Indian Affairs re: Casinos
D~~~E
~~~
MEMORANDUM
r-',
November 22, 2006
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Bureau of Indian Affairs Rules
Economic Development Director Dave Heiar and Assistant City Manager Cindy
Steinhauser are transmitting information on the proposed Bureau of Indian Affairs Rules
regarding Indian Casinos.
N~d
Michalll C. Van Milligen
MCVM/jh
Attachment
cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
David Heiar, Economic Development Director
DD~~E
~<k~
MEMORANDUM
November 16, 2006
FROM:
Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
David Heiar, Economic Development Director 1Jril.
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager 11 I
TO:
SUBJECT: Bureau of Indian Affairs Rules
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memo is to provide you information on the proposed Bureau of
Indian Affairs Rules regarding Indian Casinos.
DISCUSSION
Attached is a copy of Federal Register Vol. 71, No. 193 regarding proposed regulations
for proposed gaming establishments and the impact such regulations may have on
existing facilities. The public has until December 4, 2006 to submit comments on the
regulations.
Based upon our review, we recommend that the city submit the following comments:
. Paragraph 292.2 regarding definitions be modified. The proposed regulations
identify that the definitions of ''Appropriate State and Local Officials" and
"Surrounding Community" be include Public Officials and Local Governments
within a 25-mile radius. Our recommendation would include that the 25-miles be
a minimum standard. In actuality Dubuque would be impacted from a gaming
facility within a 50-100 mile radius. For example, when the Mesquakie Casino in
Tama, Iowa was shut down, both casinos in Dubuque saw significant increases
from this redirected business.
Recommendation: Modify this language to allow the minimum radius to be
50-miles. Consideration of extending this radius to 50-miles or greater should be
allowed if the existing facility can show, according to industry standards, an
impact beyond the 50 mile radius. This radius should not be limited to State
borders.
. Paragraph 292.18 regarding impact to surrounding communities needs to be
clarified.
Recommendation: The final regulations need to make sure that the "impact to
surrounding communities" includes communities within the above-mentioned
radius, even when that crosses state line.
. Paragraph 292.22 regarding concurrence and approval needs to be expanded to
provide for more legislative review. The proposed regulations allow the Governor
to have sole authority regarding this concurrence. As part of the proposed
regulations, new gaming facilities must undertake due diligence to mitigate
proposed negative impacts to the surrounding communities. Due to the impact on
multiple jurisdictions, a more public process through the legislature should be
considered.
Recommendation: Include language in the final regulations that coincide with the
"Pombo" legislation; specifically language that would address public domain
issues, consideration of legislative approval and require a binding referendum.
. Paragraph 292.19 regarding the comment period and appeal process. The
proposed regulations allow for a 50-day timeframe for public comment with the
potential for a 30-day extension. However there is no appeal process identified in
the regulations. Paragraph 292.18 identifies what information an application must
contain regarding detrimental impacts on surrounding communities. Included in
this information are economic, housing, social, environmental, employment and
infrastructure impacts. Sixty-days (or 90-days with a granted extension) does not
provide an insufficient timeframe in which to substantiate and adequately
address these impacts. After the 50-days are completed, the tribe is allowed to
rebuttal any public comment. Lastly, there are no provisions included anywhere
in the proposed regulations to appeal the Regional Director's, Secretary or
Governor's decisions or concurrence on the process.
Recommendation: Include language in the final regulations to provide for a
minimum 90-day comment period with a 30-day extension on the impacts on
surrounding communities. Also include language in the final regulations that
allows for decisions to be appealed to the Legislature.
Cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Dawn Lang, Budget Director
Jenny Larson, Budget Director
F:IUSERSIDHeiarlBIA gaming rules 06_11.doc
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 193/Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
elements are most critical to make
consistent? Is a focus on comparability
of A TC calculation and transparency
more important than consistency of
ATe calculation?
2. What is a reasonable timeline to
achieve the consistency goal?
3. Are there common standards and
modeling assumptions that can be
developed to calculate TRM and CBM?
4. What are the most critical data to
be exchanged among transmission
providers to ensure that all are
performing A TC calculations most
accurately? How should that data be
exchanged, what protocols should be
used, and what forum should develop
the protocols?
5. What is the most important data to
make transparent? Regarding the
Commission's proposal to require a
narrative explanation for changes in
monthly or yearly A TC, are there
modifications that would achieve the
Commission's transparency goals
without imposing an undue burden on
transmission providers? What A TC
information posted in narrative form
will be most beneficial?
6. Regarding the proposal to enhance
OASIS postings, what are some industry
tools/best practices that can be utilized
to assist with this effort?
1:45 p.m.-2 p.m.-Break.
2 p.m.-4 p.m.-The Commission's
Proposals Regarding Redispatch and
Conditional Firm Service.
. Presentations by Panelists
(* Tentative Panelist):
Don Furman, PPM Energy, on behalf
of American Wind Energy Association
(AWEA).
Patricia Alexander. Consultant!
Energy, Dickstein Shapiro LLP, on
Behalf of Electric Power Supply
Association (EPSA).
John Lucas, Transmission Services
Director, Southern Company Services,
Inc.
Lauren Nichols-Kinas, Bonneville
Power Administration (BP A).
Anthony Taylor, Director of
Transmission. Williams Power
Company, Inc.
*Natalie McIntire, Senior Policy
Associate, Renewable Northwest
Project.
. Panel discussion topics include
related issues raised in the NOPR, as
well as the following:
1. Are there improvements to the
revised redispatch provision in the pro
forma DATT (section 13.5) that are
necessary to facilitate redispatch?
2. Would customers be willing to pay
for the actual costs of redispatch in
addition to the embedded costs of
transmission to secure previously
unavailable long-term transmission
rights? How can the Commission best
remove discretion in calculating these
costs and create a method for verifying
them?
