Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 1 of 11
S.
HRC.105-65, Pt. 2
,
FISCAL YEAR 1998 BUDGET
BEEDRE THE
COMMITTEE 014 INDIAN AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
OVERSIGHT HEARING OF THE ]'RESIDENTS BUDGET REQUEST FOR
THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND THE INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE
F'.EBRUiIIRY 26. 1997 WASHINGTON, DC
ADDENDUM
42822
CC
U 9 COVERNME.NT PRlNTWC OFFICE .. WASHINGTON : 1887
g,:
gi;.:.;.:. , v:,;.:. ., .
.%
f(j
,!,':
For snle by the U.S.(3ovemmenr Rinting O f c fie Superintendent of Dccumenrs. Congressio~lnl Sala OWce. Washington, DC 20402 I S B N 0-'16-055427-0
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 2 of 11
United States Department of the Interior
OFFICE OF THE SECRET.R\' Ub*l,,"~lon. "UP40 D.C.
Honorable Ben Nighthorse Campbell Chairman. Cornminee on Indian Affairs Unired States Senate Washingron, D.C. 20510-6450 Dear Mr. Chairman: I am pleased to prov~de response to the Commit[ee's questions recelved rv~Lhinyour lerter of our February 26, 1997, following the oversight hearing on the Presldenl's budget requesl for fiscal year 1998, held on the same day. Please advise if the Commi~lec needs W l e r information. Sincerely,
CLcL
2 $b-b/
-
Ada E. Deer Assistant Sscm.~tary Indian Affairs Enclosure
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 3 of 11
S U B M I n E D BY: BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, CHAlRMAN Ques~ionI . Secretary Deer, the President's request includes an additional $76.5 million for the Tribal Pnoriry Allocations (TPA) account which is a positive sign as more functions are made available to mbcs Ihrough TPA's flezibilily. In 1995. the TPA account was significantly reduced and many nibal governments were hun badly. Does h e re(lucsl rrflect these recent reductions in funding? Answer: The significant budgel reductions incurred by the Bureau of lndian A f f n h ( B w a u ) In P 1996 did hurt Tribes badly. TPA was r e d u d a total of 13 percent in fl 1996. I Subsquently, the Adminisnation's budget rqucsts for botb fiscal years 1997 and 1998 restored the budget to the FY 1995 enacted level. Funding has been rqueslcd to reslore and enhance programs that affea the local tribdagency level, while maintaining minimal Bunau incrcasar.
'
Answer:
Although the Bureau had hoped lo systematically address h e Tribal needs by &ea it has become apparent that Lhe funds will need to be used to address the most serious needs over all lndian a t lands. The funds will be allocated based on ranking factors that will consider the immediate threat to heallh and safety, EPA actions. congrssional mandate and Lhc potential t eliminate h e specific h d wirhin a pamculsr funding o cycle. The funds will address underground storage t a n k owned or l e a s d by b o a the Bureau and Tribn. Most of Ihe ranks owned and o p m t e d by Tribes are at facilities onceowncd by the Bureau. All of these funds will be used to address environmental concerns on Indian ma lands.
Q w ~ i o 2. Secre~aryDeer. the request for the Office of Special Tmstee for American Indians n includes an increase of 57 million over FY 1997 levels. The management of tribal and individual Indian trust funds is a national disgrace. At h i s point. what are the pnorily tasks for the OSTAl and what docs the OSTAl project its needs are to Fulfill i u responsibilities? Answer: Paul Homan. Special Tmstee h a responded as follows: The priorities and the requested budget for the OSTAl to accomplish thost tasks arc included within the Ofice of the Special Tmstee's Snatsgic Plan, submitted lo Ihe Congess and the Secre~ary ofthe Interior on April 1I. 1997.
."
Question 5a. Madam Secruary, is thwe a federal responsibility to provide for the operation of tribal governments grounded in treaty, statute, course. of dealing. and coun decision? Answer: There is legislative responsibility. Over the yean Congress has enacted many laws providing for United States suppon and assistance ro tribal governmental operations in such a r e s as law enforcunenl, child welfarc, tribal court systems, gencnl assistance, social services, fire prevention and suppression, education, health care, housing, environmenlal protection, and similar governmental programs and suvices. See generally, Snyder AcL 25 U.S.C. 5 13: Indian Reorganization Act 25 U.S.C.5 461 el seq.; lndian Self-Dclenninalion and Education Assistance Act 25 U.S.C.5 450; Johnson-O'Malley Act 25 U.S.C.9 452; Anh-Drug Abuse Act. 25 U.S.C. 5 2401 et Kq.; Tribal Self-Governance Ac: 25 U.S.C.9 458aa el sq.; lndian Tribal Justice Act 25 U.S.C.9 3601 el seq. See also, Maine tribal couns. 25 U.S.C.5 172 1 et seq.; law enforcement 18 U.S.C.5 3055; Indian Child W e l f m Act 25 U.S.C.S 1901 el. scq.; Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act, 18 U.S.C.5 53: Vocational Training 25 U.S.C.5 309; Surface Transportation Assistam Act of 1982. 23 U.S.C.9 LO\; Facility Construction 25 U.S.C.5 631(2)(12)(14); 25 U.S.C.$465; 25 U.S.C.5 318a: Road Constnution. 23 U.S.C.ยง 104(b)(S)(A); 23 U.S.C.5 2M(b) and (c). Treaties. There are a l w provisic,ns in numerous maties obligating the Unitcd Slates to provide various types of !:uppon and ~ s i s t a n c eto rribal governments for governmental PUT~OSCS. such rn the Trealy wtth Kansas Tnbe of January 14. 1846, (9 Stat. 842). the Treaty wilh the (:hottaw a d Chickasaw o f June 22. 1855, (1 I Slat. 61 1); and the Treary of Fort Lluamie with he Sioux of September 17. 1851. (1 I Stat.749). for example. The Tre~ity I868 b w e e n the United States and the Sioux of Nation expressly obligated the C:ongress to secure them an orderly government. Coun Decisions. As a general principle, the Supreme Coun h a interpreted ARicle I. Section S of the Constitution as incorporati~ig~ribnlg o v m e n t s into the overall political framework o f the Unikd States. In ascries of landmark decisions dating to
