[Senate Hearing 112-424]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-424
TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION: PAVING THE WAY FOR JOBS, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND
SAFETY IN NATIVE COMMUNITIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 15, 2011
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
73-248 WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
KENT CONRAD, North Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
JON TESTER, Montana MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
TOM UDALL, New Mexico
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
Loretta A. Tuell, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
David A. Mullon Jr., Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on September 15, 2011............................... 1
Statement of Senator Akaka....................................... 1
Statement of Senator Barrasso.................................... 15
Statement of Senator Franken..................................... 18
Statement of Senator Hoeven...................................... 37
Statement of Senator Johanns..................................... 2
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 20
Witnesses
Baxter, John R., Associate Administrator, Office of Federal Lands
Highway, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation; accompanied by: Robert Sparrow, Indian
Reservation Roads Program Manager.............................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Chaco, Paulson, Division Director, Navajo Nation Division of
Transportation................................................. 61
Prepared statement........................................... 63
Healy, C. ``John'' Sr., President, InterTribal Transportation
Association.................................................... 29
Prepared statement........................................... 30
Hostler, Jacque, Chief Executive Officer, Cher-Ae Heights Indian
Community of the Trinidad Rancheria............................ 65
Prepared statement........................................... 66
Keel, Hon. Jefferson, President, National Congress of American
Indians........................................................ 21
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Martel, Hon. Wes, Vice Chairman, Eastern Shoshone Business
Council; accompanied by Jim Shakespeare, Chairman, Northern
Arapaho Business Council, John P. Smith, Transportation
Director, Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes, and Jim Garrigan,
Transportation Planner, Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians...... 50
Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 53
Murphy, Hon. Charles W., Chairman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe;
accompanied by Pete Red Tomahawk, Transportation Director...... 39
Prepared statement........................................... 40
Tsosie, Paul, Chief of Staff, Office of the Assistant Secretary
for Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior; accompanied by
Leroy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior................ 10
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Appendix
Chaliak, Sr., Zechariah C., President and Wassilie Pleasant,
Secretary, Native Village of Nunapitchuk (IRA Council) Tribe,
prepared statement............................................. 81
Dorris, Julia F., President and Steeves, Loreen J., Vice
President, Village of Kalskag Traditional Council, joint
prepared statement............................................. 78
Greendeer, Jon, President, Ho-Chunk Nation, prepared statement... 84
Hall, Tex ``Red Tipped Arrow'', Chairman, Mandan, Hidatsa,
Arikara, Three Affiliated Tribes, Great Plains Tribal
Chairman's Association, prepared statement with attachments.... 87
Hoffman, Michael, Vice President, Association of Village Council
Presidents (AVCP), prepared statement.......................... 75
TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION: PAVING THE WAY FOR JOBS, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND
SAFETY IN NATIVE COMMUNITIES
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:15 p.m. in room
628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
Aloha and welcome to the Committee's oversight hearing on
Tribal Transportation: Paving the Way for Jobs, Infrastructure,
and Safety in Native Communities. And I must tell you that we
are very timely on this hearing in Washington, and would really
like to move on it.
Investment in transportation and infrastructure projects is
critical to bringing economic development opportunities to
States and local jurisdictions across the Country. Nowhere is
this more evident than in Indian Country.
As you can see by the chart we have here, the Indian
Reservation Roads program has grown significantly since the
last Surface Transportation bill was enacted, going from
approximately 63,000 road miles in 2005 to nearly 144,000 road
miles today. The current transportation needs of Tribes have
grown along with the program. Current backlog to bring the road
inventory to adequate conditions is approximately $69 billion.
One in every four BIA bridges is structurally deficient. And
the annual fatality rate on Indian reservation roads continues
to be three times the national average.
These are the roads that Native children rely on to get to
school, that emergency responders must navigate, and that
Tribal and local employees drive to get to and from work. The
President's proposed American Jobs Act has a strong emphasis on
investments for highway projects, transit, highway safety and
other transportation-related activities. It is critical that
Tribal transportation programs be part of any surface
transportation reauthorization considered by the Congress.
Tribes must be empowered to build the programs in a way
that makes Tribal members safer, brings jobs and economic
development to Native communities and allows Tribal governments
to work in partnership with State and local governments. This
last part, working with State and local governments, is
crucial. The roads in Native communities serve the whole
community, not just the Tribal members. Improvements to Tribal
roads benefit everyone. And investments in infrastructure bring
jobs and economic development opportunities to Tribal and non-
Tribal members alike.
In May, this Committee held a Tribal transportation
roundtable, which was attended by over 65 Tribal leaders,
transportation planners and congressional staff. We will use
the information obtained at that roundtable, along with this
hearing record, to write a Tribal transportation bill.
So I encourage any of you that are here today and any other
interested parties to submit written testimony for the record
with recommendations. The hearing record will remain open for
two weeks from today.
Now I would like to call on Senator Johanns for any opening
remarks he may have.
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE JOHANNS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Johanns. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
My remarks will be relatively brief today. I can only be
here a rather short period of time, so I am kind of anxious to
get the testimony of the witnesses started.
The Chairman has outlined the challenge that we face, I
think, very, very well. We want to do all we can as we look
forward to the next Highway Bill and the bill specifically
dealing with the needs in Indian Country. We want to make
absolutely sure that we are efficiently using the resources
that we have.
As I look out there, and I think about funding for various
programs including the one that this hearing is devoted to, I
just have to reach the conclusion that money will be hard to
come by. It will be a constrained process, if you will, maybe
more constrained than we have seen in a long time.
So what I would ask our witnesses to think about, whether
it is in the testimony today or whether it is in a written
submission after the testimony, is what is not working well
that you feel is chewing up resources. For example, as I was
reading the information for today's hearing, it just occurs to
me that when you deal with projects in Indian Country, you are
often dealing with a number of bureaucracies. And that costs
money and that chews up resources.
Is there something that we can focus on to help you and to
help those who are trying to provide the best transportation
they can? Is there something we can focus on that would be
helpful to streamline that process, to make that process easier
to manage?
The second area that I have a real interest in, being a
former governor, not every Tribe has significant resources in
terms of staff and engineering. Typically the Tribes are trying
to do so much, oftentimes with volunteers in many cases. So I
am curious to know about the interrelationship with the Tribes
in their States when it comes to transportation planning, grant
funding, whatever it is and how we might facilitate that
relationship, if that is not working well.
With that, I just want to say to all the witnesses who are
here, thank you very much. This is an opportunity for you to
educate us, and I look forward to your testimony. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Johanns.
We look forward to hearing from the witnesses who are with
us today. I appreciate your commitment to this issue and for
sharing your views with us today.
Our first panel of witnesses today is Mr. John Baxter, the
Associate Administrator for the Office of Federal Lands,
Federal Highway Administration at the Department of
Transportation. Mr. Baxter is accompanied by Mr. Robert
Sparrow, the Indian Reservation Roads Program Manager at the
Department of Transportation.
Mr. Paul Tsosie, Chief of Staff in the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of
Interior. Mr. Tsosie is accompanied by Mr. Leroy Gishi, Chief
of the Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Department of Interior.
I welcome all of you. Mr. Baxter, will you please proceed
with your testimony?
STATEMENT OF JOHN R. BAXTER, ASSOCIATE
ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY, FEDERAL HIGHWAY
ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; ACCOMPANIED
BY: ROBERT
SPARROW, INDIAN RESERVATION ROADS PROGRAM
MANAGER
Mr. Baxter. Chairman Akaka and Senator, thank you very much
for inviting me to testify today on transportation issues
facing Native American communities and the programs the Federal
Highway Administration administers that provide support to
Tribes to address these issues.
Accompanying me today is Mr. Robert Sparrow, he is our
Indian Reservation Roads Program Manager.
The FHWA is committed to improving safe transportation
access to and through Tribal lands through our stewardship and
oversight responsibilities for the Federal lands and the
Federal-aid programs. The Indian Reservation Roads program,
which is administered by FHWA in partnership with the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, serves 565 federally-recognized Indian Tribes
and Alaska Native villages in 32 States. In many cases, this
program is the only source of funds for transportation
improvements.
Today I would like to focus on three key areas where our
agency has been working to address the transportation
challenges in Indian Country. These include safety, outreach
and capacity building and infrastructure. Despite reaching
record low traffic deaths for the past two years on all of our
Nation's roads, the annual fatality rate in Indian Reservation
Roads is still more than two times the national average. To
address this serious problem, FHWA has cosponsored 11 summits
in the past two years to focus on this issue and bring safety
partners together. Two additional State-based summits, as well
as another national Tribal safety summit are planned for the
near future.
The agency also continues to implement SAFETEA-LU programs,
such as the Highway Safety Improvement Program and the Safe
Routes to School Program, which benefit Tribes as well as
States, and are aimed at reducing traffic fatalities and
injuries on public roads through the implementation of
infrastructure improvements.
