DOI SELF-GOVERNANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SGAC) …€¦ · DOI SGAC & Technical Workgroup Quarterly Meeting March 27-28, 2018 – Agenda Page 4 of 4 . Draft Agenda 3.15.2018 . 11:30

DOI SELF-GOVERNANCE

ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SGAC)

QUARTERLY MEETING

March 27-28,2018

Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

900 10th Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20001

Phone: (202) 739-2001

DOI Self-Governance Advisory Committee and Technical Workgroup Quarterly Meeting

Tuesday March 27, 2018

Wednesday March 28, 2018

Embassy Suites Washington DC - DC Convention Center 900-10th Street NW

Washington, DC 20001 Phone: (202) 739-2001

Table of Contents

1. SGAC Information

a. SGAC Agenda

b. 2018-2019 SGCE Calendar

c. SGAC Membership Matrix

d. SGAC Workgroup Assignment Matrix

2. SGAC Committee Business

a. January Quarterly Meeting Summary

3. OSG Update

a. DTLL 02-15-18 FTT Resched CT session and deadline (2)Executive Order No 13781

b. NPM-OFPSM-1 Construction Funding Allocation_FINAL_w.letterhead_footer_508P.L 144-

178

c. NPM-PROP-2 A1 GSA-leased Vehicles Annual Miles Utilization

Report_signed_w.footer_508

d. NPM-PROP-3 A1_GSA AutoChoice Vehicle Ordering Policy_signed_w.footer_508

4. Office of Indian Services Update

a. Native American Children’s Safety Act PL 114-165 b. P.L. 115-93, Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Consolidation Act of 2017

5. Legislative Update

a. Update

b. 12-7-2017 PL 477 Bill with President

6. Budget Update

a. TIBC Budget Update-Dave Conner

b. TIBC NCAI presentation on Presidents budget

7. Farm Bill a. Update b. Update2

8. SGAC Joint Discussion a. FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan (3-5-2018)

Draft Agenda 3.15.2018

DOI SELF-GOVERNANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE c/o Self-Governance Communication and Education

P.O. Box 1734, McAlester, OK 74501 Telephone (918) 302-0252 ~ Facsimile (918) 423-7639 ~ Website: www.tribalselfgov.org

DOI Self-Governance Advisory Committee and Technical Workgroup Quarterly Meeting

Tuesday, March 27, 2018 (8:30 am to 4:30 pm) Wednesday, March 28, 2018 (8:30am to 12:45 pm)

Embassy Suites

900 10th Street NW Washington, DC 20001 Phone: (202) 739-2001

AGENDA

March 27, 2018 (8:30am to 4:30pm)

Meeting of the SGAC and Technical Workgroup Members

8:30 am Tribal Caucus Facilitated by W. Ron Allen, Chairman/CEO, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe and Chairman, Department of Interior (DOI) Self-Governance Advisory Committee

(SGAC)

• DOI Strategic Plan (no consultation and material changes)

• DOI FY2019 President’s Budget Update

• AS-IA Nomination

• DOI Land into Trust Consultation Comment Deadline June 30, 2018 9:30 am Invocation Roll Call Introductions – (All Participants and Invited Guests) 9:45 am Opening Remarks

W. Ron Allen, Tribal Chairman/CEO, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe and Chairman, Self-Governance Advisory Committee (SGAC)

SGAC Committee Business

• Approval of Meeting Minutes (January 23-24, 2018) 10:00 am Office of Self-Governance Update

• OSG Update Sharee Freeman, Director, Office of Self-Governance, DOI 10:30 am Office of Indian Services Update

• Native American Children’s Safety Act PL 114-165

• P.L. 115-93, Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Consolidation Act of 2017

Hankie Ortiz, Deputy Bureau Director, Office of Indian Services, DOI 11:00 am 115TH Congress First Session Enacted Legislation

• P.L. 115-93, Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Consolidation Act of 2017 (signed 12/18/17)

• P.L. 115-97,Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (signed 12/22/17)

http://www.tribalselfgov.org/

DOI SGAC & Technical Workgroup Quarterly Meeting March 27-28, 2018 – Agenda Page 2 of 4


• U.S. Department of the Treasury - Tribal Treasury Advisory Committee Update


Geoff Strommer, Partner, Hobbs, Straus, Dean and Walker, LLP - Lloyd Miller, Partner, Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Miller and Monkman, LLP

11:15 am 115th Congress Second Session Pending Legislation

• The Practical Reforms and Other Goals to Reinforce the Effectiveness of Self-Governance and Self-Determination for Indians (Progress Act – the Title IV amendments), S.2515

o Mike Andrews, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel, SCIA (invited)

o Rhonda Harjo, Majority Deputy Chief Counsel, SCIA (invited) o Alex Ortiz, Legislative Director, The Honorable Don Young (R-

AK-1) (invited)

• Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act

• S. 1870, Securing Urgent Resources Vital to Indian Victim Empowerment Act (SURVIVE Act) (Hoeven-R-ND)

• S. 1953, Tribal Law and Order Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2017 (Hoeven-R-ND) H.R. 3864 (Pearce-R-NM), S. 1895 (Udall-D-NM)

• Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2017 (may be included in Omnibus)

• Remote Sales Tax Legislation H.R.2193 / Indian Tax Provisions (may be included in the Omnibus)

• Carcieri (Gun Lake Case)

• Farm Bill Reauthorization S.2489

• Tribal Nutrition Improvement Act of 2018 S. 2409 o Jennifer Romero, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel,

SCIA(invited) o Anthony Sedillo, Minority Senior Policy Adviser, SCIA (invited)

• Tribal Amber Alert Bill S.772 Geoff Strommer, Partner, Hobbs, Straus, Dean and Walker, LLP Phil Baker-Shenk, Partner, Holland & Knight LLP Lloyd Miller, Partner, Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Miller and Monkman, LLP 12:00 pm Lunch 1:30 pm Budget Update

• FY2018 Appropriations Update

• FY2019 Budget Status

• FY2020 Budget Formulation & Surveys Update

• Tribal Interior Budget Committee Update

• Identify all Funding Streams for SG Base Funding Dave Conner, Director, Natural Resources, Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians Jack Sullivan, Acting Director, Office of Budget Management, BIA Gail Veney, Program Analyst, Office of Budget Management, BIA Amber Ebarb, Budget/Policy Analyst, National Congress of American Indians



2:30 pm Keeping Our Children Safe in School

• FY2018 Comprehensive School Safety Initiative US DOJ OJP Update

• Create and Maintain Healthy Learning Environments for kids

• Improve Safety of Schools, Students and Communities

• Addressing School Shootings, Bullying, and Violence Eugenia Tyner-Dawson, Senior Advisor for Tribal Affairs, Office of

Justice Programs, Department of Justice Tony Dearman, Director, Bureau of Indian Education, DOI (invited) Ron Lessard, Acting Executive Director, White House Initiative on

American Indian and Alaska Native Education (WHIAIANE) (invited)

3:00 pm U.S. Department of Transportation – NPR Update Tribal Representatives 3:30 pm Farm Bill Update Maria Givens, Policy Analyst, National Congress of American Indians 4:00 pm 2018 Annual Tribal Self-Governance Consultation Conference 4:15 pm Preparation of Issues to Discuss with Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs 4:30 pm Adjourn Meeting

Wednesday, March 28, 2018 (8:30 am to 12:45 pm) Meeting of the SGAC & Technical Workgroup with Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian

Affairs (Only Members of the SGAC and Proxies to be seated at the table)

8:30 am Welcome & Introductions


8:45 am SGAC Joint Discussion with Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs John Tahsuda, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary – IA, DOI (invited) Bryan Rice, Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, DOI (invited)

• Strategic Plan all agencies within DOI

• Reorganization

• DOI Budget

• Follow-up Issues SGAC Quarterly Meeting January 23-24, 2018 New Business

9:45 am Break 10:00 am SGAC Joint Discussion with Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs

11:30 pm SGAC Members Executive Session with Acting Assistant Secretary -

Indian Affairs



11:30 pm Technical Workgroup Work Session

• Agenda Topics for March SGAC Quarterly Meeting Jennifer McLaughlin, SGAC, Tribal Technical Co-Chair, Self-Governance Legislative Associate, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe

Ken Reinfeld, SGAC, Federal Technical Co-Chair, OSG Senior Policy Analyst 12:45 pm Adjourn the SGAC Meeting

2018 Calendar

Date Event Location

January 23-25, 2018

1st Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

March 27-29, 2018 2nd Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

April 22-26, 2018 Tribal Self-Governance Annual Consultation Conference

Albuquerque Convention Center Albuquerque, NM

July 17-19, 2018 3rd Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

September 11-12, 2018 (Tentative)

Tribal Self-Governance Strategy Session

Doubletree Downtown St. Paul, Minnesota

October 1-4, 2018 4th Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

2019 Proposed Calendar

Date Event Location

January 22-24, 2019

1st Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

March 26-28, 2019 2nd Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

April 21-25, 2019 Tribal Self-Governance Annual Consultation Conference

Grand Traverse Resort and Spa, Traverse City, Michigan

July 16-18, 2019 3rd Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

September 10-12, 2019 Tribal Self-Governance Strategy Session

TBD

October 1-3, 2019 4th Quarterly Meeting Washington, DC-Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

DOI SELF-GOVERNANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE c/o Self-Governance Communication & Education

PO BOX 1734 ~ McAlester, OK 74502 Telephone (918) 302-0252 – Facsimile (918) 423-7639 – Website: www.tribalselfgov.org

Page 1 of 6

SGAC MEMBERSHIP LIST (July 27, 2017)

AREA MEMBER (Name/Title/Organization) STATUS CONTACT INFORMATION Alaska Robert Keith, President

Native Village of Elim

Primary PO Box 948 Nome, AK 99762 P: (907) 890-3737 F: (907) 890-3738 E: [email protected]

William Micklin, 1st Vice President Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska

Alternate 320 W Willoughby Avenue, Suite 300 Juneau, AK 99801 C: (619) 368-4382 E: [email protected]

Eastern Cheryl Andrews-Maltais, Chairwoman Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah)

Primary 20 Black Brook Road Aquinnah, MA 02535-1546 P: (508) 645-9265 E: [email protected]

VACANT

Alternate

Eastern Oklahoma

Bill John Baker, Principal Chief Karen Ketcher, Proxy Cherokee Nation

Primary PO Box 948 Tahlequah, OK 74465 P: (918) 772-4130 E: [email protected]

Gary Batton, Chief Mickey Peercy, Proxy Choctaw Nation

Alternate PO Box 1210 Durant, OK 74702-1210 P: (580) 924-8280 ext. 2322 E: [email protected]

Midwest

Annette Johnson, Treasurer Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians

Primary PO BOX 550 Red Lake, MN 56671 P: (218) 679-3341 E: [email protected]

Jane Rohl, Tribal Council Secretary Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa & Chippewa Indians

Alternate 2605 N West Bay Shore Drive Peshawbestown, MI 49682-9275 P: (231) 534-7494 E: [email protected]

Northwest

W. Ron Allen, Tribal Chairman/CEO Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe SGAC Chairman

Primary 1033 Old Blyn Highway Sequim, WA 98382 P: (360) 681-4621 F: (360) 681-4643 E: [email protected]

Tyson Johnston, Council Member Quinault Indian Nation

Alternate P.O. Box 189 (1214 Aalis Drive) Taholah, WA 98382 P: (360) 276-8211 F: (360) 276-4191 E: [email protected]

Pacific

Ryan Jackson, Chairman Hoopa Valley Tribe

Primary PO Box 1348 Hoopa, CA 95546 E: [email protected]

Scott Sullivan, Council Secretary Tolowa Dee-ni’ Nation

Alternate 140 Rowdy Creek Road Smith River, CA 95567 P: (707) 487-9255 ext. 1224 E: [email protected]

SGAC & Technical Work Group Membership List (July 27, 2017)

Page 2 of 6

Rocky Mountain

Beau Mitchell, Council Member Chippewa Cree Tribe

Primary PO Box 544 Box Elder, MT 59521 P: (406) 395-5705 ext. 205 E: [email protected]

VACANT

Alternate

Southern Plains

John Barrett, Jr., Chairman Rhonda Butcher, Director Citizen Potawatomi Nation

Primary Proxy

1601 S. Gordon Cooper Dr. Shawnee, OK 74801 P: (405) 275-3121 ext. 1157 F: (405) 275-4658 E: [email protected]

Kay Rhoads, Principal Chief Sac and Fox Nation

Alternate 920883 S Hwy 99, Building A Stroud, OK 74079 P: (918) 968-3526 ext. 1004 F: (918) 968-1142 E: [email protected]

Southwest

Ruben A. Romero, Governor Taos Pueblo Shawn Duran SGAC, Vice Chairwoman

Primary P.O. Box 1846 Taos, NM 87571 P: (575) 758-8626 ext. 115 F: (575) 758-8831 E: [email protected]

Chris Gomez, Lt. Governor Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

Alternate 119 S. Old Pueblo Road El Paso, TX 79907 P: (915) 859-8053 E: [email protected]

Western

Delia M. Carlyle, Council Member Ak-Chin Indian Community

Primary 42507 W. Peters & Nall Road Maricopa, AZ 85138 P: (520) 568-1019 F: (520) 568-1001 E: [email protected]

VACANT Alternate



Page 3 of 6

SGAC TECHNICAL WORKGROUP TRIBAL TECHS

AREA MEMBER (Name/Title/Organization) STATUS CONTACT INFORMATION Alaska Bruce Baltar

Bristol Bay Native Association Tech Rep PO Box 130

Dillingham, AK 99576 P: (907) 842-5257 F: (907) 842-5932 E: [email protected]

Martha Whitman-Kassock Association of Village Council Presidents

Tech Rep P.O. Box 219 (101 Main Street) Bethel, AK 99559 P: (907) 543-7371 F: (907) 543-7379 E: [email protected]

John Bioff Kawerak, Inc.

Tech Rep PO Box 948 Nome, Alaska 99762 P: (907) 443-4336 E: [email protected]

Eastern Dee Sabattus United South and Eastern Tribes

Tech Rep 711 Stewarts Pike Ferry, Suite 100 Nashville, TN 37214 E: [email protected]

Elizabeth Malerba United South and Eastern Tribes

Tech Rep 400 North Capitol Street, NW Suite 585 Washington, DC 20001 E: [email protected]

Eastern Oklahoma

Melanie Fourkiller Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma

Tech Rep PO Box 17 Cookson, OK 74427 P: (918) 457-5763 F: (918) 458-6157 E: [email protected]

Rhonda Farrimond Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma

Tech Rep P.O. Drawer 1210 Durant, OK 74702-1210 P: (580) 924-8280 ext. 2322 F: (580) 920-3138 E: [email protected]

Midwest

John Mojica Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe

Tech Rep 43408 Oodena Drive Onamia, MN 56359 P: (320) 532-7479 F: (320) 532-7505 E: [email protected]

Dave Conner Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians

Tech Rep 24200 Council Street Red Lake, MN 56671 E: [email protected]

Jay Sam Little River Band of Ottawa Indians

Tech Rep 375 River Street Manistee, MI 49660 E: [email protected]

Chris Johns Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin

Tech Rep PO Box 365 Oneida, WI 54155 P: (920) 660-2335 F: (920) 869-4040 E: [email protected]


Page 4 of 6

AREA MEMBER (Name/Title/Organization) STATUS CONTACT INFORMATION Northwest Jennifer McLaughlin

Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe Tribal Technical Workgroup Co-Chair

Tech Rep 1033 Old Blyn Highway Sequim, WA 98382 P: (360) 912-2241 E: [email protected]

Eugena R Hobucket Quinault Indian Nation

Tech Rep PO BOX 189 Taholah, WA 98587 P: (360) 276-8211 F: (360) 276-8201 E: [email protected]

Pacific Danny Jordan Hoopa Valley Tribe

Tech Rep PO Box 1348 Hoopa, California 95546 E: [email protected]

Briannon Fraley Tolowa Dee-ni’ Nation

Tech Rep 140 Rowdy Creek Road Smith River, CA 95567 E: [email protected]

Rocky Mountain Ruth Swaney Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes

Tech Rep PO Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 P: (406) 275-2741 F: (406) 275-2806 E: [email protected]

Southern Plains

Kasie Nichols Citizen Band of Potawatomi Indians

Tech Rep 1601 S. Gordon Cooper Dr. Shawnee, OK 74801 P: (405) 275-3121 ext. 1285 F: (405) 275-0198 E: [email protected]

Southwest

Clyde M. Romero, Jr. Taos Pueblo

Tech Rep P.O. Box 1846 Taos, N.M. 87571 P: (575) 758-8626 ext. 111 E: [email protected]

Linda Austin Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

Tech Rep 119 S. Old Pueblo Rd. El Paso, TX 79907 P: (915) 859-7913 ext. 7725 E: [email protected]

Washington DC C. Juliet Pittman SENSE Incorporated

Tech Rep Upshaw Place 1130 -20th Street, NW; Suite 220 Washington, DC 20036 P: (202) 628-1151 F: (202) 638-4502 E: [email protected]

Cyndi Ferguson SENSE Incorporated

Tech Rep Upshaw Place 1130 -20th Street, NW; Suite 220 Washington, DC 20036 P: (202) 628-1151 F: (603) 754-7625 C: (202) 638-4502 E: [email protected]

Western Robert Scabby Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community

Tech Rep 1005 East Osborn Road Scottsdale, AZ 85256 E: [email protected]

Karen Fierro Ak-Chin Indian Community

Tech Rep 42507 W. Peters & Nall Road Maricopa, AZ 85138 P: (520) 568-1036 E: [email protected]



Page 5 of 6

Federal Partners

NAME CONTACT INFORMATION Sharee M. Freeman DOI Office of Self-Governance

1951 Constitution Avenue NW Room 355 Washington, D.C. 20240 P: (202) 219-0244 F: (202) 219-4246 E: [email protected]

Ken Reinfeld DOI Office of Self-Governance

1951 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20240 P: (202) 219-0244 F: (202) 219-1404 E: [email protected]

Danny Santiago DOI Office of Self-Governance

1951 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20240 P: (202) 219-0244 E: [email protected]

Tyler Scribner DOI Office of Self-Governance

1951 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20240 E: [email protected]

Rufina Villicana DOI Office of Self-Governance

1951 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20240 E: [email protected]

Matthew Kallappa DOI Office of Self-Governance Northwest Regional Office

Northwest Regional Office 911 Northeast 11th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97232 E: [email protected]

Gordon Smith DOI Office of Self-Governance Northwest Regional Office

Northwest Regional Office 911 Northeast 11th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97232 E: [email protected]


Page 6 of 6

Additional Technical Resources

SGAC Mailing Address:

c/o Self-Governance Communication and Education PO BOX 1734 ~ McAlester, OK 74502

Telephone (918) 302-0252 – Facsimile (918) 423-7639 – Website: www.tribalselfgov.org

NAME CONTACT INFORMATION Phil Baker-Shenk Holland & Knight, LLP

2099 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Washington D.C., 20006 P: (202) 955-3000 F: (202) 955-5564 E: [email protected]

Geoff Strommer Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, LLP

806 S.W. Broadway, Ste. 900 Portland, OR 97205 P: (503) 242-1745 F: (503) 242-1072 E: [email protected]

Lloyd Miller Sonosky Chambers, Sachse, Miller & Munson, LLP

900 West Fifth Avenue, Ste. 700 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 P: (907) 258-6377 F: (907) 272-8332 E: [email protected]

Matthew Jaffe Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Miller & Munson

E: [email protected]

Jim Glaze Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Miller & Munson


Steve Osborne Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, LLP

2120 L St. NW, Ste. 700 Washington, DC 20037 P: (202) 822-8282 F: (202) 296-8834 E: [email protected]

Brian Upton Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes

PO Box 278 Pablo, MT 59855 P: (406) 675-2700 F: (406) 675-4665 E: [email protected]

Terri Gonzales Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community


Crystal Banuelos Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community


Tammy Wingo Kaw Nation

PO Box 50 Kaw City, OK 74641 P: (580) 269-2552 F: (580) 269-2294 E: [email protected]

Sonja Diggs Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma

PO Drawer 1210 Durant, OK 74701 P: (580) 924-8280 ext. 2351 F: (580) 924-3854 E: [email protected]

Leonard Fineday, Legal Director Leech Lake


Caroline Mayhew Hobbs Straus


Joni Costello, Accountant Taos Pueblo Tribal Government Operations


DOI SELF-GOVERNANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE c/o Self-Governance Communication & Education Tribal Consortium

PO BOX 1734 ~ McAlester, OK 74502 Telephone (918) 302-0252 ~ Facsimile (918) 423-7639 ~ Website: www.tribalselfgov.org

SGAC TECHNICAL WORKGROUP ASSIGNMENT MATRIX

Quarterly Meeting January 2018

Technical Workgroup Co-Chairs: Jennifer McLaughlin, Tribal Co-Chair Kenneth Reinfeld, Federal Co-Chair Assignment Person(s)

Responsible Date Task Originated

Status

1. Develop a Self-Governance Educational tool for new members of the Administration

SGCE October 26, 2017

2. Draft recommendations for improving the budget distribution process/Greenbook

Budget Workgroup October 25, 2016 On hold pending TIBC Budget Subcommittee Budget Process Workgroup Recommendations

3. Host call to discuss follow up on /BIA Strategic Plan (these changes will support the DOI Strategic Plan)

Jennifer McLaughlin Pitt Clyde Terra

March 30, 2017 On hold – pending DOI initiation of consultation.

4. Develop a Self-Governance Legislative Package for Tribes to download.

SENSE & SGCE March 30, 2017

5. Letter to Secretary Zinke object to the Reorganization Effort because the plan has not been shared with the Tribes so we do not know the impact the changes may have within the Department for Tribes; the Department has failed to engage with Tribes through consultation; and Tribes want to provide input before the Plan is implemented

January 23, 2018

6. Letter to House and Senate Appropriators – Do not authorize legislation or allow for any legislative riders to allow the Department of the Interior to Reorganize without first engaging in Tribal Consultation

SENSE Jenn

January 23, 2018

7. Letter to Natural Resource Committee and SCIA Calling on the Chairman to hold a Hearing on Secretary Zinke’s

SENSE Jenn

January 23, 2018

http://www.tribalselfgov.org/

SGAC Technical Workgroup Assignment Matrix Page 2 of 3

2

Reorganization Plan for the Department of the Interior. Include the fact that Tribes have not seen the Plan nor has the agency engaged in Consultation with Tribes on the Plan

8. Letter OST Special Trustee – Trust Audits/ Deputy needs to coordinate with OST and staff to cease and desist from issuing audit findings on language not included in FAs. Express concern over continuing to issue findings if a Tribe does not agree with the language.

January 23, 2018

9. Letter Proposal to Move OST Function

January 23, 2018

10. Letter to Secretary Zinke – Land-into-Trust Articulate the Key Points

Geoff / Jennifer January 23, 2018

11. Letter DOI Strategic Plan – Object to the current Plan for Failure to consult with Tribes before submitting a plan that affects the Departments commitment to our agenda and Note there was not even an opportunity for Public Comment; Request a Clear Commitment to Advance the Tribes SG Agenda and how it interfaces with other Departments and Agencies

January 23, 2018

12. Farm Bill – Share information with SG Tribes – there is a lot of overlap between Interior and USDA on programs that serve Tribes. Start to identify champions in the House and Senate that would pursue a SG Initiative in USDA; prepare a cheat sheet on what the bill is seeking to accomplish; how SG can offset these goals; prepare letter to committee of jurisdiction how SG has positive benefits in these fiscally challenged times and the Congressional [and Administration] agenda towards devolution of programs and resources; want Tribes included as

Phil Bakershenk Geoff Strommer

January 23, 2018

SGAC Technical Workgroup Assignment Matrix Page 3 of 3

3

“eligible”

Insert a “Congressional Update” Link on SGCE Website

January 23, 2018

13. Letter to Secretary of Transportation – Object to the process and challenge the scope of work – concerns over the contract awarded to the University of VA to provide technical assistance – no Tribal consultation and the individuals providing the TA do not have experience with or knowledge of Tribes or their needs; Request a comprehensive evaluation of the contractors since the contract has been finalized; contractors need to consult with Tribes regarding implementation;

January 23, 2018

Invite Anthony Bedell and Erin Henley, DOT to Annual Conference

SENSE

14. Letter DOT “VOLPE” contractor – reference examples to show 30 years success of SG; invite to Annual Conference

SENSE January 23, 2018

15. Letter John McCain Staff – Honoring at the Annual SG Conference

January 23, 2018

Self-Governance Communication & Education Tribal Meeting

Tuesday, January 23, 2018 (8:00 am to 5:00 pm) Wednesday, January 24, 2018 (8:00am to 5:00 pm)

Embassy Suites

900 10th Street NW Washington, DC 20001 Phone: (202) 739-2001

AGENDA

January 23-24, 2018 (8:00am to 5:00pm)

Meeting of the TSGAC/SGAC and Technical Workgroup Members

Introductions Opening Remarks Legislative Update Mary Pavel-Sonosky Chambers, Geoff Strommer-Hobbs, Strauss Pavel – Congress kept government open til February 8th CHIP authorized for 6 years but SDPI wasn’t reauthorized – Mullin assured it would be dealt with before it lapses at the end of March. We were left off and no one walked to the floor to bring it up. None of friends on the Hill acknowledged it. Strommer – SDPI was reauthorized a number of times as part of Medicaid package but over past 12 months the efforts have been to tack it onto CHIP. Pavel – It was created in the same bill as CHIP and money to pay for it came from tobacco tax. CHIP is viewed as one health issue. It was part of the Doc fix. SDPI certain it will get reauthorized but not clear if it will be one year or two years. Public Safety and Justice – bipartisan support – 477 program was enacted and the deadline for the report is 2018. Had some exciting conversations with Senator Daines staff – 477 for Department of Justice Programs. She is looking at these issue holistically and reformulating the plan similar to 477. Survive Act – created a 5% set aside VOCA funds. Stand the greatest chance of that going through. Goodlatte is a challenger and opponent ISSA is a big proponent of it but he is retiring. Tribal Comment – Survive Act has competitive grant language built into the legislation and no one acknowledged it wouldn’t serve every applicant so it will have the same issue as the current competitive grant process. Pull out competitive grant language to give us a foothold to fight it later. Some will get quite a bit and some will get nothing. TLOA Reauthorization – BOP Program has expired and there needs to be discussion why more Tribes didn’t take advantage of the program. It may be that people don’t want their folks that far away from home. Savannah’s Act – missing and exploited children – Cheney said there was a lapse in reporting and he made it his mission to gather that data. We have the same challenge because the data is not there and is not being collected. Tribal Comment– DOJ meeting – when there is a missing person it doesn’t even break down if it is male and female – do you know if Indian – do you know if they are under the age of 18?

They said they don’t have sufficient data to understand the trafficking problem so it is a big problem to communicate how drastic it is. Pavel – Data collection on missing and murdered people is not there and we need to make it our focus. Tribal Comment– Disturbing don’t have the data because the issue is alarming. Pavel – We need to focus on how we collect that data and Savannah’s Act make them collect that data. Pavel–Expand the VAWA jurisdiction to acts of sexual violence against anyone, sex trafficking and stalking. Tribal Comment – Common logic if violence against Indian women there is violence against children too. Tribal Comment – It does affect the children because if not physically attacked they are observing it and it is having a psychological impact. We cannot silo these programs. If talk about domestic violence it impacts the entire household. Pavel– VA Choice Reform Bill Rule 14th to the Floor and it includes what they believed were protections to Tribal MOU but some agreements were under IHCIA and savings clause in the bill doesn’t protect those MOUs. We need to fix this but there is no timeline for when it will come up on the Senate floor. The Chairman can put together a managers amendment to correct it. CHOICE Bill is challenging because it is running out of money. Strommer– 477 passed and it is a significant piece of legislation. It turns the 477 into a permanent program and expands the agencies involved so it has a broad impact. It also builds in concepts familiar to all of us for review of plans and makes clear incorporation of the plan. Next steps – all agencies identified in the bill have to within one year negotiate an MOU that spells out how they will collaborate. February 14th Hankie Ortiz will hold a meeting for agencies and Tribes (kick off meeting) development and signing of the MOU. Spoke to Hankie last week – Bureau enact regulations within 180 days but may rethink how they do it because no statutory timeline. OSG– Is the expansion mandatory or at their discretion? Strommer – It is mandatory and there are more tools to force agencies to participate because you can force a final offer. Tribal Comment – We have both SG and 477 and it sounds like they will negotiate at a higher level before we have a chance to weigh in. Strommer– Meeting on the 14th will be the meeting that kicks off the development of the MOU and that issue should be raised. Check with the 477 workgroup because Tribes are invited. There needs to be close coordination between 477 and SG Tribes participating in the workgroup. OSG – Initially worked on 477 at the beginning – we went out to the Tribes and asked them what would work for you in terms of consolidation. We had a list – so maybe come ready to present to each agency the programs you want included.

Strommer – The Tribal workgroup is the right group to take it on because they have been at the forefront of these conversations. Tribal Comment – Have grant folks weigh in as well. Strommer- Title IV – Last year came close but state fish and wildlife agencies challenged the legislation and it triggered a process that resulted in 8-9 months of negotiation to come to terms with the issues and developed language and towards end of session we had a version of the bill we could live with. Staffer on House Resources Committee wanted to strip out the BOR provision and we were not willing to cross that line. Bill died at end of session. This session slow to kick back up because the Senate said unless meaningful traction on House side we are wasting our efforts so go to the House side. Staffer has now moved up to the House Speakers Office – last 6-8 months reached out to a number of House Republican Offices and we have interest by several Mullin, young, LaMalfa. Tribal Comment– If get LaMalfa to respond and get it out of the Committee we go to Cole and say we need your help to deal with the Speaker. Strommer – It depends on who we get as a champion. Young has been asked to introduce it and we have been asked to find others. We will still have a problem with Kiel – Cole staff indicated would go to bat for us. Senate staff is in the final stages of working on a bill. Hopefully, that bill will be done quickly and introduced. That is where we are now. During the last Congress the bill was scored with a zero. In conversations with SCIA Majority staff they said in April holding a Hearing that focuses in on the Self-Determination Act with package of amendments to clean up Title IV would be good. Pavel– Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act passed the House as an S bill and can come back over to the Senate under a truncated schedule. There is talk to bring it to the floor during NCAI but need 60 votes (McCain and Cocheran). Murrays Office is still open. Tribal Comment– Labor has bigger fish to fry than Indian labor so I cannot see them going ballistic on those two Senators. Tribal Comment– Jobs for Tribes Act – introduced week after Thanksgiving Pavel– NAHASDA was reported out without the Native Hawaiians Block Grant Reauthorization (Senator Lee’s challenge) because he thinks it is a racial classification. Congresswoman Moore was not happy. VA Tribe Recognition Bill was sent to the President this month. Budget Update George Bearpaw, Director, Office of Budget Management, Indian Affairs Jeannine Brooks, DOI Amber Ebarb, Budget/Policy Analyst, National Congress of American Indians

• CR til February 8 - This could all come to a head again on February 8th because Immigration not resolved and no top line agreement on raising the caps on defense and non-defense spending.

• Letter – Take higher levels of the House and the Senate for FY2018 Budget. Tribal Comment – Is the President’s Budget projected to come out on time? Bearpaw – February 5th for rollout of President’s Budget.

