U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

87–495 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 108–119

TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN INDIAN COUNTRY

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE STATUS OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN

INDIAN COUNTRY

MAY 22, 2003

WASHINGTON, DC

(
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Vice Chairman

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona,

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota

HARRY REID, Nevada

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

PAUL MOOREHEAD, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel

PATRICIA M. ZELL, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel

(II)
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Statements:

Dejordy, Gene, vice president, Regulatory Affairs, Western Wireless Corporation .......................................................................................................... 44

Edelman, Marcia Warren, president, Native Networking Policy Center ..... 14

Fast-Horse, Valerie, cochair, Telecommunications and Utility Committee,

Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Portland, OR, and director,

Management Information Systems, Coeur D’Alene Tribe of Idaho .......... 38

Fohrenkam, Robin, chairman and president, Gila River Telecommunications, Inc., Chandler, AZ ........................................................................... 18

Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs ............................................................................... 1

Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from South Dakota .................................. 43

Legg, Hilda Gay, administrator, Rural Utilities Service, Department of

Agriculture ..................................................................................................... 5

Levy, Kelly Klegar, associate administrator, Office of Policy Analysis

and Development, National Telecommunications and Information, Department of Commerce ................................................................................. 7

McDowell, Nora, chairperson, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe .............................. 20

Monette, Gerald ‘‘Carty’’, president, Turtle Mountain Community College 30

Narcia, Richard P., Governor, Gila River Indian Community ...................... 18

Shaddox, Roanne Robinson, senior advisor/External Relations, Privacy

Council ........................................................................................................... 47

Snowden, K. Dane, chief, Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau,

Federal Communications Commission ........................................................ 2

Standifer, Jr., Ben H., chief information officer, Tohono O’odham Nation—executive branch ................................................................................. 55

Strand, Mike, chief executive officer and general counsel, Montana Independent Telecommunications Systems ........................................................ 51

Turner, Denis, executive director, Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s

Association, Tribal Digital Village ............................................................... 27

Twist, Kade L., president, Kade L. Twist Consulting ................................... 10

Whiting-Hildebrand, Cora, Oglala Sioux tribal council member .................. 42

Yawakie, Madonna Peltier, president, Turtle Island Communications,

Inc. ................................................................................................................. 24

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

Dejordy, Gene (with attachments) .................................................................. 158

Edelman, Marcia Warren ................................................................................. 104

Fast-Horse, Valerie ........................................................................................... 142

Legg, Hilda Gay ................................................................................................ 80

Levy, Kelly Klegar (with attachments) ........................................................... 85

McDowell, Nora ................................................................................................ 118

Mescalero Apache Telecommunications Inc. .................................................. 185

Monette, Gerald ‘‘Carty’’ .................................................................................. 132

Murphy, Charles W., chairman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe ........................ 122

Narcia, Richard P. ............................................................................................ 109

Shaddox, Roanne Robinson .............................................................................. 173

Snowden, K. Dane (with attachment) ............................................................. 64

Standifer, Jr., Ben H. ....................................................................................... 177

Strand, Mike ..................................................................................................... 61
Page

IV

Prepared statements—Continued

Turner, Denis .................................................................................................... 126

Twist, Kade L. .................................................................................................. 94

Whiting-Hildebrand, Cora ............................................................................... 152

Additional material submitted for the record:

Grosz, Albert, CEO/general manager, West River Telecommunications

Cooperative, Hazen, ND, letter to Senator Conrad .................................... 35
(1)

TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN INDIAN COUNTRY

THURSDAY, MAY 22, 2003

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in room

485, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye (vice

chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Inouye, Conrad, and Johnson.

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM

HAWAII, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

Senator INOUYE. Good morning. This morning, the Committee on

Indian Affairs meets to receive testimony on the status of telecommunications in Indian country. Last year, this committee held

a joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Communications of the

Commerce Committee on some of the issues related to telecommunications serving Native America. Today, we have structured a more comprehensive hearing. I think it is clear that whether it is characterized as a ‘‘gap’’ or a ‘‘digital divide’’ or some other

term, Indian country lags far behind the rest of America in some

of the most basic services that most Americans take for granted.

Thirty-two percent of all Indian homes nationwide lack basic

telephone service. In some areas of the country, like the State of

Arizona, 50 percent of tribal homes have no access to telephone

services. A study conducted by the Economic Development Administration in 1999 informs us that at that time, only 9 percent of Indian households had computers and only 8 percent had access to

the Internet. As always, Indian country has been resourceful in trying to bridge the gap in telecommunications capacity, and some

tribal governments, after assessing their communities’ needs, have

elected to start up their own telephone companies to serve reservation communities and both the Indian and non-Indian residents of

those communities.

There are new approaches being explored to connecting Indian

country to bridge the absence of sophisticated communications infrastructure, because often the costs associated with putting in

land lines in remote rural areas are so prohibitive that land-based

communications simply are not an economically viable solution.

Then there is the interesting fact that Federal agencies that have

a physical presence in tribal communities, such as the Bureau of

Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service, have their own telecommunications infrastructure on tribal lands, but because of var-
2

ious regulatory restrictions they cannot make that infrastructure

available to tribal governments, schools, teachers, students, or to

any citizen. So you may have a high-performance computer right

next to your home that has no electricity and no telephone service.

Clearly, this basic lack of telecommunications infrastructure

means that in an emergency there is no one who can call 9–1–1.

And naturally, there is no means for law enforcement officers or

emergency medical technicians to know that they are needed. People have died because they cannot reach help in a timely fashion,

and tragically it is likely that more people will suffer serious and

life-threatening injuries as long as there are no means of communicating with the outside world. I am certain all of you will agree

that this gap must be closed.

Finally, we know that at the Federal level, there is no one point

of access, nor is there any agency that serves a coordinating function to assure that those existing Federal programs that provide

support for community assessments and the development of telecommunications infrastructures and capacities are adapted to the

unique needs of Indian country.

So we look forward to receiving your testimony this morning. I

would like to note that we have a long witness list today, and a

limited amount of time because of new scheduling that was just

issued by the leadership. I would like to assure the witnesses that

all of their full statements will be made part of the record, and ask

that you try your best to summarize your testimony so that there

will be time for all witnesses to present their testimony and be

heard.

With that, I would like to welcome the first panel—K. Dane

Snowden, chief, Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau, Federal Communications Commission; Hilda Gay Legg, administrator,

Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Kelly

Klegar Levy, associate administrator, National Telecommunications

and Information Administration, Department of Commerce.

Ladies and gentleman, welcome.

Mr. Snowden.

STATEMENT OF K. DANE SNOWDEN, CHIEF, CONSUMER AND

GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS BUREAU, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Mr. SNOWDEN. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Vice Chairman.

My name is Dane Snowden. I am the chief of the Consumer and

Government Affairs Bureau for the FCC. I appreciate this opportunity to again appear before you and discuss the FCC’s role in addressing the continued advancement of telecommunications and information services in Indian country.

Just over 1 year ago, the FCC completed its reorganization. My

Bureau established an Intergovernmental Affairs Office in part to

honor and respect the government-to-government relationship we

have with federally recognized tribes. Establishing this office has

resulted in, one, centralizing communications between the tribes

and the Commission; and two, raising the profile within the Commission of issues impacting the provision of telecommunications

services in Indian country.
3

Since my appearance 1 year ago, we have aggressively built upon

the foundation established by the Commission only 3 years ago to

promote telecommunications subscribership and infrastructure deployment within tribal communities, taking on the issues of outreach, consultation, and policy reform. We recognize the need of

tribal nations to have the tools and resources available to help

them increase access to critical telecommunications services. As a

result, the Commission launched the Indian Telecommunications

Initiative, or ITI. ITI takes multiple forms—interactive regional

workshops, meetings with representatives of individual tribes to

address their unique telecommunications issues, participation by

Commission senior staff at tribal conferences, and dissemination of

educational materials to American Indian tribes and tribal organizations.

Last July, as part of ITI and the launch of a national outreach

program to raise awareness of Lifeline and LinkUp, we contacted

more than 550 tribes and 25 tribal associations with educational

materials about Enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp. Through these efforts and others, participation in Enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp

programs has increased almost seven-fold since the year 2000.

Commission staff has participated in interactive regional workshops and conferences around the country. Through our participation, we have witnesses first-hand the state of telecommunication

in Indian country. Last September, Chairman Powell delivered the

keynote at the National Summit on Emerging Tribal Economies.

This demonstrates the depth of the Commission’s continued commitment to outreach. In February, Chairman Powell and each of

the commissioners and bureau and office chiefs hosted a meeting

with the National Congress of American Indian executives and

members of the NCAI Telecommunications Subcommittee.

A central element set forth in the Commission’s statement of policy is the goal and principle that the Commission will consult with

tribal governments. When tribes voiced concerns about tower siting

and historic preservation consultation, we responded, devoting considerable time and resources to address the issue. Commission staff

have consulted directly with tribes and their representatives, as

well as the United South and Eastern Tribes in the context of a

draft nationwide programmatic agreement. The draft agreement

among the Commission, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National Council of State Historic Preservation Officers proposes to streamline the national Historic Preservation Act

review process. Consultations thus far resulted in addressing tribal

concerns.

When we realized the initial wireless tribal bidding credit rules

may have been too narrow, the FCC improved the tribal bidding

credit mechanism by expanding the rules this past March. The

Commission also initiated a notice of inquiry, or NOI, asking how

to facilitate the provision of spectrum-based services and promote

opportunities for rural telephone companies, including tribally

owned companies, to provide such services. In another recently released NOI, the Commission seeks data on competitive market conditions with respect to wireless service, particularly seeking data

on tribal lands. Just last week, the Commission authorized spectrum leasing in a broad array of wireless services. The Commission
4

also sought comment on additional steps to improve how secondary

markets function. These steps will further promote the development of innovative services in Indian country.

Finally, the Commission recently adopted an order pertaining to,

among other things, the Enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp Programs

that clarifies the operation of the eligibility criteria. This order also

asked how to expand enhanced programs beyond reservation borders. A recent analysis based on 2000 census data indicates that

telephone penetration rates of federally recognized tribes has increased from approximately 47 percent to 67 percent in the past 10

years. However, in a Nation that boasts a national penetration rate

of 94 percent, we can conclude only that more needs to be done to

increase access in Indian country. The Commission will continue to

support the development of telecommunications infrastructure in

Indian country, bringing basic telephone services to unserved and

under-served areas and laying the foundation for the deployment

of advanced services, including broadband. We will continue to consult with tribes and engage in a dialogue with industry and other

Federal agencies, as well as the States, to determine how, working

together, we can best achieve our mutual goals.

I thank you for this opportunity and look forward to answering

any questions you have.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Snowden appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. I am most grateful to the position taken by the

agency to be open to discussion and be helpful, but I would like to

ask a few questions as to something you can do immediately. We

have noted that 9 percent of Native households have access to the

Internet. My question is, is the FCC willing to consider extending

the E-rate discount to tribal institutions and lower-income individuals during hours that schools and libraries are not using the

Internet?

Mr. SNOWDEN. I did not follow the last part of the question. That

are not willing to what?

Senator INOUYE. During hours when schools and libraries are not

using this, would you permit Indian country to use that with the

E-rate discount?

Mr. SNOWDEN. I think that is something that we should seriously

look at. At the FCC, we are currently evaluating the entire E-rate

program to make sure that, first, the funding is still there, to make

sure that it is not in jeopardy, which it is not, and we want to continue our efforts in that area. In addition, I think it will be important for us to take what you are asking and take it back to the

Commission and have our five commissioners debate that issue.

Senator INOUYE. Will you tell them that this is the most severe

situation one can find in the Nation. There is no other community

where one can say we have less than 10 percent access to Internet,

and that is what it is in Indian country. So I would like to see the

time when an Indian child can dial 911, for example, and get the

ambulance.

Do you know of anything we can do, that Congress can do to

change the laws, besides appropriating additional funds?

Mr. SNOWDEN. I think the U.S. Congress can do whatever the

U.S. Congress sees fit to do.

Senator INOUYE. No; but can you suggest something?
5

Mr. SNOWDEN. I think what we need to do is evaluate the situation. As you referred to the 911 situation, I can say that we are

seriously looking at that issue across the board. We recently held

an E–9–1–1 coordination initiative to discuss the importance of this

issue, and elevate it to a level where someone on a reservation does

not have that problem. We do plan to coordinate with the tribes on

that particular issue as we move forward. We just held that forum

about 2 weeks ago.

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Snowden, I thank you very much, and will

you convey to the Commission our gratitude.

Mr. SNOWDEN. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. And tell them to make this their highest priority?

Mr. SNOWDEN. I will. Thank you, sir.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you, sir.

Ms. Legg.

STATEMENT OF HILDA GAY LEGG, ADMINISTRATOR, RURAL

UTILITIES SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Ms. LEGG. Senator Inouye, vice chairman of the committee,

thank you very much for the opportunity to testify at this oversight

hearing on the status of telecommunications in Indian country.

And thank you also for your vision in understanding what modern

and high-speed telecommunications means and how that can make

a difference in the quality of life for the folks who live on Native

American reservations. Today’s advanced telecommunications network will allow Native American communities to become platforms

of opportunity for businesses, both new and established businesses,

to compete locally, nationally and globally. On behalf of President

Bush, Secretary Veneman and Under Secretary Tom Dorr, I assure

you that we are committed to enabling and empowering these communities through working with them in whatever way we can.

Whether that be assisting them with development of a sound

business plan or making sure the right technology is fitted to the

right community, or educating potential customers to the application of cutting-edge technologies, we want to be a driving force in

helping to create that economic demand. USDA is very proud of its

contributions to improve the infrastructure in many Native American communities. Its Rural Utilities Service [RUS] has worked

with telephone companies and cooperatives serving Native Americans since the inception of our program, both in electric, water and

waste, and telecommunications. In 1961, RUS made its very first

loan to bring electricity to the Navajo Nation. In 1976, we financed

the first tribal telephone company, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe

Telephone Authority, in Eagle Butte, SD. We are especially proud

of our efforts working directly with tribally owned and operated

telecommunications utilities.

RUS has financed six tribally owned telecommunications companies for service exclusively to the reservation. Unfortunately, there

are still many communities without the access to advanced telecom

services. And Native Americans living on tribal reservations have

some of the lowest telephone penetration rates in the Nation. This

lack of telecommunications infrastructure contributes to high unemployment, depressed economic conditions, and reduced edu-
6

cational opportunities and medical care. Studies show that this

trend has begun to change, but the question is, how do we ensure

that these access to service numbers will continue to rise?

First, we look for partnerships to develop telecommunications

systems. The key to developing a successful telecommunications

system is a good sustainable business plan, one that has the support of the tribal community and meets that community’s needs. To

ensure that success, there must be a willingness of the community

to share in the investment. Local ownership and local control have

always been the keys to providing quality service and ensuring

business success. Local leadership must drive the acceptance of

new technologies by being users themselves, such as demonstrating

and explaining and understanding the uses of new technologies to

local businesses, or designing courses that can be taught over the

Internet, or embracing new technologies through their personal

use, such as being able to have your own EKG read via telemedicine.

A clear success of this type of partnership is in the Gila River

Telecommunications, Inc. story. Gila River is a tribally owned and

operated telecom system. It began as a start-up. It had no distribution lines. But by partnering with an independent telephone company, Dobson Communication, it was able to obtain the cash to

begin business, and with telecommunications loans from the RUS,

Gila River was able to construct an advanced telecom system capable of broadband delivery. As a result, the most remote of Native

Americans living on the reservation had access to modern telecommunications services, and the tribal authority was able to build

an industrial park and then recruit 50 businesses to locate on the

reservation.

Of course, hand-in-hand with job creation, education and health

care factors must be considered in an economic development strategy. Our distance learning and telemedicine program, during its

11-year history, has made more than $17 million in grants to provide the critical services of telemedicine and education to Native

Americans. And when we speak about telemedicine, the life-saving

medical procedures that can be performed via advanced telecom

networks, they are boundless and they result in improved quality

of life that is truly immeasurable. However, we as a government

need to work together to remove barriers such as the fact that the

Indian Health Service clinics are considered Federal facilities and

are not eligible for our distance learning and telemedicine funding.

One of RUS’s greatest success stories for Indian country came recently, on May 16, when Secretary Veneman announced our Community Connect grants. Of the 40 grants that were announced totaling $20 million, 10 of those grants totaling $6.2 million were

awarded directly to Native American communities. Another three

for almost $2 million were awarded to telecommunications providers to bring service exclusively to Native American reservations.

These grants competed on a national level. There were over 300 applications, and yet the Native American projects won on their own

merit. It was the quality of the application. There were no automatic set-asides. There were no eligibility parameters. These were

good, strong applications and we are delighted that that percentage

is so high and we are looking forward to working with them.
7

As I close, there are many ways in which every facet in the quality of life of rural residents can be impacted positively by the deployment of advanced telecom services. Every industry, every business, every educational institution, every health care facility and

truly every home will benefit from the deployment of broadband. It

is up to us, as the facilitators to this opportunity, to challenge our

rural communities and our partners in the telecom industry to increase the public knowledge of this tremendous life-changing resource and to demand a level that achieves maximum benefit for

our Native Americans.

Thank you again for the opportunity, and I will be glad to answer any questions, Senator Inouye.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Legg appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Ms. Legg. Your agency

is one of the principal agencies that make available grants and

funds to Native Americans. I noted in your testimony that there

were 300 applicants.

Ms. LEGG. Correct.

Senator INOUYE. And of that number, 20 were selected?

Ms. LEGG. Of that number, sir?

Senator INOUYE. Of that number 20 were selected?

Ms. LEGG. There were 300 applicants, totaling $185 million, and we have $20 million to grant. Of the $20 million, almost $9 million

of it will go to serve Native Americans.

Senator INOUYE. Were there many other qualified entities that

you could not serve, say tribal groups?

Ms. LEGG. In tribal groups, the greatest need really came from

the Native Americans, so they did score very high. There were

some applications obviously that we could not serve and there were

tribal communities within those applications, yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. What I am leading to is if you doubled your

amount, would you be able to provide more assistance to tribes?

Ms. LEGG. Yes, sir; we would.

Senator INOUYE. If the Communications Subcommittee suggested

additional funds, would your agency object to it? [Laughter.]

That is a serious question because oftentimes the Administration

says no.

Ms. LEGG. Our agency will carryout whatever Congress directs

us to do, sir. This year’s budget has $10 million for the broadband

grant program, which we call Community Connect, so we will be

making some more grants this year.

Senator INOUYE. So you think that at the present time, your

agency can distribute more funds effectively?

Ms. LEGG. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much.

Ms. LEGG. Thank you, Senator.

Senator INOUYE. And now may we hear from Ms. Levy.

