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, 35542-35545 [2017-15498]
Download as PDF
35542
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Notices
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: Ranges from 1 minute to 40
hours, depending on the activity.
Respondent’s Obligation: Response is
required to obtain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: Annual or on
occasion, depending on the activity.
Total Estimated Annual Nonhour
Burden Cost: $0.
Abstract: The regulations at 25 CFR
36, Subpart G, Home-living Programs,
implement section 1122 of the Native
American Education Improvement Act
of 2001 (Pub. L. 95–561, title XI, § 1120,
as added Pub. L. 107–110, title X,
§ 1042, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 2007).
These regulations require the BIE to
implement national standards for homeliving situations in all BIE-funded
residential schools. The BIE must
collect information from all BIE-funded
residential schools in order to assess
each school’s progress in meeting the
national standards. Submission of this
information allows the BIE to ensure
that minimum academic standards for
the education of Indian children and
criteria for dormitory situations in
Bureau-operated schools and Indiancontrolled contract schools are met.
The authorities for this action are 25
U.S.C. 2000–2021 and the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.
Elizabeth K. Appel,
Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and
Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2017–16001 Filed 7–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLCA942000 L57000000.BX0000 15X
L5017AR]
Filing of Plats of Survey: California
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of official filing.
AGENCY:
The plats of survey of lands
described in this notice are scheduled to
be officially filed in the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), California State
Office, Sacramento, California. The
surveys which were executed at the
request of Fish and Wildlife Service,
Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Forest
Service, Natural Resources Conservation
Service, and the BLM, are necessary for
the management of these lands.
DATES: Protests must be received by the
BLM by August 30, 2017.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the plats may be
obtained from the BLM, California State
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:38 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Office, 2800 Cottage Way W–1623,
Sacramento, California 95825, upon
required payment. Please use this
address when filing written protests.
Jon
Kehler, Chief, Branch of Cadastral
Survey, Bureau of Land Management,
California State Office, 2800 Cottage
Way W–1623, Sacramento, California
95825; 1–916–978–4323; jkehler@
blm.gov. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS)
at 1–800–877–8339 to contact the above
individual during normal business
hours. The Service is available 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message
or question with the above individual.
You will receive a reply during normal
business hours.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The lands
surveyed are:
San Bernardino Meridian, California
T. 3 S., R. 1 E., supplemental plat of portion
of sections 1, 2, and 12, accepted June 30,
2017.
T. 7 S., R. 8 E., dependent resurvey and
metes-and-bounds survey, accepted July
12, 2017.
A person or party who wishes to
protest a survey must file a notice that
they wish to protest with the Chief,
Branch of Cadastral Survey. A statement
of reasons for a protest may be filed
with the notice of protest and must be
filed with the Chief, Branch of Cadastral
Survey within 30 days after the protest
is filed. If a protest against the survey is
received prior to the date of official
filing, the filing will be stayed pending
consideration of the protest. A plat will
not be officially filed until the day after
all protests have been dismissed or
otherwise resolved.
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 the BLM in your
comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public
review, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
Authority: 43 U.S.C. Chapter 3.
Jon L. Kehler,
Chief Cadastral Surveyor.
[FR Doc. 2017–16055 Filed 7–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–40–P
PO 00000
Frm 00036
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.
ACTION: Notice of final action.
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 for
certain NIGC actions.
DATES: The NIGC will implement this
protocol immediately upon publication.
ADDRESSES: Andrew Mendoza, Staff
Attorney, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1849 C Street NW.,
Mailstop #1621, Washington, DC 20240;
fax at (202) 632–7066; or 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:
SUMMARY:
I. 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
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Notices
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with NOTICES
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.
Comments
On January 11, 2017, the Commission
published a notice of proposed action
and request for comments on the
amended protocol in the Federal
Register (82 FR 3352). In response, it
received only one comment. The
commenter requested that the Native
American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 25 U.S.C.
3001–3013 be included within the list of
examples of environmental laws with
which parties seeking to apply the
categorical exclusion must comply. The
Commission agrees and updated the
language accordingly.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:38 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
35543
The same commenter also questioned
how the Commission would interpret
the term ‘‘known’’ with respect to the
extraordinary circumstances involving
‘‘known cultural or archaeological
resources.’’ Given the potential for
confusion regarding this term, the
Commission eliminated the term and,
instead, references the Archaeological
Resources Protection Act (ARPA) 16
U.S.C. 470aa–470mm, and NAGPRA.
The Commission believes that
referencing the particular statutes
sufficiently demonstrates its intent to
abide by the objective, legal definitions
and processes set forth therein.
After considering the comments, 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.
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.
Tribal Consultation
The National Indian Gaming
Commission is committed to fulfilling
its tribal consultation obligations—
whether directed by statute or
administrative action such as Executive
Order (EO) 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments)—by adhering to the
consultation framework described in its
Consultation Policy published July 15,
2013. Pursuant to the Order, the
Commission engaged in extensive
consultation on this topic.
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:
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
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
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
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
35544
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Notices
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.
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Category 1—Administrative and Routine
Office Activities
A. Normal personnel, fiscal, and
administrative activities involving
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:38 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 facilities; (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, Native
American Graves Protection and
Repatriation 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. In these
cases, a Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC), documentation is
required.
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, permit requirements, or
Executive Order.
D. The proposed action/project has an
adverse effect on a property or structure
eligible for listing or listed on the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
National Register of Historical Places as
determined by-the Commission, the
State Historic Preservation Officer, the
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, the
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, or a consulting party
under 36 CFR 800. Adverse effects
include 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) cultural items
or archaeological resources as defined
by the Archaeological Resources
Protection Act and/or Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act;
(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 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.