Tribal Comment – Big battle on discretionary side Republicans want more money for Defense. Ebarb- Last Agreement – raise for both Defense and non-Defense. Tribal Comment – Where is the budget for the wall in Homeland Security? If they up it for Homeland Security it needs to come from somewhere else. Bearpaw – Comp table $3.4 billion dollars we had to use for our rescission amount came out of TMIP amounts. President’s Budget -375 million. 2018 CR $2.8 All payments have been made to the regions and Tribes through this CR. Sometimes withhold money for reductions – if President zeros out program we need to withhold the amount until it is restored. Brooks – Across the Board OMB issues it every year with a CR. They have us hold a percentage back so if it ends up a lower budget we don’t have to recoup the funds. Tribal Comment – These CR in the same way other departments and agencies struggle – CR do not let you get things done and it can be detrimental to the communities. 2019 – Embargoed and working with OMB and the Department to come up with the numbers to put forward. It is a work in progress right now. You can expect the same as you did for 2018. Tribal Comment– Anna and Aaron have been visiting Indian country. It is good to get them out so they can see what is going on. In the Northwest we focused in on fisheries and we think it had a good imprint on them. They will probably schedule another visit this year. FY2020 – Working with the Regions to get information for the budget process. Spreadsheet shows the information we got in and not as good as we hoped. PDF format may have been easier for folks to fill out but it has tripled our workload on our end and we are going to push things back out to the region for that reason. We got better quality data but it has been a whole lot of work to do it. IT group recommended a computer based service. Not sure we will come up with a good report on unfunded. On preferred program total submission of 155. A few more came in over the weekend. The methodologies didn’t change – we are looking at the tool to get the data. Tribal Comment– Budget Officers need to be involved in the process. We always press for the regional directors to be at TIBC but Budget driven so it is important that the budget officers are involved. Brooks – Senior Management agreed to Tribal involvement and originally no budget officers and said you can have 4 – problem is all the other regions will push for it so AK can come too. We need a product out of the workgroup to show it is working and things are getting done. Tribal Comment– If we don’t have the unmet need backdrop it is problematic. It also helps BIA/Tribal relations. Metrics has to pass the red-faced test. Your office and the budget officers are the ones who will get it done. Bearpaw– We are on the right track but the system we use to collect this information has to improve. Tribal Comment– How did you guys decide what got included and what didn’t. Brooks – Looked at Tribal programs and if something was inherently federal we didn’t include it and if we didn’t have a measure or variable to collect the data we didn’t include it. Tribal Comment– If Tribes could weight their response initially it may help you. Brooks– It will go automatically. We are looking for ways to simplify it on both ends. Unfunded will be even more of a nightmare. Tribal Comment– One of the areas that is still perplexing is how we prioritize the SG component to the budget. How are you guys handling that including coordinating with OSG. We have a line item – our FA and inside that are all of our programs so when we prioritize programs when it comes to SG are we being forced to break them back down? Brooks– Yes Tribal Comment-Sharee do we have it broken down so we can track it and put it in the right context. Tribal Comment– When we did ours we went through AFA and those are the top programs we started with but the problem is Bureau sends grant money that is grant funded. We didn’t put it on our preferred programs because it is not base funded. If you are SG there is no advantage to prioritize program not TPA because no benefit to include it. Smaller programs will never be prioritized. The only way for SG Tribes to narrative best interest is to only prioritize TPA.

Discussion - Annual Conference - 30th Anniversary (Albuquerque, NM, April 22-26, 2018) Honor the original leaders in both BIA and Indian Health Service. Get pictures of previous leaders. Send list of names to Rhonda Fairrmond. Honor John

McCain. (Invite Will Mayo, Ed Thomas, Bill Sinclair) Develop pins. SGAC Business - Nominations Muskogee name for Chief James Floyd as the Alternate (for Choctaw) Ysleta del Sur Pueblo new Governor Taos Pueblo Gilbert Suazo Senior new Governor Thank you for serving on our Committee – Chris, Rubin Romero and Mickey Peercy Office of Self-Governance Update Sharee Freeman, Director, Office of Self-Governance, DOI

• Charles Addington new Bureau Director for the Office of Justice Services

• James Schock BIA Southern Plains

• Other Indian Affairs Designations and Announcements –

• OSG budget deficit no travel money asked for extra 200,000 to conference and meetings to bring Tribes on board. Deadline to apply for 2019 is March 1st. Running deficit in salary – ok for 2019 but right now struggling. Other option if Tribes close by can go and chat with them but some Tribes prefer to have the feds there.

• CR #1 $76 million in funding received

• CSC 2017 data (51 Tribes have not yet responded)

• TIWAHE – funded and completed for prior years (asked Tribes to identify TIWAHE dollars)

• Indian Trader Regulations – Series of sessions held in 2017 and Tahsuda will make policy decisions / comments are at website listed in booklet

• Strategic Plan OSG – two performance measures and one eliminated for 2018 no more audit measure – whether complete audit management decisions within 180 days.

• Larger strategic plan OSG is not in the mix on it.

• Secretarial Order 3342 – Required DOI to produce an Annual Report of co-management opportunities with Tribes.

• Indian Trust Asset Reform – briefing paper on the Act Title III Single entity appraisal. Develop an FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions for Tribes.

• Trust Evaluations language – battle with OSG and OST regarding Trust Evaluations – Tribe reviewed by OST and downgraded because no language in FA – language for most Tribes is in the compact. OST decided to downgrade their rating of the Tribe because it was not in the Agreement. OSG said if want special language you need it to be in the Guidance and present it at the SG Conference and hear from Tribes if it will work. OST continued to downgrade Tribes. Sharee wrote another response and Tribal Chairman drafted his own letter and submitted it to OST. Makes no sense to downgrade Tribes on the language when they are not even doing Annual Reviews.

Tribal Comment – If OST exercises the option to come in April and Tribes disagree what is the option? Freeman- Last best offer or they can sit at the negotiation table. Muskogee is in the process for preparing for their evaluation. They want to identify what functions the Tribe takes and is doing with the money that the Tribe took. They feel like what the Tribe is doing is a small part and they have all the money. What is it that the Tribe is doing with the trust money they received? Tribal Comment – some regions wont give up the function and some say it is inherent federal functions.

• Tort Claims – Law Enforcement Officer would have to be certified. They are certified but they are not BIA certified. They want them to have a federal certification. Workgroup has to deal with it. Tribes have to go through training to get the coverage.

Tribal Comment – It is a waste of money. Tribal Comment – How is the coverage different than the coverage we give to healthcare providers? Freeman – It isn’t. Tribal Comment – What is the difference between certifications? Freeman – One is state and one is federal. Tribal Comment – BIA training also allows you to get coverage with Homeland Security Freeman– Consultations on ITARA – Draft Guidance Under Native American Childrens Safety Act on background checks; Tribal Resilience Funding Proposals; OSG Annual Report 2015 in Review and in Policy Management and Budget. SGAC Joint Discussion with Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs John Tahsuda, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary – IA, DOI Bryan Rice, Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, DOI Review of Priority Issues (see list above): Chairman Allen provided an overview of the issues and concerns. Tahsuda-The DOI Strategic Plan includes several pieces and we’ve been asked to help facilitate and take a larger role in looking at these changes. The re-organization is a big picture idea. The DOI hasn’t had this kind of re-organization from the top down in over 100 years. A chance to provide better services, large Department covers 12 time zones; and it’s time to take a look at how the Department is organized. Right now, every Bureau does their own NEPA; could be more efficient. We have a lot of overlap in the Department as far as capital, human resources and look at a better way to provide services to avoid overlap; more efficiencies in operations. Look at office locations. From my perspective, there are huge advantages to be made by BIA if there is better coordination. This is a large effort and will take time. We have to sell it to our own people (staff) at DOT; have to sell it externally to our stakeholders. We are still in the early stages. Mr. Tahsuda referenced the recent map of the new BIA Regional Offices being proposed. Tribal Comment – Our concern is that the Secretary has laid out this plan with Tribal consultation. Tribes don’t want to be re-organized. We’re not rocks, we’re not water. Tahsuda- stated that there will be consultation and there will need to be buy-in both internally and externally. A couple of things to keep in mind, we want to hear how Tribes will be impacted. As far as organizational re-structuring, there will still be agency offices; 90% of the people you deal with will be there. There is big “R” and small “r” reorganization that the Department is trying to do. We are still having internal discussions. These discussions include all senior leadership; we’re at the early stage in the process. If you want to change the Regions and create cross-functional activities, it takes Congressional action. It will take time. Tribal Comment – When we saw this map of the new Regions, we hope that this is time and consideration for the Pueblos. Mr. Tahsuda stated that you can submit those comments directly regarding the proposed map. There is plenty of room for discussion. He welcomed suggestions from the SGAC on when/what they would like on the Tribal consultation. Tribal Comment – As you deal with attrition and loss of institutional knowledge, how do you recruit?

Tahsuda – This is a challenge right now. We do have a need for senior management level people. This is an issue within other Bureaus as well. We are looking at some places that would be popular--- easy to live in, most cost effective.

• EO 3342 – Secretary Executive Order; identifying opportunities for collaborative partnership with tribes. (Shawn Duran requested a copy).

• Review of SGCE letters (see list above).

• Meeting adjourned at 5:00 pm

Tyler.Scribner

Highlight

Tyler.Scribner

Highlight

#18-16, Issued: 2/21/18 1

New

United States Department of the Interior

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY Washington, D.C. 20240

National Policy Memorandum

Office of Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs

Deputy Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs (Management)

Office of Facilities, Property and Safety Management (OFPSM)

Number: NPM-OFPSM-1 Effective: 2/21/18

Expires: 2/21/19

Title: Construction Facilities Improvement & Repair (FI&R) Funding Allocation

Methodology

1. Purpose

The purpose of this memorandum is to establish funding allocation procedures for Construction

FI&R programs for Education Construction, Public Safety and Justice Construction, and Other

Construction across Indian Affairs (IA).

2. Scope

This policy applies to all IA headquarters, field, and program offices under the authority of the

Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs (AS-IA), including the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and

the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE).

3. Policy

It is IA’s policy to comply with all Federal laws, regulations, and policies regarding the

allocation and execution of appropriated funds. The Construction FI&R funding allocation

procedures outlined in this memorandum will be implemented to allocate funding for

construction FI&R across IA programs1. The funding allocation methodology will identify and

prioritize deferred maintenance (DM) requirements for programs. The timely identification and

prioritization of DM requirements will enable funds to be allocated and acquisition actions to be

coordinated effectively and efficiently to initiate the required corrective actions.

This methodology will not apply to Replacement School Construction or Replacement

Facility Construction, which has a more comprehensive project selection process.

1 This summary uses the Education Construction FI&R Major and Minor funding accounts to present the methodology; however, this methodology is planned to be used for FI&R accounts for Public Safety & Justice Construction and Other Construction funding accounts as well.

#18-16, Issued: 2/21/18 2

New

4. Methodology

Beginning in the summer prior to a specific fiscal year (FY) or the execution year, IA programs

(including regions and agencies) will engage with their clients to validate and understand and

identify their priority needs. Programs are expected to work with their clients to convey the

importance of ensuring that any known deficiencies are input into the IA Facility Management

System (IA-FMS) as soon as possible.

All Facilities Managers must use data in IA-FMS to begin compiling the FI&R Minor priority

lists for their responsible area(s). Each Facility Manager will develop two (2) priority lists:

(1) a list addressing safety and health rank 1&2 Work Orders (WOs); and

(2) a discretionary list of all other categories of DM WOs, as well as additional safety and

health, if needed.

Facility Managers will assemble the lists for FI&R Minor using the total score assessed in IA-

FMS which uses the IA Supplemental Attachment G Project Scoring Methodology, knowledge

of customer need, and project benefits of packaging WOs in groups to achieve economies of

scale for work performed at a specific site/building. The initial list will be provided to the

OFPSM Division of Facilities, Management and Construction (DFMC) no later than the last

week of September of the preceding FY.

Mid-August DFMC will conduct an updated comprehensive data pull from IA-FMS. This

“snapshot” will be used by DFMC to determine the percent allocations for each program and

specifically for each program funding their FI&R Minor project lists. DFMC will also consider

each program’s obligation rates/status and status of legacy data validations when determining the

final percent allocations.

Time Line of Events

Summer Before FY Programs will work with clients to validate priority list for the

intended FY.

Facility Managers for the program will coordinate the

consolidation of the priorities.

Mid-August DFMC will pull data from IA-FMS on DM WOs.

Mid/Late - August DFMC will calculate 70% allocations for FI&R Minor and

finalize FI&R Major priority list. DFMC will also calculate

the planned 70% funding level and priority lists for all other

education construction supplemental programs and for all

non-education programs.

September Programs will provide FI&R Minor priority lists to DFMC per

60/40 allocation requirements.

#18-16, Issued: 2/21/18 3

New

CR/Final

Appropriation Bill

AND Acquisition

Allows

Funding will be allocated at the 70% level (up to the limits of

the CR).

February Progress review and second iteration initiated.

Programs update their priority lists with customers.

DFMC pulls data and calculates distributions.

Remaining 30% and any withdrawn previous year FI&R

Minor, recovered funds, or other carryover funds will be

redistributed based on need.

A. ALL Construction FI&R Major (Above $250K)

Safety and Health (S&H) rank 1 & 2 DM WOs are considered the highest priority for FI&R

Major projects. The IA Supplemental Attachment G Project Scoring Methodology provides a

higher weight to S&H WOs, but allows for the other categories to reflect their level of need

for each scoring category as well. DFMC will identify a list of FI&R Major projects ranked

by total score (also known as the Attachment G score).

DFMC will develop and review the list of FI&R Major projects, validate the list, and compile

an initial list of FI&R Major projects to be funded. DFMC uses the information in IA-FMS,

listed category and ranks, attachment G information, and qualitative knowledge of the sites

and building locations for developing the initial list. Once developed, the programs will be

requested to confirm the supporting data for each WO under their management.

Subsequently, the projects will be funded and the program will initiate the process for

corrective action. In addition to the current year funded list of WOs, DFMC will rank all

remaining FI&R Major WOs as a “snapshot” of additional projects ranked for future years.

B. ALL Construction FI&R Minor ($250K and below)

The FI&R Minor DM WOs are prioritized more closely by the programs. DFMC is requiring

the programs to apply a minimum 60% of their allocation toward correcting S&H rank 1&2

DM WOs, and the remaining 40% (up to) to be utilized at their discretion with priority given

to rank 1 and 2 DM WOs. The added flexibility allows the programs to “package” DM WOs

to take advantage of economies of scale.

For example, if 10 DM WOs can be funded at a single location under one (1) contract, the

overhead and indirect costs can be spread across all 10 DM WOs and will likely reduce the

overall cost and reduce the administrative requirements.

The programs must provide the S&H (60%) and discretionary (40%) priority lists to DFMC

for initiation of funding allocations. DFMC will not normally fund the discretionary (40%)

list until the S&H (60%) list is provided2.

2 As program personnel are trained and certified in the use of the Budget and Project Execution, Ranking and Management (BPERM) module of

IA-FMS, the program will begin to operate as described in the BPERM Expansion in the process improvement section at the end of this NPM.

#18-16, Issued: 2/21/18 4

New

C. Determining Funding Levels for FI&R Minor Planning Allocations

The planning methodology begins before the final appropriation amount is known.

Therefore, DFMC uses the requested budget and plans for 70% to be allocated in the first

iteration of this process. In September, DFMC calculates each program’s projected allocation

for FI&R Minor, allowing program’s to identify and prioritize the FI&R Minor DM WOs for

their clients. DFMC or programs that are Budget and Project Execution, Ranking and

Management (BPERM) certified will initiate the FBMS Entry Documents (FEDs) to fund the

projects which are prepared to be processed as soon as the continuing resolution (CR) and/or

final appropriation is made available. Programs are encouraged to conduct all the pre-

planning, market research, and other acquisition process activities to ensure the Purchase

Request Packages and Statement of Works are ready for acquisitions to solicit Request for

Proposals (RFPs) as soon as possible.

Similarly, DFMC will apply the same 70% target to developing first iteration priority lists for

the FI&R Major, all supplemental programs, and non-education program priority lists.

In February of the FY, a second iteration of the methodology will be initiated. This iteration

is planned to allocate the remaining appropriation (30%) plus any additional carry-over or

recovered funds. As a result, all funding will be allocated against specific DM WOs within

the first half of the FY with the majority allocated in the first quarter. This will enable the

programs to initiate the acquisition process with sufficient time to get these projects on

contract at the beginning of the construction cycle rather than in the middle or at the end.

It is expected that a program will commit and obligate the allocated funding for their share of

FI&R Minor at an execution rate that will result in full obligation or at least commitment

before the end of the FY. DFMC will monitor the execution rate for each program’s FI&R

Minor funding. If the execution rate does not appear to be on a path for full commitment

(preferably obligation) by the end of the FY, then DFMC will require the program to provide

their plan to achieve the goal. If a plan is not provided or is insufficient, DFMC may

withhold some or all of a program’s allocation at the next iteration and distribute that portion

of the allocation among the other programs that are able to meet the goal. The intent is to

ensure that the distributed funding can be put to use in a timely way. As a program catches

up to their target execution rate, they will be provided the calculated allocation during the

next iteration process.

D. Determining Funding Allocations for FI&R Minor

Education FI&R Minor Funds are allocated as a prorated share of the available funds based

on percent of “need” using the total DM WOs in IA-FMS for all S&H categories grouped

together and all “Other” categories grouped together.

For example, the total universe of DM WOs for S&H are broken down as a percentage for

each program, then each program’s percentage is applied to the total allocation.

#18-16, Issued: 2/21/18 5

New

Example (assumes beginning of the year 70% allocation):

Total FI&R Minor S&H in IA-FMS is: $300M in S&H DM WOs

For FI&R Minor S&H, Region X has: $30M or 10% of the total

Total FI&R Minor Funding Available (Projected): $20M

70% of FI&R Minor Funding Available (Projected): $14M

60% of Available is (Min Req’d for S&H): $8.4M

Region X would get 10% of $8.4M $840K for S/H at Region X

The same calculation methodology is used to calculate the 40% discretionary share for each

program using the total universe for all non-S&H categories (Other).

This example reflects the procedure for calculating the allocations at the beginning of a FY

based on 70% of the expected appropriation. During the mid-year review (around

February/March); the remainder of the appropriated funds and any other funds will be

similarly allocated.

The result is that the allocations distributed are based on “need.” Therefore, each program

must work with their clients to stress how critically important it is that all DM WOs and

abatement plans need to be current and accurate in IA-FMS.

E. Project Savings and Carryover Funds Management

In order to more effectively and efficiently manage carryover funds, IA is establishing a

process where all construction funds that are not directly obligated to a specific ongoing

project are returned to DFMC for reallocation. Any funded Project (Work Breakdown

Structure3 (WBS)) that is not fully obligated by July 31 must either have the unobligated

balances returned to DFMC or be included in a consolidated report (Due to DFMC NLT July

31) from the program identifying the plan for use of the unobligated balances. Note: funds

provided for a specific Project (WBS) may only be used for the DM WOs identified in that

Project (WBS).

All identified project savings (e.g. recovered, close-out, overestimated scope, etc.) is required

to be returned to DFMC for reallocation. As an incentive to the programs returning identified

“savings” on a project, programs will be given a short two (2) week period to identify

specific DM WOs and request using a portion of the saving (up to the total) to fund them.

The funds must first be returned, and then will be reallocated properly toward the specific

DM WOs. After the two (2) week period, the funds will become part of the general funds

available for that funding category. Funding is provided for a specific Project (WBS) which

represents a “specific” set of DM WOs; consequently, programs ARE NOT

AUTHORIZED to re-administer those funds outside the original WBS for any other

purpose.

3 In facilities project management, a work breakdown structure (WBS) is a deliverable-oriented breakdown of a project into smaller components.

In this case a WBS is a project that consists of one or more DM WOs that can be packaged together in a logical manner (e.g. same building, site, etc.) to enable more efficient management and execution of the work effort.

#18-16, Issued: 2/21/18 6

New

F. Budget Planning

Preliminary Five (5) Year Plans are established utilizing the IA Capital Planning and

Investment Control policy (20 IAM 8) and in alignment with DOI guidance for developing

Five Year Plans. Five Year Plans are typically completed prior to the Congressional

Justification being submitted to DOI and OMB in September, two (2) years prior to the

execution FY. It is impracticable to expect detailed future planning for individual FI&R DM

projects estimated less than $2 million4 as changes may occur over the two (2) year planning

to execution period. For most of Education, PS&J, and Other-Agency construction DM

planning, DFMC will provide current (at time of planning) and past trend analysis of DM

current (at time of planning) requirements, annual growth of DM WOs for at least the two

previous years, and an assessment of the effect that each years DM funding has had on the

trend-line.

Similarly, education construction FI&R Major (>$250K) or other program (PS&J or Other-

Agency) FI&R >$2 million unscheduled maintenance does not lend itself to long-term

planning models for specific individual actions. DFMC will compile a list of these projects at

the beginning of each FY in order to determine the current execution year funded priority list

for each program using the DOI Attachment G criteria and IA specific scoring guidance

developed for these programs. DFMC will work with the programs to validate the list as

needed. The resulting list will identify the intended major projects to be funded during the

execution year and provide a “snapshot” of the projects that would be funded in future years

if nothing changed or during the current year if additional funding became available. The list

will be provided to the Indian Affairs – Construction Investment Review Board (IA-CIRB)

for notification and review. The list will not be used for specific future years planning

(specific DM WOs), but rather for general plans and justification of consolidated needs.

Larger capital improvement (CI) projects (e.g. schools, detention, or agency facilities) are

more conducive to long-rang planning.

5. Roles and Responsibilities

A. Deputy Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs (Management) is responsible for

providing oversight and direction to the OFPSM.

B. Director, OFPSM is responsible for implementing policies and providing oversight for

facilities, property, and safety management programs for IA.

C. DFMC is responsible for providing direct oversight for the implementation of this policy,

develop the priority lists for all construction FI&R Major projects, calculating program

funding allocations for FI&R Minor, and allocating funding to programs for executing

the FI&R Major and Minor projects.

4 This is actually defined further as any education constriction FI&R Minor (<=$250K) or other program (PS&J or Other Agency) <= $2 million.

2/21/18

3/05/183/05/19

3/05/18

3/05/18

3/05/18

3/05/18

3/05/18 3/05/19

3/05/18

3/05/18

3/05/18

3/05/18

3/05/18

Children's Safety Act Review

Safeguarding to the Seventh Generation: Protection and Justice for Indian Children and the

Implementation of the Native American Children’s Safety Act of 2016

Testimony

of

Michael Black

Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs

United States Department of the Interior

Before the

Senate Committee on Indian Affairs

On

“Safeguarding to the Seventh Generation: Protection and Justice for Indian Children and

the Implementation of the Native American Children’s Safety Act of 2016”

April 21, 2017

Chairman Hoeven, my name is Michael Black and I am the Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian

Affairs at the Department of the Interior. Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony for

the Department of the Interior (Department) on, “Safeguarding to the Seventh Generation:

Protection and Justice for Indian Children and the Implementation of the Native American

Children’s Safety Act of 2016.”

The safety of Native children is a Departmental priority. The Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA)

Human Services and BIA Public Safety and Justice programs support Native American families

and communities and address the significant challenges faced by children throughout Indian

Country.

The Native American Children’s Safety Act of 2016 (NACSA) addresses the need for tribal

social services agencies to conduct comprehensive background checks of residents in foster

homes and employees of foster care institutions before placing children in foster care. In this

way, the Act expands the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act of 1990,

which required character investigations of federal and tribal employees who had regular contact

with or control over Indian children.

The NACSA requires that, prior to finalizing a foster care placement, the tribal social services

agency must complete a criminal records check on every covered individual who resides in the

household or is employed at the institution in which the foster care placement will be made.

Additionally, the Act requires Tribes to establish standards of placement that include: a criminal

records check, including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases; a

check of any abuse registries maintained by the Tribe; and a check of any child abuse and

neglect registry maintained by the State in which the covered individual resides or previously

resided in the preceding five years. The NACSA also requires that the Department consult with

Tribes and issue guidance regarding these procedures.

In preparation for developing this guidance, the BIA is currently in the process of identifying

best practices of social service agencies in Indian Country, with a view toward how they can be

adapted for use by tribal social services agencies. As an example, at the Fort Totten Agency

serving the Spirit Lake Tribe, the BIA conducts background checks on all relative placements

either prior to placement or in conjunction with emergency placements. There are three levels of

checks conducted by BIA to ensure the safety of Indian children and we believe it is a best

practices model that can be replicated nationwide.

The first check is a tribal name based check, which is completed immediately in the case of an

emergency placement. The Fort Totten Agency then calls the BIA-Office of Justice Services to

request a name-based background check on all individuals residing in a home prior to the

emergency placement of a child. Within 24 hours prior to granting care and control of a child,

the Agency conducts a background check of state criminal records through a search of the State

of North Dakota website. Finally, all relative placements undergo a full federal background

check in which the Fort Totten Agency takes the individuals’ fingerprints and sends them to a

third party vendor under contract with the BIA that carries out that review. The Agency typically

receives the results of the background check within a week.

The BIA is also examining processes that will provide Tribes the ability to check child abuse and

neglect registries maintained by States. Such processes will require the cooperation of State

governments, and we look forward to continue developing those relationships. As mentioned

above, the BIA is required to consult on the required guidance and we expect to begin

consultations in the fall of 2017.

Conclusion

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the issue, “Protection and Justice for Indian Children

and the Implementation of the Native American Children’s Safety Act of 2016.” The

Department is committed to doing its part to ensure the safety and protection of children

throughout Indian Country. I would be glad to answer any questions the Committee may have.

Children’s Safety Act Links and Guidance

• https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ165/PLAW-114publ165.pdf - Childrens Safety Act Link

• http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/328188-strengthening-childrens-safety-act-closes-loopholes-in-existing - article about childrens safety act

• https://www.bia.gov/sites/bia.gov/files/assets/as-ia/raca/pdf/NACSA-Draft-Guidelines-Presentation-02-06-18.pdf - Guidelines

• https://www.bia.gov/sites/bia.gov/files/assets/as-ia/raca/pdf/Draft_Guidance_for_NACSA.pdf - Background Checks Guidance

https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ165/PLAW-114publ165.pdf

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/328188-strengthening-childrens-safety-act-closes-loopholes-in-existing

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/328188-strengthening-childrens-safety-act-closes-loopholes-in-existing

https://www.bia.gov/sites/bia.gov/files/assets/as-ia/raca/pdf/NACSA-Draft-Guidelines-Presentation-02-06-18.pdf

https://www.bia.gov/sites/bia.gov/files/assets/as-ia/raca/pdf/NACSA-Draft-Guidelines-Presentation-02-06-18.pdf

https://www.bia.gov/sites/bia.gov/files/assets/as-ia/raca/pdf/Draft_Guidance_for_NACSA.pdf

119254-1

I. PUBLIC SAFETY AND JUSTICE ISSUES

SURVIVE ACT, S. 1870. Before the end of the Session, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs approved SURVIVE Act, S. 1870, which would provide a 5% tribal set aside of the Victims of Crime Fund.

Tribal Law and Order Act, Savanna’s Act, Justice for Native Survivors of

Sexual Violence Act. The Committee also held hearings on the reauthorization of the Tribal Law and Order Act, S. 1953 and Savanna’s Act, S. 1942, which is intended to improve the reporting of missing and murdered Indian people. In addition, Senator Franken (D-MN) and Senator Murkowski (R-AK) have introduced the Justice for Native Survivors of Sexual Violence Act, S. 1986, which would expand the 2013 VAWA special tribal jurisdiction to include crimes of sexual violence, sex trafficking and stalking committed by non-Indians within a tribe’s special jurisdiction. Currently, the special tribal jurisdiction can only be exercised for domestic violence crimes.

II. HEALTH CARE ISSUES

MARVIN J. SONOSKY (1909-1997) HARRY R. SACHSE REID PEYTON CHAMBERS WILLIAM R. PERRY LLOYD BENTON MILLER DOUGLAS B. L. ENDRESON DONALD J. SIMON ANNE D. NOTO MARY J. PAVEL DAVID C. MIELKE GARY F. BROWNELL (NM)* COLIN C. HAMPSON RICHARD D. MONKMAN (AK)* MATTHEW S. JAFFE WILLIAM F. STEPHENS VANESSA L. RAY-HODGE FRANK S. HOLLEMAN REBECCA A. PATTERSON (AK)* KENDRI M. M. CESAR (AK)* MATTHEW L. MURDOCK (NM)* WHITNEY A. LEONARD (AK)* OF COUNSEL MYRA M. MUNSON (AK)* ARTHUR LAZARUS, JR ROGER W. DUBROCK (AK)* KAY E. MAASSEN GOUWENS (AK)* *NOT ADMITTED IN D.C.

LAW OFFICES SONOSKY, CHAMBERS, SACHSE,

ENDRESON & PERRY, LLP 1425 K STREET, N.W., SUITE 600

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 TEL (202) 682-0240 | FAX (202) 682-0249

WWW.SONOSKY.COM

January, 2018

POLICY ADVISOR HON. MARK BEGICH

ANCHORAGE, AK OFFICE

725 E. FIREWEED LANE, SUITE 420 ANCHORAGE, AK 99503

(907) 258-6377 FAX (907) 272-8332

_____

JUNEAU, AK OFFICE 302 GOLD STREET, SUITE 201

JUNEAU, AK 99801 (907) 586-5880

FAX (907) 586-5883 _____

SAN DIEGO, CA OFFICE

600 W. BROADWAY, SUITE 700 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101

(619) 267-1306 FAX (619) 267-1388

_____

ALBUQUERQUE, NM OFFICE 500 MARQUETTE AVE., N.W., SUITE 660

ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102 (505) 247-0147

FAX (505) 843-6912

119254-1

SPDPI, THC, SCHIPS. Congress extended the authorizations for these programs until March, 2018. Congress continues to work on these issues in connection with the FY 2018 funding measures.

VA-CHOICE Reforms. On December 5, 2017, Veterans Affairs Committee

Chairman Johnny Isakson introduced S. 2193 (“The Caring for Our Veterans Act”). The bill was introduced on behalf of the Veterans Affairs Committee and was therefore immediately placed on the Senate calendar. The bill includes a provision that would authorize a medical residency program between, Tribal and IHS facilities and the VA. However, Title I of the bill because it is of most immediate concern, which would establish the VA Community Care Program by amending existing Section 1703 of the Veterans Act. Of particular note are these elements:

Under 1703(b), covered health care providers would be any Medicare provider, DOD, IHS, and FQHC, and any other provider that meets criteria to established by the VA. This section does not mention tribes or tribal organizations.

Subsection 1703(d) sets for the conditions under which the VA must use non-VA providers (such as when the VA doesn’t offer the care; the covered veteran was eligible under the 2014 Choice Act under the 40-mile rule; or – under “criteria” to be developed by the VA – the veteran and the veteran’s primary care provider agree that non-VA care “would be in the best medical interest of the covered veteran”).

o The VA’s criteria must consider distance, nature of the care required, frequency of the required care, availability of VA care, whether the veteran “faces an unusual or excessive burden to access” care (including driving, geographic or environmental factors, and whether VA care is “reasonably accessible”[among other factors])

Subsection 1703(e) sets conditions under which the VA may use non-VA

providers. This situation will arise if the VA determines that the VA care “is not providing care that meets such quality and access standards as the

119254-1

Secretary shall develop.” In making this judgment the secretary would be required to compare VA care with non-VA provider care.

Subsection 1703(j) authorizes the VA to establish provider networks

through a competitive bid process.

Subsection 1703(k) sets as a maximum reimbursement rate the amounts the Medicare amounts the government pays under 42 U.S.C. §1395x(u) and §1395x(d), unless the veteran resides “in a highly rural area” that has fewer than 7 people per square mile.

o Under subparagraph (3), in Alaska “the Alaska Fee Schedule of the

Department of Veterans Affairs shall be followed, except for when another payment agreement, including a contract or provider agreement, is in effect.”

o Under subparagraph (5), the VA may, but is not required to,

employ “value-based reimbursement models.”