FHWA also supports Tribes through outreach and capacity
building programs. We maintain seven Tribal technical
assistance program centers that provide a variety of training
and professional development programs, as well as technical
publications and training materials related to transportation
planning, safety, the environment, infrastructure design,
construction and project management and other topics.
Infrastructure condition remains a significant challenge in
Indian Country. The Indian Reservation Roads system consists of
over 140,000 miles of roads that link housing, schools,
emergency services and places of employment and facilitate
tourism and resource use. Billions of vehicle miles are
traveled annually on the Indian Reservation Road system, even
though it is among the most rudimentary of any transportation
network in the U.S.
Just over 60 percent of the network is unpaved, and about
27 percent of the bridges are classified as deficient. These
conditions make even the most basic travel difficult for
residents of Tribal communities.
The Recovery Act supplemented SAFETEA-LU funding for Tribal
communities by providing an additional $310 million for the
Indian Reservation Roads program. Much of the Indian
Reservation Roads portion of the Recovery Act has been
dedicated to improving roads that provide critical links
between Tribal residences and vital community services, such as
workplaces, schools and health care facilities.
In July of this year, Secretary LaHood announced the
availability of $527 million in funding for a third round of
the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery
(TIGER) grant program. This discretionary funding will provide
an additional opportunity for Tribes to compete for capital
Improvement funds as direct recipients.
In recognition of the importance of this program to the
Tribes, DOT will hold a webinar tomorrow, actually, to provide
outreach and education to the Tribes on the application
process. Such outreach will continue through the application
process over the next few weeks.
We recognize that transportation is a critical tool for
Tribes to improve the quality of life for Tribal residents by
providing safe access to jobs, hospitals and schools. FHWA is
committed to maintaining and improving the safety and
conditions of transportation systems serving Indian lands and
Alaska Native villages.
Chairman Akaka, again, thank you for the opportunity to
testify and I will be pleased to answer any questions that you
or other members may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Baxter follows:]
Prepared Statement of John R. Baxter, Associate Administrator, Office
of Federal Lands Highway, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation
Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding
transportation issues facing Native American communities and the
programs administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) that
provide support to Tribes for addressing these issues.
The Department of Transportation (DOT) recognizes that
transportation needs for Tribes are often different than what we see
needed elsewhere in the U.S. transportation network. In much of this
country, we take for granted that roads and highways will be there for
children to reach their schools, for emergency vehicles to reach those
in need of medical care, and for members of the community to get to
work. But, in Indian Country, we cannot always make that assumption.
Moreover, Tribal communities need good roads to support economic
development.
Secretary LaHood shares President Obama's commitment to addressing
Tribal issues and concerns. Last year, meeting with the National
Congress of American Indians, the Secretary emphasized the DOT's
commitment to improving existing Tribal transportation programs by
seeking Tribal input on important regulations, providing timely
technical assistance, and ensuring that Tribes are given ample
opportunities to compete for grants. The Department also has
implemented its Tribal Consultation Plan, a detailed plan of action the
agency will take when developing, changing, or implementing policies,
programs, or services with Tribal implications.
FHWA has a long history of supporting Tribal governments' rights to
self-determination and working directly with Tribes in a government-to-
government relationship. FHWA's top leadership continues to meet
directly with Tribal government elected officials and transportation
staff, and is committed to delivering a transportation program that
works for all Tribes whether the Tribe has a large or small population.
FHWA has sought to improve Tribal transportation by working
directly with Tribal governments to improve Tribes' technical capacity,
to improve safety on reservations and Native communities, and to foster
partnerships between Tribal governments, local governments, Federal
agencies, and State DOTs.
The Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) program, administered by FHWA in
partnership with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), is critical to
supporting Tribal transportation needs. In many cases, it is the only
source of revenue for transportation improvements. In working through
FHWA's partnership with the Tribes and the BIA, the IRR program seeks
to balance transportation mobility and safety goals with the
environmental and cultural values of Tribal lands. FHWA also works with
the Federal Transit Administration and the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) in coordinating transportation programs
that focus on planning, safety, and construction of roads and transit
services within Indian country.
Overview
The IRR system of roads provides access to and within Indian
reservations, Indian trust land, restricted Indian land, eligible
Indian communities, and Alaska Native villages. The IRR system consists
of more than 140,000 miles of roads that link housing, schools,
emergency services, and places of employment, and facilitate tourism
and resource use. Almost 11 billion vehicle miles are traveled annually
on the IRR system, even though it is among the most rudimentary of any
transportation network in the United States. Just over 60 percent of
the system is unpaved. If only BIA and Tribal roads of the IRR system
are considered, this number increases to approximately 80 percent.
Within the system, there are more than 8,000 bridges and approximately
27 percent of these bridges are classified as deficient. These
conditions make it very difficult for residents of Tribal communities
to travel to employment centers, hospitals, schools, and stores--the
most basic needs for a livable community.
The poor road quality on Tribal lands also affects safety. For the
past two years, traffic deaths on U.S. roads have reached record lows.
However, despite the gains we have made on other systems, the annual
fatality rate on Indian reservation roads continues to be more than
twice the national average. Safety continues to be the Department's top
priority, and FHWA is working closely with Tribes, the BIA, NHTSA, and
others to address this disproportionate level of fatalities on Tribal
roads.
The IRR program is the largest Federal Lands Highway (FLH) program
and is unique due to the relationship with Federally-recognized Indian
Tribal Governments under the program. The IRR program serves 565
Federally-recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native villages in 32
States. FHWA co-administers the IRR program with the BIA under an
agreement originating in 1948 and a Stewardship Plan from July 1996.
IRR program funding has grown significantly under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy
for Users (SAFETEA-LU), from a program size of $275 million annually
under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) to
$450 million annually today. This equates to a total of $2.76 billion
over the life of SAFETEA-LU, including the extensions through the end
of this fiscal year. These funds have been distributed according to a
Tribal shares formula, which was developed through a negotiated
rulemaking with Tribal governments. SAFETEA-LU also increased the
eligible uses of IRR program funds by allowing a Tribe to use up to 25
percent of its share of funds for road and bridge maintenance
activities. This change allowed Tribes to supplement the funding they
receive annually from the Department of the Interior (DOI) for
maintenance activities. It also allowed the Tribes to address critical
safety, snow removal, and pavement preservation issues. The increased
funding and programmatic changes provided in SAFETEA-LU for the IRR
program, along with an additional $310 million provided by the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), discussed below,
have provided tools and resources to substantially improve Tribal
transportation.
Safety Programs
Safety remains a significant transportation issue in Indian
Country. Native Americans are overrepresented in several traffic
fatality categories--including individuals under the age of 35,
unbelted drivers, and individuals driving under the influence of
alcohol. Eleven safety summits, including ten State-based and one
national summit held in the past two years have focused on the subject,
bringing the many safety partners together to discuss the safety issues
affecting them. Two additional State-based summits, as well as an
updated national Tribal safety summit are planned for the near future.
FHWA and NHTSA will continue these summits to promote safety strategies
across the four E's of safety--engineering, enforcement, education, and
emergency medical services.
Highway Safety Improvement Program
SAFETEA-LU established the Highway Safety Improvement Program
(HSIP) with the purpose of achieving a significant reduction in traffic
fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads through the
implementation of infrastructure-related highway safety improvements.
HSIP funding has been utilized for Tribal lands projects across the
country.
In Montana, for example, two HSIP construction projects totaling
$1.88 million provided improvements such as the installation of
Variable Message Signs on US-2 on the Blackfeet Reservation and the
addition of a left-turn bay on US-93 on the Flathead Reservation.
A $107,650 HSIP project in North Carolina along US-74 from the
Haywood County line to NC-28 (North), in Eastern Band of Cherokee
Nation, funded the installation of milled rumble strips on the median
and outside shoulders.
In North Dakota, two HSIP projects totaling $300,000 provided
improvements along State highways within reservation boundaries of
Standing Rock Reservation and Fort Berthold Reservation. Such
improvements included the installation of shoulder and centerline
rumble strips along State Highways 23 and 24.
In Wisconsin, a $316,000 HSIP project was undertaken by the
Wisconsin DOT along with the Forest County Potawatomi Tribe to improve
a Tribal owned intersection at Everybody's Road and USH 8 in Forest
County. The intersection project was combined with $900,000 BIA funds
and $74,000 Tribal funds to construct a newly relocated intersection
and frontage road (Everybody's Road) that leads to the Tribal
headquarters offices and Tribal Community Center.
Safe Routes to School
The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program is a Federally-funded but
State-managed and administered grant program established by section
1404 of SAFETEA-LU. Under this program, each State has received at
least $1 million each fiscal year to fund planning, design, and
construction of infrastructure-related projects to improve the ability
of students to walk and bicycle to school. A portion of each State's
SRTS funding must also be used for non-infrastructure-related
activities to encourage walking and bicycling to school. Federally-
recognized Tribes are eligible sub-recipients of this State-
administered program.