STATEMENT OF KELLY KLEGAR LEVY, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT,

NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Ms. LEVY. Mr. Vice Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity

to testify this morning on behalf of the National Telecommuni-
8

cations and Information Administration [NTIA], setting forth our

views of the role of the Federal Government in addressing the telecommunication needs in Indian country.

NTIA serves as a principal adviser to the President, Vice President and Secretary of Commerce on domestic and international

telecommunications and information policy issues. The Administration shares your interest in ensuring that telecommunications and

information networks and services are available in Indian country.

Clearly, we face a unique set of challenges here. In general, these

communities are low-population densities and low-income areas.

We have had difficulties with the data collection, research and

analysis that are needed to assess the telecommunication needs of

American Indian communities. We need to determine the type of

telecommunications technologies that would best serve the needs of

these communities and be affordable.

There are also questions as to whether existing telecommunications companies are serving the needs on Indian reservations,

how to create and sustain tribal telecommunications companies,

and what is the appropriate role of competition with tribal telecommunications companies. On all these issues, tribal input and

consultation are critical.

NTIA understands the importance of basic telephony, as well as

Internet access for all Americans. We have released a series of reports that profile Americans’ access to the Internet at home and

outside the home, and how different demographic groups are using

the Internet. Our most recent report, entitled A Nation On-Line,

which we coauthored with the Department of Commerce’s Economics and Statistics Administration, and released in February 2002,

analyzed census data taken from 57,000 households. We have been

able to report the raw data regarding access to and use of computers and the Internet by American Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts.

Unfortunately, however, because of the small sample size of these

populations and the high cost of over-sampling, we have been unable to obtain enough data points for these populations to run economic analysis and draw conclusions on the data in our reports.

Our next census survey will be taken in October 2003. We hope

that the numbers now will be large enough to provide a statistical

baseline for measuring American Indian’s use of computers and the

Internet. We will be happy to share these findings with you and

other interested parties once we have them.

At NTIA, we have worked hard to connect American Indian communities to advanced telecommunications services. Our Technology

Opportunities Program [TOP], has been providing matching grants

to nonprofit institutions and State, local and tribal governments to

demonstrate ways to use advanced information technologies, to provide access to public information and tribal government services, to

offer greater access to health care services and tribal cultural services, and to provide job training and opportunities. TOP grants

have provided seed funding for such projects that then receive sustaining funding from other sources. Approximately 9 percent of our

past TOP grants, which is about $17.5 million, have been awarded

to tribes or organizations that serve tribes. For example, TOP

grants have been awarded to the White Mountain Apache Tribe,

the Pueblo of Santa Ana, the Minneapolis American Indian Center,
9

the Navajo Technology Empowerment Centers, and the Cherokee

Nation for projects establishing community-wide networks that enhance access to educational, economic development, health, government and electoral services, as well as build capacity for e-commerce, e-training and distance learning.

NTIA has also helped to extend the benefits of communications

technology to American Indian and Alaska Native communities

through the Public Telecommunications Facilities Program [PTFP].

This program has made a significant contribution to the public

broadcasting system in Indian country by engaging in outreach efforts and providing critical funding. PTFP has funded seven Native

American projects over the past two fiscal years, including grants

for Native-oriented public radio service, as well as construction

grants to improve the transmission equipment of stations licensed

to tribes.

NTIA is not alone in our efforts to address telecommunications

needs in Indian country, as my colleagues from the FCC and RUS

have testified today. In addition, the Federal Government’s efforts

on spectrum reform, including authorizing secondary markets and

the five GHz allocation will also engender opportunities for meeting

the needs in Indian country. These reforms enable us to use the

spectrum resource better, and allow for more innovative use of both

licensed and unlicensed wireless technologies to meet these needs.

For example, as part of a National Science Foundation-funded effort called Advanced Networking with Minority-Serving Institutions, Motorola deployed its unlicensed wireless Canopy service on

three Indian reservations, providing them Internet access as well

as video and IP telephony services.

Mr. Vice Chairman, I thank you again for the opportunity to testify and welcome any questions you may have for me.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Levy appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much, Ms. Levy. As you are

well aware, the primary and largest source of funding is the Department of Agriculture. In the title of that Department, there is

no word ‘‘communication’’ or ‘‘telecommunication.’’ The second

source of funding is the Technology Opportunity Program. I commend you for the $17.5 million that have been spent to date, but

why is the President discontinuing this program if it is such a good

program?

Ms. LEVY. As I understand it, the President’s budget reflects the

Administration’s belief that the program’s mission has been fulfilled. At this point, the President is looking to other programs in

the Administration. The programs at RUS, such as the community

grants and the broadband grants, the programs at the FCC such

as the e–Rate, and the programs at the Department of Education,

to implement many of the lessons learned from the TOP program.

Senator INOUYE. Well, the NTIA is going to discontinue the Technology Opportunity Program. The only remaining program that we

are aware of is the Agriculture one.

Ms. LEVY. A lot of the distance learning grants that we have provided, we have learned lessons that are now being implemented by

the funding over at the Department of Education.

Senator INOUYE. The third source is the Department of Education Community Technology Center Program, is that it?
10

Ms. LEVY. That is one of them.

Senator INOUYE. The budget proposes no funding for this program.

Ms. LEVY. I think that the President’s budget is looking toward

the Department of Education’s $700 million in its educational technology grants—grants that are delivered directly to the States.

Senator INOUYE. Does it not propose eliminating this Community

Technology Center Program?

Ms. LEVY. I believe that is also in the President’s budget, yes.

Senator INOUYE. Do you not want to restore it? We are talking

about all the problems—about 9 percent having Internet, less than

40 percent with telephone service, no one can use the 9–1–1. I am

glad that all of us are saying we are going to do our best, but at

the same time while we are saying we are going to do our best, we

provide no funding. It is not your fault, I realize that, but will you

go back to your leaders and tell them Indian country has a few

problems?

Ms. LEVY. I will do that, sir.

Senator INOUYE. And just remind our leaders that in every war

in the last century and this century, Indian country has sent more

sons and daughters in uniform in the military service of our Nation

per capita than any other ethnic group. In many ways, they have

paid their dues. It is about time they got the benefits.

[Applause.]

Senator INOUYE. As you can see from the response here, I appreciate the testimony of you three and I know you are doing your

best, but please tell your seniors and principals that it is a serious

problem and I hope that the Administration will reconsider restoring these programs. They have great promise.

Thank you very much.

Ms. LEVY. Thank you.

Ms. LEGG. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman.

Mr. SNOWDEN. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Our next panel is made up of the president of

Kade L. Twist Consulting of Arizona, Kade L. Twist; and the president of Native Networking Policy Center, Marcia Warren Edelman.

Mr. Twist, it is your show now.

STATEMENT OF KADE L. TWIST, PRESIDENT, KADE L. TWIST

CONSULTING

Mr. TWIST. Mr. Vice Chairman, I would like to thank you for inviting me to testify here. It is an honor to be here with you today.

I would like to express my sincere appreciation for your continuing

efforts to improve the status of telecommunication in Indian country. I think you are providing tremendous leadership on this issue.

My name is Kade L. Twist. I am a member of the Cherokee Nation and president of Kade L. Twist Consulting. I have been conducting research on the subject of telecommunications in Indian

country for the past year as a consultant for the Ford Foundation.

Prior to that, I was with the Benton Foundation as a policy analyst

specializing in telecommunications in Indian country. While at the

Benton Foundation, I was a member of a talented and dedicated

staff that was responsible for shaping much of the public discourse

pertaining to what is now referred to as the digital divide.
11

Over the course of my research, one significant finding has

emerged over and over. That is providing equipment and infrastructure is not a solution in and of itself for the telecommunications development needs of Indian country. Equipment and infrastructure are merely tools. They are only effective when they are

applied in a manner that provides for and advances the social, civic

and cultural needs of respective Indian communities. Even if every

mile of Indian country were to be fully wired, many tribes do not

have the knowledge, expertise and organizational capacity to effectively utilize, manage and sustain their infrastructure.

Telecommunications systems are very expensive to sustain, and

require a large number of staff with a wide array of skill sets to

keep them up and running. These technologies require a great deal

of experience, expertise, creativity, community education, community organizing to utilize them in a manner that complements the

cultural will of tribal people, while meeting their civic and social

needs. Therefore, stakeholders should match their investments in

equipment and infrastructure with investments in human capital.

It is critical for stakeholders to pay close attention to capacity

building and sustainability issues, because Indians have just begun

the process of making telecommunications fit their respective cultural and social worlds. This is a new technology. This is a new enterprise. It is a new ball game for us.

Therefore, Indian nations have an intense need for planning,

community organizing, training, technical assistance, capacity

building assistance and the recruitment of talent with a diversity

of skill sets. Indian nations must develop their organizational infrastructures to ensure the appropriate development and sustainability of telecommunications endeavors on tribal lands, as well as

ensuring the consumer rights of their respective tribal members.

One of the main issues that I have been addressing is the knowledge and capacity building. During the course of my research and

speaking with top Indian telecommunications executives and information managers, practitioners in the field, they have identified

knowledge and capacity-building needs as more significant even

than funding and development needs. Furthermore, respondents

expressed frustration toward existing knowledge and capacitybuilding resources because they were typically limited to 1-day

workshops that do not address the specific needs of their specific

communities, and provide very little or no opportunities for ongoing

support. The majority of respondents also state that they experienced difficulty accessing capacity-building funds for their respective organizations. That is both through the Federal sector and

through the private foundation sector. The following is a list of the

most frequently identified knowledge and capacity-building needs.

First, is core funding; second, is training and technical assistance;

third, is planning; fourth, is community organizing; fifth, is research, data collection and analysis; sixth, is technology selection;

seventh, is demand aggregation; eighth, is regulatory systems, regulatory codes; nineth, is fundraising; and tenth, is recruiting staff

with advanced skill sets.

Therefore, I have two recommendations at this point. First, is to

urge this committee to design and implement a funding mechanism

that is specifically designed to meet the telecommunication needs
12

of Indian country and flexible enough to accommodate pre-development, development, and knowledge and capacity-building endeavors as well.

Indian country needs its own funding mechanism for telecommunications development because Indian nations should not

have to compete against States, municipal governments and other

incorporated entities to gain access to the benefits of the Federal

Government’s trust responsibility. Furthermore, Indian country

needs a telecommunications funding mechanism that adequately

addresses its pre-development and knowledge and capacity-building

needs. Currently, no such Federal funding is readily available, including that of the RUS broadband pilot project and the TOP Program. The funding mechanism should be designed to link telecommunications investment with nation-building, economic development, cultural preservation, community networking and efforts

to improve upon core public services such as education, health care,

housing, law enforcement, fire and public safety and enhanced 9– 1–1 services, which as you have already identified as very, very important and critical to public safety right now in Indian country.

The key to linking these developments with these services is promoting community-driven telecommunications development that is

scalable, efficient, sustainable and better-suited for leveraging diverse sets of resources.

I would like to also mention, and reiterate the comments of Hilda

Gay Legg of RUS, that the current broadband pilot project is going

to be reduced from $20 million to $10 million, or at least planned

to do so. So what progress has been made this year will not be duplicated next year. So it may be a smokescreen of some sort. The

second recommendation would be to facilitate the development of

a system of training, technical assistance and knowledge and capacity building intermediaries for telecommunications in Indian

country. There is a need for a system of American Indian nonprofit

telecommunications intermediaries capable of providing training

and technical assistance, knowledge and capacity-building assistance, brokering broad-based partnerships, facilitating collaboration,

leveraging multi-layered funding sources, and leveraging political

clout. There are already such systems in place—training and technical assistance, capacity-building and intermediaries, for TANF,

WIA, for housing, for economic development and so on. Yet there

is not an organized system for telecommunications.

However, there are individual organizations such as Affiliated

Tribes of Northwest Indians and the Southern California Tribal

Chairman’s Association that have been very successful telecommunications intermediaries. In fact, representatives from both

ATNI and SCTCA are here today to testify about their tremendous

achievements. These are precisely the types of organizations that

should serve as models for building a comprehensive system of telecommunications intermediaries for all of Indian country. Regional

intertribal organizations already play a significant role as intermediaries for TANF, WIA, economic development and so on. They

are already well-positioned to play a role as intermediaries for telecommunications as well.

Likewise, there are already a number of national American Indian nonprofit organizations such as the Native Networking Policy
13

Center, the National Indian Telecommunications Institute, and the

National Congress of American Indians which are already well-positioned to add value to the work of regional intertribal organizations. All that is needed is funding to support their work and to

support their organizing efforts.

In conclusion, funding assistance for telecommunications development that does not include knowledge and capacity-building merely

solves half of the equation—the non-human side of the equation.

Indian country stands to benefit most from an investment in equipment and infrastructure that is matched equally with an investment in its people. An investment in building the capacity and

knowledge of Indian people will contribute to their ability to manage, sustain and adapt these technologies so that they effectively

meet the needs of Indian communities.

Thank you very much.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Twist appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Twist. You may be

aware that there are 562 recognized tribes in the United States. Of

that number, optimistically 20 tribes can be considered to be

wealthy and self-sufficient. Most tribes are very, very poor, almost

on a deadly level, with unemployment as high as 90 percent. Obviously, these tribes just cannot afford to hire these organizations to

give them the expertise and what have you, which leads us into

this awful situation where high technology surrounds this Nation,

but Indian country is not ready to absorb it. What can we do to

make certain that we provide training, expertise and proper assessments of the needs because if you asked the other 460 tribes, they

may not know what to do, and they do not have the loose money

to spend to hire experts. There are many tribes that can do that,

but most tribes do not have the capacity to do that. So we have to

be realistic, so you tell me what this committee can do.

Mr. TWIST. I would like to point out one thing before I answer

that question specifically, and that is the program like the

broadband pilot project, the majority of tribes would not be able to

even apply for that because they would not have the $20,000 or

$30,000 necessary to get an application completed. That is why it

is so critical just to get to that level that we need a system of intermediaries. I would believe that it should be done on a pilot project

basis and it should be modeled after the intermediaries that serve

TANF, because I believe that TANF is most critically linked to the

needs of universal service. I think that a lot of data- sharing can

happen to gain a higher enrollment of Native people in the Enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp Programs through that type of collaboration. But I think TANF intermediaries to represent the most

comprehensive and effective model out there.

Senator INOUYE. I am going to suggest to the NCAI that they

make this their top priority project, so that Indian country can get

into this new high technology world. Otherwise, the inequities that

will result from this would make a bad situation that we have

today worse. So I thank you very much, Mr. Twist.

Mr. TWIST. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. We will be conferring with you as to what we

can do. If you have any suggestions on what we can do legislatively, do not hesitate to share them with us.
14

Mr. TWIST. Thank you very much, sir.

Senator INOUYE. Ms. Edelman.

STATEMENT OF MARCIA WARREN EDELMAN, PRESIDENT,

NATIVE NETWORKING POLICY CENTER

Ms. EDELMAN. Good morning, Vice Chairman Inouye, members of

the committee, tribal representatives and leaders, and distinguished guests. Thank you for the invitation to come before the

committee today to discuss the current status of telecommunications in Indian country.

My name is Marcia Warren Edelman. I am an enrolled member

of the Santa Clara Pueblo located in Northern New Mexico, and

the president of a newly formed nonprofit organization, incorporated actually this March 2003, that focuses on facilitating the

development of a collaborative policymaking process, building Native capacity, and increasing education outreach among tribes and

policymakers at all levels of government on issues regarding the

digital divide in Indian country. We are named the Native Networking Policy Center. I am pleased to be here representing our

group.

From 1999–2002, as you may be familiar, I served as the Senior

Policy Adviser for Native American Affairs at the Department of

Commerce, and was fortunate to be there during a time when the

digital divide became a national catch-phrase and a national priority. I worked with many issues with NTIA and also with the Secretary’s office as we conducted visits to Indian country to examine

this particular issue. I am also the co-author of Native Networking

in Telecommunications and Information Technology in Indian country, a report that the Benton Foundation published in 1999.

As we have heard before and in last year’s testimony, this is an

extremely dire situation, an issue that has been brought up in a

number of reports that have been referred to—four of them, three

published in 1999 by NTIA, by the Economic Development Administration, Benton Foundation. Also the National Congress of American Indians published their own report in 2001 that was based on

the findings of their Digital Divide Task Force. In that report, it

outlined specific areas of policy and action that can be used as a

basis for future collaborative efforts, I believe, between NCAI, regional organizations and policymakers at the tribal and national

levels. I would encourage the committee to refer to that report at

their Web site, www.ncai.org, or also on their national clearinghouse site, which is Indiantech.org, where they have a number of

these reports already available.

In Falling Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide, the

NTIA report, we saw statistics showing that Native American

households ranked far below the national average, at 76.4 percent.

The national average at that time was 94.1 percent. And showing

that the digital divide in this country is really a dial tone divide.

The basic service of telephone access was being denied to our own

reservations and our own tribal communities at a level that I feel

is highly unacceptable. I commend the committee for holding last

year’s hearing to introduce the issue to members of the Committee

on Commerce, and also to the general public, and keeping the issue

alive over the past year. As a result of that hearing, I believe that
15

additional policy efforts were made in Indian country to start discussing on a very real level some recommendations and some forward action items that we could undertake in conjunction with the

Federal Government and also Congress.

I would like to bring up three areas that I outlined in my testimony last year as sort of an overview of some of the efforts that

have been taking place over the past few years and to provide a

current status of policy discussions today. Last year, I noted that

there were three obstacles to telecommunications infrastructure deployment in Indian country. First, is the lack of investment capital

in technical assistance, as my colleague Mr. Twist has mentioned;

second, is a lack of current and accurate information; and third, the

lack of ongoing coordination of resources. As we have heard today,

we have had some Federal programs that have had great impact

in Indian country in terms of capital and technical assistance,

namely the TOP program from NTIA, the CTC program at the Department of Education, RUS’s program of broadband technology

grants, as well as the telemedicine and distance learning grants.

Another one that we have not heard too much about, but I believe

is still quite important, which is the Department of Treasury’s Native American Community Development Financial Institutions Program, which has provided ongoing funding for new organizations,

new financial institutions that serve primarily Indian country, to

develop and thus provide a new source of capital that can be directly tapped into by Indian nations throughout this country.

Some of these are quite small. Some of them are more developed.

However, this is still an important starting point for tribal communities, individual entrepreneurs, and tribal businesses to begin

working to develop the kind of capital that they need in order to

realize their own business goals.

However, as we have discussed, overall funding for telecommunications and information technology projects in Indian country remains inadequate to address the needs of these communities, especially in the areas of feasibility studies and upgrades and ongoing

operations support, and also ongoing technical assistance. I urge

the committee to ensure that the Technology Opportunities Program and the CTC Programs are preserved in some way, shape or

form, and at the very least that the lessons learned from these programs are not lost.