Question 3. Madam Secretary. the President's rquest continues the pattern of revenue shortfalls in w n m c t cost suppon funds for lndian mbes. The 131A funded hibal contract costs at 87 percent of need in PI 1996 and at 84 percent in FY 1997. Tribes have to use p r o e m money to make up the difference and in the long-tcrm. tribes will be discouraged From entering 638 contracts and selfgovernance compacts. In your statement you note this d u c t i o n s an taking place as a result of increased tribal contracting and cornpacling. Shouldn't we be providing incentives and assistance lo tribes instead of reducing M E s and not providing enough contnct suppon costs? Answer: When the Bureau reduces FIT at cht: local agency Icvel, as a result of contracting or compacting, funds that supported those Bureau employees are transferred lo the connacting tribes for the propam op~:rationlhcy are assuming. The N 1998 rquest for contract suppon cosu represents net increase of S 15.0 million above the FY 1997 enacted levcl. It is estimated that \his level of funding wilt pay .3pp~oximalely95 percent of triba' indirect cost rates fix contracting Bureau programs. In addition. !he request includes S5.0 million for the lndian Self-Determination Fund, specifically for new or expanded tribnl contracts or contracts.
p increase of 93 million to clean U u n s a n i q Question 4. The Presiden'srequest also includes landfills. leaking undergound storage lanks (TAbKS), and other environmental hazards. With a backloy 015200 million in environmental cleanup wok. how will this increax be ullocnled? With regard to the problem, are the tank5 to be cleaned ulp owned and operated by h e BIA or by the tribes
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 4 of 11
4
the 1830's. Chief Justice John Marshall fashioned the legal principla governing the relationship beween the tribes m d the Government of the United Stams arid re-affirmed the principle that [rjbes retained not only the right to poswsion of (he Soil. but the ihcrent right of self-government. The history of federal acknowled@nent of (he n a m e and authority of tribes and the practice of providing aid to tribes dates to the earliest days of rhe republic. Federal-Indian Tribal relnionship. The federal-Indian Tribal relationship is deeply imbedded in the naion's jurispmdence. In (he firs1of the cases now referred to as the Marshall Trilogy, the Chief Justice crafted the b u i c framework for the U.S. land tenure system, clarifying the exclusive right of the federal government to acquire land From the tribes ihrough purchase or conquest. J o b ~ 2 U I;.I L8 3(1823). In c h e w s,mlysis, Marshall began lo aniculate the federal lndian law prinoples thal he would mclre fully develop in the two subsequent cases in relation to the mbes' possessory intetests in land. acknowledgment of lribal sovereignty, and the obligations of tht conqueror toward the conquerd. Over time. h i s l a n e concept, which derives h r n principles of international law. has cvolved into the Lndian trust doctrine a doctrine containing b o ~ h Legal and moral prerogatives. "Humanity," wrote Marshall, "...has established as a gsneral ~ l e that the conquered . shall not be wantonly oppressed. an11their condition shall remain ffi eligible as is compatible with otrjets.of the conqu,est."
actively promotes self-governance by providing senjves and resourcs. The modem era of federal Indim policy w u launched in 1934 with ihe passage of the Indian Reorganizntlon Act. ( 2 5 U.S.C. 461 et seq.) The Act was desiped to strengthen the institutional inl'mlruclurcj of tribal governments. It authorized the Secretary of the Interior on request of a tribe to convene a special elecrion for the purpose of adopting a consu'rulion and by-laws under which the tribal government could operate subject lo the oversight of lhe Secretary. Excepl for the period between 1953 and 1973. when Congress experimented with the concept of tem.nating the politics1 status of uibes, fedelat policy has-consistenlly been supponive of tribal self-determinalion and self-gov~mance, federal aid to tribal governments h s been and vtewed as essential to the long term economic growth and development of vibal communities. The present policy commibnenl to strengthening and enhancing tnbal self-determioation and self-governance is largely an outgrowh of the disastrous social ahd ecbnornic consequences orthe termination policy. It is also consislent with the present federal policy supponive of providing variouc types of aid lo state and local governments for government s~!rvices. In 1973. Congress renounced Ihe policy oftermination, replacing it with the policy o f Self-Dclermination. Congess declared: "[Olur national Indian llolicy shall gi\.e full recognition to and be predicated upon [he unique rrlationship th11exists benvecn this p u p ofcitizens m d the federal government and that a govcmment-wide commitment shall derive from this relationship that will be desimsd to pive Indians the freedom and cncouragcmcnt~o develop their individual. fmlly. and commuruty potential and to determine their o u n future ..." On J a n u q 4. 1975. Congress enacted the lndian SelT-Determination m d Education Assistance Act, declaring: "The Congress after w!hl reviek of Ihe federal government's historical and lndian special legal relationship with, and resulting responsibilities to. .*encan people. finds ~hnl
I . The prolonged federa! domination of lndian Semrce proguns h u served to retard rother than enhance rhe progress of lndian people and their communities by depnviny Indians of the full opportunity to develop leadership skills c ~ c i a to the l realization ofself-govcmment. w d has denied to lhe Indian people an eficcticri\.e voice in the planning and implement~tion f proprams for Ihe benefit orlndims whicb are o responsive lo the needs of lndizn communities ..."
