Pg. 1 of 8 

November 3, 2008 

Bulletin No. 2008-3 

Subject: Compliance guidance for new technical standards, 25 C.F.R. part 547 

On October 10, 2008, the National Indian Gaming Commission published final 

“Technical Standards for Electronic, Computer, or Other Technologic Aids Used in the 

Play of Class II Games.” (Technical Standards). These Technical Standards become 

effective on Monday, November 10, 2008. Since publication, the NIGC has received a 

number of questions about compliance with the Technical Standards. Those and other 

questions, and their answers, are set out here as guidance. 

Questions about the effective date of the Technical Standards 

Q: What is the effective date of the Technical Standards? 

A: Monday, November 10, 2008. 

Q: Do all Class II gaming systems have to be compliant on that date? 

A: No. Class II gaming systems may be grandfathered for five years if they meet the 

requirements of 547.4(a). 

Questions about grandfathering – submissions under 547.4(a) and use of Class II 

gaming systems while grandfather status is pending.

Q: In order to be grandfathered, existing Class II gaming systems must be submitted 

to an independent testing laboratory to be tested for compliance with minimum 

standards set out in 547.4(a)(2). Who has to submit the systems? 

A: NIGC did not intend to change the usual practice that the system manufacturer or 

distributor submit the systems, and it anticipates that the manufacturer or 

distributor will do so. However, a tribal gaming regulatory authority may require 

that a different entity, such as the gaming operation, make the submission. 

Q: In order to be grandfathered, must a Class II gaming system be submitted to a 

testing laboratory multiple times, once for each tribal jurisdiction in which the 

system is in use? 

A: No. A gaming system only need be submitted to a testing laboratory once. Every 

tribal gaming regulatory authority that has been asked to grandfather the system 
Pg. 2 of 8 

may make use of the resulting report. A tribal gaming regulatory authority is, 

however, free to require additional tests for grandfathering beyond the minimum 

standards set out in 547.4(a)(2). In that case, the Class II gaming system would 

have to be submitted separately and be tested against the standards in 547.4(a)(2) 

and the additional standards required. 

Q: In order to be grandfathered, a Class II gaming system must be submitted to the 

testing laboratory within 120 days after November 10, 2008 (by March 10, 2009). 

Does the testing laboratory have to finish its review by that date, and does the 

tribal gaming regulatory authority have to certify the system by that date before it 

can be grandfathered? 

A: No. As long as a Class II gaming system is submitted to a testing laboratory 

before March 10, 2009, it may be grandfathered, even if the testing laboratory 

finishes its examination and the tribal gaming regulatory authority issues its 

approval after the 120-day period expires. Delays can occur through no one’s 

particular fault – the queue at the testing laboratory may be sufficiently long that a 

timely review of a particular system is not possible, for example. 

Q: Can a gaming system manufactured and in use on or before November 10, 2008, 

be used after March 10, 2009, if the system was submitted to a testing laboratory 

for review before that date but the laboratory has not yet tested the system or the 

tribal gaming regulatory authority has not certified the game as grandfathered by 

that date? 

A: Yes. The Technical Standards allow Class II gaming systems to be grandfathered 

and used so long as they are submitted to a testing laboratory within 120 days 

after November 10, 2008, even if the testing laboratory has not yet completed its 

testing of the system or the tribal gaming regulatory authority has not certified the 

game by March 10, 2009. 

That said, the Technical Standards intend the review and certification of most 

grandfathered games be completed within the 120-day window beginning on 

November 10, 2008. In the event that review and certification for a particular 

system will run longer, the tribal gaming regulatory authority should notify, or 

have the manufacturer notify, NIGC in writing of that fact and of the date the 

testing laboratory expects to complete its review. 

Allowing systems to continue operation until the review and certification process 

is complete will avoid the unnecessary economic consequences of having to shut 

the systems down until certification is complete. 

Q: The Technical Standards can be read to suggest that a system may not be used at 

any time after November 10, 2008, until it is submitted to a testing laboratory, 

tested for compliance with the requirements set out in § 547.4(a)(2), and certified 

by tribal gaming regulatory authority as a grandfathered system. In particular, 
Pg. 3 of 8 

547.4(b)(1) states that if a gaming system does not comply with the requirements 

of the Technical Standards on November 10, 2008, it can only be offered for play 

after that date if it is grandfathered. Section 547.4(b) states that a system is only 

grandfathered after its submission to an independent testing laboratory and its 

certification by the tribal gaming regulatory authority. Is this a correct 

interpretation? 