Section 101(d) addresses continuity of care with existing agreements: (d) Continuity of Existing Agreements.— (1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 1703 of title 38,

United States Code, as amended by subsection (a), the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall continue all contracts, memorandums of understanding, memorandums of agreements, and other arrangements that were in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act between the Department of Veterans Affairs and the American Indian and Alaska Native health care systems as established under the terms of the Department of Veterans Affairs and Indian Health Service Memorandum of Understanding, signed October 1, 2010, the National Reimbursement Agreement, signed December 5, 2012, and agreements entered into under sections 102 and 103 of the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-146).

119254-1

(2) Modifications. --Paragraph (1) shall not be construed to prohibit the Secretary and the parties to the contracts, memorandums of understanding, memorandums of agreements, and other arrangements described in such paragraph from making such changes to such contracts, memorandums of understanding, memorandums of agreements, and other arrangements as may be otherwise authorized pursuant to other provisions of law or the terms of the contracts, memorandums of understanding, memorandums of agreements, and other arrangements.

III. 477 IMPLEMENTATION

MOU between agencies must be in place within one year of enactment (December, 2019).

HOBBS STRAUS DEAN & WALKER

TO:

FROM:

RE:

900 T HOBBSSTRAUS.COM

F 503 242.1072

MEMORANDUM

December 7, 2017

p

endment with President Trump for Signature

A comprehensive amendment to the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (as amended) is one step from becoming law. 1 It was formally presented to President Trump for signature on December 6, 2017. This legislation is codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 3401-3417 and more commonly referred to as PL 4 77. Several years in the making, the amendment legislation makes the PL 4 77 program permanent, expands the range of programs and funds eligible for integration in PL 477 plans, clarifies the plan approval process, and makes other improvements to strengthen tribal employment and training programs.

PuRPOSE AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The PL 477 program allows tribal organizations to combine formula-funded federal grants that come from varied sources but all pertain to employment, training, or related services into a single plan with a single budget and reporting system. The PL 477 program allows tribal organizations more flexibility in deciding how to spend their federal funds. They are able to design programs that are more successful based on the unique needs of their own community members. It also allows them to streamline administrative processes, including program applications and federal reporting, thereby lowering administrative costs and making more funds available for direct services.

The amendment legislation serves multiple important purposes in strengthening the PL 477 program. First, it reauthorizes the PL 477 program as permanent rather than as a demonstration project. Second, it expands the types of programs and funding that may be integrated in PL 477 plans, including integration beyond only the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Labor (Labor), and the Department of Education (DOE). Third, it clarifies that PL 4 77 plans require only one annual report or audit and do not require reporting dollar-for-

1 The amendment legislation is entitled "A bill to amend the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 to facilitate the ability of Indian tribes to integrate the employment, training, and related services from diverse Federal sources, and for other purposes."

HOBBS STRAUS DEAN & WALKER, LLP WASHINGTON, DC PORTLAND, OR OKLAHOMA CITY, OK SACRAMENTO, CA ANCHORAGE, AK

MEMORANDUM December 7, 2017

Page 2

dollar by program-as some federal officials had insisted. Fourth, it creates strict deadlines and processes for review and approval of PL 477 plans, as some federal officials have wrongly disapproved or delayed approval of eligible programs' integration within PL 477 plans. Last, it clarifies the process for agencies to waive requirements of integrated programs. The amendment legislation also makes other helpful changes to the PL 477 program.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 228 AMENDMENT LEGISLATION

Summarized below are the significant substantive changes the amendment legislation makes to PL 4 77. The amendment legislation affects all but two Sections of PL477.

Section 9 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3408), entitled "Job creation activities authorized," is not affected by the amendment legislation. This Section authorizes tribal governments to expend a certain percentage of PL 4 77 funds for the creation of employment opportunities and development of the economic resources of the tribal government or individual Indian people.

Section 18 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3417), entitled "Assignment of Federal personnel to State Indian economic programs," is also not affected by the amendment legislation. This Section mandates a state with an economic development program targeted to tribal organizations is eligible to receive federal personnel assignments made by DOI.

Section 1. Short title

• This Section cites the amendment legislation as the "Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Consolidation Act of 2017."

Section 2. Amendment of short title

• This Section amends Section 1 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3401 note), pertaining to PL 477's short title.

• The amendment removes the word "demonstration," thereby changing the PL 477 program from a demonstration project to a permanent program. References to PL 477 as a demonstration project are likewise removed throughout the remainder of PL 477.

Section 3. Statement of purpose

• This Section amends Section 2 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3401), entitled "Statement of purpose."

• The amendment emphasizes that services eligible for integration into PL 477 plans may come from diverse federal sources and that one goal of the PL 4 77 program is reducing administrative, reporting, and accounting costs.

STRAUS & WALKER, OK '

Section 4. Definitions


Page 3

• This Section amends Section 3 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3402), entitled "Definitions." • The amendment emphasizes the term "Indian tribe" includes tribal organizations. • The amendment cross-references the broader types of programs eligible for

integration in a PL 4 77 plan listed in amended Section 5 of PL 4 77.

Section 5. Integration of services authorized

• This Section amends Section 4 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3403), entitled "Integration of services authorized."

• The amendment emphasizes that, upon approval of a PL 477 plan, tribal organizations may integrate the included programs and funds into one consolidated plan, including but not limited to consolidating administrative functions.

Section 6. Programs affected and transfer of funds

• This Section significantly amends Section 5 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3404), entitled "Programs affected," regarding the types of programs and funds eligible for integration in PL 477 plans.

• The amendment expands the types of programs that may be integrated into a PL 477 plan by providing a more detailed list of the purposes of programs eligible for integration. Although included in previous drafts of the amendment legislation, the House ultimately removed higher education from the list. Before passage by the Senate, statements were made on the record asserting that the Head Start program is not eligible for inclusion in a PL 477 plan.

• The amendment expands the types of programs eligible for integration by listing as agencies with which DOI should cooperate when approving PL 477 plans the Departments of Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs, and DOE, Labor, and HHS. Previously, PL 477 throughout its Sections only referenced DOI, Labor, HHS, and DOE. Therefore, the amendment implies programs administered by these additional agencies may be integrated into PL 477 plans. Any language referencing only DOI, Labor, HHS, and DOE has likewise been removed or expanded to include the additional agencies throughout the remainder of PL 4 77.

• The amendment expands the types of funding that may be integrated into a PL 477 plan by adding-in addition to those made available under a statutory or administrative formula- funds to which tribal organizations are eligible due to their status as Indians under federal law or that they secured as a result of a noncompetitive process. Although included in previous drafts of the amendment legislation, the House ultimately removed funds secured as a result of a competitive process from the types of funding sources eligible for integration. In an effort to maintain competitive grants' eligibility for integration, tribal advocates insisted on language stating that any

DEAN & WALKER, ll!' OR !


Page4

funds for which tribal organizations or members are eligible based solely, or even in part, on their status as Indians under federal law may be integrated.

• The amendment also clarifies that block grant funds may be integrated. • The amendment emphasizes that DOI is the ultimate arbiter of whether a program and

its funds are eligible for integration.

Section 7. Plan requirements

• This Section amends Section 6 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3405), entitled "Plan requirements."

• The amendment does not make significant substantive changes.

Section 8. Plan review; waiver authority; and dispute resolution

• This Section significantly amends Section 7 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3406), entitled "Plan review," regarding agencies' authority to waive statutory or regulatory requirements associated with a program requested for integration into a PL 477 plan.

• The amendment emphasizes the existence of agencies' waiver authority under PL 4 77. Other references to the process for plan approval are likewise amended to refer to waiver authority throughout the remainder of PL 4 77.

• The amendment states an agency shall use its waiver authority unless specific circumstances exist, replacing more permissive language that said an agency "shall have the authority to waive" requirements.

• The amendment formalizes the process for a tribal organization to request that an agency use its waiver authority, which involves a timeline for approval, deemed approval for requests not acted upon, DO I review of agencies' denials, and an interagency dispute resolution process if DOI and the affected agency disagree on whether the waiver is appropriate.

• The amendment clarifies that the agency affected by the waiver request has final authority regarding whether it will issue a waiver if the interagency dispute resolution process fails to resolve the issue.

Section 9. Plan approval; secretarial authority; review of decision

• This Section significantly amends Section 8 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3407), entitled "Plan approval," regarding the process for approval and review of disapprovals of PL 477 plans.

• The amendment emphasizes that DOI has exclusive authority to approve or disapprove a PL 4 77 plan in whole, notwithstanding that an affected agency has ultimate authority regarding whether to waive statutory or regulatory requirements associated with a program it administers that is requested for integration into a PL 477 plan. It also states that DOI must consult with each agency providing funds to be used to implement the PL 477 plan when approving or disapproving a plan.


Page5

• The amendment creates a time line for review and approval of submitted PL 4 77 plans, stating such decision making must take place within 90 days after receipt of the plan unless an extension is granted. If a decision is not made within this timeframe, the plan is deemed approved.

• The amendment provides for approvals of only part of a submitted PL 477 plan. • The amendment states that, if a PL 477 plan is disapproved, DOI must provide the

tribal organization a written notification of disapproval of the plan that contains a specific finding that clearly demonstrates, or that is supported by a controlling legal authority, that the plan does not meet the requirements of PL 4 77. This language is similar to that found in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA).

• The amendment creates a process for seeking review within DOI of a disapproval, including requesting a hearing on the record.

• The amendment provides for jurisdiction in federal court for civil actions brought by tribal organizations challenging a disapproval.

Section 10. Employer training placements

• This Section amends Section 10 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3409), entitled "Private sector training placements."

• The amendment increases the period of allowable placement from 12 months to 24 months (which need not be consecutive) when tribal organizations with PL 477 plans use program funds to pay an allowance to participants in training positions with employers.

• The amendment allows placements with any employers, not just private sector employers as in the past.

• The amendment removes the requirement that the employer guarantee permanent employment and instead requires only prioritization of permanent employment.

Section 11. Federal responsibilities

• This Section significantly amends Section 11 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3410), entitled "Federal responsibilities," regarding the responsibilities of federal agencies to facilitate and oversee PL 477 plans.

• The amendment calls on DOI to develop a model report for use by tribal organizations utilizing PL 477 plans and clarifies that the model report may not require a tribal organization to report on the expenditure of funds expressed by fund source or single agency code.

• The amendment requires DOI to distribute funds to tribal organizations not later than 45 days after the date of receipt of the funds from the appropriate agency, thereby clarifying that DOI serves as the hub of fund receipt and disbursement and requiring DOI to act within a specific timeframe.

• The amendment requires DOI to establish an interagency dispute resolution process.

DEAN & WALKER,


Page6

• The amendment requires DOI, Labor, HHS, DOE, and the Departments of Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs to enter into an interdepartmental memorandum of agreement (MOA) providing for the implementation of PL 477 within one year of the amendment legislation's enactment. The MOA must provide for an annual meeting between agencies and tribal organizations, a forum to identify and resolve interagency conflicts and conflicts between tribal organizations and agencies, and an annual review of implementation of the PL 477 program.

Section 12. No reduction in amounts

• This Section amends Section 12 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3411), entitled "No reduction in amounts."

• The amendment emphasizes that the PL 4 77 program shall not affect tribal organizations' eligibility for funding. It states approval or implementation of a PL 477 plan does not reduce funding available to tribal organizations.

• The amendment states that integration of a program in a PL 4 77 plan does not affect its eligibility for ISDEAA contracting or the applicability of any of that Act's provisions (such as the eligibility of Bureau of Indian Affairs programs for contract support costs).

Section 13. Transfer of funds

• This Section amends Section 13 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3412), entitled "Interagency fund transfers authorized."

• The amendment requires that, not later than 30 days after the date of apportionment to an agency, the agency overseeing a program identified in a PL 477 plan must transfer the funds to DOI for distribution.

• The amendment states that, at the request of the tribal organization, program funds incorporated into a PL 477 plan shall be transferred to the tribal organization pursuant to an existing ISDEAA contract, compact, or funding agreement.

Section 14. Administration of funds

• This Section significantly amends Section 14 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3413), entitled "Administration of funds and overage," regarding record keeping on and treatment of funds integrated into PL 477 plans.

• The amendment highlights that tribal organizations are not required to maintain separate records or conduct audits that trace services conducted to the program for which funds were initially authorized.

• The amendment states DOI may use accounting procedures that conform to accepted accounting principles and auditing procedures.

• The amendment emphasizes that program funds incorporated into a PL 477 plan may be consolidated and reallocated, including commingling of administrative costs.

DEAN &


Page 7

• The amendment states funds used to carry out a PL 477 plan must be administered in such a manner as DOI determines to be appropriate to ensure the funds are spent on activities authorized under the approved PL 477 plan.

• The amendment states funds transferred under a PL 4 77 plan are treated as nonfederal funds for purposes of meeting matching requirements under federal law, except for funds from Labor and HHS.

• The amendment states funds transferred under PL 4 77 that are not obligated or expended in that fiscal year remain available.

• The amendment mandates tribal organizations may earn interest on their PL 4 77 plan funds, and funds must be managed according to the prudent investment standard.

• The amendment states tribal organizations are entitled to recover 100 percent of any indirect costs incurred as a result of the transfer of funds under a PL 477 plan and are also entitled to the full amount of administrative costs under each program or department's regulations.

• The amendment makes the Federal Tort Claims Act applicable to approved PL 477 plans.

Section 15. Labor market information on Indian workforce

• This Section amends Section 17(a) of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3416(a)), entitled "Labor market information on Indian workforce."

• The amendment requires Labor, instead of DOI, to develop-in consultation with DOI, tribes, and the Bureau of the Census-a biennial report on the population eligible for the services that DOI provides to Indian people.

Section 16. Repeals; conforming amendments

• This Section repeals Section 15 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3414), entitled "Fiscal accountability."

• This Section repeals Section 16 of PL 477 (25 U.S.C. § 3415), entitled "Report on statutory obstacles to program integration."

• This Section re-designates the remaining Sections of PL 4 77.

Section 17. Effect of act

• This Section states that nothing in the amending legislation affects already-approved PL 477 plans, requires resubmittal of PL 477 plans, or modifies the effective period of existing PL 4 77 plans.

NEXT STEPS

The amendment legislation is now officially with President Trump awaiting signature before it becomes law. It will become law if it is either signed by President Trump or ten days pass while Congress is in session. The White House may choose to

DEAN & UP


Page 8

hold a signing ceremony. However, if Congress adjourns during the 10-day period and the President has not yet signed the legislation or the President vetoes the legislation, it will not become law. We have been in contact with White House representatives, and they will keep us updated on any movement.

Once the amendment legislation is enacted, the agencies have a statutory deadline of one year from enactment to develop and enter into an interdepartmental MOA on implementation of the new PL 477 legislation. Tribal organizations may want to push the agencies to include the PL 477 Work Group in these discussions and to engage in formal tribal consultation on the resulting draft MOA.

If you have any questions about this memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact Geoff Strommer ([email protected] or 503-242-1745), Steve Osborne ([email protected] or 503-242-1745), or Katie Klass ([email protected] or 202-822-8282).

DEAN WALKER,

2017 Enacted Budget:

$2.86 Billion, $67 Million More Than 2016

2018 Administration Budget:

$2.49 Billion, $375 Million Below 2017 Enacted

2019 Administration Budget:

$2.39 Billion, $465 Million Below 2017 Enacted

?

37% Cut

28% Cut

Eliminated

28% Cut

10% Cut

5% Cut

Eliminated

Eliminated

7% Cut2% Cut

10% Cut

25% Cut

18% Cut

12% Cut

Eliminated

Tribal Government:

-Small & Needy Tribes

Human Services:

-Tiwahe Initiative

-Domestic Violence Initiative

-Methamphetamine Initiative

-Housing Program

Trust Natural Resources:

-Tribal Climate Resilience

Trust Real Estate Services:

-Alaska Native Programs

-Litigation Support/Attorney Fees

-Other Indian Rights Protection

Public Safety & Justice:

-Recidivism Reduction Initiative

-Tribal Justice Support for tribes subject to P.L. 83-280

-Conservation Law Enforcement Program

Many Tribal Programs Proposed for Elimination!

Indian Education:

-Tribal Scholarships

-Johnson O’ Malley Program

-Tribal Education Departments

-Early Child & Family Development

-Juvenile Detention Education

-Special Higher Education Scholarships

-Science Post Graduate Scholarships

-Replacement School Construction

-Replacement Facility Construction

Cuts to Tribal Government Funding

____________________________________________________

1996 General Reduction (enacted) - 16%

2000-2018 ATB Rescissions (enacted) - 9.5%

2013-2018 Sequester Cut (enacted) - 5%

President’s 2019 Budget (proposed) - 16.2%

Total Cuts since 1996: - 46.7%_____________________________________________________

- Only increases for most tribal programs were Pay Costs,

but Pay Costs have only been partially funded most years

We are facing dire times for the BIA budget. It appears

that our only hope to avoid severe budget cuts lies with

Congress, not the Administration.

A primary role of Tribal Leaders and Indian Affairs

Leadership, through TIBC & SGAC, is to advocate for

BIA funding increases. This job has become much

more complicated under the present Administration.

The Administration says it wants to preserve Core

Tribal Programs, but does not understand what the

Core programs are. Most of the budget lines cut or

eliminated do in fact deliver Core funding to tribes.

Across the Board Rescissions

Year Description % Cut % Cut

2000 General Reduction 0.47 0.47

2001 ATB 0.22 0.22

2002 No Rescission 0 0

2003 ACB 0.65 0.65

2004 BIA-IT 0.24 0.24

2004 Omnibus ATB 0.59 0.59

2004 ATB 0.65 0.65

2005 Omnibus ATB 0.8 0.8

2005 Interior ATB 0.59 0.59

2006 ATB 0.48 0.48

2006 ATB Hurricane & Other 1 1


2008 ATB 1.56 1.56



2011 ATB 0.2 0.2

2012 ATB 0.16 0.16

2013 ATB 0.2 0.2

2013 Sequester 5.04 5.04

2014 ATB 0.2 0.2

2015 ATB 0.06 0.06

2016 ATB 0.21 0.21

2017 ATB 0.5 0.5

2018 ATB 0.68 0.68

Rescissions Subtotal 9.45 9.45

Sequester Subtotal 5.04 5.04

Total Rescissions & Sequester 14.49 14.49

President’s FY 2019

Budget Request

Amber Ebarb

www.ncai.org

Agenda

• Bipartisan Budget Act

• BBA Impact on FY 2018 and FY 2019

• FY 2019 Details

– Bureau of Indian Affairs

– Indian Health Service

– Housing and Urban Development

– Department of Justice

– Treasury and Labor

Bipartisan Budget Act

Opportunity for Tribes and NDD Programs

• The Bipartisan Budget Act raised the limits on defense and non-defense appropriations in FY 2018 and 2019 that were set by the 2011 Budget Control Act.

• Similar to 2013 and 2015 two-year deals– Except BBA deal adds funding above the original pre-

sequester caps

– Fully repeals sequestration for two-years and adds new NDD funding above caps

– Raises NDD cap by $63 billion in FY18 and $68 billion in FY19

– Abides by the parity principle

Bipartisan Budget Deal in Context

• These increases do not expand appropriated programs beyond historical levels.

• Returns funding to where it was in 2010, before the multiple rounds of budget cuts.

• Adjusted for inflation, the new cap on non-defense appropriations in 2018 would still be 5.3 percent below the comparable 2010 level.

• If adjusted for population growth as well as inflation, it would be 11.0 percent below the 2010 level.

NDD in President’s Budget Compared to Bipartisan Budget Act

$516 $530

$462

$540$579 $597

FY2018 FY2019

Bill

ion

s

Caps w Sequester Pres. Budget BBA

*

* Reflects the levels in the addendum to the Trump budget

Outlook for Passage

• The Director of the Office of Management and Budget characterized the FY 2019 budget request as a “messaging document.”

• It does no spend all of the funding that was increased under the non-defense discretionary spending cap with the Bipartisan Budget Act.

• The White House budget assumes a steep decrease in non-defense discretionary spending after FY 2019, proposing roughly $1.5 trillion through FY 2028 and another $1.7 trillion in mandatory spending cuts. The cuts assume repeal of health insurance subsidies under the 2010 health care law (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) and over $500 billion in Medicare reductions, but none of these specific proposals seem likely to be enacted by Congress.

Congressional Response

• Congressman Don Young (AK)– “This may be my President, but this is not my budget.”

• Senator Merkley (OR)– “The budget cut almost half a billion dollars out of the

BIA. I think there will be bipartisan rejection of that. We know that we all need to be a better partner of Indian Country.”

• Bipartisan agreement that the proposed reductions will be countered and addressed during the Congressional appropriations cycle.

FY 2019 Indian Country Budget

Treaty and Trust Responsibility

• For a nation that bases its greatness to a significant degree on its rule of law, treaties and intergovernmental agreements carry paramount importance.

• In 1884, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Miller remarked: – “A treaty is primarily a compact between

independent nations. It depends for the enforcement of its provisions on the interest and the honor of the governments which are parties of it.”

Our Nations, Our Promises

Current Reservations, Tribal Statistical AreasCredits: US Forest Service Enterprise Map Services Program, Tribal Lands Ceded to the United States

Probability of Reaching the Top Income Quintile from the Bottom Quintile

Source: Chetty, 2014, Appendix Figure VI.B. Darker areas signify lower upward mobility.

Fiscal Trust Responsibility

• Solutions for facilitating economic growth in Indian Country must be multi-faceted. For instance, tribes are working to create a positive business environment via good governance and legal infrastructure, such as commercial codes and courts.

• However, some pieces of the growth puzzle still rely on improving basic physical infrastructure and fulfillment of other fundamental aspects of the trust responsibility, such as public safety and education.

Examples of Significant Need

Funded

Remaining Need

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

Law enforcement Courts Detention

Mill

ion

s

Tribal Public Safety Funding Need

Funding Need

Major Reductions

• Native American Housing Block Grant cut from $654 million to $600 million, or -8.2%

• Bureau of Indian Affairs cut by $453 million, or -15.2%– Major Reductions in BIA include

– Social Services cut by $19 million, or -37%

– Indian Child Welfare Act cut by $5 million, or -27%

– Welfare Assistance cut by $8.4 million, or -11%

– Rights Protection Implementation cut by $14.7 million, or -37%

– Job Placement and Training cut by $4.4 million, or -35%

Eliminations

• Indian Community Development Block Grant (in HUD)• Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)• Indian and Native American Program (INAP in DOL)• Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program • Eliminations within BIA include

– Small and Needy Tribes– Housing Improvement Program ($10 million)– Tribal Climate Resilience– Alaska Native Programs– Johnson O’Malley Program ($15 million)– Scholarships and Adult education ($35 million)

Proposed Increases

• Indian Health Service Clinical Services, increase of $353 million to expand direct health care services.

• IHS would receive $150 million for Opioid multi-year competitive grants based on need; this is out of the $10 billion proposal for opioid funding.

• In the Department of Justice, the budget proposes:– $115 million for Indian tribes through a 5% set-aside from the

Crime Victims Fund for providing services to crime victims. Indian tribes have never directly received funding from the Crime Victims Fund;

– A 7% set-aside from across the Office of Justice Programs totaling $93.8 million for tribal assistance. This compares to a 7% set-aside from certain OJP and OJJDP programs for FY 17 and is a significant increase in funding overall over FY 17 levels.

Bureau of Indian AffairsFY 2019 Details

BIA/BIE Funding FY 2003 - 2019

FY2018 CR

FY 2019 PB

FY2018 CRadjusted

FY 2019 PB adjusted

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Mill

ion

s

% Decrease from FY10 = -25%Adjusted for inflation

FY19 request for BIA is $2.4 billion, $443.9 million below FY18 CR, -15.6%

Source: Red Lake Tribe, Dave Conner, Tribal Interior Budget Council

11

10

9

9

9

8

6

5

5

4

4

3

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

Social Services (TPA)

Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA)( (TPA)

Scholarships and Adult Education (TPA)

Tribal Courts (TPA)

Aid to Tribal Government (TPA)

Criminal Investigations and Police Services

Housing Improvement Program (TPA)

Johnson O'Malley Assistance Grants (JOM)…

Road Maintenance (TPA)

Detention/Corrections

Forestry Program (TPA)

Wildlife & Parks Program (TPA)

Water Resources Program (TPA)

Consolidated Tribal Government Program…

Welfare Assistance

Agriculture Program (TPA)

EQ Program (TPA)

Small and Needy Tribes

Indian Guaranteed Loan Progam - Subsidies

2019 PRIORITY RANKING RESULTS ‐ ALL REGIONS

Social Services (TPA)

Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA)( (TPA)

Scholarships and Adult Education (TPA)

Tribal Courts (TPA)

Aid to Tribal Government (TPA)

Proposed Reductions to Top Priorities

-37%

-27%

-100%

-27%

-10%

-5%

-100%

-100%

-6%

-2%

-3%

-3%

-3%

-3%

-11%

-7%

-5%

-100%

-22%

1. Social Services (TPA)

2. Indian Child Welfare Act

3. Scholarships and Adult Education

3. Tribal Courts (TPA)

3. Aid to Tribal Government

6. Criminal Inv. and Police Services

7. Housing Improvement Prog

8. Johnson O'Malley

8. Road Maintenance (TPA)

10. Detention/Corrections

10. Forestry Program (TPA)

12. Wildlife & Parks Program (TPA)

13. Water Resources Program (TPA)

13. Consolidated Tribal Government Prog

15. Welfare Assistance

15. Agriculture Program (TPA)

15. EQ Program (TPA)

15. Small and Needy Tribes

15. Indian Guaranteed Loan Prog

Indian Health Service

• Indian Health Service (IHS)

– $5.4 billion, $413 million over FY 2018 CR

– 8% increase over the current FY 2018 CR

– Proposal also cuts or eliminates several important programs at IHS

– Compares to $6.4 billion in FY 2019 recommended by IHS Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup

SDPI

• Proposes to move SDPI from mandatory to discretionary

• Congress would provide funding to SDPI through the annual appropriations process

• Proposal moves in opposite policy direction –tribes have been calling for making the entire IHS budget mandatory instead of discretionary

Opioids

• President’s Budget includes $10 billion to combat the opioid epidemic.

• IHS would receive $150 million "to provide multi-year competitive grants based on need for opioid abuse prevention, treatment, and recovery support in Indian Country."

– Competitive grants are not the best way to administer this funding, formula would be

Cuts in IHS, FY 2019 PB

• Eliminations– the Community Health Representatives program ($60 million)

and the – health education program ($19 million).– Tribal management grants ($2 million).

• Reductions – cuts health facilities construction by $38 from $117 million.

• Justification: "to prioritize direct health care services and staffing and operating costs for new and replacement facilities."

ACA Proposed Changes

• FY 2019 budget request proposes to make major changes to programs authorized under the ACA.

– Medicaid spending would be replaced with a block grant to states leading to the elimination of the ACA's Medicaid expansion and cuts in Medicaid over the next decade.

– Medicaid provides supplemental resources to the IHS budget.

– The budget would also eliminate subsidies for the ACA's health insurance marketplace.

SNAP

• The budget proposes to cut the SNAP Program by 22% over the next decade.

• The Administration has announced it will change the SNAP program into a food delivery system for eligible SNAP participants who receive at least $90 a month in SNAP benefits.

• Approximately 25% of AI/AN households current utilize SNAP, but in some Tribal communities over 50% of households are recipients of the program.

Labor and Treasury

• The President's proposed FY 2019 budget zeroes out funding for the Department of Labor's Division of Indian and Native American Programs (DINAP).

• CDFIs– Community Development Financial Institutions

(CDFIs) through the CDFI Fund. In FY17, Congress appropriated $15.5 million for the Native American CDFI Assistance (NACA) Program.

– The President’s FY19 Request would eliminate funding for the NACA program and the three other discretionary CDFI grant programs.

Opportunities for Advocacy

• May 9, 10th, Interior AI/AN Public Witness Hearing Dates

– Deadline to request: April 6

• March 21, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Hearing on the President’s Budget

Questions?

Amber Ebarb

Budget and Policy Analyst

National Congress of American Indians

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

FARM BILL

KEY PRINCIPLES TO INCLUDE INDIAN COUNTRY IN THE NEXT FARM BILL:

Governmental parity across the Farm Bill- Treatment as a State for Tribal Governments

and Tribal Departments of Agriculture.

Tribal Administration of SNAP and All Federal Food Assistance Programs

Expand Substantially Underserved Trust Areas definition to all Rural Development

programs

Consistent definitions for Indian Lands to provide better access to USDA Programs

BACKGROUND

The Indian Agriculture industry accounts for $3.4 billion. Over 57 million acres of Indian

Country are engaged in food production and are supported by over 56,000 Indian

operated farms and ranches.

TRIBAL PRIORITIES

NCAI urges Congress to recognize Tribal Governments across the entire bill to achieve

many of the benefits, incentives, and protections provided to state and local governments.

Supporting local, Tribal Governments in the Farm Bill will ensure efficiency of USDA

Programs for rural Tribal communities.

Treatment as a State for Tribal Governments: Agency-Wide Parity for Tribal Governments

and Tribal Departments of Agriculture. One of the largest steps that can be taken in the

2018 Farm Bill is for Congress to permanently recognize the role Tribal governments and

Tribal Departments of Agriculture on par with State governments and Departments of

Agriculture. Tribal Departments charged with administration of Agriculture and Food

Systems must have the authority to interface with all agencies within USDA and the Office

of Intergovernmental Affairs at USDA with other offices of government. This would include

full treatment as a state for Tribal governments recognizing their laws, authority, and

jurisdiction.

Areas for Tribal Parity throughout the Farm Bill

Recognizing Tribal Law- Amend any references to “State Law” to “State and Tribal

Law” to fully recognize the jurisdiction of Indian Tribes and existing Tribal Laws

that govern Indian Lands.

Conservation Title- Including a provision in all sections of the Conservation Title to

allow tribal governments, tribal producers, and tribal entities or organizations

created for conservation and natural resource protection purposes to have full

access to every program.

Crop Insurance- Simply changing the timing of premium payment to coincide with

production would ease the burden of participation for Indian producers. Increasing

the federal subsidy rate for this type of programs has also been demonstrated to

incentivize participation and mitigate federal outlay in times of disaster.

McIntire-Stennis Parity- Allow Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) offering a

bachelor’s degree in forestry or higher to perform tribally and state-relevant

forestry research and develop a well-trained Native forestry workforce.

Tribal Administration of the SNAP and All Federal Food Assistance Programs. Provide tribal

governments and tribal organizations the direct authority to administer SNAP and all

other federal food assistance programs which Tribes currently are not authorized to do.

This can be achieved by providing tribes with “638” self-governance contract authority for

nutrition programs which exists for Departments of the Interior and Health and Human

Services. Allowing tribes to take over these functions from the federal government will

improve efficiency, reduce regulatory burdens, and support self-governance and self-

determination.

Broader Application of SUTA Language. Broadening the Substantially Underserved Trust

Area (SUTA) provision across all Rural Development programs will grow rural, Tribal

economies. Currently, SUTA is only applied to a small segment of infrastructure programs,

but more explicit guidance must be provided to allow the Secretary to exercise this

discretion more broadly. This change will help ensure more equitable access to RD

programs and authorities, and can be used to provide much-needed support to tribal

citizens living in rural communities. The change would allow the waiver of matching

requirements for projects funded through RD, which is a significant barrier to socially

disadvantaged applicant participation.

