Common use of Development and Maintenance of the Implementation Agreement Clause in Contracts

Development and Maintenance of the Implementation Agreement. The agreement for implementation of the SNPLMA was first developed in 1999 by a team of representatives from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior, and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) in the Department of Agriculture. The purpose of the agreement was to address how the Federal agencies would work together to implement the portions of SNPLMA that require coordination within the Department of the Interior and between the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture. The team also addressed the requirements related to coordination and consultation with the State of Nevada, local governments, and interested parties. The team assembled a document, entitled The Federal Partners Charter, which outlined a collaborative process for developing a recommendation for the Secretary of the Interior regarding the SNPLMA Special Account expenditures. The Federal Partners Charter was executed to produce the Round 1 Recommendation for Expenditures from the SNPLMA Special Account. The lessons learned in executing the process proved valuable in modifying certain terms of the Charter in order to make the process more efficient and effective. A continuous improvement approach was adopted, and the Charter, renamed The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA) Implementation Agreement, was signed in May 2000. Changes to the Implementation Agreement (IA) over the years reflect lessons learned for implementation, modifications to the Act that have expanded the SNPLMA program to include additional eligible entities and funding/project categories, opinions provided by the Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor, direction and guidance resulting from audits, and changing circumstances due to the growth of the program. A history of the revisions can be found in Appendix P. This IA is expected to continue to evolve during the life of SNPLMA. Maintenance of the IA is the responsibility of the Partners Working Group (PWG). BLM will prepare draft revisions based on processes put into place by decision memorandums approved by the Executive Committee (EC) since the previous version was approved; SNPLMA Division recommendations; and comments and suggestions from Federal managers, non-Federal eligible entities, and PWG recommendations. The BLM will distribute the draft revisions for review and comment by eligible entities and others involved in implementation of the Act. The PWG will make a recommendation on the final draft to the EC. All proposed changes must be approved by the EC before they take effect. Appropriations laws apply to all funded activities without exception whether the funded activity is called a “project” or a “program.”6 Throughout budgetary guidance and standard usage, the two terms are often used interchangeably. Implementation of SNPLMA, therefore, does not distinguish between “projects,” “programs,” “programs of work”, or “programmatic projects.” All policies, procedures, and business rules contained herein, including those intended to ensure compliance with appropriations law and the Secretary’s requirements, shall apply to all SNPLMA projects regardless of whether a project is for a single activity or a group of activities and regardless of the category within which the project falls. Furthermore, arbitrary descriptors of “program” or “project” shall not affect the guidelines or rules used to implement a project or assess requests for project modifications.7 6 The September 2005 GAO Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process defines “Program” as: “Generally, an organized set of activities directed toward a common purpose or goal that an agency undertakes or proposes to carry out its responsibilities. Because the term has many uses in practice, it does not have a well- defined, standard meaning in the legislative process. It is used to describe an agency’s mission, functions, activities, services, projects, and processes [emphasis added].” Also see GAO Glossary definition of “Program, Project, or Activity” as a single unit within a budget account. 7 This revision for resolution of the “project vs. program” question made by EC decision memorandum approved 8/11/11.