3. What tools are available to allow
redispatch to occur using resources
other than those owned by the
transmission provider?
4. Should curtailments under
conditional firm service be specified
based on a number of hours per month,
when certain transmission constraints
or elements bind, when certain load
levels are present, or some other factor?
How would these different methods be
studied and implemented? Which
method is preferable from the
perspective of the potential conditional
firm transmission customers, the
network customers and the transmission
providers?
5. What curtailment priority should
be assigned to conditional firm service?
Would this require changes to NERC
curtailment protocols? How should
changes between firm and non-firm
service be handled in real-time systems?
Would changes need to be made to e-
tags or OASIS?
6. Should conditional firm service be
offered indefinitely, or only as a bridge
product until transmission upgrades are
complete?
[FR Doc. E6-16442 Filed 10-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-61-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
25 CFR Part 292
RIN 1076-AE81
Gaming on Trust Lands Acquired After
October 17. 1988
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian Affairs
proposes to establish procedures that an
Indian tribe must follow in seeking to
conduct gaming on lands acquired after
October 17. 1988. The Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act allows Indian tribes to
conduct class II and class III gaming
activities on land acquired after October
17. 1988, only if the land meets certain
exceptions. This proposed rule
establishes a process for submitting and
considering applications from Indian
tribes seeking to conduct class II or class
III gaming activities on lands acquired
in trust after October 17, 1988.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 4,2006.
58769
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the number 1076-AE-81,
by any of the following methods:
. Federal rulemaking poria!.' http://
www.regulations.govFollow the
instructions for submitting comments.
. Fax: 202-273-3153.
. Mail: Mr. George Skibine, Director,
Office of Indian Gaming Management,
Office of the Deputy Assistant
Secretary-Policy and Economic
Development, 1849 C Street, NW., Mail
Stop 3657-MIB, Washington, DC 20240.
. Hand delivery: Office of Indian
Gaming Management, Office of the
Deputy Assistant Secretary-Policy and
Economic Development, 1849 C Street,
NW, Room 3657-MIB, Washington, DC,
from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
Comments on the information
collection in this rule are separate from
comments on the rule. If you wish to
comment on the information collection,
you may send a facsimile to (202) 395-
6566. You may also e-mail comments to:
OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George Skibine, Director, Office of
Indian Gaming Management, (202) 219-
4066.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
authority to issue this document is
vested in the Secretary of the Interior by
5 U.S.c. 301 and 25 U.S.c. 2,9, and
2710. The Secretary has delegated this
authority to the Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs by
part 209 of the Departmental Manual.
Background
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
(IGRA), 25 U.S.c. 2701-2721, was
signed into law on October 17, 1988.
Section 20 ofIGRA, 25 U.S.C. 2719,
prohibits gaming on lands that the
Secretary of the Interior acquires in trust
for an Indian tribe after October 17,
1988, unless the land qualifies under at
least one of the exceptions contained in
that section. If none of the exceptions in
Section 20 applies, Section 20(b)(1)(A)
of IGRA provides that gaming can still
occur on the lands if:
(1) The Secretary consults with the
Indian tribe and appropriate State and
local officials, including officials of
other nearby tribes;
(2) After consultation, the Secretary
determines that a gaming establishment
on newly acquired (trust) lands would
be in the best interest of the Indian tribe
and its members, and would not be
detrimental to the surrounding
community; and
(3) The Governor of the State in which
the gaming activity is to be conducted
concurs in the Secretary's
determination.
58770
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 193/Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
On September 28, 1994, the Bureau of
Indian Affairs (BIA) issued to all
Regional Directors a Checklist for
Gaming Acquisitions and Two-Part
Determinations Under Section 20 of the
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. This
Checklist was revised and replaced on
February 18. 1997. On November 9,
2001, an October 2001 Checklist was
issued revising the February 18, 1997
Checklist to include gaming related
acquisitions. On March 7, 2005 a new
Checklist was issued to all Regional
Directors replacing the October 2001
Checklist.
The proposed regulations implement
Section 20 of the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act (IGRA) by articulating
standards that the Department will
follow in interpreting the various
exceptions to the gaming prohibition on
after-acquired trust lands contained in
Section 20 of IGRA. Subpart A of the
draft proposed regulations define key
terms contained in Section 20 or used
in the regulation. Subpart B delineates
how the Department will interpret the
"settlement of a land claim" exception
contained in Section 20(b)(1)(B)(i) of
IGRA. This subpart clarifies that, in
almost all instances, Congress must
enact the settlement into law before the
land can qualify under the exception.
Subpart B also delineates what criteria
must be met for a parcel of land to
qualify under the "initial reservation"
exception contained in Section 20
(b)(l)(B)(ii) ofIGRA. The proposed
regulation sets forth that the tribe must
have present and historical connections
to the land, and that the land must be
proclaimed to be a new reservation
pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 467 before the
land can qualify under this exception.
Finally, Subpart B articulates what
criteria must be met for a parcel of land
to qualify under the "restored land for
a restored tribe" exception contained
Section 20 (b)(1)(B)(iii) of IGRA. The
proposed regulation sets forth the
criteria for a tribe to qualify as a
"restored tribe" and articulates the
requirement for the parcel to qualify as
"restored lands." Essentially, the
regulation requires the tribe to have
modern connections to the land,
historical connections to the area where
the land is located, and requires a
temporal connection between the
acquisition of the land and the tribe's
restoration. Subpart C sets forth how the
Department will evaluate tribal
applications for a two-part Secretarial
Determination under Section 20(b)(1) of
IGRA. Under this exception, gaming can
occur on off-reservation trust lands if
the Secretary, after consultation with
appropriate State and local officials,
including officials of nearby tribes,
makes a determination that a gaming
establishment would be in the best
interest of the tribe and its members and
would not be detrimental to the
surrounding community. The Governor
of the State must concur in any
Secretarial two-part determination. The
proposed regulation sets forth how
consultation with local officials and
nearby tribes will be conducted and
articulates the factors the Department
will consider in making the two-part
determination. The proposed regulation
also gives the State Governor up to one
year to concur in a Secretarial two-part
determination, with an additional 180
days extension at the request of either
the Governor or the applicant tribe.
