INDIAN ENERGY 

DEVELOPMENT

Additional Actions by 

Federal Agencies Are 

Needed to Overcome 

Factors Hindering 

Development

Report to the Chairman, Committee on 

Indian Affairs, U.S. Senate

November 2016

GAO-17-43

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-17-43, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, U.S. 

Senate

November 2016

INDIAN ENERGY DEVELOPMENT

Additional Actions by Federal Agencies Are Needed

to OvercomeFactors HinderingDevelopment

Why GAO Did This Study

Indian tribes and their members hold 

considerable energy resources and may

use these resources to provide economic 

benefits and improve the well-being of 

their communities. However, GAO and 

others have found that Indian energy 

development is hindered by several 

factors, such as a complex regulatory 

framework, BIA workforce challenges,

and limited access to energymarkets.

Tribes and their members determine how 

to use their energy resources. In doing 

so, they work with multiple federal 

agencies with various roles in the 

development process—including a 

regulatory role, a role as provider of 

technical and financial assistance, or as 

a purchaser of energy. 

GAO was asked to evaluate issues 

related to Indian energy development. 

This report examines, among other 

things,(1) federal efforts to help 

overcome factors that hinder 

development, (2) BIA’s efforts to address 

workforce challenges, and (3) federal 

efforts to implement a preference 

authority to purchase energy from tribes.

GAO analyzed federal data and 

documents and interviewed tribal and 

federal officials.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making 10 recommendations, 

including that the Secretary of the Interior 

identify resources and a funding model 

for the Energy Subgroup, involve other 

agencies in the Service Center so it is a 

single point of contact for the regulatory 

process, and require BIA to undertake 

workforce planning activities. GAO is also 

recommending that the Administrator of 

the GSA develop implementing guidance

relating to purchasing energy from tribes.

Interior, DOE, and GSA concurred with 

GAO’s recommendations. 

What GAO Found

Two key federal initiatives led by the Department of the Interior (Interior)—the 

interagency White House Council on Native American Affairs’ Energy Subgroup 

(Energy Subgroup) and Interior’s Indian Energy Service Center (Service Center)—

were implemented to help improve collaboration and the effectiveness of federal 

efforts to fulfill management responsibilities for Indian lands, assist tribes in 

developing their energy resources, and overcome any related challenges. However, 

the Energy Subgroup and the Service Center have not incorporated leading 

collaborative practices, which may limit the effectiveness of these initiatives to

address the factors that hinder Indian energy development. For example, GAO found 

the following:

• Energy Subgroup: Participating agencies have dedicated few staff and financial 

resources to the Subgroup and have not identified resources needed or a funding 

model—a leading practice to sustain collaborative efforts. Some participating 

agency officials noted that the effectiveness of the Subgroup is limited without 

dedicated resources. They also stated that key activities completed to date by 

the Subgroup are the result of agencies voluntarily applying budgetary resources 

to specific activities. Without dedicated resources and a funding model to support 

its activities, the extent to which the Energy Subgroup will be able to effectively 

accomplish its goals is unclear. 

• Service Center: Interior has recognized the need for collaboration in the 

regulatory process and described the Service Center as a central point of 

collaboration for permitting that will break down barriers between federal 

agencies. However, some regulatory agencies, such as the Fish and Wildlife 

Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers have not been included as participants. Without the involvement of 

key regulatory agencies, the Service Center will be limited in its ability to improve 

efficiencies in the regulatory process for Indian energy development.

GAO and others have previously reported that Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) 

has longstanding workforce challenges that have hindered Indian energy 

development. In this review, GAO found that BIA has high vacancy rates at some 

agency offices and that the agency has not conducted key workforce planning 

activities, such as an assessment of work skills gaps. These workforce issues further 

contribute to BIA’s inability to effectively support Indian energy development. Federal 

internal control standards recommend agencies identify the key skills and 

competencies their workforces need to achieve their goals and assess any skills 

gaps. Until BIA undertakes such activities, it cannot ensure that it has a workforce 

with the right skills, appropriately aligned to meet the agency’s goals and tribal 

priorities.

A provision in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorizes the federal government, the 

largest single consumer of energy in the nation, to give preference to tribes for 

purchases of electricity or other energy products. However, the General Services 

Administration (GSA), the federal agency with primary responsibility for purchasing 

energy, has not developed guidance to implement this provision government-wide; 

doing so could help to increase tribal access to the federal government’s energy

purchasing programs.

View GAO-17-43. For more information, 

contact Frank Rusco, (202) 512-3841 or 

ruscof@gao.gov
Page i GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Letter 1

Background 6

The Effectiveness of the Energy Subgroup and Service Center in 

Helping Overcome Factors Hindering Indian Energy 

Development May Be Limited by Several Factors 15

BIA Has Not Incorporated Key Workforce Management Practices 23

DOE Developed Guidance for Giving Preference to Tribes When It 

Purchases Power, but Government-Wide Guidance Does Not 

Exist 26

Stakeholders Identified Additional Actions That Could Overcome 

Some Factors Hindering Development 27

Conclusions 28

Recommendations for Executive Action 29

Agency Comments 30

Appendix I Comments from the Department of the Interior 32

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Energy 35

Appendix III Comments from the General Services Administration 37

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 38

Figures

Figure 1: Examples of Facility-, Community-, and Utility-Scale 

Solar Energy Projects on Tribal Lands 7

Figure 2: Various Roles of Federal Agencies in the Development 

of Indian Energy Resources 9

Contents
Page ii GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Abbreviations

BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs 

BLM Bureau of Land Management

Council White House Council on Native American Affairs 

DOE Department of Energy

DOD Department of Defense 

Energy Subgroup White House Council on Native American Affairs’ 

 Energy Subgroup

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation 

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

GSA General Services Administration 

HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

 Development 

IE Office of Indian Energy 

IEED Office of Indian Energy and Economic 

 Development 

Interior Department of the Interior

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

ONRR Office of Natural Resources Revenue

OST Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians 

Service Center Indian Energy Service Center 

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

November 10, 2016

The Honorable John Barrasso

Chairman

Committee on Indian Affairs

United States Senate

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Development of energy resources is vital for the livelihood, well-being, 

and long-term economic sustenance of some Indian tribes and their 

members, in part because energy development provides opportunities to 

improve poor living conditions and decrease high levels of poverty.1

Tribes and their members determine how to use Indian energy resources 

to meet the needs of the community. However, if the resources are held 

in trust or restricted status, the Department of the Interior’s (Interior) 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)—through its 12 regional offices, 85 agency 

offices, and other supporting offices—generally must review and approve 

leases, permits, and other documents required for development.2 Other 

federal agencies—such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA)—also have regulatory roles and involvement with energy 

development.

Although tribes are pursuing a variety of opportunities to develop their 

energy resources, federal mismanagement of Indian resources and other 

factors hindering development of Indian energy resources have been 

reported for nearly a decade by Interior’s Inspector General, us, and 

others. For instance, in 2012, Interior’s Inspector General found that 

weaknesses in BIA’s management of oil and gas resources contributed to 

a general preference by industry to acquire oil and gas leases on non-

 1Depending on the tribe’s preference, Indian tribes may be referred to as tribal nations, 

bands, villages, pueblos, rancherias, and communities. Members are individuals who are 

enrolled citizens or members of a tribe. In this report, we use these terms interchangeably 

depending upon a tribe’s preference. 

2Trust resources are held for the beneficial interest of the tribe or a member, and 

restricted resources are owned by the tribe or a member but subject to restrictions on 

alienation. Trust and restricted resources generally cannot be leased without approval of 

the Secretary of the Interior, who has generally delegated this authority to BIA.

Letter
Page 2 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Indian lands over Indian lands.3 In addition, in June 2015, we reported 

that BIA staff limitations, a complex regulatory framework that involved 

multiple agencies, tribes’ limited access to capital and energy markets, 

and other factors also hindered Indian energy development.4 At that time, 

we recommended that Interior take four actions to help address BIA’s 

management shortcomings related to incomplete data and oversight of its 

internal process for reviewing and approving energy-related documents. 

