AUDIT
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR’S
MANAGEMENT OF LAND BOUNDARIES
Report No.: C-IN-MOA-0001-2009
July 2010
OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
JUL 1 6 2010
Memorandum
To:
From:
Subject:
Final Audit Report, "Department of the Interior's Management of Land
Boundaries" (Audit No. C-IN-MOA-0001-2009)
This memorandum transmits the results of our audit of the Department's management of
land boundaries. Our audit found that the Bureau of Land Management's Cadastral Survey
program was missing the opportunity to identify and perform surveys on high risk lands where
significant potential revenues could be collected by the Department or Indian tribes. Proper
survey and management of high risk lands with antiquated surveys has the potential to generate
hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue from lands with valuable resources.
Our report includes nine recommendations related to management of land boundaries.
Based on management' s response to the draft report, we consider:
•
•
Recommendations 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 resolved but not implemented.
Recommendations 1 and 2 unresolved. While management generally agreed with the
recommendations, additional information is needed before we can consider the
recommendations resolved. (Pages 9 and 10 of the report describe the additional
information needed.)
Please provide us a response to the report within 30 days. The response should provide
information on actions taken or planned to address our findings and recommendations, target
dates and titles of the officials responsible for implementation. Please address your responses to:
Ms. Kimberly Elmore
Assistant Inspector General for Audits, Inspections and Evaluations
U.S. Department of the Interior
Office of Inspector General
1849 C Street, NW, MS 4428
Washington, D.C. 20240
Office of Audits, Inspections, and Evaluations
I Washington, DC
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Cadastral Survey program has been missing the
opportunity to identify and perform surveys on high risk lands where significant potential
revenues could be collected by the Department or Indian tribes. The Department has outdated
and unreliable survey information on more than 1 million boundary miles. This encompasses
almost 90 percent of the 385 million acres of federal and Indian lands that DOI is responsible for
in the western United States (excluding Alaska). Proper survey and management of high risk
lands with antiquated surveys has the potential to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in
revenue from lands with valuable surface and subsurface resources. This revenue could result
from the collection of fees or royalties from identifying (a) unauthorized uses including rightsof-way violations and (b) the improper removal of oil, gas, timber, or other resources from
federal or Indian lands. The Cadastral Survey program, however, has not developed an adequate
system to identify high risk lands or attributes in need of survey. Although project prioritization
systems for both the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and BLM exist, neither system is properly
designed or utilized.
Transactions on lands with unreliable boundary surveys and high value resources were routinely
processed and approved without the benefit of boundary evidence review by Cadastral Survey
personnel. The importance of performing cadastral work 1 on these lands is not adequately
understood by many BLM and BIA personnel. As a result, the Cadastral Survey program is not
being properly utilized. While the cost of some cadastral work can be high, using proper risk
management procedures, less expensive cadastral services, and other procedures can make this
work very cost effective.
BLM estimated the cost to survey and perform the work necessary to modernize all boundary
lands in the billions of dollars. We believe, however, that only a small fraction of antiquated
boundaries will be a high priority for survey once a risk management system is developed and
boundary risks are clearly established. Furthermore, if a portion of revenues recovered could be
retained by BLM, those funds could be used to perform high priority surveys on the highest risk
boundaries.
1
Cadastral services are those performed to show or record property boundaries, subdivision lines, buildings, and related details.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Why We Did This Audit ....................................................................................................................1
Background ........................................................................................................................................1
Results of Audit .................................................................................................................................2
Risk Management ........................................................................................................................2
Program Coordination..................................................................................................................5
Automated Systems .....................................................................................................................8
Promising Practices ......................................................................................................................8
Recommendations ..............................................................................................................................9
Appendix A: Objective, Scope, and Methodology ............................................................................13
Appendix B: Locations Visited..........................................................................................................15
Appendix C: Schedule of Monetary Impacts .....................................................................................16
Appendix D: Status of Recommendations .........................................................................................17
Appendix E: Bureau of Land Management’s Response ....................................................................18
Appendix F: Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Response .............................................................................25
WHY WE DID THIS AUDIT
Information obtained during a previous audit 2 indicated a significant problem with outdated
surveys and unreliable federal land boundaries. As a result, we were concerned about the
potential for significant, uncollected revenues and initiated this audit to review both Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) and other departmental agencies’ management of land boundaries.
(See Appendix A for complete audit scope and methodology. See Appendix B for a list of
locations visited.)
BACKGROUND
Public lands in the U.S. have been surveyed into townships and sections since 1785. Each
township is 6 miles by 6 miles square and subdivided into 1-mile square sections each containing
640 acres. The corners of each township and section are marked by small monuments.
Monuments have evolved from stone markers and
wood posts used prior to 1910, to iron posts with
brass caps used prior to 1973, to the current stainless
steel posts with brass caps. When a survey is
conducted, a master title plat is created showing the
land survey or boundary lines and their relation to the
adjoining official surveys. As more modern official
surveys or resurveys are conducted, land use
information is added to plats including rights-of-way
for utility companies and others, and other land uses
including commercial leases for energy production
and mineral extraction.
The Cadastral Survey program is a core mission of
BLM, responsible for supporting field offices by
Brass Cap Boundary Monument
supplying clearly defined boundaries and other land
information for the protection and proper management of federal and Indian lands. The program
performs surveys to establish, re-establish, and describe the boundaries of public lands in the
United States. All bureaus and offices are required to coordinate their federal survey needs with
BLM which either performs the requested survey work or oversees the cadastral surveying
activities of others. BLM also administers, and makes all changes to, the Public Land Survey
System which is the official system for storing public land boundary record information.
BLM reports it is responsible for cadastral survey on about 1.3 million miles of federal and
Indian land boundaries on 385 million acres in the western U.S (excluding Alaska). According to
BLM, federal surveys conducted since 1973 have highly reliable boundary data. These total
about 150,000 miles, or only 12 percent, of the federal boundary miles in the west. Estimates for
the remaining miles are:
2
Department of the Interior, Office of Inspector General, Abandoned Mine Lands in the Department of the Interior (Report No.
C-IN-MOA-0004-2007, Issued July 2008).
Page | 1
•
boundaries with no federal survey, about 300,000 miles (23 percent);
•
boundaries with poor reliability, about 350,000 miles (27 percent, conducted prior to
1910), and;
•
boundaries with fair reliability, about 500,000 miles (38 percent, conducted between
1910 and 1972).
Needs for cadastral survey vary, but can include establishing accurate boundaries for transfer of
land ownership, resolving ownership or land use disputes, and establishing accurate locations of
proposed roads, pipelines, or utility lines. Conducting surveys requires extensive fieldwork and,
if planned properly, can result in identifying unauthorized, or previously unknown, land uses or
damages.
BLM and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) have identified thousands of unauthorized use
cases and estimated the number of unknown, unauthorized use cases to be significantly higher
than the number of known cases. Most cases represent obvious and immediately visible
violations such as illegal dumping and occupancy. Some cases, however, are less obvious but
have the potential for recovering millions of dollars in revenue from unauthorized rights-of-way
and/or the unauthorized extraction of oil, gas, or other valuable minerals. Resolving complex
unauthorized use cases can require extensive work and documentation including compiling
evidence, conducting referrals, and seeking resolutions. Processing these cases can cost $100,000
or more.
RESULTS OF AUDIT
BLM and other departmental agencies could improve the management of land boundaries.
Specifically, we found that BLM’s Cadastral Survey program was missing the opportunity to
identify and perform surveys on high risk lands where significant potential revenues could be
collected by the Department and/or Indian tribes. Land transactions with unreliable boundary
surveys and high value resources were routinely processed and approved without the benefit of
boundary evidence review by Cadastral Survey personnel. Further, the Department does not have
a business solution for land managers who face an increasingly complex environment of
complicated transactions, legal challenges, and deteriorating and difficult to access records.
Finally, we identified a promising practice which, if implemented department-wide, could
improve the management of land boundaries.
Risk Management
The Cadastral Survey program was missing the opportunity to identify and perform surveys on
high risk lands where significant potential revenues could be collected by the Department and/or
Indian tribes. The following examples illustrate the potential opportunities that could be realized.
•
The Yakama Indian Tribe and BLM conducted cadastral survey work which identified
extensive unauthorized uses by electric, cable, and gas companies. The tribe invested
Page | 2
about $2 million to develop systems to manage this data and used it to negotiate
settlements of about $25 million for the tribe. The tribe also negotiated to purchase an
electric company’s power distribution system enabling them to start a tribally operated
utility company. The tribe expects to provide lower cost power to all residents on the
reservation and to employ as many as 100 tribal members.