Common Definition of Indian Lands. Currently, there is no common definition of “land

owned by Indian Tribes” across all USDA programs, creating inconsistent program access

even within programs run by a single agency. Congress should address the consistency

across the family of USDA programs and authorities by supporting a common definition of

Indian Land.

For additional information, contact Maria Givens at 202.466.7767 or [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title I: Commodities

Key Points and Recommendations

• Indian Country is heavily invested in commodity food production, especially livestock which

makes up nearly $2 billion of agriculture income for tribal producers. • Ensure tribal producer eligibility for all disaster assistance programs in Title I, and increase

payments to 90 percent of value to acknowledge their unique land and market issues. • Create parity for tribal producers in Farm Service Agency Committees and decision-making.

Background Information and Context Many tribes and individual Indian producers are deeply invested in commodity food production under Title I on their lands, either through leases to non-Natives or their own production systems. More than half of all income from agriculture in Indian Country – $1.9 billion annually – comes from livestock production. Tribes and individual Indian producers need continued and improved access to price support and safety net programs, which meet the unique needs of tribal producers. This will ensure the continued growth and vitality of agriculture businesses during volatile market fluctuations and unpredictable environmental condition. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Commodities Title Amend Definitions for the Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance Programs

• Section 1501(a)(1)(B)(iv) must be amended to read: “a corporation, limited liability corporation, or other farm organizational structure organized under Federal, State law and Tribal law.” This addition creates parity for tribal governments and acknowledges the authority of entities organized under tribal law or under federal law such as Section 17 corporations.

• Update the livestock definition in Section 1501(a)(3) to include other commonly raised livestock like “reindeer,” “caribou,” “elk,” “horses,” or other animals raised or harvested in tribal communities. All of these animals must be further recognized as a livestock and eligible for full protection and program participation Department-wide.

Increase Livestock Indemnity Payments for Tribal Producers to 90 Percent

• The current 75 percent Livestock Indemnity Payment under Section 1501(b) to eligible producers who have incurred livestock death losses above the normal mortality rate, does not address the lack of land equity that exists for tribal producers on trust lands, and the unique challenges tribal livestock producers have in obtaining secure markets for their animals, which generally causes a lower rate of market return. To put tribal producers on equal footing, indemnity payments for tribally owned livestock should be increased to 90 percent.

Ensure Tribal Eligibility in the Livestock Forage Disaster Program

• A new provision under Section 1501(c) must be added to protect tribal producers’ eligibility in the Livestock Forage Disaster Program through issues of federal government preclusion outside of their control. For example, instances relating to “normal carrying capacity” may inadvertently exclude some

Version 1 – 08/03/17

tribal producers if the Bureau of Indian Affairs does not negotiate or recognize the specific environmental or other variances which impact production.

• Due to the unique challenges facing tribal livestock and forage producers, all other provisions of the program shall ensure that payment rates are set at 90 percent levels (as opposed to any lower rates identified in the law for non-tribal producers).

• Explicitly exempt tribal producers from any limitations on receiving payments on any losses due to fire on “public managed land.” Tribal lands are not “public” lands.

Farm Service Agency County Committee

• Amend the FSA County Committee determinations on normal grazing periods and drought monitor intensity to be established at the national FSA office to ensure that separate carrying capacities and normal grazing periods for each type of grazing land or pastureland are set at different rates for tribal lands and individual Indian owned land after tribal consultation.

• Require FSA to do an assessment based on Census data and Agricultural Census data to determine the population makeup of the county and conduct tribal consultation with tribal governments to guarantee that tribal members are effectively and efficiently notified of the opportunity to be nominated and considered for county committee membership. All FSA county committees in predominately tribal population areas and/or tribal land base areas should have predominately Native membership and should reference to the local administrative area which are the voting districts mapped by FSA county committees.

Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farm-Raised Fish

• Explicitly include tribes and individual Indian producers as eligible for Commodity Credit Corporation emergency relief funds for livestock, bees, and farm-raised fish for under Section 1501(d).

Trees

• Make tribal producers eligible for 80-90 percent of the cost of replacement, salvage, pruning, removal, or preparing the land or replanting, under Section 1501(e). This ensures that the higher cost of providing these remediation activities on tribal lands and individual Indian owned land is accommodated within the limitations of the program and tribal governments.

• Recognize tribal business entities organized under tribal law and individual tribal producers as “legal entities” and “persons” allowed to participate in the program.

Rulemaking Related to Significant Contribution for Active Personal Management

• Amend Section 1604 regulations related to “active personal management” or “active engagement in farming/ranching” to recognize that tribal producers, tribal business entities, and tribal governments should not be excluded from any determination of “active personal management/engagement” simply by the existence of an active lease relating to their lands.

• Require the Secretary of Agriculture to engage in tribal consultation concerning the application of this requirement to tribal producers.

Geographically Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers

• Amend Section 1606 on “Geographically Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers” to ensure that tribal governments, tribal entities, and tribal producers are explicitly recognized as farmers or ranchers eligible to participate in the program as they are often left out even in the “insular areas” provision.

Base Acres

• Require the Secretary to consult with tribal governments regarding the determination and election of “base acres” applicable to all programs under the Commodity Title.

For more information, please contact: Colby D. Duren, Policy Director and Staff Attorney, at [email protected]. This document is strictly for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice nor create an attorney/client relationship.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title II: Conservation


• USDA conservation programs must allow for the use of traditional ecological knowledge-based

conservation practices. • Cross-agency coordination between Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Bureau

of Indian Affairs must be improved to ensure all tribal producer have access to conservation programs and other U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs which require an NRCS-approved conservation plan.

• Parity must be achieved throughout the Conservation title by explicitly including “tribes” or “tribal” where “state” or “local” or “regional” agricultural producers are mentioned to ensure tribal access to all NRCS programs.

Background Information and Context Conservation planning is not only necessary for enrollment in crop insurance and other U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs and services, but conservation programs can be an essential part of land protection and product development. The lands within Indian Country are in significant need of intensified conservation practice implementation. Access to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) conservation programs and services is essential to meet those needs. While previous Farm Bill negotiations provided improvements in the reach of NRCS programs onto tribal lands and individual Indian owned land, the NRCS program portfolio could still be more effective on tribal lands and individual Indian owned land. For example, many NRCS programs are difficult to implement on Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)-managed trust lands. This makes the process of getting approvals for practices or entering into conservation cost-sharing agreements unnecessarily difficult for tribal producers. In some instances, complications can occur based on the length of lease terms pertaining to the lands. In addition to cross-agency coordination issues, highly fractionated interests which are present on many of the lands in Indian Country can make it difficult to execute and accomplish conservation goals. It is essential to not only improve coordination between USDA and BIA, but to continue to improve tribal access to conservation programs in the 2018 Farm Bill. Opportunities for Indian Country in Conservation Title Recognition of Traditional Ecological Knowledge-Based Conservation

• Develop a new section of the Conservation Title to explicitly allow a tribe or a group of tribes within a state or region to develop traditional ecological knowledge-based technical standards that will control the implementation of all conservation projects allowed under the Farm Bill. This new section would codify current NRCS practices that encourage traditional ecological knowledge-based conservation and would further recognize the fact that tribal jurisdiction and use of traditional practices to improve conservation project implementation are decisions best left to the tribal governments and individual Indian producers who live on those lands and are engaged in ongoing activities that are designed to improve environmental conditions, habitats, and their lands for agricultural purposes. These traditional ecological knowledge-based standards already have a solid scientific basis and are acknowledged by various federal research organizations and agencies.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) Land Availability for Beginning Tribal Farmers and Ranchers

• Create a new section of the Conservation Title to allow the use of CRP land or other lands engaged in conservation practices to be used by tribal citizens who are beginning farmers and ranchers in ways that do not damage the conditions of the land or resources.

Include Tribal Priorities in Definition of Priority Resource Concerns

• Amend the definition of “Priority Resource Concerns” in Section 1238D(5) of the Farm Bill to include any natural resource as determined by the Secretary that is identified at the national, state, tribal or local level as a priority for a particular area of a state or tribal area and to consider environmental disaster mitigation as a priority resource concern.

Allow Lands Held in Common and by Tribal Entities to Access Conservation Programs

• Create a new section of the Conservation Title or in sections related to eligibility determinations to ensure that lands held in common, such as reservation lands that are controlled and farmed/ranched by groups of individuals, can participate in all Conservation Title programs and that special provisions are enacted in regulations to ensure that any tribal government-allowed entity is the recognized conservation program participant (as opposed to specific individuals).

Priority for Enrollment of Tribal Lands in the Conservation Reserve Program

• Section 2001 of the 2014 Farm Bill establishes priorities for the Secretary to consider when implementing the Conservation Reserve Program and Conservation Priority Areas. Due to the prolonged periods that tribal lands have been under-enrolled in conservation programs and due to the needs of those acres and watersheds to have focused attention on enrollment in conservation programs and utilization of conservation practices on those lands, all tribal lands falling under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, tribal governments, tribal agricultural entities, and individual tribal producers, landowners or land operators should receive mandatory priority consideration for all conservation programs authorized in the upcoming Farm Bill. Further priority should be given to beginning farmers and ranchers seeking to establish or re-establish working land activities on tribal lands and commercial activities related to the reestablishment of working lands or the emergence of beginning farmers and ranchers who are tribal members utilizing those working lands. In any ranking activity conducted by USDA officials to determine which lands or resources to enroll in a conservation program allowed under this title, the Secretary and/or state conservationists or technical committees (state or tribal) shall give priority to tribal lands for enrollment in relevant programs, provided these lands or resources also meet requirements for inclusion in the programs.

Notice Regarding Conservation Activities & ARMP compliance

• Ensure conservation activities will be required to be in conformance with the tribal government’s Agricultural Resource Management Plan, if one is in place and that proper individuals or officials receive adequate notice of conservation activities.

Recognizing Tribal Law Parity

• Amend any reference to “state law” in the Conservation Title to say “state law or tribal law” and any reference to “state technical committee” to “state technical committee or tribal technical committee.”

Tribal Technical Committee

• Require each state conservationist to establish a separate tribal technical committee should any tribal headquarters exist within their state boundaries or any land under the jurisdiction of tribal governments or the BIA. These tribal technical committees shall be given the same respect and deference that is currently given to the state technical committee and each tribal technical committee shall be able to establish separate technical standards utilizing traditional ecological knowledge and, to the extent that they do so, such standards shall be the technical standards under which conservation programming can be deployed on tribal lands. Require establishment of state level inter-tribal, regional inter-tribal and national tribal advisory committees regarding conservation matters.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

No Additional Compensation for Expired Conservation Measures • When a conservation practice installed on tribal land, individual Indian owned land, or lease/permit expires, do

not require individual tribal citizens, tribal governments, or tribal entities to compensate the former lessee of the tribal lands for the installation or maintenance of such practice since those practices have already been the subject of cost share with the federal government. Any further payment to lessees or users of the lands would constitute a windfall or unjust enrichment to such user of the land.

NRCS Report on Natural Resource Inventory Investments Needs on Tribal Lands

• Require USDA-NRCS to immediately develop a report to be delivered]to all tribal governments and individual Indian producers identifying which tribal lands still need proper Natural Resource Inventory funding support to perform soil and range surveys to create a baseline report of needs for said lands.

Traditional Ecological Knowledge Consideration for Conservation Compliance • Consider traditional ecological knowledge whenever the Secretary determines the level of compliance of

landowners who have lands or resources enrolled in any of the Conservation Title programs, particularly when determining whether a meaningful stewardship threshold has been reached.

BIA Actions Responsible for Non-Compliance

• Do not determine any tribal landowner or operator of lands in violation of any term of a conservation program enrollment requirement when the BIA can be established as the cause for any alleged non-compliance, whether through delay in action, other non-action in decision-making requirements, or any other reason.

Tribal Priority in Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)

• Give priority consideration to tribal governments, tribal entities, and tribal landowners and operators to participate in EQIP program activities, in addition to the 5 percent tribal set-aside. This priority shall be widely advertised throughout each state in which the lands are located, and each tribal headquarters in the state shall receive notice of all activities related to the EQIP program. Tribal landowners and operators shall be entitled to additional priority for any activities related to organic and organic transition practices on their farms and ranches. Each tribal government shall be invited to at least two meetings with the state conservationist in a government-to-government conversation concerning the implementation of NRCS conservation programs that could be beneficial to tribal lands. When requested by tribal headquarters, the state conservationist shall enter into cooperative agreements and other activities that will establish a plan by which NRCS programming will be deployed on tribal lands for which the tribal government has an ongoing plan for conserving and protecting habitat, grasslands, rangelands, and other lands and land uses within tribal jurisdiction.

Tribal Parity in the Conservation Title

• Include a provision in all sections of the Conservation Title allowing tribal governments, tribal producers, and tribal entities or organizations created for conservation and natural resource protection purposes to have full access to every program allowed under the Conservation Title. Wherever reference is made to “state” or “local” or “regional” agricultural producer, the terms “tribal” should be inserted into that section to ensure that inadvertent failure to list tribal governments, tribal producers, or tribal organizations does not preclude them from participating or relegate them to a lesser importance or priority within the relevant section.

Technical Assistance Funding for Tribal Governments and Organizations

• Due to the relatively low use of all conservation programs on tribal lands and individual Indian owned land, give the Secretary the authority to create a permanent fund within the available technical assistance funding authorities, appropriations, and programs to ensure that specialized technical assistance is made available on a continual basis to tribal governments, tribal organizations, and tribal landowners and producers throughout Indian Country, including in all tribal areas of Alaska and Hawaii. These targeted technical assistance funds shall be given priority to tribal organizations that have an established record of providing technical assistance to tribal audiences and shall demonstrate their knowledge of and ability to successfully complete projects involving conservation programming with tribal audiences. The funding shall not be provided to predominately non-Native organizations with little to no experience and knowledge of working with tribal audiences. Multi-year cooperative agreements should be authorized under such technical assistance programs.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Alternative Funding Arrangements –EQIP and Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) • The 2014 Farm Bill allowed for entering alternative funding arrangements with tribal governments to carry out

the intention of the EQIP program and the CSP if the Secretary determined that the goals and objectives of the law would be met by such arrangements and that statutory limitations on entering arrangements with individual producers would not be exceeded. This provision needs more attention and improved implementation to ensure that each tribal government is offered the opportunity for alternative arrangements.

Tribal Conservation Technical Committee

• Authorize the Secretary to work with BIA and a technical committee made up of tribal government representatives from each of the BIA regions to formulate a set of initiatives and programs that can be carried out under existing laws as well as a set of programs that may be needed under future conservation program authorities to improve the conditions of tribal lands throughout the United States. This interdepartmental entity shall be put in place no later than 12 months after the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill and shall issue its report no later than 24 months after passage of the 2018 Farm Bill. The interdepartmental efficiencies and improvements shall be undertaken immediately upon the issuance of the interdepartmental report and annual reports of improvements and actions taken under this provision shall be made to Congress.

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)

• Create a pilot program to explore the use of livestock to improve soil health in fields set aside by the Conservation Reserve Program, and allow for a rental rate over and above the CRP payment to be made to the producer. Scientific studies have demonstrated the effect that a lack of animal impact can have on the soil. This program would seek to determine the impacts and benefits of this pilot program, for consideration in subsequent iterations of the Farm Bill or conservation legislation. Preference in the use of this land would be afforded first to SDR producers, Young and Beginning Producers, and then to customary producers. The more need that is met through the rental agreement, the smaller the reduction in CRP Payment.

Beginning producers in Conservation Programs

• Encourage and allow all beginning producers to participate in conservation programs and amend all conservation programs to incentivize beginning producers by removing the “one year of control” requirement.

Rollback CSP program to 2013 standards

• Reinstitute the CSP program 2013 standards. Next Generation Easement

• Incorporate a new “next generation easement” in conservation programs. This “easement” should incorporate tax credits for landowners who are mentoring new and beginning producers and should include a death tax “write-off” for farm transfer to the next generation.

For more information, please contact: Colby D. Duren, Policy Director and Staff Attorney, at [email protected].

This document is strictly for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice nor create an attorney/client relationship.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill

Title III: Trade


• Support and maintain tribal food and agriculture businesses entry into foreign markets by expanding Indian Country’s access to the Market Access Program (MAP) and protecting unique tribal foods against fraud.

• Improve interdepartmental coordination and tribal government and individual Indian producer inclusion on all U.S. trade missions.

Background Information and Context The Trade Title programs are a vital part of food production for all food industries, especially in Indian Country. A growing number of tribes and individual Indian producers are engaged in trade of food and agriculture products and have participated in MAP via the Intertribal Agriculture Council’s American Indian Foods Program, which provides export-readiness training assistance and the incorporation of products into international food trade shows. Tribal food products have high market demand in overseas markets; however, the hurdles necessary to engage in such markets are complex and limit tribal participation. Improvements to the Trade Title can help support and build tribal food businesses and provide new markets for unique and traditional tribal foods, while protecting producers and increasing economic development. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Trade Title

Expand Market Access Program (MAP) • Expand MAP by substantially increasing the funding available to the existing agreements that

facilitate coordination and administration of the MAP program and result in increasing tribal food business participation in the program so that tribal audiences and more tribal food and agriculture businesses can benefit from the program. The impact of such engagement will further solidify local food economies and food businesses and stabilize tribal economies.

Supporting Unique Tribal Foods and Fighting Native Food Fraud

• Require the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to institute a system by which fraudulent foods that mimic tribal foods and tribal food businesses can be uncovered and prevented in the marketplace. Food fraud is on the rise throughout the world, and unscrupulous food business entities are already trying to mimic or replicate unique tribal food products. Those businesses should not be allowed to participate in programs that allow them to access markets with products that perpetrate frauds on tribal food producers or food businesses.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Interdepartmental Coordination to Support Tribal Trade • Include Indian Country as the USDA develops a stronger relationship with the Department

of Commerce on food and agriculture trade. A special interdepartmental coordination group with USDA, Department of Commerce, Department of State, and other applicable agencies should be created to ensure that tribal food production is properly supported and encouraged on tribal lands and is thereafter made a part of the U.S. trade missions and efforts to promote agricultural trade.

Tribal Representatives on U.S. Trade Missions

• Include tribal governments, tribal food businesses, and individual tribal food producers on all foreign trade missions undertaken by the United States to further assist the access of tribal food products to such markets.

Study on Tribal Representation on USDA Advisory Bodies

• Require the Secretary to study all Trade Title programs to ensure that tribal representatives are included on all advisory bodies related to agricultural trade issues and concerns.


Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title IV: Nutrition


• Approximately 25 percent of Native Americans receive some type of federal food assistance, and in

some tribal communities, participation is as high as 60-80 percent. • Indian Country needs a consistent, comprehensive, and tribal-led approach to tailor federal food

assistance programs to the specific needs of tribal communities and citizens. • Allow tribes the option to enter into Self-Determination Contracts pursuant to P.L. 93-638 for

administration of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and all other federal feeding programs.

• Improve the funding, flexibility and infrastructure of the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR).

• Require a CBO or CRS inquiry into the impact of drastic cuts or elimination of food assistance programs on the overall agricultural economies of tribes.

Background Information and Context With 25 percent of all Native Americans receiving some type of federal food assistance, and in some tribal communities as high as 60-80 percent, the importance of the Nutrition Title programs in Indian Country cannot be overstated. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides benefits to 24 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native households; 276 Tribes and 100 Inter-Tribal organizations administer the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR); and American Indians and Alaska Natives make up more than 12 percent of the participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), to name a few. These participation rates hinge on limited meaningful employment opportunities, poor transportation options to food sources or food retail, lack of food retail locations in Tribal communities, the age and population characteristics of the individuals in the communities, and the prevalence of chronic health problems, among other issues. Because the rate of obesity, diabetes, chronic heart diseases, cancer, and other health problems is so high in so many communities in Indian Country, participation rates in the feeding programs when coupled with the prevalence of persistent poverty create a fragile system of food access across Indian Country. A consistent, comprehensive, and tribal-led approach that is tailored to the needs of Indian Country is paramount. Any cuts or changes to reduce direct participation in the programs directly diminish the food, and in some cases the only meals, available to Native children, pregnant women, elders, and veterans. No one, especially our most vulnerable tribal citizens, should ever have to go without food. Tribal governments have consistently sought the authority to take over the administration of federal food assistance programs, like SNAP, which they currently cannot run, to not only improve food access and efficiency of the programs, but to further tribal self-governance and serve the unique needs of their citizens and communities. Programs like FDPIR must be improved to allow tribes to better respond to the infrastructure, storage and transportation challenges, and provide the means and support to purchase traditional, locally grown food in food packages. Traditional and locally grown foods from Native farmers, ranchers, fishers and producers encourages healthy living, cultural sustainability, and traditional practices and supports economic development, food production, and agribusiness in Indian Country.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Opportunities for Indian Country in the Nutrition Title Tribal Administration of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and All Federal Food Assistance Programs

• Provide tribal governments and tribal organizations the direct authority to administer SNAP and all other federal food assistance programs which they are currently not allowed to directly manage. This can be achieved by providing tribes with “638” self-governance contract authority for nutrition programs which exists for Department of the Interior and Indian Health Service programs. Allowing tribes to take over these functions from the federal government will improve efficiency, reduce regulatory burdens, and support tribal self-governance and self-determination.

Improvements to the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) and other Federal Feeding Programs

• Since 2015, several tribal leaders have consulted with the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) over significant improvements needed to FDPIR. While Tribes have made some headway with USDA, significant legislative changes still need to occur within the FDPIR program, including:

• Eliminating the matching funds requirement for each of the FDPIR program sites to participate, or limiting the matching requirement to 5 percent.

• Providing tribal feeding sites with parity to state counterparts programs by allowing them to engage in carryover of unspent funds from year to year. This unequal treatment is problematic to tribal feeding programs whose funding needs, particularly for food distribution infrastructure (e.g., warehouses) could be met by allowing carryover funding.

• Requiring FNS to continue to engage in tribal consultation. • Requiring FNS to engage in tribal consultation concerning reasonable alternatives to the regulatory-

approved practice of “tailgating” at FDPIR program sites. No FDPIR program site should be allowed to engage in this practice as it is demeaning to program participants.

• Requiring FNS consult with tribes and develop a written, public contingency plan in the event of any lapses in funding, disasters, government closures, or related incidents which might interrupt or cause the stoppage of food delivery.

• Allowing those who participate in the FDPIR program to also simultaneously participate in the SNAP program. Neither program provides enough food for participants in remote places; by allowing simultaneous usage of the programs these two supplemental feeding programs can be combined to actually result in addressing food insecurity.

• Requiring FNS to hire at least one national tribal liaison located in its Washington, D.C., offices and one regional tribal liaison located in each regional FNS office subject to a federal Native American hiring preference or high levels of experience with tribal communities.

• Increase nutrition education funding to at least $5 million per year and create an alternative to competitive funding so each tribal program receives support for nutrition education program materials through a coordinated approach.

• Requiring FDPIR traditional food purchases (bison, wild rice, salmon, blue corn, and other products) to be a regular part of food package purchases and not require supplemental or special appropriations to purchase these foods.

• Requiring FNS to engage in tribal consultation to compile a budget for FDPIR warehouse and other infrastructure needs to be included in its entirety in each federal budget cycle and request until it is fully funded.

• Requiring all FDPIR purchasing and distribution to occur on a regional basis and include as much locally and regionally tribal-produced food as reasonably possible.

• Remove the “Urban Place” definition to allow tribes and the USDA to work collaboratively to serve even more tribal citizens who need nutritious food, regardless of where they live.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title V: Credit


• Many tribal communities are located in “Credit Deserts,” where access to fair and reasonable credit

terms is limited or non-existent. • Improvements must continue to be made to Farm Service Agency (FSA) programs to address the

availability, efficiency, and application of credit programs in Indian Country. Background Information and Context During uncertain economic times, Indian Country is always hit as hard or harder than most other areas of the country because of the remote and isolated nature of our farms and the reality that most reservation communities are located in “credit deserts.” While the Farm Service Agency (FSA) has made many improvements to credit and debt servicing to farmers and ranchers in Indian Country in the post-Keepseagle era, the 2018 Farm Bill must continue to address the longstanding issue of credit access for tribal producers, in addition to providing tribal-specific training and technical assistance on financial education and loan servicing programs. This Farm Bill must also address the lingering administrative coordination issues experienced by tribal producers when seeking loans or loan servicing and dealing with both the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Credit Title must create efficiencies and eliminate delays in approvals and the related failure to extend deserved credit to tribal producers. USDA and BIA should be required to create an administrative team shared by both departments whose role is to review and update all federal practices and regulations that hinder tribal food production, tribal food system lending, and tribal loan servicing that support and maintain tribal food systems. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Credit Title Structuring Loans to Suit the Business

• Authorize several innovative loan structuring measures in the coming Farm Bill. For example, currently FSA will lend 100 percent the cost of bred livestock. They will then subordinate their lien position to a local commercial lender for annual production costs, increasing the amount of debt secured by the same amount of assets, sometimes by as much as 25 percent. If the first year of operating expenses could be included in the original loan, and amortized over the life of the secured asset, producers would end the year with cash in the bank, allowing producers to take advantage of pricing opportunities on input materials, replacement stock, or expansion opportunities. Such an approach would incentivize operating from available resources, instead of what could be borrowed on an annual basis.

Debt Restructuring for FSA Planning Prices

• When commodity price cycles run contrary to the mandated FSA Planning Prices, despite a producer’s inclination to plan conservatively, producers are often faced with choice of accepting a plan based on those planning prices or shutting down their operation. In cases where FSA planning prices are more than 20 percent higher than the actual prices, a producer should be able to restructure their debt in a way that will not count towards lifetime limits on loan servicing.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Socially Disadvantaged Interest Rate • Update the Socially Disadvantaged Rate (SDR) interest rate for FSA loans from a static number (currently 5

percent) to be indexed to the prevailing rate and set a commensurate proportion of that rate, 50 percent of the standard rate. The current rate was set years ago when the prevailing interest rate was in the double digits and should already have been revisited and revised.

FSA Food Loan Authority

• Under current program guidelines, there is some latitude for producers whose production will take a period to fully ramp up. Initial payments can be made at an 18-month mark rather than within the first year. This same methodology should be employed for producers wishing to take their raw product to the next step in the value chain.

Keepseagle-class Forgiveness

• The Keepseagle litigation proved there was a systemic and deeply rooted history of discrimination at the USDA against Native and other producers. While Native Americans could avail themselves of the opportunity for debt settlement and a small monetary award to attempt to make them whole, some successful claimants also received a “clean slate” when dealing with the FSA in the future. With only 3,000 successful claimants of an anticipated 12,000 potential claimants, many Native producers, still feeling the disenfranchisement of decades of disparate treatment, did not take part in the claims process. Allowing the larger pool of potential Keepseagle claimants to experience a “clean slate” would be a no-cost change that would improve future opportunities for many tribal producers.

Remove the Graduation Requirement for FSA programs

• Due to the general lack of credit availability on and near Indian reservations, it is difficult to access viable credit rates for even experienced producers operating farms and ranches on trust lands. Removing the statutory requirement for producers on Indian reservations to have graduated from FSA programs would allow agriculture operations to be more stable and assist other producers who farm and ranch in areas where credit access is tenuous at best.

Remove the Requirement for Private Credit Denial

• Explicitly exempt tribal producers from the FSA requirement of obtaining three denial letters from private credit sources in order to participate in an FSA loan program. The general lack of private lending available in Indian Country renders the requirement onerous and unduly burdensome.

Create Common Definition of Land Owned by Indian Tribes across all USDA

• Currently, there is no common definition of “land owned by Indian Tribes” across all USDA programs creating inconsistent program access even within programs run by a single agency. An alternative to placing the definition in the Credit Title or another a section having application broadly across the entire Department, is to place it within the Definitions section of the Conservation Title, where many problems associated with lack of common definition are most pronounced. Regardless of where such definition is placed, attention should be paid to consistency across the family of USDA programs and authorities.

GAO Study on Credit Access in Indian Country

• Conduct an in-depth analysis by the Government Accountability Office into the nature of credit in Indian Country; specifically examining compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act by banks on and near Indian Reservations.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title VI: Rural Development


• The Rural Development (RD) programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are essential for

rural and reservation tribal communities to develop and improve declining infrastructure systems while spurring economic development and job creation in tribal communities.

• Many ready-to-go (“shovel-ready”) tribal infrastructure and community development projects have gone unfunded over the past several years, leaving promises to Indian Country and rural communities unrealized.

• RD must have dedicated funding and technical assistance for tribal governments as part of the federal trust responsibility and to ensure that tribal communities and the rural communities around them thrive.

• Tribes must be consulted during the restructuring of the USDA’s RD agency due to its unique impact on tribal economies and tribal economic development. Any budget shifts must also receive tribal consultation before changes occur.

Background Information and Context With more than 100 million acres of tribal lands and individual Indian owned land, located in primarily rural areas across 34 states, Rural Development Title programs and funding are vitally important to tribal governments, communities, individual Indian producers, and tribal businesses. In fact, the Rural Development grant and loan programs are sometimes the only option tribes and their neighboring communities have for building new infrastructure or updating antiquated systems essential to spur and sustain economic development and growth in their rural communities. However, there are still issues with accessing and funding Rural Development programs. For example, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development (RD) Water and Waste Disposal Program did not fund 28 tribal projects which submitted applications in Fiscal Year (FY) 2016. Of those, 15 were complete applications, which requested only $18 million ($16.8 million in grant funding and $1.2 million in direct loan financing), that could have been approved if the agency had additional funding. The 13 incomplete applications requested $37.1 million ($18.8 in grant funding and $18.3 in direct loan financing). In FY 2016, RD electric programs still had remaining loan funds at the end of the year. Yet, the High Energy Cost Grants Program, which provides grants to help decrease the cost of electricity in areas where energy costs are 275 percent of the national average or higher, received more than $48 million in eligible requests with substantial representation from tribal entities and Native Alaskan corporations, yet only $16.9 million was available. The high levels of need in Indian Country go unmet. Making small adjustments to the Rural Development Title will help tribes build strong economies, develop state-of-the-art infrastructure systems, support individual Indian producer businesses, and create jobs, all while promoting and advancing tribal self-governance and tribal self-determination. These improvements in turn support the broader rural communities. In addition, steps should be taken to ensure that RD staff (and all USDA staff) have a thoroughly and modern understanding of how tribes and individual Indian producers do business so that interpretations of RD funding authorities do not inappropriately affect tribes, tribal producers, and tribal businesses. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Rural Development Title Implement SUTA Provisions Throughout all Rural Development Programs

• Further broaden the Substantially Underserved Trust Area (SUTA) provision across all RD programs. Currently, SUTA is only applied to a small segment of infrastructure programs, but more explicit guidance must be provided

Version 1 – 08/03/17

to allow the Secretary to exercise this discretion more broadly. This change will help ensure more equitable access to RD programs and authorities, and can be used to provide much-needed support to tribal citizens living in rural communities. The change would, among other things, allow the waiver of matching requirements for projects funded throughout RD, which can be a significant barrier to socially disadvantaged applicant participation in RD business and infrastructure projects.

Rural Development Tribal Set-Aside

• Provide a tribal set-aside in either terms of percentage of the funding portfolio or a specific funding level for tribal applications within each of the RD program authorities to address the inadequacy and general lack of rural infrastructure in Indian Country. The trust responsibility of the federal government to tribes provides the broad foundation for such set-aside. Without dedicated funding for tribal rural development, the promise of these places will never be realized and Indian Country’s infrastructure will continue to decline. In many areas around the country, tribal governments are the strongest remaining rural government entity. In some locations, tribal governments have taken over the management of key infrastructure (such as water systems, electric, and other utilities) because there is no other sound governmental or non-governmental entity that can handle these functions.