A second point, the current inaccurate information—over the

course of 2 days in February 2003, three important meetings took

place which examined telecommunications policy and practice in

Indian country. The first was the NCAI Telecommunications Subcommittee conducted a half-day policy and advocacy meeting after

the NCAI winter session. The FCC conducted a day-long meeting

with a high-level delegation of tribal leaders and representatives of

tribal telecommunications companies and organizations to discuss

ways to improve access to telecommunications products and services throughout Indian country. Also, this committee invited

attendees of both those meetings to an informal brainstorming session to explore ways to develop legislation to address the issue.

We saw the first result of these meetings at the beginning of this

month with the release of the new FCC report on telephone

subscribership on Indian lands, which shows that 67.9 percent of
16

American Indians have telephone service, compared to 46.6 percent

in the 1990 census. The good news is that of course over the past

10 years there has been a 20-percent increase in residential access.

However, the bad news is that we remain well below the national

average of 95.1 percent, and that figure is based on July 2002 census current population surveys.

It was also evident during these meetings that even though

many efforts have been made to address the need in Indian country

for access to infrastructure and funding information technical assistance, these efforts have not resulted in a consistent and coordinated activities process that can best serve tribes and tribal organizations working to close the gap. What is missing is a central repository for policy development, research and educational outreach,

which can effectively address the problems being presented to date

to the Native community. For this reason, our organization, the

Native Networking Policy Center, was created in order to leverage

the existing experience, resources and efforts already underway to

finally achieve the goal of digital inclusion in Indian country. We

were formed as a nonprofit whose mission is to ensure equitable

and affordable access to, and the culturally appropriate use of, telecommunications and information technology throughout Indian

country. We are working to achieve this mission by addressing the

following goals: First, policy development to ensure the inclusion of

Native interests in the development and promotion of policies at all

levels of government to improve and increase the deployment and

use of telecommunications and information technology throughout

Indian country; second, research and evaluation, to conduct research and data collection to create a baseline of information to

support policy development and education efforts, as well as to inform local and Federal stakeholders of relevant and current information impacting telecom and information technology needs in Indian country; and third, education and outreach, and we wish to

analyze, evaluate and disseminate all relevant information and resources to tribes, Native organizations, policymakers and practitioners so that they can develop policies that will promote the appropriate and timely deployment of telecom and information technology infrastructure throughout Indian country.

We feel the expertise to address these issues exists among tribes

in the public and private sector today. All that is needed is an organization to focus on providing information and communication

between the stakeholders necessary to achieve these results. Our

organization is willing to serve in this capacity as an added value

to any tribe or public or private sector entity by providing the policy and information tools necessary to best coordinate the efforts,

create resources, identify relevant information and promote awareness and action.

I feel today tribes are at a pivotal point in history. Self-determination policies have begun to yield measurable results in Native

communities in the development of diversified tribal economies, to

the revitalization of Indian languages and culture. Throughout the

country, the number of tribal and Indian-owned enterprises has

grown dramatically, and many tribes have become active participants in economic and political arenas on both local and national

levels. However, the impressive growth we have seen in these areas
17

will continue to be limited as long as the opportunities afforded by

access to the digital economy of this Nation exist beyond the

boundaries of infrastructure, funding and regulations existing in

our Indian country communities today.

It belongs to those of us in the room today and who we represent

to work together to further the progress being made in closing the

digital divide in Indian country. I am confident that today’s hearing

will provide the substance and direction to bring the resolution of

this issue into action. I thank you for your invitation to testify, and

welcome any questions you may have.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Edelman appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Ms. Edelman, I would assume that everyone in

this room is not only interested in telecommunications, but involved in it in some way. The statistics that I cited when I opened

the hearing are tragic statistics. Many of us sitting here comfortably think that the high-tech age is a good thing for us, therefore we want everyone to benefit from it. Is that the feeling in Indian country? Does Indian country really want this?

Ms. EDELMAN. I believe our communities see technology not as

the solution to all the problems, but as a valuable tool. I believe

that the discussion has really taken root as to how technology can

be used in a culturally appropriate way, can be used as a facet of

strategic planning to achieve the goals of the community, the vision

of the communities. I think we may have passed the point where

technology represented the new and interesting area to explore,

and has become really more of the realistic facet of planning and

implementation of what the community itself sees itself achieving.

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Twist has said that unfortunately most

communities are not prepared to absorb the funding or resources

that may be available because of the lack of trained personnel and

the lack of experience and such. How do we bring this about?

Ms. EDELMAN. One of my greatest——

Senator INOUYE. Are there any places where large numbers of Indians can go to study?

Ms. EDELMAN. For this particular issue? No, that is one area of

development that needs to be examined. We do not have as many

individuals in Indian country that understand telecommunications.

Senator INOUYE. Do the Indian community colleges provide studies and courses on what to do?

Ms. EDELMAN. Actually, I think Mr. Twist may want respond to

that.

Mr. TWIST. I would like to defer that to Carrie Billy who will be

providing testimony later on. The American Indian Higher Education Consortium has made a concerted effort to organize the tribal colleges to provide that anchor in the communities that is needed to develop that sort of expertise and awareness of the issues as

well, but mainly, the expertise, and to keep that, to retain that expertise within the communities. By far, AHEC has provided the

most comprehensive leadership on this issue. I think they should

be worked with in addressing that and expanding that to other institutions that serve large populations of Indian people, Native people, like Arizona State University, University of Arizona, University of Oklahoma they have very high Native enrollment.
18

Senator INOUYE. If I may, I will be sending questions to all of

you because we just do not have the time today. I hope you can respond to them.

Ms. EDELMAN. I would be happy to.

Senator INOUYE. I want to thank both of you for joining us today

and helping us with your testimony. Thank you very much.

Ms. EDELMAN. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Our next panel consists of the Governor of the

Gila River Indian Community of Arizona, Richard P. Narcia. He

will be accompanied by the chairman and president of the Gila

River Telecommunications Inc., Robin N. Fohrenkam. The next witness is the chairperson of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe of California, Nora McDowell, and the president of Turtle Island Communications, Madonna Peltier Yawakie of North Dakota.

I would like to call upon Governor Narcia. I gather that you have

a plane to catch, so please proceed, sir.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD P. NARCIA, GOVERNOR, GILA RIVER

INDIAN COMMUNITY, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBIN N.

FOHRENKAM, CHAIRMAN AND PRESIDENT, GILA RIVER

TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., CHANDLER, AZ

Mr. NARCIA. Good morning, Vice Chairman Inouye. My name is

Richard Narcia. I am Governor of the Gila River Indian Community, and on behalf of the community I am very pleased to be here

to provide some testimony regarding issues of telecommunications

and technology implementation that has evolved in our community.

Accompanying me is Robin Fohrenkam, who is the chairman of

the board of directors for the Gila River Telecommunications, Inc.

[GRTI].

Also, I would like to acknowledge other members of our community that are here from the board: Cecil Antone, former Lieutenant

Governor; Reuben Norris, a board member; Steven Lewis; Aiessa

Fullen, who is the current general manager of GRTI; and Gary

Bohnee, who is my executive assistant.

Over the past several years, the community, through its partnership with its community-owned telecommunications company, and

the development of a management information system has devoted

significant resources to bring our technology system on par with

current levels. A little background on our community—we are composed of two tribes, the Pimas and the Maricopas. The 373,000-acre

reservation was established by an Act of Congress in 1859. Today,

the community is the home for nearly 50,000 members and is the

largest Indian community in the Phoenix metropolitan area.

Traditionally, we are an agricultural people, and in recent years

we have attempted to diversify into other various entities and businesses. We have developed industrial parks that are home to local

and national companies. The community owns and operates three

gaming facilities. Recently, the community has developed a premier

destination resort spa and golf facility. Next month, our Sheraton

Wild Horse Pass will host the National Congress of American Indians mid-year conference. Additionally, the community has established several tribally chartered corporations including the Gila

River Telecommunications, or GRTI as we refer to it.
19

As the leadership of the community has planned for the diversification of its economy, while also providing essential services to

our constituents, it has been vital that we invest adequate resources in technology and telecommunication. A key element in our

community’s ability to implement technology improvements has

been through the efforts of GRTI. GRTI was formed in 1988 for the

primary purpose of providing telephone service for our community

members. At that time, it was not cost-effective for our community

members to receive this type of service. Some services would cost

approximately $20,000 for one service. With initial capital funding

from the Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service and

continued support by way of low-interest Government loans for infrastructure and construction from RUS, GRTI has been able to

continue providing reasonably priced service for our customers. The

model that has evolved has allowed GRTI to use of a combination

of private financing, Federal funding, and loan programs. In fulfilling its mission, GRTI has increased the number of telephone subscribers, promotes community employment, improves the quality of

service, and provides state-of-the-art technology. Today, the GRTI

system consists of 117 miles of fiber optic cable, and 342 miles of

copper cable that is deployed throughout the reservation. Starting

in 1998, as I mentioned, the basic reason was to provide telephone

services, but since that time GRTI has expanded into a variety of

services—DSL Internet service, satellite TV service, Web page design, cellular phone sales, data cabling, and business phone systems.

GRTI has also implemented several programs for our community

members—first, the Fresh Start Program which allows customers

with delinquent accounts to retain phone services; second, a customer incentive program which promotes responsible payment of

phone bills; and third, an Enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp Program

which allows qualified low-income residents to receive basic phone

service. We are recommending that the criteria for this program be

included for those on fixed incomes, such as the elderly. I think it

is fair to say that GRTI continues to meet the demand of our

unique tribal marketplace and the challenges that are present on

a daily basis.

As was previously mentioned, the evolution of GRTI has in part

been a function of the growth of the community marketplace. Tribal economic development and housing has spurred the need for improvement in technology and telecommunications. We believe our

marketplace will allow the business model to work. One of the biggest customers at this time is the tribal government. Over the past

5 years, the demands of equipping a growing tribal workforce of approximately 1,500 employees and approximately 83 departments

and programs has presented significant challenges in two major

areas—infrastructure and financial resources. The function of the

investment in the community’s technology effort has always been

to meet basic infrastructure needs. While we have established basic

connectivity to all of our seven district service centers, we are challenged by the sheer size of our reservation in developing systems

that are effective, efficient, and reliable in all circumstances.

Mr. Vice Chairman, in summing up, the community has several

recommendations. For the most part, I believe all tribal govern-
20

ments and tribal corporations like GRTI support the inclusion of

Federal programs that allow communities to consider more options

in providing and building services. From the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Services grants and loan programs to the

National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s

Technology Opportunities Program, these initiatives, as a matter of

policy, should continue to be funded. In addition, the committee

should be aware of important issues pending before the FCC. We

are recommending to the FCC that the e-rate discount program be

continued. Also, Congress must continue the educational process of

the unique jurisdictional and regulatory issues that exist in our

communities. Finally, Mr. Chairman, it is my hope that the committee will continue to support tribal efforts in the area of technology and telecommunications.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Narcia appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Governor, I can assure you that this committee

will continue to do whatever it can to help you. We will urge the

agencies to change their policy so that the programs that we cited

will be continued—RUS plus TOP; that much, we can promise you.

You have been saying you have not been consulted as often as

you want by these agencies?

Mr. NARCIA. I think there is a need for that consultation at any

level as far as—it goes back to the basic question that tribal communities need to be involved in whatever decisionmaking is done,

or have a part in it.

Senator INOUYE. Do you think we should have laws enacted to

require the FCC to consult with you before they designate certain

communications carriers located within your service area?

Mr. NARCIA. I believe that it would be very appropriate to have

that type of legislation in place.

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much, and I know you have

got a long trip to take, so thank you for your presence.

Mr. NARCIA. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for your support.

Senator INOUYE. May I know recognize Chairperson McDowell?

STATEMENT OF NORA MCDOWELL, CHAIRPERSON, FORT

MOJAVE INDIAN TRIBE

Ms. MCDOWELL. Good morning, Vice Chairman Inouye, and Patricia and others that are here today, distinguished tribal leaders,

and others that are here on behalf of telecommunications throughout the United States, on behalf of tribal governments.

Before I begin, I just want to thank our creator for giving us this

day and allowing us to safely be here today to represent the needs

of tribal governments throughout not only our communities, but

throughout the United States.

On behalf of our tribe, the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, I want to

thank you today for having this hearing to address the status of

telecommunications in Indian country. During the early 21st century as we look at needs throughout Indian country, telecommunications obviously is one of the highest technologies that is continuously evolving. Every 6 months there is a new telephone, you

know—everybody has a different way and mechanism of commu-
21

nicating. Tribal governments have historically communicated using

communication tools throughout their history and their culture. As

most economic factors predicate today, high quality communications services are vital to our communities in Indian country, especially in rural areas.

Without access to high quality services similar to those found in

the urban areas and at comparable prices, most Indian youth and

people sometimes have to make a heart-wrenching decision whether to stay and seek work off their ancestral lands and-or perhaps

never realize their full potential because of the lack of capabilities

that are there on reservations that currently exist not only in the

telecommunication area, but all economic areas. There is location

to be considered. We are fortunate with our tribe to have been located in an area that is diverse. We are located in three States— California, Arizona, and Nevada. Through the efforts or our tribe,

when we look at establishing a telecommunications company back

in 1988, actually in 1989, our tribe looked at how we could best accomplish and complete our true vision of ensuring tribal sovereignty and actually exercising tribal self-determination. In that,

we looked at our communications. We look at our utilities on reservation. We also looked at the unmet needs of our tribal people,

the future vision for our people. Most current location for our

homesites were in California only. We expanded in 1972 into Arizona and established homes there, and it was virgin territory at

that time. The company that had traditionally provided service

there for 35 years was a company that was not able to provide

service to us just because of remoteness of our location there at

that time, and not being able to service that area. And every other

mile of land on our reservation was checkerboarded in Arizona,

which meant every other mile was tribal-nontribal, tribal-nontribal.

As you have probably heard and have seen throughout other testimony from different tribes throughout the United States where the

Railroad Act was implemented therein, so our reservation became

checkerboarded.

Prior to the formation of the Fort Mojave Telecommunications

Inc., our penetration rate of telephone service on my reservation

was about 35 percent. During the short life of Fort Mojave Telecommunications, it has increased the penetration rate to an astounding 98 percent, and currently provides 1,016 access lines

throughout the reservations in California, Arizona, and Nevada.

These significant gains of which my people are collectively proud

are made even more noteworthy when you consider that the reservation is in three States, as I mentioned before, consisting of

48,000 acres. In Arizona, the difficulties mount, obviously, as you

are aware of the checkerboarded situation.

My tribe wanted its own telecommunications basically because in

order to achieve total exercise of its tribal sovereignty and self-determination and because high-quality telecommunications services

were vital. Prior to the formation of FMTI, the telephone network

consisted solely of copper lines; not all parts of the reservation, especially the remote areas, had access to the network. The Fort Mojave Telecommunications has greatly improved the communication

capability of the reservation as is evidenced by the vastly improved

penetration rate. It no longer matters where you live. Before, we
22

only had access to analog services. FMTI has upgraded the network

to approximately 75 percent digital. To hit that mark, FMTI has

laid over 45 miles of fiber optic cable to increase both the speed

and quality of our communications system.

It is really something to sit here today and recount the beginnings and resulting growth of FMTI. I can tell you about all the

meetings to determine not whether we needed our own telephone

company, for it was quite obvious that we did, but rather the path

to that goal. I could relate to you some of the stories of some of our

tribal members, especially in the areas that were remote at that

time. Sometimes we would be without service for 3 to 5 days. So

for us, for some people it was just imperative just to have dial tone,

so for us the increase in the capacity that we have been able to

achieve throughout our 15 years of development of our company

was something the remarkably that our tribal people totally appreciate.

I also have to mention, though, the legal, jurisdictional and political opposition we faced from formation of our company from local

service providers who had a monopoly of the area for over 35 years.

My tribe certainly had help, obviously, from others such as the Gila

River Telecommunications, Cheyenne River, who had gone before

us, and from other rural telephone companies who had similar experience in dealing with providing service to rural areas. The establishment of FMTI has been of extraordinary value to my people,

not simply because now we can call in when in the world, or we

currently run our own Internet-based business, but for the shining

example of the Fort Mojave Tribe’s self-determination. All the

world can now see how my people came together and cooperatively

fulfilled a need, and in the end provided ourselves with what had

previously been denied.

Far from saying that the path is wrong, Fort Mojave Telecommunications must continue to grow and expand to meet the development needs of the community it serves. The Federal Government has also contributed to the success of FMTI. Key programs

such as the Technology Opportunity Program, TOP, RUS grants

and loans, and Federal universal service support have enhanced

our ability to bring high quality advanced telecommunications service to my tribe. Unfortunately as we look forward to providing for

the future needs of the tribe, we are concerned. In the early years

of FMTI, the assistance received from RUS was really significant

and important to our tribe.

I know there are other funds that also RUS provides for electricity and other rural needs out there. In some areas we have been

denied actually access to those Federal dollars because other providers in rural areas had already received grants and funds to provide service to our area, such as electricity. On my reservation, we

had difficulty there, and hopefully those will be areas that will be

looked at. Also, when you implement programs or grants to Indian

reservations, because another rural company coming in without

proper authority or jurisdiction over your tribal lands cannot claim

your property or say they are going to provide service without consulting with that tribe. We had experienced that with our electricity company. Fortunately, we did not have to go through that

with our telephone service, but it is something that is there that
23

needs to be looked at in any program that is implemented or where

funds are appropriated by Congress to be addressed in Indian

country.

We are fortunate that we did have that startup money, and currently not many financial institutions, as I am sure you have heard

in past testimony from other tribes in looking at economic development. We are willing to sit down with tribes and financial markets

throughout Indian country in dealing with tribes, and because of

the trust status of lands and/or allotted lands, have created barriers to financing companies such as FMTI, and/or utility services,

and/or any other services that are currently provided on our reservation.

Therefore, the grants, loans and loan guarantees that we received from RUS helped to breathe life into FMTI, and continue to

assist us in achieving our dream on our reservation. As much help

as RUS has provided and continues to provide, there is room for

improvement. With input from tribes such as at today’s hearing,

employees and customers, some programs can be better tailored to

have greater impact on our reservations. The recent broadband

loan program implemented last year provides low-interest loans

and loan guarantees for broadband services. While most reservations would meet the requirements, some tribes seem unable to

participate in this program, for instance because a community

must first apply for resources from a fund from a specific State.

This seems to disqualify reservations which, like mine, stretch over

three States. While my tribe could apply to the national fund, this

pool is only funded with money left over, if any, from the earlier

States’ process. A better approach would have been to carve out

funds for entities seeking to provide broadband services on tribal

lands.

