[Senate Hearing 113-92]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-92
RECEIVING THE VIEWS AND PRIORITIES OF
INTERIOR SECRETARY SALLY JEWELL WITH REGARD TO MATTERS OF INDIAN
AFFAIRS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 15, 2013
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
85-178 WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, Chairwoman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
JON TESTER, Montana LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TOM UDALL, New Mexico JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
MARK BEGICH, Alaska DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
Mary J. Pavel, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
David A. Mullon Jr., Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 15, 2013..................................... 1
Statement of Senator Barrasso.................................... 2
Statement of Senator Begich...................................... 29
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 1
Statement of Senator Fischer..................................... 4
Statement of Senator Franken..................................... 5
Statement of Senator Heitkamp.................................... 7
Statement of Senator Hoeven...................................... 22
Statement of Senator Johnson..................................... 4
Statement of Senator Schatz...................................... 6
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 4
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 31
Witnesses
Jewell, Hon. Sally, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior;
accompanied by Lawrence Roberts, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Indian Affairs................................................. 8
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Sally Jewell by:
Hon. John Barrasso........................................... 38
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 35
Hon. Heidi Heitkamp.......................................... 48
RECEIVING THE VIEWS AND PRIORITIES OF INTERIOR SECRETARY SALLY JEWELL
WITH REGARD TO MATTERS OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 15, 2013
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room
628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
The Chairwoman. The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
oversight hearing will come to order.
We are here this afternoon to hold an oversight hearing on
Receiving the Views and Priorities of Interior Secretary Sally
Jewell on the Matters of Indian Affairs.
I am very happy to welcome Secretary Jewell, a good friend
and fellow Washingtonian, to her first appearance before the
Indian Affairs Committee. She was sworn in as Secretary of the
Interior on April 12, 2013. Although she has only been
Secretary for a little over a month, the Committee appreciates
this opportunity to hear your priorities for the Indian affairs
at the department.
It is important to hear from Secretary Jewell in her early
tenure as Secretary of Interior because the relationship
between tribal governments and the Federal Government is a
unique one. The government-to-government relationship is
grounded in the United States Constitution, treaties, Federal
statutes and Supreme Court decisions.
This relationship is a mature relationship expressed in the
terms of legal duties, moral obligations and expectancies that
have arisen based on the continuous history of tribal
interactions with the Federal Government since the formation of
the United States.
This relationship, a trust relationship between the Federal
Government and tribal governments exists at every Federal
agency. However, because Congress has placed primary
responsibility for Indian matters in the Department of
Interior, the Department is seen as the agency leader on Indian
matters. It is important to have this opportunity to hear from
the Secretary and for the Committee to make sure that the trust
responsibility is upheld at the Department.
There are many areas in which the Department and the tribes
are working together. The Department and tribes have put
significant resources and plans in place to improve public
safety on Indian lands. The Department has been committed to
settling longstanding trust resource cases and has created a
Secretarial Commission on Trust Administration and Reform to
look at ways that trust policies can be improved.
There are many other issues. I know the Vice Chairman and I
are both personally very interested in energy issues in Indian
Country and we know there are other areas that need to be
improved. For example, only 52 percent of American students who
attend Bureau of Indian Education schools graduate in
comparison to 76 percent in public schools.
Recent General Accounting Office testimony before Congress
found that high turnover at the Director position and a
fragmented administrative structure within the Bureau has
negatively impacted the education of Indian students.
The Committee has heard countless times about the poor
conditions of Bureau of Indian Education facilities, so the
Committee will be looking to you, Secretary Jewell, to provide
the leadership in making improvements in this area.
We also want to encourage you to bring your strong business
background into the position of Secretary to look for other
ideas for enhancing the economic and job opportunities for
tribal governments and tribal members and certainly in getting
legislation passed on a Carcieri fix and taking land into trust
is an important aspect of economic development.
The Committee looks forward to hearing your views on these
issues and we look forward to working with you in putting
forward a very positive impact for Indian people throughout the
United States of America.
The Chairwoman. I would like to now turn to Vice Chairman
Barrasso for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for holding
this hearing to receive testimony from Interior Secretary
Jewell on her views and priorities for Indian country.
I would like to begin by welcoming Secretary Jewell to the
Committee and again, congratulating her on her confirmation as
the 51st Secretary of the Interior.
I know it has been a busy month and it is getting busier
every day. We appreciate your taking the time to join us today.
I have questions for Secretary Jewell on a number of
different topics. For now, I would just like to make a couple
of points so that we can then proceed to the testimony.
First, I think it is worthwhile to pause and remind
ourselves of some important historical facts about our
country's Indian reservations. One of those is that Indian
reservations were conceived of and created by the United States
Government. Like many ideas emanating from Washington, D.C.,
the 19th Century policy of confining whole populations of
Native peoples to reservations deserves, in retrospect, about
as much criticism as we can possibly heap upon it now, today,
in the 21st Century.
But that is what the government did back then and there is
no erasing it from the history books. Yet, as unfortunate as
this policy was, these reservations we created were not
supposed to be just a place to put people. They were supposed
to be a homeland. They were supposed to be a place where Indian
people would live, raise children and celebrate their lives and
their cultures. Homeland means these things and much more.
My point is that this is not just land and not just a
place. Each reservation represents a specific homeland that was
set aside for the benefit of the specific Native people on that
reservation. We often seem to forget this basic historical fact
when we formulate Indian policy here in Washington.
Whenever we have witnesses from the BIA or the Department,
I always ask about the status of things like the Indian
irrigation projects and the deferred maintenance. The reason
for that is that these projects were supposed to form the basis
of local economies for specific Indian homelands.
The problem is that 100-plus years later, now they are
falling apart and the Department and Congress do not seem to
know what to do about it. When Washington, D.C. creates
statutes, regulations and policies for Indian country, we
simply must ask ourselves what are we doing to people's lives.
For example, take oil and gas development--the Chair
mentioned our mutual interest in energy. I realize the
Administration wants to promote alternative energy sources to
shift away from fossil fuels. To one extent or another, some
members of this Committee may feel the same way, and that is
fine.
In fact, on some reservations, renewables like wind and
solar may hold real promise. On other reservations, oil and gas
or coal reserves held in trust by the United States for the
tribes or for their members represent by far the number one
best opportunity for prosperity of that tribe in that location.
Some tribes rightfully believe that now is the time to make
something of these trust assets. Now is their chance to bring
real benefits to the current and future generations. Are we
going to tell them, no, we are sorry, but we don't like these
things anymore? I am certainly not going to tell them that.
Instead, we should be asking, what can Congress do to help
tribes and their members make use of the trust minerals that we
set aside for their sole benefit if, in fact, that is what they
want to do today? We should be asking the tribes, not the
Sierra Club or the policy wonks in some think tank or some
university what they want to do with their homelands.
After all, these are the tribes' homelands, not ours, and
those trust assets were set aside for the benefit of the
tribes.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
I am going to go back and forth on opening statements.
Senator Johnson.
STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Chairwoman Cantwell, for
holding this hearing with Interior Secretary Jewell to discuss
the views at the Department regarding Indian affairs.
This is an important time to discuss issues regarding
Indian country. The effect of sequester cuts is starting to
impact tribal programming. In February, I shared my views with
former Secretary Ken Salazar and Secretary Sebelius regarding
the devastating impacts these cuts would have on already under-
funded programs.
Based on treaties, the Federal Government has a special
relationship with American Indian tribes. It is important that
the United States Government recognizes this obligation to
uphold and honor these treaties and trust responsibilities. We
all play an important role at the Federal level to promote
economic development, public safety and self sufficiency for
Indian communities.
Today, I look forward to the testimony of Secretary Jewell.
Thank you again, Madam Chair, for holding this hearing.
The Chairwoman. Senator Fischer, do you have an opening
statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chair and Vice Chairman
Barrasso.
Welcome and it is nice to see you here, Madam Secretary. I
appreciate you taking the time to come before the Committee to
have a conversation with us about this very important issue.
As you know, the BLS statistics indicate that the
unemployment rate for American Indians and Alaska Natives is
nearly double the national average. This is not acceptable.
In your testimony, you said that no area holds more promise
for growing our economy and creating jobs than American energy.
I am following up on what Senator Barrasso talked about because
I believe that the Department needs to be committed, as you say
in your testimony, to assisting tribes in expanding safe and
responsible oil and gas development in accordance with tribal
objectives.
I do agree with Senator Barrasso that our government needs
to work with Native people in developing their resources and
managing their resources in a responsible manner so that they
can grow their economies and help their citizens, as well as
grow their communities. I think that is vitally important.
I look forward to having that conversation with you. Thank
you again for being here.
The Chairwoman. Senator Tester.
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. Thank you, Madam Chair. Once again, I want
to thank you and the Ranking Member for having this hearing.
I welcome Secretary Jewell. This is the second time you
have been before one of my committees. I appreciate the
opportunity.
I would like to say from the outset, you are setting a
great example of leadership in the Department. Not only are you
visionary in what you want to do but you also hired away one of
my best staff members in Stephanie Harding.
In all truthfulness, I think you are off to a very good
start. Indian country is a little different than the rest of
the issues you will be dealing with. There are trust
responsibilities, how we deal with Indian lands compared to
lands like BLM and the relationship we have between Native
Americans and the Federal Government.
I refer back to a friend of mine, now deceased, who was
head of the Crow Tribe when I was first elected to this
position, Carl Van. Carl used to say, give us the tools to
succeed and then get out of the road. I think those are words
to live by in Indian country.
I want to say there are a ton of issues out there. We will
get into some of them today. I certainly appreciate your
openness to improve Indian country and make it all it can be.
Thank you.
The Chairwoman. Senator Franken.
STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Franken. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for this
hearing and thank you, Secretary Jewell for coming before the
Committee.
I had the pleasure of following your nomination from my
seat on the Energy Committee. I have already discussed the
important role that the Department of Interior plays in the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Country.
Congratulations on your confirmation and I look forward to
working with you as Secretary of the Interior.
As you know from our earliest conversations during your
confirmation process, I am extremely concerned about the
condition of schools under the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The
Bureau lists 46 schools in poor condition that need to be
rebuilt. With the lack of funding over the years there is now a
backlog of $1.3 billion in Indian school construction projects.
One such school, you have heard me discuss, is the Bug O
Nay Ge Shig School on the Leech Lake Reservation in my home
State of Minnesota. The Bug school is desperately in need of
replacement. Students and teachers have to deal with leaking
roofs, mold, rodent infestations and sewer problems. If the
wind starts blowing at a certain rate, they have to leave the
school because it doesn't meet the safety standards. This can
be when it is 20 degrees below zero in northern Minnesota. It
puts the Bureau of Indian Education to shame.
Despite the fact that many schools need to be rebuilt, this
year, like last year, the President requested that no funding
go to rebuilding these schools, leaving thousands of Indian
children to study in crumbling and even dangerous buildings.
This is unacceptable and I hope you will work to change that
request in the future. We have to work to do something about it
this year as well.
I was happy to see you discuss in your testimony the
potential for renewable energy development on Indian lands.
There are immense, untapped renewable energy resources on
tribal lands. Your department plays a key role in unlocking
that potential. Support to help tribes invest in renewable
energy and energy efficiency can help tribes become energy
independent, create jobs and enhance economic development.
The last thing I would like to touch on is sequestration.
These extreme cuts are having an outsized impact on the
services the Federal Government provides to the tribal nations.
As with many issues in this Committee, those impacts do not
receive the national attention that many other sequestration
cuts are receiving.
These include cuts to health benefits under Indian Health
Service where Medicaid, Medicare and veterans health benefits
are exempt from sequestration cuts and rightly so, but singling
out Native American programs for sequestration cuts is unfair
and at odds with the Federal Government's trust responsibility.
I hope you will use your position as Secretary of Interior
to help raise the profile of the impact of sequestration on
tribal communities. We need to replace these devastating cuts
with a more responsible and balanced approach.
Thank you for coming today. I look forward to your
testimony and the questions.
The Chairwoman. Senator Schatz.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Vice
Chairman Barrasso.
Thank you, Secretary Jewell. I appreciate your willingness
to come before the Committee. I note this is your first post-
confirmation appearance before an authorizing committee of the
Congress.
For almost two centuries, policies of removal, relocation,
assimilation and termination dominated and often worsened the
conditions for all Native peoples--Native Alaskans, Native
Americans and Native Hawaiians--and their communities. In 1968
and 1970, the Administrations of President Johnson and Nixon
introduced Federal policy statements supporting tribal self
determination and called for a shift in responsibility of
public programs to tribal governments. This marked a new policy
of self-determination and self-governance.
Federal reaffirmation of tribal sovereignty through self-
governance programs has enabled tribes to generate revenues
through their own business enterprises, manage and prioritize
program funding and design school curricula to better meet the
needs of Native students.
While there is much work to be done to enhance the ability
of tribal nations to strengthen and sustain their communities,
the Federal focus on self-determination and self-governance has
proven to be the only Federal policy that works in Native
communities.
Unfortunately, Madam Secretary, Native Hawaiians are the
only federally-recognized Native people without a government-
to-government relationship with the United States. I believe
strongly that Native Hawaiians deserve the same access to the
prevailing Federal policy on self-determination as American
Indians and Alaska Natives.
Separate is not equal and that is why I urge your support
for parity in Federal policy for Native Hawaiians. This year
marks 120 years since the Kingdom of Hawaii was overthrown by
force by agents of the United States. It is long past time for
the Native Hawaiian people to regain their right to self
governance.
I look forward to working with the members of the
Committee, the Department and the White House to right this
wrong.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Senator Schatz.
Senator Heitkamp.
STATEMENT OF HON. HEIDI HEITKAMP,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Heitkamp. Thank you, Chairwoman Cantwell and Vice
Chair Barrasso for this very important first meeting and what
we hope will be a long relationship with the Secretary and the
Department of Interior on critical issues.
For eight years, I served as North Dakota's Attorney
General and Madam Secretary, you will have the honor of meeting
with the Western AG's probably once a year. I always sat as the
last speaker. As we talked about problems with endangered
species, problems with water and land management, everyone
would address their concerns, I said the same thing for eight
years. I said, what are you going to do to improve the
conditions for Native American children in Indian country. For
eight years, I got the same response which was, we share your
concern.
The last year that I was AG and raised it, I said, could
you humor me and actually do something about it. Could you
actually make a commitment to when you leave office that the
condition for Native American children will be improved in
Indian country because that is the future, not only for our
Native people, but it is also the future of our States who
enjoy a large percentage of our population who are Native
people who live in Indian country and who are looking for an
opportunity and housing.
They are looking for quality education, whether it is Head
Start or higher education. They are looking for public safety.
They want the same things we want which his to be safe in our
homes. They are looking for an economic opportunity. They are
looking for an infrastructure that addresses their needs.
Their veterans serve in record numbers, record percentages,
highest percentage of anyone in the Armed Services of any group
and they deserve that recognition and attention.
I would close with the great words of Sitting Bull who
said, ``Let's put our heads together and see what we can
accomplish for our children.'` I hope you will make a personal
commitment, along with this Committee, that when you walk out
of the Department of Interior that the conditions in Indian
country for Native children and their families have been
improved.
Thank you so much. I look forward to your testimony.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Secretary Jewell, thank you for being before the Committee.
Welcome to both you and Deputy Assistant Secretary Roberts.
Thank you both for being here. We look forward to your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. SALLY JEWELL, SECRETARY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY:
LAWRENCE ROBERTS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
INDIAN AFFAIRS
Secretary Jewell. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Cantwell,
Vice Chairman Barrasso and members of the Committee.
Thanks also for your collective opening statements. It is
very helpful.
I want to say that Kevin Washburn, the Assistant Secretary,
is sad that he cannot be here. He is in South Dakota working on
child welfare issues with a gathering of nine tribes dealing
with the issues of foster parenting of children on tribal
lands.
I know that Larry Roberts is going to do a great job
standing in for him as Deputy Assistant Secretary. I think it
would be fair to say that Larry and I and Kevin would gladly
hold hands and say at the end of our tenure, life will be
better for Indian children than it is at this point. It is
certainly a commitment that I have and also the two gentlemen I
referenced have, and I sense throughout the Department of the
Interior.
I was very happy to meet with tribal leaders my first week
on the job. It was really an opportunity for me to learn from
them, to listen to them and hear what they had to say. They
were a great representative sample of the 566 federally-
recognized tribes that we have, but by no means, the end of my
communication, just the very start. It was a great opportunity
to hear what they had to say.
I am completely committed to upholding the Federal
Government's trust and treaty responsibilities and the nation-
to-nation relationship that we have with Indian tribes and
Alaska Natives. It is difficult to do, as you know. It is very
important to do and I cannot do it without your help and
without Congress' help. I hope we can be partners together in
strengthening tribal nations, in promoting self-governance and
self-determination, which are a part of what many of you just
referenced.
Quickly, on the personal side, I have had a number of
connections with tribes over the years, mostly as a commercial
banker. I was the lead banker for NANA, an Alaska Regional
Corporation based in Kotzebue. I did work with Doyon, Sealaska,
Cook Inlet and others in the State of Washington. In my work in
banking there, I did work with the Squaxin Tribe, the Colville
Tribe and had engagement with other tribes sometimes behind the
scenes, sometimes on the front lines.
That gave me an appreciation of both the government-to-
government relationship that we have, the regulations, the
opportunities they have and frankly, a lot of the challenges
that they have as well.
In talking about my priorities for this job, my role and
how it knits together with all of you, first is honoring our
trust relationship with tribes, fulfilling our moral and our
legal obligations to tribes, protecting and restoring tribal
homelands, following through on the Cobell settlement, the
historic recent settlement and making sure that is
operationalized.
Also, it is addressing the challenges Chairwoman Cantwell
mentioned on Carcieri and also the Patchak litigation. These
are things that we need legislative support to address.
It is developing tribal energy resources. To Vice Chairman
Barrasso and Senator Fischer, it is conventional energy, it is
also renewable energy as Senator Franken referenced. On the
renewable side, we have 50 projects already going on 35
reservations. With up to 267 reservations we think have
potential there.
On the conventional side, we have opportunities to improve
the leasing process, in particular to accelerate development.
With the price of oil in particular, this can bring tremendous
economic value to tribes. We are committed to developing energy
resources, both conventional and renewable.
Indian education is an embarrassment to you and to us. It
is not for lack of desire. This is the one part of the
Department of the Interior that deals with Indian affairs, but
particularly Indian education that deals directly with services
to children. We know that self-determination and self-
governance is going to play an important role in bringing the
kind of academically rigorous and culturally appropriate
education that children need. It is not easy to do.
To Senator Franken's comment concerning facilities, we have
put $2 billion into facilities over the last ten years and
still have something like 68 that are in poor condition. We
need support from a resource standpoint to do that. Perhaps
there are some opportunities to do something creative outside
of what we thought of before to help address the circumstances
that you speak so passionately about, Senator Franken.
Climate change adaptation, not surprisingly perhaps, when
things get tough, it feels like the tribes take it on the chin
more than others. In Alaska, climate change is far more evident
in subsistence, in melting snow packs earlier and the changes
to wildlife and the ability to get out on pack ice to do hunts
and so on. It is very up close and personal.
Also, throughout parts of the west, we have wild land fires
where we have significant tribal lands, and need to make sure
we have water resources, and even flooding as we saw in the
upper Midwest earlier this season. Climate change adaptation
will hit tribes harder than other communities. We have to be
prepared for that.
Lastly, in terms of priorities, regulatory reform,
particularly in the acknowledgement process for tribes, it is
going to be a very high priority to figure out what we can do
within the Department, how we can work with you, how we can
work with tribes to consult on what is wrong with the process
and how we can enhance the process to bring clarity on those
rules and the roles we each have.
Regarding challenges, several of you mentioned the
sequester. This is the part of Interior that deals with the
people. When the cuts are indiscriminant and across every
category, we can say we are concerned about Indian education
but we have whacked directly $40 million out of the Indian
education budget. That hurts and it is a budget that cannot
take it.
