcement
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
promulgating a regulation authorizing the withdrawal of an NOV after it
has been issued. Some Tribes stated that because there was no
prohibition against withdrawing an NOV, the regulation was unnecessary.
Other comments stated that while the Chairwoman retains authority to
withdraw an NOV, a specific regulation outlining the process and
circumstances for the withdrawal was appropriate. Some comments stated
that only the entire Commission should withdraw an NOV.
Many comments stated that the issuance of an NOV can potentially
have serious negative economic impact on the Tribe. These comments
recommended the NIGC institute a compliance model before utilizing a
punitive approach. Such an approach would provide for tribal regulatory
agencies to take enforcement action in the first instance and provide a
notice and opportunity to cure before NIGC action is taken. Tribes also
recommended that NOVs be automatically expunged after a specified
number of years and removed from the Web site or, in the alternative,
identifying information should be removed from NOVs on the Web site.
The Commission agrees that under no circumstance should an NOV be a
surprise to Tribes. This Commission established Assistance, Compliance,
and Enforcement as its policy for regulating Tribes and agrees that a
regulation identifying the process for ensuring compliance would
benefit the industry. The Commission will be reviewing this potential
regulation during the Group 2 period.
B. Proceedings Before the Commission
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
more comprehensive and detailed procedural rules for proceedings before
the Commission. Some Tribes expressed a concern that a more formal
process may be more burdensome, costly, and delay the process for
review. Other comments recommended that more detail would provide
greater certainty for Tribes. Some comments recommended that the
Chairwoman should be prohibited from participating in appeals of agency
actions issued by the Chairwoman. Those comments noted that the
underlying principle of these procedural rules should be the guarantee
of due process. Many comments requested concise, streamlined rules in
order to protect all parties and recommended reviewing the appeals
process utilized by other federal agencies for guidance.
Included in the comments received by Tribes regarding proceedings
before the Commission were a number of comments requesting
clarification on submission and approval of gaming ordinances and
amendments. Some Tribes expressed concern about the length of time it
takes for approval of an ordinance and requested further clarity on how
the Commission contacts Tribes if there are questions concerning a
proposed ordinance.
The Commission recognizes the perception that the current process
may not provide clarity to Tribes when appealing the Chairwoman's
actions. The Commission will review these regulations during the Group
Two period.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will hold tribal consultations on
Group Two regulations on the following dates as set forth in more
detail below. The Commission has attempted to schedule consultations in
every region and to hold those consultations either before or after
other events widely attended by tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner is both to encourage
participation of tribal officials and to conserve tribal resources by
reducing the amount of travel of participants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GROUP 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 16, 2011................ Great Plains/Rocky Mountains/ Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN.
Midwest Tradeshow &
Conference.
May 20, 2011................ ATNI Mid Year Conference...... Coeur d'Alene Resort & Casino Plummer, ID.
June 8, 2011................ Indian Bingo and Class II Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN.
Summit.
June 21-22, 2011............ CNIGA Membership Meeting...... Harrah's Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley Center, CA.
July 14-15, 2011............ Northwest Indian Gaming Expo.. Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
Aug. 18-19, 2011............ Oklahoma Indian Gaming Tulsa, OK.
Association Conference.
Aug. 25-26, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale, AZ.
Sept. 7-8, 2011............. NIGC Consultation--United Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Tribes International Powwow.
Sept. 15-16, 2011........... National Tribal Gaming Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino, Coarsegold, CA.
Commissioner/Regulator
Association Fall Meeting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Group Three: Part 543--Minimum Internal Control Standards for Class
II Gaming; Part 547--Minimum Technical Standards for Gaming Equipment
Used with the Play of Class II Games
The NOI also requested comment on the Class II Minimum Internal
Control Standards (MICS) and Minimum Technical Standards. Specifically,
the NOI requested comment on how to proceed with revisions to these
Parts. While the Technical Standards were revised in 2008, the NOI
noted that Tribes had requested additional updates.
The Commission received many comments requesting the review and
update of both the Class II MICS and Class II Technical Standards.
Comments emphasized the importance of Class II gaming and the need to
ensure that the regulations address changes in technology. Some
comments recommended a Tribal Advisory Committee be formed with
representation from a broad group of interests, including Tribes,
manufacturers, and testing laboratories. Other comments suggested the
[[Page 18463]]
regulations be revised utilizing a negotiated rulemaking process.
Finally, some commentators stated that electronic gambling machines are
public health hazards and that the technical standards should
distinguish between harmful and less harmful games. These comments
stated that NIGC should require the industry to demonstrate that Class
II games are in fact safe.