Several States are working closely with Tribes to promote the SRTS
program. For example, in Washington State, DOT provided SRTS funds to
the Suquamish Tribe to install sidewalks, bike lanes and signs and to
conduct education and enforcement activities to teach children
pedestrian safety skills. Similarly, in Arizona, the Yavapai-Apache
Nation utilized SRTS funds to add signs and roadway striping throughout
the community surrounding a Montessori Children's House school. In
Montana, SRTS funds were utilized in the City of Arlee for an
elementary school traffic education program and construction of a
pathway. The Santee Sioux Nation Indian Reservation used SRTS funds in
Nebraska to build a path for children that connected a local school
with a residential community and increased pedestrian visibility. In
Oregon, Warm Springs Elementary School on the Warm Springs Reservation,
received a $1000 mini-grant in Safe Routes to School Clearinghouse
Funds to reduce speeding and improve yielding to pedestrians in
crosswalks. These funds will be used for a media campaign and to hire a
crossing guard trainer for crossing guard volunteers.
Section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant Funds
NHTSA provides safety grant funds to the Secretary of the Interior
to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce economic loss due to motor
vehicle related crashes on Tribal land. The BIA administers the funds,
known as the Section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant
Funds. NHTSA provides technical assistance to Tribes through
partnership with the BIA.
SAFETEA-LU Funding for Tribal Transportation
Although the IRR program is the principal funding source for Tribal
roads, these roads are eligible to receive funding under other SAFETEA-
LU programs as well.
Indian Reservation Roads Bridge Program (IRRBP)
The Indian Reservation Roads Bridge Program (IRRBP) was established
under TEA-21 and funded using $13 million of the primary IRR Program.
The program's purpose was to provide funding for reconstruction or
rehabilitation of structurally deficient or functionally obsolete IRR
bridges. SAFETEA-LU amended the IRRBP by establishing it as an
independently funded program, authorized at $14 million per year, and
allowing design activities to be funded. FHWA worked with the Indian
Reservation Roads Program Coordinating Committee to implement these
legislative changes. Since its inception in TEA-21, the IRRBP has
provided more than $175 million in funding to over 300 bridge projects
in Indian Country.
National Scenic Byways Program
Indian Tribes have participated in the National Scenic Byways
Program since its inception under the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). SAFETEA-LU authorized the Secretary of
Transportation to make grants from this program directly to Indian
Tribes and to allow Tribes to nominate Indian roads directly to FHWA
(without going through a State department of transportation) for
possible designation as a National Scenic Byway or an All-American
Road.
FHWA has participated in Tribal transportation conferences to
inform Tribes of these changes to the National Scenic Byways Program.
FHWA also worked with the America's Byways Resource Center in Duluth,
Minnesota to establish a Tribal liaison position within the Resource
Center to provide technical assistance to Indian Tribes for
establishing Tribal scenic byways programs and designating roads as
Indian Tribe scenic byways.
In addition, FHWA has modified its grant application procedures so
that Indian Tribes may submit grant applications directly to FHWA. In
fiscal year 2011, Tribes submitted nine applications directly to FHWA
and two applications through the State departments of transportation,
requesting a total of $3.13 million. FHWA selected five of the
projects, providing a total of $2,104,796 in funding.
Public Lands Discretionary Program
The Public Lands Highway Discretionary program is another source of
funding available to Tribes for transportation needs. The program
provides funding to any project eligible under title 23, United States
Code, that is within, adjacent to, or provides access to Tribal or
Federal public lands. Over the life of SAFETEA-LU, including the
extensions through the end of this fiscal year, nearly $570 million was
made available through this program. Of the $570 million, $72 million
was provided for 78 Tribal related transportation projects. This year
alone, 16 Tribal projects totaling more than $20 million will receive
funding through this program.
FHWA Implementation of SAFETEA-LU Requirements for Tribal
Transportation
In addition to increased funding, SAFETEA-LU brought about many
changes in how the IRR program is administered and to the roles and
responsibilities of all parties involved in transportation delivery to
Tribal communities. Prior to SAFETEA-LU, FHWA provided stewardship and
oversight to the IRR program from a national perspective, and the BIA
worked with the Tribes by delivering the funds and providing technical
assistance. With the passage of SAFETEA-LU, Tribes now have the option
to enter into IRR Program Funding Agreements and work directly with
FHWA for their IRR Program share as long as the Tribes meet financial
audit and management capacity requirements. The number of Tribes
electing this option has grown from three the first year to more than
92 Tribes today.
In response to this increase in the number of Tribes, and increased
stewardship and oversight responsibilities, FHWA's FLH Office, which
has direct responsibility for administering the IRR program, has
increased staffing and worked closely with the Tribes and the BIA to
develop uniform program guidance. In addition to carrying out numerous
face-to-face meetings with each Tribe and conducting outreach and
training through webinars, regional conferences, and organized classes,
FLH developed a new program manual for all Tribes, States, counties,
and Federal agencies that communicates program expectations, roles and
responsibilities, and best practices.
National Indian Reservation Road Inventory
SAFETEA-LU directed FHWA to complete a comprehensive national
inventory of IRR eligible transportation facilities and submit a Report
to Congress. The purpose of the inventory study was to ensure that the
data in the existing inventory is accurate, and to help streamline the
procedures that Tribes utilize for updating their inventory. The
inventory is the most significant factor used to calculate the Tribal
shares of IRR program funding; thus, it is critical that data in the
inventory be accurate.
FHWA completed and delivered the required Report to Congress in
2008. The Report outlined the Agency's assessment of the inventory
process, including its accuracy and consistency of application. The
Report included the identification of more than 100,000 miles of road
as well as recommendations for improvement and additional study areas.
Since issuance of the Report, the inventory has grown to more than
140,000 miles of road. As a result of the Report and issues that have
arisen from the Question 10 series of consultations, FHWA plans to work
with a consultant to review more than 75 percent of the inventory data.
This work will clarify programmatic definitions of the inventory
entries and correct critical data errors and omissions that exist
within the current inventory in order to ensure an accurate data
system. Ultimately, the inventory will reflect the needs of Tribal road
transportation and serve as an important tool to help make the program
fair and equitable for all Tribes.
Outreach and Capacity Building
Road Safety Audits and Safety Trainings
Strategies such as Road Safety Audits (RSAs) and community-based
enforcement are proving to be effective tools for reducing fatalities
on Tribal lands. The FHWA Office of Safety sponsors training on Road
Safety Fundamentals and RSAs, and works with State and local
jurisdictions and Tribal governments to integrate RSAs into the project
development process for new and existing roads and intersections.
RSAs examine the safety performance of an existing or future road
or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team. They
estimate and report on potential road safety issues and identify
opportunities for improvements in safety for all road users. RSAs
enable localities and Indian Tribes with little or no safety data to
get an expert assessment on how to improve the safety of their roads.
RSAs were conducted for the following Tribal entities--Santa Clara
Pueblo and Jemez Springs Pueblo, New Mexico; Standing Rock Sioux, North
Dakota; the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, North Carolina; the
Navajo Nation, Utah; Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Wisconsin; Smith
River Rancheria, California; Native Villages of Minto and Manley Hot
Springs Village, and on Prince of Wales Island in Alaska; and six
additional Tribes in Arizona. These RSAs were carried out in
cooperation with State DOTs.
Tribal Technical Assistance Program
Tribes report that education and training remain significant
challenges. Many Tribes do not have a sustainable level of
transportation expertise, given their size and resources. The FHWA
supports a Tribal transportation assistance program with seven centers
serving Indian Country. These Tribal Technical Assistance Program
(TTAP) centers provide a variety of training and professional
development programs as well as technical publications and training
materials related to transportation planning, safety, the environment,
infrastructure design, construction and management, and other issues.
The centers are a key resource for basic services and to help many
Tribes become self-sufficient as sovereign nations in transportation
delivery. The purpose of our seven TTAP centers is to foster a safe,
efficient, and environmentally sound surface transportation system by
improving the skills and increasing the knowledge of local
transportation professionals.
The TTAP centers provide access to information, training, and
program management enhancements that may not have otherwise been
accessible to Tribes. In 2010, the TTAP Centers provided 299 training
courses to over 7,000 participants.
Through the TTAPs, FHWA also continues to provide technical
assistance and training to Tribes on conducting their own RSAs. For
example, FHWA has provided funding and support to the Northern Plains
TTAP to sponsor a Road Safety Audit Outreach Coordinator, who has
provided training and RSAs for the Spirit Lake Nation, the Winnebago
Tribe of Nebraska, and others.
