Self-Regulation of Class II Gaming, 4714-4720 [2012-1763]
Download as PDF
4714
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must
identify the docket number FAA–2011–
0426/Airspace Docket No. 11–ACE–7, at
the beginning of your comments. You
may also submit comments through the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments
received, and any final disposition in
person in the Dockets Office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Office (telephone 1 (800) 647–
5527), is on the ground floor of the
building at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal
Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321–
7716.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to
participate in this proposed rulemaking
by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis
supporting the views and suggestions
presented are particularly helpful in
developing reasoned regulatory
decisions on the proposal. Comments
are specifically invited on the overall
regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related
aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both
docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above.
Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this notice must submit with those
comments a self-addressed, stamped
postcard on which the following
statement is made: ‘‘Comments to
Docket No. FAA–2011–0426/Airspace
Docket No. 11–ACE–7.’’ The postcard
will be date/time stamped and returned
to the commenter.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Availability of NPRMs
An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded through the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through
the FAA’s Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/
air_traffic/publications/
airspace_amendments/.
You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments
received and any final disposition in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
person in the Dockets Office (see
section for address and
phone number) between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. An informal docket
may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the
Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137.
Persons interested in being placed on
a mailing list for future NPRMs should
contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking
(202) 267–9677, to request a copy of
Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking Distribution
System, which describes the application
procedure.
ADDRESSES
The Proposal
This action proposes to amend Title
14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR), Part 71 by establishing Class E
airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface for new standard
instrument approach procedures at Red
Cloud Municipal Airport, Red Cloud,
NE. Controlled airspace is needed for
the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.
Class E airspace areas are published
in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011 and
effective September 15, 2011, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
71.1. The Class E airspace designation
listed in this document would be
published subsequently in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current. It,
therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant
rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will
only affect air traffic procedures and air
navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1,
Section 106 describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it would
establish controlled airspace at Red
Cloud Municipal Airport, Red Cloud,
NE.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9V,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 9, 2011, and
effective September 15, 2011, is
amended as follows:
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas
extending upward from 700 feet or more
above the surface of the earth.
*
*
*
*
*
ACE NE E5 Red Cloud, NE [New]
Red Cloud Municipal Airport, NE
(Lat. 40°04′56″ N., long. 98°32′29″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 7.4-mile
radius of Red Cloud Municipal Airport.
Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on January 12,
2012.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012–2087 Filed 1–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Part 518
RIN 3141–AA44
Self-Regulation of Class II Gaming
National Indian Gaming
Commission, Interior.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
This action proposes to
amend the NIGC’s self-regulation
regulations to tailor the self-regulating
qualifying criteria to a tribe’s regulation
of class II gaming activity and more
clearly define and streamline the selfregulation certification process. By
tailoring the self-regulating qualifying
criteria to the capabilities of a tribe’s
regulatory body, and by clarifying and
streamlining the certification process,
more tribes may become self-regulating.
DATES: The agency must receive
comments on or before April 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any one of the following methods,
but please note that comments sent by
electronic mail are strongly encouraged.
• Email comments to:
reg.review@nigc.gov.
• Mail comments to: Katherine
Zebell, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street NW., Suite
9100, Washington, DC 20005.
• Hand deliver comments to: 1441 L
Street NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC
20005.
• Fax comments to: Katherine Zebell,
National Indian Gaming Commission at
(202) 632–7066.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katherine Zebell, National Indian
Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street
NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC
20005. Telephone: (202) 632–7003;
email: reg.review@nigc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to
participate in this proposed rulemaking
by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments as they may desire.
Comments which provide a factual basis
in support of the views and suggestions
presented are particularly helpful in
developing reasoned regulatory
decisions on the proposal.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Background
On November 18, 2010, the
Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry
and Notice of Consultation (‘‘NOI’’)
advising the public that the NIGC was
conducting a comprehensive review of
its regulations and requesting public
comment on which of its regulations
were most in need of revision, in what
order the NIGC should review its
regulations, and the process the NIGC
should utilize to make revisions. 75 FR
70680 (Nov. 18, 2010). On April 4, 2011,
after holding eight consultations and
reviewing all of the comments, the
Commission published a Notice of
Regulatory Review Schedule, setting out
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
a consultation schedule and process for
review. 76 FR 18457. Part 518 is
included in one of the regulation groups
that are part of this regulatory review.
III. Development of the Proposed Rule
The Commission conducted
numerous tribal consultations as part of
its review of part 518—Self-Regulation
of Class II Gaming. Tribal consultations
were held in every region of the country
and were attended by many tribal
leaders or their representatives. In
addition to tribal consultations, on
August 16, 2011, the Commission
requested public comment on a
Preliminary Draft of part 518. After
considering the comments received
from the public, and through tribal
consultations, the Commission proposes
to amend part 518 to (a) tailor the selfregulating criteria to a tribe’s regulation
of class II gaming activity; and (b)
clearly define and streamline the
process by which a self-regulation
petition is reviewed and a final
determination is made by the
Commission.
IV. Overview of the Proposed Rule
During the regulation review process,
the Commission received comments that
the existing self-regulation regulation
discourages participation because the
burdens imposed by the regulation
outweigh the benefits. Specifically,
comments stated that the current
process is confusing, and the
submission requirements, and
continuing compliance requirements,
are redundant and intrusive. The
Commission also received comments
that the current process is misfocused
by placing greater emphasis on a tribe’s
gaming operation than on the
effectiveness of a tribe’s regulatory
system. Therefore, the Commission is
proposing amendments to streamline
and clarify the process, as well as to
ensure an effective regulatory
framework for self-regulating tribes.
The proposed rule amends the
petition and approval process to focus
on the capability of the tribal regulatory
body. To this end, the proposed rule
requires information necessary for the
Commission to evaluate the strength
and effectiveness of a tribe’s regulation
of its gaming activity.
The proposed rule clarifies both the
initial eligibility requirements and the
petition submission requirements.
Further, the proposed rule eliminates
the need to resubmit information
already provided to either the NIGC or
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (‘‘BIA’’),
such as gaming regulations,
constitutions, revenue allocation plans,
and facility licenses. The proposed rule
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4715
creates distinct stages and timelines for
the certification process, and accelerates
the timeline for the Commission to issue
a final decision. The proposed rule
provides for a streamlined process by
involving the Commission in the
certification review process. Under the
proposed rule, the Commission will
issue both the preliminary findings and
final determination as to whether a tribe
meets the approval criteria for selfregulation. The Commission will also
hold a hearing, if requested by a tribe
upon receipt of the Commission’s
preliminary findings.
Once certified, the only annual
submission requirements under the
proposed rule are the submission of
independent audits and the resumes of
all employees hired and licensed by the
tribe’s gaming regulatory body. The
Commission believes that the annual
self-regulation report currently required
provides duplicative information
already available to the agency and
therefore proposes to eliminate that
requirement. Additionally, the proposed
rule requires self-regulating tribes to
notify the NIGC within three business
days of any change in circumstances
that is material to the requirements for
issuance of a certificate of selfregulation. This self-reporting
requirement will provide the
Commission with essential information
in a more timely manner than the
annual report mechanism in the current
regulations.
Finally, the proposed rule corrects
and clarifies the existing rule by
referencing IGRA’s post-certification
limitations regarding the NIGC’s
authority over self-regulating tribes.
A. General Comments
Responses to the NOI and the
Preliminary Draft of part 518 were
generally positive. Many commenters
stated that, in its current form, part 518
should be reviewed and revised to
facilitate self-regulation while
maintaining stringent standards. A
commenter stated that the selfregulation regulations should be about
evaluating a tribe’s regulatory agency,
not the gaming operation. Another
commenter agreed, stating the focus
should be on the tribal regulatory
agency, not the gaming operation. Other
commenters noted that the current
financial benefits of waived fees do not
outweigh the paperwork burdens of the
current regulations. One commenter
noted that the promise of self-regulation
contemplated by the Act is not fulfilled
by the NIGC’s current regulations.