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Notices
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
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: July 14, 2017.
Jonodev O. Chaudhuri,
Chairman.
Kathryn Isom-Clause,
Vice Chair.
E. Sequoyah Simermeyer,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2017–15498 Filed 7–28–17; 8:45 am]
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 7565–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:38 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
[S1D1S SS08011000 SX066A0067F
178S180110; S2D2D SS08011000 SX066A00
33F 17XS501520]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: OMB Control Number 1029–
0091; Requirements for Surface Coal
Mining and Reclamation Operations on
Indian Lands
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments for 1029–0091.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement (OSMRE) is
announcing that the information
collection request for the requirements
for surface coal mining and reclamation
operations on Indian lands has been
forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval. The information collection
request describes the nature of the
information collection and the expected
burden and cost.
DATES: OMB has up to 60 days to
approve or disapprove the information
collection, but may respond after 30
days. Therefore, public comments
should be submitted to OMB by August
30, 2017, in order to be assured of
consideration.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Department of the
Interior Desk Officer, by telefax at (202)
395–5806 or via email at OIRA_Docket@
omb.eop.gov. Also, please send a copy
of your comments to John Trelease,
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, 1951 Constitution
Ave. NW., Room 202–SIB, Washington,
DC 20240, or electronically at jtrelease@
osmre.gov. Please refer to OMB control
number 1029–0091 in your
correspondence.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
receive a copy of the information
collection request, contact John Trelease
at (202) 208–2783, or electronically at
jtrelease@osmre.gov. You may also
review this collection by going to https://
www.reginfo.gov (Information Collection
Review, Currently Under Review,
Agency is Department of the Interior,
DOI–OSMRE).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB
regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which
implement provisions of the Paperwork
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35545
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13),
require that interested members of the
public and affected agencies have an
opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping activities
[see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)]. OSMRE has
submitted a request to OMB to renew its
approval of the collection of information
for 30 CFR 750—Requirements for
surface coal mining and reclamation
operations on Indian lands. OSMRE is
requesting a 3-year term of approval for
this information collection activity.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
number for this collection of
information is 1029–0091. Applicants
are required to respondent to obtain a
benefit.
As required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), a
Federal Register notice soliciting
comments for this collection of
information was published on April 5,
2017 (82 FR 16621). No comments were
received. This notice provides the
public with an additional 30 days in
which to comment on the following
information collection activity:
Title: 30 CFR 750—Requirements for
Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation
Operations on Indian Lands.
OMB Control Number: 1029–0091.
Summary: Surface coal mining permit
applicants who conduct or propose to
conduct surface coal mining and
reclamation operations on Indian lands
must comply with the requirements of
30 CFR 750 pursuant to Section 710 of
SMCRA.
Bureau Form Number: None.
Frequency of Collection: Once.
Description of Respondents:
Applicants for coal mining permits.
Total Annual Responses: One new
permit, one significant revision, 25
minor revisions annually.
Total Annual Burden Hours: 16,427
hours annually.
Total Annual Non-Wage Burden
Costs: $34,000.
Send comments on the need for the
collection of information for the
performance of the functions of the
agency; the accuracy of the agency’s
burden estimates; ways to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the
information collection; and ways to
minimize the information collection
burden on respondents, such as use of
automated means of collection of the
information, to the addresses listed
under ADDRESSES. Please refer to the
appropriate OMB control number 1029–
0091 in your correspondence.
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 145 (Monday, July 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35542-35545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15498]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
ACTION: Notice of final action.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
for certain NIGC actions.
DATES: The NIGC will implement this protocol immediately upon
publication.
ADDRESSES: Andrew Mendoza, Staff Attorney, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1849 C Street NW., Mailstop #1621, Washington, DC 20240;
fax at (202) 632-7066; or 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. 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
[[Page 35543]]
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.
Comments
On January 11, 2017, the Commission published a notice of proposed
action and request for comments on the amended protocol in the Federal
Register (82 FR 3352). In response, it received only one comment. The
commenter requested that the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 25 U.S.C. 3001-3013 be included within the
list of examples of environmental laws with which parties seeking to
apply the categorical exclusion must comply. The Commission agrees and
updated the language accordingly.
The same commenter also questioned how the Commission would
interpret the term ``known'' with respect to the extraordinary
circumstances involving ``known cultural or archaeological resources.''
Given the potential for confusion regarding this term, the Commission
eliminated the term and, instead, references the Archaeological
Resources Protection Act (ARPA) 16 U.S.C. 470aa-470mm, and NAGPRA. The
Commission believes that referencing the particular statutes
sufficiently demonstrates its intent to abide by the objective, legal
definitions and processes set forth therein.
After considering the comments, 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.
Tribal Consultation
The National Indian Gaming Commission is committed to fulfilling
its tribal consultation obligations--whether directed by statute or
administrative action such as Executive Order (EO) 13175 (Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments)--by adhering to the
consultation framework described in its Consultation Policy published
July 15, 2013. Pursuant to the Order, the Commission engaged in
extensive consultation on this topic.
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
[[Page 35544]]
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 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
facilities; (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, Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation 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. In these cases,
a Record of Environmental Consideration (REC), documentation is
required.
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, permit
requirements, or Executive Order.
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 as determined by-the Commission, the State Historic
Preservation Officer, the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, or a consulting party under
36 CFR 800. Adverse effects include 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) cultural items or archaeological
resources as defined by the Archaeological Resources Protection Act
and/or Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act; (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.
[[Page 35545]]
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 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: July 14, 2017.
Jonodev O. Chaudhuri,
Chairman.
Kathryn Isom-Clause,
Vice Chair.
E. Sequoyah Simermeyer,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2017-15498 Filed 7-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565-01-P