Previous Rulemaking Activity
On September 14, 2000, we published
proposed regulations in the Federal
Register (65 FR 55471) to establish
procedures that an Indian tribe must
follow in seeking a Secretarial
Determination that a gaming
establishment would be in the best
interest of the Indian tribe and its
members and would not be detrimental
to the surrounding community. The
comment period closed on November
13,2000. On December 27, 2001 (66 FR
66847). we reopened the comment
period to allow consideration of
comments received after November 13,
2000, and to allow additional time for
comment on the proposed rule. The
comment period ended on March 27,
2002. On January 28, 2002 we published
a notice in the Federal Register (67 FR
3846) to correct the Effective Date
section which incorrectly stated that the
deadline for receipt of comments was
February 25, 2002 and was corrected to
read "Comments must be received on or
before March 27, 2002." No further
action was taken to publish the final
rule.
We are publishing a new proposed
rule because we have determined that
the rule should address not only the
exception contained in Section
20(b)(1)(A) ofIGRA (Secretarial
Determination), but also the other
exceptions contained in Section 20, in
order to explain to the public how the
Department interprets these exceptions.
Procedural Requirements
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Order 12866)
This document has been determined
not to be a significant regulatory action
and is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
(a) This rule will not have an annual
economic effect of $100 million or
adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or
other units of government. The annual
number of requests and applications to
conduct gaming on trust lands under the
exceptions or two-part determination of
IGRA have been small. Since IGRA was
enacted, approximately two
applications per year qualify and have
been approved to operate a gaming
establishment on trust land under the
general exceptions and only three
positive two-part determinations have
successfully qualified to operate a
gaming establishment on trust land
under the exception to the gaming
prohibition in Section 20 (b)(l)(A) of
IGRA.
(b) This rule will not create serious
inconsistencies or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another Federal agency. The Department
of the Interior (DOn, BIA is the only
governmental agency that makes the
determination whether to take land into
trust for Indian tribes.
(c) This rule will not materially affect
entitlements, grants, user fees, loan
programs, or the rights and obligations
of their recipients. This rule sets out the
procedures and criteria for the
submission of an application from an
Indian tribe seeking to conduct class II
or class III gaming activities on land
acquired by the Secretary of the Interior
under Section 20 of the IGRA.
(d) OMB has determined that this rule
will not raise novel legal or policy
issues. For this reason, OMB review is
not required under Executive Order
12666.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior
certifies that this document will not
have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
D.S.C. 601 et seq.). Indian tribes are not
considered to be small entities for the
purposes of this Act.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREF A)
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal. State. or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 193/Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This rule does not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector
of more than $100 million per year. The
rule does not have a significant or
unique effect on State, local or tribal
government or the private sector. A
statement containing the information
required by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (2 U.S,C. 1531 et seq.) is not
required because only Indian tribes may
conduct gaming activities on land
acquired after October 17. 1988, only if
the land meets the exceptions in Section
20 ofIGRA.
Takings Implication Assessment
(Executive Order 12630)
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, the Department has determined
that this rule does not have significant
takings implications. The rule does not
pertain to the "taking" of private
property interests, nor does it impact
private property. A takings implication
assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
In accordance with Executive Order
13121, the Department has determined
that this rule does not have significant
Federalism implications because it does
not substantially and directly affect the
relationship between the Federal and
State governments and does not impose
costs on States or localities. A
Federalism Assessment is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order
12988)
This rule complies with the
requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) Does not unduly burden the
judicial system;
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(a)
requiring that all regulations be
reviewed to eliminate errors and
ambiguity and be written to minimize
litigation; and
(c) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2)
requiring that all regulations be written
in clear language and contain clear legal
standards. The rule does not preempt
any statute.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Department 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
under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection has been
reviewed and cleared by the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
as amended. The collection has been
assigned the tracking number of OMB
Control Number 1076-0158. The
clearance expires November 30, 2006.
The collection of information is
unique for each tribe even though each
submission addresses the requirements
found in 9292.16.
All information is collected in the
tribe's application. Respondents submit
information in order to obtain a benefit.
Each response is estimated to take 1,000
hours to review instructions, search
existing data sources, gather and
maintain necessary data, and prepare in
format for submission. We anticipate
that two responses will be submitted
annually for an annual burden of 2,000
hours.
Submit comments on the proposed
information collection to Attention:
Desk Officer for the Department of the
Interior, Office ofInformation and
Regulatory Affairs, OMB by facsimile at
(202) 395-6566 or bye-mail to
OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov. You
should also send comments to the BIA
official as found in the ADDRESSES
section. The BIA solicits comments in
order to:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the BIA, including whether
the information will have practical
utility;
(2) Evaluate the BIA's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond.
OMB is required to make a decision
between 30 and 60 days after
publication of this document in the
Federal Register. Therefore, your
comment to OMB has the best chance of
being considered if OMB receives it
within 30 days of publication. This does
not affect the deadline for the public to
comment to BIA on the proposed rule.