While FHWA has remained focused on implementing SAFETEA-LU
programs, the Agency has also been recently hard at work ensuring that
Tribes use the much needed supplemental resources provided by the
Recovery Act.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
In addition to SAFETEA-LU funding, the Recovery Act has
supplemented funding for Tribal communities by providing an additional
$310 million for the IRR program. Since the Recovery Act was signed
into law, FHWA and BIA have worked diligently to ensure that the funds
for these projects are distributed quickly, wisely, and with
unprecedented transparency and accountability. The Federally-recognized
Tribes were eligible to receive Recovery Act funding based on the IRR
formula, which takes into account the highway projects' estimated
construction cost, volume of traffic along the route, and the Tribe's
current population. Much of the IRR portion of the Recovery Act has
been dedicated to improving roads that provide critical links between
Tribal residences and vital community services such as schools and
health care facilities.
FHWA, along with BIA and with input from Tribes, developed a
process that described the requirements for Tribes to receive and
obligate their share of Recovery Act funding by focusing on obligating
the majority of the $310 million before the end of fiscal year 2010.
FHWA and BIA also developed guidance to ensure a fair and transparent
process to redistribute funds in cases where funds would not otherwise
be obligated. The redistribution of more than $22.5 million to
approximately 25 Tribes nationwide helped ensure the efficient and
effective use of Recovery Act funds. To date, the more than 518 ARRA
funded projects are on average 80 percent complete, and according to
documentation provided by the Tribes, these projects have generated
more than 8,500 jobs.
An example includes the Blackfeet Indian Tribe in Montana that
awarded a project for $916,068 to improve a 14-mile segment of road
known as the Starr School Road. This completed project is now providing
a safer facility for school buses and other school traffic through sign
replacement, new right of way fences, and new roadway striping. The
drainage and pavement improvements made will extend the life of the
facility.
Another example is the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico that used
its Recovery Act funding along with its allocated IRR funding to
construct a $2.2 million project to provide an all weather surfaced
road to a new housing development. These residents had previously been
required to access their homes via a two-track mud road which became
impassible in inclement weather.
In the Native Village of Tuntutuliak in Alaska, the Tribe combined
Recovery Act funding with IRR Program funds and funding from the Denali
Commission to reconstruct a 30-year-old board road. This $846,000
project now allows villagers to move within the village without having
to trudge through the tundra. The BIA reports that this project was
completed using all Tribal employment.
For the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery
(TIGER) grant award program, Congress dedicated $1.5 billion under
TIGER I and $600 million under TIGER II for DOT to provide direct
grants to State, local, and Tribal governments, to fund surface
transportation projects that have a significant impact on the Nation, a
region or a metropolitan area. DOT was able to fund 51 innovative
capital projects under TIGER I, and an additional 42 capital projects
under TIGER II. TIGER II also featured a planning grant category, and
DOT was able to fund 33 planning grant projects. Both TIGER programs
involved a highly competitive process and received tremendous applicant
interest. Tribal projects were selected under both TIGER I and TIGER
II.
The Navajo Nation received a $31 million TIGER I grant to improve
US-491, the primary north-south highway that connects the Tribe to
other parts of New Mexico, Colorado, and the Four Corners area, by
constructing two new lanes and making safety improvements. The project
is being administered by the New Mexico DOT and will improve safety and
transportation efficiency. It will also create potential economic
development opportunities for the Navajo Nation.
TIGER I funds were also used to reconstruct a portion of US-18
between Oglala and Pine Ridge on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South
Dakota. This $10 million project upgraded 15.6 miles of a two lane
highway that had no shoulders and deteriorating pavement. These
improvements will significantly improve the overall safety of this
section of road which has experienced an accident rate more than 2.5
times the South Dakota average.
The Pueblo of Laguna received a $1,470,000 TIGER II planning grant
to plan and design approximately 40 miles of trails on the reservation
to connect six distinct communities with a focus on their traditional
village cores. Creating links between five villages supports the
collaborative efforts of the communities on the reservation and
provides inexpensive transportation choices in this rural region of
need.
On July 6, 2011, Secretary LaHood announced the availability of
$527 million in funding for a third round of the TIGER grant program.
This discretionary funding will provide an additional opportunity for
Tribes to compete for capital improvement funds as direct recipients.
In recognition of the importance of this program to the Tribes, DOT
will hold a webinar tomorrow to provide outreach and education to the
Tribes on the application process. Such outreach will continue through
the application process in order to ensure quality applications are
received for consideration.
Conclusion
Transportation infrastructure is a critical tool for Tribes to
improve the quality of life in their communities by providing safe
access to jobs, hospitals, and schools. The challenges are to maintain
and improve transportation systems serving Indian lands and Alaska
Native villages in order to provide safe and efficient transportation,
while at the same time protecting environmentally sensitive lands and
cultural resources. The Department is committed to improving
transportation access to and through Tribal lands through stewardship
of the Federal Lands and Federal-aid programs. Thank you again for this
opportunity to testify. I will be pleased to answer any questions you
may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Baxter.
I would like to ask Mr. Tsosie to please proceed with your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF PAUL TSOSIE, CHIEF OF STAFF, OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY LEROY GISHI, CHIEF,
DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Tsosie. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and
other members of the Committee. Aloha.
The Chairman. Aloha.
Mr. Tsosie. My name is Paul Tsosie. I am the Chief of Staff
for the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs. And as is
customary with Navajos, I am going to introduce myself in
Navajo.
[Greeting in Native tongue.]
Mr. Tsosie. In preparation for this testimony, I want to
thank certain individuals, Mr. Darren Pete and Chastity Bodoni,
who both work in the Office of Congressional Affairs for the
Department of Interior. I also want to give a special thanks to
Leroy Gishi, who is here to my right, the Division Chief for
the BIA's Division of Transportation. He will be here with me
to answer any technical questions after I testify.
Last week, the President of the United States gave an
urgent message about the lagging economy, the need to create
jogs, to put people to work, to rebuild decaying roads and
bridges. On behalf of the Department of Interior, we have a
duty to carry this out for Indian communities.
Now, as a piece of background, I want to give the baseline.
We have around 145,000 roads in Indian communities; 31,000 of
those are BIA, Bureau of Indian Affairs, roads. That is about
22 percent. And 20,000 of those are unpaved, which means that
two-thirds of the BIA roads are automatically considered
inadequate for BIA standards. We need investment in our road
system. If we invest in our road system, we can create jobs and
safer communities.
Since 1982, under the IRR program, the Department of
Interior, along with the Department of Transportation, we have
invested over $6 billion into infrastructure within Indian
communities. Another good example of our investment into Indian
communities is ARRA. Under ARRA, about 6,500 jobs were created
in Indian communities. That was over 800 projects estimated to
be around $440 million into these projects. And we had an
obligation on behalf of the Department of Interior of 99.9
percent. And 90 percent of these funds made it directly into
Tribal communities and local economies.
This was investment into local economies where unemployment
is high, the average income is low, and people are hungry for
the work. As far as safety goes, our roads are being used every
day by police officers, ambulance drivers, school buses,
everyday traffic. And to add on top of this, these past few
years in Indian Country have been some of the worst, with
floods, rain, snow, natural disasters in Indian Country. These
natural disasters emphasize the need for safe roads within
Indian communities.
Mr. Baxter just testified that the annual fatality rate on
Indian reservation roads is more than twice the national
average. So what all these facts add up to is that we have a
big job to do. We have a big job to invest in infrastructure
which will lead to jobs and safety.
Now, this is not just a responsibility of the Department of
Interior. It is not just the responsibility of the Department
of Transportation. This is a responsibility of the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes. We look forward to working
together with Mr. Jefferson Keel from NCAI, Chairman Murphy
from Standing Rock. We look forward to working together with
them and we also look forward to working together with State,
county and local entities.
And especially, we look forward to working together with
this Committee on any SAFETEA-LU reauthorizations where we can
offer specific recommendations to this Committee to make sure
this happens. Because in Indian Country right now, Tribal
individuals need employment. Tribal companies need to be put to
work. Tribal communities are waiting for infrastructure
development. Roads and bridges are there that need to be
repaired. There are projects in the Southwest, Great Plains,
the Rocky Mountains and Alaska that need to be completed. We
need to provide job opportunities and safe roads for our Indian
people.
Thank you, mahalo. I will be here for any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Tsosie follows:]
Prepared Statement of Paul Tsosie, Chief of Staff, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior
Introduction
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name
is Paul Tsosie and I am the Chief of Staff for the office of the
Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of the
Interior (Department). With me today is Mr. LeRoy Gishi, the Division
Chief for the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) Division of
Transportation.
Last week President Obama reminded us of the urgency of addressing
our country's lagging economy, the need to create jobs, the need to put
people to work rebuilding America, and to address our badly decaying
roads and bridges all over our country. This includes the roads and
bridges that are constructed, maintained and traversed in Indian
Country. This Administration has been focusing on improving the lives
of people living in Indian Country through the BIA Indian Reservation
Roads and the Roads Maintenance Programs. This focus has also been
supplemented with the federal government's investment through the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy
for Users (SAFETEA-LU) funding authorizations.