Overall, for Indian affairs, $119 million has been cut, $52
million in contracts to tribes where they are providing
services directly themselves and $67 million in total for
federal direct services.
We have tough choices going forward in the budget. Some of
you referenced some of those. Contract support costs are one.
They are not fully funded in the budget in spite of the Supreme
Court decision in Salazar v. Ramah but we are trading off
direct programming costs relative to contract support costs.
We know we need to consult with tribes to work with them on
the long term solutions that benefit them. How can we support,
in more effective ways, self-governance and self-determination.
I am committed to working with you in all of those areas.
In conclusion, I recognize you have a lot more experience
on this than I do. I am now beginning my fifth week on the job.
I do have great colleagues at the Department of the Interior
and at Indian Affairs, in particular, who are very, very
helpful to me and certainly will be helpful to me in this
hearing as you drill into detail.
I also will say that the meetings I have had with tribal
leaders have been enormously powerful and helpful in
understanding the issues they face. Tribal consultation will be
an important part of the role I play in carrying out the
responsibilities entrusted to me.
I look forward to continuing the commitment of this
Administration to the Federal Government's role as a respectful
and productive partner with American Indians and Alaska Natives
through our work at the Department of the Interior, working
with other departments of the Federal Government and working
together with you.
Thank you very much and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Jewell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sally Jewell, Secretary, U.S. Department of
the Interior
Good afternoon, Chairwoman Cantwell, Vice-Chairman Barrasso, and
Members of the Committee. I would like to thank my friend and fellow
Washingtonian Senator Cantwell for inviting me to be here today. It is
a pleasure to appear before your Committee to discuss my views and
priorities relating to Indian Affairs at the Department of the
Interior.
Introduction
As I have become more familiar with the details of the Department's
many missions and programs over these past few weeks, I have come to
see the truly astonishing breadth of the issues and responsibilities
located within this one agency. As I said at my confirmation hearing,
it is with deep humility that I acknowledge the scale of the duties
entrusted to the office, from upholding our solemn trust
responsibilities to American Indians and Alaska Natives to making wise
decisions about the use and conservation of the resources with which we
have been blessed. Almost all of these duties and responsibilities are
applicable to the Indian Affairs programs.
As Secretary of the Interior I have the responsibility to oversee
the work of all components of the Department that intersect with Indian
Country, including the important work performed by the Office of the
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the
Bureau of Indian Education, and the Office of the Special Trustee.
My familiarity with Native American issues developed through my 19
years in commercial banking from 1981 to 2000. During that time, I
worked with a number of Indian tribes in the Northwest, and served for
several years as the lead banker for NANA, an Alaska Regional
Corporation. I learned that, through treaties, the Constitution,
Federal law, and court decisions, the United States has a government-
to-government relationship with, and obligations to, American Indian
tribes and Alaska Natives. I also learned that American Indian tribes
and Alaska Native groups are governments with inherent sovereignty.
As Secretary of the Interior, I am committed to upholding the
Federal government's obligations to Native Americans and to
strengthening the United States' government-to-government relationship
with Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. I realize that the Federal
Government has not always honored its trust responsibilities or fully
recognized the sovereign status of tribes. I acknowledge this before
discussing my broad goals and the challenges that we face.
American Indians and Alaska Natives are survivors of efforts to
assimilate indigenous people, terminate tribal governments, and wipe
out native languages and cultures. The emotional, spiritual,
psychological, and physical violence perpetrated on continues to haunt
Native American communities today. American Indians and Alaska Natives
consistently rank near the bottom of every economic, social and health
indicator. While nothing can undo this tragic history, I am learning
that this Administration, including my predecessor Secretary Ken
Salazar, has taken action to address these disparities in Native
American communities.
That effort began with a promise by then presidential candidate
Barack Obama to hold a yearly summit with tribal leaders from all
Federally-recognized tribes. Beginning with his first address to the
first gathering of tribal leaders in 2009, President Obama told these
tribal leaders that this time would be different and that he would
begin a lasting conversation--one that would be crucial to our shared
future. He also committed to forging a new and better future together
where those in Indian Country could be full partners in pursuing the
American Dream. As you can imagine, Indian Country was skeptical. But
with the passage of the Tribal Law and Order Act, the settlement of the
Cobell case and tribal trust litigation and, more recently, the passage
of the tribal criminal jurisdiction provisions in the Violence Against
Women Act, all with the full support of the Obama Administration, we
have made great progress in showing that it is indeed a new day.
As Secretary, I intend to carry on the Obama Administration's
policy with respect to Indian Affairs. The cornerstone of that policy
continues to be promoting tribal self-governance and self-determination
and recognizing the inherent right of tribal governments to make their
own decisions to strengthen their communities. Over the past few weeks,
I have reviewed the various programs and issues at the Department and
have identified a number of important priorities with regard to Indian
Affairs programs. Those priorities generally fall within several broad
issue areas: honoring the trust relationship by restoring tribal
homelands; upholding treaty obligations and protecting trust and
natural resources; strengthening tribal nations; and promoting self-
governance.
Successful management of all of these priorities is important to
Indian Country. At the end of our tenure here, I hope that Indian
Country will have no doubt that the Federal Government can be a
respectful and productive partner.
Working Toward the Promise: Departmental Goals and Priorities
Honoring the Trust Relationship
Restoring Tribal Homelands
One way that the Obama Administration has sought to advance a
nation-to-nation relationship with tribal governments and the long-
standing policy goals established in the Indian Reorganization Act
(IRA) is by protecting and restoring tribal homelands. We must never
forget that through the destructive federal policies of allotment and
assimilation, Tribes lost tens of millions of acres of tribal lands. At
the present time, tribes use lands acquired in trust for housing,
schools, hospitals, tribal government administrative offices and
economic development projects. More generally, tribes use trust lands
to promote the health, safety, social, and economic welfare of tribal
members and tribal governments. Over the last four years, Indian
Affairs has processed more than 1,100 separate applications and
acquired over 205,000 acres of land in trust on behalf of Indian tribes
and individuals. Nonetheless, efforts to restore tribal homelands have
been hindered by the United States Supreme Court decisions in Carcieri
v. Salazar and Salazar v. Patchak.
In Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009), the Supreme Court held
that land could not be taken into trust for the Narragansett Tribe of
Rhode Island under Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934
because the Tribe was not under Federal jurisdiction in 1934. The
Carcieri decision represents a step back toward misguided policies of a
century ago and is wholly inconsistent with the United States long-
standing policy of self-governance and self-determination for all
Federally-recognized tribes.
The decision has placed unnecessary and substantial administrative
burdens on the Department and tribes, and has significantly increased
litigation risks. The historical inquiry into whether an Indian tribe
was ``under federal jurisdiction'' in 1934 is often fact-intensive and
can make the Department's review process for acquiring land in trust
pursuant to Section 5 of the IRA both time consuming and costly for
tribes and the Department.
Then, after the Department's decision is complete, it is not
atypical for suits to be filed challenging the acquisition. The
Department is currently engaged in both Federal court and
administrative litigation regarding the Secretary's authority to
acquire land in trust pursuant to the IRA following the Carcieri
decision. The increase in litigation results in years of delay and
significant additional cost to the Department, tribes, and also the
Department of Justice. These litigation costs have real life
consequences--including the unwarranted diversion of time and resources
that could be expended on services and programs in tribal communities.
Overall, the Carcieri decision creates uncertainty and adversely
affects the tribes' ability to progress as a government.
The Administration continues to support a legislative solution to
address the negative impacts and increased burdens on the Department
and on Indian Country resulting from this decision. The President's
Fiscal Year 2014 Budget includes language that, if enacted, would
resolve this issue.
The Supreme Court's decision in Salazar v. Patchak, or Match-E-Be-
Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak, 132 S. Ct. 2199
(2012), has exacerbated the problems created by the Carcieri decision.
In Patchak, the Court held that, despite the Quiet Title Act, the
decisions of the Secretary to acquire land in trust for tribes could be
challenged even if the land at issue was already held in trust by the
United States. The Supreme Court rejected the Government's argument
that there was a widely-held understanding that once land was held in
trust by the United States for the benefit of a tribe, the Quiet Title
Act prevented a litigant from seeking to divest the United States of
such trust title.
The Administration could support a legislative solution to the
Patchak decision that allows for judicial review of the Secretary's
decisions to acquire land in trust while also protecting the tribal
land base after title to the land transfers to the United States in
trust for a tribe.
Cobell Settlement Implementation
Congress approved the Cobell Settlement Agreement in the Claims
Resolution Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-291 (Dec. 8, 2010). The
Settlement was finalized on November 24, 2012, following the end of the
appeal process. The $3.4 billion Settlement addresses the Federal
Government's responsibility for trust accounts and trust assets
maintained by the United States on behalf of more than 300,000
individual Indians.
I know that Secretary Salazar, Deputy Secretary Hayes, and
Solicitor Tompkins were major proponents of that settlement. Its
implementation will ultimately serve to strengthen the relationship
between Native Americans and the Federal Government. I am pleased to
continue to make implementation of this historic settlement a priority
at the Department.
Individual Compensation
Of the Settlement funds, $1.5 billion compensates class members for
their historical accounting, trust fund, and asset mismanagement claims
regarding the Individual Indian Money accounts held in trust by the
Federal Government. The Department's involvement in this phase of the
settlement is limited to supplying the ``best and most current''
contact information for each beneficiary class member and indicating if
the class member is a minor; non-compos mentis; an individual under
legal disability; in need of assistance; or whose whereabouts is
unknown. Settlement payments to the Historical Accounting Class members
began on December 17, 2012 for Stage 1. Payments to Trust
Administration Class (Stage 2) members may occur before the end of
2013.
OST's Trust Beneficiary Call Center has increased its capacity to
address the increased number of calls that occurred following Stage 1
payments, and we expect even more capacity will be needed to meet the
volume increase expected with the Stage 2 payments.
Land Buy-Back Program
The remaining part of the Settlement establishes a $1.9 billion
fund to consolidate fractionated ownership of land interests in Indian
Country. The Land Buy-Back Program provides for voluntary purchases of
fractionated interests in trust or restricted parcels from willing
Individual Indian Money Account holders. The Settlement gives the
Department ten years to consolidate such fractional interests under the
program for beneficial use by tribal communities.
Given the Land Buy-Back Program's size, limited duration, and
importance, the Department established an office within the Office of
the Secretary, subject to the oversight of the Deputy Secretary, to
facilitate coordinated engagement and accountability within the
Department and to streamline projects and the prioritization of
resources. The Department hopes to make offers to purchase fractional
interests at initial locations by December 2013.
Indian Education Scholarship Fund
As an additional incentive to participate in the Land Buy-Back
Program, the Settlement authorizes up to $60.0 million to be set aside
for an Indian Education Scholarship Fund for American Indian and Alaska
Native students when individuals sell fractional interests under the
Land Buy-Back Program. On March 12, 2013, Secretary Salazar announced
the selection of the American Indian College Fund to administer the
student scholarship fund, with a fifth of the annual scholarships to be
awarded by the American Indian Graduate Center.
Indian Trust Commission
One of the many outcomes of the Cobell Settlement was the creation
of the Secretarial Commission on Indian Trust Administration and
Reform. This five-member Commission is charged with conducting a
comprehensive evaluation of the Department's management of nearly $4
billion in American Indian trust assets and offering recommendations
for improvement. The Commission is expected to deliver a report at the
end of November 2013.
Honoring Treaty Commitments
The Obama Administration has made it a high priority to honor our
treaty obligations and trust responsibility to Native Americans and
Alaska Natives, and I intend to carry out that commitment.
One important way the Department honors its commitments is through
the Rights Protection Implementation program, which supports the
implementation of Federal court orders that resulted from decisions in
complex, off-reservation treaty rights litigation. Generally speaking,
these cases involved treaties in which the signatory tribes conveyed
significant amounts of land to the United States and reserved the right
to hunt, fish, and gather within the ceded territory. The rights
involved are shared among multiple tribes and involve co-management
with other jurisdictions.
There are 49 tribes whose off-reservation hunting, fishing and
gathering rights in the Pacific Northwest and Great Lakes regions are
supported by this program. Five umbrella intertribal organizations
assist the tribes in implementing relevant court orders and carrying
out co-management responsibilities. The court decisions and orders
implemented through this program include U.S. v. Washington, U.S. v.
Michigan, Lac Courte Oreilles v. Voigt, U.S. v. Oregon, Minnesota v.
Mille Lacs and Grand Portage v. Minnesota. In addition, this program
supports implementation of the US/Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty.
Settling Indian Water Rights Disputes
With respect to Indian water rights, I am committed to continuing
and enhancing the Department's longstanding initiative of settling
Indian water rights disputes whenever possible. Indian water
settlements help fulfill the United States' general trust
responsibility trust responsibility to tribes and ensure that Indian
people have safe, reliable, and accessible water supplies. Indian water
settlements also end decades of controversy and contention among tribes
and neighboring communities and promote cooperation in the management
of water resources.
The Administration is committed to resolving Indian water rights
claims and ensuring that Native American communities can use and manage
water to meet domestic, economic, cultural, and ecological needs, as
demonstrated by the six Indian water rights settlements that have been
enacted into law during this Administration. These settlements include
the four enacted under the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, Pub. L. No.
111-291 (Dec. 8, 2010), benefitting seven tribes in three different
states at a total Federal cost of more than $1 billion: White Mountain
Apache Tribe in Arizona, the Crow Tribe in Montana, and the Pueblo of
Taos, Pueblo of Nambe, Pueblo of Pojoaque, Pueblo of San Ildefonso, and
Pueblo of Tesuque in New Mexico; and the two settlements enacted under
the Omnibus Public Lands Act, Pub. L. No. 111-11, 123 Stat. 991 (2009),
including the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation
Water Rights Settlement (Nevada), and the Navajo-San Juan River Indian
Water Rights Settlement Agreement (New Mexico).
To help the Department more effectively partner with tribes on
water issues, the Department assists tribes during the assessment,
litigation, negotiation and implementation phases of establishing and
enforcing tribal water rights. Currently, there are 17 appointed
Federal Indian Water Rights Negotiation Teams active in negotiating
water rights claims in the western United States. An additional 21
Federal Indian Water Rights Implementation Teams work on implementing
congressionally enacted settlements, including the four enacted in
2010. With increasing drought conditions in the United States and
pressure from an expanding population, the number of requests for the
appointment of new negotiation teams continues to grow.
Strengthening Tribal Communities
Increasing Renewable and Conventional Energy Development on Indian
Lands
A stronger America depends on a growing economy that creates jobs.
No area holds more promise than investments in American energy. As the
President has stated many times, our success depends in significant
part on pursuing an all-of-the-above energy strategy. As a part of this
strategy, the Department is committed to assisting tribes in expanding
on Indian lands renewable, low cost, reliable, and secure energy
supplies as well as and safe and responsible oil and gas development in
accordance with tribal objectives. Implementing the President's all-of-
the-above energy strategy in Indian Country will contribute to the
goals of increasing our nation's domestic energy supplies and of
improving the economies of many Indian tribes and Alaska Native
villages.
Under the Assistant Secretary, the BIA is responsible for
developing, implementing and reviewing bureau-wide policies, plans,
processes, environmental impact studies, industry leasing and
development activities, and other functions related to development and
production of energy and mineral resources on Indian lands. In
addition, the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED),
within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs,
provides financial and technical assistance to tribes, supporting
development and management of their energy resources. This includes
resource assessments, geologic studies, economic analyses, and market
studies.
The Department currently holds in trust 55 million surface acres
and 57 million acres of subsurface mineral estate throughout Indian
Country. The potential on Indian lands for the development of both
conventional and renewable energy resources is significant.
Renewable Energy Development
More than 50 renewable energy projects are ongoing on an estimated
35 reservations. This, however, is barely tapping into the renewable
energy potential that exists in Indian Country. While the resources on
these reservations have not yet been fully determined, the BIA has
identified 267 reservations with renewable energy potential.
An example of this great potential is the solar energy project on
Moapa Band of Paiute's trust lands in Nevada, approved by the
Department last year. This milestone project is the first-ever,
utility-scale solar project approved for development on tribal lands.
The project will generate lease income for the Tribe, create new jobs
and employment opportunities for tribal members, and connect the
existing tribally-owned Travel Plaza to the electrical grid, decreasing
its dependence on a diesel powered generator. The procurement of
construction materials and equipment is expected to generate additional
sales and use tax revenues for the county and the State. In addition,
the Tribe's agreement with the Los Angeles City Council for a 25-year
power purchase agreement will provide enough energy to power over
100,000 Los Angeles households.
Conventional Energy Development
The BIA is also working closely with tribal nations that are
interested in developing conventional energy resources. Together, BIA
and Indian tribes are defining, quantifying, and developing tribal
energy resources for industrial scale energy production. The Department
has estimated that energy and mineral development on Indian lands in
2012 supported over $16.0 billion of economic activity and nearly
120,000 jobs related to trust resources. In the last three years, IEED
assisted Indian mineral owners in the negotiation of 55 leases for oil,
gas, renewable energy, and aggregate materials development on
approximately 3.1 million acres.
The IEED assisted the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold
Reservation in the negotiation of lease agreements with oil and gas
companies that have allowed the Tribes to share in the success of the
oil and gas leasing boom in the Bakken Formation in the Williston
Basin. In 2011, over 200 drilling permits and associated rights-of-ways
were approved in the area. In 2012, the number of drilling permits and
associated rights-of-way permits rose to over 300. Also in 2012, the
Department approved a fee-to-trust application from the Tribes to build
a refinery on the Fort Berthold Reservation. Once all required
approvals are obtained, this will be the first new refinery built in
the U.S. in more than 30 years.
Advancing Indian Education
Education of Native American children is an issue of paramount
concern. These children experience some of the highest levels of
poverty in the United States, which not only affects the possibilities
for their academic success but may also limit other possibilities for
success later in life. The Administration is committed to ensuring
Native American students receive an academically rigorous, culturally
appropriate education that will prepare them to be productive citizens
and leaders in their communities and help build safer, stronger,
healthier, and more prosperous Indian communities.
The BIE elementary and secondary school system currently has 183
academic or resident-only facilities located on 64 reservations in 23
States. During the 2011-2012 school year, the BIE-funded schools served
nearly 48,000 individual K-12 American Indian students and residential
boarders. After accounting for transfers, absences, and dropout rates,
this equates to an average daily membership of around 41,000 students.
Currently 125 of the BIE's schools are tribally-controlled with grant
support funding helping to cover administrative and indirect costs
incurred by tribes operating contract and grant schools. The BIE also
operates two post-secondary schools, administers operating grants to 27
tribal colleges and universities and two tribal technical colleges, and
promotes post-secondary opportunities with scholarships to
approximately 32,000 students attending other institutions of learning.
The BIE's mission is to provide quality educational opportunities
from early childhood through life in accordance with a tribe's needs
for cultural and economic wellbeing while respecting the diversity of
Indian tribes as distinct cultural and governmental entities. The BIE's
vision for success includes:
Maximizing student achievement--Teaching its students well
is the number one priority for BIE. Effective instruction is a
critical element in turning BIE schools around. The BIE has
increased the number of School Improvement Grants to encourage
school turnaround models across BIE schools.
Advancing Indian education through self-determination--Self-
determination and self-governance are an integral part of
advancing Indian education. Over the past year, BIE consulted
with tribal governments and their leaders on topics such as the
Johnson-O'Malley student count, the Indian Affairs
Administrative Assessment, and the Public Law 100-297 grant
assurance form. Consultations have resulted in agency-wide
collaborative efforts in the areas of education, language,
culture, and economic development.
Optimizing school operations--To support the President's
commitment to provide every student even footing when it comes
to education, BIE has expressed a desire to adopt the Common
Core State Standards, as have 46 States and the District of
Columbia, to allow BIE to pursue a unified system of standards,
assessments, and accountability rather than using the
standards, assessments, and average yearly progress definitions
of the 23 different States where BIE schools are located.