BIA generally agreed with our recommendations and stated that it was 

taking some actions in response to them. BIA also stated that the 

formation of its Indian Energy Service Center (Service Center) would help 

to increase coordination among the numerous regulatory federal agencies 

involved with Indian energy development and would make the agency 

more efficient in its management role.

In June 2013, Executive Order 13647 established the White House 

Council on Native American Affairs (Council) to improve the coordination 

of federal programs and the use of available resources, and to make the 

federal government work more efficiently to find solutions to the 

challenges facing tribes and their members. The Council established five 

subgroups, including an Energy Subgroup, to discuss current initiatives 

and identify interagency solutions. The Energy Subgroup is co-chaired by 

the Secretaries of Energy and the Interior and comprises 11 key federal 

agencies that could help tribes to achieve their energy goals. The General 

Services Administration (GSA) is one of the agencies included in the 

Energy Subgroup because it is responsible for purchasing energy for the 

federal government—the largest consumer of energy in the United States. 

To encourage the federal government to work with tribes to meet its 

energy needs, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 included a provision 

authorizing federal agencies to give preference to tribal entities when 

purchasing electricity and energy products.5

You asked us to review federal efforts to assist Indian energy 

development. This report examines (1) whether the actions of the Energy 

Subgroup and Service Center have helped to overcome long-standing 

 3Office of Inspector General, Department of the Interior, Oil and Gas Leasing In Indian 

Country: An Opportunity For Economic Development,Report No. CR-EV-BIA-0001-2011 

(Washington, D.C.: 2012).

4GAO, Indian Energy Development: Poor Management by BIA Has Hindered Energy 

Development on Indian Lands, GAO-15-502 (Washington, D.C.: June 8, 2015).

5Pub. L. No. 109-58, § 2602(d) (2005); 25 U.S.C. § 3502. 
Page 3 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

factors hindering development, (2) BIA’s efforts to address workforce 

challenges that hinder Indian energy development, (3) the progress of 

federal agencies to implement the preference authority to purchase 

energy from tribes, and (4) any additional opportunities stakeholders 

identified that federal agencies could take to help overcome factors 

hindering Indian energy development.

To examine actions taken by the Council and Service Center that may 

overcome long-standing factors that have hindered Indian energy 

development, we reviewed documentation and interviewed key officials 

associated with these efforts. The factors that have hindered Indian 

energy development are found in our prior work, as well as reports from 

Interior’s Inspector General, the Commission on Indian Trust 

Administration and Reform and congressional testimony.6 The factors 

include shortcomings in BIA’s management of Indian energy development 

as well as additional factors that are generally outside of BIA’s 

management responsibilities, such as a complex regulatory framework 

and infrastructure limitations. For the Council’s Energy Subgroup, we 

reviewed the Subgroup’s enabling documentation relevant to our review, 

which established policy goals and workgroups, as well as a document 

that reported the Energy Subgroup’s key activities. We interviewed 

federal officials representing key agencies participating in the Subgroup, 

including the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Indian Energy (IE), 

Interior, GSA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); the 

Executive Director of the Council; and the Special Assistant to the 

President for Native American Affairs. We assessed the extent to which 

these activities and processes met best practices for collaboration that we 

have identified in our prior work.7 For the Service Center, we collected 

and reviewed available documentation, including a memorandum of 

understanding establishing the Service Center, Interior’s budget 

justification reports, congressional testimony, a transcript of an Interior 

 6GAO-15-502.

7GAO, Managing for Results: Implementation Approaches Used to Enhance Collaboration 

in Interagency Groups, GAO-14-220 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 14, 2014); GAO, Managing 

for Results: Key Considerations for Implementing Interagency Collaborative Mechanisms, 

GAO-12-1022 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 27, 2012); GAO, Results-Oriented Cultures: 

Implementation Steps to Assist Mergers and Organizational Transformations, 

GAO-03-669 (Washington, D.C.: July 2, 2003); and GAO, Mergers and Transformation: 

Lessons Learned for a Department of Homeland Security and Other Federal Agencies, 

GAO-03-293SP (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 14, 2002).
Page 4 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

tribal budget meeting, and documents that reported the Service Center’s 

planned and completed tasks.

We also reviewed documents from an interagency planning meeting of 

the Indian Energy and Minerals Steering Committee that included 

representatives from BIA, BLM, Interior’s Office of Natural Resources 

Revenue (ONRR), Interior’s Office of the Special Trustee for American 

Indians (OST), and Interior’s Office of Indian Energy and Economic 

Development (IEED) at which updates related to the Service Center were 

presented. We interviewed federal officials, including representatives from 

BIA and IEED. We also interviewed 8 of the 12 BIA regional directors and 

10 of the 85 BIA agency offices to understand their role establishing the 

Service Center. The data we collected cannot be generalized to all BIA 

regional and agency offices. We selected BIA regional and agency offices 

that work directly with tribes that have a history of energy development or 

expressed an interest in energy development and that represent different 

geographic locations. Further, to obtain additional perspectives on the 

Service Center, we interviewed officials representing 30 tribal nations and 

representatives from two intertribal organizations. Because this was a 

nonprobability sample, our findings are not generalizable to other tribal 

nations. We assessed the extent to which Interior’s activities and 

processes for developing and implementing the Service Center follow 

Interior’s Departmental Manual,8 which identifies requirements for the 

creation of a new office; best practices for modernizing the federal 

permitting and review process identified by an interagency committee; 

and leading practices for permitting, collaboration, and organizational 

change that we have identified in our prior work.9

To examine BIA’s efforts to address its workforce challenges, we 

reviewed documentation from BIA on the status of its workforce and any 

known gaps. We collected workforce data from 17 BIA agency offices that 

work directly with tribes that have a history of energy development or 

have expressed an interest in energy development. The data we collected 

cannot be generalized to all BIA agency offices. To assess the reliability 

of these data and this information, we (1) reviewed the data for obvious 

errors in completeness and accuracy, (2) interviewed BIA 

superintendents who were knowledgeable about the data, and (3) verified 

the results of our work with agency officials. We found the data to be 

 8Department of the Interior’s Departmental Manual, 110 DM 8, effective May 5, 2015. 

9GAO-14-220, GAO-12-1022, GAO-03-669, and GAO-03-293SP.
Page 5 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We interviewed 8 of the 12 BIA 

regional directors, the BIA director, and other BIA officials identified by 

BIA as relevant to workforce planning and management to identify actions 

taken to determine the status of its workforce. We interviewed consultants 

conducting a BIA workforce study to identify the scope and purpose of the 

study. We assessed the extent to which BIA’s activities and processes 

met Office of Personnel Management standards, federal internal control 

standards, and leading practices for workforce planning that we have 

identified in our prior work.10

To identify the progress federal agencies have made to implement the 

preference authority for tribal energy purchases, we reviewed the 

provision contained in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, federal regulations, 

and guidance documents and interviewed federal officials from GSA and 

DOE. We spoke with GSA officials because the agency is involved with 

energy purchases for most government agencies. In addition, GSA is a 

member of the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council. The Council helps 

direct and coordinate government-wide procurement policy and maintains 

the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). We spoke with DOE officials 

because DOE developed agency-specific guidance to implement the 

preference authority.

To identify additional opportunities to address the factors that hinder 

Indian energy development, we reviewed federal documents and 

interviewed stakeholders, including tribal and federal officials. Specifically, 

we interviewed federal officials from BIA, IEED, DOE, DOE’s Western 

Area Power Administration, USDA, GSA, and the U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) who may have a role associated 

with Indian energy development. We also interviewed officials from 30 

tribal nations. We selected these tribes on the basis of their experience 

developing or planning to develop oil, gas, and renewable energy 

resources and to obtain views from tribes located in different geographic 

locations. Because this was a nonprobability sample, our findings are not 

generalizable to stakeholders not included in our review. To characterize 

stakeholders’ views, we define the modifier “several” to mean 

representatives from six or more entities; “a few” means representatives 

 10GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO-14-704G 

(Washington, D.C.: September 2014); GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective 

Strategic Workforce Planning, GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 2003); and Office 

of Personnel Management, The Human Capital Assessment and Accountability 

Framework: Systems, Standards, and Metrics (Washington, D.C.: March 2006). 
Page 6 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

from three to five entities. We may not have identified all of the additional 

opportunities to address the factors that hinder Indian energy 

development, and as a result other opportunities may exist that we do not 

report. Rather, the opportunities we present are examples identified 

through stakeholder interviews and documentation provided in response 

to interviews.