Another commenter stated that the fact
that only two tribes are self-regulating
means something is wrong with the
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
4716
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
regulations. As noted above, the
Commission’s proposed changes
attempt to address many of these
concerns.
B. Eligibility and Submission
Requirements for Petition
The statute identifies who is eligible
to petition for a certificate of selfregulation, and those criteria are
contained in § 518.2 of the current
regulation. The proposed rule attempts
to clearly identify what a tribe is
required to include in its petition at the
time it is submitted to the NIGC,
including evidence that the tribe meets
the statutory eligibility requirements.
The requirement that a tribe must
have continuously conducted class II
gaming activity for the 3-year period
immediately preceding the date of the
petition raised concerns by several
commenters. Commenters stated that
this requirement could make ineligible
those tribes conducting both class II and
class III gaming, but which have not
continuously conducted class II gaming
for a 3-year period prior to submitting
a petition. Commenters stated that if a
tribe has conducted, and successfully
regulated class II and/or class III gaming
for three years, then it should be eligible
to petition for a certificate of selfregulation. Further, there are instances
in which tribes operate their gaming
facilities seasonally or in which tribes
have to temporarily close their facilities.
While the Commission understands the
perspective of the commenters, IGRA
requires a tribe to continuously conduct
class II gaming activity for three years
before submitting a petition for selfregulation. Accordingly, and in light of
the comments received, the Commission
will continue to interpret the phrase
‘‘continuously conducted’’ in a way
consistent with the common-sense
interpretation found in the preamble to
the existing rule at 63 FR 41961 (August
6, 1998). Likewise, this Commission
does not intend to preclude a tribe from
obtaining a certificate of self-regulation
if its gaming operation is closed for
temporary or seasonal closures, and will
evaluate each situation on a case-bycase basis. Commenters noted that the
current rule requires submission of
information that is more focused on the
gaming operation than the gaming
regulatory framework. The Commission
agrees with this comment and has
attempted to strengthen the submission
requirements that would indicate
whether a tribe was successfully
regulating its gaming activities, such as
the criteria used for hiring tribal
regulatory agency employees and a list
of the gaming activity internal controls
in place at the gaming operation. Under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
the proposed rule, tribes will be
required to provide a list of their
internal controls as part of the petition.
Additionally, tribes must only submit
the gaming regulations with the petition
if the gaming regulations are not part of
the gaming ordinance previously
submitted and approved by the Chair.
Further, commenters also noted that
requiring information such as a tribe’s
constitution, revenue allocation plan or
facility license is duplicative, as these
documents have already been submitted
to the NIGC or the BIA. The
Commission agrees with this
observation and has attempted to
streamline the certification process by
removing the requirements to resubmit
documents previously provided to the
NIGC or the BIA.
C. Criteria That Must Be Met To Receive
a Certificate of Self-Regulation
The statute establishes criteria that
must be met by a tribe before a
certificate of self-regulation can be
issued. The current rule identifies those
criteria and provides a list of
‘‘indicators’’ that a tribe may use to
demonstrate they have met the criteria.
The proposed rule clarifies that the
examples listed are not all-inclusive and
that a tribe can provide other evidence
to satisfy the criteria. As discussed
above, the proposed rule focuses on
evidence related to the tribe’s regulation
of the gaming activity. The proposed
rule also streamlines criteria addressed
by other NIGC regulations, such as
compliance with applicable building,
health and safety codes and procedures
for resolving disputes between the
gaming public and the tribe. Those
requirements are addressed in Parts 559
and 522, respectively.
D. Process for Petition Review and
Certification of Tribes
Several tribes commented that the
timing and process for certification
needs clarification. In response, the
proposed rule attempts to simplify and
streamline the certification process,
including how petitions are submitted,
reviewed and approved, and the
timelines for each stage. The proposed
rule also attempts to clarify the
respective roles and responsibilities of
the Commission and the Office of SelfRegulation (‘‘OSR’’). The current
regulation authorizes the OSR to
administer the self-regulation program
and receive, review and approve
petitions. Commenters stated that IGRA
requires the Commission itself to
consider petitions and certify qualifying
tribes. The proposed rule modifies the
roles of the OSR and the Commission by
requiring the full Commission to make
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the final determination as to whether a
tribe meets the approval criteria for selfregulation, based on information
presented in the tribe’s petition,
supplemental documentation and a
hearing, if held. The proposed rule also
streamlines the process by requiring the
Commission to issue preliminary
findings to the tribe and provide the
tribe with an opportunity for a hearing
before the Commission issues a final
determination. This change allows a
tribe to respond to a preliminary
adverse finding before a final
determination by the Commission. This
proposed process is intended to
facilitate collaboration with the NIGC to
meet the approval criteria. Finally, the
proposed rule provides for judicial
review in a more timely manner than
the current regulations.
E. Post-Certification Rights and
Responsibilities
IGRA requires a tribe which has been
issued a certificate of self-regulation to
submit an independent annual audit
and a complete resume on all employees
hired and licensed by the tribe. The
proposed rule requires self-regulating
tribes to submit, on an annual basis, an
independent audit and the resumes of
employees hired and licensed by the
tribal gaming regulatory body. Some
commenters requested the regulation
include a definition of ‘‘tribal
regulator.’’ The proposed rule does not
define ‘‘tribal regulator’’ because tribal
law may vary on how it defines a tribal
regulator. In order to account for all
persons responsible for the regulation of
a tribes’ class II gaming activity, without
interfering with the tribe’s interpretation
of a ‘‘tribal regulator,’’ the proposed rule
requires self-regulating tribes to submit,
on an annual basis, the resumes of all
employees hired and licensed by the
tribal gaming regulatory body. The
Commission invites comment on this
approach and comment on potential
definitions of ‘‘tribal regulator.’’
Part 518 currently requires the tribe to
submit an annual report to establish that
the tribe has continuously met the
eligibility and approval requirements.
The proposed rule reduces this
paperwork burden. The proposed rule
requires a tribe to notify the NIGC
within three business days of any
change in circumstances that is material
to meeting the requirements for issuance
of the certificate. This approach will
ensure timely reporting to maintain the
integrity of Indian gaming while
reducing paperwork requirements for
the regulated community.
Finally, commenters stated that the
current regulations concerning the
NIGC’s enforcement powers over self-
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
regulating tribes were unclear and
overbroad. Consistent with public
comments, the proposed rule corrects
and clarifies § 518.9 by referencing the
powers of the NIGC that are limited by
statute once a tribe is issued a certificate
of self-regulation
Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule will not have a
significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities as
defined under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. Indian tribes
are not considered to be small entities
for purposes of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This proposed rule is not a major rule
under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. This rule does not have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more. This rule will not cause
a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries,
Federal, state or local government
agencies or geographic regions, and does
not have a significant adverse effect on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability
of U.S.-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
The Commission, as an independent
regulatory agency within the
Department of the Interior, is exempt
from compliance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act. 2 U.S.C. 1502(1);
2 U.S.C. 658(1).
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, the Commission has determined
that this proposed rule does not have
significant takings implications. A
takings implication assessment is not
required.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order
12988, the Office of General Counsel has
determined that the proposed rule does
not unduly burden the judicial system
and meets the requirements of sections
3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Executive Order.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Commission has determined that
this proposed rule does not constitute a
major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment and that no detailed
statement is required pursuant to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule requires
information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and is, therefore,
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR 518
Gambling, Indian—lands, Indian—
tribal government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, for the reasons
discussed in the preamble, the
Commission proposes to revise 25 CFR
part 518 to read as follows:
PART 518—SELF-REGULATION OF
CLASS II GAMING
Sec.
518.1 What does this part cover?
518.2 Who will administer the selfregulation program for the Commission?
518.3 Who is eligible to petition for a
certificate of self-regulation?
518.4 What must a tribe submit to the
Commission as part of its petition?
518.5 What criteria must a tribe meet to
receive a certificate of self-regulation?
518.6 What are the responsibilities of the
Office of Self-Regulation in the
certification process?
518.7 What process will the Commission
use to review and certify petitions?