Today, I want to thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman, for your time

and attention and thoughtful consideration of the issues I have presented here today. I ask that when you consider the provisioning

of communications in Indian country, and especially your committee, you remember the inherent right of a governing body of a nation, which I know you promote and envision and continue to support tribal governments and the tribal sovereignty issues that we

face daily, not only here in Congress, but in the States and the

counties, and the tribal governments that we represent—that the

tribes are best able to meet basic needs based on the distinctive

cultural heritage. When a tribe is able to adequately fund and provide for these needs, not only does it strengthen the self-determination of our tribes as a whole, it also provides self- esteem and confidence for every tribal member. In the end, both nations, the tribe

and America are stronger and connected for the future.

Today, I thank you for hearing us and having me here today providing our comments on behalf of our tribe, and I am able to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Ms. McDowell appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Chairperson McDowell.

Your testimony has been filled with criticism and citing shortcomings of the Federal agencies and Federal laws. If you have any

suggestions as to what can be done to improve, for example, the
24

designation process of eligible telecommunication carriers, we

would like to receive them from you.

Ms. MCDOWELL. Yes; I have suggested a number of items within

my testimony, specifically to the FCC and others that have actually

those authorities to designate what those would be. I think in Indian country, I think most of us, like my company, is very young.

It is a young company that does not have the competitive edge. On

reservations, it is a lot different providing services as a tribal government versus an individual entity or corporation or company. I

am not saying we should be anti-competitive, but I am also saying

that we should be looking at the needs of the communities that we

are providing service to. Some reservations I am also advocating for

do not have those services. So we need to look at those issues. I

would suggest that we also look at providing legislation where

there would be a set-aside for tribal governments of any sort, whatever size, that decides to take on the responsibility of providing

services on its reservation. There needs to be money carved out in

all of the communication areas throughout the Federal Government

process that provides that service. But I think the tribes need to

be consulted.

We have had different groups and entities that have come together that have addressed those issues. They bring you all together to talk about telecommunication needs, but they do not give

you any answers or funds or a mechanism to go to actually start

that and develop it. A lot of that takes feasibility studies. It takes

analysis. It takes all these technology-based performance results to

achieve those goals for your tribe. It may not be in the best interests of you as a tribal government to take that responsibility on,

but at the same time you should be afforded that opportunity to

decide that, based on the needs of your tribal governments. So I

would wholeheartedly ask the Senate and Congress to consider a

set-aside for tribal governments for development of technology,

much like the energy bill that is before you currently, to address

the unmet needs of providing basic electric service needs on reservations. The moneys appropriated for that may not be a whole

lot, but it is a beginning, and it is something that tribes that want

to enter into that new technology can achieve and have resources

available to develop their communities.

Senator INOUYE. We will do our best.

Ms. MCDOWELL. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. And now may I call upon Madonna Peltier

Yawakie, the president of the Turtle Island Communications.

STATEMENT OF MADONNA PELTIER YAWAKIE, PRESIDENT,

TURTLE ISLAND COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

Ms. YAWAKIE. Good morning, Mr. Vice Chairman and staff members.

Charles Murphy, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was

unable to present testimony at today’s hearing due to a scheduling

conflict. My name is Madonna Peltier Yawakie. I am the president

of Turtle Island Communications, which is a 100-percent Native

American-owned telecommunication engineering firm providing

consulting services to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. I have been

asked to testify today on behalf of Chairman Murphy.
25

The tribe welcomes the opportunity to inform this committee of

the obstacles that are faced by the tribe in its efforts to improve

telecommunications services on the reservation. Census 2000 figures place the average penetration or average percentage of occupied Indian households with telephone service on the reservation at

69 percent. In stark contrast, non–Indian occupied households on

the reservation enjoy a 96-percent telephone penetration rate.

These figures represent an entire class of people on the reservation

who are denied access to emergency medical and police services,

educational and economic opportunities, and the ability to communicate with their government. These basic human needs strike at

the heart of commitments made by the United States in the Fort

Laramie Treaty of 1868. Ironically, it was Federal law that enabled

current telecommunications service providers on the reservation

the ability to deploy telecommunication infrastructure in a discriminatory manner.

The tribal council is attempting to correct this serious threat to

our communities, but we may need the help of Federal legislation.

For a period of time, the non-Indian population exceeded the Indian population on the reservation. However, the 2000 census reveals the vast majority on our reservation are now American Indian. The devastation of the allotment policy allowed for non-Indian acquisition of reservation lands. When these non–Indians

needed phones, the BIA generously granted right-of-ways to tribal

land areas to telephone companies. These telephone systems are financed with Federal resources and-or subsidies, and were establish

with complete disregard for the tribe or its members.

There is inadequate 9–1–1 service provided on the reservation.

Emergency calls are routed in such a way that they are long distance calls for many of our tribal members. Those tribal members

that meet Lifeline eligibility requirements to obtain telephone service are also required to submit a monetary deposit to the local telecommunication company or have toll-blocking applied to their telephone service. When a tribal member is unable to make a deposit

for long distance telephone service and due to lack of extended area

service between our tribal districts, many of our community members are unable to place calls to the government and service centers. As an alternative, the tribe offered toll-free access to its members to address this problem, but it became too costly to sustain.

Wireless services are typically considered an alternative where

wire length services do not exist. However, cell phone service is effectively nonexistent on the reservation. There are only two cell

towers located within the exterior boundaries of the reservation,

which encompasses 2.6 million acres. One of these towers is located

adjacent to the home of and on the property of a board member of

one of the telephone cooperatives. Both cell towers are located in

areas that limit service quality and reception. In 2001, the council

decided to take corrective action and hired an engineering firm to

complete a feasibility study and an attorney to draft the regulatory

quote. The feasibility study included telecommunications service

improvement options and the financing and funding options available for tribal telecommunication development. Telecommunication

wireline infrastructure and wireless license holders were documented that serve all communities within the exterior boundaries
26

of the reservation. Telecommunication right-of-way easements were

obtained from the BIA to review their locations and terms of these

existing agreements.

Telecommunication network design options were developed, along

with their associated costs that would best meet the long-term

service needs and economic objectives of the tribe. Financial statements were completed for this project to demonstrate the economic

impact of service improvements and employment opportunities

within the tribal land area. A draft utilities service code was developed and distributed for comments to the FCC, the North Dakota

Public Service Commission, the South Dakota Public Utility Commission [PUC] and the four LECs providing service on the reservation. The North Dakota Public Service Commission held an informal hearing and offered written comments on the code. To the contrary, the South Dakota PUC did not respond to our request for

comments. Similarly, West River Telecom, the principal carrier on

the reservation, did not provide its comments until after the comment period. Basically, their only comments were that the tribe

lacks jurisdiction to regulate them. West River Cooperative Telephone Company also offered comments to contest the tribe’s jurisdiction. The LECs have been communicating with State regulators

about our draft code, but not with the tribe. The draft code was revised to address the comments we did receive, and we are again

soliciting comments on the revised version, which are due later this

month.

According to the FCC report released recently on telephone

subscribership on American Indian reservations and off-reservation

trust lands, the State of South Dakota ranks 27th and North Dakota ranks 24th in telephone subscriber rates when comparing

rates with 33 States where American Indian tribes reside. Though

Congress clarified in the 1996 Telecommunications Act that tribes

do have jurisdiction in this area, the lack of specific guidance in the

act has left the FCC with only recent Supreme Court rulings for

direction. More legislation is needed that supports tribal authority

to regulate and improve wire-line and wireless telecommunication

service levels on tribal land. For instance, the FCC has resorted to

the Supreme Court’s ruling that applies the test developed in the

United States v. Montana, to decide whether a tribe can assert its

jurisdiction over non-Indians on the reservation. The result, which

has been applied only in the wireless context, is that tribes have

been held to have jurisdiction only over carriers to the extent they

are providing service to Indians on the reservation, and the States

have been held to have jurisdiction over carriers providing service

to non-Indians.

While that jurisdictional arrangement may be somewhat workable, yet awkward, in a wireless context, it becomes even more

challenging in a wireline context. It creates checkerboard jurisdiction that is subject to change with the transfer of land ownership

or with the voluntary submission to tribal jurisdiction. Nevertheless, that is the jurisdictional scheme we are forced to establish in

order to address the lack of service and poor quality service on the

reservations. The FCC has fallen prey to loose language of the recent Supreme Court decisions that suggest tribes have jurisdiction

only over members of the tribe. Despite Congress’ effort to correct
27

that problem with the Duro-Fix legislation, any correction in the

telecommunication legislation may need to again, at the very least,

clarify that tribes have jurisdiction over all Indians on their reservation, and that States should not be allowed to assert jurisdiction just to collect taxes.

As carriers of last resort, telecommunication providers operating

on Indian reservations are required to serve Indian people. Without

direction from Congress, we expect that the lack of clarity will only

make our efforts more challenging to improve services on the reservation. Regardless of these obstacles, the Lakota and Dakota people of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe deserve the benefits of a modern society and we will not allow jurisdictional opposition to defeat

our efforts.

Again, we thank you for the opportunity to testify on this very

important issue.

[Prepared statement of Charles Murphy presented by Ms.

Yawakie appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. You have come up with a very basic concern of

Indian country—who has jurisdiction over what. I have noted your

suggesting that maybe we should revisit Duro.

Ms. YAWAKIE. Yes.

Senator INOUYE. And to clarify the language so that it will be jurisdiction over everything in the reservation.

Ms. YAWAKIE. That would be wonderful.

Senator INOUYE. We will at the earliest time consider having appropriate hearings here to see if we can work out something.

Ms. YAWAKIE. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Because according to your testimony, the problems you are having, some of the high technology that can be made

available may be denied your people. So we will do our best.

Ms. YAWAKIE. Thank you very much.

Senator INOUYE. We appreciate your testimony, and we will be

submitting questions if we may. Thank you.

Incidentally, I am going to be presiding until we finish, so if you

are getting hungry, I think you should have lunch now or wait

until later. It might be good for you to fast a little. [Laughter.]

Our next panel is the president of the Turtle Mountain Community College, Dr. Gerald ‘‘Carty’’ Monette; Director of Technology,

Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Seattle, Elsun Lauesen, accompanied by Valerie Fast-Horse, the Cochair of Telecommunications and Utility Committee, Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Portland, OR, and Director of Management Information Systems, Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho; and Denis Turner, executive director, Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association of Tribal

Digital Village, California.

I was advised that Mr. Turner has to leave right away, so Mr.

Turner.

STATEMENT OF DENIS TURNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRIBAL CHAIRMEN’S ASSOCIATION,

TRIBAL DIGITAL VILLAGE

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Senator. My name is Denis Turner. I

am the executive director of the Southern California Tribal Digital

Village.
28

The 19 tribal governments in Southern California recently obtained a grant and made a partnership with the Hewlett-Packard

Foundation to develop a wireless communication system within the

19 reservation areas. We believe it is a solution for self-sufficiency

for strengthening our sovereignties within Indian country. In doing

so, I am providing for the record a written testimony of 5 pages.

Hopefully, you have received that, Senator.

Senator INOUYE. It will be made part of the record.

Mr. TURNER. Thank you.

I would just like to briefly tell you, though, that if you look beyond the pages that we have provided and that I have mentioned,

we have developed a vision of what we think our solution is. We

encourage other tribes to look at our model and consider our vision,

because we believe it fits Indian country. It leaves no one behind.

It brings everybody up to speed in developing their independent,

individual tribal communities, systems connectivity to the bigger

Worldwide Web, to developing their own community Internet, as

well as an intertribal community Internet, as well call our

IntraNet.

So I think that this can only be done with using, as we have in

our model, the universities, certainly the tribal colleges that we

have used, and engineering and developing the architecture of our

first-generation of our wireless system. I think that is constantly

and always will be changing as the technology and the inventions

and solutions come about in the future. I think that is something

that all tribes need to keep abreast of and build their depth into.

I want to just kind of briefly tell you about some of the real

things that are more tangible that have happened since we have

developed our model. I think that we have seen and other tribes

will see in Indian country that by setting up our system ourselves,

by building our towers, teaching our people to build the towers for

broadband wireless, developing shadow projects through TANF

people or other programs within the community for social services,

to understand the value of the wireless broadband system, and

having academies with the young people and showing them the

maintenance, the development, to the final product, is something

that really needs to happen. If you just build labs and expect our

young people to learn telecommunication and what broadband

wireless is, then you are leaving that other important part out.

And how we learn this is that we have a charter school on our

reservation. I am a member of the Rincon Band, and over the past

years we have had a problem of attendance at our charter school.

We have 200-and-some kids at a high school on the reservation, but

since the development of our program, Tribal Digital Village, the

attendance by the Superintendent of Schools in California cited us,

and the State addressed for the Superintendent of Schools, that our

charter school since we developed our lab and our Tribal Digital

Village had a 99-percent attendance rate. That is very tangible. It

shows that our kids are learning the system that all Indian kids

throughout Indian country need to learn. This is very valuable. So

on a page of our report, we kind of give you an outline and a graph

of what it is that Tribal Digital Village is doing in terms of resources for Indian students.
29

I think that the issue that we face, though, is developing sustainability for our systems, because they are forever changing. That is

just the nature of wireless and the nature of the IT business, as

we have been taught. We were kind of guided by some defense contractors in the architecture of our system for wireless. They were

able to teach us that the sustainability of it can only come, though,

that if there is an economic structure that holds it up. We are

working on that, but we have found out that even through that system, there are, as has been earlier said, the e-rate discount system

in which tribes can build their systems and become self-sustaining.

That is our goal. It is part of our vision. Unfortunately, I left behind our vision chart. I will supply that, along with a video that

we would like you to see and your committee members to see, Senator, concerning our project in more detail.

We were able to develop a video so that we can share it with the

tribes throughout the country on how we developed our wireless

broadband system. We do believe it is the solution, not because

that is—under H–P, they say invent solutions. This truly is a solution that we ourselves are inventing for Indian country, and would

all like to invite all tribal leadership and all Senators on your committee for visiting us and seeing what our model looks like. We

truly believe that it can help everybody.

You asked the question earlier, our children, our students and

our elders have adopted and do want to be part of the Worldwide

Web and communications system and support those efforts. Just in

closing, I would like to thank you, as a veteran and other veterans,

and our Native American veterans, for providing us for the freedom

we have, and a safe place to be able to communicate on this earth.

Thank you, Senator.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Turner appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Turner.

When did you establish your digital center?

Mr. TURNER. We obtained a grant in the year 2000, February

2000. We established a steering committee, a backbone committee

composed of everybody from the University down to people who

were on public assistance.

Senator INOUYE. Do you have this model already established?

Mr. TURNER. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. And where did the participants receive training?

Mr. TURNER. I am sorry, sir?

Senator INOUYE. Where did they get their training?

Mr. TURNER. We developed some training for our students, for

our adults, parents, through classes, through training through the

University.

Senator INOUYE. You had an arrangement with the University?

Mr. TURNER. Yes; with the University of California. That is

where we feed our wireless from, although we are moving from

dot.com to dot.org to dot.gov. In doing so, we have to get off their

nonprofit status because we are going to economic development. In

doing so, we have purchased another system in California for our

wireless system so that we can maintain our own wireless phones,

our own wireless communication. I really believe it is something

that is a solution for tribes in very other isolated areas.
30

Senator INOUYE. How much did it cost?

Mr. TURNER. The costs in the last two years have been close to $10 million for the last 24 months.

Senator INOUYE. Where did you get the funding?

Mr. TURNER. One-half of those funds came from the HewlettPackard Foundation, in the amount of $5 million a year. The other

one-quarter of it came from our tribes. They have some new businesses in Southern California and were able to supplant the Foundation grant, which was not a requirement, but they were able to

provide that. And then the Indian people that were interested in

it provided the other one-quarter, through various companies that

are on the reservations, just providing that. One of the greatest

things they have done is that every high school student we are

having, and you are welcome, too, Senator, on May 29th, high

school graduation for 120 Indian high school students in San Diego

County, by which they have committed to provide every high school

graduate student a laptop computer that is wireless.

Senator INOUYE. Congratulations.

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, sir.

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much, Mr. Turner.

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Senator. It is always an honor to be before you.

Senator INOUYE. Now, may I call upon Dr. Monette.

STATEMENT OF GERALD ‘‘CARTY’’ MONETTE, PRESIDENT,

TURTLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Mr. MONETTE. Vice Chairman Inouye, on behalf of the Nation’s

34 tribal colleges, which comprise the American Indian Higher

Education Consortium, I thank you for extending us this opportunity to testify today.

I am honored to be here. I, too, am a veteran, not a combat veteran, but a veteran during the Vietnam War. I see you on television and I read about you in the newspaper, and I get the opportunity now to say thank you for what you have given to this country and our people. You are a great supporter of Indian people, as

are all members of this committee. The two Senators from our

State, Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Byron Dorgan are also

tremendous champions for Indian people and tribal colleges.

My name is Carty Monette. I am president of Turtle Mountain

Community College, located in North Dakota. We are one of the

first of five tribal colleges in the country, and this year we are celebrating our 30th year of existence.

In my summary statement, I will cover three areas. First, I will

briefly talk about a strategy that the tribal colleges have already

used to plan for and to bring new opportunities to our people. Second, I will talk about the new tribal college wireless Internet backbone project. And third, I will provide a few recommendations for

the committee’s consideration.

Senator Inouye and Senator Conrad, it is neither necessary for

me to provide an assessment of the state of telecommunications in

Indian country, nor to review the history of the tribal college movement. The two of you and others on this committee probably know

best the history of tribal colleges and the struggles that we faced.

I will simply say this: American Indian tribal colleges are young,
31

geographically isolated and poor. The reservation-based tribal colleges are the poorest institutions of higher education in this country.

About 10 years ago, our tribal colleges began to learn about the

Internet and the awesome power that information and communication technology has in bridging the boundaries of geography and

time. By that time, technology had already become a fundamental

component of teaching, learning and research in higher education.

Tribal colleges and universities, because of our poverty and isolation, had the most to gain or to lose from this evolution.

But the new technological revolution was largely passing us by,

just as it bypassed most of Indian country. We were faced with two

choices: Either we could view our communities’ lack of access to

technology as a digital divide that most of us would never cross,

or we could view technology as a digital opportunity. As tribal colleges, we chose the latter. In late 1999, we began a series of steps

that would lead to the creation of a dynamic and broad-based strategic plan to guide our effort to join the technology revolution. Our

goal was to reach a circle of prosperity, a place where tribal traditions and new technologies are woven together to build stronger

and more sustainable communities. We call our plan the Tribal

College Framework for Community Technology. It is a framework

of strategic partnerships, resources and tools that is helping us to

create locally based economic and social opportunities through information and communication technology and use of the Internet.

