Protocol for Categorical Exclusions Supplementing the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act for Certain National Indian Gaming Commission Actions and Activities, 3352-3355 [2017-00364]
Download as PDF
3352
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2017 / Notices
Dated: January 6, 2017.
Tina A. Campbell,
Chief, Division of Policy, Performance, and
Management Programs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–00462 Filed 1–10–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
U.S. Geological Survey
[GX170A030AD0100]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Request for Comments
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of a new information
collection, Ecosystems Program
Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey.
AGENCY:
We (the U.S. Geological
Survey) will ask the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to
approve the information collection (IC)
described below. As required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of
1995, and as part of our continuing
efforts to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, we invite the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on this IC.
DATES: To ensure that your comments
are considered, we must receive them
on or before March 13, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this information collection to the
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201
Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 807, Reston,
VA 20192 (mail); (703) 648–7197 (fax);
or gs-info_collections@usgs.gov (email).
Please reference ‘Information Collection
1028—NEW, Ecosystems Program
Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey’ in all
correspondence.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linn
Kwan, Senior Program Officer, Tel.
703.648.4494 or Email-lkwan@usgs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
I. Abstract
The survey will be sent to USGS
Ecosystems Mission Area stakeholders/
partners to provide respondents the
opportunity to share their comments,
insights and satisfaction of USGS
Ecosystems research products, training,
and technical assistance. The survey
results will be compiled and reported in
three new performance measures that
are being proposed for FY2018–2022.
The survey is voluntary and
anonymous. The respondents’ identities
will only be known if they chose to
share that information in the response.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:05 Jan 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
II. Data
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
OMB Control Number: 1028—NEW.
Title: Ecosystems Program
Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey.
Type of Request: New information
collection.
Affected Public: USGS partners at
other DOI bureaus, Federal and State
agencies, Tribes and Non-governmental
Organizations.
Respondent’s Obligation: None,
participation is voluntary.
Frequency of Collection: Information
will be collected once at the end of each
fiscal year.
Estimated Annual Number of
Respondents: 150
Estimated Total Number of Annual
Responses: 120
Estimated Time per Response: 10
minutes or less to complete the survey.
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’
Burden: None.
Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor and
you are not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number and current expiration date.
III. Request for Comments
We are soliciting comments as to: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the agency
to perform its duties, including whether
the information is useful; (b) the
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) how
to minimize the burden on the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Please note that the comments
submitted in response to this notice are
a matter of public record. Before
including your personal mailing
address, phone number, email address,
or other personally identifiable
information in your comment, you
should be aware that your entire
comment, including your personally
identifiable information, may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can ask us in your comment to
withhold your personally identifiable
information from public view, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
John Thompson,
Deputy Chief, CRU.
[FR Doc. 2017–00444 Filed 1–10–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4338–11–P
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
National Indian Gaming Commission
Protocol for Categorical Exclusions
Supplementing the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations
Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act for Certain
National Indian Gaming Commission
Actions and Activities
The National Indian Gaming
Commission, Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of proposed action and
request for comments.
AGENCY:
The National Indian Gaming
Commission (NIGC or ‘‘the
Commission’’) is amending its protocol
for categorical exclusions under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), as amended, Executive
Order 11514, as amended, and Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations for implementing the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500–1508) for certain NIGC
actions.
SUMMARY:
Comments and related material
must be post marked no later than 60
days after publication of this notice.
ADDRESSES: Please submit your
comments by only one of the following
means: (1) By mail to: NIGC Attn:
Andrew Mendoza, Staff Attorney, C/O
Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street
NW., Mailstop #1621, Washington, DC
20240; (2) by facsimile to: (202) 632–
7066; (3) by email to: andrew_
mendoza@nigc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew Mendoza, Staff Attorney at the
National Indian Gaming Commission:
202–632–7003 (not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
I. Comments Invited
The NIGC encourages interested
persons to submit written comments.