•
The Southern Ute Indian Tribe and BLM invested about $2 million for extensive
cadastral survey work and land management systems development. While the tribe’s
purpose for conducting the survey was not only to identify unauthorized uses, they
estimate future, unauthorized use recoveries over 20 to 25 years to be in excess of $100
million.
•
The Santa Fe Indian School requested BLM perform a cadastral resurvey to establish
reliable boundaries after a utility company offered $100,000 for a 20-year renewal and
expansion of an existing electric transmission line right-of-way. The resurvey
information was used to negotiate a $4 million, 20-year right-of-way.
Aerial photo of the Santa
Fe Indian School. The solid
yellow line shows school land
boundaries and the broken
yellow line shows the location
of a utility company’s electric
transmission lines.
As these examples illustrate, proper survey and management of high risk lands with antiquated
surveys has the potential to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. The Cadastral
Survey program, however, has not developed an adequate system to identify high risk lands and
attributes in need of survey. Although project prioritization systems for both BIA and BLM exist,
neither system is properly designed or utilized. Specifically:
Page | 3
•
BLM and BIA developed the Cadastral Automated Request System (CARS) for BIA to
ensure the highest priority survey projects were identified and funded. The system relied
on tribal and BIA input to assign a numerical score to survey projects based on boundary
evidence risk. While the system was well intentioned, it lacked adequately defined risk
attributes. Neither BLM nor BIA provided needed policies and procedures to ensure the
data provided was consistent, accurate, and supported. We reviewed applications at three
BIA offices and found little or no support for the data submitted.
•
BLM began development of an inventory system in response to an Office of Management
and Budget review. This involved field offices compiling an inventory of survey projects
they considered high priority. These projects, however, were identified without the
benefit of adequately defined high risk attributes, and were largely unfunded. BLM has
funded a project to determine the information needed to identify high risk boundaries.
The project matches the age (reliability) of official surveys with other boundary risk
attributes including the land’s status, energy and other resources present, current and
potential land uses, and urban interface. The project is ongoing and boundary risk maps
have been provided to BLM state offices. Although an inventory of projects and high risk
boundaries have been identified, BLM has no formal plans to consolidate this
information into a risk management system for identifying and prioritizing cadastral
projects or for funding those projects.
In addition to not performing surveys on high risk lands, the program also did not take the
opportunity to design requested cost reimbursable surveys to identify high risk attributes present.
Because cost reimbursable surveys were funded by other programs, the requested work was
generally narrowly focused. Expanding the design of these cost reimbursable surveys to identify
what high risk attributes should be present, and clearly identifying any additional high risk
attributes while performing the survey, would be a cost efficient way to begin clearly identifying
unauthorized uses.
BLM estimated the cost to survey and perform the work necessary to modernize all federal
and/or Indian land boundaries in the billions of dollars. We believe, however, that only a small
fraction of antiquated boundaries would be high priority for survey once a risk management
system is developed and boundary attributes are clearly established.
If a portion of revenues recovered as a result of survey work could be retained by BLM, the
funds could be used to perform other high priority surveys on lands with the highest risk
boundaries. Such retention to fund future recovery efforts is already used by the Department of
Justice in both its Affirmative Civil Enforcement program and in qui tam cases. For example, the
Affirmative Civil Enforcement program retains 3 percent of all dollars recovered to support
future collection efforts. Performance of targeted high risk surveys by the Cadastral Survey
program would likely result in significant revenue recoveries from identification of high value
unauthorized use and/or environmental damages.
Page | 4
Program Coordination
Land transactions with unreliable boundary surveys and high value resources were routinely
processed and approved without the benefit of boundary evidence review by Cadastral Survey
personnel. This occurred because managers and Lands and Realty staff:
•
believed cadastral expertise was not necessary to establish adequate boundary evidence.
•
believed cadastral services cost too much and took too much time when making
significant land management decisions.
•
often did not receive adequate training in cadastral services, rights-of-way, and other land
issues.
•
did not completely understand the potential benefits of cadastral services.
Services provided by Cadastral Survey are essential for the proper processing of significant land
transactions. Significant transactions processed by Lands and Realty cover a wide variety of
public land uses including processing high value rights-of-way and for congressionally required
land sales, disposals, and acquisitions. Although reviewing the adequacy of boundary evidence
requires cadastral expertise, it can generally be accomplished with a simple review of existing
documentation. Cadastral expertise may not be required for most transactions but is essential for
high value or otherwise significant transactions.
During the audit, many BLM staff made comments demonstrating a lack of understanding or
appreciation of Cadastral Survey’s complex science. The location of original corner monuments,
even when they deviate from the intended location, represent the legal boundary of the property.
Many Land and Realty staff failed to understand that older surveyed land boundaries often do
not correlate closely to the assumed location on maps or precise GPS locations. Actual survey
land boundaries can be located as much as one mile from the location a GPS/GIS or non-survey
map would identify. Some specific statements from BLM staff are as follows:
•
What you don’t know (about boundary accuracy) won’t hurt you. Let private landowners
worry about shared boundaries. It’s not BLM’s responsibility to know where the
boundary is.
•
We can locate boundaries because we know how to use compass and GPS devices.
The following examples illustrate the value of utilizing cadastral survey personnel to review the
adequacy of boundary evidence on significant land transactions:
•
BIA’s Fort Hall Agency personnel approved a utility company’s request for a
right-of-way without review by a cadastral expert. Several years later a cadastral expert
reviewed maps submitted by the company with its request and found survey errors. This
subsequent review resulted in negotiations and payments to tribal members exceeding $4
million.
Page | 5
•
The BLM Uncompahgre Field Office worked with a neighboring property owner to
locate and install a cattle guard and a fence. Without a survey, BLM picked the location
for the cattle guard by backing off the believed property line by approximately 300 feet.
The neighbor then, in accordance with a verbal agreement, installed the fence in line with
the cattle guard. The neighboring property owner, when building a house, assumed the
fence was located on the property line. A subsequent BLM survey revealed the boundary
actually went through the middle of the house. Because the land was part of Gunnison
Gorge National Conservation Area, it required an act of Congress to execute a boundary
modification to resolve the issue.
“Backed Off” location of the
cattle guard, fence and BLM
land boundary sign erected
without the benefit of a survey.
The house in the background
was subsequently constructed,
on what the new landowner
assumed was their property, but
which actually trespassed onto
federal land. A BLM survey
revealed the boundary went
through the middle of the house.
Page | 6
•
BLM’s Las Vegas Field Office requested a 1-year survey project estimated to cost
$142,000. State Office Cadastral Survey staff determined that a survey was not needed
and, subsequently, provided a less expensive product that took less than 2 months to
complete at a cost of about only $3,000. According to State Office Cadastral Survey
personnel, cheaper alternatives to a survey are often available if Cadastral Survey’s staff
is consulted. Often, however, field offices choose to use the services of a non-BLM
surveyor rather than first consulting with Cadastral Survey about possible alternatives.
•
BLM's Oregon State Office is working with a pipeline company that is proposing the
construction of a 230-mile, natural gas pipeline in Southwest Oregon. The pipeline would
cost approximately $900 million to construct and could carry up to 1 billion cubic feet of
natural gas per day. The proposed pipeline crosses numerous parcels of BLM lands,
which are intermingled with private lands. The project will require the identification of
many miles of federal land boundaries to accurately describe the right-of-way
authorization area. Accurate property line identification is critical for the sale of high
value timber located on BLM lands and the avoidance of trespass. BLM's Lands and
Realty program does not have adequate funds for BLM surveyors to perform the required
surveys and the company has proposed the use of state-licensed and federally certified
surveyors. The Cadastral Survey staff believed, however, that on a project of this size and
complexity, agency oversight should be performed. Oversight could require a full-time
surveyor at a cost of about $100,000 annually until the necessary surveys are completed
and approved. The cost of BLM survey oversight could be recovered from the pipeline
company through the BLM cost recovery right-of-way regulations. Cadastral survey
oversight would help ensure the pipeline's proper location and accurate assessment of
significant right-of-way rental fees and timber values.
The proposed pipeline (in red)
crosses 230 miles of land
including Federal land in Oregon.
Page | 7
During our audit, BLM and BIA staff told us that many BIA realty staff cannot adequately
interpret or prepare key realty documents. For example, some realty staff can not accurately read
or write legal land descriptions. This is a basic, critical function for realty staff. BIA does not
offer standardized lands or realty training which is essential to managing and protecting Indian
lands. Recognizing this need, some BLM employees have provided 1 to 2 day basic land
description courses to BIA and tribal employees. Several BIA realty staff have also met with
staff from the National Indian Programs Training Center to discuss designing a realty course for
BIA staff.