Improving school facilities--Indian Affairs provides funds
for facility programs for 183 academic and resident only
campuses. From 2002 through 2012, $2.0 billion has been
invested in construction, improvement, and repair projects that
have reduced the number of schools in poor condition from more
than 120 to 63. This includes 42 complete school replacements
and 62 major renovations, which are either completed, funded or
under construction. The physical state of our schools remains a
significant challenge, as it does for so many other parts of
the Interior infrastructure.
Seeking partners--The BIE signed eleven Memorandums of
Understanding, Memorandums of Agreement, and cooperative
agreements with other federal agencies, tribal colleges, and
tribal governments to increase access to new programs and
initiatives as well as to build capacity at tribal colleges and
within tribal governments. The BIE recently partnered with
Teach for America to increase BIE-funded schools' access to
highly qualified teachers in hard-to-fill locations in the BIE
system.
Protecting Native Communities and Natural Resources Through Climate
Change Adaptation
The Department recognizes that climate change may
disproportionately affect Indian tribes and Alaska Natives because they
are often heavily dependent on their natural resources for economic
development and cultural identity. The Department has a special role to
play in working with Indian tribes to safeguard resources and to
maintain fish and wildlife needed for subsistence harvests. These
protections are especially critical for Native Alaskan populations
given the rate of change observed in the state. Given these
responsibilities, the BIA will have an essential role in the
Department's response to the impacts of climate change in Indian
Country.
Climate change impacts are becoming increasingly evident for Indian
tribes, and tribal leaders have voiced their growing concerns with the
effects of climate change on their surrounding environment. For
example:
In Alaska, the loss of sea ice and resulting shore erosion
places subsistence life-ways at risk as well as entire
communities experiencing coastal erosion;
The Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians lost
its entire wild rice crop last spring in a record flood;
For the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, the Chinook
were late again this spring, resulting in one ceremony without
fish and the late root crop just delayed another traditional
feast;
In Oklahoma, Kansas, and the Southwest, extended drought has
decimated crops and groundcover, and allowed the wind to move
soils, making recovery harder once the drought does break.
These types of events pose significant challenges to any affected
community. For Indian nations, these challenges are exacerbated because
they not only impact Native economies--they also threaten Native
cultures. The Cooperative Landscape Conservation Program, BIA's primary
climate change adaptation program, allows the BIA to expand tribal
climate adaptation planning and increase BIA capacity to transfer
technical information. The Program engages field level managers, Indian
Affairs staff and tribal representatives and provides them with the
opportunities to improve technical skills.
Other programs at the Department address climate change adaptation
as a key purpose, such as the Department's nationwide network of
Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, which allows the BIA to assist
tribes in identifying and implementing strategies to address impacts on
tribal lands. Another example is the work of the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) to identify best practices for the potential
integration of traditional ecological knowledge into science and
funding opportunities. To this end, USGS is interviewing Indian elders
who are familiar with the local climate and terrain. This facilitates
the incorporation of different and traditional forms of knowledge that
allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the complex challenges
posed by climate change. The indigenous knowledge encompasses
observations, lessons, and stories about the environment that have been
handed down for generations. This data provides a long history of
environmental knowledge and also can help uncover new areas for
scientific study.
Promoting Self-Governance in Tight Fiscal Times
For the Country as a whole, one key challenge moving forward is the
uncertainty of the Nation's budget. In these hard fiscal times, tough
choices and hard decisions will have to be made at all levels of
government. As I said in my introduction, the cornerstone of my policy
as Secretary of the Interior will be centered on promoting self-
governance and self-determination, and the inherent right of tribal
governments to make their own decisions to strengthen their
communities. Nonetheless, given the financial climate, tough choices
must be made with respect to Departmental programs. One such decision
involves the need to balance funding for contract support costs with
funding for direct programming and other tribal priorities within
constrained resources.
Congress and the Administration have not fully funded contract
support costs for many years. Shortfalls in the Department's
appropriations for contract support costs have led to litigation to
recoup unpaid support costs, most recently in a Supreme Court decision
in Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter, 132 S. Ct. 2181 (2012). The
Administration intends to consult with tribes and work with Congress on
a long term solution that will further promote the shared goal of
tribal self-determination and self-governance.
The President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2014 has two key features
related to contract support costs. First, it proposes $231 million for
contract support costs, which is $10 million more than the Fiscal Year
2012 enacted level, and approximately 91 percent of the amount
identified in the most recent projections as the estimated full funding
requirement. Second, to accompany the proposed appropriations language
in the President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2014, the Department will
submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a Contract
Support Cost Table that identifies an amount to be made available for
each self-determination contract for Fiscal Year 2014, consistent with
one of the Supreme Court's solutions. The appropriation will also make
available a lump-sum amount for contract support costs associated with
new or expanded self-determination contracts. This would provide
certainty to tribes on the funding they will receive. The contract
support costs proposal in the President's FY 2014 Budget is designed to
be an interim step toward a long term solution reached by working with
Congress and consulting with Indian tribes.
To be clear, the Administration is strongly committed to supporting
and advancing self-determination and self-governance for Federally-
recognized tribes. For the reasons discussed above, I hope a long-term,
mutually beneficial solution can be achieved by working with Congress
and consulting with Indian tribes.
Regulatory Reform
As part of this Administration's goal to improve regulatory
processes, the Department has been looking at a number of areas,
including programs within Indian Affairs.
Reform of the Federal acknowledgment process is a high priority for
the Department. The acknowledgment of the continued existence of
another sovereign entity is one of the most solemn and important
responsibilities undertaken by the Department. Federal acknowledgment
permanently confirms the existence of a nation-to-nation relationship
between a Federally-recognized Indian tribe and the United States. The
work of Assistant Secretary Washburn and his staff on this issue is
important and we are committed to improving the process
The Department's process for acknowledging an Indian tribe provides
for the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs to make a decision on
whether to acknowledge a petitioner's government-to-government
relationship with the United States. Some have criticized the process
as expensive, inefficient, burdensome, intrusive, less than transparent
and unpredictable. The Department is aware of these critiques, and we
are reviewing our existing regulations to consider ways to improve the
process and address these criticisms and concerns. With this in mind,
the Department is actively working to develop draft revised Federal
Acknowledgement regulations and will be initiating the Tribal
Consultation soon. Pending the outcome from tribal consultation, the
next step would be to release the proposed rule for public comment,
which will be published in the Federal Register. While the current goal
is to publish a final rule sometime in 2014, the timing for publication
of a final rule depends upon the volume and complexity of comments and
revisions necessary to address the comments received.
Conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to share my views with the Committee
on some of the critical issues affecting tribal nations. I look forward
to working with you as we collectively work to uphold our
responsibilities.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Secretary Jewell.
You mentioned taking land into trust. Obviously the agency
has acquired over 200,000 acres in trust for tribes and
individual tribal members. Why do you think it is important to
still get a Carcieri fix if the agency is able to continue to
do this?
Secretary Jewell. The key issue of the Carcieri fix is one
of resources. The way Carcieri is written with the requirement
that we have to identify that every tribe was federally
recognized back in 1934 requires a lot of staff time to assess
records and prove all of that. It is almost universally
litigated at the end as people cross check that work.
When you think about effective use of limited resources in
Federal Government, without a Carcieri fix, we cannot
effectively use our resources and we get sued for just about
everything we do. I think it really is a function of trying to
put our resources where they need to go and assessing the land
values, making the transfers and carrying through the trust
obligations and not spending our time researching historical
records and fighting lawsuits.
Larry, do you have anything you want to add?
Mr. Roberts. I just want to add that it does have real live
consequences. For example, I am a member of the Oneida Nation
of Wisconsin. When we acquire land within the boundaries of our
reservation and someone challenges that acquisition, the Oneida
Nation was one of the first nations to sign treaties with the
United States from 1794, so the notion we were not under
Federal jurisdiction in 1934 is mind boggling.
It is those resources that not only the Federal Government
is contributing to analyze this issue, but it is the resources
of tribes taking money away from other limited resources and
pouring those into applications and litigation. I think it has
real life consequences in Indian Country and for the
Department.
The Chairwoman. You stated both your interest and the
Administration's interest to honor treaty obligations and trust
responsibilities. The Department has a number of bureaus and
agencies with a duty to honor that responsibility as well.
Frequently Interior offices, like the Office of Policy
Management and Budget or the Bureau of Oceans Management have,
in my opinion, exhibited a lack of understanding of those
obligations to protect treaty rights.
Specifically, will you ensure that the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management in its trust responsibility will engage with
coastal tribes as they move forward in important roles like
national ocean policies and things of that nature?
Secretary Jewell. Yes is the short answer. The slightly
longer answer, just to use an example from our home State of
Washington, the Bureau of Ocean Management, Pacific Team, has
been working with a number of tribes on offshore issues in the
State of Washington. I know they have convened with the
Quinault, Makah, Quileute, Hoh, and Shoalwater Bay Tribe last
November to talk about these issues. That is just an example
from our home State.
In talking with Tommy Beaudreau, who is director of that,
it certainly is a commitment to working with tribes on offshore
issues. As we look at both renewable development, as well as
conventional development, particularly renewables, tribes will
have an important seat at the table as we come up with these
plans.
The Chairwoman. I am sure you know that places like Neah
Bay can be treacherous waterways. The Makah Tribe has basically
become a Federal partner with the Coast Guard in the protection
and management of that area because it is so remote. I would
hope the agency would have the same partnership mentality when
it comes to working with tribes on these resource issues.
I have just a last question. Will you commit to appointing
a team to work in resolving outstanding issues as part of the
Spokane settlement legislation?
Secretary Jewell. A quick answer to that is I am happy to
have some people work on that, specifically Alaska Assistant
Secretary Kevin Washburn to look into it, to bring some
resources to the table to better understand exactly what the
issues are what we might be able to do to address them.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I want to talk about irrigation. At no less than eight
committee hearings, I have raised the issue of the enormous
backlog of deferred maintenance on the 15 Indian irrigation
projects operated by the BIA. Assistant Secretary Washburn
recently testified there was no long term plan to address the
backlog.
While there has been some progress in assessing the extent
and the valuation of the deferred maintenance, we are a long
way away from a plan to address the problem and the causes of
the problem. Will you commit to making this deferred
maintenance problem a high priority within the Department?
Secretary Jewell. Senator, I appreciate the maintenance
issue. I know there are some specifics in your region--I think
the Wind River is one area of particular concern. I know we
have an opportunity to charge operating and maintenance for
these projects to customers to help reimburse the costs. That
should be part of the offset.
It will be important for me to know more about this, to
have Kevin work with you or your staff on this to figure out
how we can address the issues. It certainly doesn't make sense
to build projects and not be able to maintain them.
Senator Barrasso. We will go into additional depth on that
but the amount they are able to charge for the services they
are receiving are so dwindled because of the lack of
maintenance that it is hard to charge for the services they are
not getting. That is kind of the issue there.
With regard to park safety, as with irrigation, I have
raised the issue of safety at the Grand Teton National Park
with the Department on several occasions. We discussed this in
a letter to Park Service Director Jarvis dated February 1 and
then I mentioned it to you on March 6 in our meeting with
follow up questions at your confirmation hearing on April 8.
Then we had a phone conversation on April 26.
The safety of the park visitors is extremely important and
I have not yet gotten a response from you or the Department. I
have another copy of the letter here and perhaps can get it to
you today. I would just ask that I get some answers to my
concerns.
Secretary Jewell. I will check into it. I am sorry you
haven't had a response. Is this on the road?
Senator Barrasso. Yes.
Secretary Jewell. The bicycles?
Senator Barrasso. Yes, the pathways and the road.
Secretary Jewell. I will figure out where that is.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
With regard to energy, for some tribes oil and gas revenues
make up a substantial portion of the tribal operating budget
which is used for essential tribal services. As I understand
it, the BLM is expected to release new regulations on hydraulic
fracturing very soon.
I just hope you realize that any new regulations are likely
to exacerbate delays and costs and continue to hinder tribes in
their efforts to develop their trust mineral resources. Have
you done any economic analysis on the negative impacts that any
new hydraulic fracturing regulations will have on tribal
economies?
Secretary Jewell. Senator, we are close to releasing the
proposed rule and there will be a comment period after that. We
do not anticipate additional costs associated with this. We
have worked I concert with industry to come up with the rules.
We have also looked at the science that is out there.
Our obligation, as it relates to tribal matters, is to
ensure that we are overseeing the appropriate procedures on the
subsurface mineral estate. It is our obligation to do that so
it is carrying out that obligation and fulfilling the
regulations. I don't anticipate that it would cost the tribes
any more.
Senator Barrasso. The Office of the Inspector General
issued a report on Indian oil and gas leasing last September.
It identified several problem areas, including lack of a
coordinated strategy or organizational structure to manage the
BIA's oil and gas activities, extra layers of governmental
review and complexities associated with self-determination by
the tribes. These are some of the problems identified, not by
us, but by the Office of the Inspector General that push oil
and gas develop off Indian reservations.
One of the recommendations was that the Department of the
Interior should work with Congress in improving something we
worked on which is the Tribal Energy Resources Agreement. Last
year, I introduced a bill designed to do that. Will you work
with the Committee to help implement these recommendations from
the Office of the Inspector General?
Secretary Jewell. Yes, I would be happy to work with the
Committee. I will tell you that in discussions with my
colleagues in Indian Affairs, there is a commitment to
streamline leasing, in general, on Indian reservations.
Certainly that encompasses leasing for mineral development.
Senator Barrasso. Madam Chairwoman, I have additional
questions on education, law enforcement, energy and wild horses
on Indian land. Perhaps I could submit those for written
answers.
The Chairwoman. Absolutely. We will keep the record open
for members to do just that and get responses.
Senator Johnson.
Senator Johnson. Secretary Jewell, as you know building a
house in Indian Country is not a simple process. Each Federal
agency plays a role from obtaining the lease, ensuring proper
water infrastructure and leveraging the funds.
As Chairman of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
Committee, it is important to me to find solutions to our
critical housing needs. How will you ensure that Interior
programs are working effectively with other federal agencies to
address the dire need for Indian housing?
Secretary Jewell. Thank you, Senator Johnson.
I think there are things that we can do and things we can
do working with other agencies. In terms of what we can do,
there is no question that leasing lands for housing or other
purposes in Indian Country has been a cumbersome process, one
where one size doesn't fit all and yet we have had the same
process no matter whether it is a complicated, commercial
enterprise or a single family residence. There are
opportunities to improve that and those are underway.
Second, in working with other agencies, Housing and Urban
Development is a place with which we need to work. I am
actually having dinner with Secretary Donovan tonight. I am
building a relationship with him and getting to know the
resources HUD has and how that knits together with the Bureau
of Indian Affairs and our responsibilities in Indian Affairs
broadly.
Larry, do you want to add anything to that?
Mr. Roberts. I know this has been a high priority for
Assistant Secretary Washburn as well. I know he has already met
with HUD on issues and where we can collaborate on this. Also,
with regard to our new leasing regulations, hopefully that will
streamline issues of leasing for housing.
Senator Johnson. I have had Secretary Donovan visit with me
at the Rosebud Indian Reservation in South Dakota.
As you know, the Department of Interior operates one of two
federally-operated school systems. In my home State of South
Dakota, nearly 60 percent of BIE or tribal-controlled schools
are in poor or fair condition according to the Education
Facility Condition Index.
With the elimination of funding for education construction
and a decrease to ISEP funds, how does the Interior ensure our
children are learning in an adequate and secure environment?
Secretary Jewell. Senator, you identify a very, very
difficult issue that I would say is going to require our
cooperation and working together. We cannot repair and replace
schools without money. We are prioritizing our budget in these
lean times on what happens in the classroom and on repairs and
maintenance as opposed to school replacement.
Over the last ten years, we put $2 billion into school
replacement and upgrades, including $300 million of stimulus
money. We have to make sure we are maintaining the structures
we have. In a tight budget, the 2014 budget focuses on repairs
and maintenance and not on new construction.
I don't know if there are creative ways. I asked in the car
on the way here whether there was an opportunity for private
philanthropy as happens in so many other areas to support this.
I don't think that legislation allows that right now but it is
an attractable challenge. I know that a learning environment
where people feel respected is more conducive to high quality
learning than one where children don't feel valued.
I think you identify an important issue that I will need
your help in addressing.
Senator Johnson. Secretary Jewell, you mentioned in your
testimony that we have not fully undertaken the potential for
energy projects in Indian country. Many of the South Dakota
tribes are interested in wind and solar energy, both large
scale projects and residential scale projects.
Please explain the Interior's plans for working on tribal
energy projects in tribal communities and on tribal lands.
Secretary Jewell. As I mentioned in my opening statement,
there is a lot of potential in surface development of renewable
energy projects. We have 50 projects underway on 35
reservations right now. There are great examples of local solar
that supports local businesses. In one particular case in
Nevada, there is a utility scale solar project.
It is definitely a priority to address that because it can
help lift those tribes economically and provide reliable
sources of power. It is certainly on our radar. I think there
are opportunities to overhaul outdated leasing practices and
engage the Hearth Act signed into law to help streamline and
smooth out those projects.
Senator Johnson. My time has expired. Thank you.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Madam Secretary, it is good to see you again. Deputy
Secretary Roberts, it is good to see you. Thank you for your
help. I want to express my appreciation. I am going to touch on
the subject of Spirit Lake in just a moment.
In general, law enforcement is a real need on all of our
reservations. In the 2013 budget, the Administration did not
fund $3.5 million that BIA requested for law enforcement. In
the Senate budget, I inserted that $3.5 million for law
enforcement. It is a crying need in our part of the world and I
think probably all over on reservations.
We put it in the 2013 budget. My question is in the 2014
budget, are you satisfied that you have adequate funding for
law enforcement and child protective services?
Secretary Jewell. I will address the law enforcement. We
have an increase of nearly $20 million for public safety and
justice in the 2014 budget. From talking with some of the U.S.
Park Police, the effort we made in putting a surge into
reservations with law enforcement from a variety of different
agencies proved that additional law enforcement resources would
make a significant difference. The 2014 budget represents a
step in the direction of implementing some of the learning from
that.
It will provide I think $5.5 million for additional law
enforcement personnel and another $13 million for detention
centers that are tribally-operated in Indian country.
In terms of child welfare, I think it is fair to say it
would be difficult to put enough money into that really
important program. It is critical. It is what Assistant
Secretary Washburn is doing right now, working with tribes in
South Dakota on this difficult issue. I cannot speak
specifically to the 2014 budget. Do you know, Larry, how much
is in their for child welfare?
Mr. Roberts. I don't have that information in front of me.
Secretary Jewell. We will find out and make sure we get
that to you specifically as it relates to child welfare.
Senator Hoeven. I appreciate your commitment to come to our
State. I know we are working on that schedule right now. We can
provide you with very different examples that create some of
the same challenges.
For example, as we have talked and as Deputy Secretary
Roberts has seen firsthand, we have issues with social service,
child protective services on the Spirit Lake Nation. BIA, of
course, has now taken over and is working to remedy that. I
think it is very important that you see it. As I say, Deputy
Secretary Roberts has been there.
I think that level of commitment is very much needed and
will help in terms of the whole effort, both to make the real
progress we need to make, but also for transparency.
Another example we want to show you is the whole energy
patch. The Three Affiliated Tribes, another one of our
reservations, is right in the middle of this incredible energy
play so they are going through this huge boom in terms of
development and drilling but that also creates law enforcement
needs.
You have this influx of people so different situations but
both emphasize the incredible need to make sure we are
addressing law enforcement and social services, the whole gamut
of things, not only child protective services but drug
addiction and so many of these things. We want to get them
going economically or help them, but we really cannot do it
without having the kind of law enforcement, social services in
some of the fundamental, basic areas so that people feel safe
and protected.
Your coming is very important so you get a firsthand look.
I know you want to see the energy aspect of it too and we are
very much interested in that.
The hydraulic fracturing is very important. You and I
talked about this before. It is very important to States but it
is really important to tribes and another reason for you to
come out and see. We will show you a reservation, Three
Affiliated Tribes, doing incredible things. They have just
broken ground on a new refinery, green field refinery. Think
how amazing that is. They need to be able to hydraulically
fracture.