Establish a Permanent Rural Development Tribal Technical Assistance Office

• Establish a permanent office providing technical assistance across all RD funding authorities via a cooperative agreement with USDA for two reasons. First, the complexities of lending and infrastructure establishment in Indian Country – tied to the nature of the trust land base – call for the establishment of such an office that can prepare and monitor lessons learned, establish user-friendly application systems, and assist staff at the tribal or business level in preparing applications. This is a function the federal government cannot readily undertake. Such assistance will also provide needed insight to federal staff in the ongoing execution of their roles by providing a single point-of-contact for all concerned. Second, the trust responsibility of the federal government to tribes supports the need to establish such assistance interventions. This is not unheard of, as RD (particularly in the infrastructure arena) has field staff who assist agency staff and the applicant in analyzing financial viability, key engineering specifications, and related technical requirements for more complex infrastructure projects.

Maintain the Under Secretary for Rural Development Position

• Maintain an Under Secretary for Rural Development in the 2018 Farm Bill and all additional sequent legislation and appropriations packages. Having an Under Secretary whose primary duties are to focus on RD programs and funding is critical for Indian Country and rural America. Any changes that would impact the Under Secretary role for Rural Development must be the subject of tribal consultation.

Uplift America by Supporting CDFIs Loan Authority

• Develop a process to allow small, new, and emerging Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) access to loan authority. The concept of batching and obligating all loan guarantee authority annually is a game changer. The requirements put upon CDFIs to participate in this endeavor are patently prohibitive. Only the largest CDFIs could secure any meaningful funding levels, and some had threatened litigation to do that.

Extend Rural Electric Loan and Grant Program Authority to CDFIs

• Rural electric cooperatives are uniquely poised to be economic development drivers in their communities. Often, they choose not to avail themselves of this opportunity. In cases where a rural electric cooperative chooses not to participate in this program in the past, local CDFIs should have the opportunity to carry out the function.

Maintain Rural Water Program Funding

• Rural water and waste water systems are essential to community support and economic growth in Indian Country. The rural water and waste water program funding in the Rural Development Title should never be lost. Tribal governments, individual Indian producers, reservations, and remote and isolated communities will be severely undercut in the protection and growth of their food systems and their ability to access markets for their food production markets if access to funding for rural water systems is lost or diminished. This is a matter of food insecurity and economic and environmental justice.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title VII: Research


• Research Title programs must allow for the development of tribal research, education, and Native youth

in agriculture by making programs and funding more accessible to Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), support a tribally led focus on traditional knowledges and practices, and provide additional opportunities for education.

• Fund the Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program at a minimum of $10 million to address the persistent inequity in educating and developing Native American extension resource programming and Native youth in food and agriculture programming.

• Provide dedicated funding, and tribal preference, at National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) to build tribal research and educational capacity.

• Require all institutions (non-TCUs) that receive any funding for extension programming in states that have tribal lands and tribal producers to report and demonstrate their work with tribal governments, tribal communities, and tribal producers and their cooperative and respectful coordination with TCUs in close proximity. These institutions should be required to conduct a percentage of their overall work that is equal to the amount of land in the state held by Indians, the Indian farms in those states, and such extension programming must be done with Indian communities and done by staff experienced in and knowledgeable of issues important to Indian Country.

• Removal of FRTEP from the 2008 Farm Bill requirements that all Smith-Lever programs be competitive and reinstate the consultative requirements for FRTEP implementation.

Background Information and Context Monitoring and exploring old and new knowledge regarding plant and animal health, exploring the impact of science to solve food problems, tackling societal issues related to food and health, and ensuring our food supplies are sound and resilient through food and agriculture research is critical to our food, health and self-sufficiency. Accessing research, building tribal research systems within TCUs, and supporting educational institutions within communities are critical to stabilizing tribal agriculture and food systems, food production, and tribal communities. We must also continue focusing on the importance of traditional knowledge, which is best done at tribal-owned and managed institutions. Research Title programs must allow for educating the next generation of tribal producers, scientists, technical specialists, business managers, engineers, lawyers, and related professionals who advise and support the agriculture and food sectors. There are many Native youth who aspire to these career paths, and the funding and programs in the Research Title must help support these goals. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Research Title Parity in Funding for the Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program (FRTEP)

• Increase funding for the Federally Recognized Tribal Extension Program (FRTEP) to at least $10 million, and preferably increased to greater levels of funding. FRTEP supports farmers, natural resources managers, youth (via 4-H youth programs), and communities by providing an agent to liaise with other USDA programs, provide

Version 1 – 08/03/17

training in farm and ranch business management, supervise 4-H and youth development activities, and coordinate special training programs, including the application of new agriculture technologies, among many other vital activities. While there are more than 3,100 extension offices available to farmers nationwide (through the institutions in the land grant system), the current $3 million funding level provides only 36 FRTEP extension agents to serve more than 50 million acres of tribal lands, a growing number of tribal food producers, and 567 federally recognized tribal reservations as well as many state-recognized tribal communities. Providing more than $10 million in funding would begin to address this persistent inequity by nearly doubling the FRTEP staff and the number of Native youth served by the program. Greater attention must be given to whether the land grant extension system funding is being used appropriately or in such a way that tribal communities and producers receive the resources they need in relation to the proportionate formula funding distributed. The current system of competitive funding is also in need of adjusting, as it results in long-standing and effective programs being cast aside in favor of new programs with no established track record; and States like South Dakota with nearly 19 percent of the land owned by Indians not receiving funding at all. Consultative review of all FRTEP applications must be reinstated.

Research Title Funding Mechanisms

• Update funding systems to reflect the research and educational needs of tribal communities. The competitive and formula funding mechanisms within the Research Title can provide much-needed research and development, infrastructure development, education, and extension of knowledge, but the assumptions about the funding systems have outlived their usefulness.

TCU Eligibility for all National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) Funding

• Make TCUs eligible for all USDA-NIFA funding authorities. TCU extension professionals are not present among enough tribes, and they are currently not provided with even the minimum level of funding to accomplish their work. However, FRTEP, due to its unique history and implementation must be excluded from this requirement as the circumstances of the FRTEP program is entirely different.

Additional Resources for Tribal College Extension, Research, and Education Programs

• Increase non-FRTEP funding considerably for Tribal College extension programs so they can effectively address the needs for tribal research and education related to tribal food systems and food producers.

• Require extension programs funded at 1862 institutions to provide services to tribal food systems, so that there is not a gap in tribal educational scholarships, internships, and critical needs. The growth of Native food systems requires the improvement of access and parity within the Research Title.

• Commission a comprehensive study to explore the potential ability of 1862 Land Grant Institutions to share administrative functions, classroom and faculty resources, and other related support mechanisms.

Tribal Set-Aside, Preference, and Funding at NIFA

• Provide tribal set-asides and preferences within all non-FRTEP NIFA funding authorities while retaining the competitive nature of the funding, which is necessary to continue building capacity and strength.

• Amend the agricultural legal funding authority contained in the 2014 Farm Bill to ensure that competition for the funds occurs and funding is set-aside to be provided to organizations and entities that have a proven specialty and primary focus on Indian law issues that intersect with food and agriculture law.

• Require NIFA funding authorities to focus a portion of their work on building knowledge and capacity in business development unique to tribal lands and individual Indian owned land, and approach this work separately due to the unique complexities in tribal land use, law, regulatory burdens, and related issues. Since business training and the development of solid business planning tools are also necessary, funding would be best focused around risk management education programs and the funding authorities in this area.

• Allow tribal governments and tribal organizations full access to all nutrition education programs at NIFA, including SNAP-Ed, and all research programs related to building knowledge in nutrition, health, obesity, and diabetes prevention.

• Include a set-aside in Small Business Innovation Research projects funded through NIFA for tribal projects leading for commercialization of food products or food systems innovations.

• Ensure that the federal formula funding authorities that support basic research, education, and extension funding for 1862 institutions is revisited to ensure that the institutions receiving such funds based on the federal formula actually provide research, education, and extension services to the tribal communities, farms, ranches,

Version 1 – 08/03/17

farmers, and rural citizens who are counted in the formula that establishes funding allocations. At present tribal interests are considered in establishing formula allocations but there is no follow through to determine if actual projects result in such funding allocations.

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program

• Reauthorize the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program with a set-aside for tribal sustainable agriculture project funding.

Agricultural Research Service Projects on Traditional Ecological Knowledge

• Launch and support a significant number of research projects within the Agricultural Research Service that focus on the important role that traditional knowledge plays in the environmental, natural resource, ecological, food science, nutrition, and health arenas. Funding provided in these unique content areas must be done with full consultation with tribal governments and full compliance with modern cultural practices and recognition.

Multi-Tribal Funding for Research Title Programs

• Develop a separate funding authority, like the Sun Grant or Sea Grant authorities, to allow multi-tribal, multi-state, and consortium approaches to meeting the research, education, and extension needs of Indian Country.

Native Youth Grants

• Include a provision of grants for youth-focused organizations in Indian Country that focus on developing food and agriculture leadership and scientific knowledge in all grants for youth organizations.

TCU Center of Excellence

• Encourage, allow, and include the Centers of Excellence approach to funding in the next Farm Bill Research Title.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title VIII: Forestry


• Tribal forests and woodlands make up one third of all tribal lands held in trust, and provide resources,

jobs, and economic development opportunities for many tribal governments. • Many tribal forests and adjacent federal forests contain sacred places and important trust and treaty-

protected resources. • Tribes must be provided parity throughout the Forestry Title to better access, manage and develop

tribal and federal forests and woodlands to protect tribal resources while providing jobs and economic development.

Background Information and Context Indian forests and woodlands comprise 18.6 million acres, or one third, of the total 57 million acres of Indian land held and managed in trust by the federal government. More than 300 tribes have forests, which are one of the principle renewable resources available to tribes. Across the country, Indian forests provide more than $40 million in annual tribal governmental revenues, 19,000 jobs in and around tribal communities, wildlife habitat, and food and medicine sources for Indian people. The proper health and management of Indian forests are crucial to tribal and rural economies.

Further, many American Indian and Alaska Native tribes have long-standing and deeply spiritual relationships with the forests where they have lived for centuries. The U.S. Forest Service now maintains National Forests that coexist within and among the boundaries of current and historic tribal homelands. Since many tribes either live within the jurisdiction of federal agencies with forest responsibilities (primarily the U.S. Forestry Service at U.S. Department of Agriculture), or have trust and treaty rights resources located on federal forest lands, the intensely specific and expertise-dependent issues around forests require a specialized focus on policy changes in the Forest Title. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Forestry Title Improve the Tribal Forest Protection Act (TFPA)

• Adopt the legislative text from the Sections 301 and 303 of the 114th Congress’s H.R. 2642 (Rep. Westerman) in the new Farm Bill.

• Include the TFPA streamlining provisions to improve the timelines for review and implementation of forest restoration projects requested by tribes.

• Allow for greater tribal participation in TFPA projects by authorizing, as a discretionary pilot program, the application of “638” contracting authority to TFPA projects on Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands.

Cooperative Management of Adjacent Federal Lands

• Since tribes continue to have legal, historic, and economic connections to adjacent federal forests, include a pilot program authorizing tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to conduct cooperative, discretionary forest restoration activities on Forest Service and BLM lands using existing regulations governing the management of Indian forests. Additional means and legal and financial arrangements that would support the cooperative management of forest lands with and through Tribes must be explored.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Tribal Forestry Workforce Development

• Authorize the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to fund a Native American forestry workforce coordination and development program through an intertribal organization familiar with Tribal forestry issues. The Indian Forest Management Assessment Team, an independent panel of scientists, has identified the need to recruit, train and retain a future forestry and fire workforce to address the growing shortage of trained workers for the management and operation of Indian forests. This shortage of forest workers constrains the ability of tribes and related federal agencies to effectively manage and protect tribal forests and forest-related natural resources and to participate in broader landscape-based forest management activities.

McIntire-Stennis Parity

• Allow Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) offering a bachelor’s degree in forestry or higher to perform tribally and state-relevant forestry research and develop a well-trained Native forestry workforce. The McIntire-Stennis Act of 1962 dedicates funds to states to pursue forestry research at state colleges and universities and to help train the next generation of forest scientists and professionals. All 1862 land grant institutions and, since the 2008 Farm Bill, 1890 Historically Black Colleges and Universities have access to funding, yet the National Institute of Food and Agriculture made just under $32 million available under McIntire-Stennis. While tribal trust lands are included in the formula that allocates funding to the individual states, the 1994 Land Grant TCUs remain ineligible to receive research funding.

Fire Suppression Priorities

• Any federal wildfire suppression efforts in the Farm Bill should ensure that Indian forests are properly prioritized in fire suppression activities and funding. Current priorities place protection of private structures above protection of tribal forest assets held, managed and protected by the U.S. as trustee. As a result, in the 2015 fire season, suppression crews were removed from wildfires on Indian trust forests to protect private structures. The fires on Indian trust forests exploded, destroying hundreds of thousands of acres and millions of board feet of timber vitally important to tribal economies. These priorities, allowing federally protected trust assets essential to tribal communities to be sacrificed to protect private structures, needs review.

Support Anchor Forests

• Provide authority to develop more Anchor Forest initiatives. The Inter-Tribal Timber Council, its member Tribes, the U.S. Forest Service, and other forest resource stakeholders have recently completed a pilot study in Washington State and report on an “Anchor Forest” concept to foster landscape-scale forest collaboration and management projects intended to improve forest health while preserving local logging, milling, and other critical infrastructure. The pilot study was successful and many tribes in the Great Lakes states and Southwest are interested in developing Anchor Forest projects in their own regions.

Protection of Sacred Places

• Ensure that interdepartmental efforts to protect Indian sacred places are maintained and strengthened, and that the responsibilities of USDA and other federal departments to consult with tribes on an ongoing basis concerning sacred places continually occurs. The Memorandum of Understanding among departments of the federal government must be kept in place indefinitely.

Tribal Representatives on Forestry Advisory Bodies

• Require tribal representation on all local, regional and national planning and implementation bodies which serve in advisory capacities to USDA and the U.S. Forest Service.

Parity Between Forest Services and NRCS Land Language

• Create parity between Forest Service management agreement language and Natural Resources Conservation Service determination of land control language to preserve tribal sovereignty and rights to gather/manage traditional plant stands and enhance opportunities for tribes to leverage Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) assistance on traditional lands under Forest Service jurisdiction.


Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title IX: Energy


• Tribal lands, individual Indian owned land, and natural resources hold immense potential to develop

bio-based energy economic development, energy infrastructure buildouts, and jobs in tribal communities and surrounding rural communities.

• Establish a Tribal Bio-Based Energy Development Grant Program to help tribal governments, tribal producers, and tribal business entities develop bio-energy businesses and production.

Background Information and Context Energy projects in Indian Country hold immense potential for diversifying tribal economies while bringing essential energy infrastructure to remote and isolated communities. Growing crops for energy purposes or converting natural resources on tribal lands and individual Indian owned land to bio-energy projects is an important tool for economic development and self-sufficiency. The 2018 Farm Bill can further support tribal bio-energy projects focused on the needs of remote tribal food producers which embrace the importance of research and development of products and systems on tribal lands. This will not only help tribes reach their energy production and infrastructure goals, but support the surrounding rural communities in dire need of lower energy costs, jobs, and economic development. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Energy Title Establish a Tribal Bio-Based Energy Development Grant Program

• Create a Tribal Bio-Based Energy Development Grant program in the 2018 Farm Bill to help spark economic development and energy infrastructure development in tribal communities, while providing low-cost energy to tribal communities and surrounding rural areas. This grant program for tribal governments and wholly owned tribal entities would operate much like a grant in lieu of tax credit, similar to the existing Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI) Program. Further, the Tribal Bio-Based Energy Development Grant program should specify the eligibility of tribally chartered and federally chartered tribal corporations for Rural Development Programs, including for grants and loan programs, as well as any technical assistance programs available. Since the U.S. Department of Agriculture has made a policy statement that it will recognize federally charted Section 17 Tribal Corporations as eligible entities for the Rural Development programs, the program should codify this and clarify that tribally chartered tribal corporations are also eligible.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title X: Horticulture


• Many traditional Native foods fall under the designation of horticulture crops and are necessary to

support food sovereignty and healthy food access in Indian Country. • USDA programs which oversee horticulture crops must engage in tribal consultation to ensure the

unique needs of tribal producers are being met. • The Farm Bill needs to include provisions to protect Native foods in the marketplace, as well as Native

seeds and traditional foods. Background Information and Context The Horticulture Title supports specialty crop and organic farming operations with provisions that provide trade promotion and risk management assistance. Horticulture crops are extremely important to tribes and individual Indian producers for many reasons, and as a result, tribes and tribal producers must have equitable access to the programs authorized in the Horticulture Title. First, and most importantly, many of the traditional crops that are so important to the cultural and spiritual lives of Indigenous people are “produce” or “specialty crops” under federal law. Second, there are many individual and community acts of food sovereignty that are occurring throughout Indian Country that are critical to improving the health and wellness of tribal citizens. Indian Country health data is among the worst in the country. Chronic diseases, stroke, cancer, heart disease, obesity, and diabetes are at very high rates throughout Indian Country. One of the most important ways to address these health issues is to increase the amount of fresh fruits and vegetables available in our communities and to make those foods accessible locally and regionally. Third, as more of these foods are grown and raised in Indian Country, the surpluses are already finding their way into local and regional markets. Many tribes and tribal producers are improving their economic development alternatives by expanding into diverse food production systems. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Horticulture Title Tribal Consultation on Fruit and Vegetable Programs

• Require the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agencies primarily responsible for specialty crops to engage in ongoing tribal consultation concerning the impact and growth of the fruit and vegetable sector within Indian Country and the opportunities and challenges that can be positively impacted by changes in USDA regulations.

Tribal Inclusion in the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program

• Change the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program to ensure that tribal departments of food and agriculture are eligible for funding under this important program and that tribal projects are not required to go through state funding mechanisms at state departments of agriculture to receive support. There are very few tribal projects that currently receive support and, at the same time, the number of tribal departments of agriculture is likely to continue to grow over time. This program is critical to the growth of this sector in Indian Country, and tribal sovereignty must be respected by allowing these new departments to receive funding parity.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Honey and Beekeeping Reports

• Include the growth and increase in beekeeping and honey operations in Indian Country in any reports on honey or beekeeping.

Tribal Farmer’s Markets

• Require that a minimum of 10 percent of available funding in farmer’s market and local food promotion programs grant funding authorities go to tribal and tribal producer farmer’s markets and local food promotion activities. All definitions of farmer’s market and local food promotion activities must ensure that tribal food systems and producers are not excluded from participation based on the unique ways that such markets and activities iterate in Indian Country.

Support for Tribal Organic Producers

• Launch a special program in USDA designed to increase technical assistance to those within Indian Country who are interested and prepared to transition to organic production.

Increased Support for FSMA Outreach

• Ensure that tribes and tribal producers receive adequate technical assistance from USDA and/or Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Food Safety Modernization Act of 2011 (FSMA) and that the ongoing implementation of FSMA does not inequitably or disproportionately negatively impact Indian Country food systems. The impact of FSMA implementation on tribal producers is different from the impact on any other U.S. producer due to the unique land base, legal jurisdiction, and production systems in Indian Country. At present, there is not enough funding to adequately reach tribal producers to ensure their knowledge of and compliance with FSMA requirements. In addition, the unique legal and political systems in Indian Country are not taken into consideration by USDA or FDA in fashioning approaches to FSMA compliance.

Protecting Native Foods in the Marketplace

• Require USDA to work with tribal governments, tribal organizations, and tribal producers to develop programs that are designed to protect the integrity of Native food products from fraudulent versions of their foods in the marketplace. The federal trust relationship requires that USDA work with tribal governments, tribal food companies, and tribal food producers to ensure that market regulatory mechanisms can be used to augment the ability and inherent legal authority of tribes to protect their unique food products. This can be done through geographic intellectual property mechanisms put in place by tribal governments to protect unique tribal foods or other appropriate legal mechanisms that must receive recognition by the federal government. These processes for protection should be fully supported and recognized by USDA.

Protect Tribal Seeds and Traditional Foods

• Require the USDA to take steps, after tribal consultation, to ensure that tribal seeds are given the maximum protection available under federal law and not allowed to be accessed for commercialized purposes without the consent of tribal governments. Seeds of traditional foods are among the most sacred items to Indigenous peoples and the protection of those seeds, not only as food sources but as important cultural systems, must be required.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill

Title XI: Crop Insurance


• Due to the high risk of agriculture and food production, especially in Indian Country, crop insurance products must cover tribal producers in unique ways. In addition, livestock producers in Indian Country must be afforded the same risk protection as crop producers as well as the same payment options since livestock production makes up a significant percentage of tribal food production.

Background Information and Context Agricultural risk management is critical for producers, especially in Indian Country, not only from the production side, but also from legal, financial, marketing, labor, and regulatory standpoints. Managing these risks takes a lifetime of attention, focus, dedication, and assistance. Decades ago few options existed for most producers in terms of insurance coverage of risks associated with agricultural production, and most producers sought relief from Congress when disasters occurred. With the continuing development of crop insurance as an important tool of risk management and disaster mitigation, the 2018 Farm Bill must ensure that crop insurance products approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are suitable for tribal food production systems. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Crop Insurance Title Parity for Indian Country Ag Production

• With over 50 percent of the $3.4 billion Indian Agriculture Industry being comprised of cattle, it is critical to ensure that risk management products be designed to meet the needs. Currently there are few options available; and those that do exist require up-front premium payments (LFP, LRP). Simply changing the timing of premium payment to coincide with production would ease the burden of participation for Indian Producers. Increasing the federal subsidy rate for this type of programs has also been demonstrated to incentive participation and mitigate federal outlay in times of disaster.

RMA Study on Crop Insurance in Indian Country

• Require the Risk Management Agency (RMA) to conduct a study to ascertain the efficacy and applicability of the current crop insurance products as they relate to Indian Country agriculture production as indicated by the 2012 National Agricultural Statistics Service Ag Census. If that study reveals that either the specific crop insurance products or the general guidance documents of RMA do not adequately consider unique tribal production issues, a separate administrative guidance or notice should be issued by RMA to solve these concerns and unique crop insurance products and crop insurance administration systems should be pursued.

Development of Crop Insurance for Traditional Foods and Livestock

• Encourage RMA to develop a unique crop insurance policy product designed to cover the production systems associated with tribal food product, tribal livestock, and traditional food systems. The

Version 1 – 08/03/17

production systems associated with such products should be recognized as Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs), and tribal producers should also be afforded the same opportunity to pay premiums upon the sale of the crop or livestock instead of making an upfront payment.

Tribal Producer Education Programs

• Ensure that at least 10 percent of all projects funded through RMA’s Risk Management Education Program are focused on tribal producer risk management training needs and tribal food production systems and the unique risks associated with those systems.

Allow Tribal Insurance Companies to Insure Tribal Producers

• Engage AMERIND Risk, a 100 percent tribally owned and operated insurance provider, to begin the process of offering crop insurance products in Indian Country because it has significant experience offering and underwriting insurance needs in Indian Country and serves a national intertribal audience. The current crop insurance research, product development, and policy sales areas are not developed for, and do not adequately reach, smaller tribal producers. Many of these unique problems can be addressed by working directly with AMERIND Risk.

Appoint Tribal Producers to FCIC Board

• Consider appointing tribal producers to fill future vacancies on the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Board and thereby ensure that every FCIC Board has at least one, if not more, tribal producers on the board whose role will be to address the unique issues associated with tribal production systems.



Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Country Priorities and Opportunities for the 2018 Farm Bill Title XII: Miscellaneous


• Covering a wide variety of topics, as well as issues which span multiple titles of the Farm Bill, the

Miscellaneous Title is an important mechanism for Indian Country. • Fully fund the Office of Tribal Relations and create a new Office of Tribal Agriculture to improve the

service and coordination of USDA programs for tribes and tribal producers. The new Office of Tribal Agriculture should report to the Office of Tribal Relations and funding for both offices should be mandatory.

• Create mandatory interdepartmental working group between agencies at USDA and the BIA to examine and determine solutions to areas where the two departments overlap, are requiring duplicative documentation or actions on the part of tribes and individual Indian land owners in order to access programs and services; or are generally lacking in coordination and efficiency for tribal agriculture. The identified barriers and problems must be addressed and resolved by sustained mandatory interdepartmental working groups.

Background Information and Context The issues covered within the Miscellaneous Title cover a wide variety of areas ranging from veterans’ services to specific grant-making programs, to authorities related to the Office of the Secretary. There are many areas of the Miscellaneous Title that touch on issues that impact tribal communities and that also support specific programs used by tribes and individual Indian producers. This overarching title of the Farm Bill can be used to coordinate work across all titles and all federal agencies, create new programs and authorities that can be either piloted or implemented, and address issues that do not fit neatly in other titles. Opportunities for Indian Country in the Miscellaneous Title Fully Fund the Office of Tribal Relations at USDA

• Fund the Office of Tribal Relations at a minimum of $1.5 million, because insufficient funding limits OTR’s ability to provide the programs, technical assistance, content, or even the basic communications to tribes and tribal producers regarding USDA’s education and training programs. Adequate funding is essential to carrying out the Office of Tribal Relations’ duties, including the oversight of all USDA tribal consultation.

Authorize the Establishment of an Office of Tribal Agriculture

• Establish a broad reaching Office of Tribal Agriculture within the Office of the Secretary to coordinate all USDA programs as those programs apply to tribes, maximize the value of the programs, address issues in compliance and access of programs that are carried out within USDA, and serve as a liaison between the USDA and tribes. Among other requirements, the Office of Tribal Agriculture should periodically report to the House Committee on Agriculture and the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry at least once each fiscal year on the activities and progress in advancing tribal agriculture. The Office should also report annually to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. The Office of Tribal Agriculture, should receive an appropriation of $2 million for each fiscal year.

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Tax Credits or other Tax Incentives for Buying Indian Food and Agriculture Products • The 2018 Farm Bill should create a new “Buy Indian” tax credit or other tax incentives to encourage consumers

and those within the food supply chain to buy American Indian and Alaska Native food products. This will not only help Native food products in the supply chain, it will also provide incentive for distributors, retailers, and related food purchasers to examine Native food product purchases to meet their food supply needs.

Increase Cooperative Agreements Between APHIS and Tribes

• Enhanced authority for the livestock and plant disease agency of the USDA – Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) – could dramatically increase the number of cooperative agreements it has with tribal governments and tribal organizations. Since tribal lands and individual Indian owned land are among the most remote in the United States, it is important to ensure that animal and plant health is monitored closely and that animal and plant disease is dealt with properly and in ways that do not cripple Native agriculture and food production. Increasing the amount of funding of cooperative agreements is an important way to not only further the growth of agriculture management and governmental control at the tribal government level, but also meet the goals and concerns of APHIS.

Recognize Tribal Departments of Food and Agriculture

• Permanently recognize and incorporate Tribal Departments charged with administration of Agriculture and Food Systems into the ongoing interface of all agencies within the USDA and the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs at USDA with other offices of government.

Country of Origin Labeling and Beef Check-off

Reinstate Country of Origin Labeling and create a set-aside within the Beef Checkoff funds that is devoted to the marketing and promotion of Native American Beef.

Education, Training and Scholarship Programs to Support Native Producers and Scientists

• Develop a new program that focuses on educating and training the tribal agriculture labor force, provides key scholarships to Native producers, and encourages Native scholars and scientists to focus on food and agriculture. USDA currently has multiple internship, scholarship, mentoring, and other programs focused on increasing the diversity of American agriculture by educating the next generation of tribal leaders in food and agriculture. However, Native representation is low, and outreach to Native communities is weak. A Native scholarship program should be adequately funded and coordinated throughout the land grant system. A minimum of $10 million is needed to adequately endow a centralized scholarship fund for Native youth and scholars. This program should be managed by the Office of Tribal Relations and any new Office of Tribal Agriculture.

Maintain and Fund the Intertribal Technical Assistance Network

• Permanently maintain and fund the Intertribal Technical Assistance Network, which has been in place for more than five years through a cooperative agreement between USDA and the Intertribal Agriculture Council, through contributions from each of the agencies and offices of USDA. This effort should be funded at least $3 million annually, and it must continue to maintain regional offices in each of the 12 Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) regions to ensure access for all Native producers.

Interdepartmental Task Force on Indian Agriculture

• Create an Interdepartmental Task Force on Indian Agriculture with the Office of Tribal Relations, the Office of the Secretary, and representatives of each of the agencies and offices of USDA, along with the BIA. The purpose of the Task Force shall be to develop administrative efficiency and regulatory changes needed to ensure Native agriculture is supported and allowed to increase. The Task Force must report annually to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Interior.

OAO Outreach and Internships for Native Students

• Require the USDA Office of Advocacy and Outreach (OAO) to fund internships for Native students at a level equal to the number of internships the office supports for any other socially disadvantaged group (e.g., Hispanic, African American, Asian American, women, etc.). The OAO has been inconsistent in funding these internships for Native students, and they should be required to do so, if they fund members of other groups. The Tribal Liaison position within the OAO offices that focuses on the relationship between the American

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) and USDA (and staffs the joint leadership council of AIHEC and USDA officials) should be moved to the Office of Tribal Relations.

Coordination with BIA on Agricultural Resource Management Plan

• Require the BIA to coordinate with USDA in all aspects of supporting any tribe or individual Indian landowner that wishes to draft and implement (including receiving Secretary of Interior support) an Agricultural Resource Management Plan, authorized under the American Indian Agricultural Resource Management Act of 1993 (AIARMA). This act has never been fully implemented, and only a few tribes and individual Indian landowners have placed a plan in motion. The BIA, working in concert with USDA, should prioritize finding resources to assist tribes (including technical assistance resources) in establishing plans authorized under the act. The BIA should be required to accept any conservation plan or forest management plan conducted by the NRCS or USFS agencies within USDA as equivalent to any environmental assessment deemed necessary in implementing the AIARMA. Tribes and individual Indian landowners should not be required to conduct a full NEPA analysis to conduct food and agriculture operations on their lands. The requirement is far more excessive than any applicable law, and this interpretation violates principles of rights to food, food access, environmental or food justice, and food sovereignty. An ARMP created pursuant to the AIRMA should be allowed as a fundable EQIP practice, and exempted from full NEPA analysis.

Increase FSMA Technical Assistance Funding for Tribal Producers

• An increase in Food Safety Modernization Act training and technical assistance funding for tribal producers must occur. There are unique legal, jurisdictional, production, water, land use, and related issues and concerns regarding its implementation that will inhibit tribal food production if not addressed through enhanced food safety training and technical assistance. The Native American Outreach, Training, Technical Assistance, and Education cooperative agreement funded through the FDA attempts to reach the technical assistance and training needs of tribal producers, but the USDA is not funding such efforts on a regular basis and FDA funding is not at the level necessary to cover the needs of producers in over 30 states and with over 500 tribes. The Farm Bill should require that the FDA and USDA double the amount of funding received by the Native outreach organization, since that organization is required to conduct activities that cover twice the land base that any other regional training center covers. The Farm Bill should also require that the USDA fund an additional equivalent amount of activities to ensure that tribal producers are reached with this information, which is vital to their compliance and their ability to reach markets for their products. USDA and FDA must conduct joint tribal consultation with regard to any current and future interpretations of the FSMA rules in order to determine potential continuing impacts on Indian Country producers and food businesses. PSA (Produce Safety Alliance) located at Cornell University designs all approved curriculum on FDA FSMA implementation but the curriculum is not appropriate to the legal, jurisdictional, land, and water resources or food systems in Indian Country and appropriate curriculum and resources must be focused on the needs of Indian Country producers.

