Native American tribes are working to ensure that the Trump administration’s energy dominance agenda doesn’t come at the expense of their sovereignty.
Last month, Energy Secretary Chris Wright requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission open a rulemaking to reverse a policy allowing tribes to veto hydropower projects in their land. That consultation policy — in place since 2024 — was not compatible with a grid that needs to grow as quickly as possible, Wright wrote.
“For America to continue dominating global energy markets, we must remove unnecessary burdens to the development of critical infrastructure, including hydropower projects,” the letter stated.
But in comments to FERC this month, several Native American tribes said Wright’s proposal would trample on their rights and may not do much to encourage new hydropower development. Amy Trainer, the director of environmental policy for the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community in Washington state, wrote in a comment that removing tribal veto authority would “invite speculative filings” and would “undermine the government’s credibility as a trustee and partner to Tribal Nations.”
“Far from expediting hydropower development, such a rule would create unnecessary delays and uncertainty, diverting attention from projects that could advance with Tribal support,” Trainer wrote.
It comes amid a broader tension between the need to grow the nation’s grid to surging electricity demand and the environmental and procedural reviews that can sometimes slow projects down — a dynamic that includes clean power.
“In conversations we’ve had with investors, the need to get renewable capacity online as quickly as possible was often pitted against the need to engage with Indigenous peoples,” said Kate Finn, executive director of the Tallgrass Institute, which promotes Indigenous sovereignty. “What we say is the reality is that the need for energy doesn’t have to be in opposition to engagement with Indigenous people. There’s a way to include Indigenous perspectives in a meaningful way.”
Finn’s group recently partnered with investment firm Trillium Asset Management on a report laying out best practices for investors to engage with Native American tribes before embarking on projects that affect their lands. That includes conducting due diligence on projects, being transparent with tribal partners, building relationships and finding structures to share benefits.
Those practices are important since Native American land — which comprises 2 percent of total U.S. territory — has about 6 percent of the country’s renewable energy resource potential and investors are looking for every available opportunity to build new projects. The report said that the consultation step isn’t just about respect — it can also “support efficient capital flow to projects that are more likely to be successful in the long term.”
Sada Geuss, an investment manager with Trillium, said the report was part of a push to avoid negative practices from extractive industries and ensure that tribes can take some benefits to projects. Even though the Trump administration has encouraged energy dominance above all else, Geuss said that investors would still benefit from consulting before embarking on projects.
“There’s a lot of movement back and forth around engagement, about environmental issues and about land use more broadly,” she said. “We’re trying to get companies to think more holistically with a long-term view for the best practices. Just complying with what the current administration is doing does not set you up for success in a future administration.”
Resources at ‘tremendous risk’
It’s a debate that’s playing out in the FERC docket responding to Wright’s rulemaking request. The original FERC policy was adopted when the body rejected seven preliminary permits for proposed hydropower projects that would have been located within Navajo Nation land. Commissioners said at the time that they “will not issue preliminary permits for projects proposing to use Tribal lands if the Tribe on whose lands the project is to be located opposes the permit.”
The preliminary permit is only the first stage of FERC approval, and developers still need to go through a full licensing process, where tribes can still raise objections and environmental concerns.
The policy was hailed by tribes as an important step to giving them more say over energy projects that could affect their land or spiritual sites, but was never formally adopted through a rulemaking. And Wright has targeted it as part of a policy regime that makes it harder to build energy projects, even as the administration has stripped permits and eliminated incentives for large-scale renewable energy projects.
FERC, he wrote, had “effectively delegated its exclusive statutory authority to issue preliminary permits to third parties.”
It’s a position the National Hydropower Association agrees with. The group wrote in comments that Wright’s proposal would preserve “the ability for developers to protect their early investment in a proposed project … while the developer conducts the important work of consulting with federal and state regulators, Indian Tribes, and other interested parties.” Most preliminary permit objections, the group wrote, “necessarily rest on a dearth of information.”
“Meeting load growth while maintaining reliability and resilience will require timely development of new generation, and hydropower is uniquely positioned to meet that need,” NHA added.
Tribes, however, say that consultation before the preliminary permit stage means better projects that respect their rights under the Federal Power Act. The Tulalip Tribes of the Pacific Northwest wrote in a comment that “protecting the land and its resources is intrinsic.”
“Our people, our traditions, our culture, our very survival is inextricably tied to the fate of our natural environment,” wrote Jason Gobin, executive director of the tribes’ natural and cultural resources department. “We cannot afford any diminishment or circumvention to the protections of treaty resources at such a time they are at tremendous risk.”
Tribes and their advocates also drew attention to FERC’s speed in opening the docket, which came with no consultation with affected tribes. The committee also gave just two weeks for comments, coming after Wright expressed urgency for rulemakings to reduce energy project delays.
The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, based in Nevada, wrote that the proposed rulemaking was a “plain violation of Tribal sovereignty” and that the quick process made it “very difficult and likely impossible for many impacted Tribes to provide timely comments on this adverse proposal.”
Speaking to reporters in November, FERC Chair Laura Swett said that staff is “reviewing the comments we’ve received now, and we will certainly take every request into account, including the one to extend the deadline.”