We conducted this performance audit from July 2015 to November 2016 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

The U.S. Census Bureau reported in 2013 that American Indians and 

Alaska Natives were almost twice as likely to live in poverty as the rest of 

the population. A 2014 Interior report estimated that between 43 and 47

percent of American Indian families in South Dakota earned incomes 

below the poverty line, compared with a national average of about 23 

percent for all Native American families.11 In addition, according to DOE 

documents, Indian communities are more likely to live without access to 

electricity and pay some of the highest energy rates in the country—

hindering economic development and limiting the ability of tribes to 

provide their members with basic needs, such as water and wastewater 

services and adequate health care. Considerable energy resources, 

including domestic mineral resources such as oil, gas, and coal, and 

resources with significant potential for renewable energy development, 

including wind, solar, hydroelectric power, geothermal, and biomass, exist

throughout Indian country. Tribes may seek opportunities to use these 

resources as an option to create economic benefits that provide revenue 

for government operations and social service programs, create highquality jobs, and offset power costs by increasing access to reliable and 

 11U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant 

Secretary- Indian Affairs, 2013 American Indian Population and Labor Force Report

(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 16, 2014). The data in this report are from the 2010 Labor Force 

Survey of American Indians and Alaska Natives, combined with a larger set of statistics 

produced by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Background
Page 7 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

affordable energy for tribal buildings and individual homes.12 For instance, 

in fiscal year 2015, the development of Indian-owned oil and gas 

resources generated more than $1 billion in revenue for tribes and 

individual Indian mineral owners, according to Interior, making oil and gas 

resources one of the largest revenue generators in Indian country. In 

addition, tribes are taking advantage of renewable energy sources and 

developing projects that range from facility- and community-scale 

production, such as rooftop solar panels or a wind turbine to power a 

community center, to utility-scale production of hundreds of megawatts of 

electricity (see fig. 1).

Figure 1: Examples of Facility-, Community-, and Utility-Scale Solar Energy Projects on Tribal Lands

 12For the purposes of this report, we focus on federally recognized tribes. Federally 

recognized tribes have a government-to-government relationship with the United States 

and are eligible to receive certain protections, services, and benefits by virtue of their 

status as Indian tribes.The Secretary of the Interior is required by law to publish annually 

in the Federal Register a list of all Indian tribes that the Secretary recognizes as Indian 

tribes.See 81 Fed. Reg. 26286 (May 4, 2016). As of May 4, 2016, there were 567 

recognized tribal entities.
Page 8 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

However, the development of Indian energy resources can be a complex 

process involving a range of stakeholders, including federal, tribal, and 

state agencies. The specific role of federal agencies can vary on the 

basis of multiple factors, such as the type of resource, location of 

development, scale of development, ownership of the resource, and 

Indian tribe involved.13 Figure 2 shows various roles federal agencies may 

have in the development of Indian energy resources.

 13For example, under the Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal Home 

Ownership Act (HEARTH Act), federally recognized tribes can develop and implement 

their own regulations governing leasing of Indian lands for residential, business, and other 

purposes. 25 U.S.C. § 415. Upon approval of its regulations by the Secretary of the 

Interior, a tribe may negotiate and enter into leases of land for certain periods without 

further approvals by the Secretary. According to BIA data, BIA has approved tribal 

business regulations for 24 Indian tribes that may be applicable to wind or solar energy 

development.
Page 9 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Figure 2: Various Roles of Federal Agencies in the Development of Indian Energy Resources

Note: The connecting lines betw een the federal agencies and the functions indicate that the agency 

may have a role in that function.

A short description of the agencies’ roles follows.
Page 10 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Resource Identification. To develop energy resources, developers and 

operators must locate a suitable resource. To locate potential oil and gas 

resources, most operators use seismic methods of exploration.14 For 

renewable projects, developers conduct a feasibility assessment to 

evaluate the potential of the resource for development and determine the 

viability of the project, which may include evaluating market demand for 

power and financing opportunities. Both IEED and IE help tribes identify 

resource potential. For example, according to IE data, IE provided a tribe 

$210,000 in 2012 to identify available solar and biomass energy 

resources, characterize solar and biomass energy technologies, and 

analyze the technical and potential economic viability of projects.

Technical and financial assistance. IE and IEED manage the federal 

government’s financial and technical assistance programs dedicated to 

Indian energy development. IE provides federally recognized tribes and 

tribal entities financial and technical assistance to promote Indian energy 

development and efficiency, reduce or stabilize energy costs, and bring 

electrical power and service to tribal communities and the homes of tribal 

members. For example, in 2015, IE awarded technical assistance to an 

intertribal corporation for a survey of wind resources, a survey of 

transmission and environmental constraints, and market analysis for 16 

potential wind turbine deployment sites. According to a DOE report, IE 

provided $48 million to assist more than 180 tribal energy projects from 

2002 through 2014. IE also offers education through webinars, forums, 

and workshops. IEED serves tribes and their members by providing 

technical and financial assistance for the exploration, development, and 

management of tribal energy resources. According to IEED officials, IEED 

provided about $52 million to assist 340 tribal energy projects from 2002 

through 2015. According to its data, IEED is assisting a tribal member to 

develop a 5,000-acre solar project by helping secure transmission line 

access with potential right-of-way landowners, and by meeting with 

county commissioners to gain support for the project.15 In some 

 14The seismic method of exploration introduces energy into the subsurface through 

explosions in shallow “shot holes” by striking the ground forcefully (with a truck-mounted 

thumper) or by vibration methods. A portion of the energy returns to the surface after 

being reflected from the subsurface strata. 

15The development of Indian energy resources generally requires an operator or 

developer to cross Indian lands to access a development site or install pipelines or 

transmission lines needed to export the energy to market. According to BIA, a right-of-way 

is a legal right to cross land, including tribal land, individually owned Indian land, or 

government land, for a specific purpose, including but not limited to building and operating 

a line or road. 
Page 11 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

instances, both IE and IEED provide assistance for a project. For 

example, IE and IEED coordinated to help a tribal solar project. IEED 

provided an engineering design grant, and IE provided an installation 

grant and technical assistance.

For the past 6 years, IEED has also provided assistance on an as-needed 

basis to BIA agency offices by assigning staff for a period of time—

generally a year or longer—to perform such tasks as organizing oil and 

gas records, clearing backlogs of energy-related documents, reviewing 

leases, and helping BIA agencies fulfill requirements under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).16 For instance, according to a BIA 

official, IEED helped a BIA agency office by conducting 1,584 NEPA and 

right-of-way compliance inspections for energy-related activities involving 

oil and gas well pads, access roads, and pipelines. In another example, 

IEED helped a BIA agency office by reviewing environmental documents 

and conducting site surveys for 77 proposed oil and gas well pads.

Other federal agencies, including USDA, HUD, Commerce’s Economic 

Development Administration, and Treasury, can also provide financial 

assistance to tribes to explore and develop their energy resources. For 

example, according to its data, USDA awarded a $500,000 grant through 

its Rural Energy for America Program in fiscal year 2015 to a tribal entity 

seeking to develop a hydroelectric project. Also, HUD data shows that in 

fiscal year 2015 a tribe used funds provided through HUD’s block grant 

program to extend transmission lines to communities that lack basic 

electrical service.