BLM’s National Training Center offers a Beginning Lands and Realty course to its Lands and
Realty employees. The course is offered two times per year, 11 weeks per session. Although the
course is not mandatory, many BLM Lands and Realty employees attend. The course is designed
to educate Lands and Realty staff on a range of topics, including basic training in the laws and
regulations applicable to Lands and Realty. These include Cadastral Survey’s functions and
services, processes for issuing leases and rights-of-way, reading and writing legal land
descriptions, and understanding basic Lands and Realty principles such as describing and
interpreting land status and boundaries.
Automated Systems
The Department does not have a business solution for land managers who face an increasingly
complex environment of complicated transactions, legal challenges, and deteriorating difficult to
access land records. The National Integrated Land System (NILS) was to be such a solution.
Over the past 10 years, BLM spent $27 million attempting to modernize antiquated land
information systems and to bring NILS online. BLM internal reviews identified several contract
irregularities and concluded that NILS was not adequately integrated or automated and,
therefore, did not meet business requirements. (See Appendix C for monetary impact.) In
September 2009, BLM discontinued system development. As a result, we stopped work and
referred the matter to our Office of Investigations.
Fiduciary Trust M odel
Promising Practices
The Department is responsible for
establishing and supporting a fiduciary trust
relationship with Native Americans. These
responsibilities include the improvement and
protection of
56 million acres of land and natural
resources in trust. The American Indian
Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994
directed the Department to reform the
Indian Fiduciary Trust. The Office of the
Special Trustee for American Indians was
created by the Act to oversee and
coordinate the reforms.
Cadastral surveying costs vary, but average about
$6,000 per mile. For many land transactions, lowrisk alternative methods of verifying boundaries
are sufficient. As part of implementing the
Department’s Fiduciary Trust Model, BLM and
BIA designed and implemented four less costly
and time-consuming cadastral services
documented in the Departmental Manual chapter
“Standards for Indian Trust Lands Boundary
Evidence.” These services included land
description reviews, certificate of inspection and possession, chain of surveys reviews, and
boundary assurance certifications. These reviews can be completed at substantially less cost than
an Official Survey, thus providing additional resources for boundary management. BLM staff
stated these standards should be available for use by other bureaus in addition to BIA.
Page | 8
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Director of BLM should:
1. Develop and implement a plan to identify, prioritize, and conduct surveys on those lands,
both federal and Indian, with the highest risk boundaries. This plan should include, at a
minimum:
a. the use of standardized, high-risk, boundary attributes such as those identified in
BLM’s current project on risk identification.
b. how high value issues identified while performing surveys will be resolved.
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and stated: An existing pilot program
will be broadened to effectively identify lands with high-risk attributes. The
Cadastral Survey Program will further refine and prioritize surveys that are high
risk by working with other BLM program staff such as those from the oil and gas,
right-of-way, and timber programs. The pilot program results will be used to
establish a BLM-wide approach for prioritization and could serve as a model for
other federal agencies in the Department.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM's response, we consider this recommendation unresolved. While
we believe it was not intentional, BLM’s proposed action does not address two
aspects of the recommendation: (1) The response does not specifically identify a
plan for BLM’s pilot project when complete to be implemented for Indian Lands
and (2) The proposed action does not address part b of the recommendation to
include in the plan how high value issues identified while performing surveys will
be resolved. We believe resolution of these issues will require a plan and the
dedication of resources outside of the Cadastral Survey program. Therefore, we
consider this recommendation unresolved until both issues are sufficiently
addressed.
2. Develop and implement a plan to increase the scope of cost reimbursable cadastral
surveys to include evaluating significant boundary risk attributes.
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and stated: BLM will issue an
Instruction Memorandum to expand the scope of cost reimbursable cadastral
surveys to include a provision for evaluating significant boundary risk attributes
for high valued resources. The Instruction Memorandum will require offices
evaluate land status features in greater detail during survey planning. Where other
Page | 9
federal land managers are reluctant to pay for this scope expansion BLM could
provide assistance to identify potential revenue opportunities.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM's response, we consider this recommendation unresolved. BLM’s
proposed action requires clarification on whether BLM will fund the expanded
scope of surveys with significant boundary risk attributes performed for the
benefit of BLM programs. While we believe this is BLM’s intent (and is
necessary to resolve the issue), BLM’s response was not clear on this fact. We
concur with BLM’s proposed offer of assistance to non BLM federal land
managers unwilling to fund survey scope expansion. Therefore, we consider this
recommendation unresolved until the funding for the benefit of BLM programs is
addressed.
3. Explore with Congress the potential to retain a portion of any revenues recovered as a
result of surveys performed. If approved, use the additional funding to cover the cost of
performing self-initiated cadastral surveys on lands with high risk boundaries.
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and stated: BLM will pursue
discussions with the Department’s Office of Congressional and Legislative
Affairs on drafting and submitting an Administrative Legislative proposal for
such statutory change to Congress.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM’s response we consider this recommendation resolved, but not
implemented.
4. Develop and implement a plan to ensure Cadastral Survey reviews the adequacy of
boundary evidence prior to the approval of significant land and resource transactions.
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and stated: BLM will develop an
Instruction Memorandum requiring Cadastral Survey program certification of all
legal descriptions, the adequacy of boundary infrastructure, and the records of
survey for all high valued land and resource transactions.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM’s response we consider this recommendation resolved, but not
implemented.
Page | 10
5. Develop and implement a plan to ensure that project manager's coordinate with Cadastral
Survey on all significant commercial projects to evaluate boundary risks.
BLM Response:
BLM did not concur with our original recommendation and stated: While
agreeing the Cadastral Survey program should play a more central role with
respect to significant commercial projects, BLM prefers project managers perform
oversight, but coordinate with the Cadastral Survey program on all significant
projects to evaluate boundary risks. To ensure this occurs BLM proposes to
develop an Instruction Memorandum that will require Cadastral Survey evaluate
the boundary risks of all significant commercial projects and develop plans to
mitigate high risk boundary attributes.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
We concur with BLM's alternate approach and believe it will correct the issue
identified. Therefore, we revised our draft report recommendation to require that
project managers coordinate with Cadastral Survey on all significant commercial
projects. Based on BLM’s response, we consider this recommendation resolved,
but not implemented.
6. Require that costs for oversight of significant commercial projects be recovered from the
commercial entities.
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and stated: BLM will develop an
Instruction Memorandum establishing a policy for cost recovery of Cadastral
Survey services on commercial projects. BLM will utilize existing cost recovery
authority and pursue additional authority where needed.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM’s response we consider this recommendation resolved, but not
implemented.
7. Develop and implement a department-wide cadastral survey outreach program to educate
end users and promote the range of available services and the potential benefits of those
services including the opportunities to maximize:
a. collection of significant revenues from high value unauthorized use;
b. protection of federal lands from environmental and other damages;
c. identification of accurate land boundaries management of rights-of-way, land
withdrawals, land exchanges, and land disposals; and
d. identification of land features including roads, trails, and hazardous sites.
Page | 11
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and stated: BLM will develop an
outreach program to address the report’s findings. BLM’s response detailed
specific steps to be included in the outreach program.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM’s response we consider this recommendation resolved, but not
implemented.
8. Expand the procedures for boundary evidence models found in the Departmental Manual
chapter “Standards for Indian Trust Lands Boundary Evidence” (303 DM 7.9) to include
conducting less costly boundary resolutions or assurances to all bureaus departmentwide.
BLM Response:
BLM concurred with this recommendation and will consult with appropriate
officials within the office of the Assistant Secretary of Policy, Management and
Budget on how to proceed with this recommendation.
OIG Analysis of BLM Response:
Based on BLM’s response we consider this recommendation resolved, but not
implemented.
The Director of BIA should:
9. Establish an agreement with BLM so that BIA and tribal employees receive comparable
training to that provided to BLM employees at the National Training Center.
BIA Response:
BIA concurred with this recommendation and will work to establish an agreement
with BLM so that BIA and tribal employees receive comparable training to that
received by BLM employees at the National Training Center.
OIG Analysis of BIA Response:
Based on BIA’s response we consider this recommendation resolved, but not
implemented.
Page | 12
Appendix A
OBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY
Objective
The objective of our audit was to review both BLM and other departmental agencies’
management of land boundaries.
Scope
The scope of our audit covered boundary management practices including (a) land surveying and
other boundary verification methods, and (b) realty activities involving land use and ownership.