518.8 What is the hearing process?
518.9 When will a certificate of selfregulation become effective?
518.10 What must a self-regulating tribe
provide the Commission to maintain its
self-regulatory status?
518.11 Does a tribe that holds a certificate
of self-regulation have a continuing duty
to advise the Commission of any
additional information?
518.12 Which investigative or enforcement
powers of the Commission are
inapplicable to self-regulating tribes?
518.13 When may the Commission revoke a
certificate of self-regulation?
518.14 May a tribe request a hearing on the
Commission’s proposal to revoke its
certificate of self-regulation?
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706(b)(10); E.O.
13175.
§ 518.1
What does this part cover?
This part sets forth requirements for
obtaining a certificate of self-regulation
of class II gaming operations under 25
U.S.C. 2710(c). When the Commission
issues a certificate of self-regulation, the
certificate is issued to the tribe, not to
a particular gaming operation. The
certificate applies to all class II gaming
activity conducted by the tribe holding
the certificate.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4717
§ 518.2 Who will administer the selfregulation program for the Commission?
The self-regulation program will be
administered by the Office of SelfRegulation. The Chair shall appoint one
Commissioner to administer the Office
of Self-Regulation.
§ 518.3 Who is eligible to petition for a
certificate of self-regulation?
A tribe is eligible to petition the
Commission for a certificate of selfregulation of class II gaming if, for a
three (3)-year period immediately
preceding the date of its petition:
(a) The tribe has continuously
conducted such gaming;
(b) All gaming that the tribe has
engaged in, or has licensed and
regulated, on Indian lands within the
tribe’s jurisdiction, is located within a
State that permits such gaming for any
purpose by any person, organization or
entity (and such gaming is not otherwise
specifically prohibited on Indian lands
by Federal law), in accordance with 25
U.S.C. 2710(b)(1)(A);
(c) The governing body of the tribe
has adopted an ordinance or resolution
that the Chair has approved, in
accordance with 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(1)(B);
(d) The tribe has otherwise complied
with the provisions of 25 U.S.C. 2710;
and
(e) The gaming operation and the
tribal regulatory body have, for the three
(3) years immediately preceding the
date of the petition, maintained all
records required to support the petition
for self-regulation.
§ 518.4 What must a tribe submit to the
Commission as part of its petition?
A petition for a certificate of selfregulation is complete under this part
when it contains:
(a) Two copies on 81⁄2″ x 11″ paper of
a petition for self-regulation approved
by the governing body of the tribe and
certified as authentic by an authorized
tribal official;
(b) A description of how the tribe
meets the eligibility criteria in § 518.3,
which may include supporting
documentation; and
(c) The following information with
supporting documentation:
(i) A brief history of each gaming
operation(s), including the opening
dates and periods of voluntary or
involuntary closure;
(ii) An organizational chart of the
tribal regulatory body;
(iii) A brief description of the criteria
tribal regulators must meet before being
eligible for employment as a tribal
regulator;
(iv) A brief description of the process
by which the tribal regulatory body is
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
4718
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
funded, and the funding level for the
three years immediately preceding the
date of the petition;
(v) A list of the current regulators and
employees of the tribal regulatory body,
their complete resumes, their titles, the
dates they began employment, and, if
serving limited terms, the expiration
date of such terms;
(vi) A brief description of the
accounting system(s) at the gaming
operation which tracks the flow of the
gaming revenues;
(vii) A list of gaming activity internal
controls at the gaming operation(s);
(viii) A description of the record
keeping system(s) for all investigations,
enforcement actions, and prosecutions
of violations of the tribal gaming
ordinance or regulations, for the three
(3)-year period immediately preceding
the date of the petition; and
(ix) The tribe’s current set of gaming
regulations, if not included in the
approved tribal gaming ordinance.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 518.5 What criteria must a tribe meet to
receive a certificate of self-regulation?
(a) The Commission shall issue a
certificate of self-regulation if it
determines that for a three (3)-year
period, the tribe has:
(1) Conducted its gaming activity in a
manner that:
(i) Has resulted in an effective and
honest accounting of all revenues;
(ii) Has resulted in a reputation for
safe, fair, and honest operation of the
activity; and
(iii) Has been generally free of
evidence of criminal or dishonest
activity;
(2) Conducted its gaming operation on
a fiscally and economically sound basis;
(3) Conducted its gaming activity in
compliance with the IGRA, NIGC
regulations in this chapter, and the
tribe’s gaming ordinance and gaming
regulations; and
(4) Adopted and is implementing
adequate systems for:
(i) Accounting of all revenues from
the gaming activity;
(ii) Investigating, licensing and
monitoring of all employees of the
gaming activity;
(iii) Investigating, enforcing,
prosecuting, or referring for prosecution
violations of its gaming ordinance and
regulations; and
(iv) Prosecuting criminal or dishonest
activity or referring such activity for
prosecution.
(b) A tribe may illustrate that it has
met the criteria listed in paragraph (a)
of this section by addressing factors
such as those listed below. The list of
factors is not all-inclusive; other factors
not listed here may also be addressed
and considered.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
(1) The tribe adopted and is
implementing minimum internal
control standards which are at least as
stringent as those promulgated by the
Commission;
(2) The tribe requires tribal gaming
regulators to meet the same suitability
requirements as those required for key
employees and primary management
officials of the gaming operation(s);
(3) The tribe’s gaming operation
utilizes an adequate system for
accounting of all gaming revenues from
class II gaming activity;
(4) The tribe has a dispute resolution
process for gaming operation customers
and has taken steps to ensure that the
process is adequately implemented;
(5) The tribe has a gaming regulatory
body which:
(i) Monitors gaming activities to
ensure compliance with Federal and
tribal laws and regulations;
(ii) Monitors the gaming revenues
accounting system for continued
effectiveness;
(iii) Performs routine operational or
other audits of the class II gaming
activities;
(iv) Routinely receives and reviews
gaming revenue accounting information
from the gaming operation(s);
(v) Has access to and may inspect,
examine, photocopy and audit all
papers, books, and records of the
gaming operation(s) and class II gaming
activities;
(vi) Monitors compliance with
minimum internal control standards for
the gaming operation;
(vii) Has adopted and is implementing
an adequate system for investigating,
licensing, and monitoring of all
employees of the gaming activity;
(viii) Maintains records on licensees
and on persons denied licenses,
including persons otherwise prohibited
from engaging in gaming activities
within the tribe’s jurisdiction;
(ix) Establishes standards for, and
issues, vendor licenses or permits to
persons or entities who deal with the
gaming operation, such as
manufacturers and suppliers of services,
equipment and supplies;
(x) Establishes or approves the rules
governing class II games, and requires
their posting;
(xi) Has adopted and is implementing
an adequate system for the investigation
of possible violations of the tribal
gaming ordinance and regulations, and
takes appropriate enforcement actions;
and
(xii) Takes testimony and conducts
hearings on regulatory matters,
including matters related to the
revocation of primary management
officials, key employee and vendor
licenses;
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(6) The tribe allocates and
appropriates a sufficient source of
permanent and stable funding for the
tribal regulatory body;
(7) The tribe has adopted and is
implementing a conflict of interest
policy for the regulators/regulatory body
and their staff;
(8) The tribe has adopted and is
implementing a system for adequate
prosecution of violations of the tribal
gaming ordinance and regulations or
referrals for prosecution; and
(9) The tribe demonstrates that the
operation is being conducted in a
manner which adequately protects the
environment and the public health and
safety.
(c) The tribe assists the Commission
with access and information-gathering
responsibilities during the certification
process.
(d) The burden of establishing selfregulation is upon the tribe filing the
petition.
§ 518.6 What are the responsibilities of the
Office of Self-Regulation in the certification
process?
The Office of Self-Regulation shall be
responsible for directing and
coordinating the certification process. It
shall provide a written report and
recommendation to the Commission as
to whether a certificate of self-regulation
should be issued or denied, and a copy
of the report and recommendation to the
petitioning tribe.
§ 518.7 What process will the Commission
use to review and certify petitions?
(a) Petitions for self-regulation shall
be submitted by tribes to the Office of
Self-Regulation.