Based on the comments received, the Commission anticipates that it
will review this Part during the Group Three period. Class II MICS and
Technical Standards are important to both Tribes and the public.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will hold tribal consultations on
Group Three regulations on the following dates as set forth in more
detail below. The Commission has attempted to schedule consultations in
every region and to hold those consultations either before or after
other events widely attended by tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner is both to encourage
participation of tribal officials and to conserve tribal resources by
reducing the amount of travel of participants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GROUP 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 8, 2011................ Indian Bingo and Class II Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN.
Summit.
June 13, 2011............... NCAI Mid Year Conference...... Hyatt Regency, Milwaukee, WI.
June 21-22, 2011............ CNIGA Membership Meeting...... Harrah's Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley Center, CA.
July 14-15, 2011............ Northwest Indian Gaming Expo.. Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
July 20-21, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa Ana Pueblo, NM.
July 28-29, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Northeast.. DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
Aug. 18-19, 2011............ Oklahoma Indian Gaming Tulsa, OK.
Association Conference.
Aug. 25-26, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale, AZ.
Sept. 7-8, 2011............. NIGC Consultation--United Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Tribes International Powwow.
Sept. 15-16, 2011........... National Tribal Gaming Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino, Coarsegold, CA.
Commissioner/Regulator
Association Fall Meeting.
Sept. 19-20, 2011........... NIGC Regional Training........ Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO.
Sept. 29-30, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Northeast.. Turning Stone Resort & Casino, Verona, NY.
Oct. 6-7, 2011.............. G2E--National................. Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las Vegas, NV.
Oct./Nov. 2011.............. USET Annual Meeting........... Mississippi Choctaw, MS.
Nov. 3-4, 2011.............. NCAI Annual Conference........ Portland, OR.
Jan. 11-12, 2012............ NIGC Consultation--Eastern.... Wind Creek Casino, Atmore, AL.
Jan. 18-19, 2012............ NIGC Consultation--Great Crowne Plaza, Billings, MT.
Plains.
Jan. 23-24, 2012............ NIGC Consultation--California. Win-River Casino, Redding, CA.
Jan. 26-27, 2012............ NIGC Consultation--Northwest.. 7 Feathers Casino, Canyonville, OR.
Jan. 30-31, 2012............ NIGC Consultation--Oklahoma... Cherokee Hard Rock, Tulsa, OK.
Feb. 2-3, 2012.............. NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Isleta Hard Rock Casino Resort, Albuquerque, NM.
Feb. 7-8, 2012.............. NIGC Consultation--Great Radisson Hotel, Rapid City, SD.
Plains.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Group Four: Part 556--Background Investigations for Primary
Management Officials and Key Employees; Part 558--Gaming Licenses for
Key Employees and Primary Management Officials; Part 556--Formalizing
the ``Pilot Program''; Part 571--Monitoring and Investigations; Part
531--Collateral Agreements; Part 537--Background Investigations for
Persons or Entities With a Financial Interest in, or Having Management
Responsibility for, a Management Contract; and Part 502--Definitions
A. Background Investigations and Pilot Program
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
formalizing through regulation a long-standing ``pilot program'' under
which participating Tribes provide NIGC with concise information
pertaining to employees licensed or denied a license in lieu of the
process outlined in Part 556. Comments were submitted supporting the
Commission's consideration of amending the regulation to incorporate
the pilot program. One Tribe stated that the pilot program should be
formalized so long as no changes are made to the current program. Some
Tribes commented that most Tribes already participate in the program.
Additionally, the NOI requested comment on whether the NIGC should
process fingerprint cards for non-primary management officials or non-
key employees. Many comments supported increased access to fingerprint
and background information for additional employees but expressed that
this not be mandated by the NIGC. Some commentators requested that this
should include vendors and contractors as well. Additionally, many
comments requested that the NIGC provide tribal gaming commissions
access to licensing information via an online database or expansion of
the TBIS database.
The Commission agrees that the ``pilot program'' is widely
participated in by a large number of gaming Tribes and that access to
background information is important to shield Tribes from organized
crime and other corrupting influences. Based on the comments received,
the Commission intends to review these regulations during the Group
Four period.
