Business meeting to consider the nomination of William Kirkland, of Georgia, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior; to be immediately followed by hearings to examine Federal programs at the Department of Energy.

1[Senate Hearing 119-178]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                       S. Hrg. 119-17856                  UNLEASHING INDIAN ENERGY_EXAMINING7                     FEDERAL PROGRAMS AT THE U.S.8                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY9=======================================================================1011                                HEARING1213                               BEFORE THE1415                      COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS16                          UNITED STATES SENATE1718                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS1920                             FIRST SESSION2122                               __________2324                           SEPTEMBER 10, 20252526                               __________2728         Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs2930[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3132                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE3361-828 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 202634-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------3536                     COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS3738                    LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman39                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii, Vice Chairman4041JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota            MARIA CANTWELL, Washington42STEVE DAINES, Montana                CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada43MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma           TINA SMITH, Minnesota44MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota            BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico45JERRY MORAN, Kansas4647Amber Ebarb, Majority Staff          Jennifer Romero, Minority Staff48    Director                             Director and Chief Counsel49Lucy Murfitt, Chief Counsel          Darren Modzelewski, Counsel50Samuel Hiratsuka, Professional       Alanna Purdy, Policy Advisor51    Staff                            Christie Kimura, Legislative Aide52Sarah McKinnis, Legislative53    Assistant54                            C O N T E N T S5556                              ----------57                                                                   Page58Hearing held on September 10, 2025...............................     159Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................    2760Statement of Senator Daines......................................    2661Statement of Senator Murkowski...................................     162Statement of Senator Schatz......................................     263Statement of Senator Smith.......................................    246465                               Witnesses6667Conrad, David, Acting Director/Deputy Director, Office of Indian68  Energy Policy and Programs, U.S. Department of Energy..........     469    Prepared statement...........................................     570Fenton, Jocelyn, Director of Programs, Denali Commission.........    1471    Prepared statement...........................................    1672Ortiz, Dr. Anna Maria, Director, Natural Resources and73  Environment, U.S. Government Accountability Office.............     874    Prepared statement...........................................     97576                                Appendix7778Caldera, Hon. Amber, Chairwoman, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe,79  letter, submitted for the record...............................    4780Mike, Hon. Darrell, Chairman, Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission81  Indians, prepared statement....................................    3982Oceti Sakowin Power Authority (OSPA), position paper.............    4083Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Murkowski84  to:............................................................85David Conrad.....................................................    5786Jocelyn Fenton...................................................    4887Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz.............................................    5188Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to..89David Conrad.....................................................    6090Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz.............................................    529192   UNLEASHING INDIAN ENERGY--EXAMINING FEDERAL PROGRAMS AT THE U.S.93                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY9495                              ----------9697                     WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 20259899                                       U.S. Senate,100                               Committee on Indian Affairs,101                                                    Washington, DC.102    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:51 p.m. in room103628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski,104Chairman of the Committee, presiding.105106           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,107                    U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA108109    The Chairman. Good afternoon, everyone. I will invite the110witnesses to come forward.111    I now call this oversight hearing to order. At today's112hearing, we are going to learn more about the Department of113Energy's tribal energy programs, both its Office of Indian114Energy and the loan program office's Tribal Energy Financing115Program, and how these programs are working and what can be116improved upon to better serve tribes in their efforts to117unleash their energy resources.118    We will also be able to hear from the Denali Commission119about its work and partnership with DOE and promoting energy120infrastructure in rural Alaska Native communities.121    Tribes were historically left out of national122electrification efforts, and still today face lower rates of123electricity access and higher energy cost burdens than other124communities in America. The Office of Indian Energy Policy and125Programs at the Department of Energy is helping fill these gaps126by providing technical and financial assistance to tribes127across the Country.128    In Igiugig, Alaska, for example, the Office of Indian129Energy helped fund the installation of two hydro-kinetic130devices on the Kvichak River, and energy storage technology.131The devices were designed specifically to not disturb the132sockeye salmon that run in the Kvichak, which Igiugig residents133rely upon for subsistence.134    The devices augment the community's diesel fuel facility,135saving the small community nearly $170,000 a year, which is a136lot of money for a small community.137    And this is not a one-off example. There are tribally-led138opportunities for development and community sustainability139across Indian Country and Alaska. While tribal lands only140account for 2 percent of all lands in the Country, they contain141an estimated 50 percent of potential uranium reserves, 30142percent of coal reserves west of the Mississippi, 20 percent of143known oil and gas reserves, and 6.5 percent of all utility-144scale potential renewable energy resources.145    As more tribes jump into the energy development space and146look to build resilience in their existing energy systems,147lower costs, and generate revenue that can then be used to148boost the tribal economy and social services, they often need149greater amounts of capital. Unfortunately, we know that150complexities due to permitting, land jurisdiction and151ownership, and the unfamiliarity of banking with lending to152tribes means that tribes are often at a disadvantage when153developing their own resources and connecting their communities154to the grid.155    Eight-six percent of tribal lands with energy potential are156undeveloped and this, I think, is unacceptable.157    Here in Congress we have worked on a bipartisan basis to158try and provide avenues for tribal capital access. Yet, as the159GAO has found in their Tribal Energy Finance Report, one of160those avenues, the Tribal Energy Financing Program at DOE, is161not working. Meant to enable tribal access to loans and loan162guarantees, DOE's loan program office has successfully closed163only one loan guarantee since the solicitation was first issued164in 2018. You will hear that repeated throughout today's165oversight.166    Since 2018, only one loan guarantee has been closed; no167loans.168    We talked about this before in the Committee, and both169Congress and DOE have taken multiple steps to improve the170program. But these haven't gone far enough. So I am going to171look forward to hearing from GAO on their recommendations,172particularly the potential for a public financing pathway.173    Such a change could improve program implementation by174allowing DOE to treat tribes as the governments they are,175rather than as large-scale utilities or private equity groups176that receive the other kinds of loans from LPO. Maybe then we177would see the existing $20 billion in loan authority that178exists utilized to get the projects done.179    The insights and feedback that we garner here today will180help us as we work together to ensure that tribes are poised to181take advantage of their resources, build more resilient, cost-182effective energy systems, and benefit from and contribute to183this administration's focus on unleashing American energy.184    I also want to note that our hearing record is open for two185weeks, and we will welcome feedback from tribes and Tribal186Energy Development Organizations on these topics as well.187    So I now turn to the Vice Chair for his opening statement.188189                STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,190                    U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII191192    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair Murkowski.193    Last Congress, we made historic bipartisan investments in194Indian Country's energy future and its ability to determine195that future for itself, whether through non-renewable or196renewable sources. We authorized nearly half a billion dollars197directly to Native communities for their energy needs, and made198them eligible for billions more.199    Our goal was to help set up Native communities on a new200path to energy security regardless of the type of energy. Until201recently, we saw dividends on those investments. For example,202the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program issued its first203successful loan after the IRA increased its loan guarantee204amount from $2 billion to $20 billion, and authorized $75205million for tribes to help stand up their energy projects.206    We also acted so that tribes could receive DOE funds to207address their energy needs in ways that work for them and208empower their energy sovereignty. Congress listened to Native209communities and invested in their energy development potential,210putting them in the driver's seat. We made progress, but now211there are real efforts to undo that progress.212    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is a case in point. More213than 100 tribes wrote about the importance of the Tribal Energy214Loan Guarantee Program and the IRA's tax credits, urging215Congress not to reverse course. But over the objection of216Native communities and their industry partners, the One Big217Beautiful Bill rescinded millions in funding for the DOE's218Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program and raised energy costs by219terminating tax credits that could account for up to 70 percent220of project costs for tribes and their energy partners.221    On top of this, President Trump is directing agencies to222cancel and delay renewable energy projects only. And his223proposed cuts to DOE funding and staff will exacerbate the224brain drain from thousands of employees who have already left225to thousands more who may be subject to DOE's RIF plan.226    This historic loss of staff and resources creates risks for227tribes whose energy goals can't be met without Federal dollars,228and the expertise of agency staff who make tribal energy229projects a reality.230    Last Congress, we started to move past the status quo. But231now if feels like we are not even returning to that old mark,232but going past it. So I want to better understand what is233happening at DOE, so that we can continue working in a234bipartisan way to hold the Federal Government accountable to235Indian Country's energy needs.236    I look forward to the testimony from today's panel, and I237thank you for coming to testify.238    The Chairman. Thank you, Vice Chair Schatz.239    We will now turn to witnesses. We have today Mr. David240Conrad. He is the Acting Director and Deputy Director at the241U.S. Department of Energy Office of Indian Energy Policy and242Programs. He will be followed by Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz, who is243the Director at the Government Accountability Office, GAO, in244the Natural Resources and Environment Division. And we have the245opportunity today to have back before the Committee Ms. Jocelyn246Fenton. Jocelyn is the Director of Programs at the Denali247Commission.248    Thank you for being here, all of you. Jocelyn, thank you249for making the long trip from Alaska to be here today.250    I want to remind the witnesses that we do have your full251written testimony. It will be part of the official hearing252record, so we would ask that you keep your oral comments to no253more than five minutes, so we have plenty of time for members254to ask questions.255    Mr. Conrad, if you would please begin with your testimony.256257  STATEMENT OF DAVID CONRAD, ACTING DIRECTOR/DEPUTY DIRECTOR,258              OFFICE OF INDIAN ENERGY POLICY AND259              PROGRAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY260261    Mr. Conrad. Good afternoon, Chair Murkowski and Vice Chair262Schatz, and members of the Committee. Thank you for the263invitation to speak about unleashing tribal energy.264    My name is David Conrad, as you mentioned. I am a citizen265of the Osage Nation. I am proud to serve as the Deputy Director266and Acting Director of the Department of Energy's Office of267Indian Energy.268    My career began with the Council of Energy Resource Tibes269in 1991 and has centered on tribal energy ever since. I have270worked in intergovernmental relations and energy development,271both within tribal government and the Federal Government.272    These experiences have given me an understanding of the273tribal energy sector's complexities and the transformative274potential for tribal nations.275    Twenty years ago, this Committee championed the Indian276Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act. It was a277vital part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, establishing the278Office of Indian Energy within the Department of Energy. Title279V of that Act charged our office with lowering energy costs for280tribes, developing Indian energy, addressing gaps in281electricity access in Indian Country.282    This law also directed us to carry out our programs in283accordance with the principles of self-determination. Simply284put, Congress told us to trust tribes to know what is best for285their citizens as they pursue energy projects.286    Over the last 20 years, the Office of Indian Energy has287fulfilled our Congressional mandate. We have supported over 240288tribal energy projects. We have delivered more affordable and289reliable energy to over 11,000 homes and buildings across290Indian Country. And we have fulfilled over 500 requests for291technical assistance, giving tribes access to expertise at our292national labs to carry out strategic energy planning, analyze293the potential of their energy resource and chart a course to294achieve their energy visions.295    I am privileged to lead the Office of Indian Energy during296another pivotal moment as we work to unleash tribal energy.297Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Wright,298our vital work continues with a key addition. We are299strengthening our commitment to ensure tribes share in the300prosperity of American energy dominance. Securing access to301affordable, reliable energy also remains central to our mission302and Congressional charge.303    Tribes possess extensive energy resources. Our new304additional focus will help ensure that they are poised to305capture a greater share of the energy value chain. While306resource ownership offers its own opportunities, tribes307increasingly want to develop their own energy resources using308their own expertise and workforces.309    The Office of Indian Energy is working to support tribes to310implement their vision. In March, we partnered with the311Department of Commerce to extend the commercial law development312program to support tribes in advancing high value energy313projects, such as data centers, critical minerals development,314and new generation and transmission infrastructure.315    The program is already serving multiple tribal partners to316enhance the legal environment for energy sector commerce to317thrive in their communities. Additionally, in collaboration318with the Department of Energy's Innovator Fellowship program,31911 new energy innovator fellows have been placed in tribal host320institutions this year. This is the largest number of fellows a321tribe will host of any cohort to date. These fellows work with322tribes to modernize power systems, enhance energy323infrastructure, and contribute to a more reliable, affordable324and resilient U.S. power system.325    Finally, we expanded our Tribal Energy Navigator Service326with dedicated staff. This service responds to inquiries from327tribes developing energy projects, and facilitates more328efficient access to all of DOE's programs, as well as other329Federal energy programs available to them.330    Building on the foundation laid by this Committee 20 years331ago, we continue to foster the trust and predictability332essential for Indian Country to unleash their own energy333resources. As the tribal energy sector gains momentum, tribes334are proving that American Indian and Alaska Native livelihoods335flourish most when tribes direct their own energy development.336    The Office of Indian Energy, in partnership with tribal337nations and other Federal agencies, remains committed to338maximizing the impact of Federal investment in this sector. We339look forward to continuing this essential work with this340Committee.341    I am happy to answer any questions.342    [The prepared statement of Mr. Conrad follows:]343344 Prepared Statement of David Conrad, Acting Director/Deputy Director,345 Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs, U.S. Department of Energy346Introduction347    Good afternoon Chair Murkowski, Vice Chair Schatz, and members of348the Committee. Thank you for the invitation to testify. My name is349David Conrad. I am a citizen of the Osage Nation, and I am proud to350serve as Deputy Director and Acting Director of the Office of Indian351Energy. I believe I am the first Deputy Director to appear before this352Committee. Since 2011, the leadership positions in the Office,353including Deputy Director, were term-limited, forcing a reset with each354new administration. I am excited that in 2023 the position of Deputy355Director became a permanent excepted service position, strengthening356the continuity we provide to Indian Country. Achieving this continuity357has not been easy and is a testament to the sustained commitment and358vision of Tribal leadership.359    Twenty years ago, this Committee was instrumental in passing the360Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act, a key361component of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, establishing the Office of362Indian Energy Policy and Programs within the Department of Energy363(DOE).364    As I believe all of you know, that achievement was the culmination365of decades of work. From the first oil wells drilled on Indian land in366Oklahoma during the early 1900's to the formation of the Council of367Energy Resource Tribes in 1976, Tribal leadership has worked with368government, industry, and others to create the partnerships necessary369to bring us all here today.370    The vision for our Office was established in law: it charges us to371promote Tribal energy development, efficiency, and use; reduce and372stabilize energy costs; enhance and strengthen Tribal energy and373economic infrastructure; and bring electrical power and service to374Indian lands and homes (42 U.S.C.  7144e). I am happy to share that375this vision continues to be carried out under President Trump's and376Secretary Wright's leadership, with key initiatives to ensure that377Tribes are poised to unleash their own energy resources, including378identifying additional DOE resources for our partners in the Arctic379Energy Office.380    Congress also directed the Office to carry out its work in381accordance with the long-standing principle of Tribal Self-382Determination, first codified in the Indian Self-Determination and383Education Assistance Act of 1975, during the Ford Administration. The384Senate recently celebrated the 50th anniversary of that law. The385principle, simply put, tells us that Tribes know best how to implement386the programs and projects intended to benefit their citizens. We hold387this principle in mind as we support an agenda of energy dominance.388    To pursue Tribal energy priorities, Tribes have used multiple389pathways to deploy energy solutions. These include creating Tribal390Utility Authorities; incorporating energy deployment in government391operations and in housing developments; and incorporating energy392deployment in their economic enterprises from grocery stores to gaming393operations. Tribes have also used multiple approaches to securing394resources for energy projects--including federal and state grants,395loans, Tribal assets, and commercial finance options. Through the396Office of Indian Energy's Navigator service, we help Tribes find the397funding opportunities which best fit their needs.398The Impact of the Office of Indian Energy399    The Department of Energy has been faithfully implementing our400statute for the last 20 years by supporting Tribes to develop and401pursue their energy visions. Since 2010, we have supported over 240402Tribal energy projects, encompassing energy planning and the deployment403of microgrids, new power generation, and efficiency upgrades to404buildings to reduce energy costs and improve reliability. For each of405these 240+ projects, Tribes proposed the technologies they wanted to406pursue, competed for the award, and contributed cost-share. Tribes407continue to lead on the implementation, and they continue to maintain408the projects ensuring they deliver for years to come. To date, the409energy performance of 11,000 buildings has been improved--and these410buildings are now lowering energy costs for Tribes every day. Across411all Indian Energy deployment projects, Tribal governments and citizens412are projected to save $530 million. These projects have been413predominantly in rural and remote areas, creating ripple effects which414often benefit neighboring communities through reduced burden on their415grids, delivery of essential services during emergencies, and cheaper416power through energy addition.417    These projects have increased Tribal capacity to operate in the418energy sector, while injecting much needed innovation into rural and419remote development and demonstrating the strong capabilities of Tribes420in the energy sector. I'll briefly touch on three examples: First, the421Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa just completed a biomass422heating system to heat their Brookston community center near Cloquet,423Minnesota by using local wood waste products and leveraging their own424technical expertise on the unique set of required feeders and boilers.425The system is projected to save $31,000 per year. Second, Kawerak Inc,426an intertribal organization, is installing an organic rankine cycle427turbine, a novel alternative to a steam turbine, to generate firm power428from their geothermal resources in Pilgrim Hot Springs, Alaska. And429finally, the Village of Igiugig, Alaska is installing a unique run-of-430river hydropower system which is projected to add 35 kW of power431generation for 33 homes and buildings. These projects were selected for432support based on the Tribe's resources, robust analysis, and Tribal433self-determination. With this support, these small communities are434charting new paths to ensure that reliable and affordable energy435reaches every corner of America.436    Additionally, the Office of Indian Energy has fulfilled well over437500 requests for technical assistance by giving Tribes access to our438national labs and associated experts, facilitating the advancement of439energy projects with strategic planning and resource analysis.440Recent Intiatives Under the Trump Administration441    We continue to gain momentum under President Trump's and Secretary442Wright's leadership. In the past, the Office of Indian Energy has443focused heavily on community scale energy. This critical work continues444as we support Tribes in developing any energy source which, through445robust analysis, is shown to support reliable and affordable power.446Today, we also look beyond community scale projects to ensure that447Tribal Nations are poised to share in the prosperity of unleashing448American energy (E.O. 14154) through their self-determined paths. We449are doing this by leveraging strategic partnerships:450451   In March 2025, the Office of Indian Energy partnered with452        the U.S. Department of Commerce to extend the Commercial Law453        Development Program (CLDP) to work with Tribal Nations on454        energy development. This additional technical assistance455        supports Tribes in advancing high-value energy projects, such456        as data centers, critical minerals development, and new457        generation and transmission infrastructure. The assistance is458        designed to help Tribes structure energy deals and establish459        legal frameworks to enhance energy sector commerce. The program460        is already serving multiple Tribal partners.461462   Additionally, in collaboration with DOE offices, eleven new463        Energy Innovator Fellows have been placed in Tribal host464        institutions this year. This is the largest number of fellows465        at Tribal hosts of any cohort to date. These fellows will466        collaborate with Tribes to modernize power systems, enhance467        energy infrastructure for industry, and contribute to a more468        reliable, affordable, and resilient U.S. power system. These469        fellows are expanding the capacity of the Tribal energy470        ecosystem.471472   Finally, the Office of Indian Energy has expanded our Tribal473        Energy Navigator Service. This service responds to inquiries474        from Tribes developing energy projects and facilitates more475        efficient access to DOE and the other federal energy programs476        available to them.477478    These recent initiatives elevate existing federal resources, while479collectively building a foundation of trust and predictability for480Indian Country to unleash their own vast energy resources to481participate in the broader regional and national energy economy.482    Achieving affordable, reliable, and secure energy is not without483its challenges. Energy development can be demanding, especially for484many Tribes with small staff, where each employee wears multiple hats.485Tribes must create new regulations, run request for proposals, and486negotiate interconnections, off-take agreements, and rights-of-way, all487while constantly educating others about their sovereignty and history.488It takes time to get projects right. But Tribes are up for this489challenge, and the momentum for energy security has only continued to490grow.491The Unique Circumstances of Alaska492    I want to focus on Alaska for a moment as Alaska presents its own493unique opportunities and challenges. Due to its harsh climate,494remoteness, and historic laws like the Alaska Native Claims Settlement495Act (ANCSA), Alaska stands distinct from the reservation system in the496lower forty-eight. Secretary Wright acknowledged the long running497history and sovereignty of Alaska Natives, and the rights of Native498Alaskans to develop their own energy resources, when he visited the499Village of Utqiagvik this past June. To account for the unique500circumstances of Alaska, the Office of Indian Energy works closely with501key partners in Alaska to ensure remote communities have fair access to502the full suite of Tribal and programmatic resources of DOE. The Offices503of Indian Energy and Arctic Energy have co-located their workspaces in504Anchorage to facilitate interoffice cooperation and collaborative505community engagement. The Arctic Energy Office continues to focus on506engagement with Alaska Native regional and village corporations across507the entire state, and these ANCSA corporations remain eligible for508Office of Indian Energy assistance.509    Evidence shows these efforts have been effective. Since 2010,510approximately 28 percent of deployment funding and approximately 42511percent of all technical assistance from the Office of Indian Energy512has gone to Alaska, where 40 percent of all Federally recognized Tribes513in the United States reside. This technical assistance is delivered in514collaboration with the Denali Commission and the Alaska Native Tribal515Health Consortium to ensure the unique circumstances of Alaska are516being considered.517The Work Ahead518    For a generation, Congress has allowed the Office of Indian Energy519to support Tribal Nations in a sustained effort to address high energy520costs and bolster critical energy infrastructure in their communities.521The achievements that Tribes have made along the way underscore this522committee's foresight and the power of Tribal self-determination.523    That said, we recognize there is still work to be done. Our work in524support of 240 Tribal energy projects is modest in comparison to 574525federally recognized Tribes, many of which govern over multiple526communities, and the issues of reliability and affordability that527plague the Nation's grid are acutely felt in Indian Country. Tribal528communities face electricity outages approximately six and a half times529more frequently than the U.S. average. \1\ It is well known that many530Tribes are at the end of the distribution lines, on poor performing531circuits, or lack grid access altogether. Compounding this challenge,532Tribal households allocate a disproportionately high portion of their533income to energy costs, an amount that is four times greater than the534national average. \2\ These critical findings were detailed in a 2023535Report on Tribal Energy Access and Reliability, submitted to Congress536by the Office of Indian Energy, and these remain persistent challenges537today.538---------------------------------------------------------------------------539    \1\ NREL LEAD Tool; Tribal Energy Access and Reliability Report to540Congress--2023541    \2\ Tribal Energy Access and Reliability Report to Congress--2023;542Self-reported Indian Energy grant applicant data; Indian Country Energy543and Infrastructure Working Group. (2020, August 7). Tribal Energy544COVID-19 Survey.545---------------------------------------------------------------------------546    The Office of Indian Energy, in partnership with Tribal Nations and547other federal agencies, is committed to maximizing the impact of548federal investments to address these challenges, and we look forward to549continuing this essential work in collaboration with this committee.550551    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Conrad.552    Next, we turn to Dr. Ortiz. Welcome.553554STATEMENT OF DR. ANNA MARIA ORTIZ, DIRECTOR, NATURAL RESOURCES555               AND ENVIRONMENT, U.S. GOVERNMENT556                     ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE557558    Dr. Ortiz. Thank you.559    Chair Murkowski, Vice Chair Schatz, members of the560Committee, thank you for having me today. My name is Anna Maria561Ortiz, and I have the honor of overseeing GAO's portfolio on562tribal and Native American issues. I am happy to discuss our563recent report on the Tribal and Energy Finance program.564    Unleashing potential energy resources throughout Indian565Country could greatly increase access to reliable and566affordable electricity, contribute to tribal economic567development and help address the Nation's energy production568needs. The Department of Energy's Tribal Energy Financing569program, run by its loan programs office, or LPO, exists to570help tribes and tribal applicants with limited access to571private capital to invest in their own lands and resources.572    The program is technology neutral and has the authority to573offer up to $20 billion in direct loans and loan guarantees.574Additionally, the program focuses on tribal ownership of575projects, allowing even small tribes a chance to participate.576    These features offer tribes with different lands and577resources the flexibility to determine their own approaches to578effective energy development, consistent with the principle of579tribal sovereignty.580    Despite these benefits, GAO founded that LPO administered581the Tribal Energy Financing program in ways that make it nearly582impossible for applicants to successfully navigate the loan583process. Program design features have deterred many potential584applicants and have delayed and