Development and Maintenance of the Implementation Agreement. The agreement for implementation of the SNPLMA Implementation Agreement was first developed for the SNPLMA in 1999 by a team of representatives from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the InteriorFS, and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) in the Department of AgricultureNPS. The purpose of the agreement was to address how the Federal agencies would could work together to implement the portions of the SNPLMA that require coordination both within the Department of the Interior and between the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture. The team also addressed the requirements related to coordination and consultation with the State of Nevada, local governments, and interested parties. The team assembled a document, entitled The Federal Partners Charter, which outlined a collaborative process for developing a recommendation for the Secretary of the Interior regarding the SNPLMA Special Account expenditures. The Federal Partners Charter was executed to produce the Round 1 Recommendation for Expenditures from the expenditure of the SNPLMA Special Account. The lessons learned in executing the process proved have proven valuable in modifying certain terms of the Charter in order to make the process more efficient and effective. A continuous improvement approach was adopted, and the Charter has been revised on an annual basis. The first revision, completed in May 2000, added State and local government representatives to the committees that generate the recommendation; added a second public comment opportunity following development of the preliminary recommendation; refined the criteria used to rank nominations for land acquisitions; and renamed the Charter, renamed : The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA) Implementation Agreement. The second revision, was signed completed in May 2000. Changes to the Implementation Agreement 2001, added a representative of rural Nevada (IA) over the years reflect lessons learned for implementation, modifications to the Act that have expanded the SNPLMA program to include additional eligible entities and funding/project categories, opinions provided appointed by the Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor, direction and guidance resulting from audits, and changing circumstances due Governor) to the growth of the program. A history of the revisions can be found in Appendix P. This IA is expected to continue to evolve during the life of SNPLMA. Maintenance of the IA is the responsibility of the Partners Working Group Group; added a fourth representative of local government on the Xxxxx County Projects Sub-Group; added a section on the process and documentation requirements for obligation of and reimbursement from the SNPLMA Special Account following approval; allowed for Federal agencies to be reimbursed for direct labor on capital improvement projects; and changed the SNPLMA Special Account Reserve (PWGSAR) from a percentage (15%) to a fixed amount ($5 million). BLM will prepare draft revisions based on processes put into place by decision memorandums approved by The third revision, modified the Executive Committee (EC) since land nomination package requirements, including the previous version was approvedrequirement to include a “willing agency letter” from the Federal agency that would have management responsibility for the property if acquired; SNPLMA Division recommendationsprovided for acquisitions and projects to be placed “on-hold” due to extenuating circumstances; allowed, where appropriate, for early appraisal of nominated lands prior to availability of funds; modified funding criteria for all categories, including MSHCP requirements; established definitions and comments and suggestions from Federal managers, non-Federal eligible entitiescriteria for the Conservation Initiative category, and PWG recommendationsupdated appendices to reflect modifications to documentation requirements for task orders and reimbursement requests. The BLM will distribute This, the draft revisions for review and comment by eligible entities and others involved in fourth revision, incorporates the state-level implementation of the ActFLTFA, modifies the land nomination package requirements to incorporate requirements of the FLTFA, adopts definitions and criteria for projects and payment of expenditures for Lake Tahoe restoration projects, and renames the Implementation Agreement: The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act and Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Implementation Agreement. Other significant administrative and management changes include implementation procedures for expenditure of the Mesquite land sale proceeds; addition of references to regional governmental entities where appropriate and inclusion of these entities in the Park, Trail, and Natural Area subgroup due to their addition as eligible entities for SNPLMA funds under the park, trail, and natural area expenditure category; provides that the amount to be requested for the SNPLMA Special Account Reserve (SAR) shall be determined annually for each round rather than pre-established at $5 million as previously set for the SNPLMA SAR and allows for a separate Special Account Reserve for the FLTFA; refinement of methods of reimbursement for certain project categories; incorporate changes in reimbursement policies for appraisal costs; modifies and clarifies allowable costs in all categories; and provides guidelines regarding project equipment; as well as other clarifications and additions to administrative processes and procedures. The PWG will make a recommendation on the final draft to the EC. All proposed changes must be approved by the EC before they take effect. Appropriations laws in allowed costs, processes, and procedures, authorized in this revision apply to all funded activities without exception whether acquisitions and projects which have not yet been completed or terminated. This fourth revision also sets out the funded activity is called a “project” or a “program.”6 Throughout budgetary guidance process whereby Lake Tahoe Restoration Projects will be nominated, selected and standard usagerecommended parallel to but outside the SNPLMA nomination process carried out by the SNPLMA subgroups and SNPLMA Partners Working Group, with the two terms are often used interchangeably. Implementation of SNPLMA, therefore, does not distinguish between “projects,” “programs,” “programs of work”, or “programmatic projects.” All policies, procedures, Final Recommendation for Lake Tahoe being forwarded to the SNPLMA Executive Committee for its consideration and business rules contained herein, including those intended to ensure compliance with appropriations law and the Secretary’s requirements, shall apply to all SNPLMA projects regardless of whether a project is for a single activity or a group of activities and regardless of the category within which the project falls. Furthermore, arbitrary descriptors of “program” or “project” shall not affect the guidelines or rules used to implement a project or assess requests for project modifications.7 6 The September 2005 GAO Glossary of Terms Used inclusion in the Federal Budget Process defines “Program” as: “Generally, an organized set SNPLMA Final Recommendation transmitted to the Secretary of activities directed toward a common purpose or goal that an agency undertakes or proposes to carry out its responsibilities. Because the term has many uses in practice, it does not have a well- defined, standard meaning in the legislative process. It is used to describe an agency’s mission, functions, activities, services, projects, and processes [emphasis added]Interior for approval.” Also see GAO Glossary definition of “Program, Project, or Activity” as a single unit within a budget account. 7 This revision for resolution of the “project vs. program” question made by EC decision memorandum approved 8/11/11.