,
-
The narure of the fdaal-Indian Tribal relationship; tho authority of tribes; the nature of the obligations of the United Stat~:sto the native tribal peoples; and the stahls of tribes within the overall political himework of (he United Stales were more fully cases. Inthese landmark decisions. Marshall defined the visited in the principles goveming the c o u r s ~ dcliings between the United Slates and the Indim of tribes into the present. W W n v. G s L ~30 , ~ U.S. ( 5 Pet.) 1 (1 93 1 ), W o r c e s t e r v m 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832). U.S. law and coun decisions havc: consislently recognized and rc-affimcd the end~ies with whom the principles ylicularrd by Marshall: tilber are distinctpoliti~l United States has a unique legal and political relarionship, including "moral obligariom ofthe highat responsibility and Vust." Srminole Nation V. U.31 6 U.S. 1Sb (1942). S e e a l s o . E x Q s S , 109 u.S. 556 (1883): IA~L&WX, 163 U.S.376(18%);Wi\\lamsv.358U.S.217(1959):~.S.u.M&,419U.S. S M v. k k h 436 ~ (1975); V.S. v. Wheelcr, 435 U.S. 3 13 (1978); -Pueblo U.S. 49 (1978); v d States. 450 U.S. 544 (1981): W o m a Tax u i s s i o n v. Chi-,-.U.S,(1995), 115 6.Cl. 2216 (1995). O v n t h e decades. these principles have found expression in Congressional legislation and resolutiom. Executive Ordm. and irurumerable fcdaal court rulings. TNOughout its 200 yctr hisrory, ~ h United Stares has not only recognizd these principles, but h a c established a "course of dealings"which not only acknowlcdga the concept, but 2.124
With this legislnlion. Congress began the process of transferring tribal govemmennl
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 5 of 11
SJICIS
plos are daqr a o j a q spooB uo saxe1 alms jo uo!~al[os samsua leqi uo!rels!Ra~I J E U 01 ~ h\ollC.
i FP)?UP q leqM aU!WIIOp 4 ,,IUauSSXSVSpDaN,, e Aq p a p ~ a ~ d m , ? g aq dlndwd I! I,up[noqs p m 'suredad ue!pul I n 1 !~umw pasn aq plnom poqlaru IEW 01 .3s uo!lsanb
'd!tl~lOr(J~ uo!nYnpa u q % ! ~ p13ads 'pue 'anrsls!snj [ P J ~ U ~ S ~ ~ W O I I V 'saqul d p a pue ~ p r u s I W U D A ~ ~ S u l r~n o ~:Su!pnpu! 'samosar 1e!ausug uo pomq ~ ' ~ I ~ Alpmud s Su!pun~J O ~ !r!q!8!1a alaqm s w S o ~ d u o s ap!nord saop nrmng a q l ! Al a .a!t!unurmcn m!prrl-uou a41 u! punoj pIVJm6 r 01 dn suo!auasa! J @ ~ 8-q 01 u!Lq 01 anuanal I l!av Bu!m rrs pus '~uais!xa-uou u, ltupgnsu! q S q q p a p j a a q sum.%~d 103 ~ =nuaha a v Su!sna~sm a m d o l a ~ p ~ O U a~auapdxa 8 1 p g a q m ~1 ~ q u l ~ O J ~ 4 asov pun03 ahsq a h .Xluou!w aq! u! %u!lpj w q u l ~ u a ! ~ g ~ n s - ~ l ap ~ u r o u o s a d~ s yl!m %undad ~ ! I U Y umnz~ds JO peaq e JO au!pmy JOJ n s l m g aql uo puadap saqu~ uo!alndod 1 w u a 8 ayl m l a q [lam s ~ p j ~ ! r e w s ~ u ro uo a u ! ~ ! ~! p q mo m m m a uo!ll!w auo aqr JO x u a w w e uo!reznpa pue ~uauL(olduo'aurcnu! o y ~ pw 'SU!~E)I sueaw u! 6I(n91184) UO!ISB snol!d!3ald due ISU@'E os!hpe A[luass am 's,0961 pue s , 0 ~ 6 1 a q JO sp!lod uo!IeqUUaI a q JOn q a m o m q a q y l ! ~a u p a d x a mo uo pasea ~ ~ ~ s
'salels 01 a l q m d a ~ x L U ~ S J ~13Qdu03 I ~ C XEI c %u!puadploq uo lsanbar aql aleld 01 par!nbal a11pinon\ luaurlrcdaa ~oualu] q a '.
I ~ N oiu! I
:~amsuv
jsuo!le3![dde puel inoqe srua3uo~as re^ 01 L~!unuoddc~ ~ I I M aql sle!>!jjo 1c3ol puc aisls BU!P!AOI~ suo!s!ho~d a a q l o n '*\el luaLln3 rapun . , , r j a m ~ d rs~ui olu! pue~ u! a3!oh e luenb,, Laql asneyaq aql lesodord aqi uoddns s s d u o j u! auras i l s o d a d sp11 uoddns uo!~ursg~!urpv s a o a ,spuel asoq~ aqi uo l u p n 3 3 o sdaquraw-uou 01wles 1!ma uo SDXB1 a s ! ~ x a sales a ~ e ~ sI o ~ aql JOJ alms aqj PUB j U UB~ pue aqui a q ~ uaamlaq ,,~wuraaGe Bu!pu!q&,8 SPM alaql ssalun aqui e 103 ISIUI olu! pue[ Bu!ye) ruorj Xlelarlas aql luahlld 01 PJJ~POJIU! SBM lffodold e 5661 U :syl s! uo!!mnb isel Xw .g u o ! ~ s n b ! ~XllUn09 a q J OI n 1 a q ~ a ~ q e r e d u m leqj [aha1 e 01 S U O ! I ~ A J ~ S J!WI uo a j ! ~ h l e n b aql 01 s! ~J jo a s p 01 Xo 01 salmosu qaq] Bu!sn m ~uaudolohap ! W O U O Wa3uawdxa q %u!uu!Baq ~ a n leql s a q u l sqr 'anoqe pssn3s!p s v Xuahod tr! %U!A![ m!pul u e > u a W m [[cJO P J ! ~ auo 'aldurexa JOA 'paau [[elahoaqi Bu!raawjo uoqs EJ I ~ suo!leudo~dde I J lualln:, leql put uo!ls[ndod lelaua5 aq1 pu!qaq BIZ[ sue!pul ueauawv 'aJnseau ~!mouo3ao!~os Aq l e v lscj aql Quan d(uo plnom luamsmsse s p a u JO $MI Aue i u y ,sluaurssasse s p u u l e q u l l3npuo3 01s! I! ueql /bun03 ue!pq 01sa~~!{!q!suodsa~
j:
.