We conducted fieldwork from May through August 2009.
The initial audit survey included BLM, BIA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the
National Park Service (NPS). While FWS and NPS had similar percentages of unreliable survey
boundaries, we eliminated them from audit fieldwork in order to focus on BLM and BIA. These
agencies manage the majority of high value rights-of-way and resource leases, both of which are
highly dependent on accurate surveys.
Methodology
To accomplish the audit objective, we:
•
gathered general, administrative, and background information to provide a working
knowledge of Cadastral Survey and the Lands and Realty Management Program.
•
identified and reviewed policies and procedures related to Cadastral Survey and the
Lands and Realty Management Program.
•
conducted site visits to interview Cadastral Survey and Lands and Realty personnel about
the work they performed on land transactions.
•
visited BLM, BIA, and tribal locations to identify geographic information systems
developed to discover accurate property boundaries and the benefits derived from these
efforts.
•
conducted site visits to evaluate automated systems used to track land boundary
information.
•
visited BLM and BIA sites to gather data about processes and systems in place to:
o identify and track land boundary status.
o determine when, and what type of, boundary verification work is necessary.
o establish survey priorities.
Page | 13
Appendix A
o determine the level of surveyor certification and expertise required.
o identify, track, and resolve cases of unauthorized use which included a review of
select case files.
We conducted this audit 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’s
objectives. We believe the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Page | 14
Appendix B
LOCATIONS VISITED
Bureau of Land Management
Washington Office
Arizona State Office
Phoenix District Office
Tucson Field Office
California State Office
Bakersfield Field Office
Mother Lode Field Office
Colorado State Office
Uncompahgre Field Office
New Mexico State Office
Farmington Field Office
Oregon State Office
Prineville District Office
Washington, D.C.
Phoenix, AZ
Phoenix, AZ
Tucson, AZ
Sacramento, CA
Bakersfield, CA
Folsom, CA
Lakewood, CO
Montrose, CO
Santa Fe, NM
Farmington, NM
Portland, OR
Prineville, OR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Washington Office
Pacific Regional Office
Central California Agency
Palm Springs Agency
Navajo Regional Office
Southwest Regional Office
Southern Pueblos Agency
Western Regional Office
Fort Hall Agency
Land Titles and Records Office
Washington, D.C.
Sacramento, CA
Sacramento, CA
Palm Springs, CA
Gallup, NM
Albuquerque, NM
Albuquerque, NM
Phoenix, AZ
Fort Hall, ID
Sacramento, CA
Indian Tribes
Yakama Indian Nation
Swinomish Indian Tribal Community
Southern Ute Indian Tribe
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Toppenish, WA
La Conner, WA
Ignacio, CO
Palm Springs, CA
Training Centers
BLM National Training Center
National Indian Programs Training Center
Phoenix, AZ
Albuquerque, NM
Page | 15
Appendix C
SCHEDULE OF MONETARY IMPACT
Questioned
Costs
Issue
Cost Incurred Attempting to Design and
Implement the National Integrated Land
System (NILS)
TOTAL
$27 Million
$27 Million
Page | 16
Appendix D
STATUS OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations
Status
1, 2
Unresolved
Management concurred;
additional information needed
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Resolved
Not Implemented
Action Required
Please provide additional
information on actions taken
or planned.
No further response to OIG is
required for these
recommendations. We will
refer these to the Assistant
Secretary for Policy,
Management and Budget for
tracking of implementation.
Page | 17
Appendix E
[
I
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSE
Unnit
Unit
ited
ed Stales
States De
Department
Depa
partm
rtmeent of t he Interi
Interior
or
BUREAU
B
l I UREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Washington. DC 20240
http
hllp:::l///l/www.blm.gov
"
APR 02 Z
2010
2010
010
In Repl
Replyy Refer:
Refer :
245 (830)
1245
1
Memorandum
To;
Kimberly Elmore
Ass istant
Assistant
Assis
tant Inspector General for Audits.
A udit
udits.
s. Inspections and Evaluations
EVllluaLions
Through:
W ilm
aA.Lcwis
A. Lewis
t"t.
Wilma
lmaA.Lewis
AIII(t
Assistam Secretary - Land and Minerals Management
Assistant
From::
From
Ik(/~'
~/!Jw.
~fl",.fl...-"
( {~ I/1h...Ikr/'
h< 7'~l'7' t~11
/~ iI_ I,.. frf<L.-A ~.~
Ctl-"
c.u..-"
AbbY(
cyq
Raben
Robert V. Abbc
Roben
Y('(
' (.)...J-....
,.4.l-....
Director
Subject:
il/l/#1'v
A ..
i{//"frf<L.-A
J
Gcncml
Report. Department of
or lhe
orl
he Interior's
Office of inspector
Inspector Gene
ral Draft Audit Report,
the
Management of
o f Land Boundarie
Boundariess (A
(Audit
udit No. C ·I
· 1N
IN
N - MQA.0001
MOA-0001
MOA·0001.2009)
. 2009)
On February 18.
2010, the Office
18,2010.
Oflicc
General
Gcncml (OIG)
(DIG) is
issued
sued ils draft audit report.
OHicc of Inspector Gcneml
"Department
uDcpanmcnt of
orthe
lhe
th e lntcrio(
lnt
Interior'
cri o( s Management
Mllnagcrncnt of Lund
Land Boundaries"
Boundaries" (Audit No. C- 1N-MOA1N-MOA-OOOIOOOI2009). The Tepon
resuhs of
urlhe
DIG'ss aaudit
udit
o frth
thee Depanment's
Depanmen(s
Department's management
report explains the n'suhs
or
the 010'
udi t of
man<lgement of
land boundaries and contains eight recommendations for the Bureau
Bureau of land
Land Management
Man agement
BlM)) and one recommendation for the
Indian
ian AITairs
Allairs ((B
B IA).
IA),
IA
). which thc
th
thee OIG
OlG believes
bdieves
(CBlM
BLM
thc Bureau of Ind
will imp
improve
rove the
thc efficiency
eOicieney ofthc
orthe
o rt he program
program.. As rcqucsted,
requesled
requested , the BLM'
BL M'ss responses
rcsponses 10
to the
thc findings
finding
lindingss
rcc
recommendati
ommendatioo ns are
ommendations
arc sel
sct
set fonh
forth in Attachment
Allllchmcnt I.
I, and its
it s technical comments
com ment
mentss arc
alife
rc provided in
a nd rec
and
Altachment 2. Attachment
Attachment
At tachment I also pr
provides
ovides aII summary
su
sum
m mary of act
action
ionss t3ken
taken or planned
pl anned by the BLM
lLM
10
commendatiio ns, including the responsible officials and
commendat
And
datess of
co mpl y with the re
recommendations.
an
d the target date
to comply
implementation
implcmentation
mplementation.. In sum. he BlM
BLM concurs wilh
wi
with
th seven
scven
sevcn ofthc
of the eight
eigh t rcc
recommendations
ommendations
Rccommendation
1,2,., ]. 4., 6. 7 and 8).
8) . and docs not concur
concu r with Recommcndlllion
Recommendation 5. We
(R
ecommendation
ecommendati onss 1,2
th!llthe
B1 A wi
willll submit a sepa
scpamte
scparrate response til
to the
thc audi
auditt and
and Rec
Rccommcndutio
Recommendatio
ommendalionn 9.
understand that
the I3IA
BiA
Surv
ey program is a core
The Cadastral
Ca dastral Survey
Su
rvey
COTe mission of
orth
orthe
thee B
BLM
LM
lM and p lays an imponanl
important role in
eeds
survey nceds
eed s for all Federal agencies as well
\\cll as serving as aII reposi
repository
providing cadastral survcy
tory for
ror
pub lic land
notess thai
landss boundary infonnation.
infonnation. The O[G
O [G
IG nOle
th at the I3LM is re
respons
responsible
spons ible fo
forr I ..]] million
miles of
the western U.S (ex cluding
clud ing
acres in thc
o f Federal
Fcderal and Indian land boundaries on 385 million aeres
A[aska
addit ion.. the Cad
addilion.
Cadas
astral
tral Survey
SUf\'cy program plays an intcgral
integral role in It he Slate
Sta te of Alaska.