How these rules come out will be very important. I want
your commitment that you will work with the States and the
tribes on a rule that works.
Secretary Jewell. You have my commitment. We have been
working with the States and the tribes on the rules that will
be released shortly. You have my commitment to continue to make
sure that this is a collaborative process. I would throw
broader stakeholder groups into that mix as well.
Senator Hoeven. I appreciate that. I think you will find
there are tremendous things we can do on transparency and
everything else if we just work together to have something that
is simple and straightforward and empowers States' first
approach that would apply to the tribes as well.
Secretary Jewell. Just to be clear, on the Subsurface
Mineral Estate, on tribal lands, our responsibility is the same
as it is on Federal lands which is to be the regulator on those
resources as distinct from State lands. We are certainly
working alongside States to align regulations. You will see
that in any proposed rules that come out.
I just wanted to say that our obligation to the tribes is
to manage the Subsurface Estate on their behalf by statute.
Senator Hoeven. Madam Chairwoman, just a brief indulgence.
If we can follow the approach that we have taken both with
Interior and the White House like our BLM streamlining
legislation where we have worked together, that is the kind of
approach I am talking about where I think we can do good
things. That is what I am asking for.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Senator Tester.
Senator Tester. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I want to talk about water project funding first. The DOI
has authorized the Montana loan, two projects, several hundred
million dollars each. Have you been able to talk to
Commissioner Connor about the size and scope of the projects?
Good.
I would just say a lot of these water projects, at least
the two in Montana, are offsprings of the Water Compact
Agreements. This particular year, we have about $5 million to
build them. At this rate, I can tell you by the time the
projects get done they are going to have to start over and
rebuild them because they will be worn out. I will be long dead
and gone and dust by the time these projects get built.
Is there a plan to move forward on these projects in a way
that will get them done in a reasonable amount of time?
Secretary Jewell. I will give you the information that I
have and will ask my colleague, Larry, to weigh in on more
detail.
We have in the 2014 budget about $40 million in the request
for rural water projects.
Senator Tester. For the whole country?
Secretary Jewell. Pardon me?
Senator Tester. For the whole country?
Secretary Jewell. Yes, for the whole country. These are
expensive projects. There is not a lot of excess money to go
around. I would love to see where I get additional money and
would certainly welcome your support in advocating for that.
I have a list of where the projects are. The one I see in
Montana is north central Montana, the Rocky Boys.
Senator Tester. That is one and then northeastern Ft. Peck
is the other.
Secretary Jewell. Ft. Peck is another $4.3 million. Montana
is doing well out of the list that I have but there is way too
much of a need relative to the funds.
Senator Tester. Exactly right. Here is the deal. You get
one finger pointing that way, you have three fingers pointing
back at Congress and that is no truer than in this situation. I
am telling you that you have to fight if you can allow me to
fight. The truth is these projects are never going to get done.
It was 1998 when I got in the State Senate. These were $100
million projects and now they are over $300 million each. It is
just not happening. If there is a way you can develop a plan, I
think we can get people to support it to get it done.
Little Shell has been recognized, they have been turned
down, they have said yes and no. Honestly, straight up, are you
going to reconsider Little Shell as far as recognition?
Secretary Jewell. As I understand specifically as it
relates to Little Shell, there is litigation so I have been
advised that I cannot comment on Little Shell specifically
because of the litigation.
Senator Tester. That's all right. That's okay.
I have another situation that deals with firefighting
costs, the Hazardous Fuel Reduction Program. Good, you are
nodding your head.
A couple of years ago, it was at $206 million and last
year, $183 million. This year you are asking for $96 million. I
could ask you a lot of questions about is there 60 percent less
fire danger than there was three years ago or is it more or
less expensive to do mitigation versus fighting fires.
I won't do that. What I am going to ask is this. I think
the Ranking Member talked about when reservations were set up,
there were blocks of land set up and tribes were sent there to
live. In our particular case, we have one in western Montana
called Salish & Kootenai. Their hazard fuel reduction program
has been cut extensively. They do a hell of a job with that
money, quite frankly. That is not brag, that is fact.
These guys didn't have a choice, they were put there, to
live there and now they can't do the mitigation. On the other
side, just using fairness, we have mansions built in the middle
of the forest so damned deep you have to pump light into them
through a tube. When those catch on fire, they burn but they
are mansions.
My question I have is this. Is it really fair to short
change the Native Americans who were told to live there versus
the people who choose to build a house in the middle of the
wilderness?
Secretary Jewell. Senator, I just returned from NIFC, the
National Interagency Fire Center in Boise, Idaho. I had an all
hands meeting with all Interior and Forest Service staff. I
went with Secretary Vilsack.
We have a Sophie's Choice to make as it relates to
firefighting in the budget we are dealing with. There is not
enough money for hazardous fuel reduction. We have to
accommodate fire within our budget. There is not the capacity
to use emergency funds unless it is specifically authorized. We
treat hurricanes and floods as emergencies. We do not do the
same with fires.
When you have a limit on what you can spend, you put more
into suppression because you have to put out the fires. There
is a responsibility of homeowners to clear the area around
their land. I used the megaphone I had and it was in the
newspaper to make sure that homeowners recognize the
responsibility.
We are making decisions to suppress fires now because we
have to suppress certain fires instead of doing hazardous fuel
reduction because we don't have enough money to support both.
The jobs you referenced on reservations, the jobs in rural
communities associated with hazardous fuel reduction are very
important.
Senator Tester. And effective.
Secretary Jewell. And effective. They are being impacted in
2013 significantly by the sequester and in 2014 by the overall
budget limit and the fact we know that we have to fight fires.
There is, I think, a potential solution in terms of taking
emergency firefighting outside of the regular budget process so
that we can effectively look at hazardous fuels reduction in
the future. We have run over on that one.
Senator Tester. I got it and I have one point and I will
let you go. I apologize, Madam Chairwoman.
We have three fires burning in Montana right now. This is
the middle of May. This is our rainy season.
Secretary Jewell. It is early.
Senator Tester. This is not going to get any better. I know
climate change is on your radar screen and is certainly on
mine. Unless we wake up around here, we aren't going to have
the resources to manage because they are all going to be burnt
up. I don't point that at you. I point that as much at us as I
do you.
Thank you for the work you do.
Secretary Jewell. Thank you.
The Chairwoman. Senator Franken.
Senator Franken. Thank you, Madam Chair.
We got into the sequester, we got into warming, we have a
fire burning in Minnesota now, I understand. Talking about
climate change, there is a lot of potential for renewable
energy in Indian country. Indian country makes up just 2
percent of the U.S. but contains 5 percent of our renewable
resources.
I particularly think that tribes have a lot to gain through
the deployment of distributed generation which is you don't
have to necessarily be connected to the grid. Distributed
generation technology is like solar, small wind, methane
digesters or geothermal can alleviate the need for large and
expensive powerplants that have a lot of upfront costs.
There is a lot of job creation potential in distributed
generation. Those technologies are good for the environment.
I have had really good conversations with DOE on these
issues. I spoke a couple times recently with Dr. Dave Danielson
who heads the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy section of
the DOE. I asked him to work with me on these issues.
The Departments of Interior and Energy have tribal
assistance programs for these purposes. I want to make sure
these programs are strengthened and coordinated. The other
governmental agency that has a real interest in this is the
Department of Defense. The military benefits from distributed
energy technology at forward operating bases.
We have lost a lot of men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan
just in convoys hauling fuel for generators. It would be much
better to have solar there in those theaters. We are doing that
in Afghanistan now.
In Minnesota, I recently hosted DOD Assistant Secretary
Sharon Burke who is the lead on energy issues at DOD and talked
to her about these very issues.
I think there is a real opportunity for these three
departments--Energy, Interior and Defense--to work together on
renewable energy and distributed energy. I would really love to
help on this. My question is, would you please commit to me
that you will work closely with DOE and with DOD on these
renewable energy issues, in particular on the issue of
developing and deploying distributed generation on Indian
lands?
Secretary Jewell. Senator, I am happy to work on these
issues. One of my early conversations through the confirmation
process was with the Secretary of the Navy. It surprised me
when he said we actually had a lot we were working on together.
It was, in fact, around renewables. I recently had conversation
about the research money Defense has put into renewables and
distributed power. I think there are a lot of opportunities and
I certainly look forward to working with them on that and DOE.
I know Dr. Moniz is working his way through the process. I
have been in regular contact with him. We have talked about
these issues as well.
We have a role to play in streamlining leasing and the
process if these opportunities arise as well. There is no
question that there is an opportunity for us to step up.
Senator Franken. Everyone should realize that DOD is very
much leading the way in renewables.
Secretary Jewell. Yes.
Senator Franken. It is really smart. It is about saving
lives in theater. If you go to Walter Reed or Bethesda since it
is now all Walter Reed, the soldiers there, the Army is there
mainly because of IEDs, because they were in convoys.
Will you work with your office and provide my office with
recommendations on how we can achieve the goal of expanding
distributed generation on Indian lands? Would you work up a
plan? I would really love that.
Secretary Jewell. Yes.
Senator Franken. I am going to submit some questions for
the record because I am running out of time. Obviously I
brought up the Bug School in my opening remarks. Moving
forward, I would love to keep working with you on that school
and on school construction. I know the Chair is very interested
in that as well. I am very concerned about it.
Thank you. Thanks for being here. We are off to a good
start.
The Chairwoman. Senator Heitkamp.
Senator Heitkamp. Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman.
You are going to feel like you were double teamed by North
Dakota when I tell you how important we consider these issues
to be.
I want to follow up on an additional point beyond what
Senator Hoeven talked about. Obviously we are deeply concerned
about law enforcement resources and the role that you play. I
want to make one point and encourage you to look at encouraging
memoranda of understanding because the dual jurisdiction issues
are critical.
If you want chapter and verse, there have been a number of
national stories about the challenges that we have trying to
make all that fit. I hope when we introduce you to North
Dakota, we will be able to talk a little bit about working with
county sheriffs, local law enforcement and highway patrol to
expand the ability to do additional law enforcement.
I want to talk about law enforcement training because we
know how critical that is. Right now, there is only one law
enforcement training center that we are familiar with, BIA, and
it is in New Mexico. United Tribes has been working on a law
enforcement training center in Bismarck, North Dakota. They
have been working on an MOU with BIA to try and provide basic
law enforcement training.
The MOU really has not moved near as we can tell. I am
wondering if you are familiar with this or if you can give me
any assurance that we are going to see that moving forward in
the near future.
Secretary Jewell. I have a great staff and as we discuss
this in preparation for the hearing, we are open to exploring
ways we can work more closely with the United Tribes Technical
College on this in North Dakota. Larry, do you want to
elaborate?
Mr. Roberts. Just to say we already use the facilities a
little bit to conduct training there but we are open to looking
at how we can expand.
Senator Heitkamp. Just to give you some background, the
United Tribes also has a very good collaborative relationship
with law enforcement throughout North Dakota so it would be a
very good fit. I just want to put in a plug there.
The second question I have relates to VAWA, some concern
and awareness about the need to implement certain procedures
before VAWA will work in Indian country or before they can
begin to protect Native American women and children the same
way we protect them outside of Indian country.
What are you doing with the Department of Justice, with
tribal governments and tribal courts to guarantee an early
implementation in Indian Country of the Violence Against Women
Act so that we can begin this protection as early as possible?
Secretary Jewell. We are certainly delighted that VAWA
passed. We appreciate the bipartisan leadership. It is a
critical issue in Indian Country, so whatever we can do with
the Department of Justice to ensure that it is implemented as
intended and as swiftly as possible, we are committed to doing.
I am going to turn to Larry for any specifics on what we
are currently doing with Justice.
Mr. Roberts. We are coordinating with the Department of
Justice to implement those provisions. One of the things we are
doing is looking at a two-year pilot project in which tribal
courts can choose to exercise jurisdiction. We are
participating with DOJ in their formal and informal
consultations with tribes and we are doing our own training and
technical assistance as well for tribes. I am trying to
implement the VAWA provisions as quickly as possible.
I know our Office of Justice Services and our tribal courts
staff are working very closely with the Department of Justice
to ensure implementation.
Senator Heitkamp. Just to put a point on this, it is so
critical given how hard fought this provision was and how
incredibly necessary this provision was that we come out of
this with a good, solid, couple first good steps and that we
prove this up.
Last, I would like to thank you for your assistance in
Spirit Lake to recognize that we need to move forward in Spirit
Lake in a respectful government-to-government kind of
relationship as they work through their tribal government
issues. We will continue to be very concerned about the
protection of children on the Spirit Lake Reservation.
If you could give a quick--I guess you only have 30 seconds
and that would be quick--rundown on where you are with Spirit
Lake.
Mr. Roberts. I appreciate your leadership on this issue. I
did go out to Spirit Lake for a public meeting. It was very
helpful to meet with members of the community, meet with tribal
leadership and hear directly in that conversation.
One of the things that we heard loudest from that
conversation was the need for continuity and to have permanent
staff there. We are working very diligently to bring on
permanent staff to run that program. We have hired two
additional child welfare specialists and a social services
assistant.
We are in the process of advertising for the social
services director position and are making great headway there.
We are working closely with the regional office to ensure that
it is fully staffed and to make sure that we do have good
continuity.
I also want to say that had it not been for the Assistant
Secretary having to testify, he would have been out there
personally. It is a high priority for Assistant Secretary
Washburn and me.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Senator Begich.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Begich. Thank you very much. I have a couple
questions. It is good to see you. Thank you for being here.
First a quick comment on how you view tribal consultation
and I want to give you one piece of that. Tribal consultation
may be different than what happens in the Lower 48 in Alaska
because obviously we have village corporations and regional
corporations recognized under ANCSA, which is our Native land
claim settlement act. Could you give your general comment on
that?
Senator Jewell. Certainly. I want to even expand on the
answer to Senator Heitkamp around MOUs.
Tribal consultation, in everything we do, is critical. We
want to work with tribes to be helpful to them. If it means
partnering in law enforcement, child welfare services or
education, we will take the tribes' lead in providing services.
If they would like to do it themselves, we will bring whatever
resources can be useful to them in carrying that out.
Specific to Alaska, in my opening statement I referenced a
bit about my own connections with regional corporations in
Alaska and village corporations, certainly very directly with
NANA, but also SeaAlaska, Doyon and several villages as a
banker so I have an understanding of how those work with
shareholders, without the reservations in the same way and with
the tribal leadership as distinct from corporation leadership.
When we think about tribal consultations there, it really
is with tribal leadership. To the extent there is overlap, we
will work with corporations but the corporations are set up as
for-profit corporations generally, so we would work with tribal
leadership, if that gets to your question.
Senator Begich. It does. I want to encourage you that even
under that scenario, we would encourage you with the village
corporation leadership and the regional corporation leadership
that you expand into that because it is a unique model.
If we don't have this, we just have reservations, one
entity, but because there is overlap but also because the
corporations are the landholders on behalf of the tribes, it
creates a unique situation that when you start talking about
land use, corporations own it for the benefit of the
shareholders which are the tribal members.
It is a very complicated piece and I would encourage you as
you think about that, in areas where you can't expand that, I
would encourage you.
We have a unique situation again because we don't have
reservations and we also have Alaska considered Indian Country
in total. This is more specific. It is Seward and Dillingham.
The tribal members there do not have a designated tribe. They
have been working on it since the 1990s. It has been moving
forward but now has been delayed because there is no Alaska
individual within your department they are waiting for
recommendations from.
Right now, you or consultation with Assistant Secretary
Washburn could make this decision. We are worried because come
January 1, they will lose their health care benefits because
there is no tribe to associate with in order to get the health
care benefits that as Alaska Natives, they are entitled to.
There is a cross that is going to occur very quickly on January
1, 2014.
We have to get this resolved. It has been pending for a
long time. We know there have been some errors in the process
but now waiting for the Alaska person to be selected means more
delay when you or Assistant Secretary Washburn could make the
decision. We are worried that people who are qualified right
now for Indian health services may become disqualified as of
January 1 because of the way the Health Care Reform Act works.
You have to have health care.
If you are not associated with a tribe because you have to
be enrolled in a tribe to get the health care but there is no
tribe, now they are in a quandary. Do either of you want to
respond to that?
Mr. Roberts. I am familiar with the situation. I don't
think it will be hung up just because there is a regional
director vacancy. It is something I am working on personally
and we are working through that process.
Senator Begich. We appreciate it. Our office would be happy
to help in any way on that issue. You can see the dilemma that
is about to occur which should not occur because of their
current requirements or opportunity to get health care.
I know in your opening statement you mentioned climate
change. Depending on what committee we are in, you always want
to debate the science. I am not interested in that. Science has
proven itself. The bottom line is in my State, the environment
is changing rapidly. We are at ground zero when it comes to
climate change.
As strong as I am on supporting oil and gas development,
you have heard that presentation from me before, I also
recognize we have an obligation. In Alaska, we will be
utilizing renewable energy at a rate of 50 percent of our use.
By 2025, we will be the highest percentage in the country. At
the same time we are seeing the effects of global climate
change and climate change overall.
I am very happy the Interior Department has some focus on
this. I want to echo that we are anxious to work with you. You
are right about the Navy. The Navy also has a Climate Change
Task Force which is working on these issues because they have
multibillion dollars of issues.
I would be interested at some point to hear from the
Interior Department what the economic impact would be if we
don't address these issues around the changing climate. The
Navy is doing it now and it is going to be in billions because
they have to change ports. That is just a fact. You have
infrastructure and other issues that are related.
I would be curious and something in the future if you
wouldn't mind sharing with us as a committee or individually
how you see climate change impacting the work you do at the
Interior Department and the economic cost. I get the
environmental issues. I think people are missing the boat on
what it is going to cost us. I know what it is doing to Alaska.
We are literally losing villages and will probably be the first
refugees because of climate change. We have lost villages into
the ocean.
I don't know if you have any comment and I will end there.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Jewell. I need to look into that in terms of our
capacity to do economic analysis on that and balancing that
with the needs. It is certainly an interesting exercise.
In my opening comments, I talked about Alaska really being
on the leading edge, unfortunately for you.
Senator Begich. Or the falling edge.
Secretary Jewell. Or the falling edge of climate change.
The Chairwoman. Senator Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
It was very interesting to listen to my colleagues and all
the great concerns they have. I appreciate many of them and
share their concerns and will add a few here.
As you know, Madam Secretary, your department is really at
the front of the trust responsibility. It is your effort that
gets out there and weighs in to make sure the trust
responsibility works in specific circumstances. The first one I
want to focus on is the wild fires in the west.
In the last few years, New Mexico has been hit with record-
breaking fires. After the fires, we have flooding that is many
times worse than the fires that occur and the watersheds are
damaged, wildlife, all of that. We are talking about 46 percent
of New Mexico Federal land and another 11.3 percent tribal
land.
My question is, how is the Department of the Interior
coordinating with tribes in New Mexico and other States on fire
preparedness, fire suppression and post-fire remediation? It
seems to me all of those things are absolutely crucial when we
look at Indian country and the impact wild fire has on it.
Secretary Jewell. I am fresh back this week from a visit to
the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise. One of the
striking things about the visit was it truly is interagency. It
is about triaging and fighting fires or putting resources where
they need to be most for the landscapes without regard to who
that land manager is.
The BIA was at the table, the U.S. Forest Service was at
the table, the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies
working collectively together. It didn't matter what bureau or
what department.
There is not enough money to go round for the fire risk
that we face, so we have to prioritize within that. Senator
Tester had some similar issues he raised. New Mexico, just in
looking at the fire risk chart, is in serious shape in terms of
dryness and multiple years of very high temperatures and low
water. We are aware of the risks throughout the west but
specifically to your State as well.
The money is being prioritized for suppression. It does not
support the longer term needs. We really need additional
resources to do the longer term needs of both prevention, which
is hazardous fuels removal, and prescribed burns, which are
controversial but an essential way of helping clear the
landscape.
Post-fire remediation, I can tell you specifically on BLM
lands, we are only able to reseed a fraction of what actually
burns. When you think about sage grass habitat, for example,
other critical habitats if we don't get in and reseed,
cheatgrass takes over and increases the fire risk but there is
not enough money to go around.