B. Management Contracts
1. Collateral Agreements
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
approving collateral agreements to a management contract. Some comments
asserted that collateral agreements are outside the scope of NIGC
authority and requiring submission and approval of those
[[Page 18464]]
agreements would second-guess tribal business decisions. One
commentator stated that the NIGC should not expand authority over non-
management business relationships of the Tribe. Additionally, some
comments expressed concern that requiring the approval of non-
management collateral agreements would affect their relationships with
current or potential business partners, discourage private investment
in Indian Country, and potentially call into question the validity of
previously executed agreements. These commentators recommended the NIGC
only review and approve those agreements containing management
provisions. Another commentator suggested that the review and approval
of collateral agreements would greatly reduce the risks to both Tribes
and would-be management contractors, thus reducing overreaching by
third parties.
Other comments supported the review and approval of collateral
agreements by the NIGC. Those Tribes stated that it is the NIGC's trust
responsibility to ensure that such agreements do not violate the sole
proprietary interest provisions of IGRA. Other Tribes suggested that
the NIGC be available to review and approve collateral agreements
solely at the request of the Tribe. One commentator suggested drafting
a regulation that specifies the maximum amount of revenue that could be
included in collateral agreements.
Based on the comments received in response to the NOI, the
Commission intends to review this regulation during the Group Four
period.
2. Background Information for Persons or Entities With a Financial
Interest in, or Having Management Responsibility for, a Management
Contract
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
amending this regulation to specify that a contractor should be
required to submit background information when the contract is only for
Class III gaming. Some Tribes stated that the NIGC has no authority
over Class III gaming and thus no authority over Class III management
contractors. Other Tribes stated that IGRA specifically grants the NIGC
the authority to complete background investigations on Class II and
Class III management contractors. One Tribe stated that because
background investigations are a requirement of the tribal-state
compact, requiring an additional background investigation is
duplicative, burdensome, and overreaching. Other comments recommended
that in addition to the clarification, the NIGC should clarify
submission requirements for Class II and Class III background
investigations and streamline the background investigation process to
allow for expedited review of individuals and entities holding a gaming
license in other tribal and state jurisdictions.
The Commission agrees that this issue has been the point of
confusion for Tribes and the public. The Commission intends to review
this regulation during the Group Four period.
C. Inspection and Access to Records
The NOI requested comment on whether there was a need to clarify
Commission access to records located off-site, including at sites
maintained or owned by third parties. One comment stated that this
section should be revised to explicitly deny the NIGC access to Class
III records. Some comments stated that the NIGC has the right to access
all records of the Tribal gaming enterprise, regardless of location.
Other comments stated that NIGC should only request records within its
statutory authority. Another comment suggested that the regulation be
amended to require Tribes to maintain all records on site.
The Commission acknowledges the need to clarify Commission access
to records located off-site, including at sites maintained and owned by
third parties. The Commission intends to review this regulation during
the Group Four period.
D. Definitions--Net Revenues--management fee
The NOI asked whether the Commission should consider whether the
definition of Net revenues--management fee should be defined to be
consistent with the General Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) when
determining the management fee. Many comments stated that if this
definition was amended, it would need to be consistent with the
statutory definition of Net Revenue contained in IGRA, 25 U.S.C.
2703(9). Other comments stated that it should be defined consistent
with industry standards such as GAAP. One comment noted that a clearer
definition would have hastened the resolution of a dispute with their
state over the definition of net win and net revenue. Another comment
stated that the 2008 regulatory change to the definition of Net revenue
does not comply with IGRA and needs to be revised to ensure it is
consistent with the statutory definition.
Based on the comments that the definition could be clearer and that
there may be some benefit to a definition consistent with GAAP, the
Commission intends to review this definition during Group Four
consultation and comment period.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will hold tribal consultations on
Group Four regulations on the following dates as set forth in more
detail below. The Commission has attempted to schedule consultations in
every region and to hold those consultations either before or after
other events widely attended by tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner is both to encourage
participation of tribal officials and to conserve tribal resources by
reducing the amount of travel of participants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GROUP 4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 8, 2011................ Indian Bingo and Class II Mystic Lake Casino and Resort, Prior Lake, MN.
Summit.
June 13, 2011............... NCAI Mid Year Conference...... Hyatt Regency, Milwaukee, WI.
June 21-22, 2011............ CNIGA Membership Meeting...... Harrah's Rincon Hotel & Casino, Valley Center, CA.
July 14-15, 2011............ Northwest Indian Gaming Expo.. Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
July 20-21, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa Ana Pueblo, NM.
July 28-29, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Northeast.. DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
Aug. 18-19, 2011............ Oklahoma Indian Gaming Tulsa, OK.
Association Conference.
Aug. 25-26, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale, AZ.