(1) Within 30 days of receipt of a
tribe’s petition, the Office of SelfRegulation shall conduct a review of the
tribe’s petition to determine whether it
is complete under § 518.4.
(2) If the tribe’s petition is incomplete,
the Office of Self-Regulation shall notify
the tribe by letter, certified mail or
return receipt requested, of any obvious
deficiencies or significant omissions in
the petition. A tribe with an incomplete
petition may submit additional
information and/or clarification within
30 days of receipt of notice of an
incomplete petition.
(3) If the tribe’s petition is complete,
the Office of Self-Regulation shall notify
the tribe in writing.
(b) Once a tribe’s petition is complete,
the Office of Self-Regulation shall
conduct a review to determine whether
the tribe meets the eligibility criteria in
§ 518.3 and the approval criteria in
§ 518.5. During its review, the Office of
Self-Regulation:
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(1) May request from the tribe any
additional material it deems necessary
to assess whether the tribe has met the
criteria for self-regulation.
(2) Will coordinate an on-site review
and verification of the information
submitted by the petitioning tribe.
(c) Within 120 days of notice of a
complete petition under § 518.4, the
Office of Self-Regulation shall provide a
recommendation and written report to
the full Commission and the petitioning
tribe.
(1) If the Office of Self-Regulation
determines that the tribe has satisfied
the criteria for a certificate of selfregulation, it shall recommend to the
Commission that a certificate be issued
to the tribe.
(2) If the Office of Self-Regulation
determines that the tribe has not met the
criteria for a certificate of selfregulation, it shall recommend to the
Commission that it not issue a
certificate to the tribe.
(3) The Office of Self-Regulation shall
make all information on which it relies
in making its recommendation and
report available to the tribe, subject to
the confidentiality requirements in 25
U.S.C. 2716(a), and shall afford the tribe
an opportunity to respond.
(4) The report shall include:
(i) Findings as to whether each of the
eligibility criteria is met, and a summary
of the basis for each finding;
(ii) Findings as to whether each of the
approval criteria is met, and a summary
of the basis for each finding;
(iii) A recommendation to the
Commission as to whether it should
issue the tribe a certificate of selfregulation; and
(iv) A list of any documents and other
information received in support of the
tribe’s petition.
(5) A tribe shall have 30 days from the
date of issuance of the report to submit
to the Office of Self-Regulation a
response to the report.
(d) After receiving the Office of SelfRegulation’s recommendation and
report, and a tribe’s response to the
report, the Commission shall issue
preliminary findings as to whether the
eligibility and approval criteria are met.
The Commission’s preliminary findings
will be provided to the tribe within 30
days of receipt of the report.
(e) Upon receipt of the Commission’s
preliminary findings, the tribe can
request, in writing, a hearing before the
Commission, as set forth in § 518.8.
Hearing requests shall be made to the
Office of Self-Regulation and shall
specify the issues to be addressed by the
tribe at the hearing, and any proposed
oral or written testimony the tribe
wishes to present.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
(f) The Commission shall issue a final
determination 30 days after issuance of
its preliminary findings or after the
conclusion of a hearing, if one is held.
The decision of the Commission to
approve or deny a petition shall be a
final agency action.
(g) A tribe may withdraw its petition
and resubmit it at any time prior to the
issuance of the Commission’s final
determination.
§ 518.8
What is the hearing process?
(a) Within 10 days of receipt of the
request for a hearing, the Office of SelfRegulation shall notify the tribe of the
date and place of the hearing. The
notice shall also set a hearing schedule,
the time allotted for testimony and oral
argument, and the order of the
presentation. To the extent possible, the
hearing will be scheduled not later than
60 days after the notice is issued, and
the hearing schedule will be issued at
least 30 days prior to the hearing.
(b) The Commission shall issue a
decision on the petition within 30 days
after the hearing’s conclusion. The
decision shall set forth, with
particularity, findings regarding the
tribe’s satisfaction of the self-regulation
standards in this part. If the
Commission determines that a
certificate will issue, it will do so in
accordance with § 518.11.
(c) The decision of the Commission to
approve or deny a petition shall be a
final agency action.
§ 518.9 When will a certificate of selfregulation become effective?
A certificate of self-regulation shall
become effective on January 1 of the
year following the year in which the
Commission determines that a
certificate will issue. Petitions will be
reviewed in chronological order based
on the date of receipt of a complete
petition.
§ 518.10 What must a self-regulating tribe
provide the Commission to maintain its
self-regulatory status?
(a) Each tribe that holds a certificate
of self-regulation shall be required to
submit the following information on
April 15 of each year following the first
year of self-regulation or within 120
days after the end of each fiscal year of
the gaming operation, as required by 25
CFR 571.13:
(1) An annual independent audit, to
be filed with the Commission, as
required by 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(c); and
(2) A complete resume for all
employees of the tribal regulatory body
hired and licensed by the tribe
subsequent to its receipt of a certificate
of self-regulation, to be filed with the
Office of Self-Regulation.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4719
(b) Failure to submit the information
required by this section may result in
revocation of a certificate of selfregulation.
§ 518.11 Does a tribe that holds a
certificate of self-regulation have a
continuing duty to advise the Commission
of any additional information?
Yes. A tribe that holds a certificate of
self-regulation has a continuing duty to
advise the Commission within three (3)
business days of any changes in
circumstances that are material to the
approval criteria in § 518.5 and may
reasonably cause the Commission to
review and revoke the tribe’s certificate
of self-regulation. Failure to do so is
grounds for revocation of a certificate of
self-regulation. Such circumstances may
include, but are not limited to, a change
in management contractor; a change of
primary regulatory official; financial
instability; or any other factors that are
material to the decision to grant a
certificate of self-regulation.
§ 518.12 Which investigative or
enforcement powers of the Commission are
inapplicable to self-regulating tribes?
During any time in which a tribe has
a certificate of self-regulation, the
powers of the Commission, as set forth
in 25 U.S.C. 2706(b)(1)–(4), shall be
inapplicable.
§ 518.13 When may the Commission
revoke a certificate of self-regulation?
The Commission may, after an
opportunity for a hearing, revoke a
certificate of self-regulation by a
majority vote of its members if it
determines that the tribe no longer
meets the eligibility criteria of § 518.3,
the approval criteria of § 518.5, the
requirements of § 518.10 or the
requirements of § 518.11. The
Commission shall provide the tribe with
prompt notice of the Commission’s
intent to revoke a certificate of selfregulation under this part. Such notice
shall state the reasons for the
Commission’s action and shall advise
the tribe of its right to a hearing under
part 584 or right to appeal under part
585. The decision to revoke a certificate
is a final agency action and is
appealable to Federal District Court
pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 2714.
§ 518.14 May a tribe request a hearing on
the Commission’s proposal to revoke its
certificate of self-regulation?
Yes. A tribe may request a hearing
regarding the Commission’s proposal to
revoke a certificate of self-regulation.
Such a request shall be filed with the
Commission pursuant to part 584.
Failure to request a hearing within the
time provided by part 584 shall
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
4720
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Proposed Rules
constitute a waiver of the right to a
hearing.
Tracie L. Stevens,
Chairwoman.
Steffani A. Cochran,
Vice-Chairwoman.
Daniel J. Little,
Associate Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2012–1763 Filed 1–27–12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Parts 524, 539, 577, 580, 581,
582, 583, 584, and 585
RIN 3141–AA47
Appeal Proceedings Before the
Commission
National Indian Gaming
Commission, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The National Indian Gaming
Commission proposes to add a new
subchapter to its regulations to create a
clear process for appeal proceedings
before the Commission. It would, among
other things, define certain terms, set
forth the burden of proof and standard
of review, explain what information a
Commission decision will contain, and
what happens if the Commission does
not issue a majority decision, and
provide that an appeal of the Chair’s
decision does not stay the effect of that
decision. The proposed regulations set
forth rules for motion practice in
appeals before the Commission,
addresses how an entity other than a
tribe would request to participate on a
limited basis in ordinance appeals, how
parties file motions to intervene, to
supplement the record, and for
reconsideration, and how to file motions
before the presiding official.