We developed the plan in five phases, and information all of

these are included in the testimony that I have submitted. I hope

that the committee members have a chance to review that testimony. We used a methodology called a Prosperity Game—a highly

interactive, fast-paced and effective strategic planning simulation

developed by Sandia National Laboratory from strategic war

games. The game is designed to help create and sustain productive

change through strategy development and negotiation. After much

planning, we convened a 21⁄2 day Prosperity Game, led by a team

of 13 trained facilitators. Participants interacted in and across 11

sector teams to identify challenges and develop policy options and

strategies for the coordinated TCU Framework for Community

Technology. We included governments, including tribal governments, education, private sector, information technology providers,

research and development, and public. Within weeks of the Prosperity Game, we had a series of other meetings to finalize development of a strategic plan. The result by January 2001 was the first

tribal college framework for community technology.

In February 2001, the AHEC Board of Directors adopted a strategic technology plan that embodied the TCU framework community technology. With support from the National Science Foundation, NASA, Microsoft Corporation and others, AHEC established a

national coordinating office and launched a series of activities representing the initial phase of the framework. Most important to individual tribal colleges was bringing the framework full circle—

back to each tribal college through assistance with communitybased information technology planning. In addition, AHEC has undertaken a series of regional IT planning sessions to ensure that

the framework and all activities that flow from it are responsive to
32

the specific and evolving needs of tribal colleges. We have learned

that planning on this level is a never-ending process. It is a circle

of continuous improvement through locally and nationally based assessment planning, implementation and evaluation that is continually repeated.

I refer you to my testimony for more details on our process and

outcomes. In the interest of time, I will only mention two outcomes

of this ongoing process. First, everyone of the 34 tribal colleges, despite our remoteness, isolation and poverty, has achieved

broadband Internet connectivity for our campuses, most through

multiple T–1 lines. We have computer labs and we are developing

robust and growing distance education programs. This is a significant change from only a few years ago, when some colleges had

only one computer with dial-up Internet access. Second, an example of our efforts over the past few years is AHEC’s Wireless Backbone Project. To provide high-speed connectivity to remote institutions and our satellite campuses, where laying fiber optic cable

may never be cost-effective, Turtle Mountain Community College

and two other tribal colleges are piloting state-of-the-art wide-band

wireless backbone technology. We are setting distance records in

the process.

Last year, Turtle Mountain Community College, established a

point-to-point wireless infrastructure ring around our reservation,

running from our college site in Belcourt, North Dakota to several

locations in other parts of the reservation. In addition, we established a point-to-multipoint access point at the local radio station

tower, which provides line of sight access for a 10-mile radius. The

system uses commercially available and cutting edge technologies

and unlicensed spectrum. It is providing TMCC and some of our

local K–12 schools, tribal governments, tribal courts, other tribal

offices with excellent broadband connectivity, significant cost saving over the traditional services, and the ability to deliver

broadband multimedia capacity and applications that are not currently available to most rural and tribal communities.

Implementing this pilot system was challenging. We had to educate our local community and the tribal government on the initiative and win their support. We had to obtain local permission to

mount and install the wireless transmission equipment at the necessary locations. Finally, we had to establish a working agreement

with the local public utilities. Without these relationships in place,

our initiative would have failed. I am pleased to report, however,

that the system has been in place and performing well for several

months now. It is cost-effective, easy to maintain, adequate for our

needs, and has pushed wireless technology to a level never before

attained in the terms of first-mile access.

I would like to close with a few recommendations. I respectfully

request that the committee support our existing tribal college programs, and urge you to ensure that funding is available for comprehensive community-based strategic IT planning for tribal colleges and tribal communities. Currently, as we have heard today,

little money is available, and what is available is disappearing rapidly. We urge the committee during reauthorization of the Higher

Education Act and the Carl Perkins Act to consider establishing

specific technology-related programs for tribal colleges. Likewise, as
33

national security and cyber-infrastructure programs are developed,

we urge you to ensure that tribal colleges are included in any legislative initiatives.

In closing, Senator Inouye and Senator Conrad, I am grateful for

this opportunity to present our thoughts and recommendations to

the committee. The Nation’s tribal colleges and universities are

committed to working with the Congress, Federal agencies and the

private sector to build a bridge of technological opportunities across

our vast Nation. Thank you very much.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Monette appears appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much.

May I recognize the gentleman from North Dakota, Senator

Conrad.

Senator CONRAD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your courtesy, as always.

Welcome, Dr. Monette. It is excellent to have you. I was actually

on your reservation this weekend. I was with the chairman and we

were looking at some of the housing issues, as you know, that exist

there. I regretted not having seen you, but we were dealing with

other issues, so we missed having an opportunity to visit.

I would be very interested in your prioritization of what needs

to be done with respect to telecommunications. If you were to say

in a couple of sentences what the priorities are—what are the most

important things that we could do that would improve telecommunications services in Indian country, what would they be?

Mr. MONETTE. Senator, of course the broad answer is access. We

have to strive to bring access to high-speed Internet to all tribal

members. But from the tribal college president’s point of view, I

look at the teaching and learning part of our need. Teaching and

learning is enhanced tremendously when our young people and all

of our people have access to technology in the learning process.

Earlier there was a comment about education and about tribal colleges, but the role that we have at tribal colleges is multi-folded.

We have to raise the level of knowledge of technology so that all

tribal peoples recognize the need for technology. Then we have to

bring that technology to the communities. On many of our reservations, particularly where the reservation-based tribal colleges are

located, if it were not for our institutions, there would be no technology there. Our role is to bring access to technology, and then to

teach people how to use that technology. So the greatest need, of

course, is money. We need to sustain what we have, but we have

to be allowed to grow that so that all people have access to technology.

I hope I answered your question, sir.

Senator CONRAD. Excellent answer. Let me just say that I received a letter, and I would like to put this letter, Mr. Chairman,

if I could in the record.

Senator INOUYE. Without objection.

Senator CONRAD. It is from Mick Grosz, the CEO and General

Manager of West River Telecommunications Cooperative that is located in Hazen, ND. This does not serve your area. It serves the

area of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. He goes into substantial detail on what West River Telecommunications Cooperative

has done to be responsive to the needs in Indian country, and indi-
34

cates that their number one goal is to provide quality, affordable

service. To this end, they have taken a whole series of steps that

are in the letter. At the same time, they have kept rates affordable.

Local service rates average less than $12 a month. It goes into

some detail as to the quality of services they provide on the reservation that are equivalent to the non-reservation areas, and that

their level of penetration is very good. They indicate the Indian

households’ level of penetration is 69 percent. The FCC study on

telecommunication subscribership on reservations gives almost an

80 percent penetration rate for all households on the Standing

Rock Reservation; 69 percent for Indian households—far higher

than what is seen elsewhere in the country.

He concludes by saying this, and he also goes into some detail

of things they have done to broaden the area that you can make

toll-free calls in response to requests from the reservation. He said

that what they do not need is more regulations or mandates. He

says, as a member-owned cooperative, West River is very sensitive

and responsive to the needs of its member-owners. We do not need

more regulations or mandates. The program is available; the cooperative spirit and the willingness to work together will ensure

needed services will be available.

Now, this is not your service area, but this is a very clear signal,

at least from one member-owned cooperative, that the answer is

not more regulations or mandates. Would you have a reaction to

that?

Mr. MONETTE. First of all, I think it would be nice if the other

cooperatives talked to this gentleman, and I am sure they do. His

target, I believe—he is facing a challenge because it sounds as

though his cooperative that he leads, their heart is in the right

place. They want to do the right thing. But even the numbers that

you just read are far short of where they ought to be. There needs

to be a way where the cooperatives can survive and grow and show

profit and serve their members, so their members get a return on

their investment and good quality service in the process, but also

pushing them toward raising those numbers for Indian people. I

think the letter that you just read, Senator, and the gentleman

that wrote it to you, is on the right road. But I think there may

be need for more regulations to nudge them forward a little bit, so

that they raise those numbers for all Indian peoples in all areas

of the country.

Senator CONRAD. I might add in fairness to Mr. Grosz, he indicates that the numbers that I cited were estimates from a 2000

FCC estimate. On March 27 of this year, he provided my office a

worksheet that showed the total number of lines that were actually

being paid for at that time. According to that worksheet, the actual

penetration rate is in excess of 90 percent. So they have clearly

done a very good job in that particular area of improving their

services. So I would like to enter this letter into the record, and I

thank the Chairman.

Senator INOUYE. Without objection, so ordered.

[Referenced document follows:]
35

WEST RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS COOPERATIVE, Hazen, ND, May 19, 2003.

Hon. KENT CONRAD,

U.S. Senate Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR CONRAD: I am writing in response to the hearing on telecommunications services available for the Indian Tribes scheduled for May 22, 2003. I am

the CEO/General Manager of West River Telecommunications Cooperative [WRT]

headquartered in Hazen, ND. WRT provides service to the greater part of the

Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, which is located in North and South Dakota.

WRT strives to provide quality, affordable telecommunications to all people living

within its service area. WRT is a member owned cooperative that is governed by

an elected Board of Directors. Margins earned through member’s patronage are allocated back to that member and returned to that member as capital credits are retired. As a non-profit company, our No. 1 goal is to provide quality, affordable service. To this end, WRT has constantly upgraded its technology to better serve its

member owners. WRT has upgraded to all digital switches and fiber in the loop

technology. Local number, dial-up Internet is available to every customer. DSL is

available to over 80 percent of its customers both on and off the reservation. WRT

has accomplished this and kept rates very affordable. Local service rates average

less than $12 per month. The Dial-up Internet cost to the customer is $19.95 per

month. The DSL, with Internet service included, cost to the customer is $39.95 per

month.

WRT has provided service to the reservation that is equal to or superior than that

provided to off reservation exchanges. The exchanges located on the reservation

were either the first, or among the first, in our system to have digital switches and

fiber-in-the-loop technology installed. Local number, dial-up Internet was introduced

on the reservation in the same timeframe as the other exchanges served by WRT.

DSL is available to people living on the reservation in approximate proportion as

it is to the rest of our membership. WRT has made quality, affordable telecommunications available to people living on the reservation. WRT created an expanded local

calling area for three exchanges located on the reservation. This was done in response to the concerns of tribal members. With the expanded local calling area,

many more tribal members could call agencies and businesses without incurring a

toll charge.

WRT has attained a subscription rate on the reservation that is very good. The

FCC study on telecommunication subscribership on reservations released on May 5,

2003 gives a 79.9 percent penetration rate for all households [1895 of 2372] on the

Standing Rock reservation and a 68.9 percent penetration rate for Indian households [969 of 1406]. These 2000 FCC estimates are far higher than the 1990 FCC

estimates of a 46.6 percent penetration rate. But these are estimates. On March 27,

2003 I provided your office a worksheet that showed the total number of lines that

were being paid for at the time. According to that worksheet, the actual penetration

rate is in excess of 90 percent.

WRT is working hard to improve the penetration rate on and off the reservation.

WRT advertises the availability of the Lifeline and Link-up program that is available for low income consumers. We are very active in promoting the Enhanced Lifeline program that is available for people living on the reservation who qualify. WRT

has promoted this program through its monthly newsletter. We have also advertised

this through the radio and newspapers. WRT has made the appropriate agencies

and authorities aware of this program. In addition, WRT has gone to the various

towns and districts located on the reservation on 35 occasions to meet with residents

of the reservation to promote the program and sign up qualifying people.

I appreciate and share the concern the Senate Indian Affairs Committee has

about the provision of telecommunication services to the various tribes. I feel strongly that we have met and continue to meet the needs of the people in our service

area whether they live on or off the reservation. As a member-owned cooperative,

WRT is very sensitive and responsive to the needs of its member-owners. We do not

need more regulations or mandates. The programs available, the cooperative spirit

and a willingness to work together will insure that the needed services will be available to the members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.

I appreciate the opportunity to present this letter to you. Please feel free to share

this letter with other members of the Committee. I would be willing to meet with

you or any member of the Committee, at a time and place of your convenience, to
36

discuss this issue. Should you desire, I would be available to present this information to the committee.

Sincerely,

ALBERT ‘‘MICK’’ GROSZ, CEO/

General Manager.

Senator INOUYE. I was signaled by Ms. Yawakie that she wants

to say something on this.

Ms. YAWAKIE. My name is Madonna Peltier Yawakie. I appreciate Senator Conrad bringing that letter to light. I represent

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe today. Chairman Charles Murphy was

asked to testify today and he asked me to take his place. We have

submitted testimony for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. I think

what I would ask you to do is refer to that testimony. Right now,

we are working with the tribes to begin to assert regulatory jurisdiction over West River Telecommunications and three other LECs.

We are working, not actually with the South Dakota PUC, but we

have submitted a utility code to them. They have not responded to

the North Dakota Public Service Commission. They have responded, and right now they have that code for a second round and

final round of response and comment. So what I would ask you is

that we stay in touch with your staff, because this will be an ongoing effort. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is at 69 percent, but they

have eight districts and that is an average rate, because some of

their districts have 58 percent penetration rate. So while the numbers sound positive, there is a lot of work to be done in that area.

I would remind you that West River Telecommunications has been

serving that area since 1956. When we began our study, their penetration rate was at 52 percent. Substantial money has been used

through universal service funds to up those numbers. However,

there is a lot of work to be done, and I wanted to bring that to

light. We have met with your staff-person as well.

Thank you.

Senator CONRAD. If I could just inquire, in the letter they say the

69 percent rate was an estimate done in 2000 by the FCC. They

say that they have since provided my office a spread sheet that

shows the actual penetration rate is now 90 percent.

Ms. YAWAKIE. We actually have our statistics as well, and we

would be happy to share those with your office. I think that the

tribe, after having been—I am from North Dakota, as a matter of

fact. I am from Turtle Mountain, Band of Chippewa, and I am a

member there. The state of telecommunications at Standing Rock

has been notorious. It has been notorious for years. There are

things that are going on, that have gone on with some of the reservation. I think this is a complex issue. The tribe sits in two

States. We have some specific detail that we would like to talk with

you and your staff about at your convenience, and we look forward

to that.

Senator CONRAD. Thank you very much.

Ms. YAWAKIE. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Are you finished? Thank you, Senator.

Dr. Monette, your opening remarks were rather painful, pointing

out that the community colleges are the lowest-funded schools of

higher education in the United States. I am well aware of that. As

you may be aware, some of us have been working on a plan for
37

many years now to establish in the United States a university— a university without walls for Indian country. The problem we have

at this moment is, where do we locate that university, so that you

can set up a medical school; a school of law; a school of social

work—all of those specialties that community colleges do not have.

Do you have any suggestions where we can go? We would like to

have it in Indian country, not here.

Mr. MONETTE. Senator Inouye, you are correct. I am well aware

of the concept, and have mixed feelings about the concept. But

overshadowing all those feelings and all those positions I may have

is the recognition that we need to provide access to higher educational opportunities for all Indian people of all ages. So having

said that, we need to find a way to do that. It is not reasonable,

I believe, although it is preferable from my point of view to have

a tribal college at each reservation. I believe it is not feasible to do

that. So we need to look at ways to provide that access. We are

well into the 2000’s, and we still have too many Indian people who

are not enjoying access to higher education.

A couple of things—I think the current tribal colleges and those

that are coming forward now provide a unique and excellent opportunity to deliver some of that access. I think technology provides

the tool, the vehicle to do that. Even today, several of the tribal colleges are broadcasting courses over the Internet to places all over

the world. Within States, several of the tribal colleges are using

interactive video, multi-type approaches to technology used to bring

teaching and learning to tribal peoples all over the world. So I

think that is an important ingredient to this process—the use of

technology. Because I think, and I feel that several of the tribal colleges are near that position. They are almost positioned to provide

that service on a broad and grander scale.

If we are talking about bricks and mortar and where that ought

to be located, I think to have the research and the scholarship

available to students in medicine and in law, you need to have a

place where that ought to be. That is a tough question. I believe

it ought to be in North Dakota, is where I believe it ought to be.

[Laughter.]

Senator CONRAD. That is a very good idea. [Laughter.]

Mr. MONETTE. I knew I would have support for that. I think the

Upper Midwest, the Great Plains area, where a tremendous

amount of Indian people are located, where a lot of history is located both for Native people and for America, and where the reservations are isolated—the poverty, the poorest counties in the

country are located in the Upper Midwest. There is a tremendous

need for education at all levels. I would like to see if it had to be

bricks and mortar up in the Upper Plains area. But I think before

we get to that point, we should assure appropriate funding for the

existing institutions, which are tremendously underfunded. The

reservation-based colleges like Turtle Mountain Community College are operating on an amount that is about half of what a similar mainstream institution would receive. So we are having to operate our programs on that small amount of money, plus also assist

the students who for the most part are not academically prepared

for college education, so they require a lot of attention. So a lot of

our resources to into that effort, too.
38

So I think multi-faceted answer here—the use of technology, the

bringing up of the current funding level for the tribal colleges so

they may continue to provide quality education, but looking at the

need to provide access to all Indian people in a location I think

would be right in the heart of what I call Indian country, and that

is the high plains, Upper Midwest.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Dr. Monette.

May I now call upon Valerie Fast-Horse of the Telecommunications and Utility Committee of the Affiliated Tribes?

STATEMENT OF VALERIE FAST-HORSE, COCHAIR, TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND UTILITY COMMITTEE, AFFILIATED

TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS, PORTLAND, OREGON, AND

DIRECTOR, MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, COEUR

D’ALENE TRIBE OF IDAHO

Ms. FAST-HORSE. Good morning, Mr. Vice Chairman Inouye and

Senator Conrad.

My name is Valerie Fast-Horse. I am the Director of the MIS Department for the Coeur d’Alene Tribe. I serve as Cochair of the

Telecommunications and Utilities Committee of the Affiliated

Tribes of Northwest Indians. I would also like to insert that I, too,

am a veteran of the U.S. Army and served in Desert Storm, and

I have really been pleased to hear the testimony and the tributes

to veterans this morning in this room.

On behalf of the Affiliated Tribes, I am pleased to present testimony today regarding the work of ATNI and how we have been

able to address the telecommunications needs of our member

tribes. While our written testimony provides greater detail about

ATNI and the challenges we face, in this morning’s testimony I

want to highlight some of the positive steps being taken to overcome these challenges.

First, it is important to outline the framework from which we operate. When we speak to the issues of the digital divide, we see

four divides and not one. The four divides are in the areas of transport, distribution, access and content. In order to begin to break

these barriers, ATNI developed the Tribal Technologies Project.

This project is a giant leap forward for many tribes. Most of our

tribes do not have the resources, financial or human, to fully utilize

and maintain the technology needed to succeed and prosper in the

information age. The Tribal Technologies Project is designed to fill

that gap by providing technical assistance to tribes through a

structured planning process. The work is accomplished within the

framework of formal invitations to ATNI EDC, conveyed through

tribal council resolutions. These resolutions authorize the tribal

technology team to work with local advisory boards and project

staff, describes the tribal resources that are there to support the

project activities, provides a time frame to complete the work, and

specifies expected results from the assessments.