Sept. 7-8, 2011............. NIGC Consultation--United Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Tribes International Powwow.
[[Page 18465]]
Sept. 15-16, 2011........... National Tribal Gaming Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino, Coarsegold, CA.
Commissioner/Regulator
Association Fall Meeting.
Sept. 19-20, 2011........... NIGC Regional Training........ Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO.
Oct. 6-7, 2011.............. G2E--National................. Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las Vegas, NV.
Oct./Nov. 2011.............. USET Annual Meeting........... Mississippi Choctaw, MS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Group Five: Part 518--Self Regulation of Class II Gaming;
proposed new Sole Proprietary Interest regulation; and implementation
through regulation of Class III MICS options
A. Self Regulation of Class II Gaming
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
amending the process for obtaining a self-regulation certification. The
Commission has heard that the administrative burden of completing the
process significantly outweighs the benefits obtained from self
regulation. Comments received from the NOI state that this regulation
is not performing the function set forth in IGRA. Comments stated that
the submission requirements are duplicative and unduly burdensome and
the petition and annual reporting requirement undermine the purpose of
self-regulating. One comment recommended that high standards should be
maintained, and the benefits and recognition for self regulating Tribes
should be higher. A Tribe noted that self regulation is a hallmark of
tribal sovereignty.
The Commission agrees that this regulation is under-utilized by
Tribes. Of over 220 gaming Tribes, only two Tribes have gone through
the self-regulation certification process successfully. Due to the
interest expressed in revising this regulation, the Commission intends
to review this regulation during the Group Five period.
B. Sole Proprietary Interest
The NOI requested comments on whether the Commission should
consider a regulation defining sole proprietary interest and providing
a process through which a Tribe may request the NIGC to conduct a
review and make a determination. Many Tribes and other interested
parties have approached the NIGC requesting a determination regarding
whether a single agreement, or a combination of agreements, violate
IGRA's sole proprietary interest requirement. The comments received in
response to the NOI reflect the complexity of this issue. Some comments
state that the Commission should promulgate a regulation that would
provide for review only at the request of a tribe. Other comments state
that the percentages contained in IGRA serve to define what percentage
might violate the Act's sole proprietary interest provision. One tribe
suggested that if Sole Proprietary Interest is to be defined, then so
should Primary Beneficiary. Some comments stated that a clear
definition of sole proprietary interest may provide stability and
access to financing. Other comments suggested that a definition might
limit tribal access to capital. Some comments suggested that this
determination be best left to the courts to decide.
The Commission acknowledges the comments regarding defining Sole
Proprietary Interest through a regulation. Given the importance of this
issue and IGRA's mandate that Tribes maintain the sole proprietary
interest, the Commission intends to review this issue during the Group
Five period.
C. Class III MICS Implementation
Based on the comments received during the Group One period, the
Commision will address implementation of changes to Class III MICS
during the Group Five period.
Subject to future changes, NIGC will hold tribal consultations on
Group Five regulations on the following dates as set forth in more
detail below. The Commission has attempted to schedule consultations in
every region and to hold those consultations either before or after
other events widely attended by tribal officials. The purpose of
scheduling consultations in this manner is both to encourage
participation of tribal officials and to conserve tribal resources by
reducing the amount of travel of participants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GROUP 5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 14-15, 2011............ Northwest Indian Gaming Expo.. Tulalip Resort Casino, Tulalip, WA.
July 20-21, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort, Santa Ana Pueblo, NM.
July 28-29, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Northeast.. DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
Aug. 18-19, 2011............ Oklahoma Indian Gaming Tulsa, OK.
Association Conference.
Aug. 25-26, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Wild Horse Resort Casino, Scottsdale, AZ.
Sept. 7-8, 2011............. NIGC Consultation--United Radisson Hotel, Bismarck, ND.
Tribes International Powwow.
Sept. 15-16, 2011........... National Tribal Gaming Chuckchansi Gold Resort & Casino, Coarsegold, CA.
Commissioner/Regulator
Association Fall Meeting.
Sept. 19-20, 2011........... NIGC Regional Training........ Sky Ute Casino Resort, Ignacio, CO.
Sept. 29-30, 2011........... NIGC Consultation--Northeast.. Turning Stone Resort & Casino, Verona, NY.
Oct. 6-7, 2011.............. G2E--National................. Sands Expo and Convention Ctr., Las Vegas, NV.
Oct./Nov. 2011.............. USET Annual Meeting........... Mississippi Choctaw, MS.
