(4) Mauneluk Association is only a tribal organization and not a tribal governing body. This distinction has necessitated that we act conservatively and go slow. This situation imposes greater restrictions on our ability to conduct business. It is not always pleasant or easy to live with when so much communication has to be done by long-distance telephone calls, and board meetings that require extensive air travel and weeklong per dem costs. It all becomes relative to what is sought, and sometimes the Congressional Delegation, Committees, and Subcommittee members fail to see this relationship because their world of relativity does not reflect and identify local differences in Kotzebue, Alaska. The generality that all Indians are the same becomes nebulous when Alaska Native concerns are voiced. What started out as a good law can be just as disruptive if clarifications are not made. My hope is that these hearings will correct an oversight on the definition of Indian tribe responsive to Alaska Natives. I would recommend the following: (1) Find out if the definition of Indian tribe can be reworded to eliminate a multi-authority of tribal governing bodies to occur concurrently. Remember that many of these tribes can easily become tribal organizations sanctioned by a single governing body. (2) Associations have need for a place in the Act, but they must not be recognized solely on their status alone. All tribal governments and organizations in Alaska must be received and general consensus established to determined if Public Law 93-638 is applicable to their function. Senator ABOUREZK, Larry Davis of the Nome region? Carl Jack, Alaska Federation of Natives? Mr. JACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. STATEMENT OF CARL JACK, DIRECTOR, HEALTH SERVICES, ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES Mr. JACK. I have been directed by the Association Regional Health Directors to make a brief statement. However, they have advised me not to submit a full prepared statement until they have reviewed the statement themselves. So that statement, full statement, written statement will be submitted within the 30-day requirement and the statement will be on behalf of the Association Regional Health Directors. I would like to address a couple of items not directly related to the two subject matters that are being discussed, but subject matters that are inherent in the implementation of 638 in terms of contracting under title I and title II of the, of 638. One, to reiterate what we've submitted during the hearings in the District of Columbia regarding the regulations. And the primary point that we've stressed was that there were two sets of regulations that govern the act, which are somewhat inconsistent with each other, which could put the Native organization, the tribal organization, in a position having to deal with two sets of rules of conduct under which they would have to administer grants or contracts. That have become apparent here up in Alaska too by which both BIA and IHS have followed their own methods of the way they were going to implement 638. Example, under BIA insisting having to follow the regulations that are, that have been issued September 15 requiring resolutions, whereas on the other hand the Indian Health Service has chosen to defer any contracts to the Native organizations under next year. But choose to use the existing procurement authority that are in the books already as far as contracting with the Regional Health Corporations and nonprofit organizations that the health department for fiscal year 1977. Another item I'd like to point out is the basic attitude between the two agencies as to how the, they say the contracts have to be administered. Basically, insisting on the cost reimbursement type of contract versus the other type of contract methods that are available. The basic feeling is that the type of services that have to be provided by the Regional Health Corporation or nonprofit corporations feel should be, should determine the type of contract under which the services are to be provided. These are the two comments that I personally have in regards to the implementation of 638. We will submit the formal written statement within the 30-day period. Thank you. [Statement not received.] Senator ABOUREZK. Are there any questions by any of the panel members? Commissioner BORBRIDGE. Just a comment, Mr. Chairman, that Carl would be very helpful, as I'm sure he intended, if you might describe in your statement the organization in terms of its relationship to other organizations within the State representing the Alaska Natives. Mr. JACK. Yes; that will be done. Commissioner BORBRIDGE. Fine, thank you. Senator STEVENS. Carl, would you envision something like the health board ever taking on delegated responsibilities in contracting field? Mr. JACK. That would, I assume, would be at the discretion of the regions that designate the members of the health board. I assume this matter would have to be concurrently decided among the regions if, in fact, that course is