Persons submitting information
concerning the Protocol should include
their name, address, and other
appropriate contact information. You
may submit your information by one of
the means listed under ADDRESSES. If
you submit information by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit information by mail
and would like to know it was received,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. The NIGC will
consider all comments received during
the comment period.
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2017 / Notices
II. Background
On December 4, 2009, the
Commission published a draft NEPA
manual in the Federal Register (74 FR
63765). The purpose of the manual was
to establish the Commission’s NEPArelated policies and procedures and to
integrate environmental considerations
into the Commission’s decision-making
processes. The draft manual identified
one type of major federal action
performed under the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act (IGRA) that triggered
NEPA review, specifically, the approval
of contracts for the management of
Indian gaming facilities pursuant to 25
U.S.C. 2711. In addition to identifying
major federal actions applicable to the
Commission, the draft manual also
established the Commission’s NEPArelated roles and responsibilities and
created a framework for the preparation
of NEPA documentation appropriate for
each level of environmental review. The
draft manual also identified three
categories of actions taken by the NIGC
that are categorically excluded from
further NEPA review. Categorical
exclusions (CATEX) are actions that do
not normally require preparation of an
Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS),
absent extraordinary circumstances.
On May 22, 2012, after reviewing the
comments submitted on the draft NEPA
manual, the Commission published a
Protocol for Categorical Exclusions
Supplementing the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations
Implementing the Procedural Provisions
of the National Environmental Policy
Act for Certain National Indian Gaming
Commissions Actions and Activities (77
FR 30315) and requested comments by
June 30, 2012. This publication formally
adopted two of the three categorical
exclusions listed in the draft NEPA
manual.
In 2015, after evaluating its past
environmental reviews for management
contract approvals and the comments
received on the 2009 draft NEPA
manual, the Commission decided to
revisit its policies and procedures for
implementing NEPA. To obtain updated
views from the regulated community,
the Commission held several
consultation sessions over a two-year
period with tribal nations and solicited
comments regarding the scope and
extent of its NEPA responsibilities.
Following consultation, the Commission
evaluated the newly submitted
comments in conjunction with those
received in response to the 2009 draft
manual and decided to amend the 2012
Protocol to include a third CATEX for
Management Contract and Agreement
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:05 Jan 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
Review Activities. This CATEX will
apply to certain management contract
approvals that are not associated with
an application to take land into trust
and do not provide for construction or
expansion of existing structures. In
identifying this category of actions, the
NIGC relied on its past experience,
several environmental professionals’
opinions and comparisons with other
Federal agency actions that are
categorically excluded.
The Commission hereby adopts the
amended protocol set forth below for
determining whether a categorical
exclusion applies to particular action as
well as the categories of actions the
Commission has determined are eligible
for categorical exclusions.
A copy of this Federal Register
publication, as well as the
administrative record for the newly
established categorical exclusion, is
available at https://www.nigc.gov. A copy
of the Federal Register publication is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Regulatory Flexibility Act: This
Protocol will not have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number
of small entities as defined under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. Indian tribes are not considered
to be small entities for the purposes of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This Protocol is not a major rule
under 5. U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. This Protocol 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 foreignbased enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Commission, as an independent
regulatory agency within the
Department of the Interior, is exempt
from compliance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act. 2 U.S.C. 1502(1);
2 U.S.C. 658(1).
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, the Commission has determined
that this Protocol does not have
significant takings implications. A
takings implication assessment is not
required.
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3353
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order
12988, the Office of General Counsel has
determined that the Protocol 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
This Protocol supplements CEQ
regulations and provides guidance to
NIGC employees regarding procedural
requirements for the application of
NEPA provisions to certain NIGC
actions. The CEQ does not direct
agencies to prepare a NEPA analysis or
document before establishing agency
procedures for implementing NEPA.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the National Indian Gaming
Commission establishes the following
Protocol:
Protocol for Categorical Exclusions
(CATEX) of Certain Actions
The use of a CATEX can only be
applied to an action if all of the
following criteria are met:
1. The responsible NIGC official must
determine that the entirety of the NIGC
action is encompassed by one of the
listed CATEXs.