Nov. 3-4, 2011.............. NCAI Annual Conference........ Portland, OR.
Nov. 14-15, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--California. Spa Resort Casino, Palm Springs, CA.
Nov. 17-18, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Southwest.. Fort McDowell Casino, Scottsdale, AZ.
[[Page 18466]]
Nov. 30-Dec. 1, 2011........ NIGC Consultation--Oklahoma... Downstream Casino Resort, Miami, OK.
Dec. 5-6, 2011.............. NIGC Consultation--Northwest.. Clearwater Casino Resort, Suquamish, WA.
Dec. 8-9, 2011.............. NIGC Consultation--Great Turtle Creek Casino & Hotel, Williamsburg, MI.
Plains.
Dec. 12-13, 2011............ NIGC Consultation--Northeast.. DOI South Auditorium, Washington, DC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. Regulations That the Commission Does Not Anticipate Revising
A. Part 502--Net Revenues--Allowable Uses.
The NOI requested comment on whether the Commission should consider
a definition for the term Net Revenues--allowable uses. Many Tribes
commented that this approach would intrude on tribal sovereignty, that
tribal budgeting is an inherent tribal governmental function, and that
such an approach could interfere with internal tribal matters. Further,
tribal commentators noted that IGRA has a clear definition of Net
Revenues and asserted that the NIGC does not have authority to change
this definition. An accounting firm commented that no single formulaic
approach should be applied to all Tribes. A few comments from the
public stated that if NIGC were to promulgate a definition it should
only do so after extensive review, consultation, and comment. Some
comments supported promulgation of a definition, arguing that doing so
could ensure Tribes consider the financial integrity of the gaming
operation before funding other tribal programs.
After review of all the comments submitted, the Commission does not
anticipate promulgating a definition of net revenues--allowable uses at
this time. The Commission acknowledges the concerns articulated by the
public and will examine alternatives consistent with IGRA that minimize
intrusions on tribal sovereignty and internal tribal matters.
B. Part 502--Management Contract Definition
The NOI also requested comment on whether to expand the definition
of Management Contract to include contracts that pay a fee based on a
percentage of gaming revenues. The comments received from the public
expressed concern that an expanded definition would inappropriately
inhibit the ability of Tribes to enter into contracts, increase the
administrative burden on the NIGC, and infringe upon tribal
sovereignty. The public also commented that an expanded definition may
be counter to IGRA's purpose of promoting tribal economic development,
self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments. Finally, many
commentators noted that only contracts containing actual management
provisions should be subject to the management contract approval
process.
Regarding whether the Commission should consider promulgating a
definition of acceptable compensation to a manager contractor, some
Tribes commented that it would be beneficial for the Commission to
consider issuing guidance on compensation and the upper limits on
management fees. Some Tribes commented that a definition would intrude
on business decisions of the Tribe. Another Tribe noted that amending
the definition to establish a maximum fee might be appropriate, if
enforced only against the company, not the Tribe. However, most
comments suggested that NIGC should not revise this definition.
The Commission notes that IGRA establishes a maximum fee for
management contractors. Based on a review of the public's comments, the
Commission does not anticipate expanding the definition at this time.
The Commission acknowledges the concerns articulated by the public and
will examine alternatives consistent with IGRA that minimize intrusions
on tribal sovereignty and promote the purposes of IGRA.
C. Part 533--Approval of Management Contracts
The NOI sought comment on whether to consider amending the trustee
standard in Part 533 by adding two grounds for possible disapproval in
Sec. 533.6(b). One potential basis for disapproval would be because
the management contract was not submitted in accordance with the
submission requirements of 25 CFR part 533. The second potential basis
for disapproval would be because the management contract does not
contain the regulatory requirements for approval pursuant to 25 CFR
part 531. Many comments received from Tribes were generally supportive
of the Commission reviewing this part of the regulation. Some Tribes
commented that if the Commission reviewed this part of the regulation
and ultimately amended it as described, it could result in the
disapproval of a management contract for technical reasons that could
have been easily remedied.
The Commission does not anticipate amending Part 533 at this time.
NIGC will continue to assist Tribes and potential management companies
with the regulatory process set forth in IGRA and Part 533 to ensure
full compliance with IGRA.
X. Other Regulations or Policies
A. Tribal Advisory Committee
The NOI requested comment on whether a policy or regulation should
be developed identifying when a Tribal Advisory Committee (TAC) will be
formed to provide input and advice to the NIGC, and if so, how the
Committee members should be selected. Additiona