Detailed Information on the
Bureau of Land Management - Energy and Minerals Management Assessment

Revise BLM regulations to increase cost recovery in the energy and minerals program. This will better ensure that public land users, rather than the general public, pay for the costs of permitting these activities. It should also improve BLM's ability to respond to changing industry demand by providing additional BLM resources when demand is high.

Duplicat of seq 1- please remove

Develop baseline data and targets for the newly-developed performance measures.

Seek to identify additional measures of efficiency for other components of the program, including coal and mineral materials activities.

Measure: Percent of permits and lease applications processed. (Measures reduction in backlog) (non-energy minerals)

Explanation:Tracks how well BLM is meeting overall industry demand for minerals permit applications and whether or not a backlog of permit applications is developing.

Measure: Percent of permits processed within 35 days of receipt of a complete application (fluid minerals).

Explanation:

Measure: Percent of permit violations corrected on first notice (fluid minerals).

Explanation:

Measure: Percent of non-compliance and trespass actions resolved (non-energy minerals).

Explanation:

Measure: Percent of required inspection and enforcement reviews completed. (Fluid, solid, and non-energy minerals tracked separately.)

Explanation:

Measure: Customer satisfaction with permitting process. (Percent; fluid, solid, and non-energy minerals tracked separately.)

Explanation:This measure tracks satisfaction of BLM's customers such as leaseholders, coal operators and mineral purchasers.

Measure: Average cost per permit (APD) processed (fluid minerals).

Explanation:

Measure: Percent of permits and lease applications processed (measure reduction in backlog:solid) (coal)

Explanation:Tracks how well BLM is meeting overall industry demand for minerals permit applications and whether or not a backlog of permit applications is developing

Measure: Percent of permits and lease applications processed. (Measures reduction in backlog) (fluid)

Explanation:Tracks how well BLM is meeting overall industry demand for minerals permit applications and whether or not a backlog of permit applications is developing

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: BLM manages approximately 700 million acres of subsurface minerals underlying public, private, and state ownerships. The purpose of this program is to provide the energy and minerals resources the nation needs while balancing these needs with other uses of the public lands as well as private landowner's surface rights. While various minerals are treated somewhat differently under various authorizing legislation, the ultimate goal in all cases is to promote the responsible use of energy and mineral resources.

Evidence: Key authorizing legislation includes: Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, Materials Act of 1947, Geothermal Steam Act of 1970, Indian Mineral Development Act of 1982.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: These programs clearly address the nation's demand for energy and minerals production.

Evidence: President's National Energy Policy, May 2001 BLM-Managed Lands Provide: 35% of the Nation's Coal Production 48% of the Nation's Geothermal Production 11% of the Nation's Gas Production 5% of the Nation's Oil Production

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: BLM is responsible for permitting the energy and minerals development of federally-owned subsurface minerals. There is no overlap in terms of responsibility with any other authority. Moreover, BLM enters into cooperative agreements with state and federal agencies in order to eliminate redundancy and promote efficiency where development may cross jurisdictional boundaries or where surface and subsurface ownership varies.

Evidence: As an example of coordination, the 1991 Tripartite Memorandum of Understanding between BLM, MMS, and BIA delineates each agency's responsibility for oil and gas leasing. Similarly, a 2001 MOU between BLM, OSM, and BIA delineates responsibilities for coal mining on Indian lands.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: BLM does not charge users for some costs directly associated with permitting development. BLM regulations prevent managers from recovering a larger portion of agency costs. In many cases, this has constrained BLM's ability to meet quickly changing market demands for applications for permit to drill (APDs). While many energy and minerals activities are programmatic in nature and so not suitable for cost recovery, BLM could recover more permit-specific costs by charging permittees in connection with APDs and reexamining the appropriateness of the level of fees that it currently charges for a number of other permit-specific activities. In December 2000, BLM published a proposed cost recovery rule to address this problem, but has not yet taken action to complete the rule. BLM also faces an inherent balancing act in meeting public demand for minerals development while providing for other uses of the public lands, such as recreation, grazing, etc. However, from planning through implementation, the program attempts to address and respond to this inherent problem.

Evidence: Inspector General Report 95-I-379 (January 1995) found that, at the time, BLM was losing roughly $8 million per year in forgone receipts by not charging appropriate cost recovery fees. A 1996 Solicitor Opinion clarified BLM's authority to charge users for appropriate costs.

Is the program effectively targeted, so program resources reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?