lengthened the process for585others.586    For example, LPO places the burden of due diligence, the587underwriting process for the loan or the loan guarantee, on the588backs of tribal applicants, obligating them to commit unknown589amounts of money to pay for contracted legal and technical590experts, some of whom lack sufficient expertise in tribal591energy development. This puts the tribe on the hook for these592consultants' learning curves and potentially millions of593dollars overall.594    If applicants are not deterred by the program's design595features, they confront lengthy application review processes,596inconsistent and conflicting program guidance, and limited and597changing LPO staff, many of whom lack appropriate training and598experience. For example, one applicant spent nearly two years599in the review process responding to varied and redundant600requests for information from different LPO staff before a key601development partner pulled out, effectively jettisoning the602project.603    Since the Tribal Energy Financing Program first solicited604applications in 2018, LPO has only completed one partial loan605guarantee. As of July 2025, 12 other applications have been606rejected, withdrawn or paused. Of the seven remaining active607applications, four have been under review for more than two608years.609    The Tribal Energy Financing Program is a poignant example610of what happens when tribal programs are designed and611administered without regard to tribal needs. By modeling its612application review process on a different program designed613primarily for large projects and untested technologies, the614Department of Energy inadvertently curtailed its ability to615effectively serve tribal applicants.616    GAO recommended, and the Department of Energy agreed, that617LPO review and revise program elements, develop and document618consistent and coherent guidance for staff and applicants, and619designate dedicated staff with tribal expertise to support the620program. GAO's recommendations aim to remove unnecessarily621complex and lengthy processes imposed by LPO to unleash the622program to its full potential.623    Thank you. This concludes my oral statement. I welcome any624questions.625    [The prepared statement of Ms. Ortiz follows:]626627Prepared Statement of Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz, Director, Natural Resources628         and Environment, U.S. Government Accountability Office629    Chairman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and Members of the630Committee:631    Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our recent work on the632Department of Energy's (DOE) tribal energy programs. My testimony633summarizes our August 2025 report, Tribal Energy Finance: Changes to634DOE Loan Program Would Reduce Barriers for Tribes. \1\ This statement635discusses (1) the status of applications to DOE's Tribal Energy636Financing Program (TEFP), (2) strengths and limitations of the program,637and (3) ways to improve its design and implementation.638---------------------------------------------------------------------------639    \1\ GAO, Tribal Energy Finance: Changes to DOE Loan Program Would640Reduce Barriers for Tribes, GAO-25-107441 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 11,6412025).642---------------------------------------------------------------------------643    While considerable conventional and renewable energy resources644exist throughout Indian country, tribal communities often face645challenges to developing these resources. \2\ These include a lack of646access to capital and systemic barriers to accessing federal programs.647\3\ According to DOE, 86 percent of tribal lands with energy potential648are undeveloped. Developing these resources through tribal energy649projects could help address the nation's energy needs and create650economic development opportunities for some Tribes and their members.651\4\ For example, such projects can help Tribes lower their energy costs652and create access to reliable energy, improve living conditions, fund653government programs and services, increase employment, and reduce654poverty within the Tribe and surrounding areas.655---------------------------------------------------------------------------656    \2\ As of August 2025, there were 574 federally recognized Tribes657in the contiguous United States and Alaska. Federally recognized Tribes658have a government-to-government relationship with the United States and659are eligible to receive certain protections, services, and benefits by660virtue of their status as Indian Tribes. For the purposes of this661statement, we use the term ``Tribes'' to refer to any Indian tribe,662band, nation, or other organized group or community, including any663Alaska Native village or regional or village corporation as defined in664or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,665which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services666provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as667Indians.668    \3\ See GAO, Tribal Energy: Federal Assistance to Support Microgrid669Development, GAO-24-106278 (Washington, D.C.: July 22, 2024); and670Tribal Issues: Barriers to Access to Federal Assistance, GAO-25-107674671(Washington, D.C.: Dec. 3, 2024).672    \4\ U.S. Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Lab,673Techno-Economic Renewable Energy Potential on Tribal Lands, NREL/TP-6746A20-70807 (Golden, Colo.: 2018); ``Department of Energy Makes Up to675$11.5 Million Available for Energy Infrastructure Deployment on Tribal676Lands,'' news release, February 16, 2018, https://www.energy.gov/677articles/department-energy-makes-115-million-available-energy-678infrastructure-deployment-tribal-lands; and National Renewable Energy679Laboratory, ``NREL Supports Native American Tribes in Clean Energy680Transformational Leadership,'' news release, March 30, 2016, https://681www.nrel.gov/news/features/2016/24665.html.682---------------------------------------------------------------------------683    TEFP, administered by DOE's Loan Programs Office (LPO), provides684loans and loan guarantees for tribal energy development. \5\ The685program supports federally recognized Indian Tribes or tribal energy686development organizations that develop energy resources, products, or687services using commercial technology. TEFP is intended to support a688broad range of energy development projects and activities. It is689technology neutral, which means it offers financing for projects that690use various types of energy technology such as electricity generation,691transmission, or distribution facilities that use conventional or692renewable energy sources; energy resource extraction, refining, or693processing facilities; or energy storage facilities. These projects can694be on or off tribal land, and applicants can include Tribes, tribal695energy development organizations, and lenders that apply on behalf of696Tribes.697---------------------------------------------------------------------------698    \5\ The Energy Policy Act of 2005 created the Tribal Energy Loan699Guarantee Program, which initially only provided loan guarantees. Pub.700L. No. 109-58, tit. V,  503(a), 119 Stat. 594, 764-78 (codified in701relevant part as amended at 25 U.S.C.   3501, 3502(c)). The program702was first funded in 2017; see Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2017,703Pub. L. No. 115-31, 131 Stat. 135, 313 (2017). In 2022, it was expanded704to allow direct loans. DOE refers to the expanded program as the Tribal705Energy Financing Program.706---------------------------------------------------------------------------707    To conduct this work, we reviewed relevant laws, regulations,708agency policies, and guidance documents related to program709applications, design, and implementation. We analyzed TEFP application710documents and LPO data as of February 2025 to describe the status of711applications since 2018. \6\ We interviewed DOE officials, 12 potential712participants (e.g., Tribes and lenders) that applied or considered713applying to the program, and five tribal energy stakeholders (e.g.,714lenders, consultants, and nongovernment organizations). Our work was715performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing716standards. More detailed information on the scope and methodology of717our work is provided in our August 2025 report.718---------------------------------------------------------------------------719    \6\ In July 2025, DOE officials provided an update on the status of720new applications to the program. We incorporated this information into721the report where appropriate.722---------------------------------------------------------------------------723DOE Has Closed One Loan Guarantee, and More than Half of Applications724        are Inactive725    From its first program solicitation in 2018 through July 2025, DOE726received 20 TEFP applications for approximately $15 billion in loans727and loan guarantees for various project types and amounts. \7\ Loan and728loan guarantee requests ranged from $23.7 million for a solar project729to $8.7 billion for an ammonia production facility for low-carbon fuel.730Proposed projects were located throughout the contiguous United States731and Alaska. \8\732---------------------------------------------------------------------------733    \7\ In 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) increased TEFP's734loan authority from $2 billion to $20 billion. An Act to provide for735reconciliation pursuant to Title II of S. Con. Res. 14, Pub. L. No.736117-169,  50145(b)(2), 136 Stat. 1818, 2046 (2022) (amending 25 U.S.C.737 3502(c)(4)).738    \8\ Our report provides additional information on energy technology739type, requested loan amount, application status, and time spent in each740phase of the application process for each TEFP application LPO has741received since 2018.742---------------------------------------------------------------------------743    Of these 20 applications, DOE closed a $100 million loan guarantee744in August 2024 for a solar and long-duration storage microgrid project745on tribal lands of the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians in California.746\9\ As of February 2025, 12 applications were inactive (i.e., put on747hold, withdrawn, or abandoned). Progress on the remaining seven active748applications was limited by a pause that began in January 2025 as the749current administration reviewed the program. \10\ In July 2025,750Congress rescinded all unobligated program appropriations provided by751the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), reducing available funding. \11\752---------------------------------------------------------------------------753    \9\ A loan or guarantee is closed when LPO and the applicant sign754an agreement that finalizes it, and LPO begins to disburse funds to the755applicant for the project. LPO considers closed loans active because756LPO plans to monitor the loan or loan guarantee over its lifetime. The757loan guarantee amount for the Viejas project was the actual obligated758amount, based on data we received from LPO as of February 2025.759    \10\ E.O. 14154 of January 20, 2025, Unleashing American Energy,760directed agencies to immediately pause disbursement of funds761appropriated under the IRA or the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs762Act, pending a review of such disbursements. 90 Fed. Reg. 8353, 8357763(Jan. 29, 2025).764    \11\ Congress in the IRA appropriated $75 million for credit765subsidy and to administer the program. Pub. L. No. 117-169,  50145(a),766136 Stat.at 2045-46. In July 2025, Congress rescinded the unobligated767balance of TEFP's IRA appropriations in Public Law 119-21-commonly768known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. An Act To provide for769reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14, Pub. L. No.770119-21, tit. V, subtit. D,  50402(b), 139 Stat. 72, 152. As a result,771the program has only pre-IRA appropriations, if any remain unobligated,772of $8.5 million. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, Pub. L. No.773115-31, 131 Stat. 135, 313 (2017).774---------------------------------------------------------------------------775    Many applications spent considerable time in the intake phases of776the application process, and most active and inactive applications (16777of 20) remained in these phases as of February 2025 (see fig. 1). Time778spent in intake ranged from 41 days to 821 days, as of February 2025.779LPO officials told us that various factors, such as project readiness780and the applicant's familiarity with the application process, can781influence how quickly an application progresses.782783    Figure 1: Status of Applications to the Department of Energy's784(DOE) Tribal Energy Financing Program, as of February 2025785786         Note: Active applications are project applications undergoing787        review by DOE and include closed loans that DOE continues to788        monitor through the end of the loan term. Inactive applications789        are those that were withdrawn, abandoned, or otherwise put on790        hold. According to DOE officials, as of July 18, 2025, DOE had791        not received any new applications for the program.792793TEFP Has Restrictions That Can Discourage Tribal Participation794    Several aspects of the program's design create significant795financial barriers for Tribes that can discourage them from796participating in the program, including the following:797798   Limited project development assistance. LPO expects799        applicants to its programs to have projects that are well800        defined and significantly beyond the concept stage, according801        to LPO documents and officials. However, many Tribes do not802        have the upfront cash resources for early project development803        activities, which can be expensive, especially for larger-scale804        projects. One applicant told us a Tribe could spend a total of805        $10 million to $30 million to make a project ``shovel ready.''806807   Potentially high and unpredictable due diligence fees. DOE808        requires tribal applicants to pay fees and expenses for809        external legal and expert services (e.g., technical, financial,810        and environmental), as needed, that help DOE evaluate projects811        and requested financing. However, the level and812        unpredictability of these due diligence costs discourages813        Tribes from applying to814815    TEFP, according to potential participants and stakeholders. For816example, one Tribe that decided not to apply to the program said these817costs could translate into millions of dollars. Another tribal818applicant said the contractors DOE uses for TEFP legal work did not819know enough about tribal law and energy projects, resulting in more820hours billed to the Tribe.821    Our report provides more detail about these and other challenges.822    While LPO has taken some steps to help Tribes with these costs, we823recommended doing more to further reduce the challenges Tribes still824face. Actions LPO has taken include, for example, increased outreach,825allowing project development costs to be included in TEFP loans on a826project-by-project basis, and plans to develop a public finance827``application pathway'' that could reduce due diligence for lower-risk828projects and shorten application timeframes. However, Tribes often need829immediate assistance and funding for project development activities and830help identifying and accessing them. LPO offers this help on a case-by-831case basis and has compiled an internal list of development grants used832to support larger-scale energy projects. But it is unclear how833comprehensively these options will address Tribes' needs. DOE also has834not finalized steps it is taking to reduce due diligence costs, such as835details and guidance for the application pathway.836    We recommended that DOE (1) identify and disseminate information on837federal funding that could help Tribes develop large-scale energy838projects ready for application and provide Congress information on839gaps, and (2) further develop and implement options to revise the due840diligence process to further reduce or eliminate fees on a project-by-841project basis. In its comments on our report, DOE concurred with these842two recommendations and described steps it plans to take to implement843them.844Complex and Unclear Agency Processes Create Barriers That Can Derail845        Tribes' Applications846    DOE has taken steps to improve its outreach to Tribes about TEFP,847but we identified barriers that can hinder Tribes' ability to complete848the application process and close on loan guarantees or direct loans.849These barriers have created uncertainties for potential participants,850lengthened application timeframes, and may have reduced interest in the851program.852853   Long application timeframes. Lengthy application timeframes854        have resulted in delayed project timelines, higher project855        costs, and loss of project partners, according to potential856        participants. For example, one tribal applicant said it lost857        its power purchaser and access to a multimillion-dollar bridge858        loan, making its project unviable. Our analysis of application859        data found that the median time in intake was 334 days (see860        fig. 2). The Viejas project, the only application to complete861        the full process, spent almost 2 years (645 days) from entering862        intake to closing. LPO officials noted that these timelines may863        include extended periods of guidance and preparation to assist864        applicants with their applications, as well as the applicant's865        turnaround time to submit additional application support866        documents.867868    Figure 2: Loan Request Amount, Status, and Time Spent in the869Application Process for Each Application to Department of Energy's870(DOE) Tribal Energy Financing Program, as of February 2025871872         Note: The Tribal Energy Financing Program had received 20873        applications as of February 2025 and did not receive any new874        applications between then and July 18, 2025, according to DOE875        officials.876877   Complex application process. The TEFP application process878        involves multiple stages of review and feedback, according to879        our review of program documents. LPO officials said they880        understood that tribal applicants might see the program as881        complex, but that to be successful, applicants must complete882        significant work upfront with the aid of legal counsel,883        engineering firms, and consultants. However, one potential884        participant said that because of this complexity, many Tribes885        cannot move through the application process without costly886        third-party assistance.887888   Unclear program guidance. Tribal applicants we interviewed889        said they received different information from different LPO890        officials about certain program rules, such as equity891        requirements or whether TEFP could cover development costs. For892        example, one tribal applicant said they were told the loan893        could be used for development costs, such as environmental894        reviews, site control leases, and legal costs. However, LPO895        later told the applicant that such costs were not covered. When896        the applicant said it could no longer move forward with the897        loan without help with development costs, LPO agreed to include898        the costs. We reviewed LPO's program documents and found that899        its guidance was not clear on some TEFP requirements. For900        example, requirements varied for loan sizes, equity, technology901        types, and outreach and intake.902903   Limited tribal experience at DOE. Most LPO staff reviewing904        TEFP applications have limited experience in tribal energy905        finance, according to our analysis of LPO staffing practices.906        While LPO designated 12 of its 274 federal staff to focus907        primarily on TEFP or to work for the program on a recurring908        basis as of May 2025, most of these positions have not been909        filled consistently. Significant changes to LPO's overall910        staffing levels and an ongoing government-wide hiring freeze911        are also likely to affect the availability of dedicated staff912        with expertise to work on tribal applications. \12\ As of July913        18, 2025, 43 of LPO's 271 authorized positions were vacant, and914        110 employees who had elected to resign on a deferred basis915        were on administrative leave until their resignation or916        retirement date, according to DOE officials. LPO officials and917        staff told us that without adequate experienced staff, LPO918        could continue to face challenges effectively processing919        Tribes' applications--increasing application review times and920        requiring greater use of outside consultants to fill knowledge921        gaps. One tribal applicant also told us LPO staff resources922        were taken away from its application because LPO said it had923        inadequate staff for tribal projects.924---------------------------------------------------------------------------925    \12\ For example, a February 2025 executive order directed agency926heads to promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale927reductions in force, among other steps. E.O. 14210 of February 11,9282025, Implementing the President's ``Department of Government929Efficiency'' Workforce Optimization Initiative, 90 Fed. Reg. 9669 (Feb.93014, 2025). In addition, a presidential memorandum extended a previously931issued hiring freeze for executive branch agencies through October 15,9322025. Presidential Memorandum, Ensuring Accountability and Prioritizing933Public Safety in Federal Hiring (July 7, 2025).934935    LPO has taken some actions to address these barriers, according to936LPO officials, but Tribes continue to face challenges. For example, LPO937is revising its application processes, such as adjusting the rigor of938its review and testing a new public finance application pathway; has939identified timeliness goals; is verbally clarifying misconceptions; and940began providing some staff with specific training on working with941Tribes that addresses topics such as awareness of tribal law and942government procedures. However, LPO officials said they were not yet943certain whether their effort to revise the application process would be944effective, had not developed the necessary documents to guide the945effort, and did not have the staff with the needed expertise in public946finance. LPO also had not documented information to correct947misconceptions or updated internal and external guidance on the948application process.949    The barriers that still exist have created uncertainties for950potential participants and lengthened application timeframes, which may951make it challenging for DOE to meet its timeliness goals and limit952Tribes' ability use TEFP to develop their own energy resources. Given953ongoing changes to the program, including the loss of staff and954rescission of funding, streamlining program processes and ensuring955there are designated program staff with appropriate knowledge of tribal956energy finance to review applications is particularly important. We957recommended that DOE take steps to (1) reduce the length and complexity958of the application process, (2) clarify program guidance, and (3)959maintain designated staff.960    In its comments on our report, DOE also concurred with these three961recommendations and described steps it plans to take to implement them.962    In conclusion, fully implementing all of our recommendations would963help DOE address the barriers we identified and ensure more Tribes can964access and leverage TEFP to generate important economic and energy965development opportunities for their communities, as well as nationwide966energy benefits.967    Chairman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and Members of the968Committee, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to969answer any questions you have at this point.970971    The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Ortiz.972    Ms. Fenton, welcome back to the Committee.973974   STATEMENT OF JOCELYN FENTON, DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS, DENALI975                           COMMISSION976977    Ms. Fenton. Hello, Madam Chair, Vice Chairman Schatz, and978members of the Committee. Thank you for your leadership and979dedication to advancing energy security for rural and tribal980communities in Alaska and throughout Indian Country.981    My name is Jocelyn Fenton, Director of Programs at the982Denali Commission. I am privileged to present the insights and983experiences of our agency, our partners, and the Alaskans we984serve.985    The Denali Commission was created by Congress in 1998 to986address critical infrastructure and economic development needs987in rural Alaska. For more than 25 years, the commission has988served as a Federal partner for more than 200 isolated989villages, each home to a federally recognized tribe. These990villages average fewer than 500 residents, are accessible only991by plane or boat and face some of the most extreme992environmental conditions in the United States.993    Life in these villages depends on a fragile but vital994infrastructure system: small diesel powerhouses, bulk fuel tank995farms and water treatment systems. These tank farms store the996diesel and gasoline required not only for electric generation997but also for heating homes, fueling boats and snow machines,998and running schools, clinics and water plants. Without safe,999reliable fuel storage, the entire community is at risk.1000    Unfortunately, most of this infrastructure is aging and1001deteriorating. The Alaska Energy Authority, the State's energy1002arm, estimates over a billion dollars is needed just to bring1003rural tank farms into safe, code compliant condition with1004another $400 million needed for upgrading powerhouses.1005    Less than half have been upgraded, and even those are now1006aging out of their service life. Some communities still use1007tanks that are older than 70 years. The consequences of failure1008are severe. In rural Alaska, when the power goes out, it is not1009just the lights. Freezers holding food collected over the1010summer and fall thaw, water systems freeze and burst, and1011health emergencies follow. Energy security is community1012survival.1013    The costs are staggering, as well. Rural households spend1014about 27 percent of their income on energy, nearly four times1015what urban households spend. Electricity in some villages costs1016more than a dollar per kilowatt hour, compared to the national1017average of about 16 cents. Every other part of life, like1018groceries, transportation, housing, is more expensive as a1019result.1020    Investments in bulk fuel storage are among some of the most1021effective strategies to reduce these costs. A 2017 study found1022that upgrading tank farms saved communities more than $2 per1023gallon in fuel costs. Yet despite these proven benefits,1024appropriations have not kept pace with the growing backlog of1025needs.1026    This is where partnerships, especially with the Department1027of Energy, make a real difference. DOE programs can provide1028both technical expertise and financial assistance to help1029tribes design and implement solutions suited for their1030communities.1031    The DOE Office of Indian Energy plays a vital role in1032Alaska. Through technical assistance, financial planning and1033competitive grants, the office has supported dozens of Alaska1034tribes in developing diesel hybrid systems with the integration1035and investigation of additional resources, such as hydropower1036and geothermal. These projects are often small in scale, but1037for communities of a few hundred residents, they mean the1038difference between barely keeping the lights on and moving1039toward resilience.1040    The Arctic Energy Office provides another layer of support1041through the Arctic Energy Ambassadors program. These1042ambassadors are local practitioners who bring technical1043knowledge directly into villages and from villages, sharing1044lessons learned and best practices, while helping residents1045plan and implement energy projects. This model builds capacity1046on the ground and ensures projects are regionally appropriate,1047climate tested and durable for existing conditions.1048    The Denali Commission complements these DOE efforts by1049serving as the local convenor, by braiding funding streams. For1050example, we paired EPA resources and commission funds to1051deliver complete bulk fuel upgrades in high need villages.1052Recent interagency coordination enabled more than $100 million1053in these resources to flow directly to at-risk tank farms,1054while DOE-supported planning ensured those projects were ready1055to move.1056    Importantly, Alaska's partnerships look beyond our borders.1057National and regional collaboration connects Alaska's tribes1058with tribal communities in Minnesota, North Dakota, Montana,1059Washington, continuing to provide opportunities for knowledge1060sharing on microgrids, distributed generation and cold climate1061technologies.1062    The challenges of small, isolated communities are not1063unique to Alaska. And any solution developed in our villages1064should be replicated across Indian Country.1065    Even with these strong partnerships, unmet needs are1066growing. Federal appropriations alone are not enough.1067Communities need financing tools that are designed for their1068scale and circumstances.1069    Most rural utilities and tribes in Alaska operate on razor-1070thin margins. They cannot meet credit or scale requirements of1071existing Federal loan programs, and as a result, many Federal1072financing tools remain out of reach. Without flexible,1073accessible loan options, communities are unable to leverage1074grants and pursue larger projects.1075    This is an area where Congress could make a tremendous1076impact, expanding and simplifying financing mechanisms, whether1077through revolving loan funds, loan guarantees or intermediators1078with local expertise could unlock projects across rural Alaska1079and throughout Indian Country.1080    Technical assistance is equally important. Planning,1081engineering, financial structuring can be as difficult as1082construction itself. DOE's Office of Indian Energy has proven1083how effective technical support can be in moving projects1084forward. But resources are limited. Expanding funding for1085circuit rider programs and regional energy planners would1086provide consistent, trusted assistance to more communities.1087    I also want to emphasize that this is not just an Alaskan1088issue. Energy security in Alaska's villages has direct1089implications for U.S. national security. The Arctic is a region1090of growing geopolitical importance, and resilient energy1091systems in Alaska support both civilian communities and1092national defense operations.1093    Alaska can also serve as a proving ground for advanced1094technologies. If hybrid microgrids, renewable integration, or1095small modular reactors can work in Alaska's extreme conditions,1096they can work anywhere. These innovations, supported by DOE1097partnerships, have the potential to benefit tribal and rural1098communities across the Country.1099    In closing, I would underscore these points. Bulk fuel tank1100farms and microgrids are lifeline infrastructure in rural1101Alaska. Their condition directly determines whether communities1102can thrive, not just survive. Partnerships with DOE through the1103Office of Indian Energy, Arctic Energy Office and other DOE1104groups with regional collaboration are critical for moving1105projects forward from concept to completion, and building1106tribal capacity.1107    And to meet the scale of need, we must expand beyond1108grants. Flexible financing and sustained technical assistance1109tailored to small tribal utilities are essential for long-term1110resilience.1111    Energy is the foundation for survival, but it is also the1112foundation for prosperity. For Alaska's villages and for the1113Nation, investing in these systems strengthens our communities,1114our economy and our presence in the Arctic.1115    Thank you for your leadership, and I look forward to your1116questions.1117    [The prepared statement of Ms. Fenton follows:]11181119  Prepared Statement of Jocelyn Fenton, Director of Programs, Denali1120                               Commission1121    Thank you for your leadership and dedication to advancing energy1122security for rural and Tribal communities in Alaska and throughout1123Indian Country. My name is Jocelyn Fenton, and as Director of Programs1124at the Denali Commission, I am privileged to present the insights and1125experiences of our agency, our partners, and the Alaskans we serve.1126    The Denali Commission was established by Congress in 1998 to1127address the infrastructure, energy, and economic development needs of1128rural Alaska--one of the most remote and logistically complex regions1129in the United States. With over 200 isolated communities not connected1130to a road system--many dependent on diesel microgrids and lacking1131access to basic water, sewer, or port infrastructure--the Commission1132has served as a federal partner for over 25 years.1133    Through flexible authorities, a collaborative governance structure1134co-chaired by the Governor of Alaska, partnerships with Alaska Native1135communities, local and municipal governments, tribal consortiums, and1136place-based approach, the Denali Commission has supported federal1137investments that impact rural American communities otherwise out of1138reach. Over the years, the Commission has provided more than $2 billion1139to support core infrastructure such as clinics, energy systems, and1140waterfront facilities--while also evolving to address emerging1141challenges including protecting existing infrastructure from Alaska's1142extreme conditions to supporting sanitation backhaul, victim services,1143and broadband readiness by enabling local entities to pursue larger-1144scale investments.1145    In addition to Federal appropriations, the Denali Commission1146receives annual transfers from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund1147(OSLTF) on the interest from the investment of the Trans-Alaska1148Pipeline Liability Fund as well as transfers directly from other1149agencies and through congressionally directed spending.1150    In alignment with Presidential Executive Orders Unleashing Alaska's1151Extraordinary Resource Potential, Unleashing American Energy, Declaring1152a National Energy Emergency, and Deploying Advanced Nuclear Reactor1153Technologies for National Security, our efforts are guided by national1154priorities and strengthened by the partnerships that make real change1155possible in Alaska's rural and Tribal communities.1156The Urgency and Uniqueness of Rural Alaska1157    Rural Alaska is composed of approximately 200 small, isolated1158villages spread across 395,000 square miles of remote, rugged1159wilderness that includes wandering rivers and eroding coastlines. These1160communities, predominantly Alaska Native, are characterized by their1161traditional subsistence lifestyles, small size, economic hardship, and1162their reliance on a fragile, islanded infrastructure system. Most1163villages--the average size of which is less than 500 people--are not1164connected by road or electric transmission lines and are accessible1165only by air or water. Winter in these areas brings months of prolonged1166darkness and extreme cold, further intensifying the challenges of daily1167life. Population density in rural Alaska is just 0.2 people per square1168mile, compared to the national average of 98.1169    Each village depends on its own local infrastructure to generate1170electricity, store and distribute fuel, provide clean water, and manage1171waste. Central to this infrastructure are bulk fuel tank farms--storage1172facilities that hold the diesel and gasoline required for electricity1173generation, heating, and transportation. These tank farms are the1174linchpin of village survival, yet they are aging, vulnerable, and1175increasingly at risk.1176    There are few jobs in the villages, cash is chronically limited at1177both the household and institutional levels, and costs for all goods1178and services are significantly higher than the national average due to1179the combination of costly transportation logistics to these remote1180locations, small population sizes, and few opportunities for economies1181of scale. The limited cash flow of bulk fuel storage owning and1182operating entities within Alaska villages means there's very little1183local funding for tank farm projects. Most, if not all, of the funding1184needed to fortify facilities and protect communities is expected to be1185federal or state, and that funding has been decreasing. Meanwhile, the1186condition of existing facilities is deteriorating faster than the rate1187that others are repaired or rebuilt.1188    The village power system is generally made up of a diesel1189powerhouse, sometimes the integration of power from locally available1190renewable sources, above ground distribution lines, and a bulk fuel1191tank farm which stores seasonally delivered fuel not just for1192generating power but also for heating buildings and for transportation.1193It is imperative that federal agencies begin to consider tank farms a1194component of the community power system in rural Alaska. Electricity in1195rural Alaska is generated locally through isolated microgrids, usually1196powered by diesel generators. These same fuels heat homes and1197businesses and power the vehicles essential for subsistence activities,1198including boats, snowmachines, and all-terrain vehicles. Given the high1199transportation costs and limited delivery windows due to seasonal1200conditions, fuel must be delivered in bulk and stored safely onsite.1201Without secure and code-compliant fuel storage, communities face1202existential threats to health, safety, and economic viability.1203    A 2016 study by the Institute of Social and Economic Research found1204that public investments in tank farms saved more than $2.00 per gallon1205on fuel in some communities. Despite these benefits, the cost burden1206remains staggering. According to the Alaska Village Electric1207Cooperative, rural households spend about 27 percent of their annual1208income on energy--nearly four times more than urban households.1209    There are roughly 400 bulk fuel tank farms across rural Alaska,1210operated by electric utilities, fuel distributors, and institutions1211like schools. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) estimates that more1212than $1 billion is needed to address deficiencies across the system,1213ranging from minor maintenance and improvements (M&I) to full-scale1214rebuilds (Bulk Fuel Upgrades or BFUs). This growing backlog stems from1215aging infrastructure, insufficient operational and administrative1216practices, and environmental challenges like erosion, flooding, and1217permafrost degradation. Decades of limited public investment and1218chronically constrained cash flow among facility owners have compounded1219the problem--creating a snowball effect where the funding needed to1220build, repair, and maintain safe, code-compliant fuel storage far1221exceeds the funding available.1222    Compounding the issue, many tank farms were never built to modern1223standards. In the 1960s, tanks were delivered as part of Bureau of1224Indian Affairs school construction projects. In the 1990s, the U.S.1225Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency identified1226widespread environmental and safety hazards due to aged, non-code-1227compliant infrastructure. The result was an urgent call for action, and1228for several years around 2000 there was a significant increase in1229federal funding for bulk fuel upgrade projects, managed primarily by1230Alaska Energy Authority and Alaska Village Electric Cooperative. The1231high levels of funding did not persist, however. Despite well over $3001232million invested by federal and state partners over the last three1233decades, less than half of rural Alaska's tank farms have been1234improved--and many of those are now aging out of their service life.1235The average age of a rural tank farm is 40 years, well beyond the1236expected 20-30-year lifespan. Some villages still use 75-year-old1237tanks. The growing discrepancy between rising project costs and1238available funding points to the need for new solutions, including more1239accessible financing tools that effectively meet the challenging1240circumstances of bulk fuel facility operations and management.1241    Similar to tank farm facilities, rural Alaska power systems are1242also facing a growing discrepancy between need and available funding.1243The Alaska Energy Authority estimates a statewide backlog of more than1244$400M to improve the power systems keeping the lights on and water1245pumping in the state's villages. When electricity goes out in a1246village, it doesn't just turn off the lights--it causes freezers full1247of subsistence foods to thaw and it causes the above ground pipes1248pumping fresh water in and waste out of homes to freeze, creating a1249cascade of public health and food security threats on top of expensive1250and time-consuming infrastructure fixes the community cannot afford.1251    Diesel generation remains the backbone of energy reliability in1252rural Alaska, particularly during extreme conditions when other systems1253may be unavailable or unpredictable.1254    However, the region's abundant land and significant water1255resources--including powerful river systems and geothermal sites--offer1256clear opportunities to evolve toward hybrid energy systems, such as1257pairing diesel with hydroelectric and geothermal generation. This1258multifaceted approach not only increases durability and efficiency but1259also opens new possibilities for economic development. For example, the1260innovative Greensparc data center in Cordova is powered by local1261hydro--highlighting the potential to leverage local energy assets for1262high-value activities like digital infrastructure. Harnessing the1263intersection of Alaska's natural resources and advanced energy1264technologies can position communities for greater resilience and create1265attractive conditions for investment in industries ranging from data1266services to food production--all while reducing long-term energy costs1267and fostering self-sufficiency.1268    The average cost of electricity across rural Alaska villages is 471269cents per kilowatt hour and encompasses a range of $1.50 down to 371270cents. The average residential electricity cost in Alaska's much more1271populous Railbelt corridor is nearly 18 cents, and the national average1272is 16.2. \1\ As a result, rural households in Alaska spend roughly 271273percent of their annual income on energy for power and heat, almost1274four times the state's urban average.1275---------------------------------------------------------------------------1276    \1\ akenergyauthority.org/Portals/0/Power Cost Equalization/FY221277PCE Community Report.pdf1278---------------------------------------------------------------------------1279    Upgrading and maintaining code-compliant, adequately sized bulk1280fuel tank farms is one of the most effective strategies to keep costs1281as low as possible and improve energy reliability. These facilities1282enable communities to purchase and store heating oil and diesel in bulk1283by barge during short seasonal windows, rather than relying on costly,1284year-round air shipments. Critically, bulk fuel storage remains the1285backbone of energy reliability--even for communities with renewable1286energy--ensuring backup and stability during harsh weather or supply1287interruptions. Innovative adaptations can make these systems more1288efficient, like modifying marine engines for local powerhouses because1289they produce both electricity and usable heat. That recovered ``waste''1290heat warms schools, water treatment plants, and community washaterias.1291    Energy ties directly to all other aspects of village life: building1292heat, water and sewer (which can account for as much as 30-40 percent1293of community energy demand), transportation (including for subsistence1294hunting, fishing, and gathering activities), and communication. Without1295reliable power, none of these other systems can function. And without1296continued public investment in bulk fuel infrastructure, these costs1297would be even higher--a 2016 study found that such investments can save1298communities more than $2.00 per gallon in fuel costs. \2\1299---------------------------------------------------------------------------1300    \2\ 2016_10_26-TrueCostElectricityFuelRuralAK.pdf (iseralaska.org)1301---------------------------------------------------------------------------1302    Recent Executive Orders underscore the urgent need for robust1303investment in critical energy infrastructure, including highlighting1304the role of advanced reactors in meeting the country's national,1305energy, and economic security. This has direct relevance for Department1306of Defense or Department of Energy application in Alaska, where the1307state is uniquely positioned as proving grounds for small modular and1308micro nuclear technologies given its many areas of energy isolation and1309extreme conditions.1310    Grant funding alone is not enough; improved public financing tools1311and flexible eligibility criteria are vital to meeting the unique1312economic and logistical challenges of rural Alaska. Recognizing bulk1313fuel tank farms and power generation facilities as core components of1314community energy systems across federal programs will help address1315deferred maintenance and support resilient growth.1316    Strategic energy infrastructure investment not only protects1317communities during emergencies but also enables further resource1318development, economic opportunity, and innovation. Alaska Native1319communities, long accustomed to remote conditions and scarce resources,1320have always embodied ingenuity and adaptability--often finding ways to1321``make it work'' when faced with necessity. By modernizing and1322coordinating grant, loan, and technical assistance programs, Alaska's1323remote communities can remain models of resilience and self-reliance,1324advancing both local and national energy security.1325Innovation in Investments1326    Efforts to enhance power generation, fuel supply chain resilience,1327and infrastructure access are instrumental in improving energy security1328and reliability for Alaska's communities. Numerous studies--including1329work by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Indian Energy, the1330National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and independent assessments such1331as GAO-25-107441--demonstrate how targeted energy investments in remote1332and tribal regions can improve reliability, lower costs, and stimulate1333local economic development. Similarly, expanded environmental review,1334planning, and efforts to increase access in various regions in Alaska1335can open up tribal community's subsistence and other natural resources1336while reducing transportation costs.1337    Over the past two decades, more than $250 million has been invested1338in rural bulk fuel tank farm upgrades across Alaska. Despite this1339progress, aging infrastructure and deferred maintenance continue to1340pose significant challenges, with many villages facing persistent needs1341for repairs or full-scale rebuilds. Environmental factors--including1342erosion, flooding, and permafrost degradation--further increase the1343complexity and urgency of these upgrades.1344    Recently, a master contract approach was launched to address rural1345bulk fuel needs, enabling more efficient coordination of resources and1346project delivery. Integrating improvements across multiple sectors-1347such as transportation and energy--offers further efficiencies and1348helps address interconnected challenges like barge landing conditions1349and fill line reliability.1350    Current partnerships with government, industry, and local1351communities are facilitating advances in distributed energy resources1352and resilient infrastructure. Technology transfer initiatives,1353including public-private accelerators and deployment of battery storage1354and miniaturization innovations, are helping to bring solutions1355tailored for off-grid and cold climate environments. Regional1356collaboration--connecting Alaska tribes with other northern states1357(Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota, and Washington)--continues to1358provide opportunities for knowledge sharing and development of best1359practices in dual-use and expeditionary energy systems.1360Learning from Partnerships1361    Recent progress in Alaska's energy landscape demonstrates the value1362of robust federal partnerships, especially through Department of Energy1363(DOE) initiatives tailored to rural and remote communities. Locally1364based technical assistance funded by the DOE Office of Indian Energy1365ensures that solutions are designed to meet Alaska's unique climate and1366logistical challenges. These efforts help projects move swiftly from1367concept to construction--supporting financial planning and unlocking1368additional streams of funding for energy infrastructure.1369    DOE's Arctic Energy Office has expanded regional leadership in1370energy resilience by funding the Arctic Energy Ambassadors program.1371This initiative empowers experienced local practitioners to advance1372energy security and foster clean energy transitions, improving outcomes1373for communities statewide.1374    Complementing DOE programs, recent interagency coordination has1375allowed for the rapid deployment of $100 million in EPA funds to1376Alaska's highest-need rural bulk fuel facilities, paired with Trans1377Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL) interest revenue for critical1378upgrades. The highlight here was that diesel infrastructure was1379woefully omitted from most programs over the last five years but serves1380as a backbone to energy infrastructure in Alaska. Similarly, the Bureau1381of Indian Affairs (BIA) Division of Energy and Mineral Development has1382paved the way for facility improvements in highly vulnerable locations,1383such as the Scammon Bay tank farm, following major weather events like1384the Merbok storm.1385    Together, these coordinated federal investments and innovative1386technical support models offer scalable solutions for improving energy1387reliability, infrastructure resilience, and emergency preparedness in1388Alaska's most challenging environments.1389Gaps and Needs1390    Despite ongoing progress, several critical gaps remain in Alaska's1391energy and infrastructure landscape that warrant committee1392consideration. These include limited access to financing tools for1393small tribal utilities, insufficient technical assistance resources,1394and inadequate capital available for urgent infrastructure upgrades--1395including bulk fuel tank farms and diesel power systems. The absence of1396simple, flexible loan mechanisms, robust technical assistance, and1397integrated regional energy planning support--including new1398opportunities related to data centers and LNG--continues to impact1399project delivery and sustainability.1400    A key barrier is the inconsistent treatment of bulk fuel tank farm1401facilities in federal funding programs. For financing and eligibility1402purposes, bulk fuel tank farms should be recognized as a central1403component of rural Alaska community energy systems across all1404agencies--ensuring they are eligible for support alongside other1405critical energy infrastructure.1406    Other eligibility barriers persist, such as NEPA requirements for1407bulk fuel and power system upgrades and limited recognition of bulk1408fuel facilities as core rural energy infrastructure within federal1409funding programs. Additionally, current loan programs may not be1410structured or scaled for small, remote tribal and rural communities.1411Some federal loan programs remain underutilized despite potential1412opportunities for efficient deployment through entities with1413established local expertise and streamlined processes.1414    Technical assistance programs--including support for energy project1415development, circuit rider models, and regional ambassador programs--1416remain essential but often lack sufficient funding to support financial1417planning and governance. Long-term projects such as Alaska LNG have1418potential for affordable energy but face ongoing challenges in credit1419allocation and sustained support.1420Closing1421    Energy security in rural Alaska is vital; it is a basic need for1422survival, but Alaska's villages need more than survival. Energy1423security is the foundation of economic prosperity, something critically1424lacking in most of these communities, and desperately in need of1425additional investments--both grants and loans--not just for the sake of1426these communities on the edge of America, but for the nation to ensure1427a strong Arctic presence. Thank you for your leadership and for1428recognizing the vital importance of meeting these needs now.14291430    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Fenton.1431    Thank you all for your testimony. As I was listening to1432your remarks, Ms. Fenton, you are talking about bulk fuel, and1433it seems kind of like yesterday's solution, right, storing fuel1434in a tank, waiting for it to meet the need so that you can1435power your diesel generator for your community. That is old1436stuff. Our reality is that we still are relying on old stuff in1437many of our communities.1438    I mentioned all that Igiugig is doing in pioneering with1439the RivGen system, and that little hydropower is amazing, what1440Kawarak is looking to do with geothermal. So there is a great1441deal that goes on with innovation and pioneering. But for so1442many, it is still, the fuel that you consume is still your1443principal way to power your generator and to keep warm.1444    When I visited many of the coastal communities following1445Typhoon Merbok, it was really impactful to be with families1446when they were crying, not over the loss of their home, but1447over the loss of the contents of their freezers that they had1448spent all year fishing and harvesting, whether it was moose or1449whether it was caribou or it was the berries in the freezer.1450That was where the real tragedy was.1451    So when we think about the reliability and what it means,1452every little increment that you can reduce your costs, because1453you can purchase in greater bulk is appreciated. The value that1454you pointed out there to DOE with the technical and financial1455assistance that has allowed for these levels of security to be1456built are important on so many different levels.1457    I want to ask hopefully a very quick question of you, Mr.1458Conrad, to start here. Dr. Ortiz has outlined the1459recommendations from the report that was just recently1460released. If this hearing was greater down the line, I might1461say what of these recommendations have you put in place, but I1462recognize that it is all relatively fresh.1463    But the statement was made that DOE agrees to the1464recommendations and I am assuming that that is a correct1465statement and that within the Department of Energy you are1466looking to implement those recommendations.1467    Mr. Conrad. Yes, Chair Murkowski, that is correct. The1468Department and the Loan Program Office have said that they1469agree with all the recommendations and they are beginning1470implementation immediately.1471    The Chairman. Good. I want to ask you about the Indian1472Country Energy and Infrastructure Working Group, ICEIWG. This1473was previously facilitated by the National Conference of State1474Legislatures. We understand that contract was cancelled in1475March of this year.1476    Can you share specifically what DOE-IE is doing to keep1477ICEIWG operating? I am told that it has been of good benefit to1478tribal citizens. So I want to know kind of your commitment to1479keeping these lines of communication open, regarding ICEIWG,1480the annual grantee convenings, which again allow for a lot of1481sharing that goes on.1482    Mr. Conrad. Thank you for the question, Senator. We do1483support Indian Country Energy Infrastructure Working Group, and1484we have taken on operations of it internally, with Federal1485staff for the moment.1486    The Chairman. Do you have the resources, the staff and the1487funding?1488    Mr. Conrad. We currently do have the staff and the funding.1489We would like to return to more the contractor support, because1490of the logistics of handling the meetings when they are in1491person. It is quite burdensome, the scheduling and the travel1492logistics.1493    The Chairman. So you see that coming up as a----1494    Mr. Conrad. A request for approval, yes.1495    The Chairman. All right.1496    Dr. Ortiz, I want to talk a little bit more about this1497public finance pathway. You mentioned LPO is working on it. It1498makes good sense; it allows tribes to utilize other revenues1499that they may have to repay their debts. It seems like a1500natural way to increase demand for the program without1501increasing risk to the Federal Government for default there.1502    Can you share more about what other Federal loan programs1503may already utilize this pathway, what benefits you see it can1504provide to prospective borrowers? And at the same time you are1505talking about that, highlight any increased risks for the1506Federal Government that you might see in utilizing this1507proposal.1508    Dr. Ortiz. Yes. The public financing pathway that LPO has1509proposed definitely has a lot of potential. It is similar to1510some programs run by Rural Development and Rural Utility1511Service at USDA. And it allows bringing part of the work of due1512diligence or the underwriting process in the house.1513    So it has the potential to reduce the review time for1514energy projects by kind of scaling the level of review to the1515risk and size of the project. And also to reduce cost by1516reducing reliance on costly consultants.1517    That said, in order to implement it, energy is going to1518have to invest in dedicated and trained staff who really know1519how to leverage public finance alternatives.1520    The Chairman. Are you saying they don't exist currently1521within the office?1522    Dr. Ortiz. They do not currently exist.1523    In terms of the risk to the Federal Government, it is not1524something we looked at specifically in our report. But it is1525worth thinking a little bit about the risk potentially to some1526tribal governments in terms of the Department of Energy expects1527the public finance pathway to work by having projects be backed1528by tribal governments. This is essential; it recognizes tribal1529sovereignty; it is very important.1530    Though at the same time, many tribal governments do not1531have the kinds of revenue sources that allow them a lot of1532discretion in where to take funds from. So because they don't1533have the ability to levy municipal bonds or to increase tax1534revenue as easily as other States and localities might, it1535could pose some sort of potential risk to some tribes and their1536government operating revenue.1537    The Chairman. Thank you for that.1538    Senator Schatz?1539    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair. Thank you to all of you1540for testifying.1541    Mr. Conrad, the President's budget in 2026 recommends that1542the Office of Indian Energy not fund wind, solar, and battery1543projects. As we all know, that hasn't been enacted yet. So I1544guess my first question is, are you applying some sort of1545prohibition retroactively to the money that you still have in15462025 funds?1547    Mr. Conrad. No, sir.1548    Senator Schatz. Okay. So have you approved any wind, solar,1549or battery projects?1550    Mr. Conrad. With 2025 funds?1551    Senator Schatz. Yes. With any appropriated funds.1552    Mr. Conrad. Yes, we have.1553    Senator Schatz. Could you tell me what they are?1554    Mr. Conrad. This calendar year?1555    Senator Schatz. Sure.1556    Mr. Conrad. We haven't had the selections and awards this1557year. They have been on pause. But in prior years, yes.1558    Senator Schatz. I know that.1559    Mr. Conrad. So we have been under the continuing resolution1560and had our spend plan approved over the summer. So we have had1561increments of funds unable to offer a full notice of funding1562opportunity with the 2025 funds. So we are looking forward to1563using the 2025 funds in the future, once we have approval to1564develop that notice of funding opportunity.1565    Senator Schatz. Do you think the existing statute, which is1566to say the continuing resolution, gives you the authority to1567have a preference for projects--let me say it another way.1568    Do you think the continuing resolution enables you to1569discriminate against wind, solar, or batteries?1570    Mr. Conrad. It remains as it always has been. And we1571continue to work with tribes on any project that they propose1572or request technical assistance on.1573    Senator Schatz. How many grant applications to your office1574have been for wind, solar, and batteries in this calendar year1575or this fiscal year, however you want to answer that question?1576    Mr. Conrad. I would have to get back to you with the exact1577number on that. But overall, historically it is a very high1578number.1579    Senator Schatz. Yes. So what I am hearing is, and I would1580like to confirm this, but what I am hearing is that DOE is1581holding up $30 million of OIE's Fiscal Year 2025 funding, about1582half of its budget. And just for context here, I remember one1583of the first interactions I had with Senator Mullin, we had an1584energy roundtable, and he was a little surprised at the extent1585to which I was open-minded to energy sovereignty, even though I1586clearly have a preference for wind, solar, and battery. But I1587do believe in self-determination, and I don't think every1588fossil fuel project is inappropriate. And that was sort of the1589beginning of a beautiful if somewhat uneven friendship.1590    So I would like to be reassured that although the Trump1591administration and Republicans generally have a preference for1592non-renewable energy, that you are not excluding those. Because1593the truth is, right, the truth is coal doesn't pencil. Gas1594sometimes pencils, but oftentimes you are in a line to get a1595combined cycle turbine, right?1596    And so you are talking about a five, and geothermal is1597eight, ten, twelve years, nuclear even longer. So the cheapest1598and most immediate energy that you can generate, most of the1599time, not in Alaska, I understand, but most of the time in the1600continental United States is wind and solar. And I would just1601like to be reassured that if we are into energy abundance and1602energy dominance, what we mean by that is not just certain1603categories of energy.1604    Because I have stretched politically to say, there are1605instances in which, look, even on the island of Oahu, we are1606still lighting low-sulfur fuel oil on fire for electrons. I1607don't love that, but we don't have an alternative in the short1608run as we ramp up our clean energy.1609    So, could you please reassure me that you are going to look1610at this from the standpoint of what is going to get the maximum1611number of electrons on the grid, what is going to get the1612maximum dollar amount into tribal governments' hands as opposed1613to what is going to effectuate one political party or the1614other's preferences?1615    Mr. Conrad. Absolutely. We are focused on using the1616taxpayer resources to promote reliable, affordable and secure1617energy resources. And we analyze projects based on a robust1618analysis. We are not approving projects that raise energy costs1619for tribes.1620    Senator Schatz. Final question, with your indulgence,1621Chair.1622    Ms. Ortiz, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act rescinded $751623million in credit subsidy funds. Does LPO have any remaining1624credits?1625    Dr. Ortiz. Yes. Our understanding is that LPO has $10.51626million in credit subsidy funds, which is nowhere enough to1627cover the $19.9 billion in estimated loan authority it has.1628    Senator Schatz. Okay. Mr. Conrad, can we follow up on, I1629know it is not a lot of money, but it is still money. Can we1630follow up on that $10.5 million to make sure it gets put to1631good use pursuant to the statute?1632    Mr. Conrad. Yes.1633    Senator Schatz. Thank you.1634    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Schatz.1635    Just for the record here, when we have these energy loan1636programs, we all talk about technology-neutral, right, that it1637is going to be whatever your source is, whether it is wind or1638solar or fossil-based, whether it is coal, whether it is1639natural gas.1640    And so that is the expectation here. That is, from this1641Senator, is that it is technology-neutral. And in my State,1642yes, you are right, we do have a lot of the all-of-the-above.1643But the projects that we can get online quickest and quite1644honestly, cheapest right now, are wind and solar. And we do1645have several of these that are in that pause category, along1646with some battery storage.1647    So even those of us that come from fossil-rich plafces are1648waiting for some of these important technologies. Everything1649that we can do to reduce those costs that these communities are1650paying, and to offset then, bulk fuel. Because that is what we1651have right now.1652    I don't have a list on who is next. Senator Smith, thank1653you.16541655                 STATEMENT OF HON. TINA SMITH,1656                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA16571658    Senator Smith. Thank you so much, Chair Murkowski and Vice1659Chair Schatz, and thanks to all of you for being here today.1660    Mr. Conrad, I would like to follow up I think a bit on what1661Senator Murkowski and Senator Schatz were just talking about.1662This question has to do with how the Trump administration is1663approaching its government-to-government relationships with1664tribal nations.1665    A few weeks ago my staff met with your team to understand1666the office's work with Minnesota tribes. During this meeting,1667we were probing into how the department has conducted any1668tribal consultation on the administration's decision not to1669provide any financial or technical assistance for work on solar1670or wind or battery projects. And what we heard then was that1671that tribal consultation hadn't occurred.1672    So I wanted to just follow up with you on this. Can you1673address this? Can you talk about what your plan is to hold1674tribal consultation on this policy to basically pause projects1675that are wind or solar and so forth?1676    Mr. Conrad. Sure. Right now, that restriction is in the1677budget request. So it is a negotiation between the1678administration and Congress right now.1679    If that becomes law, we are obligated to implement the law1680and follow the direction of the administration, of course. And1681looking at what our strategic plan or how we are going to1682implement that, those options, what would be right for1683consultation, rather than consult on something that we don't1684have an ability or we are not making the decision on as our1685office.1686    Senator Smith. So just to be clear, this pause is in1687effect, is that right? You are not making grants; you are not1688proceeding with