.. . .an=! ayl uo uo!mjnsuo? qI ;: Isnu Sw AlaafioH . s w 01 spmy neamg qmaw % q n q g s pU! 101~e3 la=axS r s! uopm!s I ~ ! ~ U P s.aqu1 e uaqm U~ a u n ~ am03 dew w q pue ' s u o p n u r ~ u y 1 % 1 uo ~ w a r d o [ a ~ ~ p w o u o y n m s e ~ t a! I~ a ~ w ~ d 01 armSaq aheq s q a q ~ awm 1eq1 l ! o %u$emosuo am a a y l x ax JO 'slam1 amoju! u! uoqelndod p u % a g Be[ m u e s w w ~N O U ~ Y X I ma3 e w ' r(lanyel% q p n Ye} Iq uaqm w n u a m ~LIapmda~rIq alpe??s a h ~ SaqqJO laqumu aSEl q e 1-1 a s w a d aslej a q ~ passq s! 6umdo~d uo lneamg l p 1% m u 01 lesodold a q l
a
Tw nu
B
lzrerP3R!'&
~n
A
3
;wmsw
p a r ( ~ s spauoddns ~l!qqegX ~ ~ I D J ~ D S l pmuaprm I q3ym s u m d a d p p J roj .l!:a~ slrsaw,, e qI!m Iua1s!suos slql s1 q5 Uonsanb
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 6 of 11
on lndian lands. Collecting the rsx b~:fore the product is sold on lndian land avoids tnterfermce with vibal sovercigty.
Answer:
An additional problem with the proposal is thac it would not require states to waiva sovereign immunity as pan of an a p : m e n t . Under the recmt Seminole Decision by the Supreme Coun, rribes cannot sue a slate in federal w u n where jurisdiction Over such an agreement would logically lie. T w a state wuld simply r e b e to negotiate h a tax compact and thereby preclude :a tribe &om having any lands taken into UUS~. Without any m w of for Tribe to enforce stare-tribal negotiation on the issue, slates arc given an unfair advantage over decisions which aHect tribal economic development and self-governance. Under the current s m c r u r q land uansactions could come to a srandstill.
Undcr current law there are provisions to allow state and 1-1 to nise concatls about "land into tru!:tm applications. oficials the opportunity
The shonfdl in contract supcan funds in FY 1998 will be dependent upon the level of funding provrded for contractible programs. If the Bureau budget is appropriated at the President's rcquat level, the shortfall would be about 55.7 million. This would allow the Bureau lo pay contlaftors about 95 percent ofestimated need.
Question 2. 1was pleased to note hat the .BlA was requesting hrnds to address a growlng concern in lndian counny: leaking underground storage ranks and sanitary landfills in lndian county. Does the Bureau plan to use these funds to address the m o s serious environmental problems in lndian country regardless of whether i t is a tribal fitcility or a BIA facility or will the BIA use these funds ooly to limit their poteotlal llabllity for BllA owned and operated facilities? Answer: The h d s will be used to addzs the most snious environmental needs regardless of whelher it is a Tribal facility clr a Bureau facility. All funds will be used to remediate envimnmental problems on Indian ~ m s lands. Although limiting Bureau liability is t a major concern for the sovenvnent, the health and safety of affected Tribal members is a much greater concern and serious Tribal needs will be addressed as limely as possible in light of the total u m e t need.
Those oppormnitics M set out below .and are found in the regulations at 25 CFR Part 151.
25 CFR 5 15 1.10 allows loc.al governments 30 days to respond to wrinm notification that the Bureau ofindian , a r s has an application l Lake land into trusl. o
I.
Question 3. How does the BIA propose to change its leasing guidelines to ensure that proposed leases which include the installation of undtaground storage as will require the necessary financial assurances to cover m y environmental rcmediation costs associated with the underground storage tanks? Answer: The Bureau does not feel that i t is necessary to amend the leasing reglations. Pan 162 of25 CFR providesthe S ~ m e t a y the authority to require financ~al with assurances ro reasonably assure performonce of contractual obligations. The Bueou does agree. however. that additional guidance may be necessary to assure that its offices are ensurinp compliance with environmental laws as pan of any conmct and chat they are oblaining sufficient financial I~onding cover any environmental remediation that is to required under hose laws. A plan for the development and implcmentalion of additional guidance is being :studied.
1 noticed the BIA has rcquested increases in the Safety of Dams program. How will this increase impact the curmrt construction and maintenance backlog in the Safely of rn:tls proc.rnnl.?