Alaska ) . In addition
Alaska).
s upponi
upponinng the A
laska Land
P rogram
ogrnm..,
iincluding
ncluding supporti
Alaska
Landss Conveyance Pr
In 2009, Ihe
the Cadastmi
Cadaslral
Cadastral Survcy
SUT..-ey program base budgct
budget for lite
the western
wcslcrn U.S
U. S . (excluding
(cxcluding Alaska) was
2010, iI
it was ffunded
unded at
al $12.5 million
illion ., and the Pr
President's
Preesident"s
sident'S 2011 budgct
budget proposes
$12.9 million. in 2010.
funding al
million, Funhermore.
Funhennore.
FurthcmlOre. Ihc
the
thc PPresident's
re
resident'
sident'ss 20 II budgct
budget proposes
proposcs $22 mill
million
ntill ion for
forthc
forthe
lhe
at $12.] million.
Alas ka Land
Alaska
Landss Conveyance Program,
ogram. IIa reduction of
ofapp
ofapproximatcly
approximately
roximatc1 y $13
$ 13
13 million
millio n (38 perccnt)
percent) from
Ihe
20 I 0 budge\.
budget.
forlhe
Ihe
the Cad
Cadflslra!
Cadastral
astral S ur vey
Vl.'Y progmOl
progrtlnl
program in Alaska.
Alas ka .
Alaska
Ihc
budgct. This wi l l reduce funds for
the FY 2010
Page | 18
Appendix E
In addition to the base budget.
budget, the BLM also collects cos
cost-recovcry
cost-recovery
t-recovery dollars for
lor specific projec
projects.
t s.
Whilc the cost rrecovery
eecovery
covcry fund
funding
fu
nding
th e BLM'
BLM'ss ability 10
to conduct
conduc t projcct
project specific cadas
cadastral
tr
tral
al
While
ing enhances the
urvey work,
survcy
to usc such funds to ssusmin
ustain
urvcy
wo rk. it
it is difficult
difficul t 10
us13in oorr expand its profess
profcssional
ional cad
cadastral
astral ssurvey
urvey
Because
cause
otherr offices.
offices,, burea
bureaus.
us. and pro
program
gramss
workforce. Be
Becau
se the cost recovery dollars rceeived
received from othe
offices
bureaus,
programs
predictable
ctable o r consistent
consistcnLthose
consistent. th ose funds arc
are not a reliable source for long tenn
term planning
plan ning or for
lor
iiss not predi
maintaining a viable
current funding levels. th
viablc workforce.
wo
workforce,
rklOrce. At currcnt
thee BLM is able 10
to fund 87
employees
time.
em ployees full time,
thee BLM
BL:<'1 estimates the cost
COSIIO
to sun;ey
sun:cy
sun.
'c), and perform
per/orlll the
the work
Moreover, as the GIG
Moreover.
OIG noted. th
all Fede
Fedc ral and
a nd
ndll/or Indian land boundaries
boundtlTics to be billions of
o f dollars. These
necessa ry to modernize 1111
funding limitations
limita
tions haavc
ve a direct and s ignificant impact on the BLM
BLM's
's ability 10
to cond
condu
uuct
ct
lim
itations
vc
owever. as
explained in more delail
de
detail
tail in
cadastral
thatt we co
concede
ncede is still needed. Howcver,
owever,
as expillined
cadustral survey work tha
the allached
that improvements can he
be made 1
10
00 increase
in crease efficiency
efficie ncy and havc
have
a ttached re sponse. we agree Ihal
concurred
or the
th!;! O[O's
O[G's
OIG's recommendations in this rcgard.
regard.
co ncurred with
wilh most of
If you hav
d ing this
ha vec any
an y questions or
01' concerns regar
regarding
th is response.
rcsponse. please cont act Donald Buhler,
Buhler.
Branch Chief of
ofCa
Cadd aslml
as tm
rall Survey.
Survey, al
at 202-912-7353,
202-912-7353.
202·912-7353. o r LaVanna S tcvensonc vcnson- IH
Harri
-larTis.
arri s. BLM Audit
Liaison Offi
cer. al
Officer.
at 202-912-7077.
Page | 19
Appendix E
Attac hment
Atlachment
Atlat
hm t nl 1I
Rts
RcsJlon
ponst
~ e 10
to Iht
the Reeommendatiuns
Re£O
Reco mm endat
cndat lons
ions indud
includ
incl uded
ed in the O
Orriec
rric("... of Ins pector Gtncrall{cport,
rrie
General
Gencrall{cport,
Ke port,
RcsJlonse
Departm ent of the )nt('rior's
Department
Interior's
)nt(' rlor 's Management
MaDllgcmcnt or
of Land Boundll
Boundllries
Bounda ries
(Audit
(A udit
udi t No.
Nu. CC-IN-MOA-OOOI
IN-i\'IOA-OOOI-2009)
IN-MOA-OOO I-2009)
-2009)
Recommend
tion 1:
)I : Devclop :md
and implement a plun
pltln
plan to identify. prioritize. and conduct surveys
Reco
mmendaation
Rctommend
Indian. that hlLve
on targeted lands. both Federal and Indian,
have the highest risk boundaries. This phm
plan
should include. at a minimum;
minimum:
a. the usc of
ofstlLlldardized.
standardized, high-risk.
standardizcd.
high-risk, boundary altribUles
allribwes
allributes such as those
thosc identified in
IlLM'
Il
LM'ss eUTTent
CUTTent
current project
projeet on risk identification:
projcct
identificatiun: and
ami
identilied while
\\hi1e performing
pcrfomling ssurveys
sun'eys
un'eys will be resolved.
b. how high value issues identified
idenlilied
pcrfOnlling
pon
R e.~ p
o n sse:
e : The IlLM
BLM concurs
concllrs with the recommendation
recommcndation \0
to identify. prioritize,
prioritize.
priori tize. and conduct
cond uct
Response:
surveys
sun'eys on the highest risk boundaries. The QIG
O[G found "that the BLM's
BLM' s Cadastral
Cadastrol Survey
thc opponunilY
opportunity to identify and pcrfoml
program was missing Ihe
the
perfoml surveys
survcys on high
higb risk lands where
significant potential revenues could be collected by the Depanment
Dep.1nment and/or Indian tribes:' The
010
progrom . the BLM docs not
nOi systcmatically
systematically identify
identi
idcntify
fy and
a.nd
OIG is correct that under Ihe
the eurrent
current program.
initiate surveys
survcys on high risk lands whe
re signiiicant
where
signiticant
significant potential revenues
revcnues could be collected.
Cadastral Survey
Instead, the Cadastrol
Survcy program function
functionss as a sen'ice
service organi7.ation.
organi7..1Iion,
.1Iion. responding 10
to survey
survcy
requests as boundary issues arc identified by BI.M
BLM or other Federal land managers. The survey
survcy
requests arc undertaken
arc received and as funding is provided. Thc
The majority of thc
the
undenaken as requests :ITe
requests 8re
are
need.
n::quests
nrc funded
fundcd by the
thc ollice,
ollice.
office. agency,
agency. or program thm
that identifies a critical
critical need.
progrJm that
thai will be
bl- used to develop
devclop a broader process to
BLM initiated an internal pilot
The fiLM
pilUl program
effecth'ely
cffecth'ely identify lands with high risk attributes.
attributcs. The pilot program involves a systematic
effectively
cOon by States otlices
offices to prioritize surveys with these attributes.
progmm
effort
eOort
allributes. The
Thc Cadastral Survey program
will work with program staff.
System,
stafl'. such as those from the National Landscape Conservation System.
lhe
the oil and gas program.
rights-of-\\'ay progr.l.!n.
progmm, or the timber program to
funhcr refine and
program, rights-of-way
progr.l.!n,
\0 funher
further
prioritize
risk. some of which may
prioritizc surveys that are
arc high risk,
ma y also involve high revenue
rcvenue potcntial.
potential. A
high risk boundary is onc
one that
thaI is on lands containing high valued
\'alued resourccs
resourecs
resources and likely to be based
on outdatt:d
thosc involving a pre-1910
outdatl'<l or inaceumte
outdated
inaccurate data,
data. such as those
prc.1910
prc-1910 survey
survcy (when a policy was
implemented that
thai required comer markers be iron posts with brass
bra.~s caps) or those that have never
bra~s
been surveyed.
sun'eyed. The IlLM
BLM will then U$C
usc
uSt: the results of the pilot program to establish
establi
cstablish
sh a BLM-widc
BLM-wide
approach for prioritization.
prioritization. This could sern:
sen'c
serve 8S
as a model for other Federal
Fcderal agencics
agencies wi
within
thin the
thc
Depanment as they
the y prioritize their requests for surveys.
Department
addition, the BLM will work
In addition.