projects based on the direction of the Trump1689administration?1690    Mr. Conrad. But not based on the, I mean, for the Office of1691Indian Energy, we have base appropriations that are not subject1692to the larger reviews that are going on under the IHAA or OIRA1693programs. So our funds and our programs, we are paused under1694review, and as we move forward and bring things up for1695approval, we are getting things approved and getting things1696back to normal as best we can.1697    Senator Smith. So, what my concern is is that projects are1698paused right now and that is having a big impact on Indian1699Country projects that were in process and are now paused. And1700what I would expect, based on what the law is, that if you are1701going to take a policy action like that that has direct impact1702on tribal nations, that the legal requirement to do1703consultation would click into place, that that legal1704requirement is sort of underlying to the work that IE does.1705    I mean, I think that there is, as I understand it, the1706statutory authorization for IE ``requires'' that it works in1707accordance with Federal policies promoting Indian self-1708determination, which we all understand means specifically1709tribal and formal consultation.1710    So I would just ask you to maybe give this additional1711thought and then let me know the kind of consultation that is1712required when decisions the Federal Government makes that have1713specific impacts on tribal nations, that that consultation is1714occurring.1715    Mr. Conrad. Definitely, and thank you for the question. We1716also have the Office of Indian Energy continue to engage with1717tribes and we have held at least one of our tribal leader1718working group meetings. I know that the other two tribal leader1719working groups, one with fossil energy and one with nuclear1720energy, they have continued to have meetings as well.1721    So there is engagement that is going on, just not that1722formal national consultation.1723    Senator Smith. I know that you and I both understand the1724difference between engagement and communication and1725collaboration and the formal consultation that is the1726understanding of what that direct government-to-government1727relationship means.1728    Mr. Conrad. Yes. I hear you.1729    Senator Smith. I am sure you do, and I appreciate that.1730    I have one more question, but what I am going to do is1731submit that question for the record in the interest of time.1732This question has to do with the excellent report that Ms.1733Ortiz and the GAO has produced at the request of Senator1734Murkowski and Senator Schatz, looking at the many, many1735barriers that are there for the Tribal Energy Financing1736Program. I specifically have some follow-up questions for you,1737Mr. Conrad, around the issues of capacity-building and what1738more needs to be done there.1739    Thank you very much, Madam Chair.1740    The Chairman. Senator Daines?17411742                STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES,1743                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA17441745    Senator Daines. Chair Murkowski, thank you.1746    To look at the purpose of today's hearing is to discuss1747unleashing Indian energy, it is a great topic. We have been1748talking about this for a lot of years in Montana. It is very1749much in line with President Trump's goal of securing American1750energy dominance.1751    We need more reliable, affordable energy. I remember the1752days kind of before AI when you would meet with the great tech1753leaders in this Country. The first thing they would talk about1754was that one of their constraints was not enough skilled1755software developers or programmers to meet the needs of these1756growing businesses.1757    Today, the number one issue they bring up is energy, and1758not enough energy. No matter whose numbers you look at, it is1759somewhere between 50 and 80 percent more power we are going to1760need in the next 20 years than we currently use today.1761    But reliable, affordable energy is critical, not only just1762to meet the needs of the economy going forward, but for1763economic development, particularly in some of the rural1764communities in Montana, on our seven Indian reservations. As we1765say in Montana, it is a beautiful State, grateful I got to grow1766up there and still call it home.1767    But oftentimes, you speak with Montanans who will say, we1768have poverty with a view. We have to do better here in economic1769development. And by enhancing an all-of-the-above energy1770portfolio, centered on baseload power sources, that can mean1771the difference between life and death during some of our bitter1772winter months.1773    Montana has seen a number of success stories coming from1774important collaborations between tribes and the Department of1775Energy. The Office of Indian Energy was helpful in providing1776the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes with funding and1777technical assistance to acquire operatorship of the SKQ Dam.1778This helped the Tribe create a number of very good high-paying1779jobs, generating affordable hydroelectric renewable power to1780sell on the open market.1781    The Crow Tribe in southeastern Montana are also trying to1782expand their energy capacity. Montana sits on the largest1783recoverable coal reserves in the Nation. We are famous for a1784lot of things, great skiing, wonderful streams to fly fish on,1785but some folks don't recognize that Montana has more1786recoverable coal than any State in the United States.1787    There is also large tracts on the Crow Reservation. My good1788friend, Chairman Frank White Clay of the Crow Tribe, will tell1789you that coal mining is a crucial economic driver for his1790tribe. The Crow Revenue Act would authorize a land swap to1791allow the Tribe to control subsurface holdings within their1792reservation. This would put the Tribe in the driver's seat to1793make decisions about their own land, very important word called1794sovereignty, and provide a key revenue stream to promote1795economic development.1796    The Crow are also eager to develop hydropower capabilities1797on the Yellow Tail Afterbay Dam. The Crow Tribe Water1798Settlement Amendments Act extends the hydropower authorization1799with the Bureau of Reclamation to ensure the Tribe has enough1800time to complete the project. This is key, because time is1801running out.1802    First question is for Deputy Director Conrad. Would you1803agree that increasing energy revenues, no matter the source, is1804important for tribes to both bolster their economies and1805enhance tribal sovereignty?1806    Mr. Conrad. Thank you, Senator, for the question, and yes,1807of course. We have always talked about energy resources as1808solely energy generation from tribal lands. But there is also1809revenue streams from participating in the broader energy1810economy as well.1811    So, technologies that can be proven on a reservation with1812technology that they can export and work and create a revenue1813stream is another great, viable option as well. So I am excited1814to work with them and find out more how we can help.1815    Senator Daines. I will follow up on that. Thank you.1816    Would you agree and support our efforts that Congress1817should pass legislation that would allow tribes to develop1818their own resources, whether it is coal or hydropower?1819    Mr. Conrad. Absolutely. That tenet of tribal sovereignty1820and energy development, tribal energy sovereignty, that they1821have the right to develop what they have for the benefit of1822their people, revenue that they need to provide support for1823those programs.1824    Senator Daines. Thank you. Chair Murkowski, and Vice1825Chairman Schatz, it is time we moved forward on that Crow1826Revenue and Crow Water Act. Thank you.1827    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Daines.1828    Senator Cortez Masto?18291830           STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,1831                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA18321833    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Chairwoman, and thank you1834all for being here.1835    You are going to find pretty much consistent agreement1836here, that for our tribal reservations and Indian Country, we1837need to do all we can. And the technology does need to be1838neutral, and it also is based on geography, what is available.1839    I will say this, the Department of Energy, and this has1840been my frustration since I have been on this Committee, and I1841have been on this Committee since I have been in the Senate in18422017. And we get these incredible, Dr. Ortiz, thank you for1843your report, facts about Indian Country. Indian Country is1844always left behind, under-resourced, understaffed, lack of1845tribal consultation.1846    And then we work together to do everything we can to change1847that. We introduce legislation, we appropriate, we want to make1848sure there is that consultation, there is the technical1849assistance. And then it seems like politics always gets in the1850way and there is somebody in a political, who makes a political1851decision to take it away. It is frustrating. I think it is1852frustrating to all of us, no matter who the administration is.1853I think that is why you see many of us fighting to right this1854ship and do right by Indian Country.1855    So this is my frustration. The Department of Energy, this1856is their Congressional report, has reported that vast majority1857of unelectrified homes in the United States are located on1858tribal land. That is true in my State. I invite you, Mr.1859Conrad, come to Nevada. I have been to Indian Country in my1860State. Some of them do not have water, let alone electricity.1861    I will say, many, because of our geography, and our1862opportunities that are provided now because of the work that we1863have done, have the opportunity to have electricity, a1864different source of electricity. Most of it is going to be1865renewable. We have geothermal, we have solar, we have1866batteries. And there has been a strong investment for so many1867tribal communities, so that they can have that opportunity.1868    And now here we are again, the politics getting in the way1869and taking away those opportunities for folks to have just1870simple electricity in their homes that we all take for granted,1871quite honestly in some of our areas.1872    So that is my frustration. I understand your challenges and1873your constraints. But I hope you are true to your word, and I1874look forward to working with you, that this technology should1875be neutral. That no matter where you live in Indian Country,1876your source of electricity should be available to you and the1877Federal support for it should be available to you to utilize,1878based on what we received from this report.1879    So, solar and wind, I don't like this idea of playing1880favorites. That is not what this is about. So I am looking1881forward to working with you and I have listened to you and I1882hope we have an opportunity to work together.1883    Dr. Ortiz, I don't have much time but I do want to ask you1884a question because there has been a number of programs that1885have been zeroed out after we have appropriated some of the1886funds for them. One of them was the Solar for All program,1887which was designed to help low-income and disadvantaged1888communities gain access to new and efficient energy1889technologies and lower electricity bills.1890    The program was set to distribute $7 billion, $500 million1891of which had been obligated for six different tribal1892applicants. And just a few weeks ago, the Trump1893administration's EPA announced that they would be terminating1894that program, leaving grant recipients without the assistance1895they were promised.1896    So as you have outlined in your report, how does this leave1897Indian Country? What is the ultimate impact here for Indian1898Country when these types of programs are taken away?1899    Dr. Ortiz. Thank you for that question.1900    I think in addition to the failure to meet the Nation's1901trust and treaty obligations, and really follow through for the1902people of Indian Country, it perpetuates the myth that you1903can't get anything done in Indian Country. We have tribes and1904consortia and TEDOs, who are doing so much work to come1905together, really leverage the kinds of power sources they have1906on their lands, elsewhere, other resources, bring that1907together. They spend years planning the process.1908    They spend years investing in finance, responding to1909questions from agencies, and then when something like this1910happens, the deal falls apart, and it leaves people without1911power and it just perpetuates this myth. That should not be the1912case. There really is amazing potential for energy development1913in Indian Country.1914    And one of the greatest benefits of this Tribal Energy1915Financing Program in particular was this technology-neutral1916aspect of it. It really allowed tribes to be in the driver's1917seat to determine what was best for their situation and their1918resources.1919    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.1920    I know my time is up. I do have a question for Ms. Fenton,1921if it is all right. Because I do think it is important; I1922appreciate the work that you have done and the collaboration1923and thinking outside the box. I think many of our, I know in1924Nevada, many of our tribal communities are in really rural1925frontier areas, and it requires them to figure out how to1926address some of these challenges.1927    You talked about, in Alaska, being a model for some of1928these partnerships. Can you talk a little bit about some of1929those partnerships and what I can bring back to, at least1930Indian Country in Nevada, where they could look to see hey,1931this is a model, and it is something we should be looking at1932that we could possibly replicate or learn from?1933    Ms. Fenton. Yes, and specifically, we are looking into what1934can be replicated. But just hearing about some of the1935hydropower and coal resources they have in Montana, we have1936really found that the technical assistance, getting out into1937communities, seeing their needs, understanding their unique1938circumstances for developing a project and also taking a1939challenge or an issue and supporting them to get that to a1940project.1941    You can have an issue. It takes a lot of development to get1942into a fundable project, whether it is State, Federal funds,1943philanthropic funds, loan potential, adding to that capital1944stack. Having that hand-holding and technical assistance is1945crucial.1946    So that is something that can be replicated, copy-pasted,1947to other States and tribal communities.1948    Senator Cortez Masto. Can I ask, is your commission, is it1949State? Is it State-funded?1950    Ms. Fenton. We are the regional commission for Alaska. We1951focus on just the State of Alaska.1952    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.1953    Ms. Fenton. But we are looking at technology transfers and1954seeing where we can partner with other communities and what-1955not. So I say that the technical assistance aspect, the1956partnering aspect, and there could be some potential on, Mr.1957Conrad and I discussed earlier today how the regionalization of1958this type of support can be very helpful. We have seen success1959in Alaska. Maybe we can have another coordinating body or some1960additional communication and coordination to focus on tribal1961infrastructure.1962    We have areas in Alaska that have had more success because1963someone dedicated, or a group dedicated to a particular facet1964of infrastructure. So water and sewer, for example, and we have1965partners that are going into more of the energy and power1966realm. And then we have transportation groups.1967    So coordinating, communicating some of the successes from1968that regional approach, giving that support to individual or1969smaller communities that need that backup. They may have staff1970turnover. They need subject matter expertise. When we have it1971in the regions or even in addition to having additional1972supplies or things, located in region, to take away, to add1973some slack in the line of the supply chain. Of course,1974especially in Alaska, whenever you are operating with short1975construction seasons and what-not.1976    I think those are some things that can be helpful in other1977areas.1978    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you, all three, for1979being here.1980    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator. I think that is a good1981question just in terms of what kind of sharing and partnering1982is going on. Because as different as the regions may be, there1983is a lot of commonality of the challenges. So how we can get1984smarter by sharing information, and we have technology1985transfer, knowing the technical assistance that you receive1986from DOE, you not only learn a lot, but they also learn from1987what you are able to do on the ground as well.1988    So instead of just keeping all that information, making1989sure that there is sharing of this in terms of what we can do1990more to enhance program deliverability, what you can be doing1991more. We all know that there is limited expertise out there. We1992hear that over and over and over again, that we don't have the1993sophisticated grant writers, we don't have those who are really1994well versed in permit applications.1995    So how we can be collaborating more there I think is1996important.1997    One of the questions that I wanted to direct to both Mr.1998Conrad and to Ms. Fenton is on the prospect for potential1999partnering in an area that doesn't necessarily relate to2000unleashing energy here. But when we are talking about housing,2001your house doesn't mean much other than just the roof over your2002head if we can't meet the energy needs, providing for water and2003sewer hookups, providing for power there.2004    And we have seen play out in Alaska a pretty great2005partnership between the Denali Commission and the Alaska Native2006Tribal Health Consortium, working with the IE, the Indian2007Energy Office in providing technical assistance. It has been2008great. We appreciate that.2009    There are a number of funding sources at the Department of2010Energy outside of the Office of Indian Energy that aim to2011address home electrification, the weatherization issues, some2012other housing-related needs. And again, you have technical and2013financial resources that we have heard great things about. The2014tribally designated housing authorities can't directly access2015them.2016    I am hoping that we can have a follow-on conversation2017working with our staffs, your department, to talk about how we2018may be able to improve the efficiency of the distribution of2019these types of funds for housing support in places like Alaska2020and really across Indian Country, where we know that need is.2021    So I am hopeful that you will have an open door on this2022aspect of what more can be done on the technical assistance2023side. And then, Ms. Fenton, if you can address possibly the2024role that Denali Commission could play in streamlining access2025to the funds to improve whether it is home electrification,2026energy efficiency within housing. Because it is kind of part2027and parcel to what we are talking about here today.2028    Mr. Conrad. Absolutely. That is a very exciting2029opportunity, and we do have the technical assistance and an2030additional navigator service that can help guide people who are2031requesting the technical assistance to other DOE resources, as2032well as other Federal resources within the scope of what they2033are interested in.2034    So we have dedicated staff to do that. We are looking2035forward to how we can be more innovative in effective delivery.2036    The Chairman. Great. I like to hear that.2037    Ms. Fenton?2038    Ms. Fenton. You are absolutely right to connect energy2039systems with housing. We see the Denali Commission as being a2040tool to help bridge some of the Department of Energy's programs2041with Alaska's tribal housing authorities, with our broad2042authority that spans across siloed programs. We are not just2043energy, we are not just housing, we are not just water and2044sewer, we are not just transportation. We are all of the above2045when it comes to critical infrastructure in communities.2046    Paired with our Section 311 transfer authority, that allows2047us to braid funding streams and put together that capital stack2048from both Federal, State and even private organizations. We2049could assist coordinating across some of these fragmented2050funding through the various offices, which we understand, it2051makes it hard for small housing entities to access.2052    And I think if we were to serve as a coordinating partner2053similar to a HUD, Housing and Urban Development Office of2054Native American programs, we could potentially streamline some2055of that process, coordinate resources, and ensure that dollars2056are distributed strategically and effectively.2057    Then, we are even in the midst of standing up a quarterly2058housing working group. These types of things, this type of2059coordinating that we do in Alaska helps see what projects are2060in the pipeline, what funding is available, and we try to pair2061it with funding opportunities to try to build that capital2062stack and make projects move forward.2063    The Chairman. That is good.2064    Dr. Ortiz, you kind of outlined in your report some of the2065barriers that are out there in using the Tribal Energy2066Financing Program. You have high and unpredictable costs of due2067diligence. You have mentioned that in your testimony here2068today.2069    We have heard from some applicants, again, that DOE hires2070contractors without tribal expertise. So it just adds to the2071time that they have to spend on the due diligence and the cost2072for the applicant. This is all ahead of knowing whether or not2073they would be able to secure the loan or the loan guarantee.2074    So you can see a scenario where people are going to be2075like, no, I heard from so and so, it was a bad experience, they2076were two years into the process, it cost them a lot of money,2077and look where they are.2078    And then to the point that you made earlier in response to2079Senator Cortez Masto here is, you may be in a situation where2080you have done it all and now the administration has everything2081put on pause. All the money that you have spent, all the years.2082    So we are not doing a lot to kind of sell the benefits of2083the program, right? What do we do about that? Obviously, if we2084have these reforms that are made that the report suggests that2085is going to be important.2086    But there are some real deterrents that have been2087legitimate deterrents out there. And now you have stacked on2088top of that just kind of the word on the street, if you will,2089that it is a tough process, it is expensive, and you don't get2090where we need to go.2091    Do you have any good ideas on what can be done to kind of2092rebuild the credibility here of the program, so that you are2093going to have additional entrants?2094    Dr. Ortiz. I think there are definitely two major aspects.2095There is the thought of, if we are going to really revamp and2096revise the existing program, DOE needs to implement GAO's2097recommendations. They need to think about due diligence costs,2098consider how to implement a public finance pathway in a way2099that really doesn't place additional risk on applicants, but2100streamlines the process.2101    They need to rethink how they review applications to scale2102that review for the risk level and size of the loans. And then2103Congress would need to appropriate enough for the credit2104subsidy and the cost of administering the program. That is if2105the program stays as it is. That would promote its major2106benefits of having this technology-neutral tribally driven2107sense where tribes are really able to leverage what they have2108toward economic development through saved electricity costs,2109revenue generation and job creation.2110    There is another set of questions around whether or not2111this program needs to be in its current form. And really, a2112couple of questions that came out in our report are who is2113administering the program. By placing the program within the2114Loan Programs Office, it was put along with other programs that2115serve billions of dollars for their projects, that are2116addressing or using cutting edge technologies. And that is not2117what most of these Tribal Energy Financing Program applications2118are for.2119    There is also the question of what kind of need the program2120is trying to meet. One benefit of the program is that it is2121remarkably flexible. The applications that have been submitted2122have gone from $23 million to over $8 billion. That is2123wonderful. But does it make sense to have one program that is2124really including some of those really massive projects in with2125those smaller projects that might be clearly tested technology,2126easy to roll out, quick to implement?2127    So those philosophical question of like, where is it going2128to be? We really need tribal expertise. We really need people2129who understand tribal energy development, understand how tribal2130governments work, have cultural competence and really2131understand tribal revenue generation and how tribes use2132enterprises to support their operating costs.2133    That office needs to be competent in those skills, wherever2134this program lays. And currently, as our report pointed out,2135that is not a strength of the Loan Programs Office. That is a2136strength of the Office of Indian Energy.2137    But again, thinking about the goals of the program, is it2138really about serving everyone, or is it better to focus the2139program on, for example, what we heard from one expert, is the2140missing middle of programs, those projects from around $252141million to around $100 million? That would meet a lot of need2142that is in Indian Country.2143    The Chairman. Well, I really appreciate what you have2144shared there toward the end. I think oftentimes what happens2145around here and Senator, you mentioned, you have been on the2146Committee now, your full tenure here in the Senate, and2147oftentimes it is like hit replay. We have different people in2148front of us giving the testimony, but it is basically the same2149story. And it is because we just try to do a tweak here to the2150program, or maybe expand your authorization, so instead of $202151million it is $40 million.2152    But we really haven't addressed the real operational2153efficiencies within the programs themselves. We don't do that2154level of oversight. That is what this is, is an oversight2155hearing. So I really appreciate that you have ventured out and2156gone beyond just saying, this is what you might want to2157recommend for existing programs.2158    But maybe we need to revisit, to relook at this. In my2159head, I am thinking about what the Nuclear Regulatory2160Commission is dealing with on the nuclear side. And there is a2161big difference between permitting and siting Three Mile Island2162versus what we are talking about with small modular reactors.2163Yet it is kind of the same thing. We are going to put you in2164the same bucket and it is going to be just awful.2165    We are doing that with hydro relicensing, where it doesn't2166make any difference if you are the Hoover Dam or if you are a2167small dam in Southeast Alaska. So I think you are challenging2168us to look perhaps a little bit differently at how we might2169structure this, so that we really do get that value.2170    Let me ask you, Jocelyn, you mentioned a couple of times in2171your testimony that the funding that is available, the grant2172funding that we are providing, particularly when it comes to2173the bulk fuel needs, isn't enough to address the capital needs,2174much less the operation and the maintenance. So you have cited2175the need for improved public financing tools, greater2176flexibility.2177    What opportunities do you see within DOE's Tribal Energy2178Financing Program? What do you think it is going to take to2179make it work better in Alaska? And how can we kind of address2180the underutilization that we see of the Tribal Energy Financing2181Program?2182    Ms. Fenton. Right. To start with, we see that bundled2183projects and aggregating projects to get some of those2184efficiencies is key. So bundling a bulk fuel project, for2185example, instead of financing one $8 million tank farm in a2186single village, we could have a --2187    The Chairman. Remind me; how many bulk fuel projects, how2188many communities are being looped into this one proposal that2189you are working right now? Phase one, yes.2190    Ms. Fenton. What we call phase one is $100 million is going2191into 10 communities.2192    The Chairman. Okay.2193    Ms. Fenton. And each community doesn't break down to $102194million each community, it depends. It is very site-specific,2195and we have to get out and make sure that we have our designs2196and what-not.2197    So aggregating, having more funding at one time. There are2198efficiencies to be gained having projects that have proximal2199geographic locations for field visits and logistics for the2200equipment and supplies to do the projects. Having mixed energy2201infrastructure packets together or packaged together like a2202tank farm, a powerhouse upgrade, and renewables and a battery2203system package all at one time. We recognize that diesel and2204other bulk fuels are unavoidable in rural Alaska. They serve as2205the backbone to these series of microgrids.2206    While integrating renewables, we need to upgrade those2207systems so often. So having a technology-neutral or energy-2208agnostic project in a community to really push forward into --2209    The Chairman. I am going to interrupt you there, because2210that is something that needs to be underscored. I think2211sometimes the thought is, well, if we put in that wind turbine2212or if we put in a few solar panels over here, then we don't2213need the bulk fuel storage, we don't need that. But you have to2214have the backup and you have intermittent sources that are not2215there. Solar is not good 365 days a year anywhere, much less in2216Alaska.2217    So I think that is important, that we underscore that these2218do, you have a coupling that goes on.2219    Ms. Fenton. Absolutely. The wind doesn't always blow, and2220the sun doesn't always shine. But the diesel generated power2221plant is that energy and power backbone of those communities.2222    And while integrating renewables helps with fuel shortages2223or price of fuel fluctuations, and rural and remote communities2224really find renewables to be a very beneficial aspect of the2225power supply, every gallon of diesel offset is helpful,2226lowering long-term costs and what-not. So that is definitely a2227piece of the puzzle.2228    So let's see, expanding your projects, aggregating2229projects, having mixed energy infrastructure projects, and then2230mitigating risk by either having technical oversight or2231derisking projects with grant funding, understanding the2232capital stack, lowering the risk to lenders and what-not, that2233can really help these projects moving forward and2234understanding, again, understanding that deferred energy and2235bulk fuel needs, grants are not, they are just not going to cut2236it moving forward.2237    We are doing a bulk fuel aggregation study that we are very2238excited about hearing the recommendations. But they are not2239ready yet for this hearing, unfortunately. But stay tuned.2240    The Chairman. Okay, yes. We will stay tuned on that.2241    Dr. Ortiz. Chair Murkowski?2242    The Chairman. Yes, go ahead, Dr. Ortiz.2243    Dr. Ortiz. If I might jump in just on integrating different2244energy sources, one of the villages we visited in Alaska a2245couple of years ago for our work on microgrids that we put out2246last year looked at a system that had wind as well as diesel.2247    When that village was able to add battery storage to its2248system, it was able to save over 60,000 gallons of diesel a2249year. That is $250,000 or more to that one village. And that is2250an amazing cost, when you can really integrate, recognizing2251where tribes are and what different circumstances and different2252geographical factors play into their energy needs.2253    The Chairman. I appreciate your raising that. And I will2254ask you to just expand there, because you have given a specific2255example. But in terms of how the TEFP is structured, you have2256suggested before that there were reforms that the report2257addressed with regard to the office. Do you have any2258suggestions when it comes to the financing program, program2259specific, that we might want to look to either maintain or2260enhance or reform, add to other programs? What do you have to2261offer there?2262    Dr. Ortiz. I think some of the main benefits are things we2263have already discussed. There is the flexibility to address any2264kind of energy technology, that is technology-neutral aspect.2265    One other benefit is that projects for the Tribal Energy2266Financing Program could be done on or off of tribal lands. So2267when you get those partnerships working together, they can2268really leverage different strengths from different partners.2269    The program also allows multiple applicant types. So a2270tribe could apply. But a TEDO could apply. And also a lender on2271behalf of the tribe, or a tribal consortium, which really2272allows smaller tribes the opportunity to have ownership of2273these projects.2274    I think a lot of tribes are used to having developers2275approach them and want to develop something and then kind of2276maybe give the tribe some benefit but keep the bulk of the2277benefits for themselves. One of the great benefits of the2278Tribal