25 CFR 5 2.9 providaa 30 day appeal period during which a local government or other party may appeal a prelimin~ry decision to take land into uust. The appeal process itselfmay take several months. [This appeal period is not available when the Assismt Secretvy malt- adecision to take land into trust--that decision is final for Ihe Department ofthe lntmor. The absence ofthe administrative appeal opportunity does not, however. affect the 3Oday window to seek judicial w i e w . That period is available except whem lhere is a transfer of land From uust-to-twst status.]
2.
At the end ofthe appeal proc~dure (eithor by expiration of the second thiny3. day period or by a decision ofthe Int~?rior Board of Indian Appeals at h e conclusion of lhe appeal process), there is a 30-day period that provida an opportunity for judicial review beforc taking land into trust. It is that period that was cstablishcd by the nclv regul;lt:on (b I FR 18082-83) on April 24. 1996. That period is uigyered by either a notice in the Fedenl Register or by a notice in a newspaper of general circulation for the area in which the parcel is to be taken into trust.
SUBnllTTED BY: JOHN klcCAlN
Quesrion 4.
Answcr:
The proposed increase of 54 million for the Burcau's Safety of Dams Program provides funding for the follc~wisgnctivities: Repair construction of Lower Mundo Dam. New Mexico Final Design for Equalizer Dam. Oregon Conceptual Designs for: Allcn Dam. South Dakota Santa Ana Dam. New Mexico
Question I . I'car 19987
What is the anticipated shortfall in contract suppon costs for lndian uibes in Fiscal
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 7 of 11
Lake C;ipote Dam, New Mexico Deficiency Verification analysis of Cllrisrmas Trce Dam, Arizona Currently, there is an ,-timated W O million backlog of repair consauction projects O for the 104 dams that arc within the Bureau's responsibility. What the Indian Dams Safety Act became law in 1994, the Elureau had responsibility for 53 dams noted as posing a t r to human life in Ihc cvsnt of a failure. The Bureau's I04 dams include hw 46. nearly half, of the top 100 hazardous dams on Ihe 1996 Technical Priority Rating list. For comparison, in 1995, the Buteau wes responsible for 22 of the top SO d m . The number of dams requiring mmcclion has doubled, yet appmpriations for Lhjs program have remained level since the law passed in 1994. If this program is not funded at the rc:quest level, serious dam safery incidents could o w ar these critical inhstnuturcll age. C a w m p h i c dam failures, a real possibility in Ihe most hazardous Bureau dams, would result in the polenrial loss of life o r a l a minimum. significant economic damage with liability resting with the F e d w l Government. Public safety is a lonlg-tern responsibility rhat requires a continued commitment to fund the Safety of Dams Program adequately. If the requerted i n c m o f $4 million is not provided, che potential for liability to Ihe Bureau will continue to escalate as the Bureau will only be able to corrett safety hazards on lhrce dams, complete cc~nsrructiondesign on thrct dams. and conduct limited inspection work. The increase will allow Ihe B u m u to correct deficiencies on unsafe dams affecting the public saft:ty. T n n e is an estimated S750.000 shonlall in h e Dam Safety Msintenance P r o m that is funded within the Bureau's Ohel. Recurring Programs, (rrigation Operation and Maintenance. 'This shortfall will not be affected by the increase requested for Ihe Safety of Dams construction pro-n. failure of this Administration to request any Question 5. 1 arr, deeply diappointtd by the r e p e ~ c d funding for Ihc prevention and nearment of child ab~lsc M i m country. This continued action in only mean that Ihe BIA does not consider the problt:rn of child abuse in Indian c o u n w ofsuficient importance to dedicate the resources news* to tac:kle the problem. If Congress appropriates funds to implement the lndion Child Protection and Family Violence Prevation Act. what assurances do we have that rhe BIA will take h e appropriate steps lo ensure that Indian rribal g o v e m e n l s will receive these funds7 Answer:
item. The Bureau is required by the Indian Self-Determination Act, as amended, to conduct national budget hearings with mbal representatives from the Burcau's welve Area Offices. National Tribal funding priorities arc communicated to the Bunau at s these Hearings. Over the past few years. the Tribes have listed TPA programs n their highest priority. These national Tribal funding priorities become the Bureau's priorities in the submission of'the initiai annual budget =quest to the Depamnent of the Inleriar. General increa;es in TPA have been requested so that Tribes can prioritize resources to meet ttbcir needs at the local level. The Bureau has held six annual National Budget Hearings, beginning in 1992. The Bureau will continue to suppon this process. Individual Tribes establish individual priorities. The Bureau's FY 1998 budget includes a proposed general increase of $46.7 million Tor TPA. If the increase is ;ipproprialcd. Tribes can fund a variety of progmns including child protection.
