November 10, 2016

Clifton Molatore, Esq.

Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP
U.S. Bancorp Tower

111 S.W. Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400
Portland, OR 97204

Re: —_ Review of Consulting Agreement for the Karuk Tribe
Dear Mr. Molatore:

This letter responds to your request on October 12, 2016, that requested on behalf
of the Karuk Tribe for the National Indian Gaming Commission’s Office of General
Counsel to review a Consulting Agreement between the Tribe and PCI Gaming
Authority. Specifically, you have asked for my opinion whether the Consultation
Agreement constitutes a management contract requiring the NIGC Chair’s approval
under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and whether the agreement violates IGRA’s
requirement that a Tribe have the sole proprietary interest in its gaming operation.

The revised Consulting Agreement, submitted via e-mail on November 3, 2016,
contains terms similar to other agreements the Office of General Counsel has already
reviewed and analyzed that are available on the NIGC website. Applying the same
analysis here, it is my opinion that the Agreement is not a management contract and does
not require the approval of the Chair. It is also my opinion that it does not violate IGRA’s
sole proprietary interest requirement.

It is my understanding that the Agreement is represented to be in substantially
final form with respect to terms affecting this opinion. If the Agreement changes in any
material way prior to closing, this opinion shall not apply. Further, this opinion is limited
to the Agreements listed above and does not include or extend to any other agreements or
documents not submitted for review.

Please note that it is my intent that this letter be released to the public through the
NIGC’s website. If you have any objection to this disclosure, please provide a written
statement explaining the grounds for the objection and highlighting the information that
you believe should be withheld.' If you object on the grounds that the information
qualifies as confidential commercial information subject to withholding under Exemption
Four of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),” please be advised that the information

125 CER. § 517.7(0).
> 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4).

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 90 K St. NE, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20002 Tel: 202.632.7003 Fax: 202.632.7066 www.NIcc.cov
REGIONAL OFFICES Portland, OR; Sacramento, CA; Phoenix, AZ; St. Paul, MN; Tulsa OK


Clifton Molatore, Esq.

Re: Review of Consulting Agreement for the Karuk Tribe
November 10, 2016

Page 2 of 2

was voluntarily submitted and, as such, that any withholding should be analyzed in
accordance with the standard set forth in Critical Mass Energy Project v. NRC? Any
claim of confidentiality should also be supported with “a statement or certification by an
officer or authorized representative of the submitter.”* Please submit any written
objection to FO[ASubmitterReply@nigc.gov within thirty (30) days of the date of this
letter. After this time elapses, the letter will be made public and objections will no
longer be considered.° If you need any additional guidance regarding potential grounds
for withholding, please see the United States Department of Justice’s Guide to the
Freedom of Information Act at http://www.justice.gov/oip/doj-guide-freedom-
information-act-0.

If you have any questions, please contact NIGC Staff Attorney Esther Dittler at
(202) 420-9229.

Sincerely,

Michi foo —

Michael Hoenig
General Counsel

3975 F.2d 871 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
* 25 CER. § 517.7().
* Id.