Additionally, the proposed regulation
sets forth more specific rules for
different types of appeals. Rules for
appeals of ordinance disapprovals,
management contract approvals and
disapprovals, appeals before a presiding
official, and appeals before the
Commission on written submission only
each receive somewhat different
treatment.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
The agency must receive
comments on or before April 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any one of the following methods,
however, please note that comments
sent by electronic mail are strongly
encouraged.
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jan 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
• Email comments to:
reg.review@nigc.gov.
• Mail comments to: Maria Getoff,
National Indian Gaming Commission,
1441 L Street NW., Suite 9100,
Washington, DC 20005.
• Hand deliver comments to: 1441 L
Street NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC
20005.
• Fax comments to: Maria Getoff,
National Indian Gaming Commission at
(202) 632–0045.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria Getoff, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street NW., Suite
9100 Washington, DC 20005.
Telephone: (202) 632–7003; email:
reg.review@nigc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to
participate in this proposed rulemaking
by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis
supporting the views and suggestions
presented are particularly helpful in
developing reasoned regulatory
decisions on the proposal.
II. Background
On November 18, 2010, the National
Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC)
issued a Notice of Inquiry and Notice of
Consultation (NOI) advising the public
that the NIGC was conducting a
comprehensive review of its regulations
and requesting public 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. 75 FR
70680 (Nov. 18, 2010). On April 4, 2011,
after holding eight consultations and
reviewing all comments, NIGC
published a Notice of Regulatory
Review Schedule (NRR) setting out a
consultation schedule and process for
review. 76 FR 18457. The Commission’s
regulatory review process established a
tribal consultation schedule with a
description of the regulation groups to
be covered at each consultation. Part
519—Service; Part 524—Appeals; Part
539—Appeals; and Part 577—Appeals
before the Commission were included in
this regulatory review. The Commission
will address changes to part 519—
Service in a separate rulemaking action
because part 519 sets forth rules for
service of actions and decisions by the
Chair and therefore does not implicate
the appellate review process.
III. Development of the Proposed Rule
The Commission conducted a total of
10 tribal consultations as part of its
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
review of Part 519—Service; Part 524—
Appeals; Part 539—Appeals; and Part
577—Appeals before the Commission.
Tribal consultations were held in every
region of the country and were attended
by numerous tribes and tribal leaders or
their representatives. In addition to
tribal consultations, on July 22, 2011,
the Commission requested public
comment on a Preliminary Draft of new
Subchapter H. After considering the
comments received from the public and
through tribal consultations, the
Commission will remove Part 524—
Appeals; Part 539—Appeals; and Part
577—Appeals before the Commission
and will add a new subchapter H—
Appeal Proceedings before the
Commission.
Currently, rules for appeals before the
Commission are found in three separate
places: Part 524 governs appeals of
ordinance actions; part 539 addresses
appeals of management contract actions;
and part 577 sets forth procedures for
appeals of enforcement actions and
actions to void an approved
management contract. The Commission
believes that consolidating all appellate
procedures in a new subchapter
promotes clarity and effectiveness for
the regulated community.
Proposed subchapter H consists of six
parts: 580—Rules of general application
in appellate proceedings before the
Commission; 581—Motions in appellate
proceedings before the Commission ;
582—Appeals of disapprovals of gaming
ordinances, resolutions, or
amendments.; 583—Appeals of
approvals or disapprovals of
management contracts or amendments
to management contracts; 584—Appeals
before a presiding official of notices of
violation, proposed civil fine
assessments, orders of temporary
closure, the Chair’s decision to void or
modify a management contracts, the
Commission’s proposal to remove a
certificate of self-regulation, and notices
of late fees and late fee assessments; and
585—Appeals to the Commission on
written submissions of notices of
violation, proposed civil fine
assessments, orders of temporary
closure, the Chair’s decision to void or
modify management contracts, the
Commission’s proposal to remove a
certificate of self regulation, and notices
of late fees and late fee assessments.
Part 580—Rules of General Application
in Appeal Proceedings Before the
Commission
This new part sets forth rules that are
generally applicable to all appellate
proceedings before the Commission.
First, it defines terms used throughout
the subchapter. Several commenters
E:\FR\FM\31JAP1.SGM
31JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 31, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4714-4720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1763]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Part 518
RIN 3141-AA44
Self-Regulation of Class II Gaming
AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission, Interior.
[[Page 4715]]
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the NIGC's self-regulation
regulations to tailor the self-regulating qualifying criteria to a
tribe's regulation of class II gaming activity and more clearly define
and streamline the self-regulation certification process. By tailoring
the self-regulating qualifying criteria to the capabilities of a
tribe's regulatory body, and by clarifying and streamlining the
certification process, more tribes may become self-regulating.
DATES: The agency must receive comments on or before April 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods,
but please note that comments sent by electronic mail are strongly
encouraged.
Email comments to: reg.review@nigc.gov.
Mail comments to: Katherine Zebell, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005.
Hand deliver comments to: 1441 L Street NW., Suite 9100,
Washington, DC 20005.
Fax comments to: Katherine Zebell, National Indian Gaming
Commission at (202) 632-7066.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Zebell, National Indian
Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005.
Telephone: (202) 632-7003; email: reg.review@nigc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments which provide a factual basis in support of the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal.
II. Background
On November 18, 2010, the Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry and
Notice of Consultation (``NOI'') advising the public that the NIGC was
conducting a comprehensive review of its regulations and requesting
public comment on which of its regulations were most in need of
revision, in what order the NIGC should review its regulations, and the
process the NIGC should utilize to make revisions. 75 FR 70680 (Nov.
18, 2010). On April 4, 2011, after holding eight consultations and
reviewing all of the comments, the Commission published a Notice of
Regulatory Review Schedule, setting out a consultation schedule and
process for review. 76 FR 18457. Part 518 is included in one of the
regulation groups that are part of this regulatory review.
III. Development of the Proposed Rule
The Commission conducted numerous tribal consultations as part of
its review of part 518--Self-Regulation of Class II Gaming. Tribal
consultations were held in every region of the country and were
attended by many tribal leaders or their representatives. In addition
to tribal consultations, on August 16, 2011, the Commission requested
public comment on a Preliminary Draft of part 518. After considering
the comments received from the public, and through tribal
consultations, the Commission proposes to amend part 518 to (a) tailor
the self-regulating criteria to a tribe's regulation of class II gaming
activity; and (b) clearly define and streamline the process by which a
self-regulation petition is reviewed and a final determination is made
by the Commission.
IV. Overview of the Proposed Rule
During the regulation review process, the Commission received
comments that the existing self-regulation regulation discourages
participation because the burdens imposed by the regulation outweigh
the benefits. Specifically, comments stated that the current process is
confusing, and the submission requirements, and continuing compliance
requirements, are redundant and intrusive. The Commission also received
comments that the current process is misfocused by placing greater
emphasis on a tribe's gaming operation than on the effectiveness of a
tribe's regulatory system. Therefore, the Commission is proposing
amendments to streamline and clarify the process, as well as to ensure
an effective regulatory framework for self-regulating tribes.
The proposed rule amends the petition and approval process to focus
on the capability of the tribal regulatory body. To this end, the
proposed rule requires information necessary for the Commission to
evaluate the strength and effectiveness of a tribe's regulation of its
gaming activity.
The proposed rule clarifies both the initial eligibility
requirements and the petition submission requirements. Further, the
proposed rule eliminates the need to resubmit information already
provided to either the NIGC or the Bureau of Indian Affairs (``BIA''),
such as gaming regulations, constitutions, revenue allocation plans,
and facility licenses. The proposed rule creates distinct stages and
timelines for the certification process, and accelerates the timeline
for the Commission to issue a final decision. The proposed rule
provides for a streamlined process by involving the Commission in the
certification review process. Under the proposed rule, the Commission
will issue both the preliminary findings and final determination as to
whether a tribe meets the approval criteria for self-regulation. The
Commission will also hold a hearing, if requested by a tribe upon
receipt of the Commission's preliminary findings.