SUBMITTED BY: SENATOR BYRON L. DORGAN
Question I . I am extremely concerned thiu the Bureau's FY 1998 budget request includes no funding for Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention under the Tribal Priority Allocations account. Can you explain how this decision was arrived at and what steps the B1A is taking to ensure that the prevention of child a b u x and neglect is e lop priority? Answer: In the Bureau's FY 1998 budgt:~, separate line i c m is requested for Child Protection a and Family Violence Prevention under the Tribal Priority Allocation ( P A ) budgct activity. This decision war m d e to give Tribes the abiliiy to make prevention a high priority within TPA and rcdisl:ribute funds from o(her TPA into this new line item. The B u m u is required by the lndian Self-Delemination Act, as amended, to conduct national budger hearings with Tribal representatives From the Bureau's w e l v e Area Offices. Nafional Tribal funding priorities are communicated to the Bureau at these Hearings. Over the p u t fnu years. the Tribcs have listed TPA programs as their highest priority. These nalic~nalTribal funding priorities become the Bureau's pnoritifs in the submission of the initial annual budget request tot he D e p m e n t of the Interior. Gmenl incnwes :in TPA have been requested so that Ttiw can priorilize resources to meet their needs at hc locnl level. The Bureau has held six annual r\l;ltional Budget Horin$s, beginniny in 1'192. The Burnu will continue to suppon this proces. Individual Tribes establish individual priorities. The Bureau's FY 1998 budgct includes a propos~d e n e r a increase o f $46.7 million ~ l for TPA. If Ihe Increase is appropriated. T r i b e can fund a variety o f p r o g ~ a m s including child protection. Quesrion 2. The Ojibwa Indian School, located on Ihc Tunlc Mountain Reservation in Nonh Dakota, is in desperate need o f a new permanent facility. There are scverc safety deficiencies,
'
I the Bureau's FY 1998 budget, a a:parate line item is requested for Child Protcclion n and Family Violence Prevention under the Tribal Priority Allocation ( P A ) budget activity. This decision was made to give Tribes tbe ability to make pmvendon a high priorily within TPA and rcdisuibute funds from other TPA programs or form 0VRall or general incnascs included in appropriations enacted for TPA into this new line
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 8 of 11
asbcs\os, and mucnual pmbloms inlhc SchooY s h c e buUd'mgs. i facg h e BLAdecidedin 1994 that n here buildinss. housing 150 srudmts. had to be ev;~cualed the students t!dd to be relocated to and temporary portable classroom units. However, the !Schpol cumntly is not on the B W s Education Consrmction prioriv list Even if it w ~ c!bough it would be many years before a new scbwl could , be built and s ~ d e n t could have theopporruhity to l@rmi a safe envimment. What actions will the s n Bwcau fake to e m m that rho ssvsrr education sonmucdon nee& on Indian reurvalions will be met in a more timely faahion, either through crearive firlancing mechanisms which would use exisling consrmction md repair funding or other proposals? Answer: The Bureau is very concerned about the safely deficiencies in Ihe Ojibwa and many other B~lreau school facilities. Ofthe total backlog of Bureau facility repairs (5890 million). 5682 million is needed for education facilities: 562 million is needed for education quarien: 5\21 million is needed for non-education facilities; and $25 million is needed for non-cducation quaners. .The new school prioriry list of 16 schools, approved by Congms in FY 1993, r d n s frozen until all schools arc funded. The Bureau has completed ,;onztrucdon of seven new ~ h o o l s .Funding for me condtuction of the Many Fan116 High School, requecced annually since FY 1996, has yer to be funded by the Ccnpres:S. The BlA condnues to explore a n m k r of altemativcn hat may in the h n u c provide , viable means u facilitate more construction and repair of high priority BLA ranked projects, ar described below.
I) Cost sharing of construcrion expenses by the Tribedschoels and BLA for repair or replacement o f &;ting facilities. 2) Bondins legislation rhat would be available lo the Tribes wd acceptable lo OMB.DOI and BLA. 3) Support of the Adminisrration school raonsrmclion initiative, which proposes 55 billion dollars over fow years for nationwide school consbuclion and renovation, with a secaside provided for lndian schools. 4) Expanded use of the existing podable classroom program to sddrssr problem areas such as increased enrollment, programmatic space. and w a f c and unhealthy classrooms. 5 ) A I--purchasc.progr;un h been considered in the put. however, due to lhc scoring rcquimentr by OMB it was deturrlined infmible. Lcgislalion andlor policy chqcs w l d enhance prospecls for chis sllunative in the &use.
12 In addition. the Burcau'r Office of Indian Education Rogams a d Facilities Managcmmt and Construuio~l Cenla have discussed alternative hrnding and intcnd to consult on the rnarter in the summa consultation meetings with Tribes.
The Administration hw requested $5 billion to a d h s facility repair nee& for public schools across America with t i w o puccnt set-aside for the Depmment of Lntcrior. rcsowce cornbind with d ~ Bureau's education construction budget rcqucst will e help eliminate the ever-growir~g backlog o f repairs in these school,.
~
At rhe present rate of dnaiomion and with a constrained budget Ihac har not kept up with aging buildings. rmphasis will continuo to be placed on addressing the most critical deficiencies that exist in apanicular building/facitity. The liability rir)cs to the federal g o v ~ e n arc scrio~a t and potentially very costly. At rhe current time. however, chief way to ensure that rhnc are sufficient and adequate educational facilities in lndian Country is thmu* incrcascd appropriations.
'.
,
'
,
a
.,
'
. .
.
:
Question 3. Thc neai for wrrectional faci(i8tier in Indian Country far exceeds misting resources. for example, on Lhe Fon Berrhold Rcsewatio,n.there arc 3,000 arre~u annually, but the jail facility tbat the Bureau leases only hours 8 inmate. l h e to chis situation rhae essentially is no deterrence to crime on the rcservalion. I am dlsappointcd that, despite h e substantial backlog in coNauction pmjaca. the FY 1998 budget rcqucJt contains only $9.1 million lo construct a jail incolorado for a hibc that har been sow-ordercd to immediately address suious facility problems. Can you explain what steps thc Bureau will immediately d : e t emurs t h r there arc sumcient a d Jdcquate o corrsctlod facilities in lndian Country?
I
:
.
'
.
Answer:
Thc Bureau smngly agrees lhal the need for correctional facilhia f r exceeds exisdng a resources and that current facilities an inadequate, overcrowded andoutdatcd. We have soughr a ~ o r d i n a t d eUon by nibal leadaship and falenl agencies to convince C o n p s s to provide funding necessary to build marry more adu)l and juvenile detention facilities. Despite our cffon. Congress eliminated funding for jail consauction for fiscat y e m 1995 and 19% altogcthn. Funding provided prior to FY 1995 was grossly insufficient.