2. The responsible NIGC official must
determine that the action has not been
segmented in order for the NIGC action
to meet the definition of an action that
can qualify for a CATEX. Segmentation
occurs when an action is broken into
smaller parts in an effort to avoid
properly documenting impacts
associated with the complete action.
Segmentation also occurs when the
NIGC action is too narrowly defined and
the potential impacts are minimized in
order to avoid a higher level of NEPA
documentation. Connected and
cumulative actions must be considered
(see 40 CFR 1508.25).
3. The responsible NIGC official must
determine if the NIGC action will
involve any extraordinary
circumstances that would prevent the
use of a categorical exclusion.
Categorical Exclusions
The NIGC, based on past experience
with similar actions, has determined
that the following types of actions are
categorically excluded and do not
require the preparation of an EA or EIS
because they will not individually or
cumulatively result in a significant
impact on the human environment.
These types of federal actions meet the
criteria established in 40 CFR 1508.4.
Category 1—Administrative and
Routine Office Activities:
A. Normal personnel, fiscal, and
administrative activities involving
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
3354
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2017 / Notices
personnel (recruiting, hiring, detailing,
processing, paying, supervising and
records keeping).
B. Preparation of administrative or
personnel-related studies, reports, or
investigations.
C. Routine procurement of goods and
services to support operations and
infrastructure, including routine utility
services and contracts, conducted in
accordance with applicable
procurement regulations, executive
orders, and policies (e.g. Executive
Order 13101).
D. Normal administrative office
functions (record keeping; inspecting,
examining, and auditing papers, books,
and records; processing correspondence;
developing and approving budgets;
setting fee payments; responding to
request for information).
E. Routine activities and operations
conducted on or in an existing structure
that are within the scope and
compatibility of the present functional
use of the building, will not result in a
substantial increase in waste discharge
to the environment, will not result in
substantially different waste discharges
from current or previous activities, and
will not result in emissions that exceed
established permit limits, if any. In
these cases, a Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC), documentation is
required.
F. NIGC training in classrooms,
meeting rooms, gaming facilities, or via
the internet.
Category 2—Regulation, Monitoring
and Oversight of Indian Gaming
Activities:
A. Promulgation or publication of
regulations, procedures, manuals, and
guidance documents.
B. Support of compliance and
enforcement functions by conducting
compliance training for tribal gaming
regulators and managers in classrooms,
meeting rooms, gaming facilities, or via
the internet.
C. Preparing and issuing subpoenas,
holding hearings, and taking
depositions for informational gathering
purposes, not associated with
administrative enforcement actions.
Category 3—Management Contract
and Agreement Review Activities:
A. Approval or disapproval of
management contracts, management
contract amendments and collateral
agreements that meet the following
criteria: (1) Are not associated with an
application to take land into trust; (2)
does not provide for construction or
expansion of existing structures; (3)
ensures compliance with all federal,
state, local and tribal environmental
laws (e.g., Clean Air Act, Clean Water
Act, Endangered Species Act, National
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:05 Jan 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
Historic Preservation Act, etc.),
regulations, and permit requirements;
and (4) ensures adequate provision of
utilities, law enforcement, fire
protection, and other emergency service
coverage without effects on neighboring
areas.
B. Conducting background
investigations in connection with a
management contract or management
contract amendment.
Extraordinary Circumstances
Actions that can normally be
categorically excluded may not qualify
for a CATEX because an extraordinary
circumstance exists (see 40 CFR 1508.4).
If the proposed action has one or more
of the following conditions,
extraordinary circumstances exist and
the action cannot be categorically
excluded:
A. The proposed action/project would
threaten a violation of applicable
federal, state, local or tribal statutory,
regulatory, or permit requirements with
regard to public health and safety.
B. The proposed action/project has
effects on the environment that involve
risks that are highly uncertain, unique,
or are scientifically controversial.