Improving and adequately maintaining transportation systems
provides increased public safety and economic development opportunities
in Indian communities. Safe roads are important when transporting
people in rural areas to and from schools, to local hospitals, and for
delivering emergency services. In addition, transportation networks in
American Indian and Alaska Native communities are critical for economic
development in such communities because these transportation networks
provide access to other economic markets. Thus, we are pleased to
testify before this Committee on Tribal Transportation: Paving the Way
for Jobs, Infrastructure, and Safety in Native Communities, and to
provide an overview of the BIA's Road Maintenance Program and the
Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program.
Overview
The BIA has been involved in the repair, construction and
reconstruction of roads on Indian Reservations since the 1920s. From
1950 until 1983, Congress appropriated annual construction and
maintenance funds to the BIA to maintain, repair and construct roads on
Indian Reservations. During this time, approximately $1.2 billion was
provided for both construction and maintenance of reservation roads.
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-424)
created the Federal Lands Highway Program (Title 23 U.S. Code, Chapter
2) and established the IRR Program as a category of public roads
providing access to or within Indian reservations, lands, communities
and Alaska Native villages. The IRR Program is now jointly administered
by the BIA in the Department, and the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), which is within the Department of Transportation.
BIA Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program
The change in the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982
meant that the IRR Program would be funded by the Department of
Transportation's Highway Trust Fund. Since the establishment of the IRR
Program, the Federal construction investment in the IRR system that is
now comprised of BIA, Tribal, state, county and local roads and bridges
has exceeded $6 billion. These investments have contributed greatly to
the improvement of roads and the replacement or rehabilitation of
deficient bridges on or near reservations throughout Indian Country.
Today, the IRR Program supports over 145,000 miles of public roads
with multiple owners, including Indian Tribes, the BIA, states and
counties. There remains a great and continuing need to improve the
transportation system throughout Indian Country. The BIA views this as
a joint responsibility including not only Federal agencies, but state
and local governments with transportation investments on or near
American Indian and Alaska Native communities, as well. Coordination
among all of these owners is required in order to maximize available
resources to address transportation needs.
Question 10 of 25 CFR Part 170
Specific to the IRR Program, in 2004, the Department of the
Interior published the Final Rule establishing the policies and
procedures governing the IRR Program. See 69 Fed. Reg. 43090 (July 19,
2004), codified at 25 C.F.R. Part 170. Question 10, in Appendix C to
Subpart C of the Final Rule, addressed a question regarding the IRR
Program's funding formula. Since 2004, the IRR Program and Tribes have
been struggling with ``Question 10'' and the BIA and FHWA have worked
to clarify the interpretation.
Question 10 (Q10) addresses whether a road's Cost to Construct
(CTC) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is to count at 100 percent in
the formula calculation, or at the non-Federal share if the road is
otherwise eligible for Federal-aid funds. See 69 Fed. Reg. at 43121.
The non-Federal share is the local match percentage as established by
the FHWA for federal aid highways, which varies from 5 percent to 20
percent. The Federal share is the percentage of cost of Federal aid
projects payable by the Federal Government.
While the answer specified in the Final Rule was that a non-Federal
share percentage should be applied, the BIA has administered the
program with all costs counting 100 percent (except for State-owned
roads), since there was no data in the inventory to clearly distinguish
roads that were only eligible for certain types of Federal funds. The
Final Rule on IRR also established an IRR Program Coordinating
Committee (IRRPCC), to provide input and recommendations to both the
BIA and the FHWA in the development or revision of the IRR Program's
policies and procedures. The IRRPCC took up the Q10 issue beginning in
August of 2006 but was unable to agree upon a recommendation. As a
result, representatives from the IRRPCC requested that BIA and FHWA
develop a proposed clarification for Q10.
The BIA and FHWA proposal eliminates road ownership from
consideration in the IRR formula calculation and places the
determination strictly on roadway classification. This clarification
calls for the non-Federal share percentages to be applied to roads that
are determined to be otherwise eligible for Federal funds, resulting in
a consistent application of the non-Federal share across all roads in
the IRR Program inventory.
This proposed clarification recognizes that any road with a
functional classification above local road or rural minor collector
will contribute its CTC and VMT at the non-Federal share rate, except
for BIA and Tribally owned roads which contribute 100 percent to the
CTC and VMT regardless of functional classification. This
interpretation is aligned with the original language of Q10.
It is anticipated that the proposed clarification of Q10 will
appropriately move the focus of discussions surrounding the IRR Program
roads inventory and funding process from Q10 to the broader issues of
the quality, physical size and composition of the IRR Program roads
inventory. Over the past 6 years the inventory has increased from
approximately 65,000 miles in 2005 to approximately 145,000 in 2010.
Achieving consistency in the IRR Program roads inventory is an on-going
effort involving training, process improvements, and implementing
consistent parameters that will require a dedicated effort from all
parties.
More recently, the FHWA, working with BIA, has entered into a
contract with an independent engineering firm to review more than 75
percent of the inventory data. This work will clarify programmatic
definitions of the inventory entries and correct critical data errors
and omissions that exist within the current IRR inventory in order to
ensure an accurate data system. This data review and clarification of
the inventory will reflect the needs of Tribal road transportation and
serve as an important tool to help make the program fair and equitable
for all Tribes.
BIA Road Maintenance
The BIA currently implements both the Department of
Transportation's Highway Trust Funded IRR program and the Department of
the Interior-funded BIA Road Maintenance Program. The BIA Road
Maintenance Program has traditionally been responsible for maintaining
only roads owned by the BIA. Today, of the 145,000 miles of roads in
the IRR Program, the BIA has responsibility for 31,000 miles of roads
designated as BIA system roads. The BIA receives Tribal Priority
Allocation (TPA) funding annually for the administration of the road
maintenance program for those roads.
Further, approximately 30 percent of Tribes with BIA system roads
within their reservation boundaries currently carry out the BIA Road
Maintenance Program through P.L. 93-638 self-determination contracts or
agreements in lieu of federal employees. Approximately 20,500 miles (66
percent) of the BIA system roads are not paved and are, thus,
considered ``inadequate'' from the perspective of the Level of Service
index used to assess roads and bridges in the BIA road system.
There are numerous different vehicles utilizing the road systems,
paved and unpaved, in Indian Country. Passenger vehicles, commercial
vehicles and public safety and emergency medical vehicles use these
roads. The IRR Program does not track the specific type of vehicle
using the road systems in Indian Country. Building, repairing and
maintaining the roads system in Indian Country is crucial for providing
safe and adequate roads for individuals and commercial businesses and
for public safety in Indian Country.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) (ARRA). ARRA
provided supplemental funding for infrastructure investment in Indian
Country. A portion of ARRA funding was provided to the IRR Program
within Indian Affairs, subject to certain restrictions and
requirements. ARRA offered a unique opportunity to make tangible
improvements to Indian communities while promoting economic recovery
through the preservation and creation of jobs. A few of the
requirements, such as, obligating and expending the ARRA funds within
two years, resulted in an increase in employment for road construction
in Indian Country in order to meet these requirements. Based on reports
by Tribes that participate in the IRR Program, we estimate that over
6,500 jobs were created under the ARRA funding that flowed into Indian
Country. This figure may be higher if the Tribes who did not report job
increases did in fact have increased employment numbers as it related
to ARRA funding they received for road construction.
As of September 30, 2010, 99.9 percent of the funding provided by
ARRA for both Repair and Restoration of BIA roads and bridges and the
construction and reconstruction of IRR Program facilities had been
obligated to projects approved by the Secretaries of the Department of
the Interior and the Department of Transportation. Within the Repair
and Restoration of BIA roads program, over 400 projects were awarded
totaling over $141 million. Within the IRR Program, approximately 420
projects were awarded totaling over $225 million. In addition, over $50
million was awarded to Tribes contracting directly with the FHWA.
ARRA funds made a significant contribution to improving
transportation facilities in Indian Country. Each eligible Tribe was
given the opportunity to receive maintenance and construction
improvements on their BIA and IRR Program facilities, including roads,
bridges, transit structures, docks, and boardwalks. In addition, the
provisions of ARRA authorized the Secretary of Transportation to
redistribute unobligated funds to projects submitted by Tribes based on
a call for projects in February 2010. The total ARRA funding
redistributed by both agencies was approximately $22.5 million.
Reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU
As we discuss the need for jobs, infrastructure and safety of roads
in Indian communities, it is important to note that there is the need
for prompt and immediate reauthorization of the SAFETEA-LU Act. This
reauthorization is crucial to Tribal governments that rely on early
notification of their Tribal shares from the funding formula to plan
their priority projects. The numerous short term extensions of SAFETEA-
LU result in infrequent and delayed allocations to the Tribes and have
also resulted in late planning and obligations to Tribal contracts.