Current initiatives being done within this framework in the

Northwest, which we hope will serve as models for other ATNI

tribes, includes the following. First, the Makah Tribal Portal Initiative. We see this initiative as a comprehensive solution that addresses both the content and the access issues in the Makah tribal

community. The Makah Tribe is the most remote tribe of ATNI. It
39

is located in Neah Bay in the Northwestern Olympic Peninsula in

Washington. The concept is to create locally controlled content and

to provide local services as a gateway to the Internet. The use of

electronic documents and messaging boards among the households

will be used to enhance tribal communications. The development

and archiving of cultural content will enhance the use of cultural

resources for the tribe. Local news, weather, sports and a local

market trading area on the site will increase use and penetration

of the technology in many tribal members homes. Because more

households have TV’s than PC’s, the use of set-top devices for TV

owners is being tested to increase access to the tribal portal. Another program that is being carried out by ATNI is the Tribal Telephone Outreach Program. This program was developed to address

the access issue. It has two outreach advocates who provide training to tribes on telecommunication issues. This includes training on

the Lifeline and LinkUp Programs for tribal lands and consumer

rights issues. In addition, they have also impacted policy at the

local, State and Federal levels. Through written and verbal testimony to the Public Utility Commission, they have contributed to

the change of consumer laws in the State of Washington. These

changes will make it easier for low-income families to reestablish

phone service when old phone debt is an issue, and will protect the

rights to privacy for all consumers.

In addition to their outreach work, they also serve on the SEC

Consumer Advisory Committee as well. We believe this program is

an excellent model that could be replicated in other areas of Indian

country. Although this program has helped hundreds of families, it

is in serious jeopardy now due to lack of funding.

Another initiative I would like to outline is the Tribal Teleport

Initiative. This initiative addresses both distributive and transport

issues. The Lower Elwha Tribe acquired property which contains a

300-foot microwave tower and facility. The facilities are part of the

old Cold War Alaska Communication System. ATNI is cooperating

with Lower Elwha and five other Olympic Peninsula tribes, including Makah, to convert the microwave facility into a teleport site.

This site will link the tribes to an open access backbone, NoaNet,

through a point of presence owned by the S’Klallam County PUD.

There will be a fiber link from the S’Klallam County POP to the

Lower Elwha tower. The circuit will then be transmitted to participating communities. The Makah Tribe and others will have a wireless point of presence built that will receive the signal and redistribute it to the end-users PC’s and set-top devices. This will allow

cost-effective access to be established. The tribes will operate as the

content experts and the ISP for the system. Subscribers will pay

for their connection at a wholesale rate, plus capital costs and

transportation costs estimate to be around $25 per month for the

equivalent of a fractional T–1 line.

The last initiative I would like to outline is the Coeur d’Alene

Tribe Broadband Initiative. This is a project that is designed to address the transport, distribution, access and content issues on the

Coeur d’Alene Reservation. The tribe was recently awarded a $2.78

million community broadband grant from the USDA Rural Utilities

Service. Through this grant, the tribe will build a state-of-the-art

Tribal Community Technology Center and deploy a wireless
40

broadband transmission system that will be adequate enough to

support the tribal government, public safety personnel, medical facilities, educational institutes, new development and reservation

communities. In addition to providing access to free broadband, the

Technology Center will serve other purposes as well. We plan to

use the center for the tribe’s higher education, career renewal and

workforce training needs. We have been collaborating with North

Idaho College to bring instructor-led courses, online courses and

interactive video conferencing courses to the Center. The Center

will also be a focal point for e-government activities. We are currently developing a Web portal that integrates government and culturally relevant content together in order to attract users to the

Center.

These initiatives represent what ATNI hopes will be a locally empowering solution addressing all of the digital divides in Northwest

Indian country. However, in order to continue along this positive

path, ATNI also offers the following recommendations.

No. 1, support open access backbones for rural America, such as

the Northwest Open Access Network, NoaNet, throughout the

United States. The presence of these backbones are similar to the

public interstate highway system that links our great Nation together. A fair and equitable subscriber system could support the

development of these systems and the interconnect costs to remote

communities to be served by them.

No. 2, support landing rights for World Trade Organization telecommunications satellite transponders for Indian country and other

underserved rural areas. Intelsat, Telesat Canada, and other systems are capable of serving domestic U.S. markets. These systems

could provide redundancy, links to peering services and signal repeating services for remote networks.

No. 3, continue funding and supporting programs such as the

Technologies Opportunities Program under the Department of

Commerce, and the multiple programs supported through the

Rural Utilities Service—projects such as the Teleport project and

the Coeur d’Alene Tribe’s broadband project simply would not exist

without programs like these. RUS provides critical support for

tribes. However, the corporate culture at RUS is driven by the utility power and telephone sector. While RUS does excellent work in

rural America, there is a need for linking the operations of this corporate culture with the trust responsibility to Indian tribes. On

that note, it is ATNI’s position that there should be an Indian Desk

at RUS.

We also advocate support for the Economic Development Administration. EDA has been a dependable friend of rural America and

Indian country throughout the years. EDA is a public partner in

the assessment work currently being conducted by ATNI EDC.

These programs provide important investment funding for public

projects that help build the capacity of our Nations. However, we

are finding out that much more work still needs to be done.

No. 4, in particular we are requesting the support of this committee for a proposed congressionally sponsored appropriation specifically targeting the work of the Northwest Tribes, which is intended

to support projects much like those described earlier throughout

Northwest Indian country. This funding would dovetail the assess-
41

ment and planning work being sponsored by private foundations in

the Northwest over the next 24 months.

Finally, in relation to homeland security, we urge this committee

to be mindful of the unique opportunity for Indian country to support the security of our Nation. Indian nations are often inholders

within the vast tracts of wilderness and federally managed areas

that are potentially vulnerable to infiltration by terrorists, smugglers, and other criminal agents. We are co-managers with Federal

agencies in many areas, including fisheries, water resources and

environmental management. Native Alaskans served on the technological front lines of America’s Cold War, engineering and operating the district early warning sites along coastal Alaska. Native

Americans have served this Nation with distinction when called

upon to do so. In this context, the Cold War era microwave tower

at Lower Elwha closes that loop of history in these challenging

times. When this remnant of the Cold War is converted for peaceful

uses of our tribes, it may yet perhaps be a service to the domestic

security of our Nation. The Office of Homeland Security does recognize the government-to-government relationship between the

United States and federally recognized tribes. In this connection,

we urge the committee to ensure that there will be a strong role

for tribes as that office shapes its strategic thinking and the deployment of our Nation’s security resources.

Thank you for this opportunity to come before the committee and

thank you for your diligence on behalf of the Northwest Tribes.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Fast-Horse appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Ms. Fast-Horse. In your

closing remarks, you mentioned the Tribal Teleport Initiative. I believe you have an application with the Commerce Department’s

TOP program? I am certain you have heard that the Commerce Department and the President do not recommend funding for this program. Do you have any alternative sources for funding?

Ms. FAST-HORSE. I am sorry. I am not sure that—it seems to me

like the only alternative sources we have in Indian country are the

philanthropic efforts of private foundations, but that takes a lot of

work in educating them in what the issues are to Indian country.

I do not know. I am not sure what other—— Senator INOUYE. In other words, this committee must do something to overcome the President’s proposal.

Ms. FAST-HORSE. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. We will do our best.

Ms. FAST-HORSE. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Your statement has been extremely helpful. We

will be sending you questions, if we may, on other specifics.

Ms. FAST-HORSE. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. You are doing a good job there, and incidentally

my first visit to a tribe as chairman of this committee was a visit

to Makah.

Ms. FAST-HORSE. You are aware of the remoteness of the Makah

Nation.

Senator INOUYE. It was not one of my most pleasant, because— [Laughter.]

I was in an aircraft in a storm, and they have an air base about

the size of this room. [Laughter.]
42

But I landed. We left the Makah reservation by car. [Laughter.]

Senator INOUYE. It is safer that way.

Do you have any questions?

Senator CONRAD. No additional questions, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to just say a word of thanks to you for, first 1, your

holding this hearing, along with Chairman Campbell, and most of

all your extraordinary patience and willingness to listen. It is deeply appreciated throughout Indian country.

Senator INOUYE. You are very kind. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Dr. Monette. And now our next panel is:

Cora Whiting-Hildebrand, member of the Oglala Sioux Tribal

Council of Pine Ridge, SD; the vice president of Regulatory Affairs

of the Western Wireless Corporation of Bellevue, Washington, Gene

Dejordy.

Ms. Whiting.

STATEMENT OF CORA WHITING-HILDEBRAND, OGLALA SIOUX

TRIBAL COUNCIL MEMBER

Ms. WHITING-HILDEBRAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My name is Cora Whiting-Hildebrand. I am a member of the Oglala Lakota Tribal Council. On behalf of President Yellow Bird

Steele, the Oglala Lakota Tribal Council and the Oglala Lakota

people that we serve, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before

you today. We have a good story to tell here. I submitted testimony

for the record and I will summarize.

Reliable and affordable telephone service is essential for all

Americans, including those Americans on the Pine Ridge Reservation. Eighteen months ago, only 30 percent of the homes on our reservation had telephones. This service was wireline and the provider

did not make the reservation-based consumers aware of Lifeline or

LinkUp assistance available to them. At $38 a month for basic

services, with an average reservation household yearly income of

$3,500, this meant 13 percent of the average household income was

spent just to have a phone line. In other words, if a family in Toledo was making a household income of $40,000, by comparison

they would be paying $433 a month for basic service. We are happy

with Western Wireless and the competition. It is good to have

LinkUp and Enhanced Lifeline universal service fund access. Ninety-nine percent of the Western Wireless subscribers on our reservation qualify.

Next, Congress and the FCC must respect our sovereign authority. We know our need. We know our numbers. We know ourselves.

We do not trust with good cause that our use of Lifeline and LinkUp assistance would have occurred without the competition created

by Western Wireless Services. We would appreciate advice and assistance from the appropriate parties in educating ourselves about

wise and responsible use of our regulatory, financial and service

options.

In conclusion, the Oglala Lakota people are happy with Western

Wireless service. We know that without Western Wireless having

eligible telecommunication carrier status, our mutually beneficial

services would not have been possible. Before I finish, I want to

give you an example of why the Oglala people are happy with

Western Wireless. There are two sisters who live in my district,
43

which is the Pejuta Haka District. They live about 20 miles out of

town, right on the edge of the Badlands. They each have their own

little one-bedroom houses. They have no electricity, no running

water, and they use wood stoves to heat and cook. They have one

old pick-up that they share. They use to haul wood and everything.

They have never had a telephone in their whole lives. But now,

they both have cell phones due to Western Wireless, and that keeps

them connected to their doctors, to their family, to the tribal government, and it gives them 9–1–1 access if they ever happen to

need it.

With that, I would like to say thank you for allowing me this opportunity, and I will be happy to answer your questions if I can.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Whiting-Hildebrand appears in

apppendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Ms. Whiting, I thank you very much for your

testimony. It has been extremely helpful.

May I now recognize the gentleman from South Dakota, Senator

Johnson.

STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM

SOUTH DAKOTA

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator Inouye. Unfortunately, I

have been tied up with an Appropriations Committee hearing this

morning. We are dealing with a lot of rural issues in that regard,

so I had to excuse myself from here. But I did want to make a particular point of dropping by this morning to welcome Councilwoman Cora Whiting-Hildebrand to the Indian Affairs Committee.

Cora is one of nine councilwoman, now one-half of the Oglala Sioux

Tribe Council on the Pine Ridge, and providing extraordinary new

leadership for the OST. I am just so very pleased that she could

join us here to share insights that she has relative to telecommunications. Cora wears a lot of hats. She provides leadership in many

different respects, but in this particular one I appreciate all that

she does relative to telecommunications in our part of the country.

Particularly in Indian country, telecommunications is not a luxury.

It is not just a matter of economic opportunity. It is a matter of

public safety. So it is so important that we have high quality, affordable, reliable telecommunications capabilities in Indian country. I have a very high regard for Councilwoman WhitingHildebrand’s experience, her insights on what has worked well and

what has not worked well on the Pine Ridge, and I am grateful for

her leadership. I just wanted to make a special personal welcome

to her. I saw her the other day at a committee hearing as well, but

I did want to stop into this hearing to express my thanks for her

leadership on the telecommunications issues in particular.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator INOUYE. What can I say beyond that? Thank you very

much.

Mr. Dejordy, I do not think you need to testify. She has done it

for you. [Laughter.]
44

STATEMENT OF GENE DEJORDY, VICE PRESIDENT,

REGULATORY AFFAIRS, WESTERN WIRELESS CORPORATION

Mr. DEJORDY. No kidding. I do not know what else to say here.

But Senator Inouye, Senator Johnson, I appreciate the opportunity

to appear before the committee and further expand upon Cora’s

statements with respect to Pine Ridge.

I think what is noteworthy is that Pine Ridge is an exciting and

real-world story of how we can bridge the telephone divide as well

as the digital divide in Indian country. What it represents is how

a tribe and a private sector company can work together for the benefit of Native Americans, and how government can make a difference in the lives of tribal members on reservations, as well as

the value of a competitive universal service system and how it

translates into significant consumer benefits.

Let me just briefly touch upon each one of those subjects. In

terms of the tribal and private sector cooperation that took place

here, it all started several years ago with a vision by the Oglala

Lakota Tribe that they wanted to enhance their lives, they wanted

a better telecommunications system. And together, Western Wireless and the Oglala Lakota Tribe worked to address those issues.

We put aside any preconceived notions of how the system should

work, how the arrangement should be structured. We sat down

with each other and tried to work out what would be the best arrangement for both the tribe and for Western Wireless. In the end,

that culminated in the Tate Woglaka service agreement, which we

had a signing ceremony here several years ago before you, Senator

Inouye.

I think it is important to recognize that every tribe and their

telecommunications needs are potentially unique and may require

a different solution. There are tribally owned telephone companies

that are doing a very good job; there are some telephone companies

that are not from reservations and are serving reservations. And

then there are some tribes like the Oglala Lakota Tribe who have

developed a cooperative arrangement with Western Wireless, and

that has served their needs well. The point, I think, is that the

tribes should decide which approach best meets their needs and be

able to count on the government and the private sector to assist

them. That is what we tried to do in this arrangement here.

Next, I would like to just touch upon how the Government can

make a difference. The Pine Ridge story would not have been possible but for the FCC assuming jurisdiction in granting ETC status

to Western Wireless for the purposes of universal service on the

reservation itself. Universal service was the form of funding that

was available to us to build out the network and the infrastructure

on the reservation, which prior to us doing that there essentially

was no wireless services on the reservation and very little wireline

service.

This raises, however, an important issue that needs to be resolved. Currently, the law is not entirely clear as to whether the

FCC or the State commissions have jurisdiction over the designation of eligible carriers on reservations. In the Pine Ridge case, the

FCC did a commendable job in resolving the jurisdictional issue in

expeditiously granting ETC status within nine months. In our experience with being an ETC in 14 States and on the Pine Ridge
45

Reservation, that was the quickest process that unfolded in getting

us into the market.

However, the jurisdictional uncertainty in the regulatory process

can and does create a barrier to competitive carriers seeking to obtain ETC status on reservations. Therefore, we would recommend

that there be some clarity to the section 214(e)(6) process that

makes it clear that the FCC, in consultation with the tribes, has

the authority and the jurisdiction to address ETC applications on

reservations. What I would like to stress is that Western Wireless

agrees that tribal support for an ETC application should continue

to be a prerequisite to any carrier seeking to provide service on the

reservations, whether that is a competitive carrier such as ourselves or the incumbent carrier. That is certainly what we did in

this process before we even tried to obtain eligible status on the

Pine Ridge Reservation. We worked with the tribe and obtained

their full consent, as well as subjected ourselves to the jurisdiction

of the tribe in terms of addressing service-related issues that may

arise.

The next point I would like to address is really the value of competitive universal service on Pine Ridge. The importance of this

form of funding that is available to most tribal-owned telephone

companies, as well as competitive carriers who want to serve reservations. It is really the mechanism that is in place for companies

like Western Wireless to obtain the funding necessary to build out

an infrastructure and serve the reservation. Prior to our entry into

this agreement with the tribe, we had one antenna tower that partially served the reservation, and then after we entered into this

agreement, we constructed three additional towers on the reservation and essentially have ubiquitous service throughout the reservation. Recently, it has come to our attention there are some

areas of the reservation where there are gaps in coverage, and we

are addressing that issue by constructing additional antenna facilities on the reservation.

As Cora mentioned in her testimony, prior to our entry into the

market, telephone penetration rates were about 32 percent. It took

long-distance calling to call many communities from within the reservation, from one community to the another community on a reservation. The incumbent telephone company was not terribly responsive to the needs of the tribal members, as Cora mentioned.

After Western Wireless entered into the market, the penetration

rate has now increased to approximately 70 percent, if not more.

We have implemented local calling area for the entire reservation,

as well as Rapid City. All of this was very much based on us sitting

down with the tribe and identifying what their needs were and implementing a system that addressed their needs. I think oftentimes, a telephone company which could be competitive carriers,

they may enter a reservation and may not necessarily consult the

tribal government to determine what the reservation needs were.

That is not what we did, and I think in the end the tribal citizens

are better off for it. They have 9–1–1 service today. In fact, they

have a more responsive incumbent telephone company. So it is not

just us that providing our service on the reservation, but it is also

true that the incumbent service provider that has gotten better at

what it is doing.
46

In sum, I would just like to stress that Pine Ridge is a success

story. I think it can be duplicated with the right Government policies. I thank you for the opportunity to testify.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Dejordy appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

In prior testimony by other witnesses, they noted that the designation process for ETCs may be very difficult, but you found

yours to be rather expeditious and easy.

Mr. DEJORDY. Yes.

Senator INOUYE. To what do you account for the difference? The

others were tribal organizations. Would you say they were lacking

in experience?

Mr. DEJORDY. This is the FCC? Yes, that was a big issue when

we first presented the application. The threshold question that the

FCC has to answer is whether they have jurisdiction. There is a

question in the FCC’s mind as to whether they have jurisdiction

over a carrier that would seek to be an ETC just on the reservation, not counting areas outside of the reservation. The FCC has

developed a legal process that they would undergo to determine

whether they have jurisdiction. It is not entirely clear what the

outcome would be of that jurisdictional analysis. In the context of

Pine Ridge, it worked out, but it was a very painful process that,

to the FCC’s credit they went through it incredibly quickly and did

it at the same time that they granted our ETC application. But I

do not anticipate that that is the normal course of events, so when

I suggest that there is clarification to the 214(e)(6) process, I think

that would solidify the FCCs jurisdiction and then they would not

have to undergo an jurisdictional analysis to decide if they even

want to hear the application.

Senator INOUYE. We will look at your recommendations and I

think we can work out something.