Energy Financing Program is that ownership aspect. That2279gives the prospect for the tribes of increasing the reliability2280of their electricity, decreasing their energy costs, and really2281having revenue generation and job creation along with those2282projects.2283    The Chairman. So, I am coming to the end of the series of2284questions that I wanted to raise. We haven't really talked that2285much; it has been mentioned that staffing in the report was a2286concern. Limited staffing to review applications, but also the2287expertise of the staffing and their understanding or lack2288thereof of tribes and just not dealing with tribes or Tribal2289Energy Development Organizations.2290    It makes sense, when you think it through, that, okay, if2291you are dealing with somebody that doesn't really understand2292tribal applications or the implications that they are going to2293be learning as they go, or they might give you bad information.2294    What other complications do you see when you are dealing2295with those who have, loan program offices that have the2296unfamiliarity with tribes, and the Tribal Energy Development2297Organizations?2298    And I don't know whether there are specific examples,2299whether it just adds to time and cost, or whether it is even2300worse than that, that you can actually get like just bad2301information here.2302    Dr. Ortiz. There are several examples of what happens when2303you have that turnover in staff and the lack of training. It2304can cause confusion, increased administrative burden for the2305tribe and really lengthen that time of review and the cost.2306    We heard from one potential applicant that it took six2307months to get answers to questions. We heard from one applicant2308that months into the process, they were still getting questions2309about whether the project was even eligible for the programs.2310So they were feeling really strung along.2311    At one point, LPO asked one applicant to increase the scope2312of its project by adding a whole different element that the2313tribe had not planned on including. And it seemed to have no2314appreciation for the massive burden that was, both2315administratively and in terms of finances and working with its2316development partners.2317    When you have no in-house expertise or not enough in-house2318legal expertise, we heard from one tribe about how that lack of2319expertise led energy to really push every question out to2320consultants. But that was on the tribe's dime.2321    The Chairman. Then they had to pay for it, yes.2322    Dr. Ortiz. Right.2323    The Chairman. So in terms of processing of loan2324applications or loan guarantee applications between a tribal2325program versus a non-tribal program, is it about the same2326length of time? Have you done an analysis on that?2327    Dr. Ortiz. We did do a specific analysis for this report.2328But GAO has definitely reported on challenges with tribal2329energy development for many years, including delays in terms of2330what it takes to go through permitting when you are dealing2331with trust lands and resources or complicated ownership or2332access issues, in terms of understanding how revenue models2333work for tribal governments.2334    So we know that that misunderstanding or that lack of2335knowledge can really extend the time.2336    Tribes also, like other energy development projects, face2337lengthy environmental reviews at time. Sometimes that is a2338result of some of what might be going on on the lands in terms2339of cultural resources. That is not a problem necessarily. It is2340something that needs to be factored into the length of time it2341takes to review a project.2342    Also generally, many tribes don't have the kind of2343administrative capacity, and we have reported on systematic2344barriers to accessing Federal funds for tribes because of this2345lack of administrative capacity, a lack of an agency2346understanding of these tribal government structures or tribal2347revenue models.2348    And all of that gets wound into this. And when you place2349extra burdens like high equity costs, high development costs,2350and a really onerous due diligence process on top of all of2351this, our report showed how that really just puts a damper on2352the whole process.2353    The Chairman. So, Mr. Conrad, within the Office, I am2354assuming that you have seen the reductions in force that other2355departments and other agencies have. I don't know what your2356numbers are. I don't know if you can share them with me.2357    But within the loan office, the Tribal Energy Loan Program,2358have you lost that level of expertise? It is one thing to say,2359well, I have my numbers, I know how many people that I have in2360a given office. But there is a difference between the seat and2361the chair and the person that actually has this level of2362expertise that Dr. Ortiz is talking about.2363    Mr. Conrad. Thank you for the question. Digging into this2364issue and the findings of the report, our office, while we2365offer technical assistance, capacity building and grants, we2366don't do the Loan Program Office. And I don't have specific, I2367mean, I know the people who are operating it. I don't know2368their specific, I haven't reviewed their resumes and that sort2369of thing.2370    I know our office has lost nine employees, which is a2371decent amount, because we are a small office. The other offices2372have lost more, significantly more.2373    But I can't address how the Loan Program Office is able to2374staff the program. I understand that they have a few leads on2375the outreach team, and then they use portions of people's time2376on more of the origination and back of the house expertise.2377    The Chairman. I am just thinking about the time that you2378conducted this report, the time that you did the research for2379the report was before, was while the Biden administration was2380still in office. We have now seen change in administration, but2381we have also seen reductions in force across the Federal2382workforce. So I would be curious to kind of know where we are2383with those numbers. But again, I recognize that numbers are not2384just numbers when it comes to levels of expertise.2385    Dr. Ortiz?2386    Dr. Ortiz. We have a recent update from the Department of2387Energy. And they have about 272 FTEs assigned to the Loan2388Program Office. Forty-three of those positions were vacant and2389110 of those were on administrative leave in anticipation of2390retirement or resignation. So they are working with fewer than2391half of their regular staff.2392    On top of that, during the course of our review, we2393discussed with them dedicated staff for the project. They had2394dedicated at least 12 individual seats for people to have this2395expertise and really be interacting with tribes and doing that,2396bring their expertise into the origination process and the2397review process.2398    But they told us that they really struggled to fill those2399seats and that they couldn't keep people. So instead, they2400rotate folks in and that sometimes leads to a real disconnect2401in terms of what tribes hear from people.2402    So there is a very strong outreach team with a lot of2403experience working with tribal nations. But they don't always2404have the same understanding of the program that the people2405originating the loan did. And that creates a conflict and2406problems down the road, as these projects move further along.2407    The Chairman. It just causes you to recognize even more the2408inequities that we see throughout Indian Country, what we see2409in places like Alaska, when it comes to energy. We heard today2410communities that don't have running water, don't have2411electricity. We certainly have that in many of the villages.2412    It is always those that have the least capacity, that are2413in the most challenging of situations. And it is just kind of2414this deep hole that they are in, and they just can't get out.2415This is where we need that level of expertise. We need the2416technical assistance and we need these barriers of, okay, you2417are going to be able to get help with this, but you have to pay2418these outside contractors and basically they are getting paid2419by the hour. So you look at it and you don't even know how to2420start.2421    And then those who have greater capacity, greater2422capability, greater resources already are able to take the home2423that they already have that is already plumbed and already2424wired and make it more efficient. And that is great. But we2425still have so many that are just working to get the basic needs2426met.2427    So how we help facilitate this, and I am going back to the2428suggestion that you raised, Ms. Ortiz, that maybe we need to be2429separating out what is contained within this Indian Loan2430program, this Tribal Loan program, and have it be based on the2431size or the capacity or the capability, or I don't know. But2432not just basically any tribal entity, everybody is all in one2433bucket, regardless of where you sit with regard to your2434capacity or your resources.2435    So something for us to be thinking about. Because I hear2436too many who view this as, it is great that you have that back2437in Washington, D.C., but it doesn't do me a darned bit of good2438in Kipnuk. And that has really bothered me, because the number2439of people from my State who have come to me seeking help and2440seeking resources, and I say, well, don't forget, we have the2441Office of Indian Energy, we have these tribal loans. And they2442come back and say, well, out of my reach.2443    And we have to do better by that. That is why I think2444utilizing the resources that we have like the Denali2445Commission, where we can take these funding streams, these2446resources, do the braiding that we talk about, really2447leveraging things within different programs, so that everybody2448can gain access to a level of support and resource.2449    But it sounds like we might need to look to some2450restructuring here.2451    With that, I really appreciate the testimony of all of you.2452As I mentioned, this hearing record will be left open so that2453others may submit comments. I know members will have additional2454questions for the record. But I really appreciate what you have2455done, and the opportunity for a good discussion about an2456important project.2457    So with that, the Committee stands adjourned.2458    [Whereupon, at 4:27 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]24592460                            A P P E N D I X24612462 Prepared Statement of Hon. Darrell Mike, Chairman, Twenty-Nine Palms2463                        Band of Mission Indians2464    Chairwoman and Vice Chairman,2465    The Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians (the ``Tribe'')2466submits this comment on the September 10, 2025 Oversight Hearing2467entitled ``Unleashing Indian Energy--Examining Federal Programs at the2468U.S. Department of Energy.'' We have first-hand experience with those2469programs, and our experience has not been a positive one. The Tribe has2470suffered from the bureaucratic red tape of the Department of Energy2471(DOE) Loan Program Office (LPO) and is still waiting on approval for a2472loan for our shovel-ready gas-fired generating station. The Tribe has2473pursued this loan since 2022, and our proposed project is well-aligned2474with the Federal government's energy policy priorities. We submit this2475comment to explain the problems the Tribe has faced with the Tribal2476Energy Finance Program (TEFP) with the hope of helping the Senate2477Committee on Indian Affairs (``the Committee'') understand how2478bureaucratic hurdles have stymied the progress of tribal energy2479sovereignty and reliable energy generation projects.2480Process Length2481    The Tribe agrees with the U.S. Government Accountability Office's2482(GAO) recommendation that ``[t]he director of the LPO should direct2483staff to implement proposed program changes to reduce the length and2484complexity of the application process for Tribes.'' The Tribe's plans2485to build our natural gas power plant have suffered from the length and2486complexity that the GAO highlights. We are in our third year of the2487loan process and have spent over $30 million towards our grid-enhancing2488generation project and yet we still cannot break ground because our2489loan has not been approved. Meanwhile, power needs have drastically2490changed since we began this process in 2022. As the United States, and2491California in particular, grasps with increasing electricity demands to2492power American leadership in Artificial Intelligence (AI), the Tribe's2493project is more needed than ever. There is no good reason why approval2494for a loan on a shovel-ready project that meets the needs of the time2495should take three years or more to progress to the due diligence stage.2496Loan Application Review2497    One of the reasons for the long delay is the overly-bureaucratic,2498unduly protracted and expensive initial review process that occurs2499before the due diligence review process begins. In order to accommodate2500the LPO's review and the consultant contracts required, the Tribe spent2501money well beyond what we had budgeted for loan approval. Meanwhile,2502the LPO employees assigned to the Tribe's loan application refused to2503make decisions and contradicted each other. By way of example, the2504Tribe was asked to amend our initial application to include renewable2505and green energy components. This caused the Tribe to spend additional2506millions on the project developing a solar and battery storage2507component only for the LPO to then do an about-face and take the2508position that renewable components were not required for approval. Yet,2509even after all the Tribe's attempts at cooperation during the review2510process, it took almost three years to be granted entry into the due2511diligence process--which has since been rescinded--and approval still2512eludes us. Our experience is emblematic of the need for revisions to2513the due diligence process as the GAO recommends.2514Lack of Knowledge and Understanding of Native American Tribes, Tribal2515        Governance, Tribal Enterprises and Tribal Finance2516    The Tribe has also suffered from a lack of competence among the2517staff of the LPO regarding Native American tribes. For example, about a2518year into the process, we were dumbfounded to learn that some of the2519staff responsible for processing our loan did not understand that the2520Tribe is a sovereign government and that tribal enterprises are2521organized and financed significantly differently from private2522businesses. This led to continuous delay and misunderstanding about how2523LPO's loan approval and due diligence criteria should be applied to2524tribal enterprises. In order for the DOE and LPO to advance tribal2525leadership in energy development, they must understand Native American2526tribal government. For those reasons, we support the GAO2527recommendations that the LPO maintain consistent staff with knowledge2528of tribal energy finance. Approving our project will also help build2529that competence as future staff can look to our project as a successful2530model.2531Communication2532    As alluded to above, the Tribe encountered, and continues to2533encounter, many failures in communication during the TEFP loan approval2534process. For instance, the LPO has not been transparent about the2535accessibility of federal funding. Frequently, we receive external2536guidance that seems to be at odds with the internal procedures of the2537loan approval process. The Tribe is very committed to building our2538generating station and associated delivery infrastructure and has2539worked diligently to give the LPO everything it asked for and needed to2540approve our loan. Unfortunately, those efforts have been met with2541opaque requirements and contradictory guidance.2542    Twenty-Nine Palms is a proud member of the Coachella Valley2543community, a region that suffers from blackouts, brownouts and2544moratoria on consumption of additional electricity needed to meet2545expanding business demands. We want to help solve the problem in our2546region of inadequate and unreliable electricity by building a natural2547gas generating station and affiliated infrastructure that can provide2548affordable power to our businesses and our neighbors and support grid2549resiliency. If the LPO approves our loan, we can finally break ground2550and help advance the Federal government's goals of combatting a2551national energy emergency, unleashing American energy, and promoting2552energy security. We hope our story has informed the Committee about the2553struggles tribes face in securing TEFP loans. We are happy to meet with2554any member of the Committee who would like to learn more about our2555experience on our path toward tribal energy sovereignty.2556                                 ______25572558             OCETI SAKOWIN POWER AUTHORITY POSITION PAPER:2559          RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESTRUCTURING THE TRIBAL ENERGY2560                           FINANCING PROGRAM2561    The Oceti Sakowin (pr. O-CHET-ee Sha-KO-wee) Power Authority (OSPA)2562submits its Position Paper on Restructuring the Tribal Energy Financing2563Program (TEFP). OSPA is a Tribal energy development organization, 1002564percent owned and managed by seven Sioux Tribes that share territory2565with the State of South Dakota.2566    This submission follows the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs2567September 10, 2025 hearing on the Government Accountability Office's2568(GAO) Report on TEFP. \1\ OSPA thanks the Committee for directing GAO2569to study this matter, and for this opportunity for interested parties2570to submit comments. The GAO Report is excellent--which is typical for2571that Office's efforts--and OSPA supports the analysis and conclusions2572of the GAO Report. In this paper, OSPA discusses the issues of most2573importance to the OSPA member Tribes, and offers its recommendations2574for restructuring TEFP that would most benefit the OSPA Tribes' energy2575policies and goals.2576---------------------------------------------------------------------------2577    \1\ Government Accountability Office, Report to the Committee on2578Indian Affairs, U.S. Senate, TRIBAL ENERGY FINANCE: Changes to DOE Loan2579Program Would Reduce Barriers for Tribes, August 2025 (GAO Report).2580---------------------------------------------------------------------------2581I. TEFP Must Be Restructured to Support a Wide Variety of Tribal Energy2582        Projects--Most Importantly, Large-Scale Energy Transmission and25832584        Distribution2585    The GAO Report states the Congressionally-mandated goals of the2586Tribal Energy Financing Program: ``TEFP supports large-scale tribal2587energy projects that can advance economic development opportunities for2588Tribes and that use various types of conventional and renewable2589technology.'' \2\ GAO's witness at hearing, Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz, notes2590that ``TEFP is intended to support a broad range of energy development2591projects and activities. . . . such as electricity generation,2592transmission, or distribution facilities . . . or energy storage2593facilities.'' \3\ The GAO Report and Dr. Ortiz illustrate the breath of2594Tribal demand for support of energy projects by identifying2595unsuccessful applicants for TEFP loans/guarantees: generation projects2596ranging from 15 MW to 500 MW, \4\ and financing requests ranging from2597$23.8 million to $8.7 billion. \5\ The GAO Report concludes that2598``[t]he ability to use TEFP to finance a range of energy projects gives2599Tribes more flexibility to pursue projects that leverage these Tribes'2600interests and resources, according to a potential participant.'' \6\2601---------------------------------------------------------------------------2602    \2\ GAO Report at 20.2603    \3\ Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz, GAO Director, Natural Resources and2604Environment, Tribal Energy Finance: DOE Actions Needed to Reduce2605Barriers for Tribes, written testimony to Senate Committee on Indian2606Affairs, September 10, 2025 (Dr. Ortiz Written Testimony), at 2.2607    \4\ GAO Report at 17.2608    \5\ Dr. Ortiz Written Testimony at 3.2609    \6\ GAO Report at 21.2610---------------------------------------------------------------------------2611    OSPA fully endorses GAO's analyses and conclusions--the number and2612variety of applications for TEFP support, including OSPA's own2613unsuccessful application, demonstrate the longstanding desire of Tribes2614across the country to develop large-scale energy projects, the vast2615unmet Tribal need for such support, and the variety of energy projects2616that can bring transformative economic development to some of the most2617remote and poorest Tribes in the country. OSPA must, however, emphasize2618that the need for transmission upgrades to Tribal lands is the most2619compelling need and difficult challenge for Tribes, and any2620restructuring of TEFP must prioritize support for transmission on and2621adjacent to Tribal lands. OSPA discusses the critical need for2622transmission support below.2623II. TEFP Must Support Multi-Tribal and Regional Projects that Bring2624        Extra High Voltage Transmission to Tribal Lands2625A. EHV Transmission Deserts Are an Absolute Barrier to Tribal Energy2626        and2627        Economic Development2628    The OSPA member Tribes with the largest reservations are located in2629the area called ``West River South Dakota,'' west of the Missouri2630River. The entire area--the whole western half of South Dakota--is an2631extra high voltage (EHV) transmission desert. EHV is defined as 345 kV2632and above, and is the scale of transmission capacity that is required2633for the energy-intensive industries that will define the future of this2634country: AI, data centers, and advanced manufacturing. There is no EHV2635transmission in West River. \7\2636---------------------------------------------------------------------------2637    \7\ In late 2024, the Southwest Power Pool added the first 345 kV2638line in western South Dakota to its portfolio of approved transmission2639projects. That line remains in the planning stages, but one aspect of2640the project is clear--it bypasses all the Tribes in South Dakota, and2641so will perpetuate the EHV transmission desert across the Tribal lands2642in West River.2643---------------------------------------------------------------------------2644    The OSPA member Tribes with the largest reservations are all2645located within the EHV transmission desert. Most of what is used as2646``transmission backbone'' across the area--and all the transmission2647across the reservations of the Cheyenne River, Oglala, and Rosebud2648Sioux Tribes--is 115 kV, which is barely sufficient to meet the2649existing residential and limited commercial power demand, much less2650support energy-intensive industries or utility-scale power generation.2651All the 345 kV transmission in South Dakota is east of the Missouri2652River--on the other side of the state from the largest of the OSPA2653Tribes' reservations. The impact of this lack of transmission capacity2654on Tribal economic development is obvious--the map below shows the2655sites of data centers and wind farms currently in service or under2656construction in and around South Dakota. These projects generally2657follow the existing 345 kV transmission lines--east, north and south of2658the Tribes. The absence of EHV transmission has proven to be an2659absolute barrier to energy and economic development on Tribal lands.26602661    As OSPA has detailed in comments filed with the Department of2662Energy (DOE) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), four2663utility-scale renewable energy generation projects, totaling 915 MW in2664nameplate capacity, all privately funded, and being developed by OSPA2665and other Indian-owned and Tribally owned developers, have been put on2666hold because of the enormous cost of building the new transmission2667capacity needed to put those projects on line. Moreover, three2668different OSPA member Tribes want to develop their utility-scale energy2669resources but cannot obtain an interconnection queue position because2670no transmission capacity is available. The lack of EHV capacity is an2671absolute barrier to Tribal economic and energy development in South2672Dakota, and deploying EHV is the necessary precondition to Tribal2673economic development. From OSPA's discussions with other Tribes, OSPA2674understands that lack of EHV transmission capacity is a major2675impediment to economic and energy development for Tribes across the2676country.2677B. There Are Multiple Federal Grant, Loan and Loan Guarantee Programs,2678        Administered by Multiple Federal Agencies, Specifically2679        Designed to Support Tribal Community-Scale and Microgrid2680        Projects, but None Dedicated to2681        Supporting EHV Grid Upgrades on Tribal Lands2682    The DOE Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs administers2683several programs that are dedicated to supporting Indian energy2684projects. Acting Director and DOE IE witness at hearing David Conrad2685described the Office's support of over 240 Indian energy projects since26862010, which among other things, improved over 11,000 buildings. \8\ As2687Acting Director Conrad explained, these are extremely valuable programs2688that significantly reduce the cost of retail energy for Tribal2689communities, improve service resilience, and expand Tribal capacity to2690act in the energy sector. These are community-scale projects.2691Additional support for Tribal community-scale and microgrid projects is2692supplied by programs administered by the Departments of the Interior,2693Agriculture, and Commerce.2694---------------------------------------------------------------------------2695    \8\ Testimony of David Conrad, Acting Director and Deputy Director,2696Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs, U.S. Department of Energy,2697Before the Committee on Indian Affairs, United States Senate, Regarding2698Tribal Energy Dominance Hearing, September 10, 2025, at 2-3.2699---------------------------------------------------------------------------2700    There are no federal programs dedicated to upgrading the national2701power grid on and around Tribal lands.2702    The GAO Report notes that: ``In August 2023, DOE generally reported2703that few federal funding sources were available to Tribes for2704developing energy infrastructure, potentially limiting the development2705of large-scale tribal energy projects.'' \9\ In OSPA's experience, the2706GAO concern over lack of resources is understated.2707---------------------------------------------------------------------------2708    \9\ GAO Report at 27, footnote 59, citing Department of Energy,2709Tribal Electricity Access and Reliability: Report to Congress2710(Washington, D.C: August 2023).2711---------------------------------------------------------------------------2712    The GAO report identifies several federal resources that ``may be2713available, depending on whether a Tribes' project matches the program's2714criteria and timing.'' \10\ The Report goes on to cite several programs2715within DOE that ``may be able to support Tribes with project2716development for large-scale energy projects. These include an IE Tribal2717Energy Planning and Development grant program; the Grid Deployment2718Office's Grid Resilience State and Tribal Formula Grant Program and the2719Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships; and DOE's Communities2720Local Energy Action Program and Energy Transitions Initiative2721Partnership Project.'' \11\2722---------------------------------------------------------------------------2723    \10\ GAO Report at 26.2724    \11\ GAO Report at 26-27.2725---------------------------------------------------------------------------2726    At the hearing, DOE IE witness David Conrad noted that his Office2727sustained significant budget and personnel cuts, and that a number of2728programs are currently under review. He was not able to confirm whether2729or not specific programs were suspended. OSPA agrees that the Grid2730Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Grant program could2731provide significant funding for the grid upgrades required by the OSPA2732member Tribes. In 2024, OSPA, Basin Electric Power Cooperative, and2733several Tribes, supported by the Western Area Power Administration2734(WAPA), submitted an application. That application was rejected, but2735the same parties are prepared to re-apply when the third and final2736tranche is announced. DOE had stated that the last tranche was expected2737to be announced in spring 2025, but to date, a Funding Opportunity2738Announcement has not been issued.2739    Other potentially useful programs appear to be no longer available.2740The Transmission Acceleration Grant (TAG) program, administered by the2741DOE Grid Deployment Office, funds states and Tribes planning for2742transmission projects. OSPA applied for this year's award, but just2743received word it was rejected. We have been unable to find any2744announcements of any TAG grant awards made under the program this year.2745Unobligated funds for the Transmission Facility Financing (TFF) program2746were rescinded by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. OSPA is unable to2747determine if the Transmission Facilitation Program (TFP) is still2748available.2749C. The $20B Size of the TEFP Makes It Uniquely Able to Support Big2750        Transmission Projects on Tribal Lands2751    The size of the TEFP, at $20 billion, and its exclusive focus on2752Tribal energy, makes it the one indisputably remaining federal program2753that can meaningfully address the transmission shortage that has become2754a crisis for Tribal energy and economic development.2755    The EHV transmission upgrade that has been designed by WAPA, Basin2756Electric, and OSPA would bring 345 kV across four of the largest2757reservations in the country. It's a big project--the cost is expected2758to approach $2 billion. The Grid Deployment Office (GDO) reviewed the2759planned transmission project in the 2024 GRIP application submitted by2760OSPA, Basin Electric, and three Tribes, and supported by WAPA. GDO2761found that the project was an ``[i]nnovative and novel collaboration''2762that ``would improve the regional resilience of the grid in a2763monumental way. The transmission line technology is cutting edge . . .2764[t]he grid extension would open up a large amount of previously2765untapped wind energy spurring downstream investment . . . .'' \12\2766---------------------------------------------------------------------------2767    \12\ GDO, ``Strengths and Weaknesses Report,'' DE-FOA-0003195,2768Application Control Number 3195-1540.2769---------------------------------------------------------------------------2770    A transmission project this big and expensive will be complex--it2771likely will combine financing/funding from private investors and2772Transmission Owners (TOs), cost recovery through the Integrated2773Transmission Planning process conducted by the Southwest Power Pool2774(SPP), and federal funding/financing. TEFP is a large enough fund to2775make a meaningful contribution to this capital stack, and will make it2776easier for the Tribes and the TOs to attract the necessary private2777capital.2778III. TEFP Financing of Big Transmission Projects Will Ensure Tribes2779        Play a Major Role in Transmission Planning Conducted by RTOs,2780        PMAs and Utilities, and Secure Significant Ownership in the2781        Completed Projects2782    Large transmission projects are like any other expensive project;2783they operate according to the Golden Rule: ``He/she who brings the gold2784makes the rules.'' The OSPA member Tribes rank among the poorest in the2785country--while we have been able to leverage regulatory interest, the2786federal trust responsibility and good will to achieve the active2787engagement of WAPA, Basin Electric, and SPP in designing and promoting2788our Tribal grid upgrade, our Tribes don't have any significant amounts2789of money to bring to the table.2790    This is where TEFP financing can have an impact much greater than2791the actual investment. Because TEFP financing is only available for2792Tribal energy projects, the OSPA Tribes can be as large an investor in2793the project as the Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs) and other2794TOs, utilities and other investors. This will ensure that OSPA is2795centrally involved in engaging with the Regional Transmission2796Organization (RTO) and TOs in planning, permitting, and constructing2797the project. Equally important, partial financing by Tribes through2798TEFP will ensure a significant Tribal ownership interest in the2799completed transmission project.2800    GAO recognized the unique role TEFP can play in promoting Tribal2801ownership of big infrastructure projects:28022803   Focus on tribal ownership. Tribal applicants cited the2804        importance of tribal ownership for economic development2805        prospects. One applicant estimated that owning a large-scale2806        energy project would significantly increase the Tribe's annual2807        revenue, which it plans to reinvest into the community. A2808        potential program participant said the program can accept2809        applications from a consortium of Tribes, which enables small2810        Tribes with limited resources to own a large-scale energy2811        project. \13\2812---------------------------------------------------------------------------2813    \13\ GAO Report at 21.28142815IV. Designating a Portion of TEFP Loans to Support Early-Stage2816        Development and Making Them ``Forgiveable'' or Structured as a2817        Program-Related Investment Fund Will Enable Tribes to Initiate2818        Large Projects