Gani,
om NG

AD

”
S

Navajo Nation Gaming Enterprise Pr. s05.905.7100 Fax: 505.905.7240

NAVAyG
asa?

Qe

&, es
TanisneoTM

Post Office Box |700 Church Rock, NM 87311 Shipping Address: 249 E. NM 118 St. Hwy Church Rock, NM 87311

June 30, 2017

Via Email to Vannice Doulou@nigc.gov

Chairman Jonodev Chaudhuri

Vice Chair Kathryn Isom-Clause
Commissioner E. Sequoyah Simermeyer
National Indian Gaming Commission
1849 C St. NW

Mailstop #1621

Washington, DC 20240

Attn: Vannice Doulou
Re: mments on Dr: ndards for Class IJ Wireless Player Interfac
Dear Chairman Chaudhuri, Vice-Chair Isom-Clause, and Commissioner Simermeyer,

On behalf of the Navajo Nation Gaming Enterprise (the "NNGE"), we offer the following
comments concerning the National Indian Gaming Commission's ("NIGC") draft technical
standards for Class II wireless player interfaces, also known as mobile gaming. The draft
standards would add a new section (Draft § 547.18) to 25 C.F.R. Part 547, Minimum Technical
Standards for Class Il Gaming Systems and Equipment.

The NNGE offers Class II games at its gaming facilities on Navajo Nation lands, and
strongly supports the NIGC's effort to provide guidance to tribes on the use of mobile devices as
part of a Class Il gaming system. While mobile gaming is a relatively recent development, the
NIGC’s recognition that this "modern" method of playing Class II games is available to tribes is
consistent with the legislative history of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act ("IGRA"). In enacting
the IGRA, Congress was clear that it intended for tribes to have "maximum flexibility” to use
"modern" technology to conduct Class II games. S. Rep. No. 100-446, at 9 (1988), reprinted in
1988 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3071, 3079.

From a practical standpoint, the use of mobile/wireless devices for Class II gaming could
be very beneficial to tribes such as ours. Mobile gaming provides an opportunity for tribes to
increase their gaming revenue without the high costs associated with building or expanding
brick-and-mortar gaming facilities. Instead, patrons could participate in Class II games from
anywhere on the Nation's lands that is eligible for gaming under the IGRA. Other jurisdictions in
the United States have recognized that gaming via mobile devices can be a safe and lucrative
method for gaming facilities to offer games to their patrons. In recent years, states such as


Nevada (Standard 4), New Jersey (N.J.A.C. 13:690) and Indiana (68 IAC 25) have adopted
standards for mobile gaming. Further, Gaming Laboratories International, LLC has issued
detailed standards for wireless gaming systems (GLI-26).

For these reasons, the NNGE applauds the NIGC's efforts to provide guidance on minimum
standards for mobile gaming. However, the NIGC's initial draft of § 547.18 fails to address
apparent inconsistences with other provisions in Part 547 and contains language that should be
revised or removed to more accurately apply to patron-owned mobile devices.

As an initial matter, the NNGE believes that a definition of "wireless player interface”
should be added to Part 547, since the phrase is open to a number of different interpretations.
Adding a definition such as the following would help to provide clarity:

"Wireless player interface" means a communications device, whether owned by
the gaming facility or a patron, that functions as a player interface by connecting to
a Class II gaming system via a secure wireless network, and which allows play ina
Class I] game if the patron is located on lands eligible for gaming under the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act.

While the NIGC’s current Part 547 Class II Technical Standards regulations do not
preclude the use of mobile devices, they do create some uncertainty about the testing
requirements for a mobile device that is owned by a patron rather than by the tribal gaming
facility. For example, the definition of "player interface” is broad enough to include patron-
owned mobile devices: “Any component(s) of a Class II gaming system, including an electronic or
technologic aid (not limited to terminals, player stations, handhelds, fixed units, etc.), that
directly enables player interaction in a Class II game." However, the regulations suggest that all
player interfaces must be tested to confirm compliance with certain standards, 25 C.F.R. §
547.5(c)(4), § 547.7(b). Many of these standards simply do not make sense in the case ofa
patron-owned mobile device that is used only incidentally for gaming, and even then only when
(1) necessary software is downloaded to the device and (2) the device is linked to the Class II
gaming system via a secure wireless connection. Also, some provisions are unworkable in the
context of a patron-owned device, such as the requirement that the "player interface must
exhibit a serial number and date of manufacture ...", 25 C.F.R. § 547.7(d), and the requirement
that the player interface "must continually display (1) ‘Malfunctions void all prizes and plays' or
equivalent; and (2) ‘Actual Prizes Determined by Bingo (or other applicable Class II game) Play.
Other Displays for Entertainment Only’ or equivalent," 25 C.F.R. § 547.16(b).

The NNGE believes that Part 547 should be revised to clarify that testing in the context of
a "player interface" that also is a patron-owned mobile device is limited to the gaming-related
software that is downloaded to the device in order to participate in the game. Standards and
requirements, such as hardware requirements, that would apply to other types of player
interfaces should not apply to patron-owned mobile devices. The NNGE believes that this is the
intent of the Commission's proposal, as the Commission has stated at various consultation
sessions that patron-owned mobile devices are permitted by the rule.


Additionally, the draft does not include language addressing how the “wireless player
interface" will interact with the patron deposit accounts and cashless systems to deposit or
redeem credits. The standards should, at a minimum, prohibit patron account access
information from being stored on the wireless player interface.

In addition to the changes discussed above, the NNGE believes that some aspects of the
proposed § 547.18 should be revised. For example, the requirement to "[d]isable all exposed
network connectivity ports," draft § 547.18(a)(2), is not necessary or practical in the context of a
mobile device and should be eliminated. Further, the requirement that a "wireless player
interface must be designed or programmed such that it may only communicate with authorized
gaming systems," draft § 547.18(b)(3), should be revised so that it excludes patron-owned
devices.

Also, as discussed at the consultations, some items found in the draft § 547.18 could be
addressed in a guidance document rather than in the regulation. Such items might include the
provisions dealing with audit logs and printable reports (draft
§ 547.18(b)(6) and § 547.18(c)). Both are important, but do not need to be included ina
regulation intended to govern technical standards.

Finally, the NNGE suggests that the NIGC engage in a parallel effort to update the
minimum internal control standards for Class II gaming (Part 543) to specifically address those
issues that are unique to mobile gaming. In doing so, the NNGE strongly recommends that such
updates be developed with the assistance of a tribal advisory committee that includes
representatives from tribes that have experience with Class II gaming issues.

Conclusion

On behalf of the Navajo Nation Gaming Enterprise, we appreciate the opportunity to
comment on the Commission's proposed standards for Class II wireless player interfaces.

Sincerely,
tn D. 4NA-P-¢

Interim Chief Executive Officer