C. The proposed action/project
violates one or more federal, tribal,
state, or local environmental laws,
regulations, or permit requirements.
D. The proposed action/project has an
adverse effect on a property or structure
eligible for listing or listed on the
National Register of Historical Places,
including the degradation, loss, or
destruction of (1) scientific, cultural, or
historical resources protected by the
National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended; (2) on World
Heritage properties; or (3) other
significant scientific, cultural, or
historical resources.
E. The proposed action/project has
adverse effects on natural, ecological, or
scenic resources of federal, tribal, state
and/or local significance. These
resources include: (1) Resources
protected by Coastal Zone Management
Act (CZMA); (2) resources protected by
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act;
(3) prime, unique, tribal, state or locally
important farmlands; (4) known cultural
or archaeological resources; (5) park
lands; (6) federal or state listed wild or
scenic rivers; and/or (7) other
ecologically critical areas.
F. The proposed action/project is
related to other actions that may, when
considered cumulatively, have
significant adverse effects.
G. The proposed action/project may
adversely affect (1) a federal or state
listed endangered, threatened, or
candidate species; or (2) designated or
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
proposed critical habitat under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
H. The proposed action/project has
effects which will impact floodplains
and/or wetlands on Federal property.
I. The proposed action/project has
effects that will cause a criteria
pollutant listed under the Clean Air Act
to exceed the threshold level of one or
more of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for the surrounding
geographical area.
J. The proposed action/project has
effects that may cause
disproportionately high adverse
environmental or health impacts
specific to children, minorities, or lowincome populations.
K. The proposed action/project is
likely to have adverse effects on
migratory bird populations.
L. The proposed action/project has
the potential to disturb hazardous
substances, pollutants, contaminants, or
CERCLA-excluded petroleum and
natural gas products that preexist in the
environment such that there would be
uncontrolled or unpermitted releases.
M. The proposed action/project has
effects that are highly controversial on
environmental grounds.
Categorical Exclusion Documentation
The purpose of categorical exclusions
is to reduce paperwork and delay. The
NIGC is not required to repeatedly
document actions that qualify for a
categorical exclusion and do not involve
an extraordinary circumstance (see 40
CFR 1500.4(p)). The NIGC will
document its decision to treat a
particular action as categorically
excluded from further NEPA review,
when the CATEX applied specifically
requires the preparation of a REC. In
those cases, a REC will include:
A. A complete description of the
proposed action/project;
B. The CATEX relied upon, including
a brief discussion of why there are no
extraordinary circumstances;
C. Supplemental documentation that
supports the conclusions in the
narrative. Examples include exhibit(s)
showing boundaries of historical or
archeological site(s) previously
identified near the proposed project,
documentation from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service noting that no
endangered species or habitat is present
near the proposed project, evidence that
the proposed project site is located
outside any non-attainment area(s), etc.
In some cases, a ‘‘no effect’’
determination from the State Historic
Preservation Office or Tribal Historic
Preservation Office may be required;
D. The following statement: I certify
that, to the best of my knowledge, the
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2017 / Notices
information provided is the best
available information and is accurate;
E. A signature from an environmental
professional with a signature block that
includes the professional’s credentials.
Mountain View Officers’ Club, Kilbourn
Ave., Ft. Huachuca, SG100000549
Maricopa County
Peoria High School Old Main, 11200 N. 83rd
Ave., Peoria, SG100000551
Pima County
[FR Doc. 2017–00364 Filed 1–10–17; 8:45 am]
Brown, Grace and Elliot, House, (Single
Family Residential Architecture of Josias
Joesler and John and Helen Murphey MPS
MPS), 5025 N. Camino Escuela, Tucson,
MP100000550
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Polk County
Home Federal Savings and Loan Association
of Des Moines Building, 601 Grand Ave.,
Des Moines, SG100000561
MINNESOTA
Brown County
District No. 50 School, 20837 US 14, Milford
Township, SG100000564
Hubbard County
Consolidated School District No. 22, 25895
Cty. Rd. 9, Helga Township, SG100000565
Pulaski County
Hot Spring County
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The National Park Service is
soliciting comments on the significance
of properties nominated before
December 10, 2016, for listing or related
actions in the National Register of
Historic Places.