and Reduce Risk for the Tribes and the2819        Government2820    GAO speaks at length about the need for TEFP to finance early-stage2821development work. OSPA agrees that this is one of the most important2822functions TEFP can serve. Early development work for a big transmission2823project includes identifying routes on Tribal lands that meet the2824approval of Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs) and the Tribal2825communities. This means early and consistent engagement with the THPO,2826Tribal Councils and affected communities, and hiring an engineering2827design firm and Tribal Cultural Specialists for studies related to2828siting. It also requires engaging wildlife and environmental2829contractors to begin the work that will be required in the NEPA2830permitting process, and regular coordination with the relevant PMA,2831TOs, and RTO.2832    GAO recognizes that lack of funding/financing for this work can be2833a barrier to Tribal energy projects: ``However, many Tribes do not have2834the upfront cash resources for early project development activities2835which can be expensive, especially for larger-scale projects.'' \14\2836---------------------------------------------------------------------------2837    \14\ Dr. Ortiz Written Testimony at 4.2838---------------------------------------------------------------------------2839    OSPA has a recommendation for supporting early-stage development2840work within the structure of TEFP: Establish a ``forgivable'' or2841Program-Related Investment (PRI) \15\ development fund within the2842larger TEFP. This would allow the Tribes to obtain relatively modest2843funding/financing for early-stage development work (for the OSPA EHV2844project, less than $10 million over two-to-three years will complete2845the early development work for a estimated $2 billion project). If the2846early project design and engagement work supports the continued2847development of the project, the loan would be rolled into the larger2848project financing. If the project cannot proceed, the loan would be2849forgiven or treated as a grant. This enables Tribes or Tribal2850developers to undertake critical early development work without2851incurring substantial debt. Risk to the TEFP can be minimized by the2852relatively modest size of the loan, and by the quality of the PMA, TOs,2853and/or RTO involved and their initial evaluation of the project, and by2854the use of other expert contractors.2855---------------------------------------------------------------------------2856    \15\ The IRS defines PRIs as investments designed to achieve a2857purpose beyond making a return. These can be high-risk investments to2858groups that otherwise lack access to capital. The investment is2859expected to be repaid, with at least a modest return, which allows the2860institution to recycle the investment into other projects. https://2861www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/private-foundations/program-related-2862investments2863---------------------------------------------------------------------------2864V. Miscellaneous Issues Raised in the GAO Report and Senate Hearing2865A. What Agency/Office Should Administer the Restructured TEFP?2866    OSPA does not have a strong opinion on the agency or office that2867administers the restructured TEFP, provided that the agency/office has2868experience in administering financing for large infrastructure2869projects. OSPA also believes that the TEFP administrator should have2870regular access to the national laboratories. The National Renewable2871Energy Laboratory, Lawrence Berkely, the Pacific Northwest National2872Laboratory and the National Energy Technology Laboratory routinely2873advise DOE and other agencies, and are sources of considerable2874expertise on technology and finance relating to infrastructure2875projects.2876B. How to Provide for Tribal Sovereignty and Ownership While Limiting2877        the2878        Financial Risk to Which Tribes May Be Exposed? Allow TOs to2879        Participate in the TEFP Application Process2880    Dr. Ortiz provided an excellent discussion of this issue at2881hearing. She correctly noted that Tribal sovereignty in decisionmaking2882and ownership is required by Treaties and the federal trust2883responsibility, but the way control and ownership are typically2884exercised is through investing. The restructured TEFP should provide2885ways to promote sovereignty and Tribal ownership without putting the2886Tribes into debt.2887    OSPA believes that, with TEFP financing, the co-development2888arrangement that OSPA has established with WAPA, Basin Electric, and2889SPP accomplishes these goals. As discussed in  IV above, if early-2890stage development funding/financing is made available through a2891forgivable or PRI TEFP loan, OSPA and its member Tribes would be able2892to conduct the pre-permitting siting work and engage consultants2893familiar with Tribal cultural issues and priorities. As discussed in 2894III above, bringing TEFP financing to the OSPA transmission project2895will make OSPA a co-investor, and this will empower OSPA to exercise2896significant control over the planning and permitting processes.2897    The government's risk in making these loans can be minimized by2898allowing the direct involvement of PMAs and other TOs in the2899application process. In the case of OSPA's transmission project, OSPA2900engaged with WAPA and Baskin Electric early in the planning process.2901WAPA and Basin developed the original project design with OSPA's input.2902In doing so, WAPA and Basin identified the general routes that would2903result in the maximum resilience gains and congestion relief. They also2904factored in the generation projects that the Tribes could pursue once2905adequate transmission capacity becomes available. This level of2906analysis, conducted with the expertise of WAPA and Basin Electric,2907substantially derisked the project.2908    The restructured TEFP should expressly allow PMAs and TOs to join2909in the Tribe's application. This would encourage other Tribes, PMAs,2910and TOs to work together cooperatively to pursue TEFP financing, and2911would substantially reduce the risk for the TEFP administrator. As OSPA2912discusses in  VI below, WAPA's attorneys need assurances that WAPA has2913the authority to participate fully in the TEFP application process, and2914these assurances should be provided in the TEFP restructuring.2915C. How to Limit Program Expenditures on Outside Engineering, Financial,2916        and Legal Consultants? Allow TOs to Participate in the TEFP2917        Application Process2918    GAO has concluded that ``potentially high and unpredictable due2919diligence costs can pose a barrier for Tribes,'' \16\ and proposes ways2920to limit the use of outside engineering, law, and finance firms in2921evaluating proposed TEFP projects.2922---------------------------------------------------------------------------2923    \16\ GAO Report at 28-29.2924---------------------------------------------------------------------------2925    As discussed above, for big transmission projects, RTOs, PMAs,2926utilities and/or private transmission developers will be involved with2927the Tribes in designing, permitting, constructing, and operating the2928project. The involvement of these expert entities will substantially2929derisk the project. TEFP administrators, to the extent necessary, can2930hire outside experts to check the work of the project designers, but2931this will involve much less work than de novo review of a proposed2932project.2933D. The Restructured TEFP Must Be Mandated to Be Technology Neutral2934    At the September 10 hearing, every Senator who addressed the2935issue--regardless of party affiliation--stated emphatically that TEFP2936loans/guarantees may not be limited to any particular type of energy2937resource, but must support an ``all of the above'' approach to Tribal2938energy projects. As Chairman Murkowski explained at hearing, the energy2939resources available to Tribes--whether coal, oil, gas, wind, solar,2940geothermal or hydro--are determined by geography, and Tribes are2941restricted to developing what resources they have within their2942reservations and native areas. And as OSPA has demonstrated in this2943paper, in order to make these generation projects possible, EHV2944transmission and local distribution must also expressly be supported by2945the program.2946VI. Congress Must Clarify that PMAs Are Fully Empowered to Consult with2947        Tribes in Transmission Planning, and to Partner with Tribes in2948        TEFP Loan/Loan Guarantee Applications2949    In July of this year, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory2950(NREL) circulated a draft paper entitled ``Tribal Engagement in2951Transmission Planning,'' and sought comment from Tribes and Tribal2952organizations. The NREL paper conducted an excellent survey of2953transmission needs on Tribal lands and made specific recommendations on2954how the energy transmission planning process conducted by Regional2955Transmission Organizations could more effectively solicit input from2956Tribes and reflect Tribal goals and priorities in the planning process.2957One recommendation was for Tribes to partner with Power Marketing2958Administrations, who could represent Tribal interests in the RTO2959planning process:29602961        Partnerships with existing SPP members. Transmission owners2962        such as WAPA. . . . have a strong standing in transmission2963        planning because an RTO is fundamentally an agreement among2964        transmission owners to operate their common grid according to2965        common rules. \17\2966---------------------------------------------------------------------------2967    \17\ National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Tribal Engagement in2968Transmission Planning, review draft for comment by Tribes, July 2025,2969at 22-23.29702971    A year prior, the ``i2X'' program, sponsored by DOE, made a similar2972recommendation. \18\2973---------------------------------------------------------------------------2974    \18\ Interconnection Innovation e-Xchange (i2X), Transmission2975Interconnection Roadmap, Transforming Bulk Transmission by 2035, at 37-297638, Solution 2.10 (April 2024). https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/2977files/2024-04/i2X%20Transmission%20Interconnection%20Roadmap_1.pdf2978---------------------------------------------------------------------------2979    OSPA strongly supports these NREL and i2X recommendations, and in2980OSPA's experience, WAPA is the best positioned transmission owner to2981take input on Tribal transmission needs, advise Tribes on how best to2982meet them, and to promote Tribal positions within the RTO planning2983process. WAPA currently serves about 700 wholesale, or ``preference,''2984customers--10 percent of which are Indian Tribes. \19\ Moreover, as a2985federal agency, WAPA shares the federal obligation to engage in2986meaningful consultation with Tribes. WAPA's Tribal customers include2987the OSPA member Tribes, and OSPA has been working with WAPA since 20232988in designing EHV upgrades to the national power grid across four of the2989largest reservations in the country, and promoting the project's2990inclusion in the Southwest Power Pool Integrated Transmission Planning2991(ITP) portfolio.2992---------------------------------------------------------------------------2993    \19\ Western Area Power Administration, Native American Tribal2994Informational Outreach (July 12, 2022). https://www.wapa.gov/wp-2995content/uploads/2023/04/WAPA-Native-American-Tribe-Informational-2996Outreach-6-6-22.pdf2997---------------------------------------------------------------------------2998    However, OSPA has experienced a significant challenge regarding2999WAPA's full participation in supporting Tribes in the planning and3000portfolio selection process: WAPA's attorneys are concerned that WAPA3001lacks authority to engage fully with Tribes. OSPA strongly disagrees--3002WAPA's statutory authority to design, build and operate one of the3003largest electric transmission systems in the country, to manage the3004Transmission Infrastructure Program, and to serve the needs of its3005Tribal preference customers clearly is broad enough to encompass a3006transmission planning and advocacy role for Tribes. However, in OSPA's3007experience, WAPA's attorneys have been overly cautious in exercising3008it. Specifically, in 2024 OSPA formed a coalition including WAPA, Basin3009Electric, three OSPA member Tribes, and others to draft and submit an3010application for a Grid Resilience Innovation Partnerships grant to3011provide partial funding for EHV grid upgrades across multiple OSPA3012Tribes' reservations. Just prior to the filing deadline, WAPA's3013attorneys advised WAPA that it could not identify itself as a3014``partner'' or a sub-recipient in the application. DOE later cited this3015lack of specificity about the uses of the grant funds as a primary3016reason the application was denied. OSPA is concerned that this3017overabundance of caution may prevent WAPA from serving as an effective3018advocate for Tribal energy transmission needs and priorities.3019    In her testimony, Dr. Ortiz discussed at length that TEFP3020administration has been plagued by inconsistent and rapidly changing3021standards for evaluating loan applications, and states the need for the3022Secretary of Energy and the Loan Programs Office to issue a thorough3023clarification of program guidance. \20\ This analysis comports with3024OSPA's experience, and the need for such a comprehensive clarification3025of lending rules and standards is evident. As part of this3026clarification, OSPA requests that the Senate Indian Affairs Committee3027and TEFP administrator clarify that WAPA and other PMAs are fully3028authorized to participate actively in Tribes' applications for TEFP3029loans/guarantees and other federal funding/financing programs, and to3030be identified in the applications as a sub-recipient of the loan/3031guarantee proceeds.3032---------------------------------------------------------------------------3033    \20\ Dr. Ortiz Written Testimony at 4-8.3034---------------------------------------------------------------------------3035VII. Conclusion3036    OSPA thanks the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for this3037opportunity to submit our position on this matter of critical3038importance to our member Tribes. We are at your disposal if we can3039provide additional materials or information.30403041        Respectfully submitted,30423043         Lyle Jack, Chairman of the OSPA Board of Directors30443045                            Jon Canis, OSPA General Counsel3046                                 ______30473048                                Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe3049                                                 September 16. 202530503051Dear Hon. Lisa Murkowski and Hon. Brian Schatz:30523053    As the Senate evaluates the implementation of Executive Order305414154, ``Unleashing American Energy,'' the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe3055(PGST) urges the Committee to continue support for tribal energy3056sovereignty both through existing Department of Energy programs and3057through the creation of new programs that promote energy independence.3058    We are aligned with the Executive Order's goals for affordable and3059reliable energy. However, we are concerned that energy exploitation and3060production on Federal lands and waters will come at the expense of3061ecosystem integrity, tribal sovereignty, and future generations.3062Tribes, including PGST, have stewarded the lands of the United States3063since time immemorial. We encourage the Senate to consider the non-use3064value that these lands provide, including ecosystem services for clean3065water, carbon sequestration, recreations--and of particular importance3066to tribes, cultural and provisioning services. The simplified and3067expedited permitting processes dictated by Section 5 must still3068necessitate tribal consultation and provide sufficient time for tribal3069staff to evaluate permitting documentation.3070    PGST is grateful for the Department of Energy's Energy Technology3071Innovation and Partnership Project for technical assistance in the3072creation of a Strategic Energy Plan. However, the DOE's review process3073has recently been modified to require an Executive Secretary Review.3074This additional step has lengthened the timeline substantially--we have3075been waiting since late May and our expected turnaround time of one3076month has turned into nearly four months. Delaying adopting the3077Strategic Energy Plan has prevented our Energy Sovereignty Program from3078sharing our plans with external partners, hindering collaboration:3079draft documents provided by the DOE and Pacific Northwest National Labs3080are ``for internal review only--not to cite, quote, copy or3081distribute.'' We would like to receive a final version of our plan and3082the Executive Secretary Review has been an unanticipated barrier to our3083progress.3084    PGST ha been frustrated with the lack of responsiveness from DOE3085regarding funding programs. We attempted to apply for the $10,4803086allocated to us by the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant.3087First, we reached out on April 4 to eeecbg@hq.doe.gov. We received an3088unhelpful response on Apri 8: ``Thank you for reaching out. We3089appreciate your inquiry and will respond to you as soon as possible.''3090This message was the only one we received, despite following up on May30918. On May 21, we registered for the EECBG voucher portal and received3092an automated confirmation from eecbgvouchers@emailicf.com. We followed3093up on May 27 after receiving no further communication, asking when we3094might gain access to the application given the May 31 deadline, but3095never received any further response.3096    Therefore, PGST was unable to access this funding source. PGST had3097a similar experience with the Grid Deployment Office (GDO) when3098inquiring about the Grid Resilience State And Tribal Formula Grant--we3099were advised that our question about the availability of funding could3100not be answered while the GDO conducts a department-wide review of3101programming in accordance with Executive Order 14210.3102    PGST was disappointed to hear Environmental Protection Agency to3103terminate the $7 billion Solar for All. This program would have enabled3104low-income and disadvantaged communities including PGST to benefit from3105distributed solar energy. We hope that the DOE can provide a similar3106program that will enable our tribal member to access low-cost,3107renewable energy.3108    Thank you for your consideration.31093110        Sincerely,3111                             Hon. Amber Caldera, Chairwoman3112                                 ______31133114   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Murkowski to3115                             Jocelyn Fenton3116Executive Summary3117    Rural Alaska's energy systems are at a breaking point of scale,3118cost, and risk. Nearly 200 remote, fly-in or boat-access communities3119rely on aging microgrids and bulk fuel facilities that are costly to3120maintain yet essential for survival in extreme conditions. Many now3121operate beyond their design life, leaving communities--and the nation--3122vulnerable to cascading failures during supply disruptions or3123emergencies.3124    Without renewed federal investment, failures in community3125infrastructure will continue to divert military and emergency3126resources, undermining national preparedness and driving up government3127costs. Recent Executive Orders--such as Unleashing Alaska's Resources3128and Unleashing American Energy--authorize the rollback of restrictions,3129the promotion of fossil fuel and mineral extraction, and revision of3130permitting to fast-track traditional energy projects. Alaska's tribes3131are positioned to utilize these provisions in their energy planning and3132portfolios, though realizing those benefits hinges on strong local3133governance and technical capacity.3134    Across Alaska, the Department of Defense is prioritizing energy3135resilience through redundant generation, microgrids, and fuel system3136upgrades to ensure mission continuity under extreme conditions. Rural3137communities require similar reliability. Modernizing bulk fuel systems3138is essential to sustain local operations, reduce costly emergency3139responses, and maintain the logistical resilience that supports defense3140readiness, Arctic security, and supply chain security.3141    Infrastructure longevity rests on three pillars: capital3142improvements, operational support, and capacity building. In addition3143to the $100 million still needed for Phase II of the Bulk Fuel3144Deployment Plan, ongoing investment in operations, maintenance, and3145technical collaboration is critical to ensure long-term reliability.3146    Well-maintained community infrastructure underpins both economic3147and national security. Stable energy systems attract private investment3148in critical minerals, strengthen supply chains, and reduce reliance on3149military assets for disaster response. Investing now in Alaska's rural3150energy backbone will secure America's northern frontier, bolster3151national readiness, and sustain the infrastructure vital to U.S.3152strategic interests in the Arctic.31533154    Question 1. How could DOE and DOE programs support bulk fuel3155systems?31563157    Answer:31583159   Consider Bulk fuel facilities an essential part of a3160        community energy system, opening up eligibility for financial3161        and technical support.31623163   DOE could open up a specific technical assistance or funding3164        opportunity, beyond E-TIPP or C-MAP, to facilitate rural Alaska3165        regional energy planning that includes bulk fuel facilities and3166        economic assessments to help tribal, municipal, and regional3167        entities determine a path toward improved operational3168        sustainability of all energy systems.31693170   DOE could partner with the Denali Commission to fund Phase3171        II--the Implementation Plan--of the Bulk Fuel Aggregation3172        Study.31733174   DOE could allow O&M set-asides in capital improvement3175        funding.31763177    Robust and well-maintained bulk fuel systems are not only vital for3178sustaining rural communities, but also increasingly recognized as3179critical infrastructure for national security and economic development,3180as underscored by recent federal Executive Orders. DOE could strengthen3181support for rural Alaska's bulk fuel infrastructure by formally3182recognizing bulk fuel systems as an essential component of rural3183community energy systems. This aligns with recent Executive Orders,3184which encourage the removal of regulatory barriers and prioritize3185domestic energy production, giving DOE a clear mandate to act on behalf3186of rural Alaska's energy security and national resilience. This3187recognition could extend across DOE programs, including the Office of3188Indian Energy, so that all aspects of bulk fuel management, from3189operator training and technical assistance to condition assessments and3190capital projects, are eligible for funding.3191    DOE could also consider providing targeted assistance for regional3192planning efforts that evaluate the comprehensive needs of bulk fuel3193facilities and the financial structures necessary for long-term3194sustainability beyond reliance on grant funding. Through this planning3195and technical support, tribal and local entities would be enabled to3196explore alternative energy resources and develop diversification3197strategies tailored to their communities--leveraging DOE and partner3198expertise to advance new energy solutions alongside bulk fuel system3199upgrades. Prioritizing direct investment in local governments, tribes,3200and consortiums strengthens community capacity, utilizes local3201expertise, and delivers resilient solutions tailored to Alaska's unique3202challenges. These collaborative planning efforts would identify3203scalable, region-based strategies that improve efficiency, reduce3204costs, and support sustainable local capacity.3205    In addition, DOE could consider partnering with the Denali3206Commission to fund Phase 2 of the Alaska Bulk Fuel Aggregation Study3207(the Implementation Plan), which will define specific policy,3208regulatory, and capital improvement pathways to strengthen both the3209financial and physical sustainability of rural tank farms. The3210Implementation Plan, when completed, is anticipated to be a roadmap for3211guiding decisions at the local, regional, and state level to improve3212long-term facility operations and financial sustainability. (Please see3213the answer to question 2 for more information about the Study.) DOE3214could further enhance impact by creating or adapting funding programs3215to support bulk fuel system operations and maintenance (O&M), including3216dedicated set-asides for O&M costs within construction awards, and by3217investing in monitoring and preventative maintenance technologies3218designed for remote, harsh environments.3219    Finally, DOE programs could address whole-system lifecycle planning3220at the point of capital investment, ensuring that construction or3221replacement projects are paired with long-term strategies for3222maintenance, modernization, and eventual replacement. This systems-3223based approach would improve reliability, extend facility life cycles,3224and safeguard public investment in critical rural energy3225infrastructure.32263227    Question 2. What federal funding streams are available to support3228utilities' O&M costs presently?32293230    Answer:32313232   Few, if any, federal funding streams are available to3233        support utilities' O&M costs.32343235   DOE and partner agencies, including the Denali Commission,3236        could explore a performance-based O&M pilot for rural Alaska3237        energy systems.32383239   Federal funding is needed for a pilot project to implement3240        the Bulk Fuel Aggregation Study Phase II recommendations.32413242   Raise TAPL Funding (one-time or ongoing): Could provide a3243        substantial, dedicated funding stream through congressional3244        appropriations. Offers high-impact infusion for infrastructure,3245        but may require political negotiation and could be subject to3246        annual appropriations cycles.32473248    Federal funding to support operations and maintenance (O&M) for3249rural utilities in Alaska is very limited and generally indirect. Most3250federal programs administered by the Department of Energy (DOE),3251Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and U.S. Department of3252Agriculture (USDA) focus on capital investment (i.e., constructing or3253upgrading infrastructure) rather than the ongoing costs of operating3254and maintaining those systems once built.3255    A few programs offer partial or related support:32563257   Denali Commission's portfolio includes funding for operator3258        training, technical assistance, and targeted facility repairs3259        or efficiency upgrades that extend the useful life of existing3260        systems. With limited exceptions, the Commission does not3261        generally extend funding opportunities for routine O&M3262        expenses.32633264   USDA Rural Utilities Service (RUS) programs may incorporate3265        some operational support or technical assistance within loan or3266        grant mechanisms, though these opportunities are narrow and3267        competitive.32683269   DOE's Office of Indian Energy, along with programs such as3270        E-TIPP (Energy Transitions Initiative Partnership Project) and3271        C-MAP (Community Managed Microgrid Assistance Program), provide3272        critical technical assistance to help local operators build3273        management capacity, yet they do not directly fund O&M.32743275    Across rural Alaska, where more than 180 remote communities operate3276isolated microgrids and bulk fuel facilities to meet essential needs in3277harsh and expensive operating environments, the absence of dedicated,3278sustained O&M funding mechanisms represents a major vulnerability.3279These systems are typically operated by small villages or local3280utilities with very limited cash flow and user bases too small to3281spread high fixed costs, leaving little margin for preventive3282maintenance or emergency repairs. This structural gap contributes to3283deferred maintenance, shortened infrastructure lifespans, and recurring3284reliability and safety challenges.3285    To begin addressing this gap, DOE and partner agencies could3286explore a performance-based O&M pilot for rural Alaska energy systems3287(including bulk fuel), implemented through a collaborative federal-3288state-tribal-nonprofit partnership drawing on existing expertise in3289technical assistance, safety, regulatory compliance, and community3290capacity-building. Modeled on performance-driven infrastructure3291initiatives such as the Department of Defense's Energy Resilience and3292Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) and Energy Savings Performance3293Contracts (ESPCs), the pilot could tie funding or technical assistance3294to measurable outcomes--such as implementation of preventative3295maintenance programs, fewer preventable leaks and spills, fewer3296unplanned outages, improved operator training, and compliance with3297safety and environmental standards.3298    Importantly, a performance-based model would need to operate at3299regional scale or across a portfolio of facilities, where aggregated3300participation provides stronger financial footing, allows standardized3301benchmarks, and generates data sufficient to evaluate effectiveness.3302While there are no existing regional utilities, the benefit of working3303together and creating utility collaborations is clear, such as TCC,3304ANTHC, and those emerging in the YK Delta and Bristol Bay regions. This3305is a known need and wouldn't be starting from scratch. The Bulk Fuel3306Aggregation Study now underway is expected to identify the structural,3307financial, and regulatory pathways that could inform such a model.3308Phase 2 of that work (the Implementation Plan) will provide the data-3309driven basis for designing and scoping any performance-based O&M3310initiative. Early estimates suggest that a modest, multi-community3311pilot, potentially on the order of several million dollars, could3312meaningfully test these concepts once guided by the Study's findings.3313    Adapting performance-based approaches to rural Alaska's energy3314systems at scale could help extend facility life, reduce emergency3315repair costs, and promote more consistent system stewardship, even3316without establishing a permanent O&M subsidy.33173318    Question 3. How does a lack of O&M support impact communities3319reliant on bulk fuel? Please provide real-world examples.33203321    Answer:33223323   The lack of dedicated O&M support directly increases the3324        likelihood of environmental contamination, fuel supply3325        disruption, threats to life, health, and safety, economic3326        hardship, and deteriorating energy and national security.33273328    The absence of consistent operations and maintenance (O&M) support3329for bulk fuel systems in rural Alaska has serious consequences for3330community safety, environmental protection, and energy reliability.3331Bulk fuel facilities are critical infrastructure in these communities;3332they store and distribute the diesel and heating fuel that power local3333microgrids, heat homes, and support water, sewer, and transportation3334systems. When preventive maintenance and operator support are3335underfunded, systems become increasingly fragile and communities are3336forced into a reactive posture, responding to crises instead of3337managing assets strategically.3338    Without adequate O&M resources, communities face:33393340   Greater risk of spills and leaks. In February 2024, roughly3341        6,400 gallons of diesel spilled in Kwigillingok when a transfer3342        pump overfilled a bulk tank and fuel breached secondary3343        containment, threatening nearby waterways. ADEC and the U.S.3344        Coast Guard coordinated an extensive cleanup (Anchorage Daily3345        News, Feb 21 2024). Similarly, an 18,000-gallon diesel spill in3346        Point Lay in 2022 was traced to a failed valve seal at the3347        community's tank farm (Reuters, Aug 12 2022). Both incidents3348        underscore how aging equipment and limited maintenance capacity3349        heighten spill risks and cleanup costs.33503351   Service interruptions and loss of power or heat. The City of3352        Akiak has endured repeated power outages due to generator3353        failures and lack of spare parts or trained staff. In 2024,3354        residents went weeks with inconsistent electricity, losing3355        frozen food stores and relying on personal generators to keep3356        freezers running (Alaska Public Media, July 1 2024). Because3357        the community has only a few hundred residents, there is no3358        financial cushion to absorb major repairs.33593360   Vulnerability to extreme weather and erosion. During Typhoon3361        Merbok (2022) and again with ex-Typhoon Halong (2025), storm3362        surge and flooding damaged fuel storage facilities in multiple3363        western Alaska villages, dislodging tanks, floating drums, and3364        spreading sheens of fuel across inundated areas (AP News, Oct3365        2025). Facilities lacking adequate foundation maintenance,3366        erosion protection, or anchoring are likely to have suffered3367        the greatest losses.33683369   Escalating and unpredictable costs. Emergency repairs, spill3370        responses, and replacement parts are several times more3371        expensive than scheduled maintenance, particularly