2008- The Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah (PITU) v. Southern Paiute Agency Superintendent, Bureau of Indian Affairs

BIA only partly met its burden of proof to clearly demonstrate the validity of the ground it cited for partially declining PITU’s proposal to contract the tribal realty program: that the amount of funds proposed under the contract is in excess of the
applicable funding level for the contract. BIA did not clearly demonstrate that any of the funds allocated for Southern Paiute Agency’s (“SPA”) realty program should be retained by SPA to perform inherent federal functions. BIA also did not clearly
demonstrate that its method used to allocate PITU’s tribal share of available funds, based solely on the tribe’s share of acreage, was reasonable in the circumstances. BIA did clearly demonstrate the validity of its declination of that part of the Tribe’s
proposal that sought a total of $75,000 from BIA’s Central Office and Western Regional Office funds.