DATES: Comments should be submitted
by January 26, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent via
U.S. Postal Service to the National
Register of Historic Places, National
Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280,
Washington, DC 20240; by all other
carriers, National Register of Historic
Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye
St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC
20005; or by fax, 202–371–6447.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
properties listed in this notice are being
considered for listing or related actions
in the National Register of Historic
Places. Nominations for their
consideration were received by the
National Park Service before December
10, 2016. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36
CFR part 60, written comments are
being accepted concerning the
significance of the nominated properties
under the National Register criteria for
evaluation.
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
Jkt 241001
McColm, Laura Musser, Historic District,
1314 Mulberry Ave., Muscatine,
SG100000562
MISSOURI
Aristocrat Motor Inn, 240 Central Ave., Hot
Springs, SG100000552
AGENCY:
19:05 Jan 10, 2017
Muscatine County
Garland County
National Register of Historic Places;
Notification of Pending Nominations
and Related Actions
SUMMARY:
IOWA
ARKANSAS
[NPS–WASO–NRNHL–22604;
PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
ARIZONA
Cochise County
Dated: December 22, 2016.
Jonodev Chaudhuri,
Chairman.
Kathryn Isom-Clause,
Vice-Chair.
Sequoyah Simermeyer,
Commissioner.
ACTION:
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
3355
Lake Catherine State Park Prisoner of War
Structures, 1200 Catherine Park Rd., Hot
Springs vicinity, SG100000553
Mississippi County
Devil’s Elbow Historic District, (Route 66 in
Missouri MPS MPS), 12175, 12177, 12198
Timber Rd., 21050, 21104, 21141, 21150
Teardrop Rd., Devil’s Elbow,
MP100000566
Piney Beach, (Route 66 in Missouri MPS
MPS), 1280 Tank Ln., Hooker,
MP100000567
OHIO
Minaret Manor, 844 W. Semmes, Osceola,
SG100000554
Monroe County
Brinkley Concrete Streets, Ash St, between
Main St. & New York Ave. & New York
Ave. between Ash & Lynn Sts., Brinkley,
SG100000555
Ouachita County
Hamilton County
Brunswick—Balke—Collender Building,
130–132 E. 6th St., Cincinnati,
SG100000568
Reakirt Building, 126–128 E. 6th St.,
Cincinnati, SG100000569
First National Bank Building, 105 E. 4th St.,
Cincinnati, SG100000570
St. John’s Episcopal Church, 117 Harrison
St., Camden, SG100000556
SOUTH CAROLINA
Pulaski County
Olympia Union Hall, 119 S. Parker St,
Columbia, SG100000571
Darragh Building, 1403 E. 6th Ave., Little
Rock, SG100000557
Richland County
WEST VIRGINIA
Sebastian County
Cabell County
First Evangelical Lutheran Church, 1115 N. D
St., Fort Smith, SG100000558
Memphis Tennessee Garrison House, 1701
10th Ave., Huntington, SG100000573
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Jefferson County
District of Columbia
Feagans’ Mill Complex, 28 Feagans’ Mill Ln.,
Charles Town vicinity, SG100000572
Chilchester Arms Apartments, (Apartment
Buildings in Washington, DC, MPS MPS),
1388 Tuckerman St. NW., Washington,
MP100000559
IDAHO
WISCONSIN
Marathon County
Marathon Shoe Company East Side Plant,
1418 N. 1st St., Wausau, SG100000574
Vernon County
Blaine County
ILLINOIS
Harris, George and Mable, Round Barn,
S1123 Harris Rd., Forest, SG100000575
A request for removal has been made for
the following resource(s):
Cook County
ARKANSAS
Carling Hotel, (Residential Hotels in Chicago,
1910–1930 MPS), 1512 N. LaSalle St.,
Chicago, MP100000563
Conway County
Hailey Methodist Episcopal Church, 200 2nd
Ave. S., Hailey, SG100000560
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Cove Creek Bridge, AR 124, Martinville
vicinity, OT04000499
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3352-3355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00364]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
Protocol for Categorical Exclusions Supplementing the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act for Certain
National Indian Gaming Commission Actions and Activities
AGENCY: The National Indian Gaming Commission, Department of the
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of proposed action and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC or ``the
Commission'') is amending its protocol for categorical exclusions under
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended,
Executive Order 11514, as amended, and Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA
(40 CFR parts 1500-1508) for certain NIGC actions.