in fly-in3372        communities where every repair requires specialized personnel3373        and chartered transport. Small utilities with minimal cash3374        reserves must often defer maintenance or seek emergency aid,3375        perpetuating a costly cycle of crisis response.33763377    These examples demonstrate how the lack of dedicated O&M support3378directly increases the likelihood of environmental contamination, fuel3379supply disruption, and economic hardship. Moreover, strategic3380investment in rural fuel systems is essential--not only for local3381safety and stability, but also to ensure military and federal emergency3382assets remain available for their designated missions, rather than3383repeated disaster response, as the Typhoon Halong situation3384illustrates. For communities already facing high energy costs and3385limited local capacity, even a single spill or extended outage can have3386cascading impacts on public health, subsistence resources, and3387community stability.3388    Sustained O&M investment, whether through dedicated funding3389mechanisms, regional aggregation strategies, or future performance-3390based pilot programs, is essential to shift rural Alaska's bulk fuel3391infrastructure from reactive repairs to proactive, long-term3392stewardship.3393                                 ______33943395   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Murkowski to3396                          Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz3397    Question 1. In GAO's report from May 8, 2025, titled, DOE Loan3398Programs: Actions Needed to Address Authority and Improve Application3399Reviews, GAO found that LPO internal application review guidance is3400``at times contradictory or unclear.'' In one instance, GAO found that3401``TEFP guidance calls for the drafting of a technical viability memo by3402the evaluating engineer to document the results of LPO's technical3403viability evaluation.'' However, LPO staff interviewed by GAO revealed3404they did not create those memos. In other cases, GAO found that when3405asking LPO officials to clarify their application review procedures,3406``their statements contradicted written procedure, practice, or other3407statements from LPO officials.'' Can you share how contradictory and3408unclear internal program guidance may contribute to potential3409applicants' disinterest in applying for a loan or loan guarantee from3410LPO?3411    Answer. As we have previously reported, Tribes can have limited3412staffing and administrative capacity, which makes it challenging for3413them to identify and apply for federal funding. Administrative burdens,3414such as application requirements, can strain Tribes' staffing capacity.3415\1\ Unclear guidance can contribute to these burdens.3416---------------------------------------------------------------------------3417    \1\ GAO, Tribal Issues: Barriers to Access to Federal Assistance,3418GAO-25-107674 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 3, 2024).3419---------------------------------------------------------------------------3420    We have found that unclear guidance about the Department of3421Energy's (DOE) Tribal Energy Financing Program (TEFP) can cause3422confusion for Tribes, creating barriers for Tribes and limiting their3423ability to access federal funding for energy projects. \2\ For example,3424one tribal applicant reported being told by DOE Loan Programs Office3425(LPO) officials that the TEFP would cover 100 percent of its project's3426costs. \3\ Later, the applicant was told the loan would only cover 803427percent, and it had to quickly get another loan to cover the equity3428difference. The applicant said the lack of clear requirements made3429applying to the program challenging. Another applicant reported that3430each time it met with LPO, the office introduced additional financing3431conditions--sometimes as many as 50 conditions simultaneously--3432requiring the applicant to spend additional time and money on its3433application. A third applicant reported that conflicting guidance about3434its project's eligibility caused delays that derailed its application3435before it entered the program.34363437    \2\ GAO, Tribal Energy Finance: Changes to DOE Loan Program Would3438Reduce Barriers for Tribes, GAO-25-107441 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 11,34392025.) Related testimony: GAO, Tribal Energy Finance: DOE Actions3440Needed to Reduce Barriers for Tribes. GAO-25-108720 (Sept. 10, 2025).3441    \3\ As part of a November 2025 reorganization, DOE renamed LPO to3442the Office of Energy Dominance Financing. For consistency with our3443hearing statement, we use LPO to refer to the office.3444---------------------------------------------------------------------------3445    Question 2. In your testimony, you noted that many of the3446challenges LPO faces with lack of Tribal expertise are strong points at3447the Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs. If the TEFP were to be3448housed at DOE-IE, what new challenges do you anticipate and what3449recommendations would you make to address capacity?3450    Answer. We have not analyzed the capacity of DOE's Office of Indian3451Energy Policy and Programs (IE) to house TEFP, or the potential3452benefits or challenges of such a change. However, we offer the3453following insights beyond the scope of our review of the TEFP:3454    IE and TEFP have similar goals of supporting development of tribal3455energy projects:34563457   IE is charged with promoting Indian energy development,3458        reducing energy costs and improving electrification on tribal3459        lands. It administers grant funding and provides technical3460        assistance to federally recognized Tribes, including Alaska3461        Native villages, and other eligible tribal entities to support3462        tribal energy development needs.34633464   TEFP supports federally recognized Indian Tribes or tribal3465        energy development organizations that develop energy resources,3466        products, or services using commercial technology.34673468    However, IE and LPO generally provide different types of funding3469for projects of different sizes with little overlap in project needs,3470according to IE officials. IE provides grant funding for smaller-scale3471projects that address Tribes' electrical needs, and awards range from3472$100,000 to $5 million, according to DOE documents. In contrast, LPO3473finances larger utility scale projects that provide Tribes with3474economic development opportunities, and the median loan request for the3475program is $108 million, according our TEFP review. Therefore, while IE3476has significant experience working with Tribes on their energy3477projects, it has no experience with loans or loan guarantees and has3478limited expertise to provide technical assistance on the larger3479projects that TEFP currently targets, according to IE officials.3480                                 ______34813482    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to3483                          Dr. Anna Maria Ortiz3484    Question 1. GAO reported that the Department of Energy's Loan3485Program Office (LPO) allocates time from shared staff from other DOE3486offices to administer the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program (TELGP),3487and that these staff often do not have experience or expertise in3488Tribal energy finance. Please describe how this is increasing LPO's3489challenge of timely processing applications and any impact on the3490Program's effectiveness, particularly for Tribal applicants who seek to3491finance commercial-scale projects.3492    Answer. Without adequate experienced staff, LPO could continue to3493face challenges effectively processing Tribes' applications, according3494to LPO officials and staff. This can increase application review times3495and require greater use of outside consultants to fill knowledge gaps,3496which can increase costs for Tribal applicants.3497    For example, LPO staff who review Tribal Energy Financing Program3498(TEFP) applications are shared with other LPO loan programs and may3499prioritize review of these programs' applications, which can prolong3500TEFP review times. \1\ One tribal applicant reported that it3501experienced LPO resources being taken away from its application and3502that LPO officials told it that they were unlikely to prioritize the3503project for staffing because the project was small and LPO staff3504resources were limited. Tribal projects submitted for TEFP can be3505smaller than those submitted to other LPO programs. Specifically, we3506reported that the average loan requested for projects that completed3507financial close for LPO's Title XVII Clean Energy Financing Program3508(Section 1703) was $1.9 billion. \2\ In contrast, the average loan3509request for TEFP was $820 million, according to our TEFP review. \3\3510---------------------------------------------------------------------------3511    \1\ The Energy Policy Act of 2005 created the Tribal Energy Loan3512Guarantee Program (TELGP), which initially only provided loan3513guarantees. Pub. L. No. 109-58, tit. V,  503(a), 119 Stat. 594, 764-783514(codified in relevant part as amended at 25 U.S.C.   3501, 3502(c)).3515The program was first funded in 2017, and in 2022 it was expanded to3516allow direct loans. DOE refers to the expanded program as the Tribal3517Energy Financing Program (TEFP).3518    \2\ GAO, DOE Loan Programs: Actions Needed to Address Authority and3519Improve Application Reviews, GAO-25-106631 (Washington, D.C.: May 8,35202025).3521    \3\ As we reported in our TEFP review, the median loan request for3522TEFP was $108 million. Loan and loan guarantee requests ranged from3523$23.7 million for a solar project to $8.7 billion for an ammonia3524production facility. For more information on TEFP project sizes, see3525GAO-25-107441.3526---------------------------------------------------------------------------3527    LPO staff's lack of experience with tribal applications can also3528slow application review and require greater use of outside consultants3529to fill knowledge gaps, which can increase costs for Tribes. For3530example, LPO staff reported that the legal nuances of developing3531projects on tribal lands and interconnection can take significant time3532for LPO to evaluate. Without adequate legal support for the program,3533LPO staff said it can take weeks or months to answer Tribes' legal3534questions. They said that having staff with experience with Tribes and3535tribal energy finance-particularly staff with experience in key tribal3536issues such as tribal project funding approaches and tribal land3537ownership types-can help with underwriting tribal energy projects.3538Program leadership said such expertise is best gained by having3539dedicated TEFP staff who develop knowledge and skills by routinely3540focusing on tribal applications. According to LPO officials and staff,3541without adequate experienced staff, LPO could continue to face3542challenges effectively processing Tribes' applications.35433544    Question 1a. Could the Office of Indian Energy enter into an MOU3545(or other official arrangement) with LPO to dedicate shared staff for3546the Tribal Energy Finance Program to address the lack of Tribal3547expertise, as mentioned in your report and testimony?3548    Answer. We have not analyzed IE's capacity to enter into a3549Memorandum of Understanding or other official arrangement with LPO to3550dedicate shared staff to TEFP, nor have we analyzed the potential3551benefits or challenges of such a change. However, we offer the3552following insights beyond the scope of our review of TEFP:3553    As noted above, IE has similar goals to LPO; however, IE and LPO3554provide different types of funding to different types of projects with3555little overlap in project needs, according to IE officials. IE provides3556grant funding for smaller-scale projects that address Tribes'3557electrical needs, with awards ranging from $100,000 to $5 million,3558according to DOE documents. In contrast, LPO finances larger utility-3559scale projects that provide Tribes with economic development3560opportunities, and the median loan request for the program is $1083561million, according our TEFP review. IE has no experience with loans or3562loan guarantees and has limited expertise to provide technical3563assistance on projects of the scale that TEFP targets, according to IE3564officials.35653566    Question 2. GAO reported that recent presidential actions have3567impacted LPO's overall staffing levels, which are ``likely to affect3568the availability of dedicated staff with expertise to work on Tribal3569applications.'' Will the LPO be able to effectively provide technical3570assistance and process applications with reduced staff, even from those3571without cultural competence or experience in Tribal energy finance?3572    Answer. Because the staffing reductions at LPO came after we3573completed the audit work for our review of TEFP, we did not analyze the3574effect of staff reductions on the program. However, before these3575reductions, we found that LPO had few designated staff with tribal3576experience to review TEFP applications. We recommended that LPO3577consistently maintain designated staff in each division reviewing TEFP3578applications and provide additional training to build tribal competence3579and knowledge of tribal energy finance.3580    Until LPO implements our recommendation, it cannot ensure TEFP3581applications are processed by staff with the needed cultural competence3582and expertise in tribal energy finance. Without such staff to work with3583them, Tribes may continue to have limited trust in LPO and experience3584increased challenges navigating the program. This can jeopardize3585Tribes' ability to secure funding for energy projects that could3586provide them important economic development opportunities.35873588    Question 2a. Will the reduced number of staff result in delays or3589fewer applications being processed?3590    Answer. Because the staffing reductions at LPO came after we3591completed the audit work for our review of TEFP, we did not analyze the3592effects of reduced staff on the program. However, before the staff3593reductions, we found that the long application review timeline was a3594pain point for applicants. We also reported that cultural competence3595and expertise in tribal energy finance is critical for timely review of3596applications. Unless LPO consistently maintains designated staff with3597the appropriate knowledge and training to review TEFP applications, it3598cannot ensure TEFP applications are processed by staff with the needed3599expertise.36003601    Question 2b. How many FTEs does the LPO need to support origination3602and monitoring of new loans without the availability of the $75 million3603credit subsidy that was rescinded in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act?3604    Answer. Because Public Law 119-21-commonly known as the One Big3605Beautiful Bill Act--was enacted after we completed the audit work for3606our review of TEFP, we did not analyze the act's effect on the program3607or its staffing needs. \4\3608---------------------------------------------------------------------------3609    \4\ An Act To provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H.3610Con. Res. 14, Pub. L. No. 119-21, 139 Stat. 72 (2025).3611---------------------------------------------------------------------------3612    In our August 2025 review of TEFP, we reported that, as of May36132025, LPO had designated 12 of its 274 federal staff positions to focus3614primarily on TEFP or to work for the program on a recurring basis but3615had not consistently filled those positions. We also reported that as a3616result of recent presidential actions, LPO was undergoing significant3617changes to its overall staffing levels, which likely would affect the3618availability of dedicated staff with expertise to work on tribal3619applications. Specifically, as of July 18, 2025, 110 LPO employees had3620elected to resign on a deferred basis and were on administrative leave3621until their resignation or retirement date, and 43 additional positions3622were vacant, according to DOE officials. We followed up with DOE3623officials in September 2025, and they confirmed these numbers remained3624the same.3625    Changes to program design (e.g., conducting due diligence in-house3626or streamlining the application process) and in the number and3627complexity of TEFP applications can affect the number of staff LPO3628needs to originate and monitor new loans.36293630    Question 3. GAO reported that the Department of Energy received 203631total Tribal Energy Finance Program applications for direct loans and3632loan guarantees. How many applications were in each category?3633    Answer. Of the 20 applications DOE received, 16 were for direct3634loans and four were for loan guarantees.36353636    Question 3a. What was the range and average of the direct loans3637requested?3638    Answer. The 16 direct loan requests ranged from $24 million to $8.73639billion. The average request was for about $914 million.36403641    Question 3b. What was the range and average of the loan guarantees3642requested?3643    Answer. The four loan guarantee requests ranged from $61 million to3644$115 million. The average request was for about $88 million.36453646    Question 4. You testified that due diligence costs are a3647``significant'' financial barrier that keeps Tribes from participating3648in the TELGP/Tribal Energy Finance Program. How can the Department of3649Energy help reduce due diligence costs?3650    Answer. In our review of TEFP, we found that DOE was taking some3651steps that could reduce due diligence costs. However, these actions3652were still under development at the time of our review and their3653current status is uncertain:36543655   DOE planned to apply $5 million in technical assistance3656        funding to help tribal applicants develop their application3657        materials before the due diligence phase. DOE officials told us3658        this could help reduce overall application preparation costs3659        for tribal applicants, which would help offset the amount of3660        due diligence work needed and associated costs charged to3661        tribal applicants.36623663   LPO was developing a public finance application pathway for3664        evaluating lower-risk projects, which it hoped would reduce the3665        length of LPO's review process and due diligence fees charged3666        to the applicant. LPO's typical application review pathway3667        assumes a riskier corporate finance project structure, which3668        requires more due diligence. In contrast, the public finance3669        pathway would support lower-risk projects--such as those that3670        are smaller scale or use established technologies--that are3671        backed by a Tribe's government. Implementing a second3672        application review pathway for Tribes could require less3673        overall due diligence (thus lowering fees and expenses) and3674        reduce application timeframes, according to LPO officials.36753676    Question 4a. Could the Department of Energy complete due diligence3677``in-house'' for program applicants? Does Congress need to act or can3678the Department of Energy act administratively? Is there an approximate3679cost for doing so?3680    Answer. We have not analyzed the capacity and cost for DOE to3681complete due diligence in-house for TEFP. In our review of TEFP, we3682recommended that LPO continue to develop and implement options to3683revise its TEFP due diligence review process to reduce or eliminate3684related fees. These options could include providing in-house3685underwriting.3686    At the time of our audit, LPO was exploring options to reduce or3687eliminate due diligence fees, but these actions were still being3688developed. Such an effort is expected to include determining LPO's3689capacity in terms of expertise and legal authority.36903691    Question 5. Did the One Big Beautiful Bill Act impact the3692Department of Energy's $20 billion TELGP/Tribal Energy Finance Program3693loan authority or its ability to guarantee up to 100 percent of those3694loans?3695    Answer. In the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Congress rescinded the3696unobligated balance of TEFP's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)3697appropriations. \5\ As a result, the program has appropriations for3698credit subsidy costs, if any remain unobligated, of $10.5 million--$8.53699million in pre-IRA appropriations and $2 million in post-IRA3700appropriations. \6\3701---------------------------------------------------------------------------3702    \5\ An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H.3703Con. Res. 14, Pub. L. No. 119-21, tit. V, subtit. D,  50402(b), 1393704Stat. 72, 152 (2025). Congress in the IRA had appropriated $75 million3705for credit subsidy and to administer TEFP. An Act To provide for3706reconciliation pursuant to Title II of S. Con. Res. 14, Pub. L. No.3707117-169,  50145(a), 136 Stat.1818, 2045-46 (2022). In GAO-25-107441,3708we did not assess the effects on the program of this rescission of3709unobligated funds.3710    \6\ Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, Pub. L. No. 115-31, 1313711Stat. 135, 313; Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Pub. L. No. 117-3712328, 136 Stat. 4459, 4637 (2022). This total excludes appropriations3713for administrative expenses.3714---------------------------------------------------------------------------3715    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act did not amend DOE's $20 billion in3716loan authority. DOE had $19.9 billion in remaining loan authority as of3717September 2025, according to DOE officials. \7\ According to LPO3718officials, information submitted in support of the President's fiscal3719year 2025 budget request estimated that from fiscal year 2029 through37202030, $10.5 million of appropriated credit subsidy funding would3721support the use of loan authority totaling $4.4 billion. However, the3722specific amount of loan authority DOE uses will vary based on factors3723such as the total dollar amount and risk of loans DOE makes.3724---------------------------------------------------------------------------3725    \7\ Loan authority is the statutory limit to the total outstanding3726amount of loans and loan guarantees LPO may issue for a program for a3727given period.3728---------------------------------------------------------------------------3729    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act did not change DOE's authority to3730guarantee up to 100 percent of loans. \8\37313732    \8\ Prior to the IRA's enactment, DOE was authorized to guarantee3733no more than 90 percent of the unpaid principal and interest due on any3734loan under TEFP. See 25 U.S.C.  3502(c)(1) (2021). This restriction3735was eliminated by the IRA. Pub. L. No. 117-169,  50145(b)(1), 1363736Stat. at 2045-46. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act did not amend this3737provision or reinstate the restriction. See generally, Pub. L. No. 119-373821, 139 Stat. 72.3739---------------------------------------------------------------------------3740    Question 6. What is the status of the 20 applications after the3741TELGP's $75 million in unobligated credit subsidies was rescinded by3742the One Big Beautiful Bill Act? Are they active? Inactive? Withdrawn?3743Paused? Some other status?3744    Answer. We previously reported that as of February 2025, DOE had3745closed one loan guarantee, seven applications were active, and 12 were3746inactive. \9\ Five of the 12 inactive projects were withdrawn,3747according to DOE's February 2025 data. We followed up with DOE in3748September 2025 and officials confirmed that the status of the existing3749applications remained the same and that they had not received any new3750applications.3751---------------------------------------------------------------------------3752    \9\ GAO-25-107441.37533754    Question 7. What are the immediate and potential long-term impacts3755of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to the TELGP or the Tribal Energy3756Finance Program?3757    Answer. Because we completed the audit work for our review of TEFP3758before the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was enacted, we have not fully3759analyzed the effects of the legislation on the program. As discussed3760above, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act did not change the program's loan3761authority of $20 billion.3762    However, as stated above, the act rescinded the unobligated balance3763of IRA appropriations. As a result, the program has only the remaining3764balances from the $10.5 million in appropriations for subsidy costs3765from other acts. The act also changes the availability of tax credits--3766including by restricting a credit for investment into certain renewable3767projects to those placed in service by December 31, 2027--which could3768affect Tribes' ability to develop renewable projects. \10\ However, we3769did not analyze the impacts of these provisions in our review of TEFP.3770---------------------------------------------------------------------------3771    \10\ See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 119-21, tit. VII, subtit. A, 377270513(a), (g)(3), 139 Stat. at 270-73 (codified in relevant part at 263773U.S.C.  48E(e)(4), 48 note).37743775    Question 8. Does the TELGP need new statutory authorizations,3776additional continuing appropriations, or other authorities to issue new3777loan guarantees following enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act?3778    Answer. We have not analyzed the need for additional statutory3779authorizations and appropriations for TEFP. However, DOE is still3780authorized to issue loan guarantees and direct loans, consistent with3781applicable law and available appropriations.3782    As stated above, the act reduced the appropriations available for3783loan subsidies, leaving the remaining balances from $10.5 million in3784non-IRA cost subsidy appropriations, but did not change the program's3785loan authority of $20 billion. According to LPO, information submitted3786in support of the President's fiscal year 2025 budget request estimated3787that in fiscal years 2029 and 2030, $10.5 million of appropriated3788credit subsidy funding would support the use of loan authority totaling3789$4.4 billion. However, the specific amount of loan authority DOE can3790use will vary based on factors such as the total dollar amount and risk3791associated with the loans it makes.37923793    Question 9. What are some best practices that the U.S. Department3794of Agriculture implements in vetting its public financing loans and3795loan guarantees that are not currently used by the LPO, and how could3796adopting these practices improve access to financing for Tribal energy3797projects?3798    Answer. According to officials from the U.S. Department of3799Agriculture (USDA), USDA federal loan and loan guarantee programs that3800issue loans to tribal applicants complete underwriting in-house and3801have limited or no additional due diligence fees.3802    In contrast, as we discuss in our report on TEFP, DOE requires TEFP3803applicants to pay for external consultants whom DOE may engage for its3804due diligence. The resulting level and unpredictability of due3805diligence costs discourages Tribes from applying to TEFP, according to3806potential participants and stakeholders we interviewed for our August38072025 review of the program. One Tribe that decided not to apply to the3808program noted that the costs could translate into millions of dollars,3809making it difficult for Tribes to plan. Another tribal applicant with3810previous experience seeking energy financing noted that the expected3811due diligence costs under TEFP were double what it would expect from3812other financing sources for its proposed energy project. This Tribe3813told us it likely would withdraw its TEFP application in part because3814of the high application costs.3815    Another important practice USDA officials identified is to have3816trained staff in the field who have experience working with Tribes and3817understand how to conduct underwriting that is appropriate for tribal3818finances. During our review of TEFP, LPO officials told us that having3819staff with experience with Tribes and tribal energy finance--3820particularly staff with experience in key tribal issues such as tribal3821funding approaches and types of tribal land--is beneficial for3822underwriting tribal energy projects. Program leadership said such3823expertise is best gained by having dedicated TEFP staff who develop3824knowledge and skills by routinely focusing on tribal applications.38253826    Question 10. To the extent possible, please provide answers to the3827following questions related to GAO-25-107441. How many DOE employees3828are designated to support the review and processing of Tribal Energy3829Finance Program applications?3830    Answer. We reported that as of May 2025, LPO had designated 12 of3831its 274 federal staff positions to focus primarily on TEFP or to work3832for the program on a recurring basis but had not consistently filled3833those positions. We also reported that as of July 18, 2025, 1103834employees had elected to resign on a deferred basis and were on3835administrative leave until their resignation or retirement date, while383643 additional positions were vacant. When we followed up with DOE3837officials in September 2025, they confirmed LPO's unfilled positions3838remained the same. However, it is unclear how many of TEFP's designated3839staff remain at the agency.38403841    Question 10a. How many of these employees are FTEs?3842    Answer. Because a significant portion of the staff designated for3843TEFP are shared with other programs and LPO's practice is to assign3844staff to projects based on availability, GAO did not analyze the number3845of FTEs assigned to TEFP.38463847    Question 10b. How many of these positions are vacant?3848    Answer. As of May 2025, seven of LPO's 12 designated TEFP staff3849positions were vacant. As noted above, LPO is undergoing significant3850changes to its overall staffing levels, and it is unclear how many of3851TEFP's designated staff remain at the agency.38523853    Question 10c. How many of these positions are solely dedicated to3854the Tribal Energy Finance Program?3855    Answer. As of May 2025, LPO's two outreach positions were staffed3856to work solely with TEFP. As noted above, LPO is undergoing significant3857changes to its overall staffing levels, and it is unclear how many of3858TEFP's designated staff remain at the agency.38593860    Question 10d. How many are dedicating part of their time to other3861LPO matters?3862    Answer. As of May 2025, LPO had 10 staff positions that dedicated3863part of their time to TEFP in addition to other programs. As noted3864above, LPO is undergoing significant changes to its overall staffing3865levels, and it is unclear how many of TEFP's designated staff remain at3866the agency.38673868    Question 10e. How many of these employees have expertise working in3869public finance and with Tribal governments?3870    Answer. We reported that LPO's outreach staff for TEFP are hired3871for their tribal cultural competency and receive in-house training on3872energy projects and finance. LPO has provided its staff with general3873training about working with Tribes and recently began providing some3874staff with more specific training that addresses topics such as3875awareness of tribal law and government procedures. However, we did not3876gather data on how many of LPO's employees have expertise working in3877public finance and with tribal governments.38783879    Question 11. GAO reported that LPO has difficulty administering the3880TELGP/Tribal Energy Finance Program effectively, citing several factors3881including lack of culturally competent staff and expertise in Tribal3882energy finance. Would the Program be more effective if housed under3883OIEPP?3884    Answer. We have not analyzed the capacity of DOE's Office of Indian3885Energy Policy and Programs (IE) to house TEFP, or the potential3886benefits or challenges of such a change. However, we offer the3887following insights beyond the scope of our review of TEFP:38883889    IE and LPO's TEFP have similar goals of supporting development of3890tribal energy projects:38913892   IE is charged with promoting Indian energy development,3893        reducing energy costs and improving electrification on tribal3894        lands. It administers grant funding and provides technical3895        assistance to federally recognized Tribes, including Alaska3896        Native villages, and other eligible tribal entities to support3897        tribal energy development needs.38983899   TEFP supports federally recognized Indian Tribes or tribal3900        energy development organizations that develop energy resources,3901        products, or services using commercial technology.39023903    However, IE and LPO generally provide different types of funding3904for projects of different sizes with little overlap in project needs,3905according to IE officials. IE provides grant funding for smaller scale3906projects that address Tribes' electrical needs, and awards range from3907$100,000 to $5 million, according to DOE documents. In contrast, LPO3908finances larger utility-scale projects that provide Tribes with3909economic development opportunities, and the median loan request for the3910program is $108 million, according to our TEFP review. Therefore, while3911IE has significant experience working with Tribes on their energy3912projects, it has no experience with loans or loan guarantees and has3913limited expertise to provide technical assistance on the larger3914projects that TEFP currently targets, according to IE officials.39153916    Question 12. What are the statutory maximums or minimums, if any,3917on Tribal Energy Finance Program application loan amount? Are there3918other statutory requirements that would limit the size or type of loan3919under the Program?3920    Answer. In our report on TEFP, we did not identify any statutory3921maximums or minimums on individual TEFP loan amounts. However, by3922statute, Tribes are required to pay at least 20 percent of total3923project costs as equity for loan guarantees, and this requirement3924extends to direct loans. \11\ The equity requirement means that for a3925$100 million energy project, a tribal applicant would need to cover at3926least $20 million of total project costs.39273928    \11\ By statute, DOE must make all loan guarantees in accordance3929with section 1702 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended,3930including that, unless otherwise provided by law, no loan guarantee3931shall exceed 80 percent of the project costs of the facility that is3932subject to the guarantee, as estimated at the time the guarantee is3933issued. 