Explanation: In an effort to meet the Nation's energy demands in 2004 and beyond, the BLM has developed a series of actions, schedules, and assignments outlining how the Bureau will efficiently and effectively implement the President's National Energy Policy. BLM conducts extensive land use planning to insure that resource uses consider local, state and national needs.

Evidence: BLM National Energy Plan task status reports and tracking of time-sensitive land use plans related to energy development.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: In developing this PART, BLM has established seven new long-term performance measures for this program. While the new measures are still largely output-based, they represent a significant improvement over previous measures. The new measures provide a better link between program performance and industry demand, and the measures can be better understood by a person who is not closely involved in the program. Also, an efficiency measure has been added for the oil and gas program.

Evidence: BLM has developed the following seven new performance measures: - Percent of permits and lease applications processed (fluid, solid, and non-energy minerals); - Percent of permits processed within 35 days of receipt of a complete application (fluid minerals); - Percent of permit violations corrected on first notice (fluid minerals); - Percent of non-compliance and trespass actions resolved (non-energy minerals); - Percent of required inspection and enforcement reviews completed; - Customer satisfaction with permitting process (%, energy minerals); and - Average cost per permit (APD) processed (fluid minerals).

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: Baseline data and targets have not yet been developed for BLM's new program measures.

Evidence: NA

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term measures?

Explanation: BLM has developed seven new annual performance measures that directly link to the new long-term measures.

Evidence: In addition to long-term targets, annual targets will be established for the measures listed under 2.1, and these targets will be used to measure annual progress.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets and timeframes for its annual measures?

Explanation: Baseline data and targets have not yet been developed for BLM's new program measures.

Evidence: NA

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, etc.) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: BLM's Energy and Minerals programs do not generally have grantees or cost sharing partners; however, BLM's federal partners such as MMS have similar goals for production of energy and federal revenues. State and tribal governments are often cooperators in regional EISs for energy and minerals programs. For example, in Montana, the Crow Tribe, the state DEQ and the state Board of Oil and Gas Conservation were co-preparers of the statewide Oil and Gas EIS. Contractors are also extensively used to accomplish work such as cultural clearance surveys, biological assessments and planning documents.

Evidence: Examples include the MOU in place with the California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources and BLM Wyoming's statewide Biological Assessment contract.

Are independent and quality evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: No regular independent evaluations are conducted for the Energy and Minerals programs. However, BLM regularly evaluates its Oil and Gas program in each state. The members of the evaluation team are drawn from throughout the agency and are allowed to collect evidence and make independent recommendations. BLM also recently contracted for a detailed survey of its energy customers in order to try and improve agency responsiveness to industry needs.

Evidence: Oil and Gas Program Evaluations: Wyoming, California and New Mexico. 2002 Energy Customer Surveys Results (Coray Gurnitz Consulting, February 2003)

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: Each program change in the budget request is tied to a specific annual target that supports long term goals. For example in recent years, BLM requested program increases to support a higher level of APDs processed (based on demand) and a higher level of inspections. These targeted increases supported the goal of higher levels of natural gas production from lands under DOI management and responded to geographically specific demands from industry.

Evidence: Budget Justification and Performance Information, 2004

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: In developing this PART, BLM has developed new program performance measures, a key deficiency.

Evidence: See performance measures listed above.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: Each BLM field office regularly reports program outputs in BLM's Management Information System (MIS). State Offices and the Washington Office review these accomplishments against targets at several points in the year. Budget allocation adjustments and corrective actions are taken after these reviews are completed. BLM also conducts periodic reviews of specific offices in various aspects of the programs to determine compliance with guidance and direction. BLM has indicated it is developing a series of self-assessments so that offices can certify compliance with program guidance.

Evidence: Performance analysis for 2004 Budget Development 2001 Budget Analysis - Coal Management

Are Federal managers and program partners (grantees, subgrantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, etc.) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: BLM program managers' evaluations have elements that are directly tied to output measures and budget performance. BLM evaluates the work performance of all employees annually. Senior level managers' performance is reviewed quarterly. Where appropriate, field manager evaluations include key Energy & Minerals program goals. Many elements within an employee's annual evaluation are tied to agency output measures. BLM tracks performance on 2 specific objectives related to energy. Each objective has an assigned senior manager with lead responsibility for tracking/reporting completion or implementation progress, as well as the current status of each objective. There is also an established target date for completion or implementation. The Director's Tracking System presents the Director with the ability to track key program measures. The Director can see in real time what has been reported compared to targets for key output measures. The report also shows costs by program element.