Tribal Representation on All Federal Advisory Committees

• Require USDA to recruit and appoint tribal members to each of the more than 100 federal advisory committees it seats and supports. In addition, the Council for Native American Farming and Ranching should receive funding to support its work, and it should become a permanent FACA advising the Secretary and the USDA.

Weather Reporting Stations

• USDA should be required to work alongside other relevant federal departments to ensure that weather reporting systems and stations are located on tribal lands and individual Indian owned land throughout the U.S., because the gathering of that information is vital to predicting production yields and assessing disaster impacts, among other weather-related needs. Currently, very few weather reporting stations are located on tribal lands, and USDA should take the lead in working with other departments to ensure this is addressed.

Buy Indian and Indian Preference for USDA Food Purchasing

• Amend the language that controls USDA contracting and procurement, including the language that controls the procurement of food, to not only recognize and support a “Buy Indian” provision, but also allow an “Indian preference” particularly when USDA is purchasing any product, including food, being utilized by Native people within their communities (such as food in the commodity food programs, like the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations).

Version 1 – 08/03/17

Establish an Indian Agriculture Development Trust Fund

• Production agriculture has the potential to provide a private sector economy for rural tribal governments. Some of the highest unemployment rates in the country located on tribal lands – several with chronic unemployment rate as high as 80 percent. Many of these tribal communities have land bases that can support production. A secure and stable source of technical assistance and expertise in the development of their agriculture-related economies could improve the quality of life for Indian peoples living on those reservations.

Make the Indian Agriculture Trust Fund Available to All Tribes

• Require that all funds used in the Indian Agriculture Trust Fund should also be available to tribes in other parts of the country and that a study be performed by USDA to find other similar sources of income to fund such trust fund and report back to Congress as to the findings. The need for such a trust fund is pervasive throughout Indian Country, not just in the Midwest or Missouri River basins and watersheds.

USDA and BIA Work Group on Farming and Ranching

• Require USDA and the BIA to form a permanent working group that examines all aspects of the interface of farms and ranches on tribal lands, and reports annually to both the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Interior concerning administrative changes that should be made to further the access of tribal governments, tribal producers, and tribal food businesses to all programs and authorities of USDA.

Tax Extenders

• Extend the Indian Employment Tax Credit (26 U.S.C. § 45A) and the Accelerated Depreciation Tax Incentive for business property located on Indian reservations (26 U.S.C. § 168) because agriculture is increasingly dependent on financing and development tools. Both tax incentives expired at the end of 2012; however, many businesses operating on the reservation rely on these tax credits to help subsidize the cost of materials and workers. While we would like to see these extended, we also feel the accelerated depreciation and Indian employment tax credits are inconsistent, because they continue to be renewed year after year instead of being made permanent, or renewed for a longer duration (four to seven years). This uncertainty makes them unreliable as investment incentives to attract the multi-year large-scale projects they were intended to attract. Making these incentives permanent does not increase costs on an annual basis, and would attract new businesses into Indian Country instead of only benefitting those non-Indian businesses already operating on the reservation.



STRATEGIC PLAN FOR FISCAL YEARS

2018 – 2022

Interior FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan Page i

Table of Contents LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY 1

MISSION AND ORGANIZATION 3

Mission 3

Vision 3

History 3

STRATEGIC PLAN FRAMEWORK 13

DESCRIPTION OF MISSION AREAS 14

MISSION AREA 1: Conserving Our Land and Water 15

GOAL #1: Utilize science in land, water, species and habitat management supporting decisions and activities 15

GOAL #2 Manage DOI water storage and delivery to resolve conflicts and expand capacity 19

GOAL #3: Foster partnerships to achieve balanced stewardship and use of our public lands 20

GOAL #4: Inform land use planning processes especially for public use and access 22

MISSION AREA 2 Generating Revenue and Utilizing Our Natural Resources 24

GOAL #1 Ensure energy and economic security for America 24

GOAL #2: Ensure access to mineral resources 26

GOAL #3: Ensure public receives fair market value for resources; and recover costs where appropriate 26

GOAL #4: Focus timber programs on “healthy forests” lifecycle 28

GOAL #5: Manage grazing resources 29

MISSION AREA 3 Expanding Outdoor Recreation and Access 30

GOAL #1: Expand hunting, fishing, and other recreation on DOI lands and waters 30

GOAL #2: Enhance public satisfaction at DOI sites 31

MISSION AREA 4 Fulfilling Our Trust and Insular Responsibilities 32

GOAL #1: Support tribal self-determination, self-governance, and sovereignty 32

GOAL #2: Fulfill fiduciary trust 33

GOAL #3: Strengthen economic and health capacities in the US Territories, and fulfill US compact obligations to the freely associated states 34

MISSION AREA 5 Protecting Our People and the Border 37

GOAL 1: Ensure emergency preparedness & DOI law enforcement staffing addresses public safety risks 37

GOAL 2: Support securing our southern continental US border 38

GOAL #3: Manage wildland fire to reduce risk and improve ecosystem and community resilience 39

GOAL #4: Provide science to safeguard communities from natural hazards 40

MISSION AREA 6 Modernizing Our Organization and Infrastructure for the Next 100 Years 42

Interior FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan Page ii

GOAL #1: Align DOI organizational structure and workforce to improve partnership engagement and mission delivery 42

GOAL #2: Reduce administrative and regulatory burden 43

GOAL #3: Prioritize DOI infrastructure needs and reduce deferred maintenance backlog 45

APPENDIX A – ACRONYMS 48

Interior FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan Page 1

LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY The Department of the Interior’s Strategic Plan for Fiscal Year 2018-2022 is our bold vision for the future under President Donald J. Trump. As the chief stewards of our public lands, it is our job to ensure that these lands continue to be used “for the benefit and enjoyment of the people,” as the words engraved into the Roosevelt Arch at Yellowstone National Park so proudly proclaim. We will restore the American conservation ethic that built our nation. Among the American traditions that made our country great was a philosophy of multiple-use on our public lands. I am an admirer of President Theodore Roosevelt – he had it right. As President Roosevelt once remarked, "It is not what we have that will make us a great nation; it is the way in which we use it." Our public lands are our greatest treasures, and all Americans should be able to experience these treasures. One of my top priorities as Secretary of the Interior is public access to public land. Recognizing that hunting and fishing is an integral part of the American heritage, we must do more to ensure that all Americans can enjoy these sports – not just the wealthy elite. Americans should also be proud of their public lands, which is why investing in American infrastructure and addressing the maintenance backlog at our National Parks is critically important. While “benefit and enjoyment” includes recreation, it also includes traditional uses like grazing and timber harvesting. Our mandate is multiple-use of public lands, and multiple-use also includes the development of natural resources as we seek to leverage American energy for American strength. Americans should have the right to make a living off the land, and one of our most critical responsibilities at Interior is upholding this right. If we are going to preserve our heritage, we must bolster our standing in the world. It is in the economic and national security interest of the United States to pursue a policy of American energy dominance. An America-First energy policy is one which maximizes the use of American resources while freeing us from dependence on foreign oil. American energy dominance requires aggressive regulatory reform. With our strategic plan, the Interior Department has a unique opportunity to cut the burdensome, unnecessary regulations that have suppressed job creation and wealth generation. Regulatory reform also includes reduced permitting times. The Trump Administration will not deregulate or streamline at the expense of environmental standards or worker safety, but we will strike a balance and strive toward regulatory certainty going forward when creating a bureaucratic framework.


MISSION AND ORGANIZATION

Mission The Department of the Interior (DOI) conserves and manages the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of the American people, provides scientific and other information about natural resources and natural hazards to address societal challenges and create opportunities for the American people, and honors the Nation’s trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities to help them prosper.

Vision The Department of the Interior strives to fulfill a vision to:

• Promote energy dominance and critical minerals development to create jobs for Americans, insulate our nation from volatile political developments overseas, provide additional energy security to allies via surplus domestic supply, and generate revenue for all levels of government so they in turn have the resources to better serve the American people.

• Increase access to outdoor recreation opportunities for all Americans so that our people can be healthier, more fully enjoy the wonderful features of their federal lands, and take advantage of hunting, fishing, and other outdoor recreation pursuits that are the roots of the conservation movement.

• Enhance conservation stewardship whereby all levels of government and private landowners work cooperatively together in an atmosphere of mutual respect to achieve shared natural resource management goals across landscapes.

• Improve management of species and their habitats by focusing our financial and staff resources on improving the status of our nation’s fish and wildlife and the healthy habitats that support them, and by streamlining bureaucracy to help us spend relatively more of our funding productively on the ground to better meet societal needs and our own natural resource management responsibilities.

• Uphold trust and related responsibilities, recognizing the importance of government-to-government relationships with Indian tribes, Alaska Natives, and insular areas, and respecting self-determination and sovereignty.

History The Department of the Interior (DOI) was established in 1849. The DOI was charged with managing a wide variety of programs, which included overseeing Indian Affairs, exploring the western wilderness, directing the District of Columbia jail, constructing the National Capital’s water system, managing hospitals and universities, improving historic western emigrant routes, marking boundaries, issuing patents, conducting the census, and researching the geological resources of the United States. As the country matured during the last half of the 19th Century, so did the DOI and its mission began to evolve as some of these functions moved to other agencies at the same time the DOI acquired new responsibilities. With information from Robert Utley and Barry Mackintosh, The Department of Everything Else: Highlights of Interior History, 1988, pp. 1-2.


Surface Lands Managed by the Department of the Interior

USGS Map, Oct 2014 (except for US Territories that are identified on next graphic)

Following Theodore Roosevelt’s conservation summit and the awakening of the conservation movement at the beginning of the 20th Century, there was an increasing urgency and expanding congressional mandate to protect and more effectively manage the nation’s natural resources. In 1905, management of the federal forests changed from the Department of the Interior to the United States Forest Service within the Department of Agriculture. Its Chief, Gifford Pinchot, introduced better forestry methods. Pinchot sought to turn public land policy from one that disposed of resources to private parties, to one that maintained federal ownership and management of public land. Pinchot argued that scientific management of forests and natural resources was profitable. He generally opposed preservation for the sake of preservation. During the 1960’s and 1970’s the DOI’s authorizing statutes shifted to put more emphasis on the preservation, management, and use of public lands and natural and cultural resources. Today, the DOI manages the Nation’s public lands and minerals, including providing access to more than 480 million acres of public lands, 700 million acres of subsurface minerals, and 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf. The DOI is the steward of 20 percent of the Nation’s lands, including national parks, national wildlife refuges, and other public lands; manages resources that supply 30 percent of the Nation’s energy; supplies and manages water in the 17 Western States and supplies 15 percent of the Nation’s hydropower energy; and upholds Federal trust responsibilities to 573 federally recognized Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages. The DOI is responsible for migratory bird and wildlife conservation, historic preservation, endangered species conservation, surface-mined lands protection and restoration, mapping, geological, hydrological, and biological science


for the Nation, and financial and technical assistance for the insular areas (many of which are depicted in the following graphic).

United States Continental Shelf Boundary Areas

National Geophysical Data Center, Sep 2001

The DOI’s programs encompassed in this Strategic Plan cover a broad spectrum of activities that are performed by 10 bureaus and multiple offices and are captured in the following presentation of each entity’s unique mission and set of responsibilities. The Strategic Plan’s six mission areas capture the vitality, inventiveness, and potential of the bureaus and offices and the DOI’s 70,000 dedicated and skilled employees. Along with our hardworking and skilled employees, over 350,000 much appreciated volunteers annually contribute their time in support of bureau and office missions, bringing unique local knowledge to park operations, assisting in recovery from natural disasters, and participating in environmental education, among other activities. We cannot effectively address all our responsibilities alone, so it is critical to strengthen partnerships with our sister federal agencies with related missions. In the federal family, we share forest, minerals, rangeland, and wildland fire management responsibilities with the US Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. We share water resource management and hydroelectric power generation responsibilities with the US Army Corps of Engineers, and we share fishery and endangered species management responsibilities with the Department of Commerce’s National Marine Fisheries Service. In some ways, our relationships with state, tribal, and local government are even more important. We operate within the bounds of state water law, and respect state authority over resident wildlife. We deal with tribal governments on a government to government basis, respecting each other’s authority and jurisdiction. We share land use planning responsibilities with local government, so we must make our own land management plans in a way that is mindful of the goals and plans of those local government neighbors.


SECRETARY---------------------------DEPUTY SECRETARY

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Fish and Wildlife and

Parks

National Park Service

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Indian Affairs

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Bureau of Indian Education

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Land and Minerals

Management

Bureau of Land Management

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Water and Science

U.S. Geological Survey

Bureau of Reclamation

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Insular and

International Affairs

Office of Insular Affairs

Office of International Affairs

ASSISTANT SECRETARYPolicy, Management, and Budget and Chief Financial

Officer

Solicitor

Director, Office of Civil Rights Inspector General

Chief Information Officer

Special Trustee for Amercian Indians

Director Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization

US Department of the Interior Organization Chart


Bureau and Office Summaries

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Manages public lands for the benefit of all Americans under the dual framework of multiple use and sustained yield on nearly 250 million surface acres, as well as 700 million acres of subsurface mineral estate. Priorities include: Making full use of the Nation’s domestic energy and mineral sources, including conventional and renewable energy sources; Serving American families by providing outdoor recreation opportunities that are key to the Nation’s heritage and its economy; and Managing working landscapes to support sustainable livestock grazing operations; and timber and biomass production. Developing and maintaining strong partnerships with State, local, and private stakeholders in shared conservation stewardship.

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE)

Protects the environment during coal mining through Federal programs, grants to states and Tribes, and oversight activities. Ensures the land is reclaimed afterwards. Mitigates the effects of past mining by pursuing reclamation of abandoned coal mine lands.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Manages access to renewable and conventional energy resources of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); Administers nearly 3,000 active fluid mineral leases on over 16 million OCS acres; Oversees 4 percent of the natural gas and 18 percent of the oil produced domestically; and Oversees lease and grant issuance for off shore renewable energy projects. Manages leasing for marine mineral resources such as sand to facilitate beach replenishment and coastal nourishment projects.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Produces information to increase understanding of natural hazards such as earthquakes, volcanoes, and landslides. Conducts research and delivers assessments on oil, gas, and alternative energy potential, production, consumption, and environmental effects. Conducts reliable scientific research in land resources, mineral assessments, and water resources to inform effective decision making and planning. Provides science information that supports natural resource decisions. Produces topographic, geologic, hydrographic, and biogeographic data and maps.


Bureau of Safety and Environmental

Enforcement (BSEE) Fosters secure and reliable energy production from the 1.7 billion acre U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for America’s energy future. Conducts inspections, permitting, incident and equipment failure analysis, oil spill preparedness and enforcement programs aimed at promoting a culture of safety and reducing risk to those who work offshore. Supports the technical expertise to engage opportunities and to meet challenges to tap the full potential of OCS energy resources.

Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Manages, develops, and protects water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Largest wholesale supplier of water in the Nation Manages 492 dams and 338 reservoirs. Delivers water to 1 in every 5 western farmers and more than 31 million people. America’s second largest producer of hydroelectric power.

Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Manages the lands and waters of the 855 million-acre National Wildlife Refuge System, primarily for the benefit of fish and wildlife. Manages 73 fish hatcheries and other related facilities for endangered species recovery and to restore native fisheries. Protects and conserves: Migratory birds; Threatened and endangered species; and Certain marine mammals. Hosts about 48 million visitors annually at more than 560 refuges located in all 50 states and 38 wetland management districts.

Indian Affairs (IA) Fulfills Indian trust responsibilities. Promotes self-determination on behalf of 573 federally recognized Indian Tribes. Funds self-governance compacts and self-determination contracts to support all Federal programs including education, law enforcement, and social service programs that are delivered by Tribal Nations. Supports 183 elementary and secondary schools and dormitories, providing educational services to approximately 48,000 students in 23 states. Supports 32 community colleges, universities, post-secondary schools, and technical colleges. Note: IA includes the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)


National Park Service (NPS) Maintains and manages a system of 417 natural, cultural, and recreational sites for the benefit and enjoyment of the American people. Manages and protects over 27,000 historic and prehistoric structures, nearly 44 million acres of designated wilderness, and a wide range of museum collections and cultural and natural landscapes. Provides outdoor recreation to nearly 324 million visitors at national park units. Provides technical assistance and support to state, tribal and local natural and cultural resource sites and programs, and fulfills responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Insular and International Affairs Coordinates federal policy for the territories of American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Oversees the Department’s involvement with oceans policy Manages the Department’s involvement in international affairs Responsible for administering and overseeing U.S. federal assistance to the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau under the Compacts of Free Association, as well as providing technical and financial assistance to all the Insular Areas. Note: Includes Office of Insular Affairs and Office of International Affairs

Departmental Offices Immediate Office of the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and Assistant Secretaries Office of the Solicitor Policy, Management and Budget provides leadership and support for the following: Budget, Finance, Performance and Acquisition; Public Safety, Resource Protection, and Emergency Services; Natural Resources Revenue Management; Human Capital and Diversity; Technology, Information and Business Services; Policy and Environmental Management Office of Inspector General Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians


CROSS-CUTTING PRINCIPLES

As the Department of the Interior (DOI) advances through FY 2018-2022, the following principles guide our leadership, management, and workforce.

Effective and Accountable Leadership - The DOI is committed to being an outstanding steward of approximately 500 million acres of public lands, 700 million onshore subsurface acres, and 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) including magnificent vistas, valuable energy and mineral resources, unique ecosystems, range, and treasured natural, cultural, and heritage assets. The management and oversight of these resources require a dedicated cadre of employees, the contributions of volunteers, and the input of stakeholders to inform decision-making. The challenges of managing for a diverse constituency while meeting national goals for energy development and sustaining high levels of recreation and access require technical expertise, the best available science, and an understanding of the balance of development and conservation.

A critical role for DOI’s senior executives is providing the necessary leadership to guide the efforts of DOI’s offices, bureaus, and field locations in effectively achieving Presidential and Secretarial goals especially through:

● Ensuring cost effective operations and quality customer-centric service to the public; ● Facilitating cooperation and collaboration across organizations within the DOI and its

federal and nonfederal partners; ● Ensuring a workplace environment that is safe, fair, and conducive to employee

productivity; resolving conflicts as needed; and ● Holding individuals at all levels accountable for their actions.

Empowering the Field - Accomplishing the multi-faceted missions of the DOI involves the skills of 10 bureaus and spans 2,400 locations across the U.S. These locations are often remote and present managers with unique challenges. Managers and experts in the field organization must be allowed to exercise informed judgement and discretion, and must have a skilled workforce to address the issues and manage their operations. The DOI’s agency reform plan, developed in response to the President’s Executive Order “Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch,” provides a strategy for better enabling our managers and workforce in the field through regional realignment and executive empowerment, increased colocation, and shifting workforce resources closer to the DOI’s field locations.

Engaging the Nation in Cooperative Stewardship - In managing such a broad range of resources for the benefit of the public, the DOI works closely with other federal agencies, state, tribal, territorial, and local governments, and the public. The DOI’s reform plan calls for increased coordination across agency lines and levels of government to achieve common goals and resolve differences without expensive and time-consuming litigation. DOI is working to increase its collaborations and partnerships across all levels of government.

Improving Infrastructure - The DOI manages an infrastructure asset portfolio with a replacement value exceeding $300 billion. Most well-known are the DOI’s iconic and unique national treasures, which have priceless historical significance. More broadly, the DOI owns approximately 43,000 buildings, 100,000 miles of roads, and 80,000 structures; including dams, laboratories, employee housing, Indian schools, visitor facilities, historic structures and hydropower infrastructure. The related deferred maintenance backlog has grown to over $15 billion in 2016, of which over $11 billion belongs to the National Park Service. DOI is committed to determining how to best address


this backlog and maintain its facilities for the safety and productivity of its workforce, and the continued high quality experience and enjoyment by the American public.

Striking a Regulatory Balance – In accordance with the Executive Order on Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, the DOI will identify regulations for repeal, replacement, or modification that eliminate jobs, inhibit job creation, are outdated, unnecessary, ineffective, impose costs that exceed benefits, or rely on data or methods that are not publicly available or insufficiently transparent to meet the standard for reproducibility. The DOI will continue to protect human health and the environment in a responsible, cost-effective manner but in a way that avoids imposing an undue process or economic burden on the public. Generating Revenue, Jobs, and Economic Activity - The DOI grants access to public lands and offshore areas for all forms of energy development—representing roughly a quarter of the Nation’s domestic supplies of oil and natural gas—while ensuring safety, environmental protection and revenue generation for the American public. It is important to the Nation’s future that these natural resources are managed wisely and – as appropriate -- made accessible for public use to help generate revenues, enhance national security, create jobs, and grow the U.S. economy.

Restoring Trust - It is critical that the DOI can be trusted to operate in the best interest of the American public. Key to maintaining public trust and confidence in the integrity of government is the adherence to high ethical standards and ensuring that government business is conducted with impartiality, transparency, accountability, and integrity. While many of our employees have important law enforcement responsibilities as part of their jobs, more generally we want the public to primarily view our employees as helpful and friendly technical experts, not as law enforcement. When we do need to perform our law enforcement responsibilities, our preference is to achieve compliance through education and demonstrating a sincere desire to create win-win situations with the public we serve. The DOI embodies this principle, follows the law and holds people accountable. Decisions are based on sound science and the best interest of the public.

The DOI is committed to effective and efficient financial operations and accountability characterized by high quality and timely reporting, robust internal controls, clean audits, and effective follow-up on audit and internal control findings. The DOI utilizes the enterprise Financial and Business Management System for the integration of business functions including budget execution, finance, acquisition, improved internal controls, a secure information technology environment, and a community of business innovation, efficiency, and transparency.

Respect for Tribal Sovereignty – As a steward of tribal trust assets, the DOI plays a critical role for the United States in fulfilling the trust responsibility to Indian tribes. The DOI is committed to effectively meeting that responsibility by assisting tribes and Indian individual land owners to create greater economic opportunities, build safer and healthier communities, and effectively consulting with tribal governments.


OVERVIEW OF THE FY 2018-2022 STRATEGIC PLAN The DOI’s FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan provides the framework for the programs and activities that are performed by 10 bureaus and multiple offices, and take place at approximately 2,400 locations throughout the Nation.

The Strategic Plan facilitates the integration of programs, the allocation and alignment of resources, and collaboration and coordination with stakeholders to achieve key goals. A set of six mission areas, 21 goals, 34 strategies, and approximately 120 performance measures will guide the DOI’s activities for the next five years. These mission areas reflect the Secretary of the Interior’s priorities, while the goals and strategies describe the means by which those priorities will be achieved.

The mission areas, goals, and strategies that constitute the Strategic Plan are displayed in the Strategic Plan Framework, followed by a description of the mission areas, goals, strategic objectives, and performance measures. An FY 2022 goal is provided for each performance measure that reflects a desirable annual level of achievement that DOI aspires to assuming the availability of a reasonable level of resources. The anticipated level of performance for these measures on an annual basis in consideration of actual resource levels will be reported in the DOI’s Annual Performance Plan and Report that is released with the FY 2019 President’s budget and available at www.doi.gov/bpp.

There is some continuity of performance measures from the FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan because the core of our statutory mission remains the same regardless of shifts in policy emphasis resulting from a change in Administrations. Trends in performance related to funding and programmatic plans are available in the DOI’s FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Report available at www.doi.gov/bpp.

http://www.doi.gov/bpp

http://www.doi.gov/bpp

STRATEGIC PLAN FRAMEWORK

Conserving Our Land and Water

Utilize science in land, water, species and

habitat management supporting decisions

and activities

Manage DOI water storage and delivery to resolve conflicts

and expand capacity

Foster partnerships to achieve balanced

stewardship and use of public lands

Inform land use planning processes especially for public

use and access

Generating Revenue and Utilizing Our

Natural Resources

Ensure public receives fair

market value for resources; and recover costs

where appropriate

Ensure energy and economic security

for America

Ensure access to mineral resources

Focus timber programs on

“healthy forests” lifecycle

Manage grazing resources

Expanding Outdoor

Recreation and Access

Expand hunting, fishing, and

other recreation on DOI lands and

waters

Enhance public satisfaction at

DOI sites

Fulfilling Our Trust and Insular

Responsibilities

Support tribal self-

determination, self governance and sovereignty

Fulfill fiduciary trust

Strengthen economic and

health capacities in the US Territories

and fulfill US compact

obligations to the freely associated

states

Protecting Our People and the

Border

Ensure emergency preparedness and

DOI law enforcement

staffing addresses public safety risks

Support securing our southern

continental US border

Manage wildland fire to reduce risk and

improve ecosystem and community

resilience

Provide science to safeguard

communities against natural

hazards

Modernizing Our

Organization and

Infrastructure for the Next

100 Years

Align DOI organizational structure and workforce to

improve partnership

engagement and mission delivery

Reduce administrative and regulatory burden

Prioritize DOI infrastructure

needs and reduce deferred

maintenance backlog

Crosscutting principles: Senior executives provide leadership in achieving Presidential and Secretarial goals and are expected to: ensure cost-effective operations and quality service to the public; facilitate organizational cooperation and conflict resolution; ensure workplace environment conducive to employee productivity and safety; and hold individuals accountable for their actions.


DESCRIPTION OF MISSION AREAS

(With Supporting Goals, Strategies, and Performance Measures)


MISSION AREA 1: Conserving Our Land and Water The DOI ensures that America’s natural endowment – the lands and waters of the United States – is conserved for the benefit, use, and enjoyment of current and future generations. The DOI’s bureaus use the best available science, modern natural resource management techniques, technology and engineering, efficient decision-making processes, robust partnerships, and improved land use planning to ensure balanced stewardship and use of the public lands and its resources, including wildlife and fish species.

GOAL #1: Utilize science in land, water, species and habitat management supporting decisions and activities The DOI will ensure that it delivers data, tools, techniques, and analyses that advance understanding of natural resources, the forces that shape them, and the interactions of plants, animals, and people that live within them. Research, monitoring, and remote sensing are necessary to understand and detect changes that affect land resources and processes that are essential to the Nation’s economic growth, well-being, and ecological health. These efforts support the DOI in its role as the largest manager of the Nation’s land and water resources. The DOI’s land and water management bureaus are stewards of the lands and waters managed by the DOI. These bureaus will utilize the best available scientific data, tools, techniques, and analyses provided by our researchers, our nonfederal government partners, or others to maintain and restore lands and waters and ensure that habitats support healthy fish and wildlife populations. STRATEGY #1: Apply science to land, water, and species management The USGS seeks to understand the Nation’s environmental, natural resource, and economic challenges with scientific monitoring and research to support the development of management strategies that address the impacts of land use on the availability and sustainability of land and water resources. The USGS helps management agencies by providing them the measures designed to prevent or control invasive species and wildlife disease outbreaks; and apply decision science to actions.

The USGS conducts monitoring, assessments, and research in order to understand and predict changes in the quality and quantity of water resources in response to land-use and management scenarios. Through advanced understanding and integrated modeling of processes that determine water availability, the USGS informs the balanced management of water resources for multiple purposes, including energy production, human and crop consumption, the sustainability of fish and other aquatic communities valued by society, and public enjoyment. The USGS works with land and water resources managers in applying its data and research results to help them make informed decisions for effectively managing the resources with which they are entrusted.


Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal

USGS Percent completion of targeted land and water management research actions 100%

USGS Millions of people living in targeted watersheds covered by completed water quality models 306.7

USGS Percent completion of planned water quality sampling and studies for the Nation's groundwater, streams and rivers 100%

USGS Percent completion of the USGS National Water Census baseline 100%

USGS Percent completion of U.S. aquifer groundwater availability baseline studies 43%

USGS Percent completion of targeted species management research actions 100%

USGS Percent completion of targeted biological threats research actions 100%

USGS Percent completion of collaborative research projects on factors affecting fish and wildlife habitat 100%

STRATEGY #2: Provide stewardship of land, surface water, streams and shorelines

The Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Reclamation manage, maintain and restore uplands, wetlands, lakes, streams and some marine areas through efforts that include controlling invasive plants and animals, restoring land or waters to a condition that is self-sustaining, and ensuring that habitats support healthy fish and wildlife populations. The DOI’s Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration program works with the bureaus to assess the impacts of oil spills and hazardous waste sites and coordinates restoration efforts. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement works with states and tribes to ensure that coal mining is conducted in a manner that protects citizens and the environment during mining, restores the land to beneficial use following mining, and mitigates the effects of historic mining by pursuing reclamation of abandoned mine lands. The DOI aims to balance the conservation of special places with resource development while also providing visitors with opportunities for outdoor recreation. Bureaus administer their resource management and conservation programs on more than 400 million acres of upland, wetland, and aquatic lands within their jurisdiction. Many of these lands have special status as national parks, seashores, monuments, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, national conservation lands or wild and scenic rivers. Land managers utilize earth and natural science, social science, partnerships with other DOI bureau, federal, state, local and tribal entities, and other tools and resources (including its front-line managers) in managing these lands and waters.


Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BLM, FWS, NPS

Percent of DOI acres that have achieved desired conditions 88.9%

BLM, FWS Percent of DOI riparian (stream/shoreline) miles that have achieved desired conditions

89.2%

BLM, BOR, FWS, NPS

Percent of acres infested with invasive plant species that are under control

0.2%

FWS, NPS Percent of invasive animal species populations that are under control 8.7%

OSMRE Percent completion of abandoned mine lands restored by eliminating health, safety, and environmental concerns

57%

OSMRE Percent of active coal mining sites that are free of off-site impacts 88%

OSMRE Percent of coal mine acreage reclaimed to beneficial post-mining land use 44% STRATEGY #3: Provide stewardship of wildlife, bird, fish, and plant species

The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is tasked with the conservation and protection of certain populations of fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats. The FWS works first to prevent species from becoming listed as threatened or endangered by using the best available science to make land management decisions that might affect species viability. The FWS conducts, consults or coordinates many species management activities in partnership with others including NPS, BLM, Reclamation, and other federal, state, local and tribal agencies and private organizations. The strategy to sustain species focuses on identifying and implementing corrective actions that will lead to species recovery. Congress passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973, to protect and recover imperiled species from becoming extinct and to conserve the habitats upon which they depend. The FWS and the Commerce Department’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) administer the ESA. The FWS has primary responsibility for terrestrial and freshwater organisms, while the responsibilities of NMFS are mainly marine wildlife such as whales and anadromous fish such as salmon. FWS works with many partners using a range of conservation tools to recover listed species (threatened and endangered) to ensure that they are able to survive on their own in the wild. These tools can include acquiring and restoring habitat, removing invasive species, conducting surveys, monitoring individual populations, and breeding species in captivity to release them into their historic range. The DOI uses a number of datasets and metrics to track its progress on species listings, downlistings, delistings, critical habitat, scientific findings, and Species Status Assessments (SSA). The SSA is the scientific foundation supporting listing, delisting, and downlisting decisions and recovery plans and includes biological and threats information and analyses that help FWS and its partners better understand the species status. Recovery criteria, describing the conditions of the species when the protections of the act are no longer necessary, address both the biological status in terms of the 3 R's (resiliency, representation and redundancy) and the mitigation of threats necessary to achieve that status. The DOI is working to include more information on critical habitat,


estimated costs of recovery and economic impact of its threatened and endangered species listings and recovery action plans, to provide a more complete perspective to states and the public of the actions being planned for attempting to save each species. In its Policy Regarding the Role of State Agencies in ESA Activities, FWS coordinates, collaborates, and uses the expertise of state agencies in developing the scientific foundation upon which FWS bases its determinations for listing actions. By September 30, 2018, all FWS decisions on whether to list a species under the ESA will be informed by input from state fish and wildlife agencies, subject to the affected states' willingness to participate (some state fish and wildlife agencies have declined participation due to lack of authority for some species under ESA review). This input should include (but is not limited to) a solicitation of state data and state personnel involvement in the development of SSAs. Per Section 4(c)(1) of the ESA, FWS is required to review the status of each listed species at least once every 5 years and determine whether it should be: (1) removed from the List (delisted), (2) reclassified from endangered to threatened (downlisted), or (3) reclassified from threatened to endangered (uplisted). By September 30, 2019, for 100% of all species with 5-year reviews recommending downlisting or delisting FWS will have proposed downlisting or delisting rules acted on by the Director, or a new status review initiated if new information indicates the need for an updated assessment prior to initiating rulemaking, within 2 years of the 5-year review recommendation. The DOI’s responsibility to protect fish, wildlife, and native plants transcends jurisdictional boundaries, and includes efforts that affect almost 1,500 species with special status under the Endangered Species Act and more than 1,000 migratory birds that receive Federal protection under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The DOI works to combat domestic and international wildlife trafficking by improving enforcement of domestic laws, strengthening international cooperation and global enforcement, promoting legal trade and hunting, and helping to reduce demand for illegal wildlife products. Under Executive Order 13771 of January 30, 2017, i.e. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, the DOI is reviewing its regulations and administrative processes to determine what cost savings, to the government and to private constituents, are possible by repealing regulations for which the perceived benefits might not be justified relative to their implementation costs, and which administrative processes could be streamlined or made more efficient. This activity is described further in the second goal under the sixth Mission Area on reducing administrative and regulatory burden. Agency Priority Performance Goals:

● By September 30, 2018, 100% of proposed species listings will be based on best available information that includes state input and/or data provided through participation in Species Status Assessments (SSA).