Regulate. Multiple federal agencies have a regulatory role associated 

with Indian energy development. For example, BIA approves seismic 

exploration permits for operators to identify oil and gas resources, 

maintains surface and mineral ownership records, identifies and verifies 

ownership of land and resources, and reviews and approves a number of 

energy-related documents—such as surface leases, mineral leases for 

the right to drill for oil and gas resources, and right-of-way agreements. In 

addition, BLM issues drilling permits to operators developing Indian oil 

and gas resources after receiving BIA concurrence to approve the 

permits. Further, EPA issues permits for air emissions that may be 

 16Under NEPA, federal agencies are required to evaluate the likely environmental effects 

of certain major federal actions, such as approving energy-related documents, by using an 

environmental assessment or, if the projects likely would significantly affect the 

environment, a more detailed environmental impact statement. 
Page 12 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

required for some oil and gas development, and FWS issues permits for 

incidental deaths of certain wildlife species, which may be needed for a 

wind project.17 If energy development affects navigable waters, the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers may need to issue a permit.

Provide transmission access assistance. Utility-scale renewable 

energy projects need to connect to the electric grid to transmit power 

generated from the project, along transmission lines, to a destination. 

DOE’s Western Area Power Administration, along with other power 

administration agencies, is responsible for marketing and transmitting 

electricity across the United States and can help tribes to better 

understand transmission capacity, identify options for accessing available 

capacity on transmission lines, and assist with interconnection 

requirements. For example, according to officials from the Western Area 

Power Administration, it partnered with a tribal utility authority to resolve 

transmission congestion affecting a proposed 27-megawatt utility-scale 

solar project.

Purchase power. To be economically feasible, utility-scale renewable 

energy projects need a customer to purchase their power. The federal 

government is the nation’s largest energy consumer. In fiscal year 2013, 

the government spent about $6.8 billion on energy for over 3.1 billion 

square feet of buildings and facilities—an area about the size of 50,000 

football fields.18 GSA has general statutory authority to enter into utility 

services contracts of up to 10 years for all federal agencies.19 GSA has 

delegated the authority to enter into contracts for public utility services to 

the Department of Defense (DOD) and to DOE for procurements by those 

agencies. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 encourages federal agencies to 

purchase electricity, energy products, and by-products from tribal entities. 

Specifically, the act includes a provision authorizing federal agencies to 

give preference to a tribe or tribal enterprise when purchasing electricity 

or any other energy or energy by-product as long as federal agencies do 

not pay more than the prevailing market prices or obtain less than 

prevailing market terms and conditions.

 17Take permits may be required under several acts, including the Bald and Golden Eagle 

Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 

U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544. 

18GAO, Energy Savings Performance Contracts: Additional Actions Needed to Improve 

Federal Oversight, GAO-15-432, (Washington, D.C.: June 17, 2015). 

1940 U.S.C. § 501. 
Page 13 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

The Council was established by executive order in June 2013. The 

executive order calls for the Secretary of the Interior to lead the Council, 

the Council to meet at least three times per year, and Interior to provide 

funding and administrative support to the Council. According to an Interior 

document, the Council will improve efficiencies by coordinating work 

across the federal government and use an “all-of-government approach”

to find solutions that address tribal needs. To accomplish its goals, the 

Council includes five subgroups—(1) energy; (2) health; (3) education; (4) 

economic development and infrastructure; and (5) environment, climate 

change, and natural resources—to discuss current initiatives and identify 

interagency solutions.20 The Energy Subgroup was formed in November 

2013 with the Secretaries of Energy and the Interior as co-chairs. In May 

2014, the Energy Subgroup identified nine additional federal agencies 

that should be included as participants and established policy goals for 

the Subgroup that, if accomplished, may help to overcome some of the 

factors that we previously identified as hindering Indian energy 

development.21 For example, in June 2015, we reported that tribes’

limited access to capital had hindered development.22 One of the Energy 

Subgroup’s goals is to evaluate, align and coordinate financial and 

technical assistance programs to leverage agency resources, funding, 

and expertise. Similarly, in June 2015, we found that the development of 

Indian energy resources is sometimes governed by multiple federal, tribal, 

and, in certain cases, state agencies and can involve significantly more 

steps, cost more, and take more time than the development of private and 

state resources.23 One of the Energy Subgroup’s goals is to evaluate 

opportunities to streamline and accelerate regulatory processes.

According to DOE and Interior officials, since May 2014, the federal 

agencies that formed the Energy Subgroup have taken the following 

actions:

• IE and IEED signed a memorandum of understanding in June 2016 as 

a format for collaboration between the two agencies;

 20According to Interior officials, a subgroup that will focus on public safety and justice is in 

development.

21GAO-15-502.

22GAO-15-502.

23GAO-15-502.

White House Council on 

Native American Affairs 

Energy Subgroup
Page 14 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

• IE and IEED began to meet regularly in August 2015 to discuss 

projects involving both agencies and grant release dates, among 

other things;

• IE, with input from numerous other agencies, developed a web-based 

tool that provides information about grant, loan, and technical 

assistance programs available to support tribal energy projects;

• IE hosted events to encourage tribal engagement, such as the 

September 2015 National Tribal Energy Summit: A Path to Economic 

Sovereignty; and

• IE, Interior, USDA, GSA, DOD, and Treasury convened a meeting to 

discuss opportunities to provide technical and financial assistance to a 

planned 1-gigawatt wind and transmission infrastructure project.

In response to tribal requests for increased coordination and more 

efficient management of their resources from the numerous regulatory 

federal agencies involved with Indian energy development, in 2014, 

Interior took initial steps to form a new office, the Service Center, 

composed of staff from four Interior agencies—BIA, BLM, ONRR, and 

OST—with BIA as the lead agency. BIA’s fiscal year 2016 budget 

included $4.5 million to form the Service Center in Lakewood, Colorado. 

According to Interior’s fiscal year 2016 budget justification, the Service 

Center is intended to, among other things, help expedite the leasing and 

permitting processes associated with Indian energy development. Among 

its accomplishments, the Service Center has (1) developed a 

memorandum of understanding among BIA, BLM, ONRR, and OST 

outlining the management and operation of the Service Center; (2) 

developed and conducted a training course on oil and gas development 

standard operating procedures for 462 Interior employees at eight 

locations across the country; and (3) hired several positions, including a 

Director and Deputy Director.24

 24Memorandum of Understanding: Management and Operation of the Indian Energy 

Service Center, Lakewood Colorado. Signed by BIA, BLM, ONRR, and OST between Oct. 

6, 2015 and Dec. 7, 2015.

Indian Energy Service 

Center
Page 15 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

The Energy Subgroup has not fully incorporated leading practices that 

can help agencies enhance and sustain collaborative efforts, which may 

limit its effectiveness in addressing long-standing factors that hinder 

Indian energy development. Our prior work on issues that cut across 

multiple agencies, as Indian energy development does, has shown that 

collaborative approaches can increase the effectiveness of federal efforts. 

Our prior work has also found that agencies face numerous challenges in 

their efforts to collaborate.25 To overcome differences in agency missions, 

cultures, and established ways of doing business, collaborative efforts, 

such as the Energy Subgroup, can use leading practices that have been 

shown to enhance and sustain these efforts. Specifically, in September 

2012, we identified sustained leadership, dedicated resources and staff, 

and active participation of all relevant stakeholders, among other things, 

as leading practices for effective collaboration.26 Specific leading 

practices the Energy Subgroup has not fully incorporated in its 

implementation efforts following.

Sustained leadership is uncertain. DOE has not designated a career 

employee of the federal government to serve as its co-chair of the Energy 

 25GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain 

Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005);

Managing for Results: Barriers to Interagency Coordination, GAO/GGD-00-106 

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29, 2000); Rural Water Infrastructure: Improved Coordination and 

Funding Processes Could Enhance Federal Efforts to Meet Needs in the U.S.-Mexico 

Border Region, GAO-10-126 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 18, 2009); and GAO-12-1022. 

26GAO-12-1022. 