Once certified, the only annual submission requirements under the
proposed rule are the submission of independent audits and the resumes
of all employees hired and licensed by the tribe's gaming regulatory
body. The Commission believes that the annual self-regulation report
currently required provides duplicative information already available
to the agency and therefore proposes to eliminate that requirement.
Additionally, the proposed rule requires self-regulating tribes to
notify the NIGC within three business days of any change in
circumstances that is material to the requirements for issuance of a
certificate of self-regulation. This self-reporting requirement will
provide the Commission with essential information in a more timely
manner than the annual report mechanism in the current regulations.
Finally, the proposed rule corrects and clarifies the existing rule
by referencing IGRA's post-certification limitations regarding the
NIGC's authority over self-regulating tribes.
A. General Comments
Responses to the NOI and the Preliminary Draft of part 518 were
generally positive. Many commenters stated that, in its current form,
part 518 should be reviewed and revised to facilitate self-regulation
while maintaining stringent standards. A commenter stated that the
self-regulation regulations should be about evaluating a tribe's
regulatory agency, not the gaming operation. Another commenter agreed,
stating the focus should be on the tribal regulatory agency, not the
gaming operation. Other commenters noted that the current financial
benefits of waived fees do not outweigh the paperwork burdens of the
current regulations. One commenter noted that the promise of self-
regulation contemplated by the Act is not fulfilled by the NIGC's
current regulations. Another commenter stated that the fact that only
two tribes are self-regulating means something is wrong with the
[[Page 4716]]
regulations. As noted above, the Commission's proposed changes attempt
to address many of these concerns.
B. Eligibility and Submission Requirements for Petition
The statute identifies who is eligible to petition for a
certificate of self-regulation, and those criteria are contained in
Sec. 518.2 of the current regulation. The proposed rule attempts to
clearly identify what a tribe is required to include in its petition at
the time it is submitted to the NIGC, including evidence that the tribe
meets the statutory eligibility requirements.
The requirement that a tribe must have continuously conducted class
II gaming activity for the 3-year period immediately preceding the date
of the petition raised concerns by several commenters. Commenters
stated that this requirement could make ineligible those tribes
conducting both class II and class III gaming, but which have not
continuously conducted class II gaming for a 3-year period prior to
submitting a petition. Commenters stated that if a tribe has conducted,
and successfully regulated class II and/or class III gaming for three
years, then it should be eligible to petition for a certificate of
self-regulation. Further, there are instances in which tribes operate
their gaming facilities seasonally or in which tribes have to
temporarily close their facilities. While the Commission understands
the perspective of the commenters, IGRA requires a tribe to
continuously conduct class II gaming activity for three years before
submitting a petition for self-regulation. Accordingly, and in light of
the comments received, the Commission will continue to interpret the
phrase ``continuously conducted'' in a way consistent with the common-
sense interpretation found in the preamble to the existing rule at 63
FR 41961 (August 6, 1998). Likewise, this Commission does not intend to
preclude a tribe from obtaining a certificate of self-regulation if its
gaming operation is closed for temporary or seasonal closures, and will
evaluate each situation on a case-by-case basis. Commenters noted that
the current rule requires submission of information that is more
focused on the gaming operation than the gaming regulatory framework.
The Commission agrees with this comment and has attempted to strengthen
the submission requirements that would indicate whether a tribe was
successfully regulating its gaming activities, such as the criteria
used for hiring tribal regulatory agency employees and a list of the
gaming activity internal controls in place at the gaming operation.
Under the proposed rule, tribes will be required to provide a list of
their internal controls as part of the petition. Additionally, tribes
must only submit the gaming regulations with the petition if the gaming
regulations are not part of the gaming ordinance previously submitted
and approved by the Chair.
Further, commenters also noted that requiring information such as a
tribe's constitution, revenue allocation plan or facility license is
duplicative, as these documents have already been submitted to the NIGC
or the BIA. The Commission agrees with this observation and has
attempted to streamline the certification process by removing the
requirements to resubmit documents previously provided to the NIGC or
the BIA.
C. Criteria That Must Be Met To Receive a Certificate of Self-
Regulation
The statute establishes criteria that must be met by a tribe before
a certificate of self-regulation can be issued. The current rule
identifies those criteria and provides a list of ``indicators'' that a
tribe may use to demonstrate they have met the criteria. The proposed
rule clarifies that the examples listed are not all-inclusive and that
a tribe can provide other evidence to satisfy the criteria. As
discussed above, the proposed rule focuses on evidence related to the
tribe's regulation of the gaming activity. The proposed rule also
streamlines criteria addressed by other NIGC regulations, such as
compliance with applicable building, health and safety codes and
procedures for resolving disputes between the gaming public and the
tribe. Those requirements are addressed in Parts 559 and 522,
respectively.
D. Process for Petition Review and Certification of Tribes
Several tribes commented that the timing and process for
certification needs clarification. In response, the proposed rule
attempts to simplify and streamline the certification process,
including how petitions are submitted, reviewed and approved, and the
timelines for each stage. The proposed rule also attempts to clarify
the respective roles and responsibilities of the Commission and the
Office of Self-Regulation (``OSR''). The current regulation authorizes
the OSR to administer the self-regulation program and receive, review
and approve petitions. Commenters stated that IGRA requires the
Commission itself to consider petitions and certify qualifying tribes.
The proposed rule modifies the roles of the OSR and the Commission by
requiring the full Commission to make the final determination as to
whether a tribe meets the approval criteria for self-regulation, based
on information presented in the tribe's petition, supplemental
documentation and a hearing, if held. The proposed rule also
streamlines the process by requiring the Commission to issue
preliminary findings to the tribe and provide the tribe with an
opportunity for a hearing before the Commission issues a final
determination. This change allows a tribe to respond to a preliminary
adverse finding before a final determination by the Commission. This
proposed process is intended to facilitate collaboration with the NIGC
to meet the approval criteria. Finally, the proposed rule provides for
judicial review in a more timely manner than the current regulations.
E. Post-Certification Rights and Responsibilities
IGRA requires a tribe which has been issued a certificate of self-
regulation to submit an independent annual audit and a complete resume
on all employees hired and licensed by the tribe. The proposed rule
requires self-regulating tribes to submit, on an annual basis, an
independent audit and the resumes of employees hired and licensed by
the tribal gaming regulatory body. Some commenters requested the
regulation include a definition of ``tribal regulator.'' The proposed
rule does not define ``tribal regulator'' because tribal law may vary
on how it defines a tribal regulator. In order to account for all
persons responsible for the regulation of a tribes' class II gaming
activity, without interfering with the tribe's interpretation of a
``tribal regulator,'' the proposed rule requires self-regulating tribes
to submit, on an annual basis, the resumes of all employees hired and
licensed by the tribal gaming regulatory body. The Commission invites
comment on this approach and comment on potential definitions of
``tribal regulator.''
Part 518 currently requires the tribe to submit an annual report to
establish that the tribe has continuously met the eligibility and
approval requirements. The proposed rule reduces this paperwork burden.
The proposed rule requires a tribe to notify the NIGC within three
business days of any change in circumstances that is material to
meeting the requirements for issuance of the certificate. This approach
will ensure timely reporting to maintain the integrity of Indian gaming
while reducing paperwork requirements for the regulated community.
Finally, commenters stated that the current regulations concerning
the NIGC's enforcement powers over self-
[[Page 4717]]
regulating tribes were unclear and overbroad. Consistent with public
comments, the proposed rule corrects and clarifies Sec. 518.9 by
referencing the powers of the NIGC that are limited by statute once a
tribe is issued a certificate of self-regulation
Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed rule will not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities as defined under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. Indian tribes are not considered
to be small entities for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This proposed rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule does not
have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. This rule
will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, state or local government agencies or
geographic regions, and does not have a significant adverse effect on
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the
ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based
enterprises.
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
The Commission, as an independent regulatory agency within the
Department of the Interior, is exempt from compliance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act. 2 U.S.C. 1502(1); 2 U.S.C. 658(1).
