tain ambiguity regarding the entry level for applications. There is uncertainty, for example, as to exactly where a proposal that is to expand services to nonreservation members is to enter the review system.

Additionally, the resolution procedure or that for declination has no stipulation concerning the length of time for each process as relates to Bureau of Indian Affairs grants. The 90-day maximum for action on an application represents a significant advance over the earlier procedure for contracts inthat unnecessary delay is prohibited. The process of review, however, remains sketchy and undefined. A system of priorities for the approval of proposals should be developed.

Of paramount concern, however, is the effect of the regulations on the contracting of education programs. It is felt that the contracting regulations are not readily applicable to schools. A whole new, specific set of regulations need to be developed for this area. Under the existing proposed rules there is an encroachment of a tribal sovereignty under section 401.18 (c) where there is an existing internal tribal organization ordinance which has already defined the relationships between the Indian tribes and tribal organizations, and the renegotiations require a redefinition or reassertion of that relationship through the passage of yet another resolution requiring very specific conditions. The regulations governing Federal assistance for education of Indian children in public schools and in the tribal- or Indian-operated schools do not in all instances deal fairly with the various types of schools which are eligible for such assistance. Under the provision of section 404.11, contract schools, which were formerly Federal schools, are not included in the school construction contracting program; thus locking them into competition with Bureau of Indian Affairs schools for construction priorities. This system will almost surely lead to contract schools being given last priorities in school construction, since there is no procedure for presenting a case of need and assuring that it will be heard before the Bureau of Indian Affairs, since decisions about priorities are in fact made by the school facility offices in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the only real solution that most contract schools have had is a direct appeal to Congress.

These regulations, in general, favor already existing public schools as opposed to local Indian initiatives in establishing contract schools. Through combinations of Johnson O'Malley, school construction grants, title IV and impact aid, public schools could achieve funding levels that would make them among the best-funded public institutions in the country, while tribal schools would suffer.

The complex regulations and the requirement for tribal government action even on recontracting militates against local communities in applying for contracts.

Having to compete with agency and area offices for hand analysis moneys, the contract schools will almost surely come out last. In addition, there are some communities and tribes which want to establish contract schools but are under the jurisdiction of agency and area. offices which have no appropriation for.

Already established public schools systems, with a considerable Indian enrollment and with the existing technical expertise, are more capable of mounting an effort to obtain the various moneys specified in the act and to establish the capacity to improve their programs than

are Indian communities which have a strong desire to operate their schools but lack technical capacity.

In general it is felt by all concerned that the proposed regulations represent a considerable improvement and advancement toward a more workable contracting procedure. The scope of the subject matter encompassed by the regulations and the many individual complexities encountered in contracting the many and varied programs within the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Services, however, makes it impossible within given time limitations and other restrictions to present an exhaustive analysis. It is hoped that the regulations as ultimately adopted will provide such latitude for the accomplishment of the true intent of applicable legislation and that necessary revisions can be promptly made, where difficulty arises. Thank you very much. Mr. BEGAY. I would like to introduce Mr. Buffalo Tiger, chairman of the Miccosukee Tribe.

STATEMENT OF BUFFALO TIGER, CHAIRMAN, MICCOSUKEE TRIBE, UNITED SOUTHEASTERN TRIBES

Mr. TIGER. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to make a comment on the contracting. I think our tribe, my tribe, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians in Florida, our reservation is in Dade County, Fla. about 38 miles west of Miami. It is on U.S. 41. We have a contract with the BIA back in 1971 and we have been contracting yearly. I realize the kind of business that some of these tribes might not want to continue or contract because they want to continue working with Bureau of Indian Affairs on their reservations.

But to me, the tribe wanted to and they can contract with BIA or Indian Health Service. But I think it should be flexible enough so that Indian tribes can move around to suit what the tribes need on the reservations. The whole operation that we did contract for our tribe because it is such a small tribe, we have schools and other developments. So we don't have BIA people running private affairs on the reservations.

The only kind of problems we have as far as the contracts is funding and some things need to be better established and that is what we are talking about today. I realize the Indian Health Service wants to make contracts capable for the tribes also. That to me is pretty broad but I think it is working better in some areas on a contract basis. I think that can be improved also and the BIA contract can be improved also.

So with us, the Miccosukee Tribes of Indians in Florida in contract with BIA, is working with us fine and I still support the bill 93-638. So many things can be improved in this bill and this act. I am sure that our attorney here will get into that so I will not get into details. because we have discussed this back and forth the last couple of weeks. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF DONALD JAY SOLOMON, USET COUNSEL, UNITED SOUTHEASTERN TRIBES

Mr. SOLOMON. We were hoping to ask a question of the Honorable. Senator Abourezk during the testimony. Perhaps he will have an opportunity to answer such a question.

Mr. GERARD. He plans to return.

Mr. SOLOMON. Thank you. I will not read all the testimony and try to specifically get into every one of my points. Since the committee will review all of these, we have tried to do a comprehensive job and there are a number of points that have not been raised.