One of the things I would like to see changed, and would be
happy to work with the appropriate committees here, is take the
emergency firefighting out of our day-to-day budgets because it
makes it very difficult to put that in an emergency fund so
that we really focus on long term, sensible management of our
lands around fire because it is not going to get better, it is
going to get worse in climate change.
Senator Udall. No doubt about it and it seems to me with
all the different agencies that are in there when we are
working with fires, if the Bureau of Indian Affairs was kind of
the lead of coordinating and bringing together--and this isn't
to be overly critical of them but there needs to be a
coordination force in terms of pulling together those trust
responsibilities throughout government and maybe beyond your
department.
They need an advocate. Somebody needs to be saying to the
Federal Government throughout, this is a responsibility, you
need to get over here and help with this.
Secretary Jewell. I am sorry to interrupt. They do and I
was very encouraged. The representative from the BIA is
assigned to a particular part of the country to manage all
fires. The representative from the U.S. Forest Service is the
same. They don't treat tribal lands any different than any
other lands. They treat all lands in a way that says what is
the fire risk, not who is responsible or who is the agency
manager.
I felt really good in speaking with the BIA representative
there that we are not treating Indian lands any differently
than other lands, that we are all working closely and that also
includes State and local fire responders. It is the most
coordinated thing I have seen in government yet.
Senator Udall. I see I have run out of time.
The Chairwoman. Do you have a follow-up to that?
Senator Udall. I have an additional question.
The Chairwoman. Go ahead.
Senator Udall. I didn't know whether you were doing a
second round. I don't want to deprive my colleague from North
Dakota.
The Chairwoman. Go right ahead.
Senator Udall. First of all, you started off on the right
foot in my opinion because you met with a small group of tribal
leaders. I know one of them was Richard Luarkie, the Governor
of Laguna Pueblo. He very much appreciated being able to meet
in the Secretary's office in a larger tribal setting
roundtable, to have a discussion with you and have a one-on-one
with him and hearing his tribal concerns. Thank you for doing
that.
I wanted to speak with you a bit more. Issues have been
raised on sequestration but there are some big picture issues
on sequestration that I think we are missing because I am
tremendously frustrated in our efforts to protect our Nation's
most vulnerable communities.
When we put the sequester in place, we said we were
exempting the most vulnerable. We didn't really push on
Medicare and these other areas. Somehow, we forgot about the
tribes. I don't know how we are ever going to get out of the
sequester. We obviously have it in the current budget and are
living with it. Many of us want to get out of it immediately
but we cannot find a way, a bipartisan way working with our
colleagues.
It seems to me whenever this is renegotiated, if we are
coming up with the next budget cycle in October, we need to
remember that our tribal communities are the most vulnerable
and they should be exempted from something like this. That is
where I am coming from on this.
Could you just give your big picture, your overall
impressions of the sequester and what it is doing in Indian
Country? I see it in New Mexico and it is absolutely
devastating to schools, to Head Start, on and on the list goes.
Secretary Jewell. You have it right, it is devastating. It
disproportionately impacts this budget because it is a more
people intensive budget. When you apply the sequester, it means
you are reducing people and it is also reducing payments to
individuals. I think 2,400 individuals will have their payments
stopped as a result of the sequester.
It impacts Indian education. Nobody on this Committee, from
the hearing so far, would argue that it is an under-resourced
challenge part of our responsibility that is very difficult to
fulfill and yet that got the same degree of cuts that other
areas did as well. There are really severe consequences.
Larry, do you want to add any specific detail to that?
Mr. Roberts. I think there are a couple concrete examples
in terms of how sequestration is affecting Indian Country.
One of the long term examples is that forest management
plans, which we are working on with the goal mandated to have
those in place by 2015, obviously we were on track to meet
those. Sequestration has impacted those deadlines. The impact
of missing that deadline is that forest revenue isn't realized
and current positions are going to be lost, the revenues
generated by those forestry programs.
A more short term example that the staff has shared with us
is dam inspections are at risk because we have fewer resources
to conduct those inspections as we are making these cutbacks.
Our sense is that the realty functions the Bureau performs,
title functions, those are going to be impacted by
sequestration. That is going to impact our fee to trust
processing and those areas that are really important to the
Department.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Secretary Jewell.
Thank you, Larry.
I will submit a few questions for the record on Salazar v.
Ramah which you have a different approach on how to deal with
that Supreme Court case, also energy development in Indian
Country, specifically renewables and the long term plan in
backlogs in terms of BIA.
Let me just give a shout out to my friend, Congressman Bill
Delahunt in the back, a great advocate for tribes, Madam Chair.
With that, thank you.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Secretary Jewell and Assistant Secretary Roberts, thank you
for being here today. We appreciate your statements and views
on these issues. As you can see, we had a very good turnout of
members today, partly because they have respect for the views
they wanted to hear from you and partly because they are
looking for that partnership of working with the Department of
the Interior on many issues, whether it is backlog on
irrigation, settlements, firefighting coordination or just a
stronger government relationship.
I hope as Interior Secretary, you will embrace this area of
responsibility of working with this Committee and these various
entities and help us in trying to solve these problems and to
live up to that pledge that you made to leave this a more
improved system. We appreciate it very much.
We are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:00 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Hon. Sally Jewell
Trust Responsibility Throughout Federal Agencies
Background: The United States has legal obligations to Indian
tribes that are grounded in the United States Constitution, treaties,
federal statutes, and Supreme Court decisions. Much of the federal
Indian policy revolves around this special relationship, which is
expressed in term of legal duties, moral obligations, and expectancies
that have arisen from treaties, federal statutes, federal court
decisions, and historical dealings between Indian tribes and the
Federal Government. This relationship is described as a trust
relationship between the trustee and the beneficiary. The Congress has
placed primary responsibility for Indian matters in the Department of
the Interior, primarily within Indian Affairs.
Although every agency within the Federal Government that has
dealings with tribes must uphold the Federal Government's trust
responsibility to tribes, the Department of the Interior is the agency
charged with primary responsibility for Indian matters. Many tribal
programs overlap among several agencies so the Department must work
with Department of Education on education policy, Housing and Urban
Development on housing, and the Department of Justice on public safety.
Question 1. What leadership role do you think you can play as
Secretary to bring all the agencies who deal with tribes together to
better understand and implement the trust responsibility across all
federal agencies?
Answer. The leadership role I can play as Secretary of the
Interior, and as a colleague with other Cabinet members, is to continue
this Administration's work on the Strengthening Tribal Nations
initiative. This initiative takes a multi-faceted approach to advance
Nation-to-Nation relationships, protect Indian communities, advance
Indian education, and continue reforms in trust-land management, with
the ultimate goal of greater tribal self-determination and self-
governance. This initiative has been highlighted over the past four
years as President Obama and his Administration have engaged in direct
dialogue with tribal nations. Held in November 2009, and December in
2010, 2011, and 2012, at the Department's Yates Auditorium, over 300
tribal leaders have attended this yearly White House Tribal Nations
Conference. Through my role as the Chair of the White House Council on
Native American Affairs established by Executive Order 13647 on June
26, 2013, I will continue to engage in direct dialogue across all
federal agencies with the goal of improving coordination of federal
programs and the use of resources available to tribal communities. I
convened the first meeting of this Council on July 29, 2013 and we are
working diligently to meet the challenges in Indian Country.
Indian Education--Management Challenges
Background: The Bureau of Indian Education system operates 183
schools and dormitories located on 64 reservations in 23 states.
Approximately 7 percent of all Indian students attend Bureau of Indian
Education schools. Recent General Accounting Office testimony stated
that the high school graduation rate for Bureau students is 52 percent
compared to 76 percent for public school students. Although the mission
of the Bureau of Indian Education is to provide quality education
opportunities to Indian students, poor student outcomes and outdated
school facilities raise questions about whether that mission is being
achieved. The General Accounting Office testified at a recent House
hearing that ``Management Challenges Continue to Hinder Efforts to
Improve Indian Education''. The report uses the word ``Continue''
because this is a subject that has been studied for some time with
seemingly no significant improvement. For example, a 1977 GAO report is
entitled ``Concerted Effort Needed to Improve Indian Education'' and a
1980 GAO report asks ``Should the Bureau of Indian Affairs Continue to
Provide Education Services to Indian Children?''
Question 2. Serious issues have plagued the Bureau of Indian
Education for decades now, and we have seen little improvement in how
education services are being provided. What can you do as a new
Secretary at Interior to take a hard look at this program and make sure
quality education is provided to Indian students?
Answer. The first action I am taking is to recruit a permanent
Director for the BIE. The position has been vacant since last July and
a new leader is needed to set the course for the BIE schools and
programs.
The second action is to promote high quality education for the BIE
schools. The BIE has a number of programs under the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and it must comply with the
requirements of the U.S. Department of Education. In that respect, I
will work with Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, to ensure that BIE
has the necessary tools to meet the demands of a school district and to
provide the necessary support to the BIE in its commitment to improving
the learning environment for its students. The reauthorization of the
ESEA will assist in this effort.
Additionally, I will work with Secretary Duncan to ensure effective
implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding between the
Department of Education and the Department of the Interior and will
work to support better collaboration between our Departments to improve
Indian education. This MOU is an important component of the Executive
Order 13592--Improving American Indian and Alaska Native Educational
Opportunities and Strengthening Tribal Colleges and Universities of
which I am a co-chair with Secretary Duncan. Both Departments are
working to strengthen the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities
and to support the President's college completion goals.
To highlight our commitment, Secretary Duncan and I convened an
American Indian Education Study Group (Study Group) in September of
this year. The Study Group will visit schools and classrooms, Tribal
Governments, and Indian Affairs employees to gather information, listen
to their concerns and, most importantly, try to find ways to improve
American Indian education. Members of the Study Group are from the
Departments of Education and Defense, as well as Brown University. The
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, Kevin Washburn, oversee the Study
Group.
Finally, I will work closely with Assistant Secretary Washburn to
ensure that we are making progress on the education of Indian children.
In addition, the FY 2014 President's Budget requests $2 million for a
formal, independent evaluation of the BIE focusing on both structural
issues of the system and the outcomes to be achieved.
Question 2a. In your testimony you stated that 63 of the Bureau of
Indian Affairs schools are in poor condition. Can you provide the
Committee with a list of those schools?
Answer. A list of schools identified as in poor condition is
included as Attachment 1. This recent list, from September 2013,
includes 43 schools.
Contract Support Costs
Background: The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance
Act authorizes tribes to enter into contracts with the Department of
the Interior and Indian Health Service to operate federal programs at
the tribal level. The Act also provides for the tribe receiving
contract support costs which are the essential for the proper
administration of federal contracts. Federal budgets have rarely
provided enough resources to fully compensate tribes for their contract
support costs. The Supreme Court ruled last year in Ramah v. Salazar
that the Government must pay each tribe's contract support costs in
full. However, in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget, the Department of the
Interior did not request enough funding to cover all contract support
costs. Further, Interior's budget request seeks to cap each tribe's
contract support costs by statute to limit the Department's liability.
Tribal self-determination and self-governance has been one of the most
successful policies in the history of the nation-to-nation relationship
between the United States and Tribes. However, tribes have constantly
been short-changed with respect to the contract support costs. Tribes
recently won a big legal victory in the recent Ramah (RAY-MUH)
decision.
Question 3. Secretary Jewell, I know that you were not involved in
the 2014 budget, but can you tell the Committee why the Department is
proposing an interim solution to cap contract support costs for each
tribe, instead of taking the time to consult with tribes on all of the
options mentioned in the Supreme Court's decision in Ramah?
Answer. The 2014 budget proposes an interim solution in the way in
which funds are budgeted for contract-support costs, which are
important to the furtherance of self-governance and Indian self-
determination. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Salazar v.
Ramah Navajo Chapter, the Administration is proposing that Congress
appropriate contract-support cost funding to Tribes on a contract-by-
contract basis. On June 14, 2013, Interior and HHS submitted initial
contract-by-contract funding tables for incorporation into the
Appropriations Act to clarify to tribes their funding level for FY
2014. This change is an interim step towards a more comprehensive
solution, through consultation with Tribes.
Contract Support Costs
Background: The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance
Act authorizes tribes to enter into contracts with the Department of
the Interior and Indian Health Service to operate federal programs at
the tribal level. The Act also provides for the tribe receiving
contract support costs which are the essential for the proper
administration of federal contracts. Federal budgets have rarely
provided enough resources to fully compensate tribes for their contract
support costs. The Supreme Court ruled last year in Ramah v. Salazar
that the Government must pay each tribe's contract support costs in
full. However, in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget, the Department of the
Interior did not request enough funding to cover all contract support
costs. Further, Interior's budget request seeks to cap each tribe's
contract support costs by statute to limit the Department's liability.
Both Deputy Secretary David Hayes and Assistant Secretary Kevin
Washburn have recently testified that the Department was simply
proposing one of the options that the Supreme Court laid out in its
Ramah (RAY-MUH) decision. However, the proposal will limit contract
support costs to every tribe that contracts with the Department, and
deny tribes the ability to recover full costs even through the courts.
Question 4. Secretary Jewell, the proposed fiscal year 2014 budget
estimates only an $11 million shortfall for contract support costs.
Wouldn't the better policy be to fully fund contract support costs and
save tribes from costly litigation, especially when they have already
pursued and won those claims all the way through the Supreme Court?
Answer. Given the financial climate, tough choices must be made
with respect to Departmental programs. One such decision involves the
need to balance funding for contract support costs with funding for
direct programming and other tribal priorities within constrained
resources. This interim solution is designed to address litigation
exposure from Indian tribes for contract support costs, and is
consistent with one of the remedies identified in the Supreme Court's
Ramah decision. We believe that this interim solution leads to a
mutually beneficial long-term solution by working with Congress and
consulting with Indian tribes.
Energy Development
Background: Tribal lands contain vast amounts of both conventional
and renewable energy resources. Development of these resources can
provide tribes with much needed revenues and provide tribal communities
with greater job opportunities. The Department of the Interior's energy
development assistance to tribes is mostly provided through grants and
lease processing, and through technical assistance and training.
The Department of the Interior, through the Bureau of Indian
Affairs and Bureau of Land Management, has the lead role in approving
lease and permit documents associated with energy development on tribal
lands. The Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development also
assists tribes and individual Indians with lease negotiations, and
provides energy resource assessments and technical assistance.
Tribes have often testified in the past about the delays in
processing leases and applications for permits to drill in Indian
Country. Tribes would like to see the Department focus on streamlining
the lease and permitting process and provide technical assistance and
grants for energy development with a focus on renewal energy projects.
In your testimony you state that the Department estimates that
energy and mineral development on Indian lands in 2012 supported over
$16 billion of economic activity and nearly 120,000 jobs related to
trust resources.
Question 5. How many of those 120,000 jobs went to tribal members
and how much of the $16 billion went to tribal governments or tribal
entities?
Answer. Our estimates of economic activity and employment were
based on a standard economic model that took as inputs the revenues
received from energy and mining production activities on Indian lands.
We do not have the information to estimate how much of this economic
activity went to tribal governments or tribal entities, or how much
employment included tribal members.
Renewable Energy Development
Background: Tribal lands contain vast amounts of both conventional
and renewable energy resources. Development of these resources can
provide tribes with much needed revenues and provide tribal communities
with greater job opportunities. The Department of the Interior's energy
development assistance to tribes is mostly provided through grants and
lease processing, and through technical assistance and training.
The Department of the Interior, through the Bureau of Indian
Affairs and Bureau of Land Management, has the lead role in approving
lease and permit documents associated with energy development on tribal
lands. The Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development also
assists tribes and individual Indians with lease negotiations, and
provides energy resource assessments and technical assistance.
Tribes have often testified in the past about the delays in
processing leases and applications for permits to drill in Indian
Country. Tribes would like to see the Department focus on streamlining
the lease and permitting process and provide technical assistance and
grants for energy development with a focus on renewal energy projects.
In your testimony you state that more than 50 renewable energy
projects are ongoing on an estimated 35 reservations, but the
Department has identified 267 reservations with renewable energy
potential.
Question 6. What tools does the Department need, either
administrative or legislative, to increase its capability to expand
renewable energy projects to some of these 267 reservations?
Answer. Developing renewable energy in Indian Country has four
principal components: assessing the resource(s); determining how to
transmit the energy to market; securing a Purchase Power Agreement and
financing the project.
Under the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination
Act of 2005, the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development
(OIEED) administers a tribal grant program to help assess energy
resource potential and market feasibility. Within available resources,
the office assists tribes with increased understanding of the renewable
energy potential of their resources so that they can craft viable
development strategies.
The IEED also administers the Tribal Energy Development Capacity
grant program as also authorized by the Act to help tribes establish
the managerial and technical expertise necessary to assume greater
authority over their energy resources. OIEED funds Tribal applications
within the resources available for grants.
As it relates to the transmission of energy, renewable or
traditional, Congress could assist by keeping Indian Country in mind as
Congress helps shape the location and design of the Nation's and Indian
Country's future transmission infrastructure with laws and incentives.
In addition, to the extent tribes could help facilitate the existence
of energy transmission lines by granting rights-of-way under a tribal
energy resource agreement (TERA), making the TERA process simpler (as
recommended below) would also help address the energy transmission
challenge.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Barrasso to
Hon. Sally Jewell
Oil and Gas Development on Indian Lands
On May 3, 2013, the Bureau of Land Management announced that it is
postponing all oil and gas lease sales in California for the rest of
Fiscal Year 2013. In the BLM press release (New Release No. CC-13-50),
the BLM states that this is due to budget constraints resulting from
sequestration and an emphasis on the higher priorities for conducting
inspection and enforcement on existing leases and processing new
Applications for Permit to Drill.
Question 7. Does this suspension in California include any proposed
leases to drill on Indian lands?
Answer. No, none of the four parcels in the postponed lease sale in
California were on Indian lands. Further, the BLM does not have the
authority to issue oil and gas leases for Indian lands. The Bureau of
Indian Affairs is vested with authority to issue oil and gas leases on
Indian lands on behalf of Federally recognized Tribes and individual
Indian allottees.
Question 8. Does the BLM plan to suspend auctioning of leases on
Indian lands in other parts of the country? If so, which other areas
will be subject to suspension of leasing?
Answer. As stated above, the BLM does not have the authority to
issue oil and gas leases on Indian lands. The Bureau of Indian Affairs
is vested with the authority to issue oil and gas leases on Indian
lands on behalf of Federally recognized Tribes and Indian allottees.
During our outreach for the Indian bill that I introduced in the
112th Congress, S.1684, the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-
Determination Act Amendments of 2012, tribes confirmed that the high
application for permit to drill fees on Indian lands are impacting
development of Indian trust minerals. According to the Bureau of Land
Management Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Justification, the President's
Fiscal Year 2014 budget proposal would impose $60 million in new oil
and gas inspection fees each year.
Question 9. Will these proposed new oil and gas inspection fees to
apply to Indian lands?
Answer. The proposed new oil and gas inspection fees would expand
and strengthen BLM's oil and gas inspections and oversight capability
and improve production accountability, safety, and environmental
protection of oil and gas operations, and would apply to BLM inspection
activities on Federal and Indian Trust oil and gas mineral estate.
Question 10. If your answer is ``yes,'' what analysis has the
Department conducted on the economic impact that these fees will have
on oil and gas development on Indian lands?
Answer. Increased funding is aimed at, among other things,
correcting deficiencies identified by the Government Accountability
Office in a February 2011 report, which found that the BLM needs a
comprehensive strategy to better manage potential oil and gas well
liabilities on Federal and Indian oil and gas leases, including
enhancing the agency's ability to verify production from these leases
to assure accurate revenue collection for the American public, tribes,
and individual Indians. While there has not been a specific analysis of
the economic impact that these proposed fees will have on oil and gas
development on Indian lands, the inspection fees would help expand and
strengthen BLM's oil and gas inspection and oversight capability and
improve production accountability and environmental protection of oil
and gas operations on Indian lands.