These delays force projects to be delayed as much as one year.
Indian Affairs established its priorities for the reauthorization
of the surface transportation programs. These priorities include, but
are not limited to, additional resources to meet the need of a
deteriorating roads system, establish an IRR Safety Program, additional
resources for the IRR Bridge Program, and increase the planning set-
aside from the IRR Programs from two percent to four percent.
Conclusion
Indian Affairs is committed to addressing the transportation needs
in Indian Country through our support for the IRR Program, the Road
Maintenance Program, and applaud the infusion of ARRA funding for
transportation in Indian Country. As the President stated last
Thursday, ``[t]here are private construction companies all across
America just waiting to get to work. There's a bridge that needs repair
between Ohio and Kentucky that's on one of the busiest trucking routes
in North America. A public transit project in Houston that will help
clear up one of the worst areas of traffic in the country.'' A similar
statement can be made for Indian Country. We know there are American
Indian owned and Tribally owned construction companies all across
Indian Country just waiting to get to work. There are bridges that need
repair on Tribal lands in New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, and
on Tribal lands in Wyoming. And there are transit projects on Tribal
lands that provide rural transportation on those Tribal lands. And as
part of the immediate infrastructure investments that the President
sent to Congress in the American Jobs Act, $310 million would be
directed towards the Indian Reservation Roads program.
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on an issue that
is an important part of the employment, economic infrastructure and
roads safety for Tribes. We will be happy to answer any questions you
may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Tsosie, for your
testimony.
I know that some of my colleagues are limited in how long
they will be able to stay for today's hearing, so I am going to
ask the first panel one question, and then I will defer to my
colleagues to make an opening statement and to ask their
questions.
My question to both witnesses is, whether you think that
the Administration's recommendations to deal with the IRR
funding formula issue, or what we call Question 10, will
resolve that issue? Or is legislative action necessary? Mr.
Baxter?
Mr. Baxter. Mr. Chairman, my sense is that we have done
quite a bit of work to remedy the issue of Question 10. Of
course, the issue gets to whether the non-Federal share is
applied toward the inventory process or not. There have been a
number of discussions related to the issue. And recently, the
Department has been working with Tribes and the coordinating
committee to make sure that we address the issue and are moving
forward with the intent of the original rulemaking process.
We have undergone efforts to make the guidance more clear.
We are working on the coding guides to eliminate any
subjectivity that might be part of that. And we are developing
teams that will look at the quality of the data that is in the
inventory.
We actually have a consultant on board to review about 75
percent of the inventory that is in question, and whether or
not those roads are otherwise eligible for Federal aid. And
that determines the percentage of the funds that are counted
toward the inventory process.
So we have been working directly with the Tribes. We think
we have an appropriate solution that honors the original intent
of the rulemaking process. And therefore, we don't believe that
there is a legislative fix necessary. We believe that what we
are doing, in partnership with the Tribal leadership, is moving
the issue forward, and we will resolve it.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Baxter.
Mr. Tsosie?
Mr. Tsosie. Mr. Baxter exactly, he stole my answer. But I
just wanted to address the Committee and indicate that it is
premature at this time for any legislative action because this
rule was developed with consultation with Indian Tribes, the
rulemaking process, and now we are implementing it in a fair
manner that is consistent with the law.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Now I would like to call on our Vice Chairman, Senator
Barrasso, for any opening statement he may have and questions.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
thank you for holding this hearing today.
Before I begin with the questions, I do want to welcome Wes
Martel, who is Co-Chair of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe in
Wyoming, as well as Jim Shakespeare, who is Chair of the
Northern Arapaho Tribe in Wyoming.
Mr. Chairman, I have a brief opening statement, because
transportation facilities are key to improving the quality of
life in Indian Country. Tribes and their members need safe,
accessible and well-maintained roads. They need them to get to
work, to get their children to and from school and to allow
police and firefighters and other emergency responders to do
their jobs as well.
They need these roads also to make economic development
possible. The Indian Reservation Roads program has over the
years greatly improved transportation infrastructure in Indian
Country. As we have heard, though, still much work needs to be
done. So hopefully we are hearing today how we can continue
working toward safe and reliable infrastructure in Native
communities.
My first question for both witnesses is this: in the second
panel we are going to hear John Healy testifying about
inconsistent interpretations of the definition of ``Indian
reservation roads,'' and that inconsistent interpretation has
resulted in some misrepresentation of the needs in Indian
Country.
Do you think that maybe your agencies should adopt a
uniform guideline for determining what roads qualify as Indian
Reservation Roads? Mr. Baxter, we can start with you, and then
Mr. Tsosie.
Mr. Baxter. Thank you.
I do believe that discussions we have had on the Q10 issue
are addressed in that issue. As we know, the Indian Reservation
Roads program consists of roads that are owned and operated by
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, those that are Tribally owned, as
well as those that are owned by State and county governments.
When we look at those roads, we look at the classifications of
them, the types of facilities, how much it costs to reconstruct
those facilities, the volumes, the population base that they
support, all those things are part of the formula, part of the
necessary analysis of determining what is a fair and equitable
distribution of funds through that inventory process.
So we apply those definitions of the different types of
roadways and whether it is on a reservation or not. A lot of
roads are not within a reservation boundary, but they certainly
serve and provide access to Tribal lands and access to Tribal
communities.
So I think we are addressing those definitions through the
process of the Q10 issue as well as the inventory items that we
addressed.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Tsosie?
Mr. Tsosie. Thank you.
On this question, I am going to defer to Mr. Leroy Gishi.
Mr. Gishi. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso, what Mr. Baxter said is exactly correct.
In fact, one of the significant changes in the regulations as a
result of the negotiated rulemaking was to develop a committee
of Tribal representatives, one of the few, in fact, that we
have at the Department of Interior that are in regulation. This
Committee, the Indian Reservation Roads program coordinating
committee, we have been working with them since they were
developed as part of the regulation. And part of that process
is to work through a lot of these issues.
We are currently working on three major issues, one of them
was Question 10, and working with that same committee, as well
as, as Mr. Baxter indicated, those roads which are identified
as access roads, proposed roads. We continue to work with them
and coordinate. The committee, 24 members from Indian Country
throughout the Nation, are very dedicated in helping us to
resolve those very issues that are out there. And we do
recognize that and they do also.
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Baxter, last October I think you testified that the
number of traffic deaths on U.S. roads reached a record low.
Meanwhile, the annual fatality rate on Indian reservation roads
continued to be more than three times the national average. You
also testified that safety summits were held to address these
high fatality rates. Today you have testified regarding
additional highway safety efforts.
Can you tell us a little bit about the effects of these
efforts, what they have had on the fatality rates in Indian
communities?
Mr. Baxter. Thank you. We have been very aggressive in the
safety area in Indian Country. We applied a comprehensive
approach, we call it the 4E approach of safety, we looked at
engineering countermeasures, we looked at enforcement, we
looked at education and we looked at emergency services. We
need to make progress in all four of those areas.
We are working very closely with the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration on behavioral programs such as
belt usage and DUI enforcement. In Indian Country, alcohol
usage is above the national average, 48 percent versus 32
percent. And percentage of unrestrained occupants is 75 percent
versus 55 percent. So we have some areas that we really need to
make some improvements and focus our resources.
On the infrastructure side, there are a number of proven
technologies and proven strategies that we use on all of our
roads across the Country. Certainly the use of rumble strips
and guardrails and roundabouts, the way we approach and design
intersections, adequate shoulders, all these things are basic
safety measures that we can take. So we have been very
aggressive in that area.
We also have a Tribal safety planning steering committee
which is represented by a number of Federal agencies as well as
a number of Tribal leaders around the Country. This past
summer, they developed a Tribal safety plan which identifies a
number of these strategies, such as the summits and plans. Road
safety audits are a very important tool, because oftentimes in
Indian Country we don't have adequate data to support the
analysis of highway crashes. So we use multidisciplinary teams
to look at these areas, corridors and roads, and make
determinations based on safety issues as to what improvements
need to be made. So that is very important as well.
Senator Barrasso. I have a final question for Mr. Tsosie.
In February of 2010, the Office of Inspector General issued a
report on the Department of the Interior roads program, citing
several concerns including inaccuracies in road inventories and
prioritizing needs and the inability to adequately detect
mismanagement or any mis-use of funds. Your response to the
report noted that the BIA was implementing a corrective plan
for the inventories. I wonder if you could just bring us up to
date on the corrective action plan and how you are addressing
the other concerns of the Inspector General.
Mr. Tsosie. Two parts of that corrective action plan. One,
we have an internal committee within the Department of Interior
composed of the bureaus within the Department of Interior. And
we meet on a regular basis. And we monitor what is going on on
a policy level.
The second part of that is that we did not decentralize or
we kept these functions out in the field where they belong,
because that is where the experts are. We are keeping a close
tab on that.
