[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47516-47517]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19166]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
25 CFR Part 571
RIN 3141-AA49
Issuance of Investigation Completion Letters
AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action amends our regulations to provide for the issuance
of an investigation completion letter if the Agency will not recommend
the commencement of an enforcement proceeding against a respondent.
DATES: Effective Date: September 10, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Hay, National Indian Gaming
Commission, 1441 L Street NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005.
Telephone: 202-632-7009.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA or Act), Public Law 100-497,
25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq., was signed into law on October 17, 1988. The
Act establishes the National Indian Gaming Commission (``Commission'')
and sets out a comprehensive framework for the regulation of gaming on
Indian lands. The purposes of IGRA include providing a statutory basis
for the operation of gaming by Indian Tribes as a means of promoting
tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal
governments; ensuring that the Indian tribe is the primary beneficiary
of the gaming operation; and declaring that the establishment of
independent federal regulatory authority for gaming on Indian lands,
the establishment of federal standards for gaming on Indian lands, and
the establishment of a National Indian Gaming Commission are necessary
to meet congressional concerns regarding gaming and to protect such
gaming as a means of generating tribal revenue. 25 U.S.C. 2702.
II. Previous Rulemaking Activity
On November 18, 2010, the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC)
issued a Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Consultation advising the
public that the NIGC was conducting a comprehensive review of 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 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. This part
571 was included in the regulatory review.
As part of its review of part 571, the Commission consulted with
tribes and tribal leaders or their representatives in every region of
the country. Further, on June 28, 2011, the Commission issued a
preliminary draft of amendments to Part 571 and requested public
comment.
The Notice of Regulatory Review Schedule announced the Commission's
intent to review whether part 571 needed revision to clarify the NIGC's
authority to access records located off-site, including at sites
maintained and owned by third-parties. Comments received by the
Commission in response to the Notice of Inquiry expressed the view that
NIGC already possessed that authority, that it was clear and that it
[[Page 47517]]
did not need to be further clarified through regulation. The Commission
agreed that further clarification was unnecessary and did not propose
changes to that section.
Throughout the review process of this part, the Commission received
comments that the regulations should include a process for notifying a
tribe that an investigation has been concluded. Tribal representatives
explained that in some instances they were never notified of the
results of investigations opened by the NIGC years ago. The discussion
draft attempted to formalize NIGC's informal process of advising a
tribe, through NIGC's authorized representative, after an investigation
was terminated. All comments received on the discussion draft were
supportive of the concept. However, several comments indicated that
such a letter should be mandatory and not discretionary. The Commission
believes it is important to provide the Chair with the discretion to
make those determinations on a case-by-case basis. The final rule
retains that discretion.
After considering the comments received from the public and through
tribal consultation, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on October 12, 2011. The comment period closed on December
12, 2011.
After considering the comments received from the public and through
tribal consultation, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on October 12, 2011. The comment period closed on December
12, 2011.
III. Review of Public Comments
In response to our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published October
11, 2011, 76 FR 63237, we received the following comments.
Comment: Numerous comments support the issuance of an investigation
closure letter. Many comments stated the importance of providing some
indication when an investigation has been completed and that an
enforcement action is no longer active.
Response: The Commission agrees that in some circumstances such a
letter may be appropriate.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the issuance of investigation
closure letters be mandatory instead of voluntary.
Response: The Commission believes that the Chair should retain
discretion in conducting investigations and when staff may indicate
that a matter is closed. Therefore, the Commission believes these
letters should not be mandatory.
IV. Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This 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 the purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This 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 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 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 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 rule does not require information collection under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and is
therefore not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 571
Gambling, Indian--lands, Indian--tribal government, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, for the reasons discussed in the preamble, the
Commission amends 25 CFR part 571 as follows:
PART 571--MONITORING AND INVESTIGATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.
0
2. Add new Sec. 571.4 to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 571.4 Investigation completion letter.
In instances where NIGC has concluded its investigation of a
particular matter and will not recommend the commencement of an
enforcement proceeding against a respondent at that time, the
Commission's authorized representative, in his or her discretion, may
advise the party by letter that the investigation has been completed.
An investigation completion letter does not constitute a finding that
no violation of IGRA, NIGC regulations, or a tribe's approved gaming
ordinance occurred. Further, an investigation completion letter does
not preclude the reopening of an investigation or the initiation of an
enforcement action by the Chair.
Dated: July 31, 2012, Washington, DC.
Tracie L. Stevens,
Chairwoman.
Steffani A. Cochran,
Vice-Chairwoman.
Daniel J. Little,
Associate Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2012-19166 Filed 8-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7565-01-P