\\ork wilh
with other agencies in the Depanment
Depllnme11lto
Department
to apply the beSt
best practices
identified in ]0]
303 OM
DM 7. Standards for Indian Trust Lands and
lind
und Boundary Evidence, to all Fedcral
Federal
lands within the Oep..1rtmem.
Dcp..1rtmelll. This ponion
portion of the manual outlines fou r processes to evaluate
boundary evidence
evidencc
evidenec wi thout the
thc cost ofa complete
complcte cadastral SUf\'cy.
survey. These cost-effective
sun'ey.
processes
processcs include land description revicws.
physical land inspections. chain ofsun'eys
reviews. physiealland
of
ol'suf\'eys
surveys reviews,
reviews.
and boundary assurance certifications.
certifications. The Cadastral
Cadtlstral Surveyor realty specialist.
specialist, as appropriate.
appropriate,
us part of the process.
proccss, For examplc.
example,
cxample, in the BIA
BI A Northwest
Nonh west Region.
Region, the I3LM
I3 LM
provides certificates as
Page | 20
Appendix E
is processing
processin!; over 216 legal description reviews.
rcviews.
reviews. Nationally. the BLM processes over 800
boundary evidence products per year for the BIA.
Target Date: The pilot project has been completed.
completed. An agcncy-widc
agency-wide system will b..:
bo!
implemented 12 months
mOnlhs from issuance of a final rcport.
report.
rcpon.
Dircctor. Mincrals
Minerals
Minernls and Rcalty
Realty
Really Management
Res ponsible Official:
Offieial: Michael D. Nedd. Assistant Director.
illld implement
implemcnt IIa plan to increase
increasc the scope of cost reimbursable
Recommendation 2: Dcvelop
Develop and
cadastral surveys
SUf\'cys
evaluating
allributes.
survcys to include e"aluHtin!;
c\,illuatin!; significant boundary risk attributes.
IInributes.
Res ponse: Thc
The BLM concurs with the recommcndation.
recommendation. The 010
DIG stmes
stutes thnt
that the Cadastrel
Cadastral
Response:
Survey program did not take the opportunity
opponunity to desi!;n
design requested reirnbuTS:lble
reimbursable surveys to identify
reirnburs:lble
attributes and that the progr-um
program should expand the design of these
surveys. The BLM
high risk allributes
thesc survcys.
BlM
will issue an Instruction Memorandum
(1M)) to expand
cxp.lnd the scope of cost rcimburs:lblc
reimbursable
reimbu rsable cadastral
Mcmorandum (1M
surveys to include a provision for evaluming
e\'lIluming
attributes for high valued
evaluating significam
significant boundary risk allributes
After the highest risk boundaries have Ixcn
Alier
been idemilied
identilied and survey projects for
idemified
lor them
resources. Atler
have been funded,
funded. the BLM
BlM will seek cost reimbursement for other survey projects where
significant boundary risk allributes
att
ributes Hre
ure idcntified
allrihutes
sta!;c. The plan
identified during the project planning sta!;e.
stage.
wi ll require that oHices
offices evaluate land
onices
lund st:nus
status
sl:nus features such as [and
righls-of-way,
will
land ownership. rights-of-way.
leases. pcnnitted
penniued
uses. withdrawals. and the potential
impacts on Ihe
leases,
the resources
pennitted uscs,
polential impacls
n:sourccs in greater detail
during sun'ey
surve y planning. The Cadastral Sun'ey
Survey program functions
functiuns as a service
scrvice organil..ation,
organi,..ation,
orgunil..3lion,
responding 10
to survey requests as boundary
bounda!,) issues arc
are identified by DLM
Bl M or other Federal land
hmd
managers. As a result. a Federal agency requesting and paying for the SUf\'ey
managers.
survey may be reluctant
re!uctant to
pay for Ihe
the expansion of scope. Ilo\\e\'er.
I lowe\"er. Ihe
Ilo\\ever.
the I3LM
DLM could provide assistance
BLM
assiSlanCe in identifying
opportunities where
whcre high valued resources may provide potential revenue opportunities to the
agencies, as described by the OIG.
agencies.
DIG.
Tllrgl" Dale
Dille : Six months from
Tan!l"
Target
Date:
rrom issuanccofa
issuance of a final
fina! rcport.
report.
report,
Rcsponsiblt' Officilll
D. Nedd.
Nedd. Assistant Director. Minerals
MineTIIls and Realty
Rell hy Management
Responsible
Official;: Michael D.
Recomme
ndlltion 3: Explore with Congress Ihe
polentialto
to retain a portion of any revenues
re\'enucs
Recommendation
Recommendlltion
the potential
recovered as .IIa result of sun'cys
surveys pcrlonned.
perfonned. If approved. use the additional funding 10
perlonned.
to cover Ihe
the
COSt ofperfonning self-initialed
scll~initiated cadastral suneys on lands wilh
sell~initialed
with high risk boundaries.
Response: The BLM concurs with
\\~th the recommendation.
recommendation. The O[G notes Ihm
Ihal
thlll if a portion of the
re\'enues as
revenues
a~ a result
retaincd by thc
the I3LM.
BLM. Ihe
the
thc funds could be used to
10
result of survey work could be retained
perfonn other high priority sun'eys.
sUT\·eys. The BLM wilt
will pursue discussions with the Department's
Department' s
Office of Congressional and Legislative
Lcgislative Affairs
AfTairs
AiTaiJ'S on drafting and submilling
submitting an Administflltive
Admi
AdminiSlnllive
nistrative
Congress.
for such a statutory change to Congrcss.
Congress,
Legislative
Legislutive Proposal
Proposullor
Target
Targe! Date: Two months from when the final report
repon is issued.
issucd.
I{es
ponsihle
pnnsihle Officia
Director.
DiTL'ClOr, Minerals and Realty Managcment
Management
Responsihle
Official:l: Michael D. Nedd. Assistant Dirt."ctor.
Page | 21
Appendix E
R«o
mmt'
plan
Cadastral
Sur\,ey TCview
review over the
RtCO
R tto mnl
nlnl endalion
e ndation.&
nd a c ion~
4:: Develop and implement aII pilln
phm to ensure Clldastral
Cadaslral Suney
Survey
adequacy of boundary evidence
1('1
significant land
lund and rCS(lUrce
resource
evidcnce prior 110
0 the approval of significant
transactions.
transactions.
R
Rt.
e.~[!on
nn
sr: The BlM
nLM
BLM concurs with Ihe
the recommendation.
recommcndation. The
Tht! OIG
DIG Slates
slates thlllland
thutland
Re.
rn n se:
thaI
land transactions
\\ere routinely processed and
lind appro\'cd
approved withoulthe
\\ithoutthe
\\ithOUI
the benefit of
with unreliable
unreliuble boundary
boundury sun'eys were
review b)
by Cadastral Suney
Sun'ey
states thlll
thaI
boundary
boundury evidence I'Cvie\\
rcvic\\
Sun.e)' personnel. The OIG
DIG stlllcs
stutes
th
ut Ihis
this occurs
beclluse manngers
nlllllagers
staff do nUl
becau$C
becnu$C!
nllma~ers and lands and realty slnrr
Sluff
nOI
nllt understand
underswnd the
thc potcntial
potential benefits
bcnclils of cadastrnl
cadastral
cadaslnll
BLM
efforts to properly
pro]lCrl~ train !lud
and infonn its staff.
stuff. we
surveys. Al
though the fiLM
grcat
BlM makes grellt
great effons
Although
recognize thntthis
recognizc
that this
thi s mny
may be truc
insta11ces.
Accordingly. Ihe
Accordingl),
BLM will
wi ll de
develop
velop an
nn 1M
I ~'I
true in some inSUlnces.
instances. Accordingly,
the IlLM
requiring Cadustral
Cadaslrul
Survey program
ccnification
ofuil
ofulllegul
legul descriptions.
desc riptions.
riptions, the adequacy
IIdequaey of
Cadastral Sun'ey
progrdm certification
certilication of
all legal
boundW)'
boundar)
in frastructure.
rrastructure. and Ihc
the records of sun'c}
survcy
vnlued land
valued
hmd and
Ilnd re!>Ouree
resource
boundary infrastructure.
sun'cy for all high valul'<l
transactions.
transactions. Some examples of
oftrolllS!lctions
tl".msactions
\\ ith high ,'aluc..-d
att
allributes
ribuh:s include the
thc boundary
transactions with
valued attributes
manugcment of sites proposed for rcnc\\able
rcnewable
lcaS{'s
ing signilic3m
management
renewable energy
involving
signilicant investment and
energ~ leases
lcas..·!> imol,
illvol\
siWlilicalll
capital improvemems,
improvements. the
capiml
impro\emenlS.