DATES: Comments and related material must be post marked no later than
60 days after publication of this notice.
ADDRESSES: Please submit your comments by only one of the following
means: (1) By mail to: NIGC Attn: Andrew Mendoza, Staff Attorney, C/O
Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., Mailstop #1621,
Washington, DC 20240; (2) by facsimile to: (202) 632-7066; (3) by email
to: andrew_mendoza@nigc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Mendoza, Staff Attorney at the
National Indian Gaming Commission: 202-632-7003 (not a toll-free
number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Comments Invited
The NIGC encourages interested persons to submit written comments.
Persons submitting information concerning the Protocol should include
their name, address, and other appropriate contact information. You may
submit your information by one of the means listed under ADDRESSES. If
you submit information by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit information by mail and
would like to know it was received, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope. The NIGC will consider all comments
received during the comment period.
[[Page 3353]]
II. Background
On December 4, 2009, the Commission published a draft NEPA manual
in the Federal Register (74 FR 63765). The purpose of the manual was to
establish the Commission's NEPA-related policies and procedures and to
integrate environmental considerations into the Commission's decision-
making processes. The draft manual identified one type of major federal
action performed under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) that
triggered NEPA review, specifically, the approval of contracts for the
management of Indian gaming facilities pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 2711. In
addition to identifying major federal actions applicable to the
Commission, the draft manual also established the Commission's NEPA-
related roles and responsibilities and created a framework for the
preparation of NEPA documentation appropriate for each level of
environmental review. The draft manual also identified three categories
of actions taken by the NIGC that are categorically excluded from
further NEPA review. Categorical exclusions (CATEX) are actions that do
not normally require preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), absent extraordinary
circumstances.
On May 22, 2012, after reviewing the comments submitted on the
draft NEPA manual, the Commission published a Protocol for Categorical
Exclusions Supplementing the Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act for Certain National Indian Gaming Commissions
Actions and Activities (77 FR 30315) and requested comments by June 30,
2012. This publication formally adopted two of the three categorical
exclusions listed in the draft NEPA manual.
In 2015, after evaluating its past environmental reviews for
management contract approvals and the comments received on the 2009
draft NEPA manual, the Commission decided to revisit its policies and
procedures for implementing NEPA. To obtain updated views from the
regulated community, the Commission held several consultation sessions
over a two-year period with tribal nations and solicited comments
regarding the scope and extent of its NEPA responsibilities. Following
consultation, the Commission evaluated the newly submitted comments in
conjunction with those received in response to the 2009 draft manual
and decided to amend the 2012 Protocol to include a third CATEX for
Management Contract and Agreement Review Activities. This CATEX will
apply to certain management contract approvals that are not associated
with an application to take land into trust and do not provide for
construction or expansion of existing structures. In identifying this
category of actions, the NIGC relied on its past experience, several
environmental professionals' opinions and comparisons with other
Federal agency actions that are categorically excluded.
The Commission hereby adopts the amended protocol set forth below
for determining whether a categorical exclusion applies to particular
action as well as the categories of actions the Commission has
determined are eligible for categorical exclusions.