Consultation With Indian tribes
(Executive Order 13175)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
13175, we have conducted consultation
meetings with tribal leaders regarding
the proposed regulations in the
58771
following locations: Uncasville,
Connecticut on March 30, 2006;
Albuquerque, New Mexico on Aprils,
2006; Sacramento, California on April
18,2006 and Minneapolis, Minnesota
on April 20, 2006. A notice ofthe
consultation meetings was published in
the Federal Register on April 11, 2006
(71 FR 18350). In additiou. a draft
regulation was sent to all tribal leaders
in the lower 48 states on March 15,
2006, seeking comments on the draft
regulation. Numerous comments were
received by the Department. The
Department revised the draft regulation
in response to written comments and
oral comments received at the
consultation meetings. No action is
taken under this rule unless a tribe
submits an application to acquire land
under Section 20 of IGRA.
Effects on the Nation's Energy Supply
(Executive Order 13211)
This rule does not have a significant
effect on the nation's energy supply,
distribution, or use as defined by
Executive Order 13211.
Data Quality Act
In developing this rule, we did not
conduct or use a study, experiment, or
survey requiring peer review under the
Data Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554).
Clarity of This Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by tbe
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
. Be logically organized;
. Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
. Use clear language rather than
jargon;
. Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
. Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments as
instructed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your
comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the specific sections
that are unclearly written, which
sections or sentences are too long, the
sections where you feel lists or tables
would be useful, etc.
Public Comment Solicitation
If you wish to comment on the rule,
please see the different methods listed
in the ADDRESSES section; we cannot
accept comments via the Internet at this
time. Our practice is to make comments,
58772
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 193/Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
including names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review
during the hours listed in the ADDRESSES
section. Individual respondents may
request that we withhold their home
address from the fuIemaking rer.ord,
which we will honor to the extent
allowable by law. Thero may be
circumstances in which we would
withhold from the rulemaking record a
respondent's identity, as allowable by
law. If you wish us to withhold your
name and/or address, you must state
this prominently at the beginning of
your comment. However, we will not
consider anonymous comments. We
will make all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 290
lndians-Business and finance,
Indians-gaming.
Dated: September 18, 2006.
Michael D. Olsen,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary-Indian
Affairs.
For reasons stated in the preamble,
the Bureau of Indian Affairs proposes to
add Part 292 to Chapter I of Title 25 of
the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 292-GAMING ON TRUST
LANDS ACQUIRED AFTER OCTOBER
17, 1988
Subpart A-General Provisions
Sec.
292.1 What is the purpose of this part?
292.2 How are key terms defined in this
part?
292.3 When can a tribe conduct gaming
activities on trust lands?
Subpart B-Exceptions to Prohibition on
Gaming on After-Acquired Trust Lands
292.4 What criteria must trust land meet for
gaming to be allowed under the
exceptions listed in 25 V.S.e. 2719(a) of
IGRA?
"Settlement of a Land Claim" Exception
292.5 What must be demonstrated to meet
the "settlement of a land claim"
exception?
"Initial Reservation" Exception
292.6 What must be dp,monstrated to meet
the "initial reservation" exception?
"Restored Lands" Exception
292.7 What must be demonstrated to meet
the "restored lands" exception?
292.8 How does a tribe qualify as having
been Federally recognized?
292.9 How does a trihe show that it lost its
government-to-government relationship?
292.10 How does a tribe qualify as having
been restored to Federal recugnition?
292.11 What are "restored lands"?
292.12 How does a tribe establish its
connection to the land?
Subpart C-Secretarial Determination and
Governor's Concurrence
292.13 When can a tribl~ condud gaming
activities on lands that do not qualify
under one of the exceptions?
292.14 Where must a tribe file an
application for a Secretarial
Determinatiun?
292.15 Maya tribe request a Secretarial
Dp,tp.rmination for lands not YRt hp,ld in
tmst?
Application Contents
292.16 What must an application for a
Secretarial Determination contain?
292.17 How musl an applicalion describe
the benefits of a proposed gaming
establishment to the tribe and its
members?
292.18 What information must an
application contain on delrimental
impacts to the surrounding community?
Consultation
292.19 How will the Regional Director
conduct the consullation process?
292.20 What information must the
consu!lation ldtl:r include?
Evaluation and Concurrence
2!J2.21 How will the Secretary evaluate a
proposed gaming establishment?
292.22 How does the Secretary request the
Governor's concurrence?
292.23 Can the public review the
application for a Secretarial
Determination?
Information Collection
292.24 Do information collections in this
part have Office of Management and Budget
approval?
Authority: 5 U.S.c. 301, 25 U.S.G. 2, 9,
2719,43 U.S.C. 1457.
Subpart A-General Provisions
g 292.1 What is the purpose of this part?
This part contains procedures that the
Department of the Interior will use to
determine whether class II or class III
gaming can occur on land acquired in
trust for an Indian tribe after October 17,
1988.
g 292.2 How are key terms defined in this
part?
For purposes of this part, all terms
have the same meaning as set forth in
the definitional section of the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25
U.S.r.. 2703. In addition, the following
terms have the meanings given in this
section.
Appropriate State and Local Officials
means thp, Govp,rnor of thfl State and
appropriate officials of units of local
government within 25 miles of the site
of the proposed gaming establishment.
BIA means Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Contiguous means two parcels of land
having a common boundary. For
flxample, it indudes parcels divided by
non-navigable waters or a public road or
right-of-way.
Federal recognition or Federally
recognized means the recognition by the
Secretary that an Indian tribe has a
government-ta-government relationship
with the United States and is eligible for
the special programs and services
provided by the United States to Indians
because of their status as Indians, and
evidenced by inclusion of the tribe on
the list of recognized tribes published
by the Secretary under 25 D.S.e. 479a-
1.
Former Resenration means lands that
are within the jurisdiction of an
Oklahoma Indian tribe and that are
within the boundaries of the last
reservation for that tribe in Oklahoma
established by treaty, Executive Order,
or Secretarial Order.