The rest of the answer I am going to turn over to Mr. Leroy
Gishi.
Mr. Gishi. One of the areas that is very critical to this
process is the majority of the work that is done in the field
is performed by Tribal members through contracts under self-
determination. And that is very critical, because for us to be
able to do that as an agency, whether Federal highways or BIA,
would be very difficult. The provisions are there within the
law.
So for that reason, it is very important to make sure that
it was understood that bringing these types of activities into
central office in terms of the actual work, the expert level
work, was not necessary and that it will continue to be handled
at the field level. But the policy areas will be handled at the
central office level.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Barrasso.
Senator Franken, any opening statement or questions you may
have.
STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Franken. Sure, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
first for holding this hearing on this important issue, and I
want to thank all the witnesses for your great testimony.
I really agree with the Vice Chairman, who said that on
roads in Indian Country, you have police cars and firefighters
and school buses and normal, everyday traffic, families and of
course economic activity, goods and services. So you have the
need for safe, accessible, well-maintained roads. It is a
source of economic development. I think that was well put by
the Vice Chairman.
I was interested, because Mr. Tsosie, you said that during
the ARRA, or the Recovery Act, that there were 6,500 jobs
approximately created in Indian Country. Is that correct?
Mr. Tsosie. Yes.
Senator Franken. That was during the Recovery Act?
Mr. Tsosie. Yes.
Senator Franken. What some people have referred to as the
stimulus.
Mr. Tsosie. Yes.
Senator Franken. That is interesting to me. Were these
Tribal contractors, by and large, and workers on the Tribes, on
the reservations?
Mr. Tsosie. Initially, the money goes into Indian
communities and the local communities surrounding Indian
communities. I can get back to you with a breakdown of, as far
as the information that we have, about exactly where the money
went.
Senator Franken. But it put 6,500 people to work in Indian
Country building infrastructure?
Mr. Tsosie. Yes.
Senator Franken. Okay. That is interesting, because that is
6,500 more than some of my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle say that the Recovery Act created, which I think is
really interesting. Because somewhere, 6,500 jobs are uncreated
somewhere else, I guess, in the entirety of the Recovery Act.
I can't agree with the Vice Chairman more that
infrastructure creates economic development. When I go around
the State of Minnesota, I have companies talking about getting
their goods around the State. And yet I hear from members of
the other side that during the stimulus package, we created
zero jobs, or the only jobs created were Federal bureaucrats.
Were these people building the roads in Indian Country, were
they Federal bureaucrats? Were they like bean counters in the
GAO or something?
Mr. Tsosie. The money was used for infrastructure projects.
Senator Franken. Right.
Mr. Tsosie. Not bean counters.
Senator Franken. Yes, that is what I thought.
Mr. Baxter, in your testimony you say that 27 percent of
bridges within the Indian Reservation Roads program are
classified as deficient. And the current backlog to bring all
Indian reservation roads to adequate condition is $69 billion.
How would you say the state of the roads and bridges in Indian
Country compares to those in the rest of the United States?
Mr. Baxter. That is a good question. As far as the
percentage of deficient bridges, compared to the States, the
State side is 24 percent deficient bridges, for local
governments it is 27 percent deficient bridges, which is about
the same overall number as the Tribal bridges. The biggest
difference is the the percentage that are structurally
deficient. On the State side of the 24 percent, 7.9 percent are
structurally deficient. For the local percentage, 27 percent,
15 percent of that is structurally deficient.
But in Indian Country, for BIA's roads, of the 27 percent,
20.7 percent are structurally deficient. So what we are seeing
is a disproportionately higher number of bridges that are
structurally deficient in Indian Country compared to other
routes.
Senator Franken. So we have relatively higher need in
Indian Country.
Mr. Baxter. That is correct.
Senator Franken. Now, under current law, 25 percent of
Indian Reservation Roads construction funds can be used for
maintenance, and the rest of the maintenance money comes from
annual appropriations through the BIA. In States like
Minnesota, maintenance projects like snow removal and pavement
preservation can be incredibly expensive.
Given the backlog, as we have just discussed, are we
spending enough on road maintenance compared to what we spend
on new construction? Anybody. And my time has run out, so I
apologize. But if I can get an answer.
Mr. Tsosie. On this answer, I am going to defer to Mr.
Leroy Gishi again.
Mr. Gishi. That is correct. The provision in SAFETEA-LU
provided that 25 percent of the funds be used for road
maintenance. And these are for all IRR roads that are out
there.
As we begin to see the Tribes, in the first few years,
continue to defer to the owner agencies to continue to maintain
roads, it has in the last few years increased from the
standpoint of about $7 million to $8 million a year to $32
million a year. So the Tribes are realizing and making an
effort to address those roads which are out there, and a lot of
times they are even utilizing their own funds to be able to
maintain roads. That is one of the critical areas that are out
there.
Senator Franken. Thank you. Thank you all.
The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you very much, Senator
Franken.
Senator Udall, an opening statement or questions.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Chairman Akaka, for
holding this important hearing on Tribal transportation.
Right now there is much debate about the future of surface
transportation. As you know, an extension of that surface
transportation bill is awaiting Senate action. That same
extension may be held up due to a disagreement on how our
transportation dollars are spent.
What we know, however, is that our Nation needs investment
in our infrastructure. That includes the Tribal transportation
system. We should not allow political fighting to hold up the
critical extension, and ultimately a long-term reauthorization
bill.
I am pleased to see that Mr. Paulson Chaco will be joining
us today on the third panel. He serves as the Executive
Director for the Navajo Nation Division of Transportation. Mr.
Chaco has a challenging job to address the transportation needs
of the vast Navajo Nation. In the past, he has worked to
develop the Navajo Nation fuel excise tax program. This program
results in $10 million annually for road construction on the
Nation.
He was also successful in applying for and receiving a
TIGER grant to improve a critical section of roadway in New
Mexico and make it safer for all travelers. I look forward to
hearing his testimony and that of the other witnesses, and I
look forward to working aggressively to draft legislation to
ensure that adequate funding is provided to maintain and
improve the transportation network in Tribal communities.
Now, a question for this panel. I am impressed with what
seems like very positive impacts of SAFETEA-LU and IRR in
Indian Country. Yet I remain concerned with the growing safety
and fatality rates that persist. You all have stressed the need
for increased and sustained funding in the reauthorization of
SAFETEA-LU. Yet the numbers you have given us, increased car
and pedestrian fatalities, show that even with this program,
the issues of safety persist.
How do we account for the rising numbers of fatalities in
Indian Country, even after SAFETEA-LU, with its increased
funding and additional programs, has been implemented? Mr.
Baxter, why don't you start, then I would love to hear from Mr.
Tsosie.
Mr. Baxter. Thank you. In recognition of the continued
needs for safety in Indian Country, what we have proposed in
our 2012 budget is that we would have a dedicated safety fund
for the Indian Reservation Roads program, essentially taking
about 2 percent of those funds, dedicated specifically toward
safety projects. We think that will make a major impact.
We also have within our safety program, our overall
program, proposed funding for rural safety, up to 10 percent of
the funds for rural safety. Again, we believe Tribes will
compete well in that program, and that will offer opportunities
for projects that would address the safety and fatality issue.
Senator Udall. Thank you. Mr. Tsosie?
Mr. Tsosie. Yes, and on this question again, I am going to
defer to Mr. Leroy Gishi.
Mr. Gishi. It is important to note that the roads which we
refer to in the Indian Reservation Roads program are
traditionally 20 to 30 years behind what the State systems are.
Many of the roads that are out there were roads that were put
in place by utility companies, resource companies and were
never engineered. So when these companies leave, a lot of the
roads are no longer usable at 55 miles an hour.
So when we talk about the $69 billion backlog, it really
reflects the need to bring the system to an adequate standard,
not overkill, but to an adequate standard. So that is the
reason why there are a lot of those problems that are out
there, because of the condition of the roads.
Senator Udall. I think the point that you are making is
that, and it cannot be made enough, is that we have to bring
Tribal roads up to the level of our other roads at the State
and Federal level. And we need to do that soon because of the
safety issue. So that is the message that I get from you.
I very much appreciate Chairman Akaka. He has been very
aggressive on all of the issues across Native nations, and this
Tribal transportation is an important one. He once again is
bringing it to the forefront. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Udall.
I want to thank this panel. In the interest of time, I will
send my remaining questions and any questions remaining members
may have to you for responses. And I want to thank you so much,
mahalo nui loa, for being here and giving us invaluable
information that is going to help us deal with the problems
that we are facing on transportation and jobs.
So thank you very much, panel one.
I would like to invite the second panel to the witness
table.
Serving on the second panel is the Honorable Jefferson
Keel, President of the National Congress of American Indians,
and Mr. C. John Healy, Sr., President of the InterTribal
Transportation Association.
Mr. Keel, will you please proceed with your testimony?