Development and Maintenance of the Implementation Agreement. The agreement for implementation of the SNPLMA Implementation Agreement was first developed for the SNPLMA in 1999 by a team of representatives from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the InteriorFS, and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) in the Department of AgricultureNPS. The purpose of the agreement was to address how the Federal agencies would work together to implement the portions of the SNPLMA that require coordination both within the Department of the Interior and between the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture. The team also addressed the requirements related to coordination and consultation with the State of Nevada, local governments, and interested parties. The team assembled a document, entitled The Federal Partners Charter, which outlined a collaborative process for developing a recommendation for the Secretary of the Interior regarding the SNPLMA Special Account expenditures. The Federal Partners Charter was executed to produce the Round 1 Recommendation for Expenditures from the expenditure of the SNPLMA Special Account. The lessons learned in executing the process proved have proven valuable in modifying certain terms of the Charter in order to make the process more efficient and effective. A continuous improvement approach was adopted, and the Charter, renamed The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA) Implementation Agreement, was signed Agreement in May 2000. Changes to the Implementation Agreement (IA) over the years reflect lessons learned for implementation, modifications to the Act that have expanded the SNPLMA program to include additional eligible entities and funding/project categories, opinions provided by the Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor, direction and guidance resulting from audits, and changing circumstances due to the growth of the programhas been revised on an annual basis. A history of the revisions can be found in Appendix P. N. This IA Implementation Agreement is expected to continue to evolve during the life of SNPLMAthe Acts. Maintenance of the IA Implementation Agreement is the responsibility of the Partners Working Group (PWG)Group. BLM will prepare draft revisions based on processes put into place by decision memorandums approved by with the Executive Committee (EC) since the previous version was approved; , SNPLMA Division recommendations; and , Executive Committee decisions regarding changes in policy, comments and suggestions from Federal managers, non-Federal eligible entitiesmanagers and SNPLMA Subgroup members, and PWG Working Group recommendations. The BLM will distribute the draft revisions for review and comment by eligible entities the subgroups and others involved in implementation of the ActActs. The PWG will make a recommendation on the A final draft approved by the Working Group will be submitted to the ECExecutive Committee. All proposed changes must be approved by the EC Executive Committee before they take effect. Appropriations laws apply to all funded activities without exception whether the funded activity is called a “project” or a “program.”6 Throughout budgetary guidance and standard usage, the two terms are often used interchangeably. Implementation of SNPLMA, therefore, does not distinguish between “projects,” “programs,” “programs of work”, or “programmatic projects.” All policies, procedures, and business rules contained herein, including those intended to ensure compliance with appropriations law and the Secretary’s requirements, shall apply to all SNPLMA projects regardless of whether a project is for a single activity or a group of activities and regardless of the category within which the project falls. Furthermore, arbitrary descriptors of “program” or “project” shall not affect the guidelines or rules used to implement a project or assess requests for project modifications.7 6 The September 2005 GAO Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process defines “Program” as: “Generally, an organized set of activities directed toward a common purpose or goal that an agency undertakes or proposes to carry out its responsibilities. Because the term has many uses in practice, it does not have a well- defined, standard meaning in the legislative process. It is used to describe an agency’s mission, functions, activities, services, projects, and processes [emphasis added].” Also see GAO Glossary definition of “Program, Project, or Activity” as a single unit within a budget account. 7 This revision for resolution of the “project vs. program” question made by EC decision memorandum approved 8/11/11.