[GRA means the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act of 1988, as amended and
codified at 25 D.S.C. 2701-2721.
Land claim means any claim by an
Indian tribe:
(1) Arising from a Federal common
law, statutory or treaty-based restraint
against alienation of Indian land; and
(2) Made against an individual person
or entity (either private, public, or
governmental).
Legislative termination means Federal
legislation that specifically terminates
or prohibits the government-to-
government relationship with an Indian
tribe or that otherwise specifically
denies the tribe land/or its members]
access to or eligibility for government
services.
Nearby Indian tribe means an Indian
tribe with tribal Indian lands, as defined
in 25 U.S.c. 2703(4) ofIGRA, located
within a 25-mile radius of the location
of the proposed gaming establishment,
or, if the tribe is landless, within a 25-
mile radius of its government
headquarters.
Regional Director mflans the official in
charge of the BIA Regional Office
responsible for all BIA activities within
the geographical area where the
proposed gaming establishment is to be
located.
Resenration means that area of land
which has been set aside or which has
been acknowledged as having been set
aside by the United States for the use of
the tribe, the exterior boundaries of
which are more particularly dflfined in
a final treaty, agreement, Executive
Order, Federal statute, Secretarial Order
or Proclamation, judicial determination,
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No, 193/Thursday, October 5, 200B/Proposed Rules
or court-approved stipulated cntry of
judgment to which the United States is
a party.
Secretary means the Secretary of the
Interior or an authorized representative.
Secretarial Determination means a
two-part determination that a gaming
establishment on newly acquired lands:
(1) Would be in the best interest of the
Indian tribe and its members; and
(2) Would not be detrimental to the
surrounding community.
Surrounding community means local
governments and nearby Indian tribes
located within 25 miles of the site of the
proposed gaming establishments.
Tribe means an Indian tribe.
t 292.3 When can a tribe conduct gaming
activities on trust lands?
This section implements Section 20 of
IGRA (25 U.S.C. 2719). A tribe may
conduct class II or class III gaming
activities on land acquired by the
Secretary in trust for the benefit of a
tribe after Octoher 17, 19B8, only if:
(a) The land meets the criteria or
exceptions in Subpart B; or
(h) The Secretary makes a
determination under Subpart C of this
purl and the Governor of the State in
which the gaming activity is to be
conducted concurs in that
determination.
Subpart B-Exceptions to Prohibition
on Gaming on After-Acquired Trust
Lands
S 292.4 What criteria must trust land meet
for gaming to be allowed under the
exceptions listed in 25 U.S.C. 2719(a) of
IGRA?
(a) For class II or class III gaming to
be allowed on trust or restricted fee land
under section 2719(a)(1) of IGRA, the
land must either:
(1) Be located within or contiguous to
the boundaries of the reservation of the
tribe on OctobflT 17, 1988; or
(2) Meet the requirements of
paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) For land to be eligible under this
paragraph, it must belong to a tribe that
had no reservation on October 17, 1988,
and must be located:
(1) Within the boundaries ofthe
tribe's former reservation;
(2) Contiguous to other land held in
trust or restricted status by the United
States for the tribe in Oklahoma; or
(3) In a state other than Oklahoma and
within the tribe's last recognized
reservation within the State or States
within which the tribe is now located.
"Settlement of a Land Claim" Exception
! 292.5 What must be demonstrated to
meet the "settlement of a land claim"
exception?
This section contains criteria fur
meeting the requirements ofIGRA
Section 20(b)(1)(B)(i).
(a) Gaming may be connucted on
lands covered by this section only when
the land has been acquired in trust as
part of the settlement of a land claim
that either:
(1) Has been filed in Federal court and
has not been dismissed on substantive
grounds; or
(2) Is induded un the Department's
list of potential pre-1966 claims
published under the Indian Claims
Limitation Act of 1982 (Pub. L. 97-394,
28 D.S.C. 2415) and meets the criteria in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) To be eligible under paragraph
(a)(2) of this section, land must be
covered by a settlement that either:
(1) States that the tribe is
relinquishing its legal claim to some or
all of the lands as part of the settlement,
results in the alienation or transfer of
title to tribal lands within the meaning
of 25 D.S.C. 177, and has been enacted
into law by the United States Congress;
or,
(2) Returns to the tribe lands identical
to the lands claimed by the tribe, does
not involve an alienation or transfer of
title to tribal lands that is prohibited
under 25 U.S.c. 177, and is either:
(i) Duly executed by the parties and
entered as a final order of a Federal
court of competent jurisdiction; or
(ii) Settled by an agreement executed
by the State in which the lands claimed
by the tribe are located.
"Initial Reservation" Exception
g 292.6 What must be demonstrated to
meet the "initial reservation" exception?
This section contains criteria for
meeting the requirements of IGRA
Section 20(b)(1J(B)(ii). Under this
section, gaming may be conducted only
when all of the following conditions are
met:
(a) The tribe has been acknowledged
(Federally recognized) through the
administrative process under 25 CFR
Pari 83;
(b) A majority of the tribe's members
reside within 50 miles of the location of
the land or the tribe's government
headquarters are located within 25
miles of the location of the land;
(c) The land is located within an area
where the tribe has significant historical
and cultural connections;
(d) The land has been proclaimed to
be a reservation under 25 US.c. 467;
and
58773
(e) This reservation is the first
proclaimed reservation of the tribe
following acknowledgment.
"Restored Lands" Exception
g 292.7 What must be demonstrated to
meet the "restored lands" exception?
This section contains criteria for
meeting the requirements of IGRA
Section 2o(bJ(1)(B)(iii), called Ihe
"restored lands" exception. The term
"restored lands" is defined in S 292.11.