● By September 30, 2019, 100% of all Fish and Wildlife Service recovery plans will have quantitative criteria for what constitutes a recovered species.


Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal FWS Percent of Threatened or Endangered species listed for 2.5 years or more with

a final recovery plan 75%

FWS Percent of five-year Threatened or Endangered species five-year status review recommendations to downlist or delist acted on within five years (prior to next status review)

60%

FWS Percent of listed species with current five-year reviews (completed in the last five years) 90%

FWS Percent of rules and findings completed based on Threatened or Endangered Species Status Assessments 100%

FWS Percent of threatened and endangered species listings with proposed critical habitat 100%

FWS Percent of migratory bird species that are at healthy and sustainable levels 72% FWS Percent of fish species of management concern that are managed to self-

sustaining levels 23%

GOAL #2 Manage DOI water storage and delivery to resolve conflicts and expand capacity The Western U.S. is one of the fastest growing regions of the country, and urbanization has created significant demands for water use and service. The DOI strives to keep its water storage facilities in good condition to ensure safe and reliable water supply. Stretching existing water supplies for multiple uses are among the many significant challenges facing Reclamation. The Bureau of Reclamation is the nation’s largest wholesale water supplier and manages water in 17 western states. Reclamation’s projects and programs are an important driver of economic growth bringing water to more than 31 million people and providing one of five western farmers (140,000) with irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland that produce 60 percent of the nation’s vegetables and 25 percent of its fruits and nuts. Reclamation’s facilities also provide substantial flood control, hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. The DOI is the lead agency in defining and protecting water rights for Indian tribes and individual Indian land owners. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is responsible for maintaining 137 dams on tribal lands. The BIA also provides irrigation water to over 780,000 acres through 17 congressionally authorized irrigation projects. STRATEGY #1 Manage water resources and delivery Changes in water supplies, water demands, and the increased duration and frequency of droughts have the potential to affect Reclamation’s ability to fulfill its mission. Many rural communities face significant challenges in financing the cost of replacing or upgrading aging and obsolete facilities and systems. Water conservation programs increase the available water supply and contribute to DOI’s broader objective of achieving a more sustainable, secure water supply. Protecting and extending the life of aging infrastructure are significant challenges facing Reclamation, and maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement will become more costly over time. Reclamation


prioritizes infrastructure assets based on detailed design criteria: engineering need, consequence of failure, financial considerations, efficiency opportunities, scheduling, and others. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) water management functions are implemented through three complementary programs. The Water Rights Negotiation/Litigation Program defines and protects Indian water rights and settles claims through negotiations if possible, or alternatively, through litigation. The Water Management Program assists tribes in managing, conserving, and utilizing trust water resources. The BIA Irrigation, Power and Safety of Dams program operates and manages irrigation, power, and dam infrastructure. The program sets high standards for maintenance, collaboration with stakeholders, and effective water and power distribution. The BIA manages facilities to ensure they do not present an unacceptable risk to downstream lives and property; and are managed in an economically, technically, environmentally, and culturally sound manner. Agency Priority Performance Goal: By September 30, 2019, the Bureau of Reclamation will facilitate water conservation capacity of 53,800 acre-feet to help reduce the impact of drought.


BOR Percent of water infrastructure in good condition as measured by the Facility Reliability Rating (FRR) [high- and significant-hazard dams] 74%

BOR Amount of acre feet of water conservation capacity enabled to help address drought 1,392,000

BIA Percent of projects completed in support of water management, planning, and pre-development.

77%

GOAL #3: Foster partnerships to achieve balanced stewardship and use of our public lands The DOI will assess, utilize and enhance the most promising of partnership practices and explore the potential for furthering these types of opportunities to work jointly with other individuals and organizations for the benefit of the nation’s public lands, waters, and historic and cultural sites and the fish and wildlife species.

STRATEGY #1: Build and maintain partnership programs Public and private partnerships provide opportunities for greater engagement of people and organizations in caring for and managing the natural, historical, cultural and physical resources across the DOI’s 500 million acres. This can be especially beneficial for our national park units, National Wildlife Refuges, wildlife management areas, and national conservation public lands. Support can come from other federal or state agencies, tribal nations, volunteers, non-profit organizations, educational institutions, corporations or foundations through sponsorship or philanthropy. DOI bureaus should endeavor to partner with non-traditional stakeholders to increase our relevance to the American public, rather than just relying on traditional constituencies.


The National Park Service already has the authority from Congress to accept monetary and in-kind gifts, including those collected through the National Park Foundation. Similarly, the Fish and Wildlife Service has authority to accept gifts from some entities, including some non-profits organizations and the federally chartered non-profit National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The Bureau of Land Management has Congressional authority to accept monetary and other types of donations, along with Congressional authorization to create a Bureau of Land Management Foundation. The BLM works with local, state, federal, and private partners on nearly all of the activities undertaken on public lands, from identifying important fish and wildlife habitat with the state game and fish agencies, working with local rangeland fire protection associations, to providing hunting and fishing opportunities for sports men groups. As permitted under current law, the DOI hopes to develop further philanthropic and sponsorship opportunities, and promote other partnering best practices. The DOI utilizes migratory bird joint ventures as collaborative, regional partnerships of government agencies, non-profit organizations, corporations, tribes, and individuals that conserve habitat for the benefit of priority bird species, other wildlife, and people. Joint ventures bring these diverse partners together under the guidance of national and international bird conservation plans to design and implement landscape-scale conservation efforts in support of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the other bird management plans. These joint ventures use state-of-the-art science to ensure that diverse habitat is available to sustain migratory bird populations for the benefit of those species, other wildlife, and the public. These partnerships have a three-decade record of success, they use non-regulatory solutions and economically sound business approaches, promote working lands conservation, sporting, and outdoor traditions, and support resilient urban and rural communities. The Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture working near each other in the field continue to pool resources, conduct joint projects and share services under Service First agreements. Service First authority promotes collaborating across bureau and agency boundaries to develop joint solutions to common problems and integrate responses to federal land management issues and opportunities. Bureaus of the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperate in jointly managing some areas. For example, the National Trail, and Wild and Scenic River Systems span every state of our nation and exceed the length of the interstate highway system. Federal land management agencies, as well as state and local jurisdictions and partners enhance recreational access, conserve the Nation’s heritage, and leverage the federal investment to manage these nationally recognized resources cooperatively. Building new partnerships for infrastructure improvement is a priority at the DOI. There are also numerous volunteer opportunities, where individuals or associations provide service in caring for natural resources and cultural and historic assets on our public lands (see www.volunteer.gov). The DOI will also empower managers in the field to directly engage in further collaboration within the units they manage, identify best practices for collaboration and partnering, provide training and technical support, and encourage field managers to find or create and execute partnerships on a local basis.

https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/bird-management-plans/north-american-waterfowl-management-plan.php

https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/bird-management-plans/north-american-waterfowl-management-plan.php

https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/bird-management-plans.php

http://www.volunteer.gov/


Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BLM, FWS, NPS

Number of estimated work hours in a national park unit, National Wildlife Refuge, or Bureau of Land Management site that are performed or sponsored by a private citizen, National Service participant or non-federal entity

9,870,000

BOR, FWS, CUPCA

Number of non-DOI acres restored, including through partnerships 593,876

FWS Number of non-DOI acres managed or protected to maintain desired condition, including acres restored through partnerships

602,654

FWS, CUPCA

Number of non-DOI riparian (stream/shoreline) miles restored, including through partnerships

255

GOAL #4: Inform land use planning processes especially for public use and access The DOI will review and improve its land planning processes to enable expanded access and use of the public lands while restoring a balance between conservation and utilization of the lands, energy and mineral resources, waters, fish and wildlife, and other natural and cultural resources. The DOI will employ the latest available science, land-imaging and other technology tools and datasets to inform land use planning to maximize the societal value of land planning. The DOI land use planning will take into account the land use plans of affected local and state governments.

STRATEGY #1: Assess land use planning processes for public access and use of DOI lands DOI land use and management plans ensure that the public lands are managed in accordance with the intent of Congress as stated in several authorities including, but not limited to: the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration and Improvement Acts, the Organic Act of 1916 (National Park Service), the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). Land use planning efforts vary across bureaus based on enabling legislation. The National Park Service creates management plans to execute its mission. The National Wildlife Refuge system creates Comprehensive Conservation Plans for each refuge as part of their mission. The BLM’s mission states that its duty is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of America's public lands for the multiple use and enjoyment of present and future generations. A common thread through all three bureaus’ mission is the need to accommodate and benefit the use and enjoyment of these public lands for both present and future generations. Some lands are made available for multiple use and sustained yield, other lands for conservation and preservation values. The DOI is undertaking the challenge to review and improve its planning processes in ways that can best meet the sometimes-conflicting uses for public lands. The DOI will strive to enhance public participation and input to the planning processes, engage our state, local, and tribal government partners, provide open and understandable decision-making, expedite the decision-making process


so that implementation is not delayed, and ensure that public access and use is appropriately built into every land use plan. STRATEGY #2: Inform land use planning with mapping and land imaging The USGS is the lead civilian mapping agency for the Nation and supports the conduct of detailed surveys and the resulting distribution of high-quality and highly-accurate topographic, geologic, hydrographic, and biogeographic maps and data. Remote sensing satellites and aircraft monitor the Earth providing information that is broad, precise, impartial, and easily available. For more than 45 years, Landsat satellites have collected data over the planet’s land surface to support global research studies. These data constitute the longest continuous record of the Earth’s land surface as seen from space. High-resolution information results in geologic maps and geospatial products that enable precise planning of civil engineering and transportation infrastructure, versatile urban planning, improved flood projection, timely and accurate emergency response, effective hazard identification and mitigation, and detailed environmental analyses. This information is also used by DOI bureau land managers in exercising their responsibilities to help plan for public land use and access. In the next decade, the USGS will continue to improve spatial and temporal resolution through research and development of products such as full four-dimensional geologic maps, showing how the complex geologic structure of the Earth has changed through time. Mapping accuracy through cutting-edge technology allows for precise planning for energy development, transportation and pipeline infrastructure projects, urban planning, flood prediction, emergency response, and hazard mitigation.

Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal USGS Percent of land-area coverage available to the public over the internet through the

National Geologic Mapping Database 55.5%

USGS Percent of foundational topographic information services updated quarterly to support on-demand mapping

100%

USGS Percent completion of research efforts related to land resource management 100%

USGS Number of terabytes of remotely-sensed data managed 20,140

USGS Percent increase of scientific research enhanced with Advanced Research Computation 100%


MISSION AREA 2 Generating Revenue and Utilizing Our Natural Resources The DOI provides access to and manages energy and other resources including oil, gas, coal, timber, grazing, and non-energy minerals on public lands and oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The DOI is committed to achieve and maintain American energy dominance through responsible productivity of the public lands for the multiple use and economic benefit of present and future generations. GOAL #1 Ensure energy and economic security for America The DOI is the steward and manager of much of America’s natural resources which include oil, gas, coal, minerals, and renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, geothermal, and hydropower. There are vast amounts of untapped domestic energy reserves on public lands. DOI is also reinitiating the National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program development process, which is a key component of the America First Energy Plan and the Executive Order on Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy, to bring jobs and prosperity to millions of Americans. Our nation will use the revenues from energy production to rebuild our roads, schools, bridges and public infrastructure. The Department’s “all-of-the-above” strategy facilitates development of all energy resources and makes our nation stronger by decreasing dependency on other nations, creating jobs, and helping drive economic growth. STRATEGY #1: Promote safe and robust oil, gas, coal, and renewable energy resource development Oil, gas, coal and renewable energy form the cornerstones of our nation’s energy base, and the DOI will continue to expand production of both offshore and onshore conventional and renewable U.S. energy resources while ensuring safety and reliability through efficient permitting, appropriate standards, assessment and oversight. As demand for energy resources grows, agencies within the DOI, such as BIA, BLM, BOEM, BSEE, OSMRE, and USGS conduct work that is increasingly critical to understand the exploration, development, quality, supply, and use of our energy resources. This work enables the DOI to advance new sources of efficient energy generation, facilitate the construction of new or upgraded infrastructure including transmission networks, develop resources responsibly, and ensure that the American public receives a fair return on that development.

Agency Priority Performance Goals: ● By September 30, 2019, the Bureau of Land Management will eliminate its backlog of

fluid mineral Applications for Permits to Drill (APD’s) that have been pending for 3 years or more.

● By September 30, 2019, the Bureau of Land Management will process 80% of parcels created for leasing public lands for oil, gas, or other mineral extraction within 180 days.


BLM Percent of pending fluid minerals Applications for Permits to Drill (APDs) which are processed

75%

BLM Percent of high priority fluid mineral cases that have completed inspection during the year

100%


BLM Percent of coal lease applications processed 15%

BLM Number of acres of public lands made available for oil and natural gas leasing 25,000,000

BLM, BOEM

Number of megawatts of approved capacity authorized (that year) on public land and the OCS for renewable energy development while ensuring compliant environmental review

2,020

BOEM Percentage of Exploration and Development Plan reviews completed within statutory timelines

100%

BOEM Percent of offshore lease sale processes completed, pursuant to the Secretary’s approved National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program

100%

USGS Percent completion of targeted energy resource assessments and research 100%

BSEE Amount of operational offshore oil spilled (in barrels) per million barrels produced

3.1

BSEE Percent of high risk production facilities and operations inspected 95%

BSEE Number of recordable injuries per 200,000 offshore man hours worked .390

BSEE Percentage of high risk well operation (e.g., drilling) inspections completed 95%

STRATEGY #2: Provide hydropower The DOI facilitates the development and use of renewable energy that employs hydropower energy to strengthen US energy security, economic vitality, and quality of life. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) is the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the U.S., operating and maintaining 53 hydroelectric power facilities, comprising over 14,700 megawatts of capacity. On average, Reclamation generates 40 million megawatt-hours of electricity each year – the equivalent demand of over 3.5 million U.S. homes, returning over one billion dollars in federal revenue through power sales. Sustainable, low cost hydropower generated by Reclamation projects has provided significant value to the nation, spurring the development of the western U.S. – through the provision of firm electric power to rural communities as well as ancillary service to support western interconnect grid reliability. Reclamation works to promote domestic energy production by enabling new energy generation from hydropower, a renewable source, and facilitating the construction of new or upgraded transmission networks, helping to create new industries and supply chains, driving economic growth and job creation, and helping provide more energy from domestic sources.

Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BOR Amount of hydropower capability, in megawatts (MW), installed from 2018 through

2022 50

BOR Percent of hydropower facilities in good condition as measured by the Facility Reliability Rating

73%


BOR Percent of time that Bureau of Reclamation hydroelectric generating units are available to the interconnected Western electrical system during daily peak demand periods

80%

GOAL #2: Ensure access to mineral resources The DOI recognizes that public lands are an important source of the Nation’s non-energy mineral resources, some of which are critical and strategic. The DOI is committed to ensuring appropriate access to public lands, for orderly and efficient development of these resources under principles of multiple use management. STRATEGY #1: Manage non-energy mineral development DOI promotes energy security, environmental protection, and economic development through responsible, science-informed management of mineral resources. The BLM conducts environmental analysis of complex issues necessary to authorize use on BLM public lands and meet the increasing demand for non-energy solid leasable minerals, especially potash and phosphate. BOEM’s Marine Minerals Program provides sand and gravel resources to protect and improve coastal infrastructure and the environment locally, regionally and nationally. Additionally, the in-depth science provided by the USGS Mineral Resources Program (http://minerals.usgs.gov) facilitates resource discovery and provides essential information and analyses for strategic, evidence-based economic and geopolitical decisions.


BLM Percent of non-energy mineral exploration and development requests processed 30%

BOEM Number of sand and gravel requests processed for coastal restoration projects 8

USGS Percent completion of targeted non-fuel mineral resource assessments and research 100%

USGS Percent completion of targeted Critical Mineral Early Warning System (CMEWS) analyses and evaluations

100%

GOAL #3: Ensure public receives fair market value for resources; and recover costs where appropriate Rents, royalties, and bonuses are collected from issuing leases on public lands, and offshore on the OCS, and for the amount of the resource extracted. These resources include oil, gas, coal, forage for grazing, and access to renewable energy resources such as solar, wind, and geothermal. It is important that these financial transactions include appropriate accountability and fair return to the American public. The associated regulations and practices for these fees and collections must also be rational and transparent to ensure businesses that extract and process these resources can function efficiently and profitably in order to support the economic growth and security of the nation.

http://minerals.usgs.gov/


STRATEGY #1: Ensure accurate and timely accounting and collection of energy revenues

The Department collects, disburses and verifies natural resource revenue generated from issuing leases on public lands, and offshore on the OCS. This revenue is then shared with states and localities according to specific statutory obligations, allocated to various Federal programs, or deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury, thus serving to reduce the deficit. The DOI is committed to managing these transactions accurately, responsibly, and in a timely manner. The Royalty Policy Committee has been reinstated by the Secretary to elicit robust advice and recommendations regarding policies related to royalties from these resources and their benefit to the American public. The BSEE helps ensure the accuracy of metering from higher risk hydrocarbon sites that experience high volumes of throughput and/or have a past history of noncompliance to help ensure the appropriate financial benefit is obtained for the American people. Additionally, data driven procedures enable the BOEM and the BLM to ensure bid adequacy through a two phased review system for onshore and offshore leasing, and also allow for timely collection and disbursement of mineral and renewable energy revenues by the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR). ONRR’s distributions benefit the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the Historic Preservation Fund, and the Reclamation Fund, helping to ensure America’s natural resources and rich history are available to be enjoyed by current and future generations. Distributions to states are used to fund capital projects such as schools, roads, and public buildings. Revenues collected from leases on Indian lands directly benefit members of the Indian community.

Bureaus/Offices

Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal

ONRR Percent of federal and Indian oil and gas revenues disbursed on a timely basis per statute ($ Billions)

98%

BSEE Percent of oil royalty meters, identified as high-risk using a risk based methodology, where meter provings will be observed

10%

STRATEGY #2: Ensure effective collection and application of recreation fees The nation’s public lands offer many excellent locations for public recreation in the outdoors at national parks and monuments, National Wildlife Refuges, BLM public lands and other locations, in historic sites and buildings and at national treasures such as the Statue of Liberty. Facilities (roads, visitor centers, bathrooms, historic buildings, museums, etc.) that enable visitors to enjoy their public lands and sites are expensive to maintain. All of the major land management bureaus have large backlogs of deferred maintenance at these facilities. The DOI will continuously review its fee structure to determine how best to accommodate visitors enjoyment while collecting fees that help to offset some of the maintenance costs required to keep visitor-facing infrastructure in good shape for visitors. All such reviews of fees and changes will remain consistent with Congressional direction that has been provided through a series of laws including the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act.


The National Park Service established fee structure guidelines in 2006 to standardize rates across the country. The resulting tier system assigns each park unit to a tier and associated entrance fee schedule based on the type of site and the amenities provided for the public. During 2017, the National Park Service initiated a comprehensive review to evaluate and consider bringing entrance fees at all park units into compliance with their assigned tier through a process of public engagement by January 1, 2018. Even with proposed increases, entrance fees remain affordable at $15-$30 per vehicle, which is normally good for several days. The America the Beautiful Pass Annual Pass remains at the price of $80 for one year for unlimited entrance fees for almost all national parks, Fish and Wildlife and BLM sites where fees are required. Congress raised the one-time cost of the America the Beautiful Lifetime Senior Pass for those age 62 or older from the previous fee of $10 to $80 effective in August 2017. Reviews of other amenity fees (such as for campgrounds and special use permits) will also strive to set fair and equitable fees for activities that visitors enjoy after they enter the park, refuge, or recreation area. The bureaus will seek public comment during any process to review and modify fee amounts to ensure that the public has an opportunity to raise questions and provide comments regarding any fee changes. The bureaus will also identify ways to modernize and enhance fee collection mechanisms that speed access to facilities and/or reduce the cost to the federal government for fee collection.

GOAL #4: Focus timber programs on “healthy forests” lifecycle The BLM manages forests or woodlands for the benefit of the American public. The BLM maintains a permanent source of timber supply, which supports the production of lumber, plywood, and paper, while also protecting watersheds, regulating stream flow, contributing to the economic stability of local communities and industries, and providing recreational opportunities. Responsible management that reduces fire fuels improves the health and resilience of our forests and helps to prevent forest fires.

The BIA manages forests as a trust asset of Indian tribes. Tribally owned forest assets contribute substantially to national sources of timber supply. Many tribes now actively participate in management of their forest assets through self-governance and self-determination programs. STRATEGY #1: Manage sales of timber and forest product resources

Forest management programs within the DOI generate economic benefits through timber harvests on public and Indian trust lands, and restoring forest health. The benefits of healthy forests include typical forest products such as timber and biomass but also include opportunities for recreation and maintenance of watershed health. The BLM has two focus areas for forest management, the Oregon and California grant lands and the public domain lands. For Oregon and California lands, generating revenue for counties is the primary driver of forest management treatments, while for public domain lands, fire management is the primary driver for forest management. The BLM is currently reviewing its management plans to determine prospects for offering additional timber for sale in the future.


The BIA manages forests as a trust asset of Indian tribes. Tribally owned forest assets contribute substantially to the national sources of timber supply. Many tribes now actively participate in management of their forest assets through the self-governance and self-determination programs.

Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BLM Percent of allowable sale quantity (ASQ) timber offered for sale consistent with

applicable resource management plans (O&C--Oregon and California--only) 100%

BLM Volume (mmbf) of wood products offered consistent with applicable management plans

285

BIA Percent of Annual Allowable Cut prepared and offered for sale or free use 48%

GOAL #5: Manage grazing resources The BLM manages livestock grazing on over half of its public lands; approximately 18,000 permits and leases are held by ranchers that graze their livestock on over 21,000 grazing allotments throughout BLM managed lands. The BLM’s overall objective is to ensure the long-term health and productivity of these lands. BLM uses a variety of methods to accomplish this objective – periodic rest or deferment of grazing in pastures in specific allotments during critical growth periods; vegetation treatments; and projects such as water developments and fences. The terms and conditions for grazing on BLM-managed lands such as stipulations on forage use and season of use are set forth in the permits and leases issued by the Bureau to public land ranchers. STRATEGY #1: Provide for sustainable forage and grazing Livestock grazing contributes to food production and adds to local economic stability, and it can be used in certain areas to maintain and improve land health by reducing hazardous fuels and minimizing the likelihood and impact of catastrophic wildfires. The BLM partners with local communities and state and local governments to develop rangeland improvement projects, stewardship contracting, and good neighbor authority in its rangeland management. In recent years, the number of grazing permits and leases processed has decreased due to dramatic increases in litigation and drought. The BLM continues to look for opportunities to streamline the grazing permit process and provide livestock operators greater flexibility in grazing their livestock on public lands.

Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BLM Percent of grazing permits and leases processed as planned consistent with

applicable resource management plans 16%

BIA Percent of tribal range units assessed during the reporting year for level of utilization 15%


MISSION AREA 3 Expanding Outdoor Recreation and Access Outdoor recreation is integral to a healthy lifestyle for millions of Americans. Visitors to the DOI’s public lands and waters take advantage of the physical, mental, and social benefits that outdoor recreational experiences provide. Americans have the opportunity to hunt and fish on public lands managed by the DOI as part of its multiple-use policy that also includes hiking, camping, climbing, boating, wildlife viewing, and other outdoor pursuits.

GOAL #1: Expand hunting, fishing, and other recreation on DOI lands and waters Hunting, fishing and other outdoor activities contributed $156 billion in economic activity across the United States according to the FWS National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. More than 101 million Americans, or 40 percent of the United States’ population 16 and older, pursue wildlife-related recreation, which supports 480,000 American jobs. Following two initial Secretarial Orders issued on his first day, Secretary Zinke issued Secretarial Order 3356 in September, 2017, to further expand public access to lands and waters administered by the DOI, for hunting, fishing, recreational shooting, and other forms of outdoor recreation. In addition, this Order gave greater priority to recruiting and retaining sportsmen and women conservationists, with an emphasis on engaging youth, veterans, minorities, and underserved communities that traditionally have low participation in outdoor recreation activities. STRATEGY #1: Promote hunting, fishing, and other recreation on DOI lands and waters There are 372 National Wildlife Refuges and wetland management districts open to hunting and 308 refuges and wetland management districts open to fishing. As practiced on refuges, hunting and fishing do not pose a threat to wildlife populations, and in some instances, are actually necessary for sound wildlife management. For example, deer populations will often grow too large for the refuge habitat to support. If some of the deer are not harvested, they destroy habitat for themselves and other animals and die from starvation or disease. The harvesting of wildlife on refuges is carefully regulated to ensure an appropriate balance between population levels and wildlife habitat. The FWS National Fish Hatcheries continue to be a valuable tool in managing fisheries providing recreation opportunities to America’s 36 million anglers who spend $46 billion annually in pursuit of their favored pastime. There are 76 areas managed by the National Park Service that permit hunting. A total of 51,097,000 acres managed by the NPS are open to hunting at various times during the year, representing approximately 60% of the total acreage of the NPS system. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that over 95 percent of the nearly 250 million acres of BLM-managed public lands are open to hunting. The recreation areas developed as a result of Bureau of Reclamation water projects are among the Nation's most popular for water-based outdoor recreation. There are 289 Reclamation project areas that have developed recreation facilities and opportunities available for public use. Reclamation has approximately 6.5 million acres of land and water, most of which is available for public outdoor recreation. The 187 developed recreation areas managed by Reclamation or a non-Federal recreation partner draw over 24 million visits annually. The 187 developed recreation areas provide 549 campgrounds, 454 boat launch ramps, and more than 5,500 miles of shoreline.

https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/NationalSurvey/2011_Survey.htm

https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/NationalSurvey/2011_Survey.htm


Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal FWS Number of National Wildlife Refuge acres newly opened to hunting and fishing 250,000

BLM Number of legal public access transactions completed that facilitate open access to recreation opportunities 20

BLM Number of newly installed campsites, restrooms, and other facilities that promote public access to BLM-managed public lands 30

BLM, BOR, FWS

Number of individuals participating in outdoor recreation activities at special events 5,420,000

GOAL #2: Enhance public satisfaction at DOI sites Visitor satisfaction with the quality of experiences on public lands remains very high. Collectively, satisfaction is above 90 percent for the bureaus providing recreation services, e.g., interpretive programs, visitor centers, camping, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, boating, off-highway vehicle driving, wildlife viewing, photography, and climbing. Satisfaction with recreation services provided through facilitated programs remains very high – also above 90 percent. STRATEGY #1: Enhance the enjoyment and appreciation of our natural and cultural heritage

Survey results show that a sizeable percentage of visitors are satisfied with their experiences at parks, refuges and other public lands. Competition from other forms of entertainment pose challenges to the DOI in its quest to ensure that all Americans understand, appreciate and enjoy the special places protected by the national parks, wildlife refuges and BLM lands.


BLM, FWS, NPS

Percent of visitors satisfied with the quality of the experience 95%

BLM, NPS Percent of visitors satisfied with facilitated programs 94%


MISSION AREA 4 Fulfilling Our Trust and Insular Responsibilities The DOI upholds the Federal government’s unique trust responsibilities by fostering the government-to-government relationships between the Federal government and federally recognized Tribes, and by providing services to individual American Indians, and Alaskan Natives. The U.S. also has important relationships with the affiliated insular areas including the Territories of American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. The DOI administers and oversees Federal Assistance to the three Freely Associated States: The Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau.

GOAL #1: Support tribal self-determination, self-governance, and sovereignty The DOI is strengthening the nation-to-nation relationship between the Federal Government and tribal nations because self-determination, sovereignty, self-government, and self-reliance are the tools that will enable tribal nations to shape their own destiny. Tribes have also assumed an expanded role in the operation of Indian programs through Public Law 93-638 contracting. Tribes contract with the Federal Government to operate programs serving their tribal members and other eligible persons. STRATEGY #1: Support self-governance and self-determination

Self-Governance: Under a self-governance compact, a tribe takes over most or all operations affecting that tribe. The Indian Affairs’ Office of Self-Governance (OSG) implements the Tribal Self Governance Act of 1994 by developing and implementing regulations, policies, and guidance in support of self-governance initiatives. Indian Affairs advocates for the transfer of Federal programmatic authorities and resources to tribal governments and supports tribal sovereignty and an expanded role in the operation of Indian programs. The program work includes negotiating annual funding agreements with eligible tribes and consortia, and resolving issues identified in financial and program audits of self-governance operations. Self-Determination: Under a self-determination contract, a tribe contracts with BIA to take over operation of a program formerly delivered by BIA employees. The funds BIA previously used to run the program transfer to the tribe. Self-determination typically is a program-by-program decision. The Indian Self-Determination Program within BIA works to further American Indian tribes’ exercise of self-determination and conducts oversight of self-determination contracts and grants.