In September 2012, the Office of Inspector General within the
Department of the Interior issued a report titled Oil and Gas Leasing
in Indian Country: An Opportunity for Economic Development, Report No.
CR-EV-BIA-0001-2011. This report identifies several problem areas,
including the lack of a coordinated strategy or organizational
structure to manage Bureau of Indian Affairs' oil and gas activities;
extra layers of governmental review; perceived risk of doing business
with tribal governments; high well permit fees assessed by the Bureau
of Land Management; and complexities associated with self-
determination.
These are just some of the problems identified by the Office of
Inspector General report that create disincentives for oil and gas
development on Indian reservations. One recommendation from the Office
of Inspector General is that the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs
should work with the Department of the Interior and Congress to improve
the Tribal Energy Resource Agreement statutes and regulations to enable
Indian tribes to exercise self-determination over tribal oil and gas
operations. As noted above, last Congress, I introduced S. 1684, the
Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments
of 2012, which was designed to do exactly what the Inspector General is
recommending.
Question 11. Will you work with the Senate Committee on Indian
Affairs and the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs to implement
that OIG recommendation?
Answer. Yes, we will work with the Committee to implement
improvements to the Tribal Energy Resource Agreement related statutes
and regulations to enable Indian tribes to exercise self-determination
over tribal oil and gas operations. The Department is committed to
improving conditions in Indian Country, and to allow Indian nations to
develop their energy resources in the efficient, responsible manner
they choose.
Hydraulic Fracturing
On May 24, 2013, the BLM published in the Federal Register its
proposed rule on ``hydraulic fracturing on Federal and Indian lands.''
As the executive summary points out, ``this revised proposed rule would
apply to Indian lands so that these lands and communities receive the
same level of protection provided on public lands.''
The summary goes on to state that, while the BLM ``fully embraces''
the laws, rules and policies that promote tribal self-determination and
control of resources, the ``Indian Mineral Leasing Act (IMLA) . . .
subjects all oil and gas operations on trust or restricted Indian lands
to the Secretary's regulations and does not authorize the Secretary to
allow tribes to opt out of these regulations.'' (Emphasis added.)
Furthermore, part II of the preamble (``Background'') of the
proposed rule states that the Department of the Interior ``has
consistently interpreted'' the IMLA ``as allowing uniform regulations
governing mineral resource development on Indian lands.'' (Emphasis
added.)
Although some of the Department's mineral development regulations
do apply to both public and Indian lands, the Department has also
adopted regulations regarding the development of Indian lands under the
IMLA, the Indian Mineral Development Act, and Energy Policy Act of 2005
that are separate, distinct, and different from the regulations that
the Department has adopted for public lands pursuant to the Mineral
Leasing Act.
Question 12. Is the Department stating or suggesting in the revised
proposed rule that current law requires the Department to address
hydraulic fracturing on Indian lands in the same set of regulations as
public or other federal lands?
Answer. In the proposed rule, the Department is not stating that
current law requires the Department to address hydraulic fracturing on
Indian lands in the same set of regulations as federal lands. However,
as a matter of policy the Department has proposed uniform regulations.
Question 13. Is the Department stating or suggesting in the revised
proposed rule that current law requires the Department to impose the
same hydraulic fracturing rules and regulations on Indian lands that it
imposes on public or other federal lands?
Answer. In fulfilling the Department's Indian trust
responsibilities, the Department follows the Indian Mineral Leasing Act
of 1938, which requires that all oil and gas operations on trust or
restricted Indian lands be subject to the rules and regulations
promulgated by the Secretary. The Department also fully embraces the
statutes, Executive Orders, and other statements of governmental or
departmental policy in favor of promoting tribal self-determination and
control of resources, which is why the revised proposed rule includes a
variance process. The process would enable the BLM to accept an
operator's compliance with a tribe's hydraulic fracturing standards or
procedures provided the tribe's standards or procedures meets or
exceeds the effectiveness proposed by this rule.
Question 14. Has the Department considered whether it is in the
best interest of Indian tribes or their members to treat their trust
lands exactly the same as public lands under the revised proposed rule?
Answer. This rule applies to Indian lands so that these lands and
communities receive the same level of protection provided on public
lands. The BLM fully embraces the statutes, Executive Orders, and other
statements of governmental or departmental policy in favor of promoting
tribal self-determination and control of resources. The Indian Mineral
Leasing Act, however, subjects all oil and gas operations on trust or
restricted Indian lands to the Secretary's regulations and does not
authorize the Secretary to allow tribes to opt out of these
regulations. The revised proposed rule, however, includes a variance
process that would enable the BLM to accept an operator's compliance
with a tribe's hydraulic fracturing standards provided the tribe's
standards or procedures meets or exceeds the effectiveness proposed by
this rule.
Question 15. Is the treatment of Indian lands the same as public
lands under the revised proposed rule consistent with the way in which
Indian lands are treated under the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)?
Answer. The Federal Government holds approximately 56 million acres
of Indian Minerals in trust for the benefit of tribes and individual
Indians. As trustee of those lands, the Secretary must ensure that the
resources are protected, and that they are used for the benefit of the
tribes and individual Indians. The trust doctrine establishes the
responsibility of the Federal Government to exercise a protective
supervision over transactions and activities related to tribal lands in
the tribes' interest. The Federal Government is expected to exercise
similar diligence in conservation and protection of health, safety, and
the environment on lands held in trust as on lands of the Federal
Government.
Question 16. Does the Department lack the authority to adopt
regulations on hydraulic fracturing that would in turn apply, adopt,
recognize or otherwise give effect to tribal laws or regulations
applicable to hydraulic fracturing activities on the trust or
restricted lands of the Indian tribe in lieu of the requirements set
forth in the revised proposed rule? Are there any circumstances or
conditions under which the Department would be authorized to adopt
regulations that would do that? If the answer to the latter question is
``yes,'' please explain in detail the circumstances or conditions,
under which the Department could apply, adopt, recognize or otherwise
give effect to tribal laws to the trust or restricted lands of the
tribe.
Answer. The BLM fully embraces the statutes, Executive Orders, and
other statements of governmental or departmental policy in favor of
promoting tribal self-determination and control of resources. The
Federal Government must fulfill its responsibilities as established by
the trust doctrine to oversee transactions and activities related to
tribal lands in the tribes' interest. This rule will not weaken tribal
regulations currently followed by operators working on Indian lands.
The revised proposed rule includes a variance process that would enable
the BLM to accept an operator's compliance with a tribe's hydraulic
fracturing standards or procedures, provided the tribe's standards or
procedures meets or exceeds the effectiveness proposed by this rule.
Question 17. Please explain in detail how you intend the tribal
variance provision in the new hydraulic fracturing proposal to be
implemented, including any process or procedures that will be followed
for obtaining a variance.
Answer. The revised proposed rule adds a provision allowing the BLM
to approve a variance that would apply to all lands within the
boundaries of a tribe or described as field-wide or basin-wide, that is
commensurate with the tribal regulatory scheme. The BLM must determine
that the variance would meet or exceed the effectiveness of the revised
proposed rule. Tribes would be invited to work with the BLM to craft
variances that would allow technologies, processes, or standards
required or allowed by the tribe to be accepted as compliance with the
rule. Such variances would allow the BLM and the tribes to improve
efficiency, increase flexibility, reduce regulatory duplication, and
reduce costs for operators and for the BLM and the tribe.
Cobell Buy-Back Program
According to the Department's ``Initial Implementation Plan'' for
the $1.9 billion land buy-back program under the Cobell settlement, 90
percent of the purchasable fractionated interests are located on 40
reservations. According to the Initial Implementation Plan, the
Department intends to focus buy-back efforts, at least initially, on
these 40 reservations in descending order of fractionation. However, to
determine the best sequence of implementation, the Plan also states
that the Department will consider other factors such as location,
status of title records, availability of valuation-related information,
and tribal priorities and involvement.
Question 18. Will the Department be able to prioritize and
implement the program for direct service tribes equally as well as it
will for self-governance and contracting tribes? Please explain.
Answer. The Program will purchase fractional interests at locations
where tribes have self-governance compacts and contracts. The
Department is not prioritizing or implementing the Program based on the
manner in which resources or services are provided to a tribe. In
addition, because the Program will utilize cooperative agreements to
obtain tribal involvement in the implementation of the Program (rather
than through Self-Determination contracts or Self-Governance compacts),
there is less likelihood of differences as the Program is implemented.
According to the Initial Implementation Plan, the buy-back program
will also first target those fractionated interests that are most
amenable to cost-efficient, mass valuation techniques.
Question 19. In what instances would land interests be unsuitable
for mass valuation techniques?
Answer. Mass appraisals are most appropriate when all of the
parcels appraised are of consistent/similar in nature, which would
include (1) all parcels are vacant or have similar improvements, (2)
all parcels are located within a relatively homogeneous geographical
area, (3) all parcels have the same , or a similar, highest and best
use, (4) the most relevant method of valuation is the same for all
parcels, and (5) the same array of market sale data will be relied on
in the valuation of each parcel.
Therefore, mass appraisals are not appropriate when the parcels are
not consistent/similar in nature (not homogeneous), parcels are not
vacant or do not have similar improvements, parcels are not located in
a homogeneous geographical area, the highest and best of each parcel
vastly differ, the method of valuation is not same for all parcels, and
multiple sets of market sale data will be relied on in the valuation of
each parcel requiring separate analysis thus separate appraisals.
Question 20. Will the Department be able to implement the buy-back
program in a fair, effective, and efficient manner in those instances
when mass appraisals cannot be utilized? Please explain.
Answer. The Cobell Settlement, and the Claims Resolution Act of
2010, requires the Department to offer fair market value to owners of
fractionated interests. The Department will use mass appraisal and
other methods as appropriate, to establish the fair market value. The
Program will use mass appraisal techniques to appraise homogeneous,
non-complex, vacant lands that have comparable land sales available.
The Program will use methods other than mass appraisals for commercial
or other lands within urbanized zones where greater variation may
exist. The presence of potentially valuable mineral commodities or
timber may also necessitate the use of additional methods or analyses.
All appraisal methods used by the Department will conform to the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Moreover,
in order to ensure that the valuation process complies with appraisal
industry practices and USPAP, the Department is working with the
Appraisal Foundation, a non-profit organization, to obtain an
independent review of the Department's methods.
Mass appraisals methods are expected to be the most efficient way
to value fractionated tracts. Consistent with the Program's Initial
Implementation Plan, a demonstrated showing of interested sellers may
be appropriate before appraisal work proceeds in order to ensure that
administrative expenditures are well founded (which showing may become
especially important in those instances where tracts are not amendable
to mass appraisal techniques).
Question 21. How will the Department proceed when certain lands are
high tribal priorities but are not amenable to mass appraisal
techniques?
Answer. Tribal acquisition priorities are vitally important to
achieving a foundational goal of the Program, which is to strengthen
tribal sovereignty and promote consolidated trust land bases for
conservation, stewardship, and beneficial use by sovereign tribal
nations. The Department cannot guarantee that it will be able to
purchase all tribal priorities given its financial and operational
constraints (e.g., inability to purchase fee lands); however, it will
actively consult with tribes to identify tribal acquisition priorities
and accommodate those priorities to the fullest extent possible.
Question 22. Please describe how the Department will engage the
tribal governments to assist in the buy-back program. Will the tribes
have any discretion in selecting land for re-purchasing?
Answer. Tribal involvement will be critical to the success of the
Buy-Back Program, especially in the area of outreach. The Program will
consult with tribes to ascertain tribal priority properties and will
incorporate those into acquisition plans to the maximum extent
possible.
The Buy-Back Program will enter into Cooperative Agreements with
tribes to conduct land consolidation activities, especially in the area
of outreach. The Program will not use P.L. 93-638 contracts and self-
governance compacts to implement Buy-Back activities because the
provisions of the Self-Determination Act specifically do not apply to
such agreements.
When the Department targets a specific reservation, the Department
will consult with the tribe to ascertain whether the tribe has the
desire and the capacity to conduct land consolidation activities within
its reservation. Additionally, as the Department will be active only at
a limited number of reservations at any one time, tribes not initially
targeted by the Buy-Back Program may be able to utilize cooperative
agreements to begin activities within their respective reservations.
Utilizing a cooperative agreement that includes land research work
might, for example, allow for Buy-Back Program valuation activities to
be completed before the time initially scheduled by the Department.
The Program is finalizing a cooperative agreement template and
scope of work. It is also finalizing a list of answers to the most
frequently asked questions regarding cooperative agreements. Once these
documents are completed, the Department will make them available to
tribes and post them on the Program's website.
Question 23. Please describe how the Department will address the
problem of improvements located on fractionated land. Will the
Department purchase improvements along with the land?
Answer. Improvements located on fractionated land are not trust
property pursuant to the Indian Land Consolidation Act, and thus cannot
be purchased through the Buy-Back program.
Wild and Feral Horses
The BLM is struggling to gather and adopt out wild and feral
horses. The agency is spending $75 million dollars a year but is still
failing to protect our western rangelands from overgrazing. The
National Tribal Horse Coalition has told me that the situation in
Indian Country is even more severe-wild elk and deer herds have been
lost, native grasslands destroyed, and riparian ecosystems ruined.''
Question 24. What will you do to prevent the further destruction of
tribal resources caused by wild and feral horse populations? Please
give details.''
Answer. The BLM's Wild Horse and Burro program protects, manages,
and controls wild horses and burros on public lands managed by the BLM
and Forest Service under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of
1971. The BLM defers to the Bureau of Indian Affairs on issues of trust
responsibilities for the management of tribal lands. The Wild Free-
Roaming Horses and Burros Act, and the BLM's program, do not provide
for the management of feral horses. In the few areas where tribal
horses exist across a fence from adjacent public land wild horse Herd
Management Areas, efforts are made to maintain fences. In these
situations, animals on tribal lands are considered tribal horses, and
those on public lands are considered wild horses to be protected and
managed by the BLM. If BLM-managed wild horses or burros stray onto
tribal lands and a request is made for their removal, the BLM complies
within its capability to do so.
The BLM takes seriously its commitment to ensure the health and
productivity of public rangelands in coordination with tribal nations.
The BLM's Cultural and Tribal Consultation program specifically
prioritizes enhancing tribal engagement in agency decisionmaking
processes through both formal and informal Government-to-Government
consultation. This coordination with tribal stakeholders remains an
important component in the BLM's landscape-level approach to public
land management concerns like rangeland health.
In keeping with its multiple-use mission, the goal of the BLM in
managing public lands is to provide healthy rangelands that support
healthy herds, permitted livestock, and native wildlife. The
conservation of cultural and tribal resources located on public lands
is another of the BLM's multiple-use responsibilities. To promote the
sustained health of public rangelands, the BLM uses professional range
conservation staff and technicians to carefully monitor range
conditions and to make determinations, as directed by the Wild Free-
Roaming Horses and Burros Act, to manage herd populations for
Appropriate Management Levels (AML). Wild horse and burro management
differs from management of other wildlife or livestock because Federal
protections and a lack of natural predators allow herd populations to
double every four years. The BLM's Wild Horse and Burro program
utilizes a variety of strategies to maintain herd populations
consistent with the land's capacity to support them, including
population growth suppression treatments, gathers, holding facilities,
adoptions, and eco-sanctuaries.
Distance Learning Project
On May 9, 2013, the Albuquerque news affiliate KRQE reported that a
distance learning project developed by the Department of Interior--the
Enhanced Learning and Knowledge Network or ``ELKNet''--wasted $10
million of taxpayer money, reaching only a handful of BIE schools
before the program ended after only 21 months.
Question 25. Please explain (1) the justification for this program
and (2) why it ended so abruptly.
Answer. The purpose of the ELKNet was to provide training and
information to BIE teachers and instructors through distance learning.
Various methods of delivery to the BIE schools were planned and some
were implemented. However, faced with the intent to reduce
inefficiencies and waste in our budget, the Department of the Interior
evaluated usage and maintenance costs of the ELKNet system and made the
decision to discontinue its use. Discontinuing the satellite time and
maintenance contracts generates a savings of $500,000 annually.
The infrastructure remains in place at the schools and juvenile
detention centers where it was previously used, and the satellite
capabilities can be reinstated should additional federal dollars become
available to make the operation a worthwhile venture once again. The
National Indian Program Training Center (NIPTC) studio continues to be
used for the development of training videos for BIE and BIA as well as
other DOI Bureaus.
Academic Achievement
The low academic outcome at BIE schools has been an ongoing
concern. According to the BIE 2010-2011 Annual Report Card, the BIE
graduation rate stands at 59 percent, and only one-third of students
perform at proficient levels in language arts and mathematics. On
February 27, 2013, the Government Accountability Office testified
before the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies that management and communication
issues between Indian Affairs offices may have a negative effect on
student achievement at BIE schools. In your testimony before the
Committee on Indian Affairs on May 15, 2013, you characterized the
state of Indian education as ``an embarrassment.''
Question 26. How do you plan to improve academic achievement at BIE
schools? Please be specific.
Answer. The comments from the GAO on communications issues between
Indian Affairs offices refers to the provision of administrative
support services by Indian Affairs to the BIE and its schools. The
provision of contracting, financial, budgeting, facilities, safety, and
property management services to BIE schools by Indian Affairs offices
is difficult due to the geographic isolation of many BIE schools.
Without proper and efficient delivery of such support services to the
BIE schools, academic progress suffers. Efforts are under way to remedy
the situation by improving communications and deliverables by the
service entity to BIE.
Regarding student achievement, graduation rates and schools making
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under the requirements of the ESEA, the
BIE-funded schools are required under 25 CFR 30.104 to use the
standards of the state in which the school resides. Since the BIE funds
schools in 23 different states, it is difficult to measure education
quality due to the fragmentation of the accountability system for the
BIE-funded schools. Under this situation, no BIE school can be compared
with other BIE schools across state lines to gauge the success of the
school programs.
In a 2001 report, GAO reported that academic achievement of BIE
students suffers because Indian parents' educational, employment, and
earning levels are significantly lower than the national average. BIE
schools find it difficult to recruit and maintain highly qualified
teachers and instructors in such remote locations. Educational
technology, as well as access levels to computers and the Internet for
students in BIE schools is more limited than for students in public
schools.
BIE is pursuing a waiver, from the U.S. Department of Education for
certain requirements of the ESEA, which includes a request to establish
its own system of measuring student achievement and educational
accountability in the near future. BIE is also working to promote high
quality education for the BIE schools. In that respect, I will work
with Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, to ensure that BIE has the
necessary tools to meet the demands of a school district and to provide
the necessary support to the BIE in its commitment to improving the
learning environment for its students. The reauthorization of the ESEA
will assist in this effort.
On September 23, 2013, Secretary Duncan and I convened an American
Indian Education Study Group (Study Group), which the Assistant
Secretary--Indian Affairs Washburn oversees. The Study Group will visit
schools and classrooms, Tribal Governments, and Indian Affairs
employees to gather information, listen to their concerns and, most
importantly, try to find ways to improve American Indian education.
Members of the Study Group are from the Department of Education, Brown
University, and the Department of Defense.
In addition, the FY 2014 President's Budget requests $2 million for
a comprehensive evaluation of the BIE school system. Once the
evaluation is completed, we will be in a better position to determine
what the system should look like in the future.
School Construction
According to testimony from Mr. John Rever, the Bureau of Indian
Affairs Director of the Office of Facilities, Environmental and
Cultural Resources, before the Committee on September 11, 2010, the
estimated need for BIE school construction is as high as $1.3 billion.
Despite this significant need, the President's Fiscal Year 2014 Budget
Request proposes a $17.8 million cut that would zero-out the
replacement school construction funds for the BIE.
In your testimony before the Committee on May 15, 2013, you stated
that because of budget restraints, the Department is prioritizing
maintenance of its current structures over funding any new
construction. However, recognizing the poor condition of many BIE
schools, you indicated that the Department has also been considering
other channels for funding, such as private philanthropy, noting that
current law may not allow private funds to be used for the purpose of
BIE school construction.
Question 27. What, if anything, could be done legislatively to help
the Department find alternative ways to meet the need for BIE school
construction?