Gaming may only occur under this
section when all of the following criteria
have been met:
(a) The tribe at one time was Federally
recognized, as evidenced by its meeting
the criteria in S 292.8;
(b) The tribe at some later time lost its
government-to-government relationship
by one of the means specified in 9292.9;
and
(c) At a time after termination, the
Trihe was restored to Federal
recognition by one of the means
specified in ~ 292.10.
g 292.8 How does a tribe quality as having
been Federally recognized?
For a tribe to qualify as having been
at one time Federally recognized for
purposes of 9 292.7, at least one ofthe
following must be true:
(a) The United States at one time
entered into treaty negotiations with the
tribe;
(b) The Department determined that
the tribe could organize under the
Indian Reorganization Act or the
Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act;
(c) Congress enacted legislation
specific to, or including, the tribe
indicating that a government-to-
government relationship existed;
(d) The United States at one time
acquired land for the tribe's henefit; or
(e) Some other evidence demonstrates
the existence of a governmenHo.
government relationship between the
tribe and the Federal Government.
S 292.9 How does a tribe show that it lost
its government-ta-government
relationship?
For a tribe to qualify for purposes of
S 292.7, it must have lost its
government-to-government relationship
by one of the following means:
(a) Legislative termination; or
(b) Termination demonstrated by
historical written documentation from
the Departments of the Interior or
Justice. The documents must show that
the Executive Branch no longer
recognized the government-to-
government relationship with the trihe
or its members.
58774
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 193/Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
! 292.1 0 How does a tribe qualify as
having been restored to Federal
recognition?
For a tribe to qualify as having been
restored to Federal recognition for
purposes of S 292.7, the tribe must show
at least one of the following:
(a) Congressional enactment of
legislation recognizing, acknowledging,
or restoring the government-to-
government relationship between the
United States and the tribal government
(required for tribes terminated by
Congressional action);
(b) Recognition through the
administrative Federal
Acknowledgment Process under 25 CFR
83.8; or
(c) A judicial determination or court-
approved stipulated entry of judgment
that:
(1) Was entered into by the United
States; and
(2) Provides that the tribe's
governmenHo-government relationship
with the United States was never legally
terminated despite action by the
Executive Branch purporting to
terminate the relationship with the tribe
or its members.
1292.11 What are "restored lands?"
For lands to qualify as "restored
lands" for purposes of ~ 292.7, it must
be demonstrated that:
(a) The legislation restoring the
government-to-government relationship
between the United States and the tribe
requires or authorizes the Secretary to
take land into trust within a specific
geographical area and the lands are
within the specific geographical area; or
(b) If there is no restoration
legislation, or if the restoration
legislation does not provide geographic
parameters for the restoration of lands,
the tribe has a modern connection and
a significant historical connection to the
land and there is a temporal connection
between the date of the acquisition of
the land and the date of the Tribe's
restoration; and
(c) If the tribe is acknowledged under
25 CFR 83.8, it does not already have an
initial reservation proclaimed after
October 17, 1988.
1292.12 How does a tribe establish Its
connection to the land?
To establish a connection to the land
for purposes of ~ 292.11, the tribe must
meet the criteria in paragraphs (a), (b),
and (c) of this section.
(a) A modern connection is
established if a majority of the tribe's
members reside within 50 miles of the
land or if the tribe's government
headquarters are located within 25
miles of the land.
(b) A significant historical connection
to the land can be established if:
(1) The land is located within the
boundaries of the tribe's last reservation
reserved to the tribe by a ratified or
unratified treaty; or
(2) The land is located in an area to
which the tribe has significant
documented historical connections,
significant weight being given to
historical connections documented by
official records of the Bureau of Indian
Affairs or the Department of the Interior,
or by the Indian Claims Commission,
other Federal court, or congressional
findings.
(c) A reasonable temporal connection
between the date of the acquisition of
the land and the date of the tribe's
restoration is established if:
(1) The land is the first land that the
tribe has acquired since the tribe was
restored to Federal recognition; or
(2) The tribe submitted an application
to take the land into trust within 25
years after the tribe was restored to
Federal recognition.
Subpart C-Secretarial Determination
and Governor's Concurrence
1292.13 When can a tribe conduct gaming
activities on lands that do not qualify under
one of the exceptions?
A tribe can conduct gaming on land
covered by this part that does not meet
the criteria in Subpart B only after all of
the following occur:
(a) The tribe asks the Secretary in
writing to make a Secretarial
Determination that a gaming
establishment on land subject to this
part is in the best interest of the tribe
and its members and not detrimental to
the surrounding community;
(b) The Secretary consults with the
tribe and appropriate State and local
officials, including officials of other
nearby tribes;
(c) The Secretary makes a
determination that a gaming
establishment on newly acquired lands
would be in the best interest of the tribe
and its members and would not be
detrimental to the surrounding
community: and
(d) The Governor of the State in
which the gaming activity is to be
conducted concurs in the Secretary's
Determination (25 V.S.C. 2719(b)(t)(A)).
1292.14 Where must a tribe file an
application for a Secretarial Determination?
A tribe must file its application for a
Secretarial Determination with the
Regional Director of the BIA Regional
Office having responsibility over the
land where the gaming establishment is
to be located.
g 292.15 Maya tribe apply for a Secretarial
Determination for lands not yet held In
trust?
Yes. A tribe can apply for a two-part
Secretarial Determination under
~ 292.13 for land not yet held in trust.
The tribe must file its application for a
two-part Secretarial Determination at
the same time that it applies under 25
CFR Part 151 to have the land taken into
trust.
Application Contents
1292.16 What must an application for a
Secretarial Determination contain?