There is one point that has been raised that I would like to emphasize. The attorney for the Alaska Federation was very strong in his opinion that there must be a revamping of the entire regulation so that there is one rule, one regulation betwen BIA, Indian Health, that conforms to the Civil Service requirement and there has to be a task force.

Our main point today is to ask for a legislative change immediately. We know that some amendments to the American Indian Policy Review Commissions have been able to get to in an expeditious manner and we ask this committee to spearhead an effort to change the law without any further delay, if it is at all possible, to extend the date of implementation so that we can establish one uniform set of regulations with Indian input. It is awfully late. If we wait for 30 days or more for this committee to issue a report, too much time will have passed.

We ask that the implementation date in the act be changed before November 4. That is very soon, we understand, but NAI, NCAI, NTCA, United Indian Tribes, Red Lake Band of Chippawa have all asked the same thing. We have shown the dangers, we have shown the inconvenience and probably the fact that the act in itself would prove disastrous to the aims of those who tried so hard to produce a good act for the benefit of tribal government.

That is our main point. Specifically, within this testimony, there is a recommended definition of trust responsibilities consistent with the position made by NCAI which limits that definition to the specific purpose of the act. That is a suggested definition that could be brought to the attention of the committee.

Many of our tribes are quite opposed to this act. They don't want to utilize it and I think they have the right not to and it has been consistent that no one would be forced to. The danger that Congress will have to look to is, will those tribes in practice be penalized through the band analysis procedures and other procedures? Will they, in fact, be left out in the cold on programs?

Second, within the procedure here, and it is not stated anywhere in the regs, is the important point of getting programs expanded and getting new programs which is a very great difficulty with something outside of this act or regulations which is the band analysis procedure now established in the BIA and Indian Health Service. That has to be made consistent and for this reason, we ask that the implementation of the act be formally extended so that Congress shows the departments what they mean, that they want this done the way they said in the first place, that there be a group of Indian tribal people allowed to work formally with the Indian Health Service and the BIA, and that that be funded. Thank you.

Senator ABOUREZK. I guess the time is up for your panel so thank you very much for your contribution.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Solomon follows:]

USET, INC. STAFF STATEMENT DONALD JAY SOLOMON, ATTORNEY

INTRODUCTION

United Southeastern Tribes, Inc. (USET, Inc.) wishes to take this opportunity to thank the Subcommittee on Indian Affiars and its Committee Members for the opportunity to testify at this hearing regarding rules and regulations under Public Law 93-638. We appreciate the Subcommittee's efforts to insure that the Act and the Regulations fit the needs of Indian people by taking your time and effort to conduct this and other hearings.

Not all USET, Inc. tribes are anxious to contract programs, and some are strongly opposed to contracting. This testimony, therefore, is not an attempt to speak for each of the USET, Inc. tribes. It must be made clear that individual tribes are not to be held responsible for this position and are not to be placed in jeopardy in the future with respect to this Act. There is no way to determine at this time the affect the Act will have on the tribes and they must remain free to develop their positions concerning it as changing circumstances require. History has shown that many government programs intended for the benefit of Indian people have contained within them seeds of destruction. If the Act is to be implemented, the regulations must be prepared in such a way that any tribes that wish to contract shall be able to do so in the positive manner suggested by the Indian Self-Determination Act and any tribes that wish to decline to contract shall not be penalized. Suggested Legislative Changes

I.

This law was passed at a very difficult time in the history of our government. It was a time when none of us were sure whether any positive legislation of any type would be passed and certainly less sure whether legislation for the benefit of American Indians would be enacted into law. It is only the dedication of those people in Congress who were attempting to

assure Indian people an opportunity to make progress in the direction of Tribal sovereignty and self-determination which enabled this law to come into being. But in the rush of the confusion raised by the national issues facing Congress it was unfortunately not possible at the time to coordinate all aspects of the law so as to make them consistent with the purposes and policies stated in the Act. We feel that the legislative requirements

of Indian consultation, time limits and review by Congress showed great foresight. This enables the tribal people the opportunity to bring to the Committee's and Congress' attention some points which might be included in amendments to the Act which would be designed to improve the Act in its operation for the benefit of Indian people. Therefore, USET, Inc. does recommend several amendments designed to improve its implementation.

First, we recommend that the law be amended so as to enable its operation to begin later than November 4, 1975. We believe that a time limit should be set by Congress; however, it is our opinion that the regulations as they have been prepared are not yet in proper form nor consistent with each other in such a way as to enable Indian people to operate programs under them. In our discussions with Indian people throughout the country there was a unified opinion that the regulations should be as clear and simple to use as possible. In order to do this, it is essential that the regulations covering grants and contracts with BIA and those with IHS should be prepared as one document, even if published separately, so that tribal people working in this area do not have to deal with complicated, inconsistent and confusing documents when undertaking grants or contracting programs. In their present state, the proposed rules and regulations leave us with the feeling that the federal government has