Answer. There is no simple legislative fix for Indian school
construction needs given the current fiscal climate. Currently,
legislation prevents combining or curtailing education programs without
tribal authorization. In some locations, however, school sites are
closely located, with some just a few miles apart. For historic
reasons, combining these programs has been rejected by tribes.
Contract Support Costs
In its Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request, the Administration proposes
to address the Supreme Court's decision in Ramah v. Salazar, regarding
the payment of full funding for the Contract Support Costs (CSC)
incurred by Indian tribal contractors and to reduce the government's
liability for the CSCs. Under the Administration's proposal, Congress
is requested to appropriate CSC funding for tribal contractors of both
the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service on a
contract-by-contract basis by incorporating by reference a table
reflecting each of these individual contract amounts.
Question 28. When does the Department plan to provide such a table?
Answer. The Department of the Interior provided the contract-by-
contact CSC table to the Congressional appropriations committees on
June 14, 2013. The table and the accompanying congressional transmittal
letters can be found at the following Department website: http://
www.doi.gov/budget/index.cfm.
Question 29. Will the Department consult with the affected tribes
regarding the amounts to be included in the table? If so, how?
Answer. In addition to providing the contract-by-contract CSC to
the Congress, the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs reached out to
Tribes in a June 14, 2013 Tribal Leader letter regarding the CSC list.
It requests tribal leaders to submit any technical correction(s) to the
BIA by July 29, 2013. In addition, the BIA held a CSC consultation
session at the National Congress of American Indian conference in Reno,
NV on June 25, 2013. DOI is pursuing the broader goal of developing a
longer-term solution through consultation with Tribes as well as
streamlining and simplifying the contract support costs process, which
is considered by many as overly complex and cumbersome to both Tribes
and the Federal Government. Department of the Interior officials will
be available to hear tribal leaders views on this issue.
Question 30. What is the methodology and process the Department
will use to determine the amounts to be included in the table?
Answer. Various OMB Circulars establish principles and standards
that are applicable for determining contract support costs applicable
to the awardee. Section 106(k) of P.L. 93-638, as amended, has made
modifications to the OMB cost principles otherwise applicable to
awardees, and section 106(a) of P.L. 93-638, as amended, defines which
of an awardee's costs qualify under the statute for contract support
costs funding. Also Appendix A-Standards for review and approval of
contract support costs in the Bureau of Indian Affairs was applied.
In determining the amount of CSC required, BIA Awarding Officials
review the awardee's cost allocation plan, its associated IDC proposal,
and approved IDC negotiations agreement for fiscal year 2012 to reduce
the possibility of duplication of funding. The process of allocating
funding available for CSC is outlined within the Bureau of Indian
Affairs National Policy Memorandum, NPM-SELD-1. The contract support
cost fiscal year 2012 actual agreed upon rates and payments are used as
the base. In addition, a prorated amount of the $9.8 million increase
included in the 2014 request level of $231.0 million is added. The
increase strengthens the capacity of tribes to manage Indian Affairs
programs for which they contract.
Social Services
In a March, 2013 report entitled, Management of Social Services in
BIA: Opportunity for Action, Report No. WR-EV-BIA-0001-2012, the
Department of the Interior Office of Inspector General (OIG) evaluated
the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) Social Services Program, which
includes child welfare and protective services. The report found
ongoing problems hindering the effective functioning of the program,
including the lack of any clear standards, guidance, or defined program
performance benchmarks; and inadequate communication among managers,
staff, and tribes. According to the OIG report, these findings are
almost identical to findings of independent evaluations contracted by
the BIA in 1999 and again in 2012 to help improve BIA operations,
including social services.
Question 31. What is the Department doing to address these findings
and recommendations to improve the functioning of the BIA Social
Services Program? Please describe any progress that has been made to
date in addressing the OIG findings.
Answer. The Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Indian Services
(OIS), Division of Human Services prepared two responses, dated
February 4, 2013 and April 18, 2013, to the recommendations and
findings cited under the OIG Report entitled, Management of Social
Services in BIA: Opportunity for Action, Report No. WR-EV-BIA-0001-
2012.
The OIS, Division of Human Services continues to work on addressing
the findings and has established internal deadlines for each
recommendation. However, the Division of Human Services progress in
addressing the recommendations contained within the OIG report has been
hindered by the constraints caused by the sequestration.
The OS, Division of Human Services is working towards meeting the
goals established in its response to the OIG.
High Priority Performance Pilot Program
Crime in Indian Country remains a significant problem and one of
the BIA's most important responsibilities to address. According to
recent information from the BIA, in the third year of operation, the
High Priority Performance (HPPG) pilot program has reduced violent
crime by 56 percent on the Wind River Indian reservation.
This downward trend in crime rates reflects persistent efforts by
law enforcement personnel to fight crimes and develop community
relations. However, that continued diligence may be disrupted by the
difficulties in retaining law enforcement personnel, in part due to the
lack of housing.
Question 32. What can you do to help these officers with their
housing needs on the Wind River Indian Reservation?
Answer. The Bureau of Indian Affairs has collaborated internally
with the Office of Facilities Management and Construction (OFMC) and
the Shoshone and Arapaho Housing Division to identify resources and
assistance to address housing needs for law enforcement officers.
Currently, the OFMC is building four residential homes that will be
designated for law enforcement officers and will be located in the
government housing area. The Shoshone and Arapaho Housing Division is
working with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to
address the maximum income stipulation that currently precludes law
enforcement officers from residing in tribal housing.
The BIA Wind River Agency provides law enforcement officers with
information for housing in the Riverton and Lander area during the new
employee orientation process. The law enforcement officers who reside
in the towns of Riverton or Lander are permitted to use a government
vehicle. The town of Riverton is 35 miles from the agency office. The
town of Lander is 17 miles from the agency office, but both towns offer
solid housing options for law enforcement officers
Question 33. What other efforts is the Department undertaking to
retain qualified law enforcement personnel on the HPPG sites and other
Indian reservations?
Answer. The BIA has increased its retention of qualified law
enforcement personnel at HPPG sites through employee relations that
include opportunities for skill development through work assignments;
employee development through training for specialized duties such as
school resource officer, or K-9 Unit; employee recognition for
successful individual or unit performance; and opportunities for
promotion.
Detention Staffing
On March 31, 2011, the Department of the Interior Office of
Inspector General (OIG) issued its evaluation entitled Bureau of Indian
Affairs' Detention Facilities, Report No. WR-EV-BIA-2005-2010,
specifically to determine how BIA spent its increased funding and how
it addressed staffing problems. The OIG found that BIA has failed to
address staffing shortages, which has created an unsafe atmosphere for
both staff and inmates. In addition, OIG found egregious physical
conditions at the detention facilities including, but not limited to,
unsecure fencing, doors, and windows; absence of practiced safety and
security measures; leaky roofs; rusted sinks, toilets, and showers; and
an overall lack of cleanliness.
Question 34. What is the Department currently doing to address the
staffing and conditions at the Indian Country detention facilities?
What if any progress has been made to date to address the problems
identified in the OIG report?
Answer. Staffing: One of the OIG's primary recommendations
addressed the need to identify and remedy staffing shortages. To
mitigate safety concerns related to understaffing, IA calculated the
standard space staffing requirement for each facility throughout Indian
Country. This report differentiated the size of the facility according
to the National Institute of Corrections' (NIC) standards. To aid in
meeting the staffing standards, the salaries of BIA correctional
officers were increased to be more competitive with their counterparts
in other agencies. Additionally, in FY 2010, BIA implemented an
aggressive recruitment and hiring strategy, harnessing multimedia tools
and broadening the pool of qualified applicants by modifying the
recruitment process, recruiting veterans and current non-IA law
enforcement officers, and working with universities to develop a
cooperative student law enforcement program. BIA continued the
recruitment initiative in FY 2011and FY 2012 and continues to see
successful results in filling vacant police and correction officer
positions. The new strategy continues to be a great success as
evidenced by a clear growth trend of 128 FTE or 22 percent from the FY
2009 baseline through the first quarter of FY 2013
Facility Conditions: The FY 2014 President's Budget includes $11.3
million for Public Safety and Justice (PS&J) construction, which funds
the repair and improvement of IA detention and other public and safety
facilities to increase public safety and improve the quality of life in
Indian Country. From FY 2009 through FY 2013, over $104.5 million has
been appropriated for PS&J construction. The resources fund Facilities
Improvement and Repair (FI&R) projects that facilitate compliance with
the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates, and other safety code
requirements, reducing IA's exposure to liability.
To ensure resources reach the facilities of greatest need, a
priority list of projects has been established within the PS&J program.
Detention centers have the highest funding priority; the second
priority is for short term holding cell facilities; and the third
priority is for court facilities and law enforcement administrative
offices. Detention facilities in the worst conditions and highest
demand receive the highest priority for funding. To support this
effort, work plans, financial program plans, and preventative
maintenance plans are developed by IA detention centers.
Employment and Labor Report
The Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration
Act of 1992 requires the Department of the Interior, in consultation
with the Department of Labor, to publish not less than every two years
an American Indian Population and Labor Force Report (``Report'') to
provide accurate statistical information on population and employment
rates for tribes.
On July 2, 2012, the Department of the Interior issued a statement
that they will not be releasing the 2010 Report because methodology
inconsistencies resulted in data that did not meet the standards of
quality and reliability required of Federal agencies and that past
reports, sometimes used to set Indian policy, were also faulty. On July
16, 2012, Senator Murkowski and I sent a letter to Secretary Salazar,
pointing out the lack of information and urging the Department to
release the report or fully explain their failure to comply with the
law.
The Department responded by letter that it intended to convene a
working group, consult with tribes, and conduct a new survey before
issuing a new report. However, it did not provide a clear timeframe for
releasing the new report. At the end of 2012, the working group held
four consultation and information sessions with the tribes, but no
further update has been provided to the Committee.
Question 35. Please explain the current efforts underway to issue a
new report.
Answer. Indian Affairs is continuing its efforts and is working in
collaboration with senior members of the Interagency Working Group that
was formed to advise Indian Affairs on the report's preparation. The
group includes senior members from inside Indian Affairs, as well as
senior members from the Office of Management and Budget, the U.S.
Bureau of the Census, and the Secretary's Office.
Question 36. Please provide a date certain when this new report
will be issued?
Answer. The target date for release of the report is December 2013.
Management
On August 10, 2012, the Department of the Interior Office of
Inspector General (OIG) issued a report entitled Hanna, Jeannette, et
al., Case No. PI-PI-11-0616-I, finding a significant waste of Federal
funds within the BIA for excessive spending for equipment, travel, and
an employment detail without required justifications just for one
senior official. This senior official was detailed to the Office of the
Assistant Secretary (against advice from the Interior's Office of Civil
Rights) for 775 days, 535 days more than what Federal regulations
allow.
Question 37. Please explain in detail what accountability and
management measures have been established to ensure this sort of waste
does not occur again?
Answer. The Indian Affairs OIG Referral Program was moved under the
operational control of the Director, Office of Human Capital
Management, where there is a comprehensive understanding of federal
personnel policies and practices. Training regarding travel regulations
was developed that was consistent with Federal Travel Regulations and
DOI travel policies and provided to all Indian Affairs administrative
support staff for them to provide appropriate advice, guidance, and
assistance to employees and managers. Also, travel review and
responsibilities was addressed at top Indian Affairs leadership staff
meetings. Finally, a memorandum from the Assistant Secretary--Indian
Affairs was issued to all travelers highlighting and outlining both the
individual travelers' and the reviewing supervisors' responsibilities
for adhering to federal travel regulations. A copy of this memorandum,
as well as a slide presentation concerning travel training, is
prominently posted on the Indian Affairs Travel intranet website for
all employees to review.
In May, 2012, the OIG issued a report entitled Bureau of Indian
Affairs' Law Enforcement Recruitment Services Contract with the
National Native American Law Enforcement Association, Report No. WR-EV-
BIA-0005-2011. This Report found that the Bureau of Indian Affairs
Office of Justice Services (OJS) had entered into a contract with the
National Native American Law Enforcement Association for law
enforcement recruitment services, which violated federal procurement
regulations and Department policy, and cost the Department almost $1
million. This failure to follow the necessary procedures resulted in
the contract being poorly written, under which the OJS paid this
contractor for recruitment services and received no benefit whatsoever,
thus wasting almost $1 million.
Question 38. What action has the Department taken to address the
findings in this Report?
Answer. After the current Office of Justice Services management
team became aware of the previous Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) Law
Enforcement Recruitment Services Contract with the National Native
American Law Enforcement Association (NNALEA), the issues that
surrounded the failed contract award highlighted the need to improve
the administrative guidance and support available to OJS management and
field staff. Please see our response to the third question below
regarding additional actions taken to address the findings in the
report.
Question 39. Has the Department recovered this $1 million? If not,
why not?
Answer. To date, we have been unable to confirm the recovery of any
amount under this contract. We will continue to research and provide an
updated status.
Question 40. What accountability, management, and procurement
measures are in place to ensure this sort of mismanagement does not
occur again?
Answer. The BIA's Office of Justice Services (OJS) has implemented
measures to ensure staff have the appropriate guidance when developing
future contracts and are adhering to the Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR). OJS has also taken steps to ensure in-house staff
and resources are utilized prior to seeking external contractual
services. Specifically, in 2011, OJS management moved the Associate
Director of Administration position from Albuquerque, NM to the
Washington, DC office and established a Support Services division that
works closely with Indian Affairs Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO) to provide guidance for operational support.
In addition, internal control process reviews related to the
acquisition function are completed on an annual basis and documented in
the OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A, Internal Control over Financial
Reporting process document and submitted to the Indian Affairs Office
of Internal Evaluation and Assessment.
Question 41. How is the BIA currently conducting recruitment
activities for law enforcement personnel?
Answer. The BIA OJS recruits for law enforcement personnel through
regional/tribal level collaboration with educational institutes and
local events. District and agency law enforcement agencies participate
in local career fairs and traditional events for recruitment. Examples
of partner organizations include United Tribes Technical College (ND),
Dull Knife Community College (MT), Little Big Horn Community College
(MT), Haskell Indian Nations University (KS), Northeastern Oklahoma A&M
College (OK), Cameron University (OK), University of Science and Arts
(OK), and Santa Fe Indian School (NM). At these events, OJS recruitment
outreach consists of a variation of activities which may include a
recruitment booth with recruitment information and application
assistance, law enforcement vehicle presentation, K-9 presentations,
and formal presentations on Indian Country law enforcement.
This collaboration has resulted in a significant increase in new
appointments to vacant positions. OJS also utilizes social media as a
recruitment tool. Its other outreach efforts include collaborating with
other such organizations as the American University's Washington
Internship for Native Students (WINS) to share employment
opportunities.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Heidi Heitkamp to
Hon. Sally Jewell
Law Enforcement Training
I strongly encourage the Department of Interior and Bureau of
Indian Affairs to better utilize the resources and vision of United
Tribes Technical College (UTTC) in Bismarck, North Dakota, to become a
major provider of law enforcement training for Indian Country,
eventually leading to an academy involving an array of training,
academics and research.
Question 42. What is the graduation rate (i.e., successful
completion of training) among BIA/Tribal law enforcement trainees
participating in the academy at Artesia? How many law enforcement
offers does the BIA certify annually?
Answer. The BIA Indian Police Academy (IPA) conducts four Basic
Training programs annually. In total for FY 2012, the IPA graduated 287
Officers from these Basic Training Programs, which equated to a 74
percent graduation rate:
The Basic Police Officer Training Program (16 week)
graduated 81 Police Officers; the program's graduation Rate for
FY-2012 was 65 percent.
The Basic Correction Officer Training Program (6 week)
graduated 123 Correction Officers; the program's graduation
rate for FY-2012 was 70 percent.
The Basic Criminal Investigator Training Program (10 week)
graduated 59 Criminal Investigators; the program's graduation
rate for FY-2012 was 97 percent.
The Basic Police Officer Bridge Training Program (2.5 week)
graduated 24 Police Officers; the program's graduation rate for
FY-2012 was 88 percent.
The IPA also conducted 100 Advanced Level Training Programs (BIA
Outreach/FLETC Advanced) that were offered to BIA and Tribal Indian
Country Public Safety and Court personnel. The Advanced Training
Programs included specific training for Law Enforcement, Corrections,
Tribal Courts, and Management personnel throughout Indian Country. In
FY 2012, a total of 1,735 public safety personnel completed Advanced/
Outreach Training programs.
Question 43. If trainees are not successful at Artesia, are there
other means by which BIA/Tribal law enforcement personnel are certified
by the BIA? Are there reciprocity agreements with state training
sources?
Answer. Trainees that do not successfully complete a Basic Training
Program fail to complete for the following reasons:
(1) Failure of Examination/Practical Exercises--The student
has the opportunity to attend a future program.
(2) Personal Resignation--If employed by a BIA or Tribal
program, the student has the opportunity to attend a future
program.
(3) Conduct Violations--Based on the severity of the Conduct
Violation, the student may or may not have the opportunity to
attend a future program.
(4) Health Reasons--The student has the opportunity to attend
a future program.
All BIA officers have to meet the BIA Basic Training Requirements
which requires completion of a Federal Basic Training Program. This
will require all BIA officers to attend and complete the BIA Basic
Police Officer Training, BIA Basic Corrections Officer Training, BIA
Basic Criminal Investigator Training, or BIA Basic Police Officer
Bridge Training programs.
There are many tribal programs that utilize their respective State
Police Academies to provide basic Training to their Police officers.
Tribal Correction Officers attend the IPA. Tribal Criminal
Investigators attend the BIA/FLETC Criminal Investigator Training
Program. Regarding Basic Police Officer Training, each specific tribal
program chooses to send their Officers either to their respective State
Academy or attend the IPA based on their tribal government's needs.
Therefore tribes have the discretion to choose which academy they send
their Police Officers in order to meet Basic Training Requirements. For
example for the two tribal law enforcement programs in North Dakota,
the Three Affiliated Tribes utilize the North Dakota State Police
Academy and the Sisseton Wahpeton Tribal Police send their Police
Officers to either the State of South Dakota Police Academy or the IPA.
There are no formal reciprocity agreements with State Law
Enforcement Academies. The IPA conducts a BIA Basic Police Officer
Bridge Training Program that is designed to provide STATE POST
certified police officers with a 2.5 week program that provides
curriculum on Federal Court Procedures, Criminal Jurisdiction in Indian
country and BIA Standards. Completion of the BIA Basic Police Officer
Bridge Program will provide the Officer with BIA Basic Training
Requirements.
Question 44. UTTC is fully accredited by the North Central
Association on Colleges and Schools and among its offerings are two-
and four-year criminal justice degrees, shorter-term training and
certificates. I understand the program at Artesia does not offer
college training and credit to persons participating in the program.
Wouldn't it be an advantage to have a program which could meet the
broader long-term needs of law enforcement trainees?
Answer. The IPA supports and promotes education of all public
safety personnel in Indian Country. As a participating organization of
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, the IPA has solely
concentrated on conducting Basic and Advanced training for law
enforcement, corrections, and Courts personnel that are hired and
working for a Tribe or the BIA. To be eligible to attend an IPA
program, the student has to be a full time, law enforcement or
corrections officer. The intent of the training provided at the IPA is
to train and develop personnel on the core competencies of the position
for which they perform in the public safety field.
Also of note is that higher education institutions, universities,
and colleges do request training records of IPA graduates with the
intent to provide the graduate with college credits toward their degree
or certificate. The IPA understands the importance of partnering with
higher education institutions to promote education for current law
enforcement professionals and future law enforcement professionals. In
2010, the IPA provided resources to East Central Oklahoma State
University (Oklahoma) and the United Tribes Technical College to
support their respective degree programs and continual development of
law enforcement personnel. The IPA has made the commitment to continue
a partnership with the United Tribes Technical College and will
continue to seek engagement with other universities or Tribal colleges
across the nation.
Question 45. What percent of law enforcement officer positions are
vacant throughout Indian Country? Please provide a breakout by
position.