An application requesting a
Secretarial Determination under
9292.13 must include the following
information:
(a) The full name, address, and
telephone number of the tribe
submitting the application;
(b) A description of the location of the
land, including a legal description
supported by a surveyor other
document:
(c) Proof of identity of present
ownership and title status of the land:
(d) Distance of the land from the
tribe's reservation or trust lands, if any,
and tribal government headquarters:
(e) Information required by ~ 292.17 to
assist the Secretary in determining
whether the proposed gaming
establishment will be in the best interest
of the tribe and its members;
(f1 Information required by ~ 292.18 to
assist the Secretary in determining
whether the proposed gaming
establishment will not be detrimental to
the surrounding community;
(g) The authorizing resolution from
the tribe submitting the application;
(h) The tribe's gaming ordinance or
resolution approved by the National
Indian Gaming Commission in
accordance with 25 D.S.C. 2710, if any;
(i) The tribe's organic documents, if
any:
(j) The tribe's class III gaming compact
with the State where the gaming
establishment is to be located, if one has
been negotiated; and
(k) Any existing or proposed
management contract required to be
approved by the National Indian
Gaming Commission under 25 U.S.C.
2711 and 25 CFR Part 533.
1292.17 How must an application describe
the benefits of a proposed gaming
establishment to the tribe and Its members?
To satisfy the requirements of
~ 292.16(e), an application must contain:
(a) Projections of class II and class III
gaming income statements, balance
sheets. fixed assets accounting, and cash
flow statements for the gaming entity
and the tribe;
Federal Register IVaI. 71, No. 193 I Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
(b) Projected tribal employment, job
training, and career development;
(c) Projected benefits to the tribe and
its members from tourism;
(d) Projected benefits to the tribe and
its members from the proposed uses of
the increased tribal income;
(e) Projected benefits to the
relationship between the tribe and 000-
Indian communities;
(f) Possible adverse impacts on the
tribe and its members and plans for
addressing those impacts;
(g) Distance of the land from the
location where the tribe maintains core
governmental functions;
(h) Evidence that the tribe owns the
land in fee or holds an option to acquire
the land at the sole discretion of the
tribe, or holds other contractual rights to
cause the lands to be transferred directly
to the United States;
(i) Evidence of historical connections,
if any, to the land; and
OJ Any other information that may
provide a basis for a Secretarial
Determination that the gaming
establishment would be in the best
interest of the tribe and its members,
including copies of any:
(1) Consulting agreements relating to
the proposed gaming establishment:
(2J Financial and loan agreements
relating to the proposed gaming
establishment; and
(3) Other agreements relative to the
purchase, acquisition, construction, or
financing of the proposed gaming
facility, or the acquisition of the land
where the facility will be located.
S 292.18 What Information must an
application contain on detrimental Impacts
to the surrounding community?
To satisfy the requirements of
~ 292.16(11. an application must contain
the following information on
detrimental impacts of the proposed
gaming establishment:
(a) Information regarding
environmental impacts and plans for
mitigating adverse impacts, including
information that allows the Secretary to
comply with the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA); e.g., an Environmental
Assessment (EA) or an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS);
(b) Reasonably anticipated impacts on
the social structure, infrastructure,
services, housing, community character,
and land use patterns of the
surrounding community;
(c) Impacts on the economic
development, income, and employment
of the surrounding community;
(d) Costs of impacts to the
surrounding community and
identification of sources of revenue to
mitigate them;
(e) Proposed programs, if any, for
compulsive gamblers and the sources of
funding; and
(fJ Any other information that may
provide a basis for a Secretarial
Determination that the gaming would
not be detrimental to the surrounding
community, including memoranda of
understanding and inter-governmental
agreements with affected local
governments.
Consultation
S 292.19 How will the Regional Director
conduct the consultation process?
(a) The Regional Director will send a
letter that meets the requirements in
~ 292.20 and that solicits comments
within a 60-day period to each of the
following:
(1) Appropriate State and local
officials; and
(2) Officials of nearby tribes.
(b) Upon written request. the Regional
Director may extend the 60~day
comment period for an additional 30
days.
tc) After the close of the consultation
period, the Regional Director must:
(1) Submit a copy of the consultation
comments to the applicant tribe;
(2) Allow the tribe to address or
resolve any issues raised in the
responses to the consultation letters;
(d) The applicant tribe must submit
written comments, if any, to the
Regional Director within 60 days of
receipt ofthe consultation comments;
and
(e) On written request from the
applicant tribe, the Regional Director
may extend the 60-day comment period
in paragraph (d) of this section for an
additional 30 days.
S292.20 What Information must the
consultation letter Include?
(a) The consultation letter required by
~ 292.19(a) must:
(1) Describe or show the location of
the proposed gaming establishment;
(2J Provide information on the
proposed scope of gaming; and
(3) Include other information that may
be relevant to a specific proposal, such
as the size of the proposed gaming
establishment, if known.
(b) The consultation letter must
request recipients to submit comments
on the following areas within 60 days of
receiving the letter:
(1) Information regarding
environmental impacts on the
surrounding community and plans for
mitigating adverse impacts;
(2) Reasonably anticipated impacts on
the social structure, infrastructure.
services, housing, community character,
and land use patterns of the
surrounding community;
58775
(3) Impact on the economic
development, income, and employment
of the surrounding community;
(4) Costs of impacts to the
surrounding community and
identification of sources of revenue to
mitigate them;
(5) Proposed programs, if any, for
compulsive gamblers and the sources of
funding; and
(6) Any other information that may
provide a basis for a Secretarial
Determination that the proposed gaming
establishment is not detrimental to the
surrounding community.
Evaluation and Concurrence
S 292.21 How will the Secretary evaluate a
proposed gaming establishment?
(a) The Secretary will consider all the
information submitted under ~292.17 in
evaluating whether the proposed
gaming establishment is in the best
interest of the tribe and its members.