Evidence: Performance analysis for 2004 Budget Development Management-by-Objective Status Reports identify key work activities. Each task has an assigned senior manager and a target due date. BLM Manager Evaluations are directly linked to key National Energy Plan tasks that are tracked regularly by BLM.

Are all funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: BLM has established a guideline for its offices to allow no more than 2% carryover. In the Energy and Minerals programs, 3.7% of available funding was unspent at the end of 2001 and 0% at the end of 2002. Internal reviews are also used to ensure that funds are spent for the intended purpose.

Evidence: MIS report ' Year End Carryover, 2001-2002, Cost Management Report: 2002 Spending by work activity 2001 Budget Analysis - Coal Management

Does the program have procedures (e.g., competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, approporaite incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The BLM uses its MIS to track the performance and unit costs for all programs. An annual performance analysis is conducted to compare offices in achieving reduced unit costs and maximum output. BLM is a leader in the Department of the Interior in implementing IT solutions to improve management processes. BLM's Activity-Based Costing (ABC) system and MIS are being used as templates for other bureaus and DOI works to develop an integrated Department-wide system.

Evidence: Performance analysis for 2004 Budget Development GAO Report 03-503 identifies BLM's performance budgeting system as an example that may be duplicated by the Forest Service in order to improve accountability.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: BLM enters into a wide variety of agreements with industry, state governments, and other federal agencies which have jurisdiction and/or interest in BLM energy and minerals actions. BLM, BIA and MMS have formally documented the division of responsibilities and provided for information exchange related to mineral leasing. BLM, BIA and OSM recently established an MOU to document responsibilities of the agencies for Indian Coal Management. BLM employees participate in various groups to ensure proper coordination. These groups include the Department's Indian Mineral Steering Committee and MMS's Royalty Policy Committee.

Evidence: 1991 and 2001 Tripartite MOUs governing coordination of programs on Indian lands Charter of the Indian Mineral Steering Committee Charter and sample agenda for the Royalty Policy Committee

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: BLM has received seven consecutive unqualified audit opinions, of which the energy and minerals program is a significant component. Key to its success has been the availability of timely and accurate financial information made available to all employees through its MIS. BLM has also met or exceeded its goals under the Prompt Payment Act, and goals to reduce or eliminate erroneous payments.

Evidence: Independent audit evaluations and unqualified audit opinions.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: BLM has identified deficiencies and developed and implemented plans to improve procedures and correct the deficiencies. Examples include corrective action taken on drainage and inspection and enforcement problems.

Evidence: APD Streamlining Memos Inspection and Enforcement Strategy

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term outcome performance goals?

Explanation: Previous performance measures were inadequate in determining program performance. New measures have been developed, but baseline data and targets are not yet available, so progress cannot be demonstrated.

Evidence: See explanation and evidence for Questions 2.1 and 2.2.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: As with BLM's long-term performance goals, previous performance measures were inadequate in determining program performance. New measures have been developed, but baseline data and targets are not yet available, so progress cannot be demonstrated.

Evidence: See explanation and evidence for Questions 2.3 and 2.4.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program performance goals each year?

Explanation: Despite overall problems with the program's performance goals, a performance analysis conducted for FY 2004 budget development generally showed increasing program effectiveness from 2001 to midyear 2003. Expenditures are more closely aligned with performance this year than previously. In some areas, unit costs are increasing as tasks become more complex.

Evidence: Performance analysis for 2004 Budget Development

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., that have similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: Industry data is generally not comparable. Although some state governments may perform similar functions on state lands, the operations are performed under a different set of laws and may not have comparable published data.

Evidence: NA

Do independent and quality evaluations of this program indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: Various reviews of specific program components have highlighted problems in those components. BLM has addressed some of the problems highlighted in these reviews, but has yet to fully address others.

Evidence: Inspector General (IG) Report 01-I-297 (March 2001) on BLM's Stripper Oil Well Royalty Rate Reduction program found that BLM had yet to act on 2 of 4 previous IG recommendations for this program. Inspector General Report 95-I-379 (January 1995) found that, at the time, BLM was losing roughly $8 million per year in forgone receipts by not charging appropriate cost recovery fees. BLM has yet to implement an appropriate cost recovery program. IG Report 99-I-358 (March 1999) on BLM's Drainage Protection program provided 4 recommendations which BLM accepted. The IG considers these recommendations resolved.