Answer. The overall vacancy rate for BIA law enforcement officer
positions nationwide is currently 28 percent. This number is comprised
of a vacancy rate of 31 percent for police officer positions and 24
percent for criminal investigator positions.
Question 46. What percent of law enforcement officer positions are
needed throughout Indian Country? Please provide a breakout by
position.
Answer. A report detailing public safety and justice needs was
compiled by BIA and submitted to the appropriate congressional
committees in accordance with Section 211(b)(2) Title II of Public Law
111-211, The Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA). In the report, BIA
provided an unmet need estimate for law enforcement programs by using a
ratio of officers per 1,000 residents. The data used to determine the
appropriate ratio are found in the FBI Uniform Crime Report (UCR). \1\
Based upon the 2010 UCR staffing tables, county agencies have an
average of 2.8 officers per 1,000 residents. \2\ The UCR does not have
a specific ratio for Indian Country, but the 2.8 sworn personnel per
1,000 residents may be the comparable ratio to the majority of Indian
communities. Applying this ratio to the resident populations of the
tribes served by BIA would produce a need of 3,187 officer positions
throughout Indian Country that current BIA law enforcement funding does
not cover. As a step toward addressing this need, the FY 2014
President's Budget includes a program increase of $5.5 million for
Criminal Investigations and Police Services.
\1\ The UCR Program was conceived in 1929 by the International
Association of Chiefs of Police to meet a need for reliable, uniform
crime statistics for the nation. In 1930, the FBI was tasked with
collecting, publishing, and archiving those statistics.
\2\ See 2010 Uniform Crime Report table 71 at www.fbi.gov/ucr/
cius2010/police/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 47. Has the BIA conducted any long-term assessment of law
enforcement needs in Indian Country?
Answer. A report detailing public safety and justice needs was
compiled by BIA and submitted to the appropriate congressional
committees in accordance with Section 211(b)(2) Title II of Public Law
111-211, The Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA). See response to previous
question.
Question 48. Do you expect the recent expansion of tribal
jurisdiction afforded by the Tribal Law and Order Act and the Violence
Against Women Act to increase the need for law enforcement officials in
Indian Country?
Answer. There is a potential for increased law enforcement needs
developing in P.L. 280 states in response to enactment of provisions
under the TLOA regarding concurrent federal jurisdiction. As affected
tribes that meet certain criteria under TLOA make the determination to
establish a law enforcement program and begin a dialogue with the BIA
about doing so, a clearer picture of need for these tribes will be
possible. As an indication of the work that lies ahead, there are
currently 105 federally recognized tribes located in the state of
California, but only five receive public safety and justice funding
from BIA.
The recent passage of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization
Act of 2013 (VAWA) will have a significant impact on tribal justice
systems as well. The law amends, among other statues: the Indian Civil
Rights Act, 25 U.S.C. 1301; the Federal Assault provisions under 18
U.S.C. 113; the Domestic Violence and Stalking Chapter, specifically
addressing the full faith and credit given to tribal protection orders,
under 18 U.S.C. 2265. As a result of provisions contained in the law,
the BIA may need to develop and implement training for our direct
service program staff in the areas of law enforcement, social services,
victim services, and especially courts. The BIA may also need to
provide additional technical assistance and training to tribes
operating these programs under self-determination contracts and
compacts. Final determination of need will be based on Tribal requests
themselves.
Question 49. What steps can the BIA take now to work with UTTC in
expanding training opportunities and to provide certification for BIA/
Tribal law enforcement personnel?
Answer. The BIA has provided resources and developed a training
partnership with the United Tribes Technical College (UTTC). The BIA
has dedicated a full time BIA Indian Police Academy Training Sergeant
(Instructor) onsite, assigned to provide technical assistance to UTTC
and coordinate advanced training programs held on the campus. The BIA
has promoted the UTTC partnership to other Indian Country public safety
programs and other federal agencies as an advanced training site for
the BIA's IPA. Prior to the effects of the sequestration, the IPA
averaged between eight to ten (8-10) advanced training programs
annually. The advanced training programs included; criminal
investigation, management/supervision, corrections, and police training
courses.
The BIA will continue to promote its support of UTTC. The current
training programs conducted at the UTTC help to accomplish continual
in-service training requirements that are required to maintain law
enforcement certification.
Question 50. One result of the Bakken oil boom in North Dakota is
the huge influx of people in areas that are not prepared for such an
immediate change and it has put a great stress on law enforcement
officials, notably for the Three Affiliated Tribes public safety
program.
Answer. The BIA provides a direct service special agent to support
the Three Affiliated Tribes law enforcement program. In May, an
additional criminal investigator position was advertised.
The BIA district office provides technical assistance to the Three
Affiliated Tribes law enforcement department regarding the influx of
drugs and violent crime. BIA has met on several occasions with the
Tribal Chairman and Chief of Police to assist them with their desire to
establish a drug task force. The first meeting occurred on February 1,
2013, in which the tribe requested assistance to interview candidates
to lead the tribal drug task force. The last meeting held by the tribe
was March 1, 2013, on initiating the drug task force.
Spirit Lake Child Welfare
I continue to be very concerned about child welfare issues at the
Spirit Lake Nation in North Dakota. There is a considerable need for
continuity and for permanent staffing of the program to ensure children
on the reservation are protected. Additionally, it is imperative the
claims of abuse that have been made to date are thoroughly
investigated.
Question 51. Please provide an outline of the steps taken by the
Department to ensure proper placement of children in foster homes since
the BIA assumed operation of the social service program at Spirit Lake.
Answer. Since October 1, 2012, BIA, Fort Totten Agency has had the
responsibility of operating the social services programs including
foster care, for the Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota.
If a relative placement cannot be located for a child, BIA will
then proceed with a foster care placement. All foster care homes are
licensed, which includes fingerprinting, background checks, and home
inspections for those homes. The homes are licensed by the respective
state county using the state criteria or through the Tribe, also using
the state criteria. The Tribe is still actively engaged in the
licensing process because it is continuing to operate a part of their
social service program through a Title IV-E of the Social Security Act
(IV-E) agreement with the state of North Dakota. This program pays for
their staff to continue to place children in foster care.
The Tribe has 33 children in IV-E state agreement foster care
placements. Those children are not subject to BIA supervision, and the
Tribe is responsible to the state of North Dakota for oversight on
those placements. If a child meets the state requirements for IV-E
eligibility, the BIA foster care program transfers children to services
under the Tribe's IV-E agreement with the state.
Question 52. What is the timeline for having the social services
office fully staffed? Does the Department have the resources necessary
to fully address the issues with the social services program? How long
do you anticipate the BIA will continue operations of the program?
Answer. The BIA has been pursuing the hiring of six permanent
positions for the social services program at the Fort Totten Agency.
However, the BIA has encountered many obstacles in hiring permanent
staff for the program. These obstacles include:
Lack of available government housing;
Negative publicity regarding child protective services
despite significant program improvements;
A shortage of qualified social worker applicants applying
for the positions;
Hiring certifications that come back with either no
applicants or only one to two unsuitable applicants;
Suitable candidates who are selected; then the individual
withdraws their application or is unable to meet specific
background requirements and/or job requirement elements
The Supervisory Social Worker, prior to the Department of the
Interior hiring freeze, had been advertised twice. On both occasions
selections were made but ultimately the selected candidates withdrew
citing personal reasons (once again for the first two reasons listed
above). Since the last applicant declination, a hiring freeze was
initiated by the Department, thus requiring a waiver. A waiver was
requested on May 6, 2013 and after approved, the position was
advertised immediately thereafter. The position closed on August 29,
2013 with the anticipation of a prompt selection.
The Child Welfare Specialist positions that will be responsible for
investigations and case management have been advertised 5 times with
selections being made however, there have been multiple declinations.
Recently, one person accepted an offer and the other position was
offered to the first and second choice candidates and both declined.
The one person who accepted is scheduled to report on September 9,
2013. The other twice-declined position will be re-advertised; this re-
advertisement will be the final re-advertisement for the positions
needed to fully staff the program.
Finally, the Social Service Representative was previously
advertised twice without any applicants qualifying for the position.
This position was finally advertised with several applicants responding
and a selection has been made. The one person who accepted is scheduled
to report on September 23, 2013. Given all the factors noted above, it
may yet be another 3-6 months before this program is fully staffed.
As a result of the issues with filling the vacancies at the Agency,
the BIA Great Plains Regional Office (which oversees the Agency) has
been coordinating the assignment of other BIA Regional and Agency
social services workers every week to the Fort Totten Agency. The
Regional Office details up to four individuals from other BIA agencies
within the Region to the Fort Totten Agency to help cover the four
vacant positions and ensure the delivery of services. Currently, there
are six BIA agency social services staff available region-wide, who can
be detailed to the Fort Totten Agency to assist.
The program is in the middle of a 12-week set of detail
assignments, which establishes coverage through mid-October. With the
new hires noted above starting in September, we hope to reduce this
schedule to two positions before it is completed. We will continue to
aggressively pursue the hiring process until all positions are filled
and expect that the next 12-week set of details will be a contingency
plan and the need for the two remaining detail positions will be
eliminated before 2014.
Question 53. What procedures within the social services office has
the Department adopted since BIA's assumption of the program to ensure
the safety and protection of children?
Answer. The BIA has adopted a number of significant procedures and
has also re-engaged in community prevention activities designed to
reduce instances of abuse. In addition, the efforts at the Spirit Lake
Tribe have also allowed program and Agency staff to filter through some
of the unsubstantiated cases through improving mandatory reporting
methodologies in coordination with other key partners such as the
medical facilities and school systems. The mandatory reporter
methodologies alone have resulted in a 40 percent drop in child abuse
and neglect reports and also in receiving reports with information
which facilitates a more rapid and thorough investigation strategy. For
the past few months, the number of referrals has maintained even levels
of approximately 80 per month.
Protocols have been established for all key social services
processes which are greatly assisted by the knowledgeable and
experienced staff assisting from other BIA locations on the proper
protocols for investigations, case management, foster care, and all
other key social services processes. This standardization has led to
more consistent processing across the board. Most importantly, abuse
and neglect reports are documented and tracked through much more
concise systems. Training has been coordinated and completed internally
and through other state and Federal Agency partners to improve services
at Spirit Lake.
Other efforts include:
The Social Services program collaborates with the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Red River Advocacy Center and BIA law
enforcement to complete forensic interviews for children who
report instances of mental, physical, or sexual abuse.
The staff has worked on encoding data and uploading
documentation for cases into the Financial Assistance and Case
Management System (FASS-CMS) that is utilized by all BIA Social
Services programs to assist with more thorough tracking.
The staff is performing 24 hour on-call Child Protective
Services as of October 1, 2012. They have partnered with BIA
law enforcement to assist with investigations of referrals of
allegations of child abuse and/or neglect.
The program has issued child assistance payments on a
monthly basis to providers for children that are placed in
foster care and residential care.
The files were re-located on October 1, 2012 to the Fort
Totten Agency. Staff has created and maintained case files.
On November 30, 2012 the BIA Great Plains Regional Office,
Division of Human Services, BIA Fort Totten Agency Social
Services, Spirit Lake Tribal Social Services, and the
University of North Dakota's Children and Family Services
Training Center co-presented mandatory abuse reporter training
for the Spirit Lake community. The goal was to increase
awareness about identifying abuse and neglect, responsibilities
of mandated abuse reporters, what to include on a referral, and
the BIA referral process. Over 40 mandated abuse reporters
attended the session.
On January 8, 2013, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Great
Plains Region and the Office Justice Services provided
fingerprint training to Tribal and BIA Social Services staff at
the Agency. The Agency has received three mobile fingerprinting
units that its social services staff utilizes for in-home
fingerprinting of adults in foster homes where children in
protected care may be placed.
On March 12, 2013, a Child and Family Wellness Fair was
conducted in Fort Totten, North Dakota. Resource providers were
present to share information with community members and
training topics presented, including domestic violence
prevention and services.
Since November 1, 2012, the Social Services program has
assumed the responsibility of leading bi-weekly Child
Protection Team meetings, which allow multiple local Agencies
to staff particular cases to best coordinate physical and
mental health services for children in the BIA's care and
custody. The members of this team are: BIA Social Services,
Spirit Lake Tribal Social Services, Ramsey and Benson County
Social Services staff, school district staff, IHS staff, and
local counseling and family services providers. The meetings
are usually held the 1st and 3rd Thursday of every month, with
the next meeting on September 5, 2013. All members of this team
sign confidentiality statements.
Since November 1, 2012, the Social Services staff has and
continues to participate in the Multi-Disciplinary Team
meetings coordinated through the Department of Justice's U.S.
Attorney's office to address those cases which are the subject
of criminal investigation and prosecution in either federal or
tribal court. The most recent MDT meeting was just held on
Tuesday, August 20, 2013. Members of this team consist of: BIA
Social Services, FBI, U.S. Attorney, Spirit Lake Tribal Social
Services, the Tribal prosecutor, BIA-OJS Law Enforcement,
Spirit Lake Tribal Victim's Assistance program, and Red River
Advocacy (organization conducting forensic interviews of
children). The next meeting is not yet scheduled, but will
likely be within the next 4-6 weeks depending on volume of
forensic interviews. All members of this team sign
confidentiality agreements.
Since June, 2012, the establishment of the Social Services
Coalition which meets approximately once a month to communicate
and collaborate on providing effective delivery of Social
Service related programs. Members of this coalition includes
all local state, county, federal and tribal social service
entities, representatives from state district, tribal and
federal court, Law Enforcement, Victim's Assistance program,
tribal council, and area leaders. The group works together on
interagency services coordination and communication, inter-
agency community events like Child and Family Wellness Fairs,
and other community issues related to social services as they
arise. The next coalition meeting is scheduled for September
11, 2013.
In case management, 66 cases have been closed in the past
month. As of this date, there are 74 active cases with an
additional 51 service only cases.
Question 54. I understand that children who are being assessed for
potential child abuse are currently being transported to Grand Forks
and Fargo, which are both hours away from the reservation, compounding
the fear of many of these children. Would the Department consider
having Native American female officials available to interview
suspected victims on the reservation as opposed to having the children
transported great distances?
Answer. Forensic interviews are tools to not only protect children
from abuse, but to document their potential testimony for future
criminal proceedings, if necessary. Accordingly, this highly
specialized process requires certain staff, environments, and even
sensitivity to the child's willingness to visit with trained staff. The
Spirit Lake BIA Social Services Program currently utilizes two
locations--Grand Forks, which is about 100 miles away, and Fargo, which
is about 185 miles away. The Program has need of about three to four
such interviews a month, on average. The possibility of local
interviews has been discussed to address the specific concerns about
the travel distances, however, the discussion revealed two challenges.
First, the interview settings have been developed to both make children
comfortable, and to document potential testimony. Accordingly,
interview sites are equipped with recording equipment, and two-way
mirrors in addition to special toys and creative materials designed to
help children express themselves about potential abuse. Resources would
need to be secured to replicate these settings on the reservation. It
is unlikely such facilities would be considered cost effective at
Spirit Lake, much less all 16 reservation locations in the Great Plains
Region.
Finally, when the possibility of reservation-based interviews were
being discussed, those staff conducting such interviews indicated that
the new location actually facilitated greater success at eliciting
credible information because children temporarily away from their usual
community environment felt safer revealing incidents of abuse and
trauma. The combination of these factors led staff and those conducting
forensic investigations to conclude that the integrity of the
information obtained outweighed the travel distance concerns in these
scenarios.
Oil and Gas Development
Energy development on Indian reservations provides significant
benefits, including economic development, jobs, and infrastructure
development. In the Great Plains, where many conventional energy
resources are available for development on Indian reservations, the
average unemployment rate is 77 percent. Facilitating Indian energy and
economic development is exactly what is needed to lift many tribes out
of poverty. However, I continue to be concerned the Department is not
providing the same level of coordination for requests from tribes to
improve federal permitting coordination as it is doing on other federal
lands. While efforts are being made to expand BLM's pilot program to
improve federal permit coordination, tribes are being left behind. A
number of years ago the Department committed to creating a ``virtual''
one stop shop at the Fort Berthold Reservation, but the office has
never received the necessary support to make it work as intended. It is
vital that permanent staff be on the ground to help the tribes oversee
and manage the energy development occurring on Indian lands.
Question 55. What steps will the Department take to improve the one
stop shop at Fort Berthold to ensure the tribe is a full and equal
partner in the overall efforts of the Department to improve the
coordination of federal permitting?
Answer. The Department is working diligently to ensure oil and gas
projects on Indian lands continue to provide valuable contributions as
a full and equal partner in securing America's energy future. As part
of the effort to increase the efficiency of Federal permitting and
review of oil and gas activities, the Department, BLM, and BIA are
currently engaged in several initiatives, including the interagency
Bakken Federal Executive Group. The Federal Executive Group recently
met on June 5, 2013, in Billings, MT to discuss methods for improving
tribal coordination and consultation on the Fort Berthold Reservation.
The Bakken Federal Executive Group recognizes the Fort Berthold
Partners, a local interagency working group focused on coordination of
oil and gas activities on the Reservation, as an important forum for
the facilitation of permitting Indian Trust minerals. This working
group grew out of the spirit of the Fort Berthold one-stop shop, and
consultation with the Three Affiliated Tribes is a core element of the
work group's agenda. The Federal Executive Group plans to strengthen
the foundation for the Fort Berthold Partners by articulating
expectations and providing support for resources intended to help
revitalize the working group. The Department will also aim to provide
greater continuity to ensure this group's long-term effectiveness in
facilitating prompt permitting and thorough environmental review.
The office has been able to provide essential coordination,
technical assistance, and communication services between the federal
partners and for the benefit of the Tribe and allotees. The Pilot
Office program expansion supported by the Department will help ensure
permit applications on both Indian trust and public lands are processed
efficiently and in a safe and responsible manner. In addition to the
benefits of an expanded Pilot Office program operating on Indian lands,
the Department, through the Office of Indian Energy and Economic
Development's Division of Energy and Mineral Development (DEMD), has
continued to provide GIS and data management support in the
implementation of the National Indian Oil and Gas Management System
(NIOGEMS). The NIOGEMS system is utilized by Tribal offices, the BIA,
BLM field offices, and the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR)
to ensure proper communication and coordination between the various
Departmental agencies, Three Affiliated Tribes, and individual Indian
mineral owners.
In 2011, DEMD hired two environmental surface compliance
specialists, one GIS specialist, and three administrative support
positions to meet increased oil and gas development activity in the
area. Furthermore, the BIA Great Plains Region and the Three Affiliated
Tribes of Fort Berthold negotiated a P.L 93-638 contract agreement to
go into effect August 1, 2013. This agreement allows for the tribe to
hire three additional staff to be co-located with the BIA Fort Berthold
Agency staff in a capacity building effort to better serve oil and gas
operations on tribal lands, and to assist willing land owners with
individual leasing matters.
To further encourage efficient permitting of oil and gas projects
on Indian lands, the Department will implement a new automated tracking
system across the BLM and BIA that could reduce the review period for
drilling permits by two-thirds. The new system will track permit
applications through the entire review process, quickly flagging
missing or incomplete information, thereby greatly reducing the back-
and-forth between the BLM and industry applicants that is currently
needed to ensure applications are complete.
Question 56. What steps are being taken by the Department of the
Interior to improve consultation with tribes on oil and gas development
issues on tribal lands?
Answer. The Department of the Interior remains committed to
continuing a robust dialogue in consultation with tribes on oil and gas
development issues on tribal lands. As part of this commitment, the
same level of support that is being undertaken at Fort Berthold is now
required for the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, Navajo, Blackfeet, and
other oil and gas producing Tribes as well.
To improve our consultation with tribes on oil and gas development
issues on tribal lands, the Director of the BIA and the Director of
IEED both recently participated in a Four Corners Tribal Energy Summit
that included the five tribes of the four corners region. The summit
provided an opportunity for both tribes and federal agencies to discuss
ways that permitting issues could be addressed. Action items from the
meeting included follow up on meetings to develop strategies to address
tribal and federal concerns regarding coordination and communication.
Attachment