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the Commission has
determined that this proposed rule does not have significant takings
implications. A takings implication assessment is not required.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of General
Counsel has determined that the proposed rule does not unduly burden
the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of the Executive Order.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Commission has determined that this proposed rule does not
constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment and that no detailed statement is required
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule requires information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and is,
therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR 518
Gambling, Indian--lands, Indian--tribal government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, for the reasons discussed in the preamble, the
Commission proposes to revise 25 CFR part 518 to read as follows:
PART 518--SELF-REGULATION OF CLASS II GAMING
Sec.
518.1 What does this part cover?
518.2 Who will administer the self-regulation program for the
Commission?
518.3 Who is eligible to petition for a certificate of self-
regulation?
518.4 What must a tribe submit to the Commission as part of its
petition?
518.5 What criteria must a tribe meet to receive a certificate of
self-regulation?
518.6 What are the responsibilities of the Office of Self-Regulation
in the certification process?
518.7 What process will the Commission use to review and certify
petitions?
518.8 What is the hearing process?
518.9 When will a certificate of self-regulation become effective?
518.10 What must a self-regulating tribe provide the Commission to
maintain its self-regulatory status?
518.11 Does a tribe that holds a certificate of self-regulation have
a continuing duty to advise the Commission of any additional
information?
518.12 Which investigative or enforcement powers of the Commission
are inapplicable to self-regulating tribes?
518.13 When may the Commission revoke a certificate of self-
regulation?
518.14 May a tribe request a hearing on the Commission's proposal to
revoke its certificate of self-regulation?
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2706(b)(10); E.O. 13175.
Sec. 518.1 What does this part cover?
This part sets forth requirements for obtaining a certificate of
self-regulation of class II gaming operations under 25 U.S.C. 2710(c).
When the Commission issues a certificate of self-regulation, the
certificate is issued to the tribe, not to a particular gaming
operation. The certificate applies to all class II gaming activity
conducted by the tribe holding the certificate.
Sec. 518.2 Who will administer the self-regulation program for the
Commission?
The self-regulation program will be administered by the Office of
Self-Regulation. The Chair shall appoint one Commissioner to administer
the Office of Self-Regulation.
Sec. 518.3 Who is eligible to petition for a certificate of self-
regulation?
A tribe is eligible to petition the Commission for a certificate of
self-regulation of class II gaming if, for a three (3)-year period
immediately preceding the date of its petition:
(a) The tribe has continuously conducted such gaming;
(b) All gaming that the tribe has engaged in, or has licensed and
regulated, on Indian lands within the tribe's jurisdiction, is located
within a State that permits such gaming for any purpose by any person,
organization or entity (and such gaming is not otherwise specifically
prohibited on Indian lands by Federal law), in accordance with 25
U.S.C. 2710(b)(1)(A);
(c) The governing body of the tribe has adopted an ordinance or
resolution that the Chair has approved, in accordance with 25 U.S.C.
2710(b)(1)(B);
(d) The tribe has otherwise complied with the provisions of 25
U.S.C. 2710; and
(e) The gaming operation and the tribal regulatory body have, for
the three (3) years immediately preceding the date of the petition,
maintained all records required to support the petition for self-
regulation.
Sec. 518.4 What must a tribe submit to the Commission as part of its
petition?
A petition for a certificate of self-regulation is complete under
this part when it contains:
(a) Two copies on 8\1/2\'' x 11'' paper of a petition for self-
regulation approved by the governing body of the tribe and certified as
authentic by an authorized tribal official;
(b) A description of how the tribe meets the eligibility criteria
in Sec. 518.3, which may include supporting documentation; and
(c) The following information with supporting documentation:
(i) A brief history of each gaming operation(s), including the
opening dates and periods of voluntary or involuntary closure;
(ii) An organizational chart of the tribal regulatory body;
(iii) A brief description of the criteria tribal regulators must
meet before being eligible for employment as a tribal regulator;
(iv) A brief description of the process by which the tribal
regulatory body is
[[Page 4718]]
funded, and the funding level for the three years immediately preceding
the date of the petition;
(v) A list of the current regulators and employees of the tribal
regulatory body, their complete resumes, their titles, the dates they
began employment, and, if serving limited terms, the expiration date of
such terms;
(vi) A brief description of the accounting system(s) at the gaming
operation which tracks the flow of the gaming revenues;
(vii) A list of gaming activity internal controls at the gaming
operation(s);
(viii) A description of the record keeping system(s) for all
investigations, enforcement actions, and prosecutions of violations of
the tribal gaming ordinance or regulations, for the three (3)-year
period immediately preceding the date of the petition; and
(ix) The tribe's current set of gaming regulations, if not included
in the approved tribal gaming ordinance.
Sec. 518.5 What criteria must a tribe meet to receive a certificate
of self-regulation?
(a) The Commission shall issue a certificate of self-regulation if
it determines that for a three (3)-year period, the tribe has:
(1) Conducted its gaming activity in a manner that:
(i) Has resulted in an effective and honest accounting of all
revenues;
(ii) Has resulted in a reputation for safe, fair, and honest
operation of the activity; and
(iii) Has been generally free of evidence of criminal or dishonest
activity;
(2) Conducted its gaming operation on a fiscally and economically
sound basis;
(3) Conducted its gaming activity in compliance with the IGRA, NIGC
regulations in this chapter, and the tribe's gaming ordinance and
gaming regulations; and
(4) Adopted and is implementing adequate systems for:
(i) Accounting of all revenues from the gaming activity;
(ii) Investigating, licensing and monitoring of all employees of
the gaming activity;
(iii) Investigating, enforcing, prosecuting, or referring for
prosecution violations of its gaming ordinance and regulations; and
(iv) Prosecuting criminal or dishonest activity or referring such
activity for prosecution.
(b) A tribe may illustrate that it has met the criteria listed in
paragraph (a) of this section by addressing factors such as those
listed below. The list of factors is not all-inclusive; other factors
not listed here may also be addressed and considered.
(1) The tribe adopted and is implementing minimum internal control
standards which are at least as stringent as those promulgated by the
Commission;
(2) The tribe requires tribal gaming regulators to meet the same
suitability requirements as those required for key employees and
primary management officials of the gaming operation(s);
(3) The tribe's gaming operation utilizes an adequate system for
accounting of all gaming revenues from class II gaming activity;
(4) The tribe has a dispute resolution process for gaming operation
customers and has taken steps to ensure that the process is adequately
implemented;
(5) The tribe has a gaming regulatory body which:
(i) Monitors gaming activities to ensure compliance with Federal
and tribal laws and regulations;
(ii) Monitors the gaming revenues accounting system for continued
effectiveness;
(iii) Performs routine operational or other audits of the class II
gaming activities;
(iv) Routinely receives and reviews gaming revenue accounting
information from the gaming operation(s);
(v) Has access to and may inspect, examine, photocopy and audit all
papers, books, and records of the gaming operation(s) and class II
gaming activities;
(vi) Monitors compliance with minimum internal control standards
for the gaming operation;
(vii) Has adopted and is implementing an adequate system for
investigating, licensing, and monitoring of all employees of the gaming
activity;
(viii) Maintains records on licensees and on persons denied
licenses, including persons otherwise prohibited from engaging in
gaming activities within the tribe's jurisdiction;
(ix) Establishes standards for, and issues, vendor licenses or
permits to persons or entities who deal with the gaming operation, such
as manufacturers and suppliers of services, equipment and supplies;
(x) Establishes or approves the rules governing class II games, and
requires their posting;
(xi) Has adopted and is implementing an adequate system for the
investigation of possible violations of the tribal gaming ordinance and
regulations, and takes appropriate enforcement actions; and
(xii) Takes testimony and conducts hearings on regulatory matters,
including matters related to the revocation of primary management
officials, key employee and vendor licenses;
(6) The tribe allocates and appropriates a sufficient source of
permanent and stable funding for the tribal regulatory body;
(7) The tribe has adopted and is implementing a conflict of
interest policy for the regulators/regulatory body and their staff;
(8) The tribe has adopted and is implementing a system for adequate
prosecution of violations of the tribal gaming ordinance and
regulations or referrals for prosecution; and
(9) The tribe demonstrates that the operation is being conducted in
a manner which adequately protects the environment and the public
health and safety.