(b) The Secretary will consider all the
information submitted or developed
under ~292.18 and all the
documentation received under ~ 292.19
in evaluating whether the proposed
gaming establishment would not be
detrimental to the surrounding
community.
(c) If the Secretary makes an
unfavorable Secretarial Determination,
the Secretary will inform the tribe that
its application has been disapproved,
and set forth the reasons for the
disapprovaL
(d) If the Secretary makes a favorable
Secretarial Determination, the Secretary
will proceed under ~ 292.22.
S 292.22 How does the Secretary request
the Governor's concurrence?
(a) If the Secretary makes a favorable
Secretarial Determination, the Secretary
will send to the Governor of the State:
(1) A written notification of the
Secretarial Determination and Findings
of Fact supporting the determination;
(2) A copy of the entire application
record; and
(3) A request for the Governor's
concurrence in the Secretarial
Determination.
(b) If the Governor does not
affirmatively concur with the Secretarial
Determination:
(1) The land may not be used for
gaming;
(2) If the land is already held in trust,
the applicant tribe may use it for other
purposes; and
(3) If the land is proposed for trust
status, it may be taken into trust for non-
gaming uses after consideration of a
revised application.
(c) If the Governor does not respond
to the Secretary's request for
58776
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 193/Thursday, October 5, 2006/Proposed Rules
concurrence in the Secretarial
Determination within Oile year of the
date of the request, the Secretary may,
at the request of the applicant tribe or
the Governor, grant an extension of up
to 180 days.
(d) Uno extension is granted or if the
Governor does not respond during the
extension period, the applicant tribe
will be notified in writing that the
Secretarial Determination is no longer
valid and that its application is no
longer under consideration.
S 292.23 Can the public review the
application fOf a Secretarial Determination?
Subject to restrictions on disclosure
required by the Freedom of Information
Act (5 U.S.c. 5521. the Privacy Act (5
ns.c. 552a), and the Trade Secrets Act
(18 US.C. 1905), the tribe's application
and all supporting documents will be
available for review at the local BIA
agency or Regional Office having
administrative jurisdiction over the
land.
Information Collection
S 292.24 Do Information collections In this
part have Office of Management and Budget
approval?
The information collection
requirements in ~~292.16, 292.17, and
292.18 have been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The information collection
control number is 1076-0158. A Federal
agency may not collect or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control.
{FR Doc. E6--16490 Filed ID-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 431G-4N-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGOO!HllHl89l
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Lewes and Rehoboth Canal, Misplllion
River, DE
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
change the drawbridge operation
regulations of three Delaware
Department of Transportation (DelDOT)
bridges: The Savannah Road/SR 18
Bridge, at mile 1.7, in Lewes, the SR
14A Bridge, at mile 6.7, in Rehoboth,
and the S14 Bridge, at mile 11.0, across
Mispillion River at Milford, DE. This
proposal would allow the bridges to
open on signal if 24 hours advance
notice is given. This proposal would
provide longer advance notification for
vessel openings from 2 hours to 24
hours while still providing for the
reasonable needs of navigation.
OATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
November 20, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District,
Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA
23704-5004. The Fifth Coast Guard
District maintains the public docket for
this rulemaking. Comments and
material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth
Coast Guard District between 8 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge
Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard
District, at (757) 398-6222.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking CGD05-06-089,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81 2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
a return receipt, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
submittals received during the comment
period. We may change this proposed
rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to Commander
(obr), Fifth Coast Guard District at the
address under ADDRESSES explaining
why one would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time
and place announced by a later notice
in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
Delaware Department of
Transportation (DelDOT), who owns
and operates the Savannah Road/SR 18
Bridge, at mile 1.7, in Lewes, the SR
14A Bridge, at mile 6.7, in Rehoboth,
and the S14 Bridge, at mile 11.0, across
Mispillion River at Milford, requested
longer advance notification for vessel
openings from 2 hours to 24 hours for
the following reasons:
Lewes and Rehoboth Canal
In the closed-to~navigation position,
the Savannah Road/SR 18 Bridge, at
mile 1.7, in Lewes and the SR 14A
Bridge, at mile 6.7, in Rehoboth, have
vertical clearances of 15 feet and 16 feet,
above mean high water, respectively.
The existing operating regulations for
these drawbridges are set out in 33 CFR
117.239, which requires the bridges to
open on signal from May 1 through
October 31 from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and
from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. if at least two
hours notice is given. From November 1
through April 30, the draws shall open
if at least 24 hours notice given.
DelDOT provided information to the
Coast Guard about the conditions and
reduced operational capabilities of the
draw spans. Due to the infrequency of
requests for vessel openings of the
drawbridge for the past 10 years,
DelDOT requested to change the current
operating regulations by requiring the
draw spans to open on signal if at least
24 hours notice is given year-round.
Mispillion River
The 814 Bridge, at mile 11.0 in at
Milford, has a vertical clearance of five
feet, above mean high water, in the
closed-to-navigation position. The
existing regulation is listed at 33 CFR
117.241, which requires the bridge to
open on signal if at least two hours
notice is given. Due to the infrequency
of requests for vessel openings of the
drawbridge for the past 10 years,
DelDOT requested to change the current
operating regulations by requiring the
draw spans to open on signal if at least
24 hours notice is given year-round.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
Lewes and Rehoboth Canal
The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33
CFR 117.239, which governs the
Delaware highway bridges, at miles 1. 7
and 6.7, both at Rehoboth. The bridge
names, the statute mile points and the
localities in the paragraph would be
changed from the Delaware highway
bridges miles 2.0 and 7.0 both at
Rehoboth to the Savannah Road/SR18
Bridge, at mile 1.7, in Lewes and the
SR 14A Bridge, at mile 6.7, in