A: No. The NIGC is aware of this potential ambiguity in the Technical Standards and 

of this possible interpretation of them. It was never the NIGC’s intent to prohibit 

the use of Class II systems awaiting certification as grandfathered systems. A 

gaming operation is, therefore, compliant with the Technical Standards if a 

gaming system was manufactured or in use as of November 10, 2008, if the 

system is or will be submitted to an independent gaming laboratory for review 

pursuant to 547.4(a) by March 10, 2009, and the system is used or offered for play 

after November 10, 2008. 

Q: If a Class II gaming system is submitted to a testing laboratory for grandfather 

review under 547.4(a) within 120 days of November 10, 2008, and the laboratory 

finds that the system software does not satisfy the minimum requirements of 

547.4(a)(2) (and any additional requirements imposed by the tribal gaming 

regulatory authority), may a manufacturer modify the software to bring it into 

compliance? 

A: Yes. However, when the testing laboratory determines that systems software does 

not satisfy the minimum requirements of 547.4(a)(2) (and any additional 

requirements imposed by the tribal gaming regulatory authority), it should notify 

the tribal gaming regulatory authority, and 547.(a)(4) requires that the system 

immediately be removed from play. The system may be offered for play once 

again only if the manufacturer has revised the software, the testing laboratory has 

completed its review and found the system to comply with 547.4(a)(2) (and any 

additional requirements imposed by the tribal gaming regulatory authority), and 

the tribal gaming regulatory authority has certified the modified system as 

grandfathered. 

Questions about grandfathering – testing 

Q: The minimum standards for grandfather testing set out in 547.4(a)(2) include 

standards set out in 547.8(b), which in turn make reference to 547.16. Section 

547.16(b) requires the system to display disclaimers to the effect that 

“malfunctions void all prizes and plays.” Does the grandfather testing include 

checking for the presence or absence of these disclaimers? 

A: No. The reference in 547.8(f) to 547.16 means only that the testing laboratory 

must check that each game is played with a constant set of rules. 

Q: How should hardware components be tested for grandfathering? 
Pg. 4 of 8 

A: Unless a tribal gaming regulatory authority adds specific hardware testing 

requirements, there are no hardware tests that must be performed for a Class II 

gaming system to be grandfathered. The minimum requirements of 547.4(a)(2) 

are only software requirements. In order to test for compliance with those 

minimum requirements, however, a testing laboratory must have the entire Class 

II gaming system, both hardware and software. 

Q: In general terms, what are the grandfather requirements of 547.4(a)(2)? 

A: They are minimum fairness and integrity requirements. For example, a system 

must not change the rules on a player in the middle of a game, and a game cannot 

start automatically without the player choosing to participate. There must be some 

industry-standard methodology of verifying the game software. The random 

number generator must meet the requirements of the Technical Standards. 

Progressive prizes cannot have a probability of winning less than 1 in 

100,000,000. No other prize can have a probability of winning less than 1 in 

50,000,000. 

Q: Are testing laboratories expected to test Class II gaming systems against 

applicable regulations of the Federal Communications Commission? 

A: No. That is not the standard practice in gaming jurisdictions now, nor do the 

Technical Standards require it. 

Q: Section 547.7(k) states that “components of the Class II gaming system that are 

locked in order to meet the requirements of this part shall include a sensor or 

other methods to monitor an open door.” Are components of Class II gaming 

systems kept in secure, back-of-house locations required to have door access 

sensors? 

A: No. Section 547.7(k) is intended to address those components on the gaming 

floor. 

Q: Section 547.8(d)(4)(ii) requires in a last game recall the “total number of credits at 

the start of play, less the purchase or wager amount.” Is it sufficient for a last 

game recall to display the total number of credits at the start of play and the 

number of credits wagered, leaving it to casino or regulatory staff to calculate the 

credits remaining after the play by subtracting these two numbers? 

A: Yes. 