Ihe disposal or
of high valued
\ alucd resources such as timber :lIld
and minerals. and the
cupital
manngcmtnt
management of high resource (but non-market)
non·market) value treasured landscapes.
llilldscllpcs. This policy will
\\;ll
apply to actions
o\'er aII YCI-Io-bc-dctcnnined
yet-to-bC'-detcnninoo dollar threshold or
Or tIa[J ddincd,
deline<!. nonmarket
nonmarkct
yet-to-bc-detennincd
defined.
aClions over
environmcntal value.
value_ As noted above.
abo\
c. the
thc I1LM
environmental
I3LM
abo\e.
I3 LM intends to apply the best prncticcs
practices described in
303 OM 7. the ··Standards
rust Lands 80undary
Boundary E\idcncc··to
E,idcnce"to all Federal agencies
"Standards for Indian ·1
Trust
E,idencc"to
age ncies
oflhe
[nterior.
Department of
the I)cpanmcnt
Dcpanment
lhe
Lhc [nlcrior.
Interior.
within thc
Tllttel
n ate:: Six months
mOnlhs from when the final rcpon
iSSUL-d.
Tllre.et
Ihte
TMrgel Ihte:
report is issued.
Official:
Assistant Director.
Minerals
Res
Rl'!lllon!lihle
R I.'~ nnn.\ihie
!lnn ~ ih l e Offiri:al:
Offici:!l: Michael D. Nedd. AssistllntDircctor.
Dirc.:ctor. Mlncrnls
Minemls and Realty
Rcalty Management
Mllnagement
Managcment
Devclop
implemcnt a plan 10
to ensure
cnsure that
thllt Cadastral
Cadastrnl Sun'ey
Sun'cy has
Recommendation:;
Recommend ation 5:: l)c\'elop
Recommendation
Develop and impkmem
implement
ovcrsight of all
projects,
oversight
lilt significant
significllnt commercial projects.
Res]lonse:
IlLM
doc'S 1I0t
recommendation as
wri nen. The O
D
IG asks
Res ponse: The 8lM
not concur with
OIG
thc
Rtsilonst':
BLM does
\\ ith the rccnmmcndntion
IlS written.
usks the
I3LM to ensurc
ensure
cnsure that
thlll Cadastrnl
thm
Cadas
Cadastral
tral Sun
SUI"\'ey
Sun'ey
·ey has oversight
oversi1;ht of all
oversight
lIll
nil significant
si1;nificant eommercinl
commercial
commerciul projects. While
thc BLM
the
th:lIthe
the Cadastral
Cadastr.t[ Sun'ey
Surve) progmm
progrnm sshould
hould plllY
playaa more central
centr"l role in Significant
significant
BlM agrees that
program
commcrcia[ projects.
projCCts. we do not believe that Cadastral
Cadastrnl
Cadastr.tl Sun'ey
Survcy should assume
ass ume an oversight role.
commercial
Sun·ey
ens uring thatlhe
project 1113nagc
managerr coord
in,Ucs
in:nes
SUn'c), on all significant
By ensuring
that the BLM
BLM projeci
project
coordina
tes with Cadastral
CadAstml Survey
commercial projects
boundary risks_
proj ects to evaluate ooundary
risks. we can gam
gain the
tht' bcnclils
benefits of these
bent'fits
tht'sc evaluations
without encumbering the
thc
tht' process
proccss with an additional lu)er
layer of
ofo\ersight.
0\
oversight.
crsighl. While Cadastral
Cadastral Survey
sen'c
thut
critic"l role.
rolc. Ihllt
th:lI is only one
has
hns expertise
e)(pcnisc in the 111nd
land boundary component :md
seT\'e Ihat
that critical
that
and should sen'\!
aspec
For that rearon.
reason. oversight
ovcrsight should relllain
remain wi
\\'ilh
aspect
aSpt.'C t of II11a significant
signi ficant commercial project. ,"or
rcmain
with
th the
BLM project manager 10
Ihat the necessary
necessaf) elcments
OLM
to ensure that
ufthese
these trnnsaetions
trnns.'lctions
clements of
transactions arc
are coordinutcd
coordinated
Sun·cy
and completed
hile at the same time requiring Ihat
completed......
\\hile
thllt the ClldaSlral
thut
Cadastral Sun·ey
SUT\'ey component
componcllI is a
mandatory pan of
mand3.tory
ofthc
the process.
process. Accordingly.
Aceordingl~. the 8LM
I3LM propoS<.~
proposc..'S that
proposc.'S
thut Rccommendation
Recommendation
Recommendution 5 be
modified
follows: ····Oe\·elop
····De\'elop and implement a3. plan 10
that
thc
modilicd
····De\·elop
to ensure
modiiicd as follows:
~nsure thllt
thaI Ihc
the fiLM
I3LM
BLM is required
requin.-d 10
to first
obtain
Cadastral
Survey
Cadastml Sun'c)
Survcy evaluation
c\'al uation ofthl"
of the boundar) risk !lurihuu."s
atlributes
atlribuh:s of all significant commercial
c\'aluation
ohtoin 8a Cada:i'tml
projects:'
BLM
develop
projc..'Cts,··
projt.'C.IS:· The IlLM
BlM will dc\
clop an 11M
M 10
to institute this ne\\
nc\\ polir;)
poliC)
polic) on Cadastral Sun'e}
Sun'e),
SUn'e)'
projects. This
rhis 1M willl\.""quire
in\'olvCfncnt
\\illl"Ctjuire
tha t Cadastrnl
Cadastral Survey
Sun 'ey
ey evaluate
c\'aluate the
involvement in commercial
commcrcial projccts.
will
require that
attributcs
ofall
all significlln(
significanl
signiiicant commercial
commercial projects
projccls
projecis and de\'clop
de\'c!0p
develop plans 10
1to0 mitigate the
boundary risk allributes
altributes of
risks associated
associllti..-d wilh
\\;Ih any
IIny high risk boundal)
boundary allribules
attributes,
altributes.
Page | 22
Appendix E
Target
Ta rget Date:
mont
months
ths from issuancc
issuance ora
ofa
of a final
tinal report.
Dat e: Six mon
Ress pon
ponss ihl
iblee Offidal:
Official:
Offici
a l: Michael D.
Nedd. Assistant Dircctor.
Mincrals and Rcalty
Realty Management
Managcmcnt
Responsible
D, Ncdd.
Director. Minerals
Re
n«ommendation
necommendation 66:: Require thm
oversight of signifi
significant
sig
nificant
cant eommcrcial
commcrcial
commercial projects
projccts be
bc
tha t costs for oversight
Recommendation
recovered
commercial entitie
cmities.
s.
recove red from the eommcrcial
entities.
~e : The
BlM concurs with the recommendation.
recommendation. The BLM will develop an 1M
1M to
R
Ru
ucs pon
ponse:
st'
Thc BLM
establish
cstablish the polic
policyy for cost reeovcry
rccovery of Cadastral
recovery
Cadas tral Survey services
se
service
rvicess in commercial
commcreial projects
projects.. This
cos
costt recovery will usc existing regulatory
authority to tthe
re gulatory :!U1hority
:JUlhority
he extent possible or the BLM
BlM will pursue
additionall authority where needed.
additiona
additional
needed .
Ila
a te
te:: Nine
Ninc
Ni
ne m
onth
onthss from issuance
issuancc ofa
of a final report.
rcport.
T a rget Il
n ate:
months
Rc.~pon s ible
ibJe Officilll:
Officilll : Michael D. Nedd. Assistllnt
Assistant Director. Minerals and Realt
Realtyy Management
Managcment
Respon
Re
Recommendation
cadastT:!1
survey
Recommendati
commendatioo n 77:: Develop and implement a Department-wide cadastral
cadas
tral su
rvey outreach
educate end users and
ilnd promote Ihe
the r,mge
r,mgc or lwailab1c
range
lIvllilllhlc
lIvailab1c services
se
service
rvicess and thc
the potcntial
potential
program to educmc
benefits of
or those services including Ihe
thc
the oppo
opportunities
rtunities t\0o maximi
maximize:
ze:
a. collection of signilicant
signi ficant fCvenues
TCvenues
rc\'enues from high val
value
ue unauthorized
unauthori zed use;
u~e:
h.
b. protection
protcction of Federal lands
environmental and
lind
Ilnd othcr
other dmnages;
dllmages;
damages:
b.
hmds from environmentlll
ofaecurme land boundaries manllgement
management of rights-of-way.
rightsights-of-way,
of-WilY. land
identiticmion ofaccurJte
idenlificmion
ofaccumte
c. identifiemion
withdrawals. land exchanges. and land dispos..1Is:
withdrawals.
dispoS<11s: and
d. identification of
orland
roads,
trails.
oflllnd
land features
fcaturcs including roads.
rollds. trail
s. and hazardous ssites.
itites.
es.