A copy of this Federal Register publication, as well as the
administrative record for the newly established categorical exclusion,
is available at https://www.nigc.gov. A copy of the Federal Register
publication is available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Regulatory Flexibility Act: This Protocol will not have a
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities
as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
Indian tribes are not considered to be small entities for the purposes
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This Protocol is not a major rule under 5. U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This Protocol 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 Mandates Reform Act
The Commission, as an independent regulatory agency within the
Department of the Interior, is exempt from compliance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act. 2 U.S.C. 1502(1); 2 U.S.C. 658(1).
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the Commission has
determined that this Protocol 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 Protocol 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
This Protocol supplements CEQ regulations and provides guidance to
NIGC employees regarding procedural requirements for the application of
NEPA provisions to certain NIGC actions. The CEQ does not direct
agencies to prepare a NEPA analysis or document before establishing
agency procedures for implementing NEPA.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the National Indian Gaming
Commission establishes the following Protocol:
Protocol for Categorical Exclusions (CATEX) of Certain Actions
The use of a CATEX can only be applied to an action if all of the
following criteria are met:
1. The responsible NIGC official must determine that the entirety
of the NIGC action is encompassed by one of the listed CATEXs.
2. The responsible NIGC official must determine that the action has
not been segmented in order for the NIGC action to meet the definition
of an action that can qualify for a CATEX. Segmentation occurs when an
action is broken into smaller parts in an effort to avoid properly
documenting impacts associated with the complete action. Segmentation
also occurs when the NIGC action is too narrowly defined and the
potential impacts are minimized in order to avoid a higher level of
NEPA documentation. Connected and cumulative actions must be considered
(see 40 CFR 1508.25).
3. The responsible NIGC official must determine if the NIGC action
will involve any extraordinary circumstances that would prevent the use
of a categorical exclusion.
Categorical Exclusions
The NIGC, based on past experience with similar actions, has
determined that the following types of actions are categorically
excluded and do not require the preparation of an EA or EIS because
they will not individually or cumulatively result in a significant
impact on the human environment. These types of federal actions meet
the criteria established in 40 CFR 1508.4.
Category 1--Administrative and Routine Office Activities:
A. Normal personnel, fiscal, and administrative activities
involving
[[Page 3354]]
personnel (recruiting, hiring, detailing, processing, paying,
supervising and records keeping).
B. Preparation of administrative or personnel-related studies,
reports, or investigations.
C. Routine procurement of goods and services to support operations
and infrastructure, including routine utility services and contracts,
conducted in accordance with applicable procurement regulations,
executive orders, and policies (e.g. Executive Order 13101).
D. Normal administrative office functions (record keeping;
inspecting, examining, and auditing papers, books, and records;
processing correspondence; developing and approving budgets; setting
fee payments; responding to request for information).
E. Routine activities and operations conducted on or in an existing
structure that are within the scope and compatibility of the present
functional use of the building, will not result in a substantial
increase in waste discharge to the environment, will not result in
substantially different waste discharges from current or previous
activities, and will not result in emissions that exceed established
permit limits, if any. In these cases, a Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC), documentation is required.
F. NIGC training in classrooms, meeting rooms, gaming facilities,
or via the internet.
Category 2--Regulation, Monitoring and Oversight of Indian Gaming
Activities:
A. Promulgation or publication of regulations, procedures, manuals,
and guidance documents.
B. Support of compliance and enforcement functions by conducting
compliance training for tribal gaming regulators and managers in
classrooms, meeting rooms, gaming facilities, or via the internet.
C. Preparing and issuing subpoenas, holding hearings, and taking
depositions for informational gathering purposes, not associated with
administrative enforcement actions.
Category 3--Management Contract and Agreement Review Activities:
A. Approval or disapproval of management contracts, management
contract amendments and collateral agreements that meet the following
criteria: (1) Are not associated with an application to take land into
trust; (2) does not provide for construction or expansion of existing
structures; (3) ensures compliance with all federal, state, local and
tribal environmental laws (e.g., Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act,
Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, etc.),
regulations, and permit requirements; and (4) ensures adequate
provision of utilities, law enforcement, fire protection, and other
emergency service coverage without effects on neighboring areas.