to be taken. Senator STEVENS. Thank you. Senator ABOUREZK. Carl, thank you very much for your testimony. Is Cliff Black here? Cliff was to come late as our last witness, and I understand he couldn't get here until about 11:30. I think that 30-day rule of holding the record open is going to have to apply to him. And we've run out of witnesses. Sir? MEMBER OF AUDIENCE. I was wondering if the village of Naknet could submit a written statement within that 30-day period? Senator ABOUREZK. Would you speak a little louder, please? MEMBER OF AUDIENCE. I was wondering if the village of Naknet would be allowed the same opportunity to submit a written statement or would that be just for those Senator ABOUREZK. Absolutely. Any village, any village can have a written statement if they'd like. Send it to me in care of the Senate Interior Committee, Washington, D.C., and indicate for which purpose you're sending it. We'll include it in the record. MEMBER OF AUDIENCE. Thank you. Senator ABOUREZK. I would like to bring these hearings to a close. The hearings will continue tomorrow in Bethel and then in Fairbanks. And once again I'd like to express my thanks to all of the witnesses who appeared and made a contribution with their testimony and with response to the questions. I'd like to thank Senators Gravel and Stevens and John Borbridge, Commissioner of the American Indian Policy Review Commission. The hearings are recessed. [The hearing was recessed to reconvene, Saturday, September 4, 1976, at Bethel, Alaska.] PROBLEMS OF DEFINITION OF TRIBE IN ALASKA RELATING TO PUBLIC LAW 93-638 SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1976 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Bethel, Alaska. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9 a.m., in the radio and TV station, Bethel, Alaska, Hon. Mike Gravel presiding. Present: Senators Gravel, Stevens, and Commissioner John Borbridge, American Indian Policy Review Commission. Also present: Tony Strong, professional staff member. STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE GRAVEL, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA Senator GRAVEL. The hearing will come to order. This morning we're holding a hearing for the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Senate Interior Committee in conjunction with the Commission of the American Indian Policy Review. Senator Stevens and myself are both ex officio members appointed by Senator Jackson for the purposes of these hearings on the subject of the definition of an Indian tribe. We started the hearings in Juneau under the chairmanship of the subcommittee chairman and also the American Indian Policy Review Commission Chairman, Senator James Abourezk, and he conducted these hearings with us in Juneau and in Anchorage. Senator Abourezk had to return to South Dakota in order to fulfill his commitments on what is a very important weekend in the year, the Labor Day recess. The hearing of necessity will have to confine itself to the narrow subject, and if time permits, we would be happy, Senator Stevens and I would be happy to listen to other problems, and our first obligation is to build a record for the subject at hand, and if time permits, we would be happy to expand the hearings to hear people on other subjects. And, so we'll go through the hearing list and at the end of that list, hear anybody else who wants to speak on the subject itself, and after that's accomplished, we'll move to other subjects if we have time. We must leave the studio here by 11 o'clock to catch a charter and to get to Fairbanks and reconvene the hearing this afternoon in Fairbanks at 2:30. The subject has been very, very well covered by witnesses in Juneau and in Anchorage, and has brought to light some of the inconsistencies existing in present law. And, I'm sure that the outcome of these hearings will be to draft new legislation to accommodate the new interest of the Native community and minimize the amount of future conflict that would take place as the Native community under the SelfDetermination Act takes on greater responsibilities of service to the people in the area, services that have previously been rendered by the Federal Government. And, in line with the Self-Determination Act in the past, 2 or 3 years ago, it's a desire in policy to see that these services are fulfilled by the Native community itself. I'd like to at this time, call upon the senior Senator from the State of Alaska, Senator Ted Stevens, for an opening comment and then after, Commissioner John Borbridge, who serves on this American Indian Policy Review Commission will make an opening statement. and then we'll go to the witnesses. And, if the witnesses will come forward as they're called, and sit in that chair and either give us their testimony or read the paper they have prepared and then we could ask them questions, if there's no questions, we'll go on to the next witness. Ted. STATEMENT OF HON. TED STEVENS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA Senator STEVENS. Well, I'm glad to be here with