42 U.S.C.  16512(a), (c).3934---------------------------------------------------------------------------3935    Question 13. Does LPO have statutory or regulatory authority to3936establish investment caps or limits on TELGP/Tribal Energy Finance3937Program applications?3938    Answer. Our report on TEFP did not include a detailed analysis of3939whether LPO has statutory or regulatory authorities to establish3940investment caps or limits on applications to the program. However, as3941stated above, by statute, the program has a loan authority of $203942billion and Tribes are required to pay at least 20 percent of total3943project costs as equity for loan guarantees, and this requirement3944extends to direct loans.3945    Our analysis of applications to TEFP showed that tribal applicants3946submitted applications for a broad range of amounts and corresponding3947total project costs (i.e., the loan request plus equity paid by3948Tribes). Loan and loan guarantee requests ranged from $23.7 million for3949a solar project, with a total project cost of $29.6 million, to $8.73950billion for an ammonia production facility, with a total project cost3951of $12.1 billion.3952                                 ______39533954   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Murkowski to3955                              David Conrad3956    Question 1. You stated to the Committee that DOE-IE continues to3957manage and support the Indian Country Energy and Infrastructure Working3958Group (ICEIWG) with internal DOE-IE resources. When is the next3959scheduled ICEIWG meeting? Please provide DOE-IE's plan for the ICEIWG3960platform in this administration.3961    Answer. DOE recognizes ICEIWG as a trusted forum that provides3962invaluable on-the-ground perspectives from Tribes regarding their3963priorities, identification of challenges, and collaboration with DOE on3964advancing energy development and infrastructure. DOE-IE is currently3965planning the second ICEIWG meeting of 2025. We anticipate holding the3966second meeting in the coming months. IE will continue to host ICEIWG3967meetings and work with members and DOE leadership to collaborate to3968advance reliable, affordable, and secure American energy.39693970    Question 2. Does DOE-IE plan to hold an in-person grantee convening3971next year?3972    Answer. IE's program review is an important event for sharing3973knowledge and successes between IE's grantees, IE staff, as well as the3974broader Tribal energy community. IE has not begun planning the 20263975program review but will work to ensure it is both impactful and cost-3976effective.39773978    Question 3. Are Tribally Designated Housing Entities (TDHEs)3979eligible for technical assistance from the DOE-IE Office? If not, is3980this something that can be addressed administratively at DOE or is3981legislation necessary?3982    Answer. Many, but not all TDHE's are eligible for IE technical3983assistance (TA).3984    TDHEs, as defined in 25 U.S.C.  4103, include nonprofit entities3985authorized to receive federal funds for the development or improvement3986of low-income housing, and can be authorized or established by both3987federally recognized Tribes and State recognized Tribes. As provided3988under 25 U.S.C.  3502(b) (and the controlling definition of ``Indian3989tribe'' at  3501(4)), the Office of Indian Energy is only able to3990serve TDHEs authorized by federally recognized Tribes. Furthermore, the3991TDHE would need to be seeking to carry out energy-related activities3992within the TA services offered to take advantage of IE's TA.39933994    Question 4. GAO testified that Tribal expertise is not a strength3995of the Loan Programs Office (LPO), but it is a strength of the DOE-IE.3996GAO also described what it characterized as ``the mismatch between3997Tribal Energy Financing Program (TEFP) and the other financing programs3998housed at LPO. What resources, expertise, staff capacity and3999authorities would be needed for DOE-IE to take over the TEFP from LPO?4000    Answer. DOE understands the importance of the TEFP to Tribal4001economies and to SCIA. DOE would like to develop a well-researched4002proposal on how best to structure joint efforts between LPO and IE in4003partnership toward the common goal to maximize the accessibility and4004impact of the TEFP, drawing upon the core capabilities and unique4005strengths of each office. The proposal will include respective roles4006for IE and LPO in program design, implementation, and evaluation.40074008    Question 5. In DOE's response to the GAO Report, Tribal Energy4009Finance: Changes to DOE Loan Program Would Reduce Barriers for Tribes,4010the agency stated that LPO would continue developing and testing the4011public finance application pathway for lower-risk Tribal energy4012projects. What steps does LPO plan to take to develop and test this4013pathway in this administration? Please provide a timeline for4014implementation of this pathway.4015    Answer. The Department is continuing to conduct a department-wide4016review to ensure all activities follow the law, comply with applicable4017court orders and align with the Trump administration's priorities and4018ensure the responsible stewardship of American taxpayer dollars. The4019Department of Energy is hard at work to deliver on President Trump's4020promise to restore affordable, reliable, and secure energy for the4021entire Nation.40224023    Question 6. GAO testified that DOE has $10.5 million available to4024support credit subsidy costs for the Tribal Energy Financing Program.4025Can you confirm that this is accurate, and that project applications4026continue to be reviewed under TEFP?4027    Answer. LPO confirms that $10.5 million is available to support4028credit subsidy costs.4029    Project applications continue to be reviewed under TEFP.40304031    Question 7. How many outreach employees at LPO are solely dedicated4032to TEFP? How many underwriting employees are solely dedicated to TEFP?4033How many full time FTE positions dedicated to TEFP are filled, and how4034many are vacant? Are there any active plans to fill the vacant4035positions? In the meantime, how is LPO filling the gaps?4036    Answer. LPO is not structured around individual loan programs.4037Instead, LPO is structured around technologies with vertically4038integrated teams focused on the Administration's priorities. These4039technology-based teams work with applicants to determine which loan4040program is the best fit for the proposed project (e.g., Title 17,4041Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing, Tribal Energy Financing4042Program). Each integrated team includes staff with expertise in4043outreach and business development, underwriting and structuring,4044technical and environmental, and Portfolio Management. Team members are4045assigned to applications and loans as they move through the application4046process.4047    In addition to the technology-based teams, LPO recognizes the4048specific nature of tribal projects and outreach. Therefore, LPO has a4049dedicated tribal outreach team. The tribal outreach team currently4050includes one Federal staff and four contractors. The tribal outreach4051team works closely with the appropriate technology-based teams on4052individual tribal financing applications.4053    LPO continuously evaluates its staffing needs across its divisions4054and technology teams. LPO will ensure designated staff for TEFP4055applications, within the current resources available to LPO under4056current Executive Orders, budget authority, and OPM and DOE guidance on4057staffing.4058    LPO includes additional training to build Tribal competence and4059knowledge of Tribal energy finance as part of the annual assessment of4060its staff training needs.40614062    Question 8. How is the DOE's Navigator Service similar to or4063different from the technical assistance staff IE maintains?4064    Answer. Many Tribes are capacity-constrained and have multiple4065priority issues competing for their attention including but not limited4066to energy issues. The Office of Indian Energy Tribal Energy Navigator4067service responds to inquiries from Tribes and Tribal entities to reduce4068administrative burden and facilitate more efficient access to DOE and4069other federal energy programs available to them. The Tribal Energy4070Navigator, an IE staff service, provides human interaction which is4071often a preferred method of communication with Tribes especially within4072a large bureaucracy. Relative to IE's Navigation service, IE's TA4073program is technical in nature. IE's TA program helps advance energy4074projects and energy commerce with expert support, through IE staff,4075national labs and partners at the Department of Commerce, the Denali4076Commission, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. Each TA4077project is no-cost to the Tribe and culminates in a specific4078deliverable to inform the next steps in energy development. Common4079types of TA include:40804081   Community-wide strategic energy planning: Inform vision and4082        goals. The process uses facilitators, who are experienced in4083        Indian Country, to help Tribal communities clarify their energy4084        vision. This is a recommended starting point for many Tribes4085        before they pursue analysis and funding of energy projects.40864087   Energy audits of buildings and facilities: Assess4088        performance, quantify usage and identify cost savings4089        opportunities.40904091   Resource assessments: Quantify energy resources in line with4092        Tribal priorities.40934094   Energy project planning: Modeling, economic analysis, third4095        party independent reviews of energy project documents.40964097   Energy governance development: Energy code development,4098        utility formation pre-feasibility assessments.40994100   Enabling a competitive business environment: Legal4101        frameworks to enhance energy sector commerce.41024103    Question 8. Are there any limitations to the resources the4104Navigator Service connects Tribes and Tribal Energy Development4105Organizations (TEDOs) to? For example, would the Navigator Service be4106able to connect an interested Tribe with staff at LPO?4107    Answer. IE's Navigator identifies potential matches between a4108Tribe's energy objectives and federal resources and provides referrals4109to technical and financial assistance (TA and FA respectively) programs4110across DOE, including IE and LPO. Yes--they have been connecting Tribes4111to LPO. TEFP is a resource on BIA's Access to Capital Clearinghouse41124113    Question 9. In your written testimony you mention the growing4114relationship between the Office of Indian Energy and the Arctic Energy4115Office (AEO), noting the engagement role the AEO is playing in4116connecting Alaska Native Corporations with the resources available at4117the Department. Please share examples of the type of collaboration IE4118has had with the AEO in getting communities the resources they need to4119develop their energy resources and reduce the cost per kilowatt hour to4120Alaskan ratepayers. I would especially appreciate examples referencing4121ongoing projects.4122    Answer. IE has had significant impacts on energy affordability,4123accessibility, and reliability in Alaska, having supported 74 projects4124across the state with a combined energy savings of $168 million over4125the life of the projects. These savings were the result of $54 million4126in federal investment. IE also has a strong record of ensuring Alaska4127Native entities have comparable accessibility to the Office's programs;4128since 2010, approximately 28 percent of IE deployment funding and4129approximately 42 percent of all IE technical assistance has gone to4130Alaska.4131    Access to IE programs is heightened by key partnerships, including4132regular collaboration with the Arctic Energy Office (AE). Below are4133ongoing examples:41344135   IE and AE leadership meet monthly to coordinate amongst the4136        Offices.41374138   Staff from IE's technical assistance program participate in4139        monthly Arctic Energy Ambassador calls, hosted by AE, to share4140        updates on IE's technical assistance program and boost access4141        to the program across Alaska. In turn, Arctic Energy4142        Ambassadors share the latest needs and trends from Alaska.41434144   IE has supported several requests from Arctic Energy4145        Ambassadors, including a design review for a geothermal4146        project.41474148   IE and AE have co-located workspace in Anchorage to4149        facilitate local collaboration.41504151    Question 10. What are DOE's plans for the unobligated IRA Section415250122 Tribal Home Electrification and Appliance Rebate funding?4153    Answer. The Department is conducting a department-wide review to4154ensure all activities follow the law, comply with applicable court4155orders, align with the Trump administration's priorities, and ensure4156the responsible stewardship of American taxpayer dollars. The American4157people provided President Trump with a mandate to govern and to unleash4158`American Energy Dominance.' The Department of Energy is hard at work4159to deliver on President Trump's promise to restore affordable,4160reliable, and secure energy to the entire nation.41614162    Question 11. Through conversations with former administrative4163staff, we have heard many positive things about the collaborative4164approach IE takes to addressing community energy and natural resources4165needs. One particularly strong example included working with the4166Department of the Interior's (DOI) Division of Energy and Mineral4167Development (DEMD). How have Tribes/TEDOs utilized both DEMD and IE in4168order to achieve their energy goals?4169    Answer. IE and the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), Division4170of Energy and Mineral Development (DEMD) each have complementary4171functions that benefit Tribal Nations and Alaska Native Villages4172throughout the energy development and deployment process.4173    Two distinctions between the two programs are as follows:41744175   IE conducts TA through access to the DOE national labs and4176        more recently the Department of Commerce. This TA, provided at4177        no-cost to Tribes and Tribal entities, is useful for early4178        analysis to help inform the development of energy projects and4179        frameworks to enable energy sector commerce.41804181   DEMD's financial assistance has focused more resources on4182        project development (pre-construction activities) whereas IE's4183        financial assistance has focused more resources on deployment4184        (construction activities). IE has also funded pre-construction4185        activities although less frequently than DEMD.41864187    Tribes have often staggered IE and DEMD resources to advance4188projects along the development pipeline. The most common path begins4189with IE no-cost TA, followed by DEMD project development resources,4190followed by IE competitive financial assistance to deploy the project.4191However, there are also many examples where a Tribe or Alaska Native4192Village will approach DEMD first for services and then apply for a4193competitive grant under IE financial assistance.4194    In addition to offering complementary resources, IE and DEMD staff4195coordinate and support each other as competitive grant application4196reviewers to maximize the use of their specialized expertise and ensure4197the projects are poised for success once selected for negotiation and4198awards.4199                                 ______42004201    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to4202                              David Conrad4203    Question 1. On average, how many grant applications does your4204office receive in a year?4205    Answer. The number of applications received in any given years can4206be dependent on the nature of the announced funding opportunities.4207Between FY 2010-FY 2024, IE received less than 1000 applications.42084209    Question 2. On average, how many annual applications has your4210office been able to fund?4211    Answer. Between FY 2010-FY 2024, IE announced about 260 awards.42124213    Question 3. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2022 and ending in Fiscal Year42142025, please provide the number of applications for renewable energy4215development, including wind, solar, and battery storage your office4216received.42174218    Answer. The vast majority of applications IE received during this4219time period contained one or more of these technologies, in line with4220the FOA objectives at the time: wind, solar, battery storage, as well4221as microgrids which often include wind, solar, and battery4222technologies.42234224    Question 3a. To date, how many of these applications have been4225funded?4226    Answer. 36 of these applications were awarded to date.42274228    Question 3b. To date, how many of these applications have been4229denied and on what basis?4230    Answer. IE followed DOE's standard procedures for reviewing4231financial assistance applications. DOE did not make awards based on:4232applicant withdrawal, failure to meet eligibility requirements set4233forth in the FOA, failure to meet the compliance requirements set forth4234in the FOA, failure to meet the responsiveness criteria set forth in4235the FOA; insufficient technical merit based on application of technical4236review criteria set forth in the FOA; application of program policy4237factors set forth in the FOA; and available funding.42384239    Question 3c. To date, what is the status of pending applications?4240    Answer. The American people provided President Trump with a mandate4241to govern and unleash `American Energy Dominance.' The Department is4242continuing to conduct a department-wide review and ensure all pending4243applications are in line with the administration's priorities to ensure4244a responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars, while providing the most4245reliable and secure energy possible, that will lower costs.42464247    Question 3d. How many of these applications are still under review?4248Why?4249    Answer. Applications received under DE-FOA-0003401 ``Tribal Energy4250Planning and Development'' valued at $25,000,000, are pending review.4251The FOA is under review by Department of Energy leadership to ensure4252compliance with Administration policies and priorities.42534254    Question 4. Does the OIEPP plan to support an all of the above4255energy strategy for Tribal projects in Fiscal Year 2026? Or will there4256be a preference for, or prohibition on, certain energy technologies?4257    Answer. While the previous administration pursued a strategy of4258energy subtraction that raised costs and made our grids less reliable4259through funding intermittent energy sources, President Trump's4260administration is advancing a strategy of energy addition-utilizing4261taxpayer resources for energy that is affordable, reliable, and secure4262and will lower costs for the entire Nation.42634264    Question 4a. Assuming an all of the above approach, how many4265projects would your office be able to fund under the President's Budget4266Request for Fiscal Year 2026?4267    Answer. The President's FY26 Budget request includes $30 million4268for IE financial assistance, out of $50 million total requested4269appropriations. If appropriated by Congress, this would allow IE to4270fund approximately 12 to 24 community scale energy projects.42714272    Question 5. For new grant applicants--are there certain types of4273projects that your office is prioritizing for funding?4274    Answer. As Secretary Wright has mentioned, DOE will prioritize4275energy solutions based on people and math, with consideration for the4276local context and available resources and the fact that one of the4277problems we've made the least amount of progress on is affordable4278energy in remote communities. IE's decisions will continue to be guided4279by robust analysis aimed at enhancing energy reliability, security and4280affordability across Indian Country, where the impacts of unreliable4281and high-cost power are acutely felt. Energy resources or technologies4282which address these challenges given the unique circumstances of any4283particular Tribe are a priority for the Office.42844285    Question 5a. Are there certain types of projects that currently4286require additional rounds of agency scrutiny, review, or evaluation4287that were not implemented in previous years?4288    Answer. Consistent with previous years, Department of Energy4289ensures compliance with Administration policies and priorities.42904291    Question 6. You testified that the Department is not delaying4292funding for wind, solar, or battery projects. For applications to use4293Fiscal Year 2025 funds for wind, solar, and battery projects, has this4294administration, DOGE, the Secretary, or any other person, persons, or4295office directed your office to re-review or evaluate applications for4296wind, solar, or battery projects that would be funded using Fiscal Year42972025 or earlier appropriations?42984299    Question 6a. If yes, what are the criteria your office is using to4300re-review or evaluate those applications?4301    Answer. The reliability and security of our power grid are4302critically threatened by inadequate and intermittent energy supplies,4303necessitating rapid and robust reforms. Without decisive intervention,4304the Nation's power grid will be unable to support Tribal energy needs4305nor expanded manufacturing, re-industrialization efforts, and the data4306centers needed to win the AI race.4307    To clarify the testimony that was provided, any projects selected4308for award in prior years (including projects which use wind, solar, and4309battery technologies) are moving forward, including through4310negotiation, and grantees continue to receive funding under the terms4311of their awards.43124313    Question 7. You testified that your office's plan was approved this4314summer. Please provide a copy to the Committee.4315    Answer. IE's FY 26 Budget Briefing to HEWD is attached to convey FY431626 program priorities.43174318    Question 8. What is the current timeline for getting OIEPP's Fiscal4319Year 2025 funds out the door?4320    Answer. As stated during testimony, IE is looking forward to4321applying FY 25 funds to a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) targeted4322for release in the coming months.4323    Question 9. GAO's Dr. Ortiz testified that the Department has $10.54324million available to use to support the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee4325Program/Tribal Energy Finance Program. Please confer with the Loan4326Programs Office to provide the Committee with a reasonable4327approximation of the total loan value the available subsidy account4328could support. Assume, for the purposes of analysis, the average loan4329request is $100 million.4330    Answer. The credit subsidy calculation is highly dependent on the4331characteristics and credit profile of the loan and underlying project.4332As illustration, LPO estimates that a reasonable credit subsidy rate4333range for TEFP could be approximately 5 to 20 percent, once again4334dependent on the attributes of a given project. Assuming this range,4335the current credit subsidy amount of $10.5 million could support4336between $52.5 million and $210 million in total loans or loan4337guarantees (or one to two projects assuming an average loan request of4338$100 million), out of the $19.9 billion available as loan commitment4339authority overall.43404341    Question 10. The last time the Department provided testimony to the4342Committee, I expressed concern that Tribes were being penalized for4343using multiple federal funding sources to stand up their energy4344projects based on a double benefit restriction in the Inflation4345Reduction Act (IRA). After enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act,4346does the Department agree with GAO that this ``double dipping''4347restriction no longer applies?4348    Answer. The Department agrees with GAO that the double benefit4349restriction no longer applies, as this restriction was tied to funds4350provided in the Inflation Reduction Act, which were rescinded by the4351One Big Beautiful Bill Act.43524353    Question 11. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act rescinded unobligated4354amounts of the $75 million Congress provided to subsize loan guarantees4355for the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program. Please confer with the4356Loan Programs Office to answer the following questions:43574358    Question11a. How much unobligated IRA funding was rescinded to4359support the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program/Tribal Energy Finance4360Program?4361    Answer. The OBBBA rescinded all unobligated TEFP IRA balances. Of4362the $75 million provided for TEFP in the IRA, $70 million was rescinded4363by the OBBBA in 2025. Since OBBBA indefinitely rescinded TEFP IRA4364balances, in the event any obligated balances are recovered in future4365fiscal years, they will be subject to the rescission.43664367    Question 11b. How much non-IRA funding remains to support the4368Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program/Tribal Energy Finance Program?4369    Answer. Available non-IRA funding resources are $19.9 billion in4370loan commitment authority and $10.5 million in credit subsidy4371appropriation. Non-IRA administrative funding available at the start of4372FY 2026 was $5.3 million.43734374    Question 11c. How many loans could these remaining funds guarantee,4375assuming an average loan amount of $100 million?4376    Answer. As illustration, LPO estimates that a reasonable credit4377subsidy rate range for TEFP could be approximately 5 to 20 percent,4378once again dependent on the attributes of a given project. Assuming4379this range, the current credit subsidy amount of $10.5 million could4380support between $52.5 million and $210 million in total loans or loan4381guarantees (or one to two projects assuming an average loan request of4382$100 million).43834384    Question 12. What is the Department's reduction in force (RIF) plan4385with respect to OIEPP?4386    Answer. DOE is not currently planning any RIFs.43874388    Question 13. Do the President's proposed reductions in Department4389staff that support OIEPP include staff that have already left the4390agency or do they include existing FTE positions that are currently4391filled?4392    Answer. DOE is not currently planning any RIFs.43934394    Question 14. In a House Energy and Commerce hearing, Secretary4395Wright expressed his support for not rescinding unobligated balances of4396LPO's credit subsidy accounts. Please confer with the Loan Programs4397Office to answer the following questions:43984399    Question 14a. After the rescission of the Tribal loan guarantee4400subsidy account, what is the Department's plan to continue to support4401Tribal energy projects through the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee4402Program/Tribal Energy Finance Program?4403    Answer. The Tribal Energy Finance Program (TEFP) at the Loan4404Programs Office will continue to operate. TEFP is focused on supporting4405the White House's priorities while closely aligning with Tribes on4406expanding the use of Tribal energy resources.44074408    Question 14b. Will the Department allocate other funds to support4409current TELGP applicants?4410    Answer. When the Administrative Budget is finalized, LPO will4411evaluate how much funding could be used for loan assistance for4412applicants. LPO will work with the Office of Indian Energy and other4413offices to determine if DOE grant funding could support TEFP applicants4414navigate the application and due diligence process.44154416    Question 14c. If yes, how much does the Department intend to4417allocate and from where?4418    Answer. When the Administrative Budget is finalized, LPO will4419evaluate how much funding could be used for loan assistance for4420applicants. LPO will work with the Office of Indian Energy and other4421offices to determine if DOE grant funding could support TEFP applicants4422navigate the application and due diligence process.44234424    Attachment44254426 Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs--Fiscal Year 2026 Budget4427       Request--House Energy and Water Development--13 June 20254428Executive Summary4429FY 2026 Priorities4430    Through financial and technical assistance IE will catalyze4431American Indian and Alaskan Native nations to lead the development of4432reliable, firm energy infrastructure in Indian Country to advance4433energy abundance, help restore American energy dominance, and address4434energy access challenges in Indian Country. Priorities:44354436   Expand reliable, firm energy development in Indian Country.44374438   Leverage IE's grant making authority to fund energy4439        infrastructure planning and deployment.44404441   Provide expert assistance to Tribes for productive4442        engagement with project developers to unleash new American4443        energy.44444445   Improve energy access for Tribes.44464447FY 2026 Request44484449   The FY 2026 Budget Request streamlines the Office of Indian4450        Energy's management footprint, but proposes to expandreliable,4451        firm energy infrastructure development in Indian Country. IE4452        offers financial and technical assistance to Indian Tribes,4453        including Alaska Native villages, and eligible Tribal entities4454        for advancing electrification and energy development and4455        deployment on Indian lands, reducing energy costs, and4456        assisting economic development in Tribal communities where4457        unemployment and poverty rates far exceed national averages.44584459FY 2026 Overview4460Program Overview4461    Mission of the Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs (454462U.S.C.  7144e):4463    The Director, in accordance with Federal policies promoting Indian4464self-determination and the purposes of this chapter, shall provide,4465direct, foster, coordinate, and implement energy planning, education,4466management, conservation, and delivery programs of the Department4467that--44684469        (1) promote Indian tribal energy development, efficiency, and4470        use;44714472        (2) reduce or stabilize energy costs;44734474        (3) enhance and strengthen Indian tribal energy and economic4475        infrastructure relating to natural resource development and4476        electrification; and44774478        (4) bring electrical power and service to Indian land and the4479        homes of tribal members located on Indian lands or acquired,4480        constructed, or improved (in whole or in part) with Federal4481        funds.44824483FY 2026 Priorities4484    Financial assistance to increase reliable, firm power: competitive4485funding opportunities for energy infrastructure deployment to American4486Indian and Alaska Native federally recognized Tribes across the Nation.4487Programs will not support work on solar, wind, or battery technologies.4488    Technical assistance to overcome energy development barriers:4489technical assistance at no cost to Indian Tribes to develop a tangible4490product or specific deliverable to address a need or barrier and move4491energy projects forward, and to enable a competitive business4492environment for energy development in Indian Country. Programs will not4493support work on solar, wind, or battery technologies.4494FY 2026 Overview44954496------------------------------------------------------------------------4497                                                                 FY264498          $ in thousands               FY24         FY25       Request4499------------------------------------------------------------------------4500Office of Indian Energy                 70,000       70,000       50,0004501Program Direction                       14,000       14,000       10,0004502Assistance Programs                     56,000       56,000       40,0004503------------------------------------------------------------------------45044505Explanation of Changes from FY25:4506    The increase in technical assistance funding will enable the4507expansion of technical assistance to more Tribes and increased local4508providers. The decrease in federal assistance funding focuses support4509on reliable, firm energy infrastructure.4510    Programs will not support work on solar, wind, or battery4511technologies.4512FY 2025 Planned Activities4513   Development of a strategy to advance electrification and4514        energy development and deployment on Indian lands to address4515        energy access challenges in Indian Country.45164517   Issuance of aNotice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)for cost-4518        shared competitive grants to eligible Tribal entities for4519        energy deploymenton Tribal lands.45204521                                  [all]