Senator Johnson.

Senator JOHNSON. Just briefly, Councilwoman WhitingHildebrand—I am not supposed to say Cora, I guess, here in a formal setting—but one of the facts of life across much of the most

rural parts of South Dakota, as you well know, is that cell phone

coverage, we have a lot of gaps in places where there just is not

a signal. Do you feel pretty comfortable that we are making good

progress in the Pine Ridge in filling in those gaps so we have a

very continuous level of coverage no matter where you might be on

the Pine Ridge?

Ms. WHITING-HILDEBRAND. Yes; they work pretty much all over

the reservation, and actually I have a cell phone with Cellular One

out of Rapid City, and my husband has a cell phone through Western Wireless. His phone works in more areas than my phone will.

The only place that neither of our phones will work is in Yellow

Bear Canyon, and probably because it is in a canyon.

Senator JOHNSON. Well, you get in a canyon, yes, you get into the

Black Hills or into some of those canyons and you are going to have

some trouble, no doubt. But you feel, particularly because of our

concern about 9–1–1 signals and things like that, it is important

that people can be sure that their signal can get across.

That brings me to the other point. When we began to adopt 9–

1–1 through South Dakota through a lot of our rural areas, one of
47

the first issues we had to deal with is an awful lot of people did

not really have an address per se. As we went through voter registration and so on on the Pine Ridge last year, we discovered that

was one of the hurdles we had to kind of get over because a lot of

people had a box number, but not really an identifiable location

number. How are we dealing with that on the Pine Ridge so that

the 9–1–1 really works so we can get rescue help to people when

they really need it?

Ms. WHITING-HILDEBRAND. Well, our dispatchers and our emergency service people, the ambulance drivers and police officers,

they have maps posted and they go by BIA highway numbers, and

just basically landmarks of where people live. After an officer has

worked in the district for awhile, they usually figure out where

people live.

Senator JOHNSON. There is nothing quite like using local people

and people who are familiar with the communities to really make

that work. I think that is interesting. I really commend the tribe

for what it has done. I think that is a huge new enhancement of

safety and quality of life for a lot of people to have that option in

the event that they have got anything from a car accident to a

heart attack that they can get immediate attention.

I appreciate your observations as well that this is not just a matter of technology. It is also a matter of implementing technology in

a way that honors the sovereignty of the tribe, and it is done in

a very closely consultative manner. I wish that all the things the

Government did was as consultative, but I applaud your work in

that regard.

With that, Mr. Chairman, that is all the questions that I have.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much. I would like to thank

Cora Whiting-Hildebrand, and Mr. Dejordy—thank you very much.

Ms. WHITING-HILDEBRAND. Thank you.

Mr. DEJORDY. Thank you very much.

Senator INOUYE. And now the final panel: the managing director

and vice president of Privacy Council Inc. of Washington, Roanne

Robinson Shaddox; the CEO and general counsel of the Montana

Independent Telecommunications Systems, Mike Strand; the chief

information officer of the Tohono O’Odham Nation—executive

branch, Ben H. Standifer, Jr.

Ms. Shaddox.

STATEMENT OF ROANNE ROBINSON SHADDOX, SENIOR

ADVISOR/EXTERNAL RELATIONS, PRIVACY COUNCIL

Ms. SHADDOX. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman Inouye and distinguished tribal leaders and guests.

My name is Roanne Robinson Shaddox, and I am managing director and vice president of the Privacy Council, and the former

chief of staff of the National Telecommunications and Information

Administration. I am also a founding board member of the Native

Networking Policy Center and a member of the Hopi Tribe of Arizona.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide my personal observations on the important role of the Federal Government in addressing telecommunication needs in Indian country. During my 6 years

with NTIA, I primarily worked on efforts to close the digital divide.
48

As the most senior Native American involved in telecommunications policy development for the Clinton administration, I tried

to ensure that Indian country was included in these important efforts.

At the outset, a key priority was educating Federal officials

about the need in Indian country and bringing tribes and tribal organizations into the fast-moving telecommunications debate. Toward that end, we held the first of a series of public field hearings

in Albuquerque, NM so that senior Commerce, NTIA and FCC officials could learn first-hand about the lack of service on tribal lands.

For many people, they had never heard that tribes and Indian people did not have phone service, so it was very educational.

We also successfully pushed for the appointment of a Native

American to the first White House National Information Infrastructure Advisory Council that, too, held a hearing focused on Native

issues. In addition, we worked to increase tribal access and awareness about the TOP program that you have heard a lot about

today, and alerted the BIA officials about the new e-rate program

which today is credited for connecting most BIA schools to the

Internet.

We also prominently highlighted Native issues at our major conferences on universal service, which further helped to bring the

issue of the digital divide to the mainstream attention. Most notable, however, were our efforts to include data on the status of Native American household connectivity in our landmark Falling

Through the Net reports. These reports received widespread national media attention, and with the President’s call to action,

helped to spur a wide range of public and private sector initiatives,

including those by AOL, Microsoft and others, that helped to target

the Indian communities’ needs. I think these efforts also should be

credited for helping to finally spur the FCC into action, which up

to that point had not paid much attention to Indian issues.

As a small agency, we had very few resources in which to do this.

However, I mention these accomplishments because they demonstrate the powerful role that the Federal Government can play

on issues of national importance. As tribes transition into the digital age, we need the Federal Government to continue to help in

several important ways. Policy advocacy is one of those. With the

rapidly changing telecommunications policy landscape, now more

than ever tribes need an advocate within the Executive Branch to

ensure that their voice is heard in major policy debates when possible ideas to create an office within NTIA or even to reestablish

the Department of Commerce Indian Desk to monitor and advocate

tribal interests on a wide range of policy issues, both inside and

outside the agency.

There are several such hot issues today, ongoing debates about

universal service, broadband deployment, wireless and unlicensed

wireless technologies, and the future of radio spectrum management. We also know that with the move to e-government, issues

such as privacy and security in the online environment are going

to be very important to tribal communities.

We also need more Federal coordination. I think that we all

know that. This is needed to improve tribal investments or Federal

investments on tribal land. These existing projects that occur today
49

throughout all the Federal agencies with all these different programs need to be further examined, better coordinated, and we

need further information about them so that this information can

be widely shared to avoid other agencies; reinventing the wheel.

For example, I recently heard that over at HHS the Public Health

Service is making Internet access in their clinics a number one priority, and how is this type of initiative being rolled out and going

to impact other projects that might be going on over at IHS?

As you have heard overwhelmingly today, the Federal Government must continue to provide funds for tribal connectivity efforts.

Programs such as TOP must be retained and fully funded to meet

the strong demand not only from tribes, but from States, universities and other nonprofits. As we have heard today, TOP has

played an important role in bringing these technologies to tribal

communities, and can also play a very important role as these communities look to improve emergency communications in response to

the war on terrorism.

Also, as you have heard today, besides NTIA’s TOP program,

there is the PTFP program. There is also EDA’s technical assistance and public works programs, and the Department of Education’s CTC programs. I respectfully disagree with the Bush administration in thinking that these programs, specifically CTC and

PTFP and TOP, have exceeded or met their mission. I think the

need has been very well established today that these programs

need to be retained and fully funded.

I think these programs also become vitally important as we look

at the FCC’s June 2 vote on media concentration. The argument

has been made that with the advent of the Internet and access to

those technologies that why do we need to have diversity of media

ownership. So I think if we are going to be in a world of further

concentration, that having access to other alternative resources or

sources for news and information on local events is very important

for tribal communities.

The guidelines and requirements for these programs should be

periodically reviewed to make sure that they do not impede tribal

participation, and timely reports very much need to be published

on these projects, especially those that can serve as other models.

We have also heard a lot about data collection. I cannot underscore

the importance of the Federal Government engaging more and getting good baseline data for our communities. Only through good

baseline data are we going to know how to best target policies and

programs that can serve the needs on tribal lands. I believe that

increased funding actually may be required for NTIA’s next Nation

Online survey to ensure that reservation households are adequately addressed in that data collection effort.

I think finally what we have also heard a lot about today is that

the FCC continues to need to build and strengthen their relationship with tribes and tribal organizations. Although tribes are on

their way toward building a solid dialog with the FCC, we have

many, many tribal communities that do not have the resources or

expertise or the time to engage in formal Commission proceedings.

My fear is that this could be misconstrued that tribes either are

not interested or that they are not affected by all the issues that

are before the FCC today. So the FCC should be encouraged to con-
50

tinue its dialog with tribes and find new ways to ensure that tribal

views are heard and addressed at all levels, particularly on these

tough jurisdictional issues.

Moreover, the FCC should dedicate more resources to do effective

consultation, enforce the universal service and build-out requirements of telecommunication providers that serve tribal lands, as

well as to perform further outreach to Native American consumers

about the Lifeline and LinkUp Programs, among other things. I

also think the letter that Senators Daschle and Johnson and Baucus sent to the FCC recently asking them about these types of activities is very important in terms of seeing more oversight of these

programs. They need to know that you are interested and that you

care, and certainly this hearing today does that.

In conclusion, the Federal Government must continue to play a

strong role in support of tribal connectivity efforts. I urge the committee to take the steps necessary to protect and promote Federal

programs and policies that best address the communication needs

in Indian country. Only through your leadership will our communities soon enjoy true universal service and the wide range of benefits that come with today’s technologies.

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to your questions.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Shaddox appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Ms. Shaddox. I was just

reminded that on my visit to the Hopi Nation, I met your mother,

Mrs. Robinson.

Ms. SHADDOX. Thank you. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. You have had experience with NTIA. At the

present time, do the Native Americans have any voice in the activities of NTIA?

Ms. SHADDOX. Unfortunately, I think very little today. I do not

think it is a lack of interest as much as that it is a very small

agency with very limited resources. Unless you have somebody

there all the time basically nagging them about Indian issues, it is

very easy to get caught up in some of the big debates that are

being driven by much larger interests and lobbies. I think that is

why, I know when I was there a lot of my work was just going and

trying to educate—who are Indians, that they do exist, about the

government-to-government relationship, and then educating them,

trying to get good information to them about the status of access.

I think everybody in this room who encounters folks at these agencies or working with the larger non-Indian community, you find

most people today still do not know that there are a lot of folks

that do not have a basic telephone in their households. So the education process has to be continuous. We tried to, and we did successfully get an Indian desk in the Office of the Secretary. That unfortunately no longer exists. I think as we have heard at other

agencies, it takes someone in there working day to day, side by side

with these professionals to keep Indian interests at the forefront.

Senator INOUYE. Does the White House have any Indian voice?

Ms. SHADDOX. Not to my knowledge. I believe there is somebody

in that area responsible for Indian affairs. My guess it is in the

intergovernmental affairs area of the White House, but I have not

heard of any major outreach.
51

Senator INOUYE. Do you believe that the so-called consultation

carried out by Federal agencies with Indian country meet the intent of the law?

Ms. SHADDOX. I am not sure exactly which law. I do not think

it meets the intent of the full trust responsibility in governmentto-government relationships. As we all know, consultation is an extraordinarily difficult process to do, particularly if you do not have

any resources to conduct that. I think that is why a lot of agencies

turn to organizations like NCAI, hopefully the National Tribal

Telephone Alliance and others, to get the word out about programs

and issues, and to get feedback. I think if you look at the BIA’s

consultation policy, it looks great on paper, but trying to execute

that without significant resources to do so is difficult. Then, we are

hindered by the fact that only until recently have all the tribes actually gotten fax machines. So if you want to alert them to information that they may have an interest in, we have gotten to that

point. We need to get tribes and communities connected so it can

be a seamless instantaneous communication process back and

forth.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Ms. Shaddox.

Mr. Strand.

STATEMENT OF MIKE STRAND, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND GENERAL COUNSEL, MONTANA INDEPENDENT TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS

Mr. STRAND. Good afternoon, Vice Chairman Inouye. Thank you

very much for having me. For the record, my name is Mike Strand.

I am the CEO and General Counsel for Montana Independent Telecommunications Systems, that represents telephone cooperatives

operating across Montana. I am also the CEO and General Counsel

for an organization called iConnect Montana that builds neutral colocation facilities and data centers across Montana. I am a member

of the Governor’s blue ribbon Telecommunications Task Force, a

long-time member of the 9–1–1 Advisory Council and a founding

board member of the Yellowstone Regional Internet Exchange,

which provides the only Internet peering point in the Great Plains

region.

I would like to thank the committee for allowing me this time to

offer my observations with respect to basic and advanced telecommunications services to Native Americans. I represent seven

small telephone companies operating in Montana. They range in

size from about 1,600 lines to about 10,000 lines. Their service

areas include all or part of five reservations—Fort Peck, Fort

Belknap, Rocky Boy, Blackfeet, and Crow. These rural telephone

companies are not tribally owned. However, several of them are cooperatives, so their subscribers on the reservation are owners of

the cooperatives, along with the other cooperative members.

While the policy of the companies I represent is to offer the same

quality of service on reservations as we do off the reservations, it

is nonetheless true that the reservation areas pose a number of

unique challenges to our operations. First, our most current information is that the average per capita income on the reservations

we serve is less than $10,000 per year, and unemployment is often

greater than 30 percent. The Enhanced Lifeline Program that
52

makes local service available for $1 per month helps the poorest

get service, but most still have difficulty paying long distance

charges or paying for more advanced telecommunication services

like high-speed Internet access.

Second, many residents, particularly among the elderly, speak

primarily in their Native language and we cannot assume fluency

in English. This creates certain challenges from a customer service

standpoint. Third, there is often a pervasive mistrust of programs

and projects offered on the reservation by non–Indians. Therefore,

we have met some initial resistance even to programs like the Enhanced Lifeline Program I mentioned earlier. And then fourth, finally and perhaps most importantly, we acquired much of the reservation areas we serve from the local Bell company in 1994. When

we acquired those areas, we found that the telecommunications facilities were antiquated, lacked adequate capacity to handle calling

volumes, and had not been deployed to many homes or businesses.

Therefore, subscribership among Native Americans in those areas

was as low as 50 percent at the time we acquired them.

Faced with these challenges, we were forced to come up with a

number of different strategies to improve service and boost

subscribership. I would like to outline some of these strategies for

the committee because I think they are instructive for any company, tribal or otherwise, seeking to improve service in reservation

areas. Then I would like to identify three areas in which we believe

further improvements can be made.

The example I will use is Project Telephone Company, which

serves most of the Crow Indian Reservation in Southeast Montana.

Project’s experience is representative of the experiences of the other

companies I represent. Our first challenge upon acquiring the Bell

company’s facilities on the Crow Reservation was to reengineer the

physical telecommunications network so that it was not only capable of serving all of the residents, but also capable of providing the

full range of basic and advanced telecommunications service. We

found that the calling traffic capacity of the Bell company’s old copper lines was exhausted in many areas, and that switching equipment was old analog equipment. There was no way for us to improve subscribership without installing new copper lines with

greater capacity, as well as a certain amount of fiber optic cable to

handle increased calling traffic. Further, there was no way for us

to offer advanced services like high-speed Internet access, voice

mail, caller ID, call waiting, call forwarding, et cetera, without converting the antiquated switching equipment to digital equipment.

This required an investment of over $2 million on top of the price

we had to pay for the Bell company system.

The reason I emphasize this point is that those companies, tribal

or otherwise, must identify who they intend to serve, where those

people are located, as they construct their networks and their capacity in order to adequately handle calling volumes. Further, they

need to identify up front what kinds of services they intend to offer,

so the correct technology platform is built that can deliver those

services. We intended to offer not just voice services, but also highspeed Internet and video conferencing services to the Crow, so we

upgraded using wireline technology, fiber optic technology, coupled

with digital switching.
53

In addition to the Bell company’s facilities being antiquated, they

simply did not reach a large segment of the population. Our understanding was that the Bell company’s construction policy required

a substantial financial contribution from the individual customers

before lines would be installed to their homes or businesses. We

were told that many customers did not have service because they

could not afford to pay the thousands of dollars the Bell company

demanded in construction assistance before it would install phone

lines to rural customers. To boost subscribership, we established a

policy under which any customer that was within one mile of our

lines could get service without construction charges. Nearly every

resident of the reservation was within this distance, so construction

charges pretty much became a non-issue. In order to address the

language and suspicion barriers, we hired Crow-speaking customer

service representatives and field technicians to do our hookups. We

also appointed a tribal member to our board of directors to help determine tribal policy.

While all of the measures I mentioned boosted overall

subscribership, we found that we were seeing a significant number

of reservation residents dropping service due to an inability to pay

long distance charges. At the time we acquired the reservation

areas, calls between the telephone exchanges on the reservation

and between the reservation exchanges and the nearest large community were long distance charges. So for that reason, we petitioned the Montana Public Utility Commission to expand the local

calling area so that all the exchanges on the reservation could call

each other as local calls and not toll calls, and so they could also

call the nearest large community as a local call without toll

charges. Although that process was long, as regulatory processes

often are, and it took us almost two years to accomplish this, we

were successful, and now calls between all of the reservation communities and the largest city in Montana are local toll-free calls.

As the 2000 census shows, all of these efforts enabled us to boost

subscribership among the Crow from around 50 percent to 87 percent. Our subscribership has continued to grow since 2000 due in

no small part to the Enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp programs that

make local service available to qualifying Native Americans for a

dollar per month. We advertise the programs very aggressively on

the Crow Reservation, and our customer service representatives

contacted individual residents on a house-to-house basis to foster

further awareness of the programs. Of the 1,400 residential lines

on the Crow Reservation, 591 or 41.8 percent of the Crow residents

are now on the Enhanced Lifeline Program. We believe that we are

one of the most successful companies in the Nation in promoting

the Enhanced Lifeline Program.

In addition to the improvements to voice services, we also made

dial-up Internet access available to all customers on the Crow Reservation. We have made high-speed Internet access using DSL

technology available to two-thirds of the tribal members. Finally,

we have installed fully interactive video conferencing studios in the

tribal college and in the K through 12 schools, so students are able

to share teaching resources with other schools across the country

and across Montana.
54

All in all, we believe we have made remarkable progress in making available basic and advanced telecommunications services to

the Crow Reservation. However, there are still a few areas that remain troublesome. First, while we have been able to alleviate some

of the problems with long distance charges by expanding the local

calling area, many residents still find themselves with large long

distance bills for calls made to areas outside that local calling area.

When those bills become unaffordable, we find some residents simply disconnect their service. Second, while we have made

broadband access available to the Crow Reservation, we have not

yet seen great demand for those services. In part, we believe this

is because of the economic conditions on the reservation, which

simply prevents people from purchasing the service. We also believe that many residents of the reservation simply do not yet see

why such access is relevant to their day-to-day lives. Our hope is

that young people who use broadband services in the tribal college

and K through 12 schools will over time create greater demand for

similar services in the reservation’s homes and businesses.