Res
es ponse:
ponsse: The OLM
pon
I3LM
BLM concu
concurs
rs with this fCeommendation
recommendation..
R
'"Inc
Ine BLM
BlM will develop
de velop and implement
implcment an Olllreaeh
outreach program to add
Olllreach
address
ress the findings of
oftnis
ofthi5
this report.
report.
The outreach
outrcach program will include 001
0DOlmccting
0 1 meetingss and functions
function s conceming
coneeming Cadastral Survey. A
diseussion
discussion of
oflhe
the new
ncw boundary standard
st andard products. new policies. enhancement
enhance
cnhancement
ment of
oftmining
training
curriculums. publiclltion
publication on websites
wehsites ofbcst
ofbc~ t practices,
practices.
practice
s. lessons leamed.
learned. fact
faci ssheets,
heets. and
nod
IlLM
BLM'·ss State Onice
Office conferences
conferenccs and workshops will
pprescntations
resentations at
Ilt OlM'
wiJ1 be pan
part of the outreach.
thc IlLM
BLM and the IlI
DlM
BIA
BlA
A staff
sUlff would benefit from additional training.
trainiing. The
train
Thc
The OIG stated thm the
BlM's
La
surveying,
BLM·s
BLM's llInd
Land
nd Academy provides basic training on cadastral
cadastml survey
survcying.
ing, legal descriptions. and
BLM
thc I3lA
BIA in the development
dC\'e!opment of similar training alt
al the
at
th
he
land status. The B
lLM has offer
offered
ed to assist the
BIA training center
centcr in Albuquerque. The BLM
BlM provides legal description
descr iption review at the
the B
il IIA
A
realty
realt y conferences
confercnccs on an
a n as-needed basis
basis.
basis.. lbe
The I3LM
BLM hilS
has also
nlso de\elopcd
dc\
developed
·clopcd the Certified F
Federal
ederal
Surveyor tmining
training modules for the professional
professional surveyor who is working on or adjacent to
Federal and IIndian
ndian lands.
Tare ..! nate:: Twelve months fr
Tareel
rrom
om issuance of a final report.
Tareetl>atf"
Page | 23
Appendix E
Res ponsible
Res
pon
ponss i bl e Offi
O
Offic
ffi ccia
ia ll:: Michael D
D.. N
Nedd,
edd, A
Assistant
ssistant Director
Director., M
Minerals
inerals and Realty Management
R
eco mm en
d atio
Ex pand the procedure
modelss found in the
Recomm
endatio
a tio n 8
8:: Expand
proceduress for boundary evidence model
Departmen tal Manual "Standards
Departmental
"Standard
Standardss for Indian Tru
Trust
st Land
Landss Boundar
Boundaryy Ev
Evidence"
idence" (303 OM
DM 7[sicJ)
to include conducting less
le ss costly boundary resol
re sol
soluti
ution
utions
ons or assurances to all bureau
bureauss Departmentwide.
w ith this
ommendation.. As explained above
Res ponse:
Res
p o n se: The BLM concurs
concurs with
thi s rec
recommendation
above,, the BLM
reco gni zes the value in the processes
recognizes
proce
processses se
sett forth in 303 OM
DM 7 and ssupports
upports the expansion of the
sco pe to other
scope
other Federal
Federal agencies in the
th e Department of the Int
Interior,
Interior
erior,, as appropriate.
appropriate. The BLM w
wii ll
consult with
wi th appropriate officia
oftlcials
ls within tthe
he office of the Assistant
Assistan t Secretary of Policy
Policy,,
recommendation.
Management and Budget on how 10
to proceed with
wit h this
th is re
co mmendation.
mmendat ion.
Targ
Target
T argeet Dat
Date:
e: Three month
monthss from issuance of a final
final report.
report.
Ress p o n s ibl e Offici
D.. Ne
Nedd.
Director.
Managementt
Responsible
Re
Officiaa ll:: Michael D
dd, Assistant Dir
ector. Minerals
Mineral s and Realty Managemen
Page | 24
Appendix F
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS’ RESPONSE
·.'..
D
D
'~"
., ''''''''''~
.
''''~
United States Department of the Interior
"'
•
A
" """;
""
.....~Io1' ,;."
•
BUREA U OF INDIAN
I DIAN AFFAlRS
AFFAIRS
'
Washinglon,
Wash inglon. D.C. 20240
1JoIlUt.
I'" uny
Y l£ru
IlU'EA 10-
MAY 0 3 2011
ZOll
Memorandum
Memorandul11
To:
Kimberly Elmore
As
Assistant
iSlam Ins
Inspecto
Inspector
pectorr General for Audi
Audits.
ts. Inspections and Evalualion
Evulualions
Evaluatio nss
Ilaw'fJ{Le~~ f
f!/-'
~
Through:f"t.rr)
Through:l"t.rr)
Through:f"t.rry Echo lIaw,
lIaw.f jJ ,rtf
,fLf
Assistant Secretar)
Secretary - Ind
Indian
ian Afl'airs
Affairs
AfTairs
From:
-/u"
--/~.
:=:::>
--/~' 5
:=5
Michael Black
Actin
Acting
Actin&
gD
Dircclor.
Din.~lOr.
ircclor. Bureau of lndia.l
Indla.l
Indl:lI/ Aff'l'irs
Affairs
Aff:l'irs
Subject:
Subject:
Office ofln
of In spcclor
specto r Gcneml
General Draft Audit Report. Department
Depanment orlhe
of the Interior's
Management of
orland
land
Land Boundaries
Bo undaries (Audit No.
o. C-IN-MOA-OOOI-2009)
C- IN-MOA-OOOI-2009)
Thi
Thiss responds 1
100 the memorandum dated Fcbnl8ry
Fcbruar) 18.2010.
18. 20 IO. from the OJlicc
Office of Inspector
General (DIG)
auditt report.
re port . Dcpnrtment
Dcpanmem orthe Interior'
Interior"s
Interior'ss Management of Land Boundaries
(D IG ) draft audi
No.
1-2009).
I-2009). The report contains
comains one recommendation for the OUTeau
IN-MOA-OOOl-2009).
Bureau of
(Audit No.
o. C- IN-MOA-OOO
Indian Affairs
AfTairs (BIA)
(B IA) and eight
l'jght recommendations for
ror the Bureau ooff Land Management (13LM).
(BLM).
The BJA
BIA concurs with
\l,ith recommendation
recommcndation 9. Ill!!
rhe
nli;~ I3IA
BIA
BJA will \\ork
\\ ork to establish
establ
establish:tn
ish an agreement with
13LM
BLM so that 131...-\
BlA and tribal
triba l employees recei\
r~ceive
r~ccive
10
0 that provided 10
to BLM
BIA
e comparable train ing 1
employees
ational
2010.
tile Nati
onal 'J
Training
date or
oofOeccmbC'r
r December 31
31.. 20
10. to
cmplo)'ces at the
ational1
raining Center. We anticipate a target dale
\\ork
\\.ork wi th BLM to develop and eSL
v"ork
estu
establish
Hbli
bli sh the agrecment.
agreement. The responsiblt:
responsiiblt:
respons
ble oflicial
official for
ror this
th is elTon
etTon
rrust Se
Serv
rvices.
ices. Bureau of
oflndiall
Indian Affairs.
AtTairs.
is Vick i Forrest. Deputy Bureau Director. Trust
Services.
orlndian
If you have
havc an)
any questions or concerns regarding
regard ing this response. please contact
colllacl
co ntact Vicki Forrest at
(202) 208-5831
208-583 1..
Page | 25
Report Fraud, Waste,
and Mismanagement
Fraud, waste, and mismanagement in
government concern everyone: Office of
Inspector General staff, Departmental
employees, and the general public. We
actively solicit allegations of any inefficient
and wasteful practices, fraud, and
mismanagement related to Departmental or
Insular Area programs and operations. You
can report allegations to us in several ways.
By Mail:
U.S. Department of the Interior
Office of Inspector General
Mail Stop 4428 MIB
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20240
By Phone:
24-Hour Toll Free
Washington Metro Area
By Fax:
703-487-5402
By Internet:
www.doioig.gov
800-424-5081
703-487-5435