(c) The tribe assists the Commission with access and information-
gathering responsibilities during the certification process.
(d) The burden of establishing self-regulation is upon the tribe
filing the petition.
Sec. 518.6 What are the responsibilities of the Office of Self-
Regulation in the certification process?
The Office of Self-Regulation shall be responsible for directing
and coordinating the certification process. It shall provide a written
report and recommendation to the Commission as to whether a certificate
of self-regulation should be issued or denied, and a copy of the report
and recommendation to the petitioning tribe.
Sec. 518.7 What process will the Commission use to review and certify
petitions?
(a) Petitions for self-regulation shall be submitted by tribes to
the Office of Self-Regulation.
(1) Within 30 days of receipt of a tribe's petition, the Office of
Self-Regulation shall conduct a review of the tribe's petition to
determine whether it is complete under Sec. 518.4.
(2) If the tribe's petition is incomplete, the Office of Self-
Regulation shall notify the tribe by letter, certified mail or return
receipt requested, of any obvious deficiencies or significant omissions
in the petition. A tribe with an incomplete petition may submit
additional information and/or clarification within 30 days of receipt
of notice of an incomplete petition.
(3) If the tribe's petition is complete, the Office of Self-
Regulation shall notify the tribe in writing.
(b) Once a tribe's petition is complete, the Office of Self-
Regulation shall conduct a review to determine whether the tribe meets
the eligibility criteria in Sec. 518.3 and the approval criteria in
Sec. 518.5. During its review, the Office of Self-Regulation:
[[Page 4719]]
(1) May request from the tribe any additional material it deems
necessary to assess whether the tribe has met the criteria for self-
regulation.
(2) Will coordinate an on-site review and verification of the
information submitted by the petitioning tribe.
(c) Within 120 days of notice of a complete petition under Sec.
518.4, the Office of Self-Regulation shall provide a recommendation and
written report to the full Commission and the petitioning tribe.
(1) If the Office of Self-Regulation determines that the tribe has
satisfied the criteria for a certificate of self-regulation, it shall
recommend to the Commission that a certificate be issued to the tribe.
(2) If the Office of Self-Regulation determines that the tribe has
not met the criteria for a certificate of self-regulation, it shall
recommend to the Commission that it not issue a certificate to the
tribe.
(3) The Office of Self-Regulation shall make all information on
which it relies in making its recommendation and report available to
the tribe, subject to the confidentiality requirements in 25 U.S.C.
2716(a), and shall afford the tribe an opportunity to respond.
(4) The report shall include:
(i) Findings as to whether each of the eligibility criteria is met,
and a summary of the basis for each finding;
(ii) Findings as to whether each of the approval criteria is met,
and a summary of the basis for each finding;
(iii) A recommendation to the Commission as to whether it should
issue the tribe a certificate of self-regulation; and
(iv) A list of any documents and other information received in
support of the tribe's petition.
(5) A tribe shall have 30 days from the date of issuance of the
report to submit to the Office of Self-Regulation a response to the
report.
(d) After receiving the Office of Self-Regulation's recommendation
and report, and a tribe's response to the report, the Commission shall
issue preliminary findings as to whether the eligibility and approval
criteria are met. The Commission's preliminary findings will be
provided to the tribe within 30 days of receipt of the report.
(e) Upon receipt of the Commission's preliminary findings, the
tribe can request, in writing, a hearing before the Commission, as set
forth in Sec. 518.8. Hearing requests shall be made to the Office of
Self-Regulation and shall specify the issues to be addressed by the
tribe at the hearing, and any proposed oral or written testimony the
tribe wishes to present.
(f) The Commission shall issue a final determination 30 days after
issuance of its preliminary findings or after the conclusion of a
hearing, if one is held. The decision of the Commission to approve or
deny a petition shall be a final agency action.
(g) A tribe may withdraw its petition and resubmit it at any time
prior to the issuance of the Commission's final determination.
Sec. 518.8 What is the hearing process?
(a) Within 10 days of receipt of the request for a hearing, the
Office of Self-Regulation shall notify the tribe of the date and place
of the hearing. The notice shall also set a hearing schedule, the time
allotted for testimony and oral argument, and the order of the
presentation. To the extent possible, the hearing will be scheduled not
later than 60 days after the notice is issued, and the hearing schedule
will be issued at least 30 days prior to the hearing.
(b) The Commission shall issue a decision on the petition within 30
days after the hearing's conclusion. The decision shall set forth, with
particularity, findings regarding the tribe's satisfaction of the self-
regulation standards in this part. If the Commission determines that a
certificate will issue, it will do so in accordance with Sec. 518.11.
(c) The decision of the Commission to approve or deny a petition
shall be a final agency action.
Sec. 518.9 When will a certificate of self-regulation become
effective?
A certificate of self-regulation shall become effective on January
1 of the year following the year in which the Commission determines
that a certificate will issue. Petitions will be reviewed in
chronological order based on the date of receipt of a complete
petition.
Sec. 518.10 What must a self-regulating tribe provide the Commission
to maintain its self-regulatory status?
(a) Each tribe that holds a certificate of self-regulation shall be
required to submit the following information on April 15 of each year
following the first year of self-regulation or within 120 days after
the end of each fiscal year of the gaming operation, as required by 25
CFR 571.13:
(1) An annual independent audit, to be filed with the Commission,
as required by 25 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2)(c); and
(2) A complete resume for all employees of the tribal regulatory
body hired and licensed by the tribe subsequent to its receipt of a
certificate of self-regulation, to be filed with the Office of Self-
Regulation.
(b) Failure to submit the information required by this section may
result in revocation of a certificate of self-regulation.
Sec. 518.11 Does a tribe that holds a certificate of self-regulation
have a continuing duty to advise the Commission of any additional
information?
Yes. A tribe that holds a certificate of self-regulation has a
continuing duty to advise the Commission within three (3) business days
of any changes in circumstances that are material to the approval
criteria in Sec. 518.5 and may reasonably cause the Commission to
review and revoke the tribe's certificate of self-regulation. Failure
to do so is grounds for revocation of a certificate of self-regulation.
Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to, a change in
management contractor; a change of primary regulatory official;
financial instability; or any other factors that are material to the
decision to grant a certificate of self-regulation.
Sec. 518.12 Which investigative or enforcement powers of the
Commission are inapplicable to self-regulating tribes?
During any time in which a tribe has a certificate of self-
regulation, the powers of the Commission, as set forth in 25 U.S.C.
2706(b)(1)-(4), shall be inapplicable.
Sec. 518.13 When may the Commission revoke a certificate of self-
regulation?
The Commission may, after an opportunity for a hearing, revoke a
certificate of self-regulation by a majority vote of its members if it
determines that the tribe no longer meets the eligibility criteria of
Sec. 518.3, the approval criteria of Sec. 518.5, the requirements of
Sec. 518.10 or the requirements of Sec. 518.11. The Commission shall
provide the tribe with prompt notice of the Commission's intent to
revoke a certificate of self-regulation under this part. Such notice
shall state the reasons for the Commission's action and shall advise
the tribe of its right to a hearing under part 584 or right to appeal
under part 585. The decision to revoke a certificate is a final agency
action and is appealable to Federal District Court pursuant to 25
U.S.C. 2714.
Sec. 518.14 May a tribe request a hearing on the Commission's
proposal to revoke its certificate of self-regulation?
Yes. A tribe may request a hearing regarding the Commission's
proposal to revoke a certificate of self-regulation. Such a request
shall be filed with the Commission pursuant to part 584. Failure to
request a hearing within the time provided by part 584 shall
[[Page 4720]]
constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing.
Tracie L. Stevens,
Chairwoman.
Steffani A. Cochran,
Vice-Chairwoman.
Daniel J. Little,
Associate Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2012-1763 Filed 1-27-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7565-01-P