The Effectiveness of 

the Energy Subgroup 

and Service Center in 

Helping Overcome 

Factors Hindering 

Indian Energy 

Development May Be 

Limited by Several 

Factors

The Energy Subgroup Has 

Not Fully Incorporated 

Leading Practices for 

Collaboration, Which May 

Limit Its Effectiveness
Page 16 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Subgroup. Instead, DOE designated an appointed official to serve as the 

co-chair, and that individual may not remain in the position with the 

upcoming presidential transition. According to agency officials, their focus 

has been to complete more time-sensitive tasks, and selecting a longterm co-chair has not been a priority. Similarly, Interior originally 

designated an appointed official to serve as its co-chair of the Energy 

Subgroup, but in August 2016 Interior designated a senior-level career 

employee of the federal government to serve as co-chair, according to 

Interior officials. Interior officials also cited higher priorities as a reason for 

not identifying a career employee sooner, but these officials told us that 

the upcoming presidential transition increased the urgency to identify a 

long-term leader. The Executive Order establishing the Council allows for 

senior-level officials to perform Council duties, which may include either 

appointed or career employees. Our prior work has shown that turnover 

of political leadership in the federal government has often made it difficult 

to sustain attention to complete needed changes.27 Our prior work has 

also shown that transitions and frequent changes in leadership weakened 

the effectiveness of a collaborative effort and that a lack of leadership 

further challenges an organization’s ability to function effectively and to 

sustain focus on key initiatives.28 Designating a senior-level career 

employee to lead the Subgroup can provide some assurance that 

leadership will remain consistent beyond this administration.

Collaborating agencies dedicated few resources and have not 

identified additional resources needed. Federal agencies have 

dedicated few staff and financial resources to the Energy Subgroup, have 

not identified the resources needed to accomplish its goals, and do not 

have an agreed-upon funding model. Our prior work has shown that 

collaborating mechanisms should identify the staff and financial resources 

needed to initiate and sustain their collaborative effort.29 According to 

 27GAO, Small Business Administration: Leadership Attention Needed to Overcome 

Management Challenges, GAO-15-347 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 22, 2015). This report 

found, among other things, that the Small Business Administration created a second 

Deputy Associate Administrator position to be held by a career employee to help ensure a 

greater level of continuity during transitional periods.

28GAO, Recovering Servicemembers and Veterans: Sustained Leadership Attention and 

Systematic Oversight Needed to Resolve Persistent Problems Affecting Care and 

Benefits, GAO-13-5 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 16, 2012) and GAO, Architect of the Capitol: 

Committed, Sustained Leadership Needed to Continue Progress, GAO-07-407 

(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 28, 2007). 

29GAO-06-15.
Page 17 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

DOE, Interior, and USDA officials, the Energy Subgroup has been staffed 

on an “other duties as assigned” basis since its creation in November 

2013. These officials said that this staffing model, which was also used by 

the other subgroups, makes it difficult to ensure continued participation by

each federal agency because of competing demands for staff and 

resources. In 2015, more than 2 years after the Council was established, 

Interior hired a fulltime Executive Director—the only dedicated Council 

staff—to manage activities of the Council and all subgroups. Beyond the 

Executive Director position, participating agencies have not dedicated or 

identified future financial resources for the Energy Subgroup. A few 

federal officials told us the effectiveness of the Subgroup in 

accomplishing tasks is limited without dedicated resources. For instance, 

federal officials told us that the Energy Subgroup has not developed a 5-

year strategic plan because no federal entity has dedicated the resources 

for key planning activities, such as a facilitated planning session that can 

define and articulate common outcomes. The executive order establishing 

the Council directs Interior to provide funding and support for the Council. 

However, according to Interior officials, dedicating resources to the 

Energy Subgroup would take away from other programs and services that 

directly support tribes and their activities.

Without dedicated resources, key activities completed to date are 

generally the result of individual federal agencies that voluntarily identified 

and applied their own budgetary resources to specific work activities. For 

example, DOE volunteered to use its own financial and information 

technology resources to develop a web-based tool that provides 

information about grant, loan, and technical assistance programs 

available to support tribal energy projects. According to a DOE official, the 

department voluntarily applied these resources because senior leadership 

determined the web-based tool was an important information source that 

could help tribes to identify federal financial assistance.

Our prior work has shown it is important for collaborative mechanisms to 

identify and leverage sufficient funding to accomplish their objectives and 

that funding models can vary.30 In some instances, specific congressional 

authority or dedicated funding from Congress may be used for the 

interagency funding for collaborative mechanisms. In other instances, we 

found a collaborative mechanism can be supported by all participating 

agencies contributing funds as well as in-kind support. Identifying 

 30GAO-12-1022.
Page 18 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

resources needed to accomplish its goals and establishing a funding 

model agreed upon by participating agencies may provide opportunities 

for the Energy Subgroup. If the Energy Subgroup does not identify 

resources and a funding model, it is unclear to what extent the Energy 

Subgroup’s collaborative efforts can be effectively sustained to 

accomplish its stated policy goals.

The Energy Subgroup has not documented how participating 

agencies will collaborate. Our prior work found that agencies that 

articulate their agreements in formal documents strengthen their 

commitment to working collaboratively.31 A formal written agreement that 

includes goals, actions, responsible agencies, and time frames may be a 

tool to enhance and sustain collaboration. According to federal officials, 

the Energy Subgroup did not develop formal documentation because 

developing such documentation would have taken time and resources 

away from completing work deliverables. However, the lack of a formal 

agreement may have limited collaboration and involvement of some 

participating agencies. For example, federal officials told us that 

numerous Energy Subgroup agencies were actively involved in the effort 

to develop the web-based tool mentioned above but that after its 

completion there has been less collaboration between the various federal 

because there was no longer a clear reason to work together. The 

Council, including the Energy Subgroup, was established to improve 

efficiencies by coordinating work across the federal government and 

using an “all-of-government approach” to find solutions that address tribal 

needs. However, most of the activities completed to date have been the 

result of collaboration between only IE and IEED—the only two agencies 

focused exclusively on Indian energy and also the only two that have a 

documented agreement to collaborate. The achievements of the 

Subgroup do not reflect the efforts of the other nine federal agencies that 

are its members. Without documenting how all members in the Subgroup 

are expected to collaborate, it is unclear how participating agencies will 

organize their individual and joint activities to address the factors that 

hinder Indian energy development.

 31GAO-12-1022. 
Page 19 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

BIA, the lead agency responsible for forming the Service Center, did not 

follow some leading practices or adhere to agency guidance during early 

stages of developing the Service Center—which may impact its 

effectiveness in helping overcome the factors that have hindered Indian 

energy development.32 An interagency plan created in response to 

Executive Order 13604, Interior’s Departmental Manual, and our prior 

work offer leading practices that have been shown to enhance the 

effectiveness of collaborative efforts, improve permitting, and increase the 

likelihood of success for organizational change.33 These practices include 

(1) creation of a lead agency or single point of contact to coordinate 

regulatory responsibilities by multiple agencies, (2) involvement by and 

active participation with all relevant stakeholders, and (3) clear 

identification and documentation of the rationale of key decisions. Specific 

leading practices that BIA did not fully incorporate when implementing the 

Service Center follow.

The Service Center has not been formed as a center point of 

collaboration for all regulatory agencies involved with energy 

development. In June 2015, we reported that the added complexity of 

the federal process, which can include multiple regulatory agencies, 

prevents many developers from pursuing Indian energy resources for 

development. Interior has recognized the need for collaboration in the 

regulatory process and described the Service Center as a center point of 

collaboration for permitting that will break down barriers between federal 

agencies.34 In addition, the memorandum of understanding establishing 

the Service Center states that it will serve as a center point for 

collaboration with other federal departments for expediting oil and gas 

development and as a point of contact for other agencies to resolve 

development issues. The Service Center may increase collaboration 

between BIA and BLM on some permitting requirements associated with 

oil and gas development. This is because, according to BIA officials, only 

entities that participate in the Indian Energy and Minerals Steering 

 32GAO-12-1022, GAO-03-669, and GAO-03-293SP.

33An interagency steering committee, developed in response to Executive Order 13604, 

calls for agencies to improve federal permitting and review processes. In 2014, the 

steering committee released the Implementation Plan for the Presidential Memorandum 

on Modernizing Infrastructure Permitting. 

34Testimony of Lawrence S. Roberts, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, 

Department of the Interior, before the Committee on Indian Affairs, United States Senate, 

on “The GAO Report on Indian Energy Development: Poor Management By BIA Has 

Hindered Development on Indian Lands” on October 21, 2015.