Q: How should rules that are intended for “stand alone” player interfaces be applied 

to hand-held “bingo minders” or other technologic aids? 
Pg. 5 of 8 

A: Sensibly. The Technical Standards are intended to encompass Class II gaming in 

all of their many possible implementations. Bingo, for example, may be played in 

a fully electronic format on client player stations connected to a server, or it may 

be played using hand-held card minders and a live number draw. Paper pull tabs 

may be played using electronic readers and dispensers. Inevitably, there will be 

standards necessary for one implementation that are irrelevant to another. For 

example, standards concerning storage of cash or other financial instruments will 

have direct application to a player interface with a cash box and no application to 

a hand-held minder that does not accept bills (though they will be applicable to 

point-of-sale cash drawers). In such cases, 547.5(b) requires that inapplicable 

standards are to be ignored. 

Questions about grandfathering – November 10, 2008, date of use or manufacture 

Q: Do all of the components of a gaming system have to be in use on the gaming 

operation floor in order for the Class II gaming system to be eligible for 

grandfather status? 

A: No. A Class II gaming system is eligible for grandfathering if it was in use on or 

before November 10, 2008, or if it was manufactured on or before that date. 

Manufactured, in this context, means off the assembly line and ready to use. Thus, 

a system that on November 10, 2008, is awaiting delivery of additional player 

interfaces that came off the assembly line the week before is eligible for 

grandfather status. By contrast, a system that on November 10, 2008, is awaiting 

chips to be soldered into boards and boards to be installed into the system server 

or the interfaces is not manufactured by that date. The intention is to bring within 

the scope of the grandfather clause systems and components that had been 

manufactured but not delivered, those in storage but not in use, those in transit, 

etc. Unfilled orders or orders not off the assembly line by November 10, 2008, are 

not eligible for grandfathering. 

Q: It is a common practice for manufacturers to identify the date of manufacture of 

player interfaces with a plate listing month and year. For interfaces manufactured 

in November 2008, must a manufacturer list month, day, and year in order to 

demonstrate that the interface was manufactured on or before November 10, 

2008? 

A: No, the Technical Standards do not require this. The manufacturer must in any 

event attest to the date of manufacture of interfaces manufactured in November 

2008 under 547.4(a)(7). 

Q: System components can be remanufactured, reconditioned, or refurbished. If a 

Class II gaming system is manufactured before November 10, 2008, if some of its 

player interfaces have been sent out for reconditioning before that date, and if the 

reconditioning is completed on November 20, 2008, what is the date of 

manufacture of those interfaces? 
Pg. 6 of 8 

A: The date of manufacture of the reconditioned interfaces relates back to, and is 

considered to be, the interfaces’ original date of manufacture. Under 547.4(a)(7), 

the manufacturer would still have to provide a statement to the tribal gaming 

regulatory authority attesting to the date of manufacture and date of 

reconditioning. 

Q: In a case where the manufacturer has to modify Class II gaming system software 

already submitted to the testing laboratory to bring the software into grandfather 

compliance (the minimum requirements of 547.4(a)(2) and any additional 

requirements of the tribal gaming regulatory authority), what is the date of 

manufacture and what is the date of submission of the modified software? 

A: So long as the original Class II gaming system was manufactured on or before 

November 10, 2008, and submitted within 120 days thereafter, the date of 

manufacture of the modified software is the system software’s original date of 

manufacture, and the date of submission is the original date of submission. 

Questions about grandfathering – modifications of grandfathered Class II gaming 

systems 

Q: Can Class II gaming systems be modified after they have been certified as 

grandfathered by the tribal gaming regulatory authority? 

A: Yes. The tribal gaming regulatory authority may authorize repairs or replacements 

of individual hardware or software components to ensure the proper functioning, 

security, or integrity of the grandfathered Class II gaming system. Repairs of 

broken components and bug fixes fall into this category. 

The tribal gaming regulatory authority may authorize software modifications that 

maintain or advance the system’s overall compliance with the Technical 

Standards or Class II MICS (25 CFR part 543), but only after receiving a 

laboratory report that the modified software meets the minimum grandfather 

requirements of 547.4(a)(2). Any software modification that makes the Class II 

gaming system meet a requirement of the technical standards that the original 

grandfathered system did not meet will fall into this category. 