you, Mike, and be able to complete the record of our hearings throughout the State on what I consider to be a very difficult problem, and that is the relationship of the Alaska legal governing body concept to the total tribal entity concept in the South 48. I really don't have any advanced or preconceived notion as to what the outcome should be except that I think we should do our best to make certain that in the process of this self-determination, we don't find the Congress or the State or any other entity in the position of directing the people of Alaska throughout the State as to what type of governing body they must have. I understand there is a concensus here in this area, so we should have a fairly noncontroversal subject here. I'm glad that John Borbridge could be along, and John I'm happy to have you with us. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BORBRIDGE, COMMISSIONER OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN POLICY REVIEW COMMISSION Commissioner BORERIDGE. Thank you, Senator. I'm very pleased to participate as a member of the American Indian Policy Review Commission at the invitation of the chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Indian Affairs, Senator James Abourezk. The American Indian Policy Review Commission was created by an act of Congress, it has the task of undertaking a comprehensive review of the relationship existing between American Indians and Alaska Natives and the Federal Government. In the process of investigating those concerns and issues that are a particular concern to the American Indians and to the Alaska Natives, we have become very much aware of problems relating to Public Law 93-638, the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, and other related acts. Some of the problems occur because mistakes are made where there is an assumption that the situation for American Indians and Alaska Natives are the same. Certainly there are similarities just as there are differences, and this is why we are here today, to attain from the people their viewpoints and their ideas and their suggestions as to how we might improve the implementation of some of these pieces of legislation that we feel have some very constructive and very positive intentions. I'm very pleased to be here, pleased to be here in Bethel again because of my many friends, and also pleased to be here because Bethel is the birthplace of my wife, so of course, it has a very special attraction. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator GRAVEL. Thank you. I'd like to also thank-I think it's helpful to the community, and not only here in Bethel, but to the entire Kuskokwim River region and the delta regions of the Yukon, and that is for broadcasting this hearing. KYUK is performing, in my mind, a very fine service. Of course, we're having the hearing here in the TV studio which was very much of a surprise to Senator Abourezk and Senator Jackson, in fact they were joshing me about it in the Senate cloak room that we would have such forethought as to have a hearing right in the studio. Our first witness of this morning-Let me just say also, the record will be open for 30 days, so if anybody from any organization or individual who might want to to file additional opinions on the subject is free to do that. They can send this to Senator James Abourezk or Senator Mike Gravel, Senator Ted Stevens or John Borbridge in Juneau, but the others just send to Washington, D.C., in care of ourselves and we'll see that it gets into the record that we're trying to build in this regard. And, those within the sound of my voice, if they similarly have-counsel members or village members, if they feel that they want to make contribution to this record or have an opinion, their views would certainly be most welcome. Our first witness this morning is Mr. Edward Hoffman, Sr., the association village counsel president. I don't think I see him in the audience. Those who are not here at the beginning, we'll go back and maybe they will be showing up later. Out second one is Harold Napolian. Is Harold here? OK. You get the opportunity to break the ice for everybody. STATEMENT OF HAROLD NAPOLIAN, CONTRACTING OFFICER, YUPIKTUK BISTA, INC., ASSOCIATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS My name is Harold Napolian and I'm from Hooper Bay, Alaska. Right now I'm working for Yupiktuk Bista, Inc., a Native organization formed by the AVCP as our contracting officer. OK. Our basic problems with Public Law 93-638 insofar as the definition of tribal governing body is concerned, is that prior to this time, prior to the passage of Public Law 93-638, was that we never had this problem before. We have never at anytime had to sit down at an AVCP convention to try to determine who was the tribal governing body, because it was our understanding up to that time that the tribe in his region was the Upik Eskimo. We have 57 communities in this region and are all represented by the AVCP. So, the problem has never been addressed before because we didn't think that there was one. |