BIA Did Not Fully 

Incorporate Leading 

Practices or Adhere to 

Agency Guidance in 

Forming the Service 

Center, Which May Limit 

Its Potential to Overcome 

Factors That Hinder Indian 

Energy Development
Page 20 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Committee—BIA, BLM, ONRR, and OST—were included in the Service 

Center. According to BIA officials, no other federal agencies were 

included because of concerns that including them would delay 

establishing the Service Center. BIA has neither included a regulatory 

agency within Interior, FWS, as a partner in the Service Center nor

identified opportunities to incorporate other regulatory agencies outside of 

Interior, such as EPA, USDA, and the Army Corps of Engineers, as 

partners. As a result, the Service Center has not been formed as the 

center point to collaborate with all federal regulatory partners generally 

involved with energy development nor is it a single point of contact for 

permitting requirements. According to a tribal chairman, issues raised by 

FWS often create significant delays in permit approvals, and Interior’s 

failure to include FWS as part of the Service Center is a great error.35

Similarly, we reported in June 2015 that delays in the regulatory review 

and approval process can result in lost revenue and missed development 

opportunities.36

Our prior work has shown that having a lead agency for permitting is a 

management practice that helps increase efficiencies for the permitting 

process.37 In addition, the Quadrennial Energy Review Task Force 

recommended that, when possible, federal agencies should co-locate 

dedicated cross-disciplinary energy infrastructure teams that consist of 

environmental review and permitting staff from multiple federal 

agencies.38 By not serving as a central point of contact or lead agency, 

the Service Center will be limited in its ability to improve efficiencies in the 

federal regulatory process to only those activities that can benefit from 

increased coordination between BIA and BLM.

 35Statement of Chairman Mark Fox, Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation, before the U.S. 

House of Representatives’ Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Interior, 

Environment and Related Agencies, on American Indian/ Alaska Native Programs, March 

24, 2015.

36GAO-15-502.

37GAO, Pipeline Permitting: Interstate and Intrastate Natural Gas Permitting Processes 

Include Multiple Steps, and Time Frames Vary, GAO-13-221 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 15, 

2013). In this report, we found that stakeholders identified the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission’s review and approval process for interstate pipeline applications as a more 

efficient and consistent model than some state permitting processes. Under its model, the 

Commission acts as a lead agency for coordinating federal authorizations.

38Quadrennial Energy Review Task Force, “Energy Transmission, Storage, and 

Distribution Infrastructure” (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 21, 2015).
Page 21 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

BIA did not involve key stakeholders in the development of the 

Service Center. Interior’s fiscal year 2016 budget justification stated that 

BIA was working with DOE to develop and implement the Service Center 

and leverage and coordinate with DOE-funded programs to provide a full 

suite of energy development-related services to tribes.39 Further, BIA 

guidance states that it will seek the participation of agencies with special 

expertise regarding proposed actions.40 However, BIA did not include 

DOE in a participatory, advisory, or oversight role in the development of 

the Service Center. Further, although IEED developed the initial concept 

and proposal for the Service Center, BIA did not include IEED in the 

memorandum of understanding establishing the Service Center. Our prior 

work has shown that involvement by all relevant stakeholders improves 

the likelihood of success of interagency collaboration.41 DOE and IEED 

possess significant energy expertise. By excluding these agencies from 

the development and implementation of the Service Center effort, BIA has 

missed an opportunity to incorporate their expertise into its efforts.

Moreover, BIA did not effectively involve employees to obtain their ideas 

and gain their ownership for the transformation associated with 

development of the Service Center—a leading practice for effective 

organizational change.42 Most of the BIA agency officials we met with told 

us they were not aware of implementation plans for the Service Center or 

its intended purpose. BIA identified its agency offices as the primary 

customers of the Service Center, yet BIA did not request their ideas or 

thoughts or identify potential employee concerns. Several BIA and tribal 

officials said they are concerned that the creation of a new office (the 

Service Center) may add another layer of bureaucracy to the process of 

reviewing and approving energy-related documents. We have previously 

reported that, as a leading practice, successful change initiatives include 

employee involvement to help create the opportunity to increase 

employees’ understanding and acceptance of organizational goals and 

objectives, and gain ownership for the changes that are occurring in the 

 39Statement of Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs, Department of the 

Interior, before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Natural Resources, 

Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs, on the President’s FY 2016 

Budget Request for Indian Programs in the Department of the Interior, March 18, 2015.

40Bureau of Indian Affairs Government-to-Government Consultation Policy (Washington, 

D.C.: Dec. 13, 2000).

41GAO-12-1022.

42GAO-03-669 and GAO-03-293SP.
Page 22 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

organization.43 Such involvement strengthens the transformation process 

by allowing employees to share their experiences and shape policies.44

By not involving its employees in the development of the Service Center, 

BIA is missing an important opportunity to ensure the success of the 

changes that it hopes to achieve.

BIA did not document its basis for key decisions. The process BIA 

followed to develop the Service Center and the basis for key decisions it 

made are unclear because BIA did not document the rationale for key 

management decisions or the alternatives considered. According to 

Interior’s Departmental Manual, agencies that propose a new office are to 

document the rationale for selecting the proposed organizational structure 

and to consider whether the new office contributes to fragmentation of the 

organization.45 Our prior work has shown that effective organizational 

change is based on a clearly presented business-case or cost-benefit 

analysis and grounded in accurate and reliable data, both of which can 

show stakeholders why a particular initiative and alternatives are being 

considered.46 BIA officials said they did not document the basis for key 

decisions because they were not aware of the requirement. In addition, a 

few Interior officials said that BIA did not present alternatives to the full 

Indian Energy and Minerals Steering Committee, even though it was 

making decisions about the structure and placement of the Service 

Center. Without documentation to justify the rationale behind key 

management decisions, it is unclear if the Service Center, as currently 

designed, is the best way to address the identified problem. Further, 

several tribal organizations and tribal leaders made recommendations 

related to the creation of the Service Center that are not currently 

reflected in BIA’s implementation of the Service Center. For example, the 

Coalition of Large Tribes Resolution calls for the Service Center to be the 

central location for permit review and approval support for Indian energy 

development.47 Without documentation of alternatives considered or key 

 43GAO, Indian Affairs: Better Management and Accountability Needed to Improve Indian 

Education, GAO-13-774 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 24, 2013), and GAO-03-669. 

44GAO-03-669. 

45Department of the Interior’s Departmental Manual, 110 DM 8, effective May 5, 2015.

46GAO, Streamlining Government: Questions to Consider When Evaluating Proposals to 

Consolidate Physical Infrastructure and Management Functions, GAO-12-542 

(Washington, D.C.: May 23, 2012). 

47Coalition of Large Tribes Resolution 3-3-6-14. 
Page 23 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

management decisions, it is unclear whether these requests were 

appropriately considered. Our prior work has shown that fixing the wrong 

problems, or even worse, fixing the right problems poorly, could cause 

more harm than good.48

In June 2015, we reported that BIA’s long-standing workforce challenges, 

such as inadequate staff resources and staff at some offices without the 

skills needed to effectively review energy-related documents, were also 

factors hindering Indian energy development.49 In this review, we found 

that BIA also has high vacancy rates at some agency offices, and it has 

not conducted key workforce planning activities that may be further 

contributing to its long-standing workforce challenges. Federal internal 

control standards, Office of Personnel Management standards, and our 

prior work identify standards or leading practices for effective workforce 

management. The standards and leading practices include the following: 

(1) possessing and maintaining staff with a level of competence that 

allows them to accomplish their assigned duties; (2) identifying the key 

skills and competencies the workforce needs to achieve current and 

future agency goals and missions, assessing any skills gaps, and 

monitoring progress towards addressing gaps; and (3) conducting 

resource planning to determine the appropriate geographic and 

organizational deployment to support goals and strategies. BIA has not 

taken steps to provide reasonable assurance it has staff with the skills 

needed to accomplish their assigned duties and has not conducted 

workforce planning activities consistent with these standards and leading 

practices.

Some BIA offices have high vacancy rates and may not have staff 

with the level of competence that allows them to review some 

energy development documents. We found that some BIA offices have 

high vacancy rates for key energy development positions, and some 

offices reported not having staff with key skills to review energy-related 

documents. For example, according to data we collected from 17 BIA 

agency offices between November 2015 and January 2016, vacancy 

rates ranged from less than 1 percent to 69 percent in those offices. 

Vacancy rates for the realty position—a key position to process leases 

 48GAO, National Protection and Programs Directorate: Factors to Consider when 

Reorganizing, GAO-16-140T (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7, 2015). 

49GAO-15-502. 

BIA Has Not 

Incorporated Key 

Workforce 

Management 

Practices
Page 24 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

and other energy-related documents—ranged from no vacancies in five 

offices to 55 percent in one office. In some cases, these vacancies have 

been long-standing. For example, at the BIA Uintah and Ouray Agency, 

located in Utah, two of the six vacant realty positions have been vacant 

since September 2014. According to BIA officials, the high vacancy rates 

can be generally attributed to a number of factors, including: employee 

early-out and buy-out retirements in 2013, difficulties hiring qualified staff 

to work in geographically remote locations, and staff transfers to other 

positions. For example, several realty positions in BIA agency offices 

were vacated because staff transferred to positions in BIA’s Land BuyBack Program.50 According to BIA officials, as of May 2016, the Land 

Buy-Back Program had hired 15 realty staff, 12 whom were from BIA 

regions and agency offices.

In addition to high vacancy rates at some offices, some BIA agency and 

regional offices may lack the expertise needed to review and approve 

energy-related documents. For example, BIA agency officials in an area 

where tribes are considering developing wind farms told us that they 

would not feel comfortable approving proposed wind leases because their 

staff do not have the expertise to review such proposals. Consequently, 

these officials told us that they would send a proposed wind lease to 

higher ranking officials in the regional office for review. Similarly, an

official from the regional office stated that it does not have the required 

expertise and would forward such a proposal to senior officials in 

Interior’s Office of the Solicitor. The Director of BIA told us that BIA 

agency offices generally do not have the expertise to help tribes with 

solar and wind development because it is rare that such skills are 

needed. In another example, a BIA agency office identified the need for a 

petroleum engineer to conduct technical reviews of oil and gas 

documents in a timely manner. However, the office has been unable to 

hire a petroleum engineer because it cannot compete with private 

industry salaries. According to BIA officials, additional staff resources and 

key skills related to energy development will be provided through the 

Service Center, once it is fully implemented.

 50To consolidate ownership of highly fractionated trust lands, in 2012, Interior created a 

land buy-back program for tribal nations to implement the land consolidation component of 

the Cobell v. Salazar settlement. This settlement provides $1.9 billion to be used to 

purchase and consolidate fractionated interests in trust or restricted land. Consolidated 

parcels will be transferred to tribal governments for uses benefiting the tribes.
Page 25 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

BIA has not identified key skills needed or skill gaps. The extent to 

which BIA does not have key skills throughout the bureau is unknown 

because BIA has not identified the key skills it needs and the extent to 

which it has skill gaps. BIA officials said that a skill gap assessment is not 

needed at this time because of the additional staff being hired through the 

Service Center. However, without key information on its workforce, as 

called for by Office of Personnel Management standards and our prior 

work, the agency risks hiring personnel that do not fill critical gaps, and 

the extent to which the Service Center will be able to address these gaps 

is unknown at this time. A BIA official also told us that in August 2015, the 

Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs contracted with a consultant to 

develop a strategic workforce plan for BIA and the Bureau of Indian 

Education. However, according to a BIA official, the Bureau of Indian 

Education and BIA management are the primary focus of the work, and 

the resulting plan will not include agency offices, the level at which tribes 

generally interact with BIA for energy-related activities.

BIA does not have a documented process to provide reasonable 

assurance that workforce resources are appropriately deployed in 

the organization and align with goals. According to several BIA and 

tribal officials, the workforce composition of agency offices is not regularly 

reviewed to provide reasonable assurance it is consistent with BIA’s 

mission and individual tribes’ priorities and goals. BIA officials said that an 

agency office’s workforce composition is routinely carried over from year 

to year, and positions are filled based on the budget, without 

consideration of existing workload needs or current tribal and agency 

priorities. A BIA official told us that this practice can result in a surplus of 

staff in some departments and staff shortages in others. In some of our 

meetings with BIA agency and tribal officials, we were told that BIA 

agency offices are not aware of tribal priorities, in part, because of poor 

relations between BIA agency offices and tribal leadership. Officials from 

one tribe said that because of concerns that BIA was not routinely 

seeking tribal input on priorities and goals, the tribe created a position to 

serve as a liaison between the BIA and tribal leadership. Among other 

things, the liaison routinely meets with both tribal leaders and BIA officials 

to ensure BIA is aware of tribal priorities and goals.

Without current workforce information on key skills needed for energy 

development, tribal goals and priorities, and potential workforce resource 

gaps, BIA may not have the right people with the right skills doing the 

right jobs in the right place at the right time and cannot provide decision 

makers with information on its staffing needs going forward.
Page 26 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

In 2012 and 2013 respectively, DOE issued policy guidance and 

procurement guidance to give preference to tribes when DOE facilities 

contract to purchase renewable energy products or by- products, 

including electricity, energy sources, and renewable energy credits, but 

this guidance applies only to DOE, and GSA has not issued governmentwide guidance. The purchase preference provision in the Energy Policy 

Act of 2005 authorizes federal agencies to give preference to a tribe or 

tribal enterprise when purchasing electricity or any other energy or energy 

by-product as long as federal agencies do not pay more than the 

prevailing market prices or obtain less than prevailing market terms and 

conditions.51 According to DOE documentation, several tribes had 

approached federal agencies to negotiate the sale of electricity from tribal 

renewable energy generation facilities, but negotiations had not resulted 

in federal purchases for a variety of reasons, including a lack of policy 

support and implementing guidance for the tribal preference provision. In 

response, DOE developed a policy to better enable the department to use 

the tribal preference provision. Under DOE’s policy statement and 

procurement guidance, DOE facilities can use a purchase preference 

when a tribal nation holds a majority ownership position in a renewable 

energy project, provided that the agency does not pay more than the 

prevailing market price or obtain less than prevailing market terms and 

conditions. The guidance provides for limiting competition to qualified 

Indian tribes and tribal majority-owned organizations for the purchase of 

renewable energy, renewable energy products, and renewable energy byproducts.

In contrast, GSA, the federal entity with general statutory authority to 

enter into utility service contracts of up to 10 years for all federal 

agencies, has not developed implementing guidance for the tribal 

preference provision contained in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

according to GSA officials. During our review, we identified one instance 

in which a tribe owned a majority position in a renewable energy project 

and submitted a bid in response to a GSA solicitation for energy. In this 

instance, GSA officials told us that they did not apply the tribal preference 

provision because GSA lacked implementing guidance. In addition, GSA 

officials said that the existence of the tribal preference provision and 

corresponding lack of implementing guidance created uncertainty and 

increased the time and costs associated with the solicitation review 

process. GSA officials also told us that they do not need to issue separate 

 5125 U.S.C. § 3502(d).

DOE Developed 

Guidance for Giving 

Preference to Tribes 

When It Purchases 

Power, but 

Government-Wide 

Guidance Does Not 

Exist
Page 27 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

tribal preference provision guidance because DOE’s guidance is 

comprehensive. However, the DOE guidance is intended only for DOE, 

and GSA has not adopted the guidance for any GSA purchases of energy 

products. Without GSA guidance on the tribal preference provision—even 

if that guidance mirrors DOE’s guidance— it is unclear if GSA’s 

procurement officials will have the information they need to apply the 

preference to its purchases.

We discussed our findings with members of the FAR Council, which is the 

regulatory body established to lead, direct, and coordinate governmentwide procurement guidance and regulations in the federal government. 

According to officials, in response to our finding, the FAR Council plans to 

revisit the tribal preference provisions and survey agencies to seek their 

input on whether government-wide guidance to implement the preference 

should be included in the FAR. Officials said the FAR Council will 

consider agencies’ input and determine if it should issue regulations 

implementing the preference authority. Additionally, the officials told us 

the FAR Council will examine DOE’s guidance in this area, as well as 

GSA’s plans to make other agencies aware of this preference and the 

DOE guidance in all future delegations for renewable energies.

Numerous federal agencies offer programs that could be used to assist 

tribes with energy development activities. However, a few stakeholders 

said impediments may limit or restrict tribal participation in some of these 

programs. Federal agencies could identify and seek to remove regulatory, 

statutory, and procedural impediments that limit or restrict tribal 

participation. For example, according to a 2016 DOE report, DOE’s Title 

XVII loan program provides loan guarantees to accelerate the 

development of innovative clean-energy technology and has more than 

$24 billion in remaining loan authority to help finance clean-energy 

projects. However, according to DOE officials, no tribes have applied to 

DOE’s Title XVII loan program because various program requirements 

discourage tribal participation. For instance, according to officials, DOE 

considers whether applicants have prior experience and knowledge to 

execute the kind of project for which they are seeking a DOE loan 

guarantee. The officials told us that because tribes have not had 

significant development opportunities that would provide prior experience, 

this consideration limits tribes’ abilities to compete with other applicants 

seeking limited resources.

A few stakeholders also told us that extensive time and monetary 

resources are required to apply for assistance from some federal 

Stakeholders 

Identified Additional 

Actions That Could 

Overcome Some 

Factors Hindering 

Development
Page 28 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

programs, making it difficult for some tribes to seek assistance. For 

example, DOE requires an application fee of $50,000 for its Title XVII 

loan program. According to DOE officials, high application fees 

discourage some tribes from applying. Two other stakeholders told us 

that tribes and tribal entities dedicate significant financial resources and 

time to complete grant applications for federal programs. Because of this 

extensive resource commitment, combined with the low probability of 

receiving assistance, a few stakeholders said they are reluctant to seek 

federal assistance in the future.

Several stakeholders said the typical size of awards from IEED limit the 

type of projects that benefit from assistance. Projects that require 

significant funds are generally not awarded because officials want to fund 

numerous projects, according to Interior officials. For instance, according 

to a 2015 Interior report, a tribe requested $321,000 from IEED to drill a 

geothermal well, but the request was rejected because of the expense 

relative to funds available. DOE and Interior officials told us they receive 

significantly more requests for assistance with viable projects than they 

can fund within existing budget levels. For instance, in 2015, IEED 

received 22 requests for assistance through its Tribal Energy 

Development Capacity Program and was able to fund 10 projects, 

according to IEED officials. In 2014, IEED received requests for $27.5 

million in assistance through its Energy and Mineral Development 

Program and was able to award $9.5 million.

Recognizing the importance of a collaborative federal approach to help 

Indian tribes achieve their energy goals and to more efficiently fulfill 

regulatory responsibilities and manage some Indian energy resources, 

the President and Interior undertook two key initiatives, in the form of the 

Energy Subgroup and the Service Center. However, to be effective these 

initiatives rely on collaboration among federal agencies and programs, 

which can be difficult to achieve. Leading practices can help agencies 

enhance and sustain their collaborative efforts; however, federal agencies 

involved in both of these efforts have not incorporated some of these 

practices. The Energy Subgroup has not identified the resources it needs 

to achieve its goals or a funding model, and the roles of each partnering 

agency have not been identified and documented. In addition, BIA, in 

leading the creation of the Service Center, has not established a single 

point of contact or lead agency for regulatory activities; has not sought or 

fully considered input from key stakeholders, such as BIA agency office 

employees; and has not documented the rationale for key decisions. By 

following leading collaborative practices, both the Energy Subgroup and 

Conclusions
Page 29 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

the Service Center have the potential to more effectively assist tribes in 

overcoming the factors that hinder Indian energy development.

In addition, through the Service Center, BIA plans to hire numerous new 

staff over the next 2 years, which could resolve some of the long-standing 

workforce challenges that have hindered Indian energy development. 

However, BIA is hiring new staff without incorporating effective workforce 

planning principles. Specifically, BIA has not assessed key skills needed 

to fulfill its responsibilities related to energy development or identified skill 

gaps, and does not have a documented process to provide reasonable 

assurance its workforce composition at agency offices is consistent with 

its mission, goals, and tribal priorities. As a result, BIA cannot provide 

reasonable assurance it has the right people in place with the right skills 

to effectively meet its responsibilities or whether new staff will fill skill 

gaps.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorization of a preference for tribal 

entities has the potential to increase tribal access to the largest single 

purchaser of energy in the United States—the federal government. 

However, GSA—the primary entity responsible for purchasing power for 

the federal government—has not developed guidance to implement the 

authority to provide a tribal preference government-wide. By developing 

such guidance, GSA would help ensure that contracting officials are 

aware of when the authority for a tribal preference is applicable and how it 

should be applied to future purchases of electricity and energy products.

We recommend that the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of the 

Interior, and the Administrator of the General Services Administration, as 

appropriate, take the following 10 actions.

• We recommend that the Secretary of Energy designate a career 

senior-level federal government employee to serve as co-chair of the 

White House Council on Native American Affairs’ Energy Subgroup.

• We recommend that the Secretary of the Interior, as Chair of the 

White House Council on Native American Affairs, direct the co-chairs 

of the Council’s Energy Subgroup to take the following two actions:

(1) Identify appropriate resources needed for the Subgroup to 

accomplish its goals, as well as a funding model.

(2) Establish formal agreements with all agencies identified for 

inclusion in the Subgroup to encourage participation.

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
Page 30 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

• We recommend that the Secretary of the Interior direct the Director of 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs to take the following six actions:

(1) Include the other regulatory agencies in the Service Center, such 

as FWS, EPA, and the Army Corps of Engineers, so that the 

Service Center can act as a single point of contact or a lead 

agency to coordinate and navigate the regulatory process.

(2) Establish formal agreements with IEED and DOE that identify, at a 

minimum, the advisory or support role of each office.

(3) Establish a documented process for seeking and obtaining input 

from key stakeholders, such as BIA employees, on the Service 

Center activities.

(4) Document the rationale for key decisions related to the 

establishment of the Service Center, such as alternatives and 

tribal requests that were considered.

(5) Incorporate effective workforce planning standards by assessing 

critical skills and competencies needed to fulfill BIA’s 

responsibilities related to energy development and by identifying 

potential gaps.

(6) Establish a documented process for assessing BIA’s workforce 

composition at agency offices taking into account BIA’s mission, 

goals, and tribal priorities.

• We recommend that the Administrator of the General Services 

Administration develop implementing guidance to clarify how 

contracting officials should implement and apply the statutory 

authority to provide a tribal preference to future acquisitions of energy 

products.

We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the 

Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Energy, and the Administrator of 

the General Services Administration. All three agencies provided written 

comments. Interior agreed with all 8 recommendations directed to the 

agency and described some actions it intends to take. Interior’s

comments are reprinted in appendix I. DOE agreed with the 1 

recommendation directed to the agency and provided technical 

comments. DOE’s comments are reprinted in appendix II. GSA also 

agreed with the 1 recommendation directed to the agency and described 

Agency Comments 
Page 31 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

the actions it intends to take. GSA’s comments are reprinted in appendix 

III. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 7 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate 

congressional committees, the Secretaries of the Interior and Energy, the 

Administrator of the General Services Administration, and other interested 

parties. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO 

website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices 

of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last 

page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report 

are listed in appendix IV.

Sincerely yours,

Frank Rusco

Director, Natural Resources and Environment
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

the Interior

Page 32 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of the Interior
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

the Interior

Page 33 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

the Interior

Page 34 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Energy

Page 35 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Energy
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Energy

Page 36 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development
Appendix III: Comments from the General 

Services Administration

Page 37 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Appendix III: Comments from the General 

Services Administration
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 38 GAO-17-43 Indian Energy Development

Frank Rusco, (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov

In addition to the individual named above, Christine Kehr (Assistant 

Director), Patrick Bernard, Richard Burkard, Patricia Chen, Cindy Gilbert, 

Alison O’Neill, Daniel Purdy, and Jay Spaan made key contributions to 

this report.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(100179)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to http://www.gao.gov

and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering 

information is posted on GAO’s website, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.