The tribal gaming regulatory authority may authorize hardware modifications that 

will maintain or advance the system’s overall compliance with the Technical 

Standards or Class II MICS. Submission to a testing laboratory for such 

modifications is not required by the Technical Standards but may be required by 

the tribal gaming regulatory authority. Any hardware modification that makes the 

Class II gaming system meet a requirement of the technical standards that the 

original grandfathered system did not meet will fall into this category. 

Finally, the tribal gaming regulatory authority may approve any other 
Pg. 7 of 8 

modification to Class II system software that does not detract from compliance 

with the Technical Standards or MICS and does not detract from, compromise, or 

prejudice the proper functioning, security, or integrity of the Class II gaming 

system. Examples of this last category are many and might include things such as 

a new theme that does not change the math of an approved game, a new attract 

mode, enhanced graphics, or additional metering or accounting functions over and 

above the minimum functions required by the Technical Standards. Again, 

submission to a testing laboratory for such modifications is not required by the 

Technical Standards but may be required by the tribal gaming regulatory 

authority. 

Q: Can new player interfaces, manufactured after November 10, 2008, be added to a 

grandfathered Class II gaming system and used with grandfathered game 

software? 

A: Yes, provided that the new player interfaces meet all of the applicable hardware 

requirements of the Technical Standards, 547.7. This will require a determination 

by the testing laboratory that the new interfaces are so compliant. For example, a 

gaming operation can add 50 new, fully hardware-compliant player interfaces to a 

grandfathered gaming system that already had 50 player interfaces on it as of 

November 10, 2008. 

Q: Can a new game “theme,” “skin,” or “clone” coded after November 10, 2008, be 

added to a grandfathered Class II gaming system? The new “theme, skin, or 

clone” does not change the underlying mathematics or function of the game or 

game system in any way save the appearance to the player. 

A: Yes, provided that the software modification is tested for, and complies with, the 

minimum grandfather requirements of 547.4(a)(2), and is approved by the tribal 

gaming regulatory authority. This kind of modification is contemplated by 

547.4(b)(4)(i), which permits software modifications that “maintain or advance 

the system’s overall compliance with” the Technical Standards or Class II MICS, 

after review by the testing laboratory and approval by the tribal gaming regulatory 

authority. 

That said, new software coded after November 10, 2008, that is not a modification 

of grandfathered software may only be offered for play if it is fully compliant 

with the Technical Standards – reviewed by a testing laboratory and approved by 

the tribal gaming regulatory authority. 547.4(c). The NIGC recognizes that the 

distinction between a modification of existing grandfathered software and new 

software is not always going to be clear and may have to be resolved case by case. 

The question here describes a straightforward example of a modification. 

Similarly, an entirely new bingo game, with graphics unlike any grandfathered 

game, running on a newly developed operating system is “new” software and not 

a modification. If a question arises whether software is a modification or new 
Pg. 8 of 8 

submission under the Technical Standards, NIGC is willing to provide guidance 

to tribal gaming regulatory authorities and testing laboratories. 

Q: Can player interfaces be added to a Class II gaming system that has been 

submitted to a testing laboratory but is awaiting completion of review and 

grandfather certification by the tribal gaming regulatory authority? 

A: Yes. Player interfaces may be freely added if manufactured on or before 

November 10, 2008. Player interfaces manufactured after that date may be added 

only if fully compliant with the applicable hardware requirements of the 

Technical Standards, 547.7. 

Q: Can grandfathered Class II gaming systems be sold to another gaming operation? 

A: Yes. Grandfathered Class II gaming systems, hardware, and software is freely 

transferable. Thus, grandfathered player interfaces, for example, may be 

purchased on the open market and added to existing grandfathered systems. 

Similarly, a grandfathered system may be purchased in its entirety and added to 

the purchaser’s gaming operation, whether or not that operation previously 

operated that, or any, Class II gaming system. 

Questions about testing requirements for new, non-grandfathered Class II gaming 

systems.

Q: May new, non-grandfathered Class II gaming systems be made available to the 

public for play pending completion of examination by the testing laboratory and 

approval by the tribal gaming regulatory authority?

A: No. Except in cases of Class II gaming systems awaiting certification of 

grandfather status, 547.4(b), and emergency hardware and software modifications, 

547.4(d), all Class II gaming systems must be submitted to a testing laboratory for 

a review of compliance with all requirements of the Technical Standards and must 

be approved by the tribal gaming regulatory authority prior to being offered to the 

public for play. 547.4(c).