Finally, there is a wrinkle in the FCC’s rules regarding the distribution of universal service support for companies serving the

reservations. Currently, if a competitor comes to the Crow Reservation and is designated as an ETC and are able to receive universal

service, that competitor receives funding based not on their own

costs of providing service, but on our costs. This creates a kind of

catch–22 dilemma for us in so far as the more we invest in services

on the Crow Reservation, the more funding becomes available to

our competitors. For the first time, our board of directors and management have to think about how much investment we continue to

make in the reservation when the cost of making those investments

result in greater support to our competitors. This issue is of no

doubt substantial concern not just to us, but to the tribally owned

companies as well because they have the same exposure.

As a final note, I would just like to take a few seconds and read

the penetration numbers for the eight reservations in Montana:

Blackfeet, 89.5 percent; Crow, 87.4 percent; Flathead, 95.9 percent;

Fort Belknap, 89.3 percent; Fort Peck, 92.3 percent; Northern

Cheyenne, 75.4 percent; Rocky Boy, 90.1 percent; Turtle Mountain,

the portion that is in Montana, 94.3 percent. So we certainly appreciate the grave difficulties that many reservations are experiencing

across the country, but we are shocked and dismayed at the 69 percent average and the much lower percentages we hear about, particularly in the desert Southwest. Clearly, those kinds of experiences are completely foreign to us in Montana, and we stand ready

and willing to share our experiences and any advice we can give

folks that are having a more difficult time getting penetration, and

talk about our successes.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Strand appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. With your background and experience, do you

think your involvement in the south might make a difference—a

company of similar background and experience?

Mr. STRAND. In the southern part of the United States, sir? Yes,

I believe that we have made so much effort in boosting penetration

on Indian reservations that I think that we could be of great value
55

to companies in the southwestern part of the United States. Quite

frankly, the cooperative model is a particularly good model for improving subscribership because it gives all of the subscribers—Native American and non–Native American alike—ownership in the

company and a place in determining the policy. So I think that is

a particularly good model.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Strand.

And now may I call upon Mr. Standifer.

STATEMENT OF BEN H. STANDIFER, JR., CHIEF INFORMATION

OFFICER, TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION—EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Mr. STANDIFER. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. I am honored to

present this written testimony to the Senate Committee on Indian

Affairs on behalf of my people of the Tohono O’odham Nation. I

would also like to acknowledge our chief technology officer, who is

with me today. I especially want to thank Senator Inouye for inviting us and allowing us to provide this written testimony on behalf

of the Tohono O’odham Nation.

The hearing being held here is to discuss the status of telecommunications in Indian country. Although I cannot speak on behalf of all Indian country, I do realize that Indian country is faced

with many unique challenges and opportunities to improve the

state of telecommunications on its lands. There are few tribes that

have the opportunity to enmesh their infrastructure with urban

areas, but there are many who are challenged by the rural remoteness of their lands. Indian country has been subjected to the overpopularized term digital divide, where a traditional understanding

of the digital divide as a series of gaps and rates of physical access

to computers and the Internet fail to capture the full picture of the

divide—its stronghold, its educational, social, cultural and economic ramifications.

Events such as September 11 have shifted focus from filling the

divide to securing the divide. As priorities of the Nation change, Indian country is faced with dealing with changes never really quite

conquering the divide. The Tohono O’odham Nation in its best effort in dealing with the divide is now faced with unique challenges

to secure a 75-mile international border with Mexico—a challenge

unique only to the Tohono O’odham Nation, and dealing with the

after-effects of a ‘‘more secure border’’. As Chief Information Officer

of the Tohono O’odham Nation’s Department of Information and

Technology, I can say that the status of telecommunication is inching forward, but there are unique opportunities for gaining access

to funding, interoperability, cost of broadband services, technical

assistance for some projects, and availability of a skilled information technology workforce.

The Tohono O’odham Nation is fortunate to own and operate the

Tohono O’odham Utility Authority, an enterprise that provides

electrical, water, telephone, cellular, Internet and broadband service. This enterprise has been able to provide affordable phone service to over 3,500 homes and businesses on the reservation, and

Internet service to 450 dial-up customers. Its current telecommunications service covers 75 percent of the Nation, and will expand to

95 percent over the next 5 years.
56

The growth of these services are partly due to the National Exchange Carrier Association or NECA pool, but participation in this

pool requires tariffs that regulate charges for telecommunications

services. The charges regulated the tariffs have challenged the development of telecommunications solutions that include the use of

broadband services. The Department of Information and Technology pays costs three to four times more than the average monthly costs of non-rural customers to provide high-speed Internet services. These monthly costs are neither economical or sustainable for

the tribal government, the service departments, and programs. In

a study conducted by NECA in 2002, titled the Middle Mile

Broadband Cost Study, it focused on the costs of transporting

Internet traffic from an Internet service provider operating in a

rural telephone company territory like TOUA, to an Internet backbone provider—this so-called middle mile.

As I quote from the study, the study concludes that without support programs, high-speed Internet connections are not economical

in many rural telephone company territories because serving areas

are located a great distance from the Internet backbone provider.

The study also demonstrates that revenue shortfalls do not just

disappear as the market grows, but actually increases, because operating margins become more negative as customers need higher

data speeds or when serving higher demand levels. This sobering

conclusion suggests that high speed Internet service may not be

sustainable in many rural areas. This is based simply on the economic costs of the telephone company broadband network upgrade

and the need to route traffic over greater distances to reach the

Internet backbone.

This particular anomaly in costs has forced the Tohono O’odham

Nation to leverage wireless solutions for connectivity opportunities,

to reconsider its strategy in servicing programs such as departments and districts, but still challenges TOUA and the Tohono

O’odham Nation to deliver broadband Internet access to all 4,600

miles of its reservation.

The Tohono O’odham Nation, since forming the Department of

Information and Technology, has been challenged with servicing a

need that is greater than its resources. It has realized that effective

tribal community-based planning was necessary to develop a strategic plan that would include the interests of all stakeholders, to

include tribal governments, community college, human service, police department, cultural museums, nursing homes and other services. A winter IT summit was held in 2000 to provide a greet and

meet opportunity for IT professionals who had an interest in the

development of IT initiatives on the Tohono O’odham Nation. What

proceeded were small cell meetings that resolved issues of

connectivity, redundancy and availability. An initiative that the

Tohono O’odham Nation created was standardization of hardware

and software and key application where information could be

shared across departments electronically, standards such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, IEEE, American

National Standards Institute, ANSI, and the Design Criteria

Standard for Electronic Records Management Software Applications, or DOD 5015.2, is providing framework for development.

These standards will create better collaboration with entities that
57

adopt similar standards while safeguarding their integrity. The

Tohono O’odham Community College detailing our communitybased planning process will provide a written testimony to this

committee.

For many years, access to Federal funding has been limited to

tribal governments, mainly by the absence of acknowledgement of

tribal governments and tribal entities eligibility for funding. Many

Federal funding opportunities are written acknowledging State and

local government eligibility, but exclude tribal governments and entities from participating through proposal submission. The addition

of words, tribal government or tribal entities, should be included on

all Federal funding opportunities. This language needs to be added

to the Appropriations Committee or in a bill to include tribal governments and entities.

In his opening statement to this committee in 1996, the Director

of the Indian Health Services said:

We must expand our search for partners in the health care arena. To become

more efficient and effective, we have to look to foundations, universities, independent organizations and others who can assist us in the delivery of care.

This CIO echoes this same sentiment for the future of technology

and telecommunications for the Tohono O’odham Nation. We must

become more effective and efficient and we must look to foundations, universities, corporations and Federal agencies that can assist in the further development of delivery of technology-based solutions. There is need for public-private sector partnership in providing the required infrastructure. Through more funding opportunities, economic and capital investments, research and developmental

projects will allow the furtherance in the development of wireless

infrastructure, health care and public safety initiatives that affect

communities, visitors and Federal workers.

An example of this model that continues to thrive today has been

the collaborative efforts between the Tohono O’odham Nation and

the Department of Homeland Security. The Tohono O’odham Nation shares a 75-mile international border with Mexico where undocumented workers become problematic, incursions from Mexican

Federals; the presence of five Federal agencies, many of which fall

under the Department of Homeland defense; the existing radio infrastructure inadequately covers 70 percent of the large contiguous

land mass; and the Tohono O’odham police and fire department

lack the necessary interoperability with each other and their Federal counterparts.

The Director of Wireless Communications of the Department of

Homeland Defense met with the Tohono O’odham Nation and

pledged his commitment and resources to develop an interim solution to create the interoperability between all public safety agencies, both tribal and Federal. His resources included telecommunications experts from the Secret Service, Border Patrol and Customs, engineers and security analysts to develop an interim solution that would create the much-needed interoperability.

This example is what can happen when the Federal Government

and tribal government commit to solve a problem with the motivation of better serving people and communities. This project delivered an interim interoperability solution within 45 days and began

a long-term commitment between the two governments.
58

Finally, I close with the discussion regarding the need for technical assistance or the higher need of growing your own. The Department of Information and Technology has taken the position of

providing quality services to the Tohono O’odham, but commits its

resources to developing an IT workforce for its membership to support the IT interests today and in the future. In a complex and

sometimes complicated field such as technology, the Tohono

O’odham Nation believes that its members can provide these services, create a skilled IT workforce, and create a real solution that

is best for the interests of the communities, districts and people of

the Tohono O’odham Nation. The gap between the information rich

and the information poor is being reduced by planned projects with

the Tohono O’odham Nation and the community college to establish

community information centers. These centers are to be equipped

with multimedia PCs and relevant software to enable even those

who are illiterate to use computers using icons and the mouse.

The Department of Information and Technology has developed

and outreach program titled Vital Link that provides mentoring

and internships for junior and senior level high school students to

experience a career in the field of technology. Students should be

able to access the Internet in certain learning environments and

use various technologies to display their knowledge. All students

should learn to locate, acquire organize and evaluate information

from a variety of sources, including electronic resources. Our goal

is to influence the decision of our youth to complete high school and

consider a career in technology. Other career programs that have

been instituted internal to DOIT have been the Grow Your Own

program, where technical and some professional staff who have

minimally accomplished an associates degree or applicable experiences are put into a career ladder where they learn while developing their skill sets to provide the function of that position. These

activities are just a few initiatives that are being used to create the

required IT workforce necessary for sustaining the O’odham people.

Consideration of mentoring programs for IT staff with Federal

agencies who can provide additional support, skill sets, and encouragement for O’odham IT workers could be a good opportunity that

will support the efforts of self-determination, because it is not a

hand out, but a hand up.

I am privileged to provide this written testimony to the Senate

committee, and hope that you will consider the challenges and opportunities that rest in Indian country, in particular with the

Tohono O’odham Nation.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Standifer appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much, Mr. Standifer. Your Department of Information Technology has made great progress in

providing telecommunications services to your people. Do you have

any outreach program to share this experience of yours with other

tribes and nations in your vicinity?

Mr. STANDIFER. Our outreach program is about two years old.

We are actually graduating our first year students that came

through our program, so it is still rather new.

Senator INOUYE. Are some from other nations?

Mr. STANDIFER. I am sorry?
59

Senator INOUYE. From other nations?

Mr. STANDIFER. No, sir; from the Tohono O’odham Nation. We

have not yet provided that information to the other tribes, but are

willing to do so.

Senator INOUYE. I think they would be most grateful if you

shared your experience with them.

Mr. STANDIFER. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. I have been advised that there will be a working meeting for those who are interested in participating in room

836 of the Hart Senate Office Building at 2:30 this afternoon. It is

1 hour from now. We would like to invite all of the witnesses who

participated this morning to be there. I think meeting together may

be helpful mutually.

With that, I thank all of you for your participation today. I know

you are hungry, so get to lunch.

Thank you very much.

[Whereupon, at 1:27 p.m., the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

(61)

APPENDIX

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MIKE STRAND, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL

COUNSEL MITS—MONTANA INDEPENDENT TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS

Good Morning. I would like to thank the committee for allowing me this time to

offer my observations with respect to basic and advanced telecommunications services to Native Americans.

I represent seven small rural telephone companies operating in Montana. They

range in size from about 1,600 lines to about 10,000 lines. Their service areas include all or part of five reservations: Fort Peck, Fort Belknap, Rocky Boy, Blackfeet,

and Crow. These rural telephone cooperatives are not tribally owned, however several of them are cooperatives, so their subscribers on the reservation are owners of

the cooperatives along with the other cooperative members.

While the policy of all of the companies I represent is to offer the same quality

of service on reservations as we do off the reservation, it is nonetheless true that

reservation areas pose unique challenges to our operations:

No. 1. Our most current information is that the average per capita income on the reservations we serve is less than $10,000 per year and unemployment is often

greater than 30 percent. The enhanced Lifeline program that makes local service

available for $1 per month helps the poorest get service, but most still have difficulty paying long distance charges or paying for more advanced telecommunications services like high-speed Internet access.

No. 2. Many residents, particularly among the elderly, speak primarily in their

native language, and we cannot assume fluency in English. This creates challenges

from a customer support standpoint.

No. 3. There is often a pervasive mistrust of programs and projects offered on the

reservation by non-Indians. Therefore we have met some initial resistance even to

programs like the enhanced Lifeline program I mentioned before.

No. 4. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we acquired much of the reservation areas we serve from the local Bell company in 1994. We found that the telecommunications facilities we acquired were antiquated, lacked adequate capacity to

handle calling volumes, and had not been deployed to many homes or businesses.

Therefore subscribership among Native Americans in such areas was as low as 50

percent.

Faced with these challenges, we were forced to come up with a number of different strategies to improve service and boost subscribership. I would like to outline

some of these strategies for the committee because I think they are instructive for

any company seeking to improve service to reservation areas. Then I would like to

identify three areas in which we believe further improvements could be made.

The example I will use is Project Telephone Company, which serves most of the

Crow Indian Reservation in Southeast Montana. Project’s experience is representative of the experiences of the other companies I represent.

No. 1. Our first challenge upon acquiring the Bell company’s facilities on the Crow

Reservation was to re-engineer the physical telecommunications network so that it

was not only capable of serving all of the residents, but also capable of providing
62

the full range of basic and advanced telecommunications service. We found that the

calling traffic capacity of the Bell company’s old copper lines was exhausted in many

areas and that the switching equipment was old analog equipment.

There was no way we could improve subscribership without installing new copper

lines with greater capacity as well as certain amount of fiber optic cable to handle

increased calling traffic. Further, there was no way to offer more advanced services

like high-speed Internet access, voice mail, caller ID, call waiting, call forwarding,

etc. without converting the antiquated switching equipment to digital equipment.

This required an investment of over $2 million on top of the price we had paid for

the Bell company’s system.

The reason I emphasize this point is that those companies, tribal or otherwise,

must identify who they intend to serve and where those people are located as they

construct their network in order to ensure that the network has both the proper geographic coverage and adequate capacity to handle calling volumes. Further, they

need to identify what kinds of services they intend to offer so that the correct technology platform is built that can deliver those services. We intended to offer not just

voice services but also high-speed Internet and videoconferencing services to the

Crow, so we upgraded using wireline technology coupled with digital switching.

No. 2. In addition to the Bell Company’s facilities being antiquated, they simply

did not reach a large segment of the population. Our understanding was that the

Bell company’s construction policy required a substantial financial contribution from

the customer before lines would be installed. We were told that many customers did

not have service because they could not afford to pay the thousands of dollars it demanded in construction assistance before it would install phone service to rural customers. To boost subscribership, we established a policy under which any customer

that was within one mile of one of our lines could get service without construction

charges. Nearly every resident of the reservation was within this distance, so construction charges pretty much became a non-issue.

No. 4. In order to address the language and suspicion barriers, we hired Crowspeaking customer service representatives and field technicians to do hook-ups. We

also appointed a tribal member to our Board of Directors.

No. 5. While all of the measures I have mentioned boosted overall subscribership,

we found that we were seeing a significant number of reservation residents were

dropping service due to an inability to pay their long distance charges. At that time

calls between the telephone exchanges on the reservation were long distance calls

and so were calls to the largest nearby city, Billings, MT. For this reason, we petitioned the state public utility commission for permission to establish a local calling

area that included all of the reservation exchanges as well as the Billings exchange.

Although the regulatory process took us nearly 2 years, we were ultimately successful and now calls between reservation communities and Billings are local, toll-free

calls.

As the 2000 census shows, all of these efforts enabled us to boost subscribership

among the Crow from around 50 percent to 84 percent. Our subscribership has continued to grow since 2000, due in no small part to the enhanced Lifeline and LinkUp programs that make local service available to qualifying Native Americans for

$1 per month.

We advertised the programs very aggressively on the Crow Reservation and our

customer service representatives even contacted individual residents to further foster awareness. Of the 1,413 residential lines on the Crow Reservation, 591 or 41.8

percent are now on the enhanced Lifeline program.

In addition to the improvements to voice services, we also made dial-up Internet

access available to all customers. We have made high-speed Internet access using

DSL technology available to nearly two-thirds of the tribal members. Finally, we

have installed videoconferencing studios in the tribal college and K–12 schools so

students are able to share teaching resources with other schools across the country.

All in all, we believe remarkable progress has been made regarding the availability of basic and advanced telecommunications services on the Crow Reservation.

However, there are still a few areas that remain troublesome.

No. 1. While we have been able to alleviate some of the problems with long distance charges by expanding the local calling area, many residents still find themselves with large long distance bills for calls made to areas outside the local calling

area. When those bills become unaffordable, we find some residents simply disconnecting their service.

No. 2. While we have made broadband access available to the Crow Reservation,

we have not seen great demand yet for such services. In part, we believe this is because economic conditions on the reservation simply prevent people from purchasing

the service. We also believe that many residents of the reservation simply do not

yet see why such access is relevant to their day-to-day lives. Our hope is that young
63

people who use broadband services in the tribal schools will over time create demand for similar services in the reservation’s homes and businesses.

No. 3. Finally, there is a ‘‘wrinkle’’ in the FCC’s rules regarding the distribution

of universal service support to companies serving the reservation. Currently, if a

competitor comes to the Crow reservation and is designated as being eligible to receive universal service funding, that competitor receives funding based on the costs

we incur to provide service and not on the competitor’s own costs. This creates a

kind of ‘‘catch 22’’ dilemma for us insofar as the more we invest on the Crow reservation, the more funding that would be available to our competitors. For the first

time, our Board of Directors and management have to think about more than just

how we can improve service when considering further investment on the reservation

because such investment may actually harm our competitive position. This issue is

no doubt of substantial concern to the tribally owned companies as well because

they have the same exposure. The FCC is currently reviewing these rules.

Thank you very much for allowing me this time to share our experiences and to

discuss some continuing challenges. I would be happy to answer questions at the

appropriate time.
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189

Æ