AS-IA Percent of Self-Governance Single Audit Act reports submitted during the reporting year for which management action decisions on audits are made within 6 months

99%

BIA Percent of Self-Determination Single Audit Act reports submitted during the reporting year for which management action decisions on audits are made within 6 months

91%

AS-IA Percent of P.L. 93-638 contracts with clean audits 90%


GOAL #2: Fulfill fiduciary trust The DOI has ongoing responsibilities to ensure that trust and restricted Federal Indian-owned lands are managed effectively and to accurately account for revenues and disbursements in a timely and efficient manner. The Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians and the Bureau of Indian Affairs oversee fiduciary trust activities. The DOI assists American Indian and Alaska Native communities in developing capabilities needed to strengthen their communities and maintain economic self-sufficiency. Efforts such as reducing fractionation of Indian lands and developing conservation and resource management plans help tribes maximize economic benefits of their lands. Securing unsubsidized employment reduces dependency on Federal subsidized programs such as childcare assistance, food stamps, and welfare. Trust assets are crucial to the financial well-being of individual Indian beneficiaries and key components in the economies of tribes. As such, these assets must be managed with great care, paying attention that all financial transactions are completed accurately and as quickly as possible. Since passage of the American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform of 1994, the trust accounts managed by OST are balanced to the penny on a daily basis. OST has also incorporated industry-standard practices, such as a lockbox facility, to shorten the time between the payment of a lease and deposit of those funds into a trust account. For Fiscal Years (FY) 2013 through 2017, OST has received a "clean" audit opinion for Individual Indian Monies (IIM) accounts, attesting to its professionalism in managing these assets. Despite this proven record of success, OST retains a commitment to continual reform, looking for more ways to improve its service to individual Indians and tribes. The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) helps provide quality education opportunities starting in early childhood in accordance with tribally identified strategies and needs that contribute to the social well-being of the community and sustain Indian cultures. Tribes directly operate 150 of the 183 BIE funded schools through self-determination contracts and Tribally Controlled Schools Act grants. STRATEGY #1: Ensure accurate and timely management of fiduciary trust assets

In its effort to promote the fulfillment of fiduciary trust processes, the DOl assists Indian tribes in developing capacity and infrastructure needed to attain economic self-sufficiency on reservations to enhance their quality of life. One critical path is economic development and job creation. The BIA coordinates development of comprehensive tribal programs with the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services. The DOl offers programs and financial services that encourage start-ups and help position Indian businesses and individuals to compete in today's economy.

Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BIA Total average gain in earnings of participants that obtain unsubsidized employment

through Job Placement Training programs for tribes submitting P.L. 102-477 related reports

$10.82

BIA Percent of active, supervised Individual Indian Monies (IIM) case records reviewed in accordance with regulations

98%


BIA Increase in the percentage of submitted land-into-trust applications with determinations (Fee to Trust)

40%

OST Percent of financial information initially processed accurately in trust beneficiaries' accounts.

99%

OST Percent of oil and gas revenue transmitted by ONRR recorded in the Trust Funds Accounting System within 24 hours of receipt.

99%

OST Percent of timeliness of financial account information provided to trust beneficiaries. 100%

STRATEGY #2: Strengthen Indian Education

Improving performance in BIE schools is a challenge the DOI is addressing through initiatives aimed at increasing student achievement. Students at BIE-funded schools receive a culturally relevant, high-quality education that prepares them with the knowledge, skills, and behaviors needed to flourish in the opportunities of tomorrow, become healthy and successful individuals, and lead their communities and sovereign nations to a thriving future that preserves their unique cultural identities.

Bureaus Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal BIE Percent of students attending BIE-funded schools completing high school with a

regular diploma within four years of their 9th grade entry date 69%

GOAL #3: Strengthen economic and health capacities in the US Territories, and fulfill US compact obligations to the freely associated states The DOI supports the U.S. Territories and Freely Associated States (FAS) through the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) under the Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs. The U.S.-affiliated insular areas are: the territories of American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Residents of these U.S. territories are U.S. citizens or nationals. The DOI also administers and oversees Federal assistance provided to the three Freely Associated States: the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau. The Assistant Secretary Insular and International Affairs and the Office of Insular Affairs carry out these responsibilities on behalf of the Secretary.

STRATEGY #1: Bolster Healthcare Capacity

The Territories and FAS experience significant healthcare challenges. The DOI along with other partners, such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), will work with insular area partners to improve the quality of healthcare across the insular areas. The DOI will make investments to implement corrective action plans which address chronic operational and facility shortcomings at territorial hospitals, which serve their U.S. citizens and nationals, with a focus on those identified by the HHS/Centers for Medicare/Medicaid (CMS) and local elected officials. Additional investments will be made to combat non-communicable and communicable diseases impacting the Pacific and Caribbean islands such as obesity, diabetes, and tuberculosis.


Offices Key Performance Indicators 2022 Goal

OIA Percent of Community Water Systems (CWS) that receive health based violations notices from the US Environmental Protection Agency 9%

OIA Number of new and relapse tuberculosis cases occurring during the calendar year on the islands (per 1,000 people in the population) 1

OIA Percent of patients with newly diagnosed tuberculosis disease for whom 12 months or less of treatment is indicated, who complete treatment within 12 months

95%

OIA Infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births (number of deaths to infants from birth through 1 year of age per number of live births)

6

STRATEGY #2: Strengthen Island Economies

Strong local economies provide employment and a viable tax base for citizens in the Insular Areas. The DOI will assist the insular areas to strengthen their economies through strategic investments in infrastructure, public services and technical assistance which will attract and retain private sector investment. The DOI will promote policies and improve Federal coordination on issues impacting insular economies.

Capital investments will be made in basic utilities, hospitals, schools, ports, tourist areas, telecommunications and roads as they create the backbone for increased economic activity. Pursuing renewable energy strategies lessens dependence on oil imports and provides more reliable and affordable energy. Stable economies and fiscally prudent insular governments foster a more hospitable climate for investment in the islands. Technical assistance will be provided to equip the insular areas with the statistical and management information necessary for informed leadership decision making, expert consultants to effectively improve insular government financial policies and procedures, and strong financial management systems along with technical planning abilities. The DOI will help create economic opportunity by forging partnerships that bolster tourism and attract industry by promoting the unique island cultures, natural resources, and by preparing the next generation of business leaders. Key indicators of OIA’s effectiveness include the following: Average per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP): In the four U.S. Territories (Guam, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)) for which it is measured, GDP remains a fraction of that for other U.S. citizens in the states. OIA provides technical assistance to the insular areas to assist with economic development planning and execution and supports local planning and education activities related to tourism, agriculture, and aquaculture. In addition, OIA funds infrastructure projects related to economic development, such as fiber optic connectivity, port improvements and renovations to tourist districts.

Cost of electricity: Without indigenous fossil fuels, insular areas face great challenges in achieving reliable, affordable, and secure energy, which can have severe economic effects on the island communities. These areas depend almost entirely on imported petroleum products for energy. The residential cost per kilowatt hour for power in the territories directly impacts the quality of life in


the insular areas and remains over three times higher than the national average. To try to address high electricity costs, the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) contracts with the Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to engage territories and provide energy efficiency and renewable energy assessments, help develop strategic energy plans, and provide technical assistance in reviewing and implementing alternative energy projects. The OIA, through its Empowering Insular Communities grant program, continues to provide funding for the highest priority projects identified in the energy plans including photovoltaic, wind and geothermal development projects, as well as assuring traditional energy plants continue operating.


OIA Difference in the mean GDP per capita in the 4 US territories compared to the mean GDP per capita in the US 60%

OIA Difference in the residential cost per kilowatt hour for power from the national average

2X

STRATEGY #3: Fulfill US Compact Obligations

In coordination with the State Department, the DOI will implement compact obligations with three U.S.-affiliated Freely Associated States (FAS): the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) and the Republic of Palau (Palau). The DOI will make direct grants to the FSM and RMI under their amended Compacts to provide assistance in six sectors: education, health care, infrastructure, public sector capacity building, private sector development, and environment. The DOI will also continue to support U.S. compact obligations to Palau.


OIA Ratio of FAS private sector jobs versus total FAS employment 55%

OIA Ratio of FAS public sector jobs versus total FAS Employment 45%

OIA Percent of FAS employment attributable to OIA Grants and Programs 30%

OIA Percent of FAS employee compensation attributable to OIA grants and programs 25%

OIA Average FAS private sector wage rate as a percentage of average FAS central government wage rate

45%


MISSION AREA 5 Protecting Our People and the Border Inherent in DOI’s management responsibilities of the public lands is the requirement to protect employees and visitors. Ensuring employee and public safety is complex and requires the resources of multiple bureaus and offices covering four disciplines – law enforcement, emergency management, wildland fire, and natural hazards science. The DOI’s Law Enforcement Program has the third largest contingent of Federal law enforcement officers in the Executive Branch. Depending on the season, approximately 3,500-4,000 law enforcement officers, rangers, and other employees patrol vast acres of public lands, national parks, wildlife refuges, and Indian communities and protect people, as well as natural, cultural, and heritage resources from illegal activities. Wildland fires potentially endanger lives and property. The Office of Wildland Fire (OWF) coordinates among the DOI’s land management bureaus and the US Forest Service to safely, efficiently, and effectively prevent, respond to, and manage the impacts of wildfires. The USGS also protects lives by monitoring and warning of natural hazards such as earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides, and environmental health hazards.

The DOI has land on both the Canadian and Mexican borders, and a presence in the Pacific that exposes Americans to risks from Asia. The Administration is presently emphasizing securing our southern border with Mexico to better protect our country. The DOI has a considerable amount of land that borders Mexico. As such, the DOI’s law enforcement officers work in partnership with the US Customs and Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Drug Enforcement Agency, and tribal, state and local governments to address the flow of illegal immigration, gun and drug trafficking, and to mitigate the impacts associated with these activities, which affect DOI lands and our community partners. In addition, OWF shares wildfire management responsibilities with Mexico along the southern border.

GOAL 1: Ensure emergency preparedness & DOI law enforcement staffing addresses public safety risks

The DOI places a high priority on safety, security, and preparedness, and will uphold its responsibilities for protecting lives, resources, and property through a wide variety of program areas, including law enforcement, health and safety, security, and emergency management. The DOI’s preference is to achieve public and visitor compliance with applicable laws and regulations by using techniques that are not confrontational and are designed to elicit voluntary as opposed to coerced compliance. STRATEGY #1: Ensure public safety on our lands

The Office of Law Enforcement and Security (OLES) provides program direction and oversight on law enforcement policy, border security, drug enforcement, training at the national academy, internal affairs, victims assistance, program compliance, and inspections as well as emergency deployment of DOI law enforcement resources. The Office coordinates with other Federal, state and local agencies (including the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Central Intelligence Agency) on law enforcement and security issues, including infrastructure on the Outer Continental Shelf, the Trans-Alaska pipeline, and gas transmission lines. To help ensure effective protection of people on DOI lands, each bureau will determine the effective level and distribution of law enforcement staffing for each of its programs on a unit-by-unit basis. The effective level and distribution of staffing needs is dependent on the differing


conditions, levels of risk, and populations served in each unit, captured through a staffing model developed and monitored by each bureau. The DOI’s bureaus will engage in developing these staffing models, to determine on a program basis the effective levels of law enforcement staffing that are needed across its units, evaluate the actual level of law enforcement staffing that presently exists, and develop recommendations for better ensuring the effective level of staffing for protecting the people in each unit. The DOI will strengthen law enforcement in Indian Country by putting more officers on the streets, bolstering tribal courts, and helping fight violent crime and drug abuse. Tribal justice systems are an essential part of tribal governments, which interface with BIA and tribal law enforcement activities. Congress and the Federal courts have repeatedly recognized tribal justice systems as the appropriate forums for adjudicating disputes and minor criminal activity within Indian Country. It is important that the BIA and tribal law enforcement activities complement the operations of the tribal courts to ensure that justice in the tribal forums is administered effectively.


OLES Percent of DOI law enforcement agencies with a current law enforcement staffing plan

100%

BIA Percent of criminal offenses solved by arrest (Part 1 Offense Clearance Rate)

44%

Strategy 2: Prepare DOI to respond to and recover from emergencies and incidents

The Office of Emergency Management (OEM) promotes all-hazard preparedness and response; ensures continuity of the DOI to perform essential functions during catastrophic events; and assists communities during imminent threats. Collectively, the DOI supports the five National Planning Frameworks (Protection, Prevention, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery) and their related five Federal Interagency Operational Plans, the National Incident Management System, and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan while continuing the DOI’s mission to protect natural and cultural resources. The DOI’s All-Hazards Baseline Operational Plan provides the baseline guidance for how the Department prepares for and responds to emergencies, regardless of type or cause. The OEM leads coordination and information sharing for emergency management regarding communications, public health, environmental health, wildlife health, integrated pest management, invasive species, and occupational safety and health across the DOI’s bureaus and offices.

Offices Key Performance Indicator 2022 Goal PEM Average Interior Readiness (I-READ) Index score for emergency preparedness across

DOI Bureaus/Offices 91.0%

GOAL 2: Support securing our southern continental US border The DOI manages 41% of the southwest border of the continental United States. The DOI’s managers in the field are daily faced with tough decisions on how to best utilize their law


enforcement assets. An integrated government approach is essential to effectively securing the border and supporting the construction of a physical barrier where needed. Through partnering, federal, state, tribal, and local law enforcement agencies working in proximity to each other have been able to address critical issues like illegal immigration and marijuana smuggling. STRATEGY #1: Support securing our southern continental US border The DOI’s goal is to increase collaboration among the agencies operating along the border to better understand each other’s mission, share resources, and coordinate efforts. This is accomplished by routine interagency coordination, participating in local Border Management Task Force (BMTF) meetings, interagency training, an annual interagency border forum, and law enforcement specific operations. The US Border Patrol is the main federal agency responsible for patrolling DOI lands adjacent to the US/Mexican Border. The DOI’s goal is to work with US Border Patrol to decrease illegal immigration on DOI managed public lands through collaborative efforts with partnering agencies.


PMB/OLES Number of apprehensions on DOI-managed lands Reduced Annually

GOAL #3: Manage wildland fire to reduce risk and improve ecosystem and community resilience The DOI, working with the Department of Agriculture, will improve the way that both agencies manage wildland fire by ensuring that fire management assets are used in the most efficient way possible. The DOI will work with state, local, tribal, and other partners to ensure a coordinated approach to wildland fire management that enables protection responsibilities to be exchanged and resources shared to improve operational efficiency and reduce management duplication. The DOI will continue to integrate science and technology into informing and supporting the firefighters with the appropriate training tools, resources and program support to enable them to work safely and effectively. The DOI is developing new wildland fire management performance measures to better articulate and determine the efficacy of Department and Administration resources in achieving desired resource conditions that reduce the intensity, severity or negative effects of wildfire. As part of this effort, the Department has established a working group among the four DOI wildland fire bureaus, as well as the U.S. Forest Service, which will explore the feasibility of concepts and principles in wildfire risk mitigation, and examine the value of the strategic placement of fuels treatments as informed by a risk assessment and mitigation plan. This group will develop recommendations for a) establishing outcome-based targets, and b) annually evaluating the performance of the program in meeting the desired objectives of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy. When


completed, the DOI will incorporate the new performance measures into its strategic plan implementation. STRATEGY #1: Integrate fire ecology, risk management, and collaboration to mitigate wildfire impacts The Department’s Office of Wildland Fire coordinates programs and funding across four bureaus (BLM, FWS, NPS, and BIA) that manage wildland fire programs to implement the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, a science-based collaborative approach to mitigating wildfire risk. The DOI, in partnership with the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, is committed to the inclusive principles of providing safe and effective response to wildfires, promoting fire-adapted communities, and creating fire-resilient landscapes. The DOI strives to achieve a science-based and technically effective wildland fire management program that is integrated with natural resources programs. Successful management in fire-adapted communities and landscapes depends on implementation of a broad-based, intergovernmental, collaborative, and national cohesive strategy to address the mounting challenges of escalating fire behavior, increased risk to responders, greater natural and cultural resource losses, and increased threats and losses to communities. The DOI is a lead agency in this collaborative approach with the Forest Service and other Federal, state, tribal, and local governments and stakeholders.

Bureaus/ Offices


OWF Percent of DOI-managed landscape acres that are in desired condition as a result of fire management 36%

OWF Percent of DOI-managed treatments that reduce risk to communities that have a wildland fire mitigation plan 94%

OWF Percent of wildfires on DOI-managed landscapes where the initial strategies fully succeeded during the initial response phase 97%

GOAL #4: Provide science to safeguard communities from natural hazards The USGS helps protect public safety, public health, and property by effectively delivering natural hazards and environmental health science. The Nation’s emergency managers and public officials use USGS science to inform citizens of the potential risks these hazards pose to natural systems and the built environment, improve preparation and response activities, and protect the health of the public, which reduce the loss of life and property. STRATEGY #1: Monitor and assess natural hazards risk and response planning

Responsibilities in natural hazards include the issuing of warnings and advisories for earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, and coastal erosion; informing warnings issued by other agencies for floods, tsunamis, and wildfires; providing timely information to emergency managers and response officials, the media, and the public to inform and educate communities during and between crises.


The USGS supports these activities by implementing 24x7 operations for seismic, volcanic, and geomagnetic monitoring efforts; maintaining an extensive national network of streamgages measuring rainfall, streamflow, stream height or lake levels; and developing the next generation of tools for rapid evaluation of hazards.


USGS Percent completion of targeted natural hazards assessments of very high and high-threat regions of the Nation (Index) 4%

USGS Percent completion of targeted landslide hazard research 8%

USGS Percent completion of coastal and marine hazards and subsidence research (Index) 87%

USGS Percent progress towards optimal monitoring capability for natural hazards situational awareness (Index)

52%

USGS Percent of the National Streamflow Network (NSN) streamgages that are fully operational

88%


MISSION AREA 6 Modernizing Our Organization and Infrastructure for the Next 100 Years The DOI is looking to better ensure effective operations and service delivery through coordinated organizational alignments in the field across bureaus and with other federal and nonfederal partners, and through putting a relatively larger fraction of our employees into the field to serve the public. Expediting environmental analysis and compliance, reducing the cost of space, collocating offices for more convenient public service and improved interagency coordination, and common regional boundaries are all being explored to help improve the DOI’s infrastructure and related effectiveness.

GOAL #1: Align DOI organizational structure and workforce to improve partnership engagement and mission delivery The DOI is reevaluating its organizational model to determine how to best achieve its mission of serving the American public, honoring our tribal and fiduciary trust responsibilities, and managing and protecting our land, water and natural resources for the next 100 years. STRATEGY #1: Ensure effective alignment of DOI organizational structure in the field and with partners

The DOI intends to establish unified regional boundaries for its bureaus in 2018 and to further develop this approach in 2019. The goal is to improve overall operations, internal communications, customer service, and stakeholder engagement. Aligning geographic areas across the DOI will enhance coordination of resource decisions and policies and will simplify how citizens engage with the DOI. Organizing bureaus with common geographic areas will allow for more integrated and better coordinated decision making across bureaus. Currently, the DOI’s bureaus have more than 40 distinct regions, each with its own geographic boundaries. This complicates coordination and hampers the DOI’s ability to get things done expeditiously. Having unified regions will help streamline operations and in doing so, provide better service to the American people. Bureaus within a region will focus on common issues, taking a comprehensive approach versus a bureau-centric approach. This culture shift will help us work better together to accomplish one vision. The new regional boundaries currently under discussion – and subject to modification – are expected to have minimal budgetary impact. To improve customer service and reduce operational costs, sharing functions at field locations has already begun. For a number of years, the Department of the Interior and Department of Agriculture’s US Forest Service (USFS) have pooled resources, conducted joint projects, and shared services under Service First agreements where field locations are in close proximity to each other. Service First authority promotes partnering across agency boundaries to develop joint solutions to common problems and to address federal land management issues in an integrated way. STRATEGY #2: Improve strategic hiring, placement and retention efforts to ensure mission-critical service delivery through data driven processes and increased employee engagement efforts

The DOI is committed to managing America’s vast natural and cultural resources with a 70,000-strong and 350 occupation-plus workforce that exemplifies high performance, customer service and


accountability. Historically, it has been difficult to attract certain DOI employees or recruits in certain occupations to positions in headquarters, or even to regional offices, because many of our employees enjoy living in relatively rural areas and because the cost of living is so much higher in large cities. Moving a larger fraction of our staff of some bureaus to relatively more rural and considerably less expensive areas in the West might therefore both reduce payroll cost because fewer employees would receive locality pay, and improve employee retention.

To facilitate strategic human capital planning, the Department has put in place hiring controls to emphasize new hiring for field-related positions rather than administrative and support positions in the Washington, D.C., and Denver, Colorado metropolitan areas.

The DOI will leverage automation to improve employee performance and training opportunities, and examine additional data to determine if operational efficiencies can be gained while minimizing redundancies under the current organizational design.

Data to be analyzed include: ● Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (e.g., employee engagement) ● Geographic Representation of Bureau Mission Critical Occupations ● Geographic Representation of Administrative and Support Services ● Customer Service data ● Benchmarking cost allocations for administrative and support functions ● DOI Human Capital Framework Evaluations ● Accountability drivers on performance, labor management, EEO, etc. ● Bureau plans in response to the Department-wide Workplace Environment Survey

Offices Key Performance Indicator 2022 Goal PHR Employee engagement index for DOI in the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 75% PHR DOI’s ranking among large agencies in the Partnership for Public Services’ Best

Places to Work report 1

GOAL #2: Reduce administrative and regulatory burden Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, directed agencies to “manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations.” The DOI is reviewing its regulations and administrative processes to determine what cost savings, to the government and to the public, are possible by repealing regulations for which the perceived benefits might not be justified relative to their implementation costs, and which administrative processes could be streamlined or made more efficient. STRATEGY #1: Evaluate and improve the net benefits of regulatory reform initiatives and policies, and identify regulations for repeal, replacement, or modification On February 24, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13777 entitled, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda” to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens placed on the American people. The Executive Order established a Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO) for each agency and a Regulatory Reform Task Force. The efforts of the RRO and the task force will help identify


regulations for repeal, replacement, or modification that eliminate jobs, inhibit job creation, are outdated, unnecessary, ineffective, impose costs that exceed benefits, or rely on data or methods that are not publicly available or insufficiently transparent to meet the standard for reproducibility. The costs of the regulatory and deregulatory actions are measured as the opportunity costs or cost savings to society, as defined in OMB Circular A-4 (i.e. the values reported are the cumulative net savings from deregulatory actions and costs of newly required regulatory actions over multiple years starting in FY 2017). In 2017, the DOI achieved cumulative net savings of $1.15B (net present value) from its deregulatory actions. Goals for subsequent years will be established as the DOI completes its review of target regulations.

Office Key Performance Indicator 2022 Goal DOI Total incremental cost of all EO 13771 regulatory actions and EO 13771 deregulatory

actions (including costs or cost savings carried over from previous fiscal years) TBD

DOI Number of EO 13771 regulatory actions issued. TBD DOI Number of EO 13771 deregulatory actions issued. TBD

STRATEGY #2: Improve transparency and timeliness of the infrastructure permitting process As outlined in the President’s Executive Order “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure,” and the corresponding Secretarial Order 3355, a significant opportunity exists for agencies to streamline and collaborate on National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) compliance efforts. The DOI believes this can best be achieved through a unified regional structure adopted across the DOI which focuses on the intersecting issues within the same geographical boundaries. The DOI is also establishing an Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting (ECEP) to expedite the responsible leasing and permitting of energy and mineral production. More specifically, this involves, but is not limited to, the processing of Applications for Permit to Drill (APD), Expressions of Interest (EOI), coal leasing actions, Right-of-Way (ROW) applications, and harmonization of appurtenant environmental reviews.

Office Key Performance Indicator 2022 Goal

DOI Cross-Agency Priority Goal metric on improving infrastructure permitting to be added

BLM Average amount of time (in days) to process and administratively complete Applications for Permit to Drill 90 days

BLM Average amount of time (in months) to issue a decision on major right-of-way applications 48 months

BLM Average amount of time (in days) to process and administratively complete a grazing permit 390 days

FWS Percent of formal Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultations addressed in a timely manner 100%


GOAL #3: Prioritize DOI infrastructure needs and reduce deferred maintenance backlog Real property assets are integral to the success of Interior’s mission. DOI’s real property inventory includes approximately 43,000 buildings and 80,000 structures across six major land-holding bureaus, with a replacement value of approximately $300 billion. DOI manages the full life-cycle requirements of nearly every type of constructed asset found, including visitor centers, dams, schools, health clinics, power generating facilities, housing, hotels, fire stations, campgrounds, roads, water and wastewater treatment plants, offices, and more. Many of these assets have historic or cultural significance that not only support the DOI’s mission, but are important to our Nation’s heritage. STRATEGY #1: Maintain critical DOI infrastructure and facilities to ensure effective operations and service delivery The DOI’s goal is to balance mission delivery demands with adequate investments in operations and maintenance to sustain the portfolio in an appropriate condition befitting of our role as America’s stewards. Appropriately maintained assets enable the DOI to accomplish habitat and resource management, provide outdoor recreation activities, deliver water, fulfill trust and treaty responsibilities, and provide critical economic inputs and job creation for local communities. Adequately constructed and maintained Federal real property supports healthy habitats and populations, availability of safe and reliable public use opportunities, and robust local economies. A significant factor impacting a sustainable portfolio of constructed assets is DOI’s aging infrastructure. Many assets already exceed original design life, and this trend of aging infrastructure continues to threaten mission delivery. Prioritizing repairs on a portfolio scale will ensure the assets condition is maintained at an acceptable level. Effective management of deferred maintenance is a Departmental priority to ensure completion of needed repairs and prevent further deterioration and unsafe conditions. The DOI prioritizes addressing deferred maintenance/repair needs for mission critical activities. Furthermore, proactive maintenance, replacement of components and colocation of programs and staff in owned facilities will help to reduce future costs. The DOI conserves the Nation’s cultural and heritage sites that reflect a rich and diverse history. The DOI safeguards our heritage for the generations that follow, to better understand our country and learn from our past. Many challenges exist in protecting and maintaining historic and archeological sites, especially with the impacts of weather on fragile sites and structures. Sites are exposed to changing weather conditions that cause damage and deterioration of the structures and sites and some locations are vandalized or accidentally damaged by visitors to federal lands. The Road Construction Program maintains and operates the 29,000 miles of BIA-owned roads and bridges. These roads and bridges serve as the primary access points to tribal communities, without which critical resources and services would not reach tribal members. The DOI will continue to improve and provide safe, functional, energy efficient, and universally accessible BIA facilities. The DOI is allocating funds to improve its Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) funded schools, and improve the learning environment of BIE students.


Agency Priority Performance Goal: By September 30, 2019, the Department of the Interior will improve the condition of its priority real property assets such that 82% are in the desired state of acceptable condition.

Bureaus/ Offices


PAM Percent of priority assets in acceptable condition (i.e. meet investment objective)

84%

PAM Amount of priority deferred maintenance (repair) needs/activities addressed (i.e. completed for that year)

$1.2 billion

NPS Value of NPS deferred maintenance work orders closed ($000) TBD

BIA, BLM, FWS, NPS

Percent of historic structures on DOI inventory in good condition 57%

BIA, BLM, BOR, FWS, NPS

Percent of museum collections on DOI inventory in good condition 59%

BIA, BLM, FWS, NPS

Percent of archaeological sites on DOI inventory in good condition 67%

BOR Maintain a completion rate of 95% for Safety of Dam recommendations 95%

BIA Percent of miles of BIA road in acceptable condition based on the Service Level Index

14%

BIA Percent of BIA bridges in acceptable condition based on the Service Level Index 69%

BIE Percent of students in BIE school facilities that are in acceptable condition as measured by the Facilities Condition Index

67%

STRATEGY #2: Provide dependable and efficient information technology

Information Management and Technology (IMT) provides modern and secure technology solutions to advance the DOI’s ability to deliver programs and services to the public and our customers. To do so, the DOI must protect its critical information assets from cyber exploitation and attack to ensure that employees and the public can rely on the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the DOI’s data and information systems. The DOI is implementing advanced technologies that will increase visibility into its IMT environment, improve protections around our high-value information assets, and empower its workforce to better detect, respond, and recover from cyber-attacks and breaches. With a more secure computing environment in place, its employees can more easily obtain the tools and data they need to perform the mission securely efficiently and effectively, anywhere and anytime. The DOI will continue to deploy and mature Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) capabilities that help to fortify its networks and systems. These capabilities provide the DOI with tools necessary to better identify cybersecurity risks on an ongoing basis, prioritize these risks based upon potential impacts, and enable cybersecurity personnel to mitigate the most significant


problems first. Achieving the performance objectives will enable the DOI to meet the requirements of Presidential Executive Order 13800, “Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure.” The DOI has adopted the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework and will work towards implementing and maturing the set of activities known to be effective in managing cybersecurity risks and that are necessary to achieve key cybersecurity outcomes that support the following functions: Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond and Recover. The DOI is working collaboratively with its user community to understand operational needs better in the field, resulting in expanding network capabilities to improve connectivity in remote areas so employees can be as productive as possible. To improve collaboration, the DOI will enhance its Geospatial Platform capabilities, which is an internet-based tool for sharing trusted geospatial data with the public, government agencies, and partners to meet their mission needs. The DOI will also seek to deliver improved services at a lower cost by consolidating and standardizing IT services and systems, including consolidating and optimizing its data center and network operations and standardizing security, customer support, and administrative functions.

Offices Key Performance Indicator 2022 Goal

PIO Percent of unclassified network hardware and software assets appropriately authorized and managed 95%

PIO Percent completion of DOI’s Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) Implementation Plan 100%


APPENDIX A – ACRONYMS

APD Application for Permit to Drill I-READ Interior Readiness (index) APIPA Association of Pacific Island Public Auditors LHP Landslide Hazard Program APP Annual Performance Plan LIDAR Light Detection And Ranging APP&R Annual Performance Plan and Report LTRO Land Title and Records Office APR Annual Performance Report MMBF Million Board Feet ARPA Archeological Resources Protection Act MR&R Major Rehabilitations and Replacements AS-IA Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs MRP Mineral Resource Program AS-IN Assistant Secretary for Insular Affairs MTS Mineral Tracking System AS-PMB Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management, and NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Budget Repatriation Act BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs NAWQA National Water Quality Assessment Program BIE Bureau of Indian Education NCGMP National Geologic Map Database BLM Bureau of Land Management NEPA National Environmental Policy Act BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management NFHS National Fish Hatchery System BOR Bureau of Reclamation NHPA National Historic Preservation Act BSEE Bureau of Safety and Environmental NIBRS National Incident Based Reporting System Enforcement NIMS National Incident Management System CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act NLCD National Land Cover Database

CFR Code of Federal Regulations NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

CFS Cubic Foot per Second NPS National Park Service CNMI Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands NWRS National Wildlife Refuge System CWS Community Water Systems O&C Oregon and California DOI Department of the Interior O&M Operations and Maintenance EHP Earthquake Hazard Program OCS Outer Continental Shelf EPA Environmental Protection Agency OEPC Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance ERP Energy Resource Program OIA Office of Insular Affairs FASS-CMS

Financial Assistance and Social Services – Case Management System

OIG Office of the Inspector General

FCI Facilities Condition Index OJS Office of Justice Services FRPP Federal Real Property Profile OLES Office of Law Enforcement and Security FRR Facility Reliability Rating OMB Office of Management and Budget FWS Fish and Wildlife Service OSG Office of Self-Governance GAO Government Accountability Office OSMRE Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement GDP Gross Domestic Product OST Office of Special Trustee GIS Geographic Information System ONRR Office of Natural Resources Revenue GPRA Government Performance Results Act OPM Office of Personnel Management GPS Geospatial Positioning System OWF Office of Wildland Fire HHS Department of Health and Human Services PAM Office of Acquisitions and Property HMA Herd Management Area Management HPPG High Priority Performance Goal PEM Office of Emergency Management ICWA Indian Child Welfare Act PEP Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance IGFOA Island Government Finance Officers’ PFM Office of Financial Management Association PHR Office of Human Resources IIM Individual Indian Money PIO Office of the Chief Information Officer ILCO Indian Land Consolidation Office ROW Right of Way ILCP Indian Land Consolidation Program SMART Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for

Tomorrow


IMARS Incident Management Analysis Reporting System SMCRA Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics T&E Threatened and Endangered TFAS Trust Financial Accounting System USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USGS U.S. Geological Survey VHP Volcano Hazard Program WUI Wildland-Urban Interface