STATEMENT OF HON. JEFFERSON KEEL, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS
OF AMERICAN INDIANS
Mr. Keel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon,
Committee members.
My name is Jefferson Keel. I am Lieutenant Governor of the
Chickasaw Nation and the President of the National Congress of
American Indians. I am honored to be here today. I want to
thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senators, for holding this hearing.
This is an extremely important hearing and the topic is
something that is not new to us. In fact, I have testified
before this Committee on other occasions, even regarding this
topic. And in the past, we have provided the Committee with the
national Tribal leadership on transportation priorities for
Tribes.
I don't need to reiterate the importance of this. You have
heard from the previous panel how important it is for Tribal
members to have access to transportation. The idea that 60
percent of the system is still under-improved earth in Indian
communities, of that 140,000 miles that we have talked about,
and the bridges that are structurally deficient, you have
already heard.
The transit, rights of way, safety, and increasing the
Indian Reservation Roads program and streamlining the process
through self-determination contracting will greatly enhance our
efforts. Today, I want to talk a little bit about the job
challenges and focus on Tribal transportation for sustainable
economic development. That is something that is very important
to Indian communities. As this Committee is aware, unemployment
is high in many Tribal communities. Creating and sustain jobs
are a significant issue for Tribal leaders and for our Nation.
Transportation infrastructure is critical in addressing these
issues.
Of course, everyone wants to create jobs. But the question
is, what is the best investment? How can you spend Federal
funds in a way that creates jobs and also spurs new development
in the private sector that leads to even more jobs? How can you
get the multiplier effect moving?
The answer is, transportation. Every form of development
starts with transportation. When transport systems are
improved, they provide economic opportunities and benefits that
result in positive multiplier effects with new investments from
business, better accessability to markets and more employment.
The productivity of land, capital and labor increases with
improvements in transportation.
Indian Country gets more out of every transportation dollar
because so much of what we do is infrastructure development.
When we pave a dirt road or build a new bridge, there are
immediate and profound effects on the economy, on the
businesses and on the lives of the very people that we are
representing.
While I am on the subject of jobs, jobs in Tribal
transportation provide training and skill development for our
Tribal members in the transportation construction and planning
fields. Many Tribes have the capacity today to hire architects,
engineers and planners to help us develop those systems that we
need. Some Tribes do not. But the fact is, many Tribes are
engaged in that activity as we speak.
We need more support for the Tribal Technical Assistance
Program, which is the only technical assistance program that
provides education and training to Tribal governments for
transportation and roads projects. Training and education is
important to assist in building a viable transportation
workforce.
Last week, President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act,
to establish a national infrastructure bank. We would like to
have our own Tribal infrastructure bank. This would increase
the ability of Tribes to obtain funding for a broad range of
infrastructure projects, especially when Federal spending is
becoming more limited.
In closing, as we move forward in addressing these
challenges, it is critical to realize that Tribal communities
offer unique innovations that can make significant
contributions to the policy debate regarding the economy. The
National Congress of American Indians looks forward to
partnering with the Committee to ensure that Tribes are
included in developing and paving the way for Tribal
transportation.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Keel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jefferson Keel, President, National Congress
of American Indians
On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI),
thank you for the opportunity to testify on Tribal transportation in
Indian Country. NCAI is the oldest and largest national organization of
Indian Tribes in the United States and is dedicated to protecting the
rights of Tribal governments to achieve self-determination and self-
sufficiency. NCAI looks forward to working with members of this
Committee to enhance transportation infrastructure and jobs for Indian
Country.
Transportation infrastructure development is critical to economic
development, creating jobs, and improving living conditions for
individuals and families in Indian Country, and the millions of
Americans who travel through our reservations every day. Construction
of transportation systems that allows for safe travel and promotes
economic expansion will help us strengthen our Tribal communities while
at the same time making valuable contributions to much of rural
America. Surface transportation in Indian Country involves thousands of
miles of roads, bridges, and highways. It connects and serves both
Tribal and non-Tribal communities.
Currently, there are over 140,000 miles of Indian reservation roads
with multiple owners, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian
Tribes, states and counties. Indian reservation roads are still the
most underdeveloped road network in the nation however; it is the
principal transportation system for all residents of and visitors to
Tribal and Alaska Native communities. Approximately eight billion
vehicle miles traveled on Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program system
annually. Many road conditions on Indian reservations are unsafe,
inequitable and it is the primary barrier to economic development and
improvement of living conditions. For example, more than 60 percent of
the system is unimproved earth and gravel, and approximately 24 percent
of IRR bridges are classified as deficient. American Indians have the
highest rates of pedestrian injury and vehicle deaths per capita of any
racial or ethnic group in the United States. These conditions make it
very difficult for residents of Tribal communities to travel to
hospitals, stores, schools, and employment centers.
The passage of a new transportation authorization is imperative for
Indian Country for construction of roads and bridges; and the
generation of jobs in Indian Country. As you are aware, Tribal
communities have faced Depression level unemployment for generations.
In 2000, when the national unemployment rate was less than 3.5 percent,
the on-reservation unemployment rate was 22 percent. \1\ The Economic
Policy Institute reports that the Native unemployment rate has risen at
a rate 1.6 times the size of the white increase during the recession
(to 15.2 percent for all Native people). \2\ Jobs and unemployment are
important issues for this Administration and Tribal leaders, and next
transportation authorization will help address these concerns for
Indian and Alaskan Native communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 4.
\2\ Algernon Austin, (2010), ``Different Race, Different Recession:
American Indian Unemployment in 2010.'' Retrieved at: http://
www.epi.org/page/-/pdf/ib289.pdf?nocdn=1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jobs In Tribal Transportation
Transportation infrastructure development not only provides
economic development but it also provides access to job training and
employment in transportation related field. Unfortunately, there are
not adequate unemployment data to show the depiction of accurate
numbers of unemployment for every Indian Tribes and Alaska Native
villages. And, it is particularly concerning to us that the Bureau of
Labor Statistics does not include on-reservation unemployment rates
(often at levels well beyond 50 percent) in their monthly employment
reports. This absence means that the unemployment rate for states with
high Native populations is likely considerably understated, whether
states with higher than average unemployment rates (as in Michigan or
Oregon at 14.1 and 12.1 percent, respectively) or lower than average
(as in Arizona or Montana, at 8.2 or 6.2 percent respectively). The
role of this data in directing federal appropriations and guiding
federal, Tribal and state policymaking underscore the importance of
remedying this situation.
Long-term Job Planning
In order for any viable economic development growth there must be
initiatives for workforce development for Tribal and Alaska Native
communities. To ensure that Indian Country develops and enhances a
sophisticated skilled Tribal work force in transportation construction
it is important that Congress consider at long-term job planning. Job
planning includes job training and skill development; and providing
employment resources such as entrepreneurship training, resume
building, internship programs, and referral services.
The recruitment and need for engineers, planners, entrepreneur and
other skilled professional within Tribal communities are necessary for
transportation infrastructure. Tribal colleges and universities can
play an important role in workforce and skills development, family
support, and community education services. They are true community-
based institutions, providing the education and skills development
needed for entrepreneurship and job creation. According to a 2007
report from the Institute for Higher Education Policy, an associate's
or bachelor's degree on a reservation may enable a person to create
jobs by starting a business, foster the spirit of leadership and
entrepreneurship, and alter negative cultural perceptions of education
for future generations. \3\ The economic and social benefits of one
Tribal citizen receiving a college degree are experienced throughout a
community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2007). The Path of Many
Journeys: The Benefits of Higher Education for Native People and
Communities. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal governments can serve as significant incubators of economic
growth in relation to long-term job planning in general, and in
innovating areas of transportation infrastructure specifically. To
address these opportunities in the areas of transportation related
jobs: supporting job programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families, creating transportation related apprenticeship and the
potential of Tribal colleges and universities to spur job growth to the
benefit of a range of rural communities.
Tribal Technical Assistance
The Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP) is the only
technical assistance program that provides much needed transportation
related education and training to Tribal governments for transportation
road projects. Education and certification is important to assist in
building a viable Tribal transportation work force. In addition, having
well qualified skilled workers enables Indian Tribes and Alaska Native
Villages to further develop Tribal transportation infrastructure.
There are currently seven TTAP centers located around the country.
TTAP is funded by both the U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
and U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Currently, each TTAP receives
$280,000 a year in total funding, which is comprised of $140,000 from
the Local Technical Assistance Program and $140,000 from the IRR
program. This totals about $1.9 million for the overall TTAP funding
each fiscal year to serve all 565 federally recognized Tribes.
To ensure that the TTAPs are able to meet the increased demand for
their services and as additional Tribes assume responsibility for
administering their own transportation programs, NCAI recommends
Congress to have the U.S. Department of Transportation institute a TTAP
for each of the twelve BIA Regions. Additionally, NCAI recommends an
increase to the overall funding of TTAPs