B. Conducting background investigations in connection with a
management contract or management contract amendment.
Extraordinary Circumstances
Actions that can normally be categorically excluded may not qualify
for a CATEX because an extraordinary circumstance exists (see 40 CFR
1508.4). If the proposed action has one or more of the following
conditions, extraordinary circumstances exist and the action cannot be
categorically excluded:
A. The proposed action/project would threaten a violation of
applicable federal, state, local or tribal statutory, regulatory, or
permit requirements with regard to public health and safety.
B. The proposed action/project has effects on the environment that
involve risks that are highly uncertain, unique, or are scientifically
controversial.
C. The proposed action/project violates one or more federal,
tribal, state, or local environmental laws, regulations, or permit
requirements.
D. The proposed action/project has an adverse effect on a property
or structure eligible for listing or listed on the National Register of
Historical Places, including the degradation, loss, or destruction of
(1) scientific, cultural, or historical resources protected by the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended; (2) on World
Heritage properties; or (3) other significant scientific, cultural, or
historical resources.
E. The proposed action/project has adverse effects on natural,
ecological, or scenic resources of federal, tribal, state and/or local
significance. These resources include: (1) Resources protected by
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA); (2) resources protected by the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act; (3) prime, unique, tribal, state or
locally important farmlands; (4) known cultural or archaeological
resources; (5) park lands; (6) federal or state listed wild or scenic
rivers; and/or (7) other ecologically critical areas.
F. The proposed action/project is related to other actions that
may, when considered cumulatively, have significant adverse effects.
G. The proposed action/project may adversely affect (1) a federal
or state listed endangered, threatened, or candidate species; or (2)
designated or proposed critical habitat under the Endangered Species
Act (ESA).
H. The proposed action/project has effects which will impact
floodplains and/or wetlands on Federal property.
I. The proposed action/project has effects that will cause a
criteria pollutant listed under the Clean Air Act to exceed the
threshold level of one or more of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for the surrounding geographical area.
J. The proposed action/project has effects that may cause
disproportionately high adverse environmental or health impacts
specific to children, minorities, or low-income populations.
K. The proposed action/project is likely to have adverse effects on
migratory bird populations.
L. The proposed action/project has the potential to disturb
hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or CERCLA-excluded
petroleum and natural gas products that preexist in the environment
such that there would be uncontrolled or unpermitted releases.
M. The proposed action/project has effects that are highly
controversial on environmental grounds.
Categorical Exclusion Documentation
The purpose of categorical exclusions is to reduce paperwork and
delay. The NIGC is not required to repeatedly document actions that
qualify for a categorical exclusion and do not involve an extraordinary
circumstance (see 40 CFR 1500.4(p)). The NIGC will document its
decision to treat a particular action as categorically excluded from
further NEPA review, when the CATEX applied specifically requires the
preparation of a REC. In those cases, a REC will include:
A. A complete description of the proposed action/project;
B. The CATEX relied upon, including a brief discussion of why there
are no extraordinary circumstances;
C. Supplemental documentation that supports the conclusions in the
narrative. Examples include exhibit(s) showing boundaries of historical
or archeological site(s) previously identified near the proposed
project, documentation from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service noting
that no endangered species or habitat is present near the proposed
project, evidence that the proposed project site is located outside any
non-attainment area(s), etc. In some cases, a ``no effect''
determination from the State Historic Preservation Office or Tribal
Historic Preservation Office may be required;
D. The following statement: I certify that, to the best of my
knowledge, the
[[Page 3355]]
information provided is the best available information and is accurate;
E. A signature from an environmental professional with a signature
block that includes the professional's credentials.
Dated: December 22, 2016.
Jonodev Chaudhuri,
Chairman.
Kathryn Isom-Clause,
Vice-Chair.
Sequoyah Simermeyer,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2017-00364 Filed 1-10-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565-01-P