7 h c aboveare some of thealtematives that. if rhey were appropriately sm~ctured and become availabl~ would sumch tho B1A constnrffion dollars lo cover more projects. Unfortunately, both h e Bureau's : the Depament's effons to expbre altemtivc & financing opriom have rtsulsd in the finding that therrsrs not many oppomnitie~. mainly bcwuse lcve yrpngements, loans. d revcnw bOn& ~ ~ i ~ r r p a y m e n t w h i & i s subject to appropriation.
The Burew is awue 01' nnd \my conccrnd about rhe jril lhc~lity!.or the Three Aftiliated Tribes. as well u th~!facilities for other Tribes on thc Detention Center Priority List (List). Aa the Sonuor points out In the question, rhc We Mauncain fxility is currently undu fedmal coun order lo address saious health Md safety nlatcd facility fcpaits. T h e FY 1998 budget is the third year \he Bureau has s ~ u g h t funding to conslmcl the Ute Mountain Ute facility, number 5 on the llm. The Three AfCiliued Tribes jail facility is ntunbu I7 on Ihc list. Thne arc facilities ahead of the Three .%ffiliated Tribes a~vaitin!$ design completion ;md construction funding. No hrn& have been appropriatedfor law enfmcernent facility conmuction dncr. FY 1995.
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 9 of 11
~h~ B~~~ cannot makc progress on r:i~her conslrucrion or facility r e p a k u n k s Con~ress appropriates the funds. Queslion 4. OMB ~
In ~~~~b~~ the umh Dakota Congw;sional delepation wmte to S e c r e t q Babbi,tt i ~i~~~the Adminismion lo secure additional SSWrKs forthe t h ~ p e u " c ~ use ~ to ~ t ~ ~ theCirCle oCNations School in Wahpeton. North D&ob. The FY 1998 reaueacontaiwno s c h additiorial doll^^.
Scholarship Tribal Courts Total
489.3m
512,m
452.800
600,900
494,800 8 p p 1,120,900
m Ql e9 L PL P l
1,142.200 1.183.100
w w 2 1 L I,052,200 1.469.200
The modest in-c provided irl 1997 following the 1996 CoMemce mark did not bring the ovsall TPA Plrnding back to the I995 level. which has exacerbated fie TFibe'~ shonfall in delivery of these services. Each program under Area Otfico Operanom w u v e d an qullable nducnon of approxlm~le[Y29 Percmt In FY 1996. For FY 1997 lhere wm a rducuon o f apmxunately 1 7perccnl. The followine is a cornpansonof* Aberdeen and Burcauwtde Area Olficc Operattons m:ent f u n h g :
. ... .
mal
the B~,A. t&c to allorlte cristing ,snew resources 10 ensure lhal the special health and psychological needs of the studen@ at the Circle pfNaGons Schoolm and to ensure the creation o r 2 viable model foc orher Indian educational 1nslltutions?
A , , ~ ~ ~ ~ :~h~ Bureau is aware ofrhe school's e.%n to implement a berapeutic madel pmgrm. I,, 1993. 1994 and 1995 the Bureau has prov~dedadditional h n d s to the school for
pumose~ ofimplemenling the model. The ddicional Fun& Pfovidod were above ,he l ~ fomuls generated for the :shoot. Due to current fiscal ~ p Ihe B~~~~~ can no longer provide additional suppon to Ihe shoo1 \qithout ne@live1y affsting Bureau schools. In an tffonto help the schooh thC Bureau fraff\vill lhrd * P bq with the school to explore several olher oplions such local, Stare* for some o f L C children (hey accept, outside finding Federal and Tribal organizations whose children actend the school and n e w from ptirqce foundarions. The BIA will do all it C a n to Pronlote the effons of scbo{, includ;og collaboration with lrdian Health Service Officials. in im~lemenlatlOn ofthe model.
-
Aberdeen Bureauwide
.
'
a n p I M ~ & l u Q L ~ B P e r P e s.aa3.000 4,434.000 4.sa6.000 1.48s.000 4279.000 54.6t7.000 54,994,000 36,714,000 36,562,000 38,861.000
SUBMITTED BY: SENATOR MURKOWSKI Q w t i o n I. As you know, h e nillional h a n g fonnula for BIA Roads funding usu the number o f miles of exisling 8 2 4 mads as a criteria lo deltrrninc how much hurdjng each y e a will rscsivc. As w s
the
.
'
b o w , Alaska doesn't have many milas of rural roads. s we lose our in terms of BL4 road hmding, o Shouldn't the funding formula be rrvssed to ~ r n c c ~ l a s k a*sat= need? t '~ wer: It is W e that Alaska has very Iew Bureau system rosdrr: however, under the current nalional formula for the Bureau road consmction program. the Jm-u Area Office is pemiued to use all the mile:s idmufisd in Yleir 1990 a d 1993 Juneau &ea Trans~onation Plans (JATP)for calculation of Ulc funding distribution formula. This road mileage includes about 4C0 miles of existing mads and about 1,000 m i l a of proposed (non-sxistin~) roads. This resulted in s total mileage incnasc from approximately 80 milea under lhc old formula to about 1,400 miles and a substanrial inc1w.e in mnding by about %13.OOO.W under the current fonnula. Cunendy, the luneau A r u Ofice receives the third highest amount in mad conrtruslion Funds which 1s about S 10.000.000. The eleven A e in the contiguous 48 States combined only have 567 m i l e ofprapovd ra (mn-cxislin$) roads cwnpsrrd to 1.OW miles ofpropowd mads for A1as.h alone. The hvlding formula c ~ t l recognii:rs Ihcmad mileage For Alaska as identified in the 1990 y and 1993 IATP tvhich i s the beat infomation available to delcmine Alaska's road constiuction funding needs. Accordingly, the cunenl nerional formula for !he Burtau mad c o n m c t l o n program
nue9ion5. chimrn ~ ~ ~ o ofthe %IYE ~ M l n ~ Afilintd ~ r i b e s ~0.h D, l in * a hm contact& me ~ b the~negalivetimpact that the FY 1997 funding reductions in Tribal Pn0n1y ~ (TPA) 1 had on social s e ~ , c btribal coun. and higher cducafions c h 0 l ~ h ~ " p m s , , PP is functtons and ac'ivl!!cs amount allocn!ed to Area Office administration of c ~ of h the related 10 the p r o w s listed above? What in the Area offla reduction cOmPZed 10 a g e n q and Inbal Level reductions in each of these programs?
Answer: no hnds allocated to m o m c e adminisIralion for each o f t h e h c ~ q n s a There education ncti\riries related lo the social sew!cs. ~ribalCOunS. md scholarsfilp p r o ~ m ~ rl~eseprognnls s, iireopernted by the Tribe IlUou@ P,L: j - 6 j S Y funded within the ~ r i b a P r i o ~ t y l Allo~afionS (TPA) budget, acnv1lY. Th,e fo\\ovrinptab\= illuarales the funds ollolled to the Programs b x e d on lhe Tribes
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 10 of 11
1 6
accounts
for ~ l u k n ' need. r
considering chanung is formulas to treat t h e r :
TOTAL
& a matter of
A& l
more fairly?
FY 1997 H ~ G H \ V A TRUST FUNDS (HTF) Y ALLCICATION BY B1A AREA OFFICE
tack Alaska does nor d in lasr place in cvay &ding category.
I
r
I UTF Dollan
-
-
As s h m in the attached lable,which displays TPA basc hrnding by whm ~ m P a c i n g& U r n per Indi;mYlor Lhc Tribal Prioriry AUo&on(TPA) basc Itndhg. " AJ& rankr founh among d l 12 Arts. W m wrnparing "dollan psr acre" Alaska h ranks =onCi.
TPA base programs are those in which funds are distiibulod on a pro-ma baris
among all Tribes. The r e ~ n a i ~ n g progtams in TPA are those where Funding is dimibulqi in scwrdmce with specific criteria. Conmct suppoti welfare w i m c e ; housing rmpmvement; awl road maintaance h d s arr dismbutcd by fonnu~p. according lo methodolo~iesestablished for each p r o m . The small and necdy Tribes program fuuds rue limited IO Tribes with low cnrollmcnt and low b a s funding. The B . is not pmposing w change its metkds for me distnburion of hm&. There Z4 are disviburion formular for some prcgmm, bur not all. Dismburion of h d s for programs such as Weliaa Assistance are biued on actual n m i ; Housing lmpmvemenl Program funds are bared on an iovcntoty of housing needs; and Conmct Support Funds slr b e d on Indirect c a t n t e s as dstcrminad by the InSptCtof Cknerals oRice, ccc.
an concerned. Alaska h j b s an healed the same as other nib=. Other h&, such
as the 5681 million included in chc Tribal Prioriry A l l ~ i o n (rP A ) activity of the budget, are dishibuttd b w i on historical funding levels.
r ~ l h ~ r i 10siiwludc. in fhc dscermination orfunding, p m d ~ d .since 1992. jUneauis hc defined (or inclusion inlo tltc road inventory vJJS nor \cnfiablc 0fwhjchrhe in bhe Bureau oilndjm AffairsM m a l 157. roads (riatc. local. B I A ) that access o r f ~ ~through c' rcscnation R O J ~ S . ~ 1 1 rcservarion or hluka villngc. Other. hll othcr rods. including pnvalc roads. BIA - Blh Syesrn Roads. BIA's raponsibilitv.
I R R . lndlrn
~ , , ~2, ~ J-,,~ ~ ~ , i D~~~~~~~
far as the fonnulaor needs baaed type pmgrsms
Recognizing fundingdeficiatics, the BL4 currently h s an ongoing initiative (Small a d N u d y Tms) which b dsjgnea to dim! new funds to vibes which have small w o l l m w t s and hrnding lertels. l h s initiative was first proposed in 1994 by the Joint Ttibal/BIA/001 Task Foxeon BLA R v i o n . The Taak Force identified an nppoxirnatc need of %l3 million IO bnng all small and necdy tribes lo a *minimum bane" funding htvsl (5160K for tribes in the contiguous 48 sraus and S2DOK for the m'bes in Alaka). Of the 554 Federally r e c o g i d Indian tribes. 309 an considered s m d l and narly, including 209 liom the State of Alaska. Congress included $2 million in the FY 1995 BIA appropriations 10 begin funding this initiative. The BIA r q u f s c dSS million in the FY 1996 budget 10 continue (he suppon of smsll and nady tribes. Congress denied this request. The BIA again q u e s t e d 55 m~llton the F'Y 1997 budga md was appropriated 54 million. Tne in Prcsidenr's FY 1998 request includes a qwt o f 54 million.
*laska ha 236 crthc 500 plus rnber in the United StaMs y e t ~ l rcccivcsfar lesskin fcdcr~ifunding than ir:ihould. RcpoflShave )islc,d A l d a in Ins' Place ~ ~ ~ inc\.cr:rv nlls(c i u n ~ i ncntepry ye1 9 pcrrcnt oi;tll Native Amcricms ItSc In r 1s Ihe BIh
With the first incremen~ l a h vibca received over $1.9 million of the 52.0 million A
Case 1:02-cv-01383-MMS
Document 60-29
Filed 05/02/2007
Page 11 of 11
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms