NOV«to-cél¢ 15:16 From:Fe rSe 49053604152 Tot 12626327466 Pase:174

To: NIGC
A xX NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER PAGE): 2
|

From: Absentee Shawnee Tribe GC
Fax number: 405-360-4182

| Date: 11/13/2017
Absentee Shawnee Tribal RE: Comments on the NIGC’s Proposed Rule
Gaming Commission Amending 25 C.F.R. § 547.5
15700 E. Hwy #9 =|
Norman, OK 73026 Phone number for follow-up:

(405)360-9270 405-360-9270 Ext.1114

| Comments:
J Comments on the NIGC’s Proposed Rule Amending 25 C.F.R. § 547.5

Thanks,

Leslie Tanyan

Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma
Gaming Commission

| 05360-9270 X 1114

This facsimile from the Absentee-Shawnee Tribal Gaming Commission is intended only for the individual or entity to
which it is addressed. This facsimile may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure
under appilcable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
| copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you receive this facsimile by mistake, please notify the sender

immediately and destroy this facsimile and all accompanying pages.



NOV~-13-2@17 13:16 From:FE?TSE 49853624182 To: 12026327866 Pase:274

Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma

Tribal Gaming Commission
15700 East Hwy. 9
Norman, OK 73026

November 13, 2017

By email (547.5_Comments@nigc.gov)
National Indian Gaming Commission
1849 C Street NW

Mail Stop #1621

Washington, D.C. 20240

Re: | Comments on the NIGC's Proposed Rule Amending 25 C.F.R. § 547.5

The Absentee Shawnee Tribal Gaming Commission ("ASTGC") is the primary tribal
gaming regulatory authority (""TGRA") of Indian gaming within the Indian lands of the Absentee
Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma. As the TGRA for one of the very first tribal gaming operations in
Oklahoma, the ASTGC has been on the front lines of regulating gaming systems in Indian
Country. The ASTGC respectfully submits the following comments on the National Indian
Gaming Commission's ("NIGC") Proposed Rule, 25 C.F.R. Part 547, 82 Fed. Reg. 45228 (Sept.
28, 2017) ("Proposed Rule"), regulating 2008 ("grandfathered") gaming systems.

Previously, the ASTGC submitted comments regarding eliminating the sunsct provision,
codified at 25 C.F.R. Section 547.5(b)(1), because the current regulatory systems have proven
adequate, and because the sunset provision is overly burdensome and costly for tribal gaming
facilitics and TGRAs, including the ASTGC. Grandfathered gaming systems have posed little to
no regulatory issue, due to the fact that they are highly regulated by multiple bodics and multiple
overlapping regulatory codes, including the minimum technical standards found in Part 547
("Technical Standards") and the Minimum Internal Control Standards ("MICS") applicable to
class II games, which provide protection to the gaming public when engaging in gaming using
grandfathered gaming systems.’ The necessary, and now proven, regulatory standards for
grandfathered gaming systems that are currently in place are more than adequate to protect the
integrity of gaming involving such systems. The ASTGC is pleased to see that the NIGC agrees
the sunset provision can and should be removed.

' Compare the 'Vechnical Standards, 25 C.F.R. §§ 547.7(e), 547.8(d), 547,9(a)(1-2), 547.10(a)(1)(i-vii), 547.12,
547.12(b), 547.15, and 547.16(a-b), with the MICS, 25 C.F.R. §§ 543.20(c), 543.8(d), 543.17(g)(8) and (15)(i),
543,8(h)(1), 543.20(h, k-1), and 543.8(g)(6).


NOU-13-2@17 13:16 From:FETSE 4053684182 To! 12026327066 Pase:3/4

‘Comments on Proposed Rule Amending 25 C.F.R. § 547.5
November 13, 2017
Page 2 of 3

While the ASTGC commends the NIGC for removing the sunset provision, the NIGC
Proposes to impose additional annual review and testing in lieu of the sunset provision, which
poses an unnecessary regulatory and monctary burden on the ASTGC and similarly situated
TGRAs and tribal gaming operations, The Proposed Rule requires that TGRAs annually review
all grandfathered gaming systems to determine: (1) whether the grandfathered gaming system
meets all requirements imposed by the Part 547 Technical Standards, and (2) what components
of the grandfathered gaming system prevent the system from complying with the Technical
Standards. Proposed Rule § 547,5(a)(2)(iii). This is both burdensome and unnecessary. First, it
appears to require lab reports on all grandfathered systems annually, regardless of whether any
changes have been made to the system. Second, it would require TGRAs to make technical
determinations regarding grandfathered games and system modifications. Additionally, by
imposing a duty to review all requirements imposed by the Technical Standards, and not simply
those applicable to grandfathered games, the proposed change is overly broad, while providing
little additional protections.

Moreover, the proposed changes would require TGRAs to submit any game modification
for all games to a testing lab to be tested against the Part 547 Technical Standards, the Part 543
MICS, and any TGRA standards. Proposed Rule § 547.5(c)(2). As with the aforementioned
proposed change, this is overly broad and burdensome, and will hinder efforts to quickly address
regulatory issues involving component modifications, The ASTGC previously voiced its
concems regarding this provision and its potential to require TGRAs to rely on the Section
547.5(d) emergency provisions to implement needed modifications in a timely manner. Since
the Section 547.5(d) emergency provisions are only available for "necessary" changes affecting
the fairness, security, or integrity of the game, however, other changes outside of this narrow
scope will likely be needlessly delayed. The NIGC's comment that it "believes that TGRAs will
continue to utilize the cmergency modification provisions for their intended purpose" (see
Proposed Rule, at 45230) does not alleviate this concem, as TGRAs will be unable to quickly
address regulatory issues involving component modifications outside of the scope of the
emergency provision. The ASTGC would prefer that the NIGC preserve the current rule, which
allows modifications which are compliant with the ‘echnical Standards for grandfathcred games.

The NIGC asserts that annual testing against all of the Part 547 Technical Standards is
warranted given the removal of the sunset provision. However, it makes no sense to Tequire that
tribes test grandfathered games and game modifications to the Technical Standards that do not
apply to grandfathered games, as this fails to address the NIGC's goal of reducing risk to the
gaming operation and the public caused by systems that are not in compliance with the full set of
Technical Standards. Annual testing of grandfathered games against standards which are
inapplicable to grandfathered games will simply confirm what is already known—that the
grandfathered games do not meet standards which are not applicable to them. While there is
little benefit provided by these changes, there is a substantial cost associated with annually
testing each grandfathered gaming system and submitting each game modification to a testing
lab to be tested against all applicable regulatory standards. The additional testing required by the
Proposed Rule will impose a significant burden and cost on the ASTGC and similarly situated
TGRAs, through both the additional expense of obtaining unnecessary lab reports, and the time
and personnel necessary to implement these proposed changes.


NOU-13-2017 13:16 From:FETSE 4853604182 To? 12426327066 Pase:474

Comments on Proposed Rule Amending 25 C.F.R. § 547.5
November 13, 2017
Page 3 of 3

Grandfathered game systems represent a substantial amount of tribal gaming revenues for
the Absentce Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma. With the exception of the deletion of the sunset
provision, the proposed changes impose significant costs on tribal gaming operations and
TGRAs. Further, by requiring grandfathered games to be tested against regulations that are not
applicable to grandfathered games, these proposed changes do not promote the effective
regulation of grandfathered games. In short, several of the proposed changes do not further the
NIGC's goals to minimize both the economic impact of the sunset provision and the risk to the
gaming operation and the public. For these reasons, the ASTGC Tequests the NIGC preserve
deletion of the sunset provision and reconsider the other proposed changes consistent with our
foregoing comments. Thank you for your consideration of this important issue.

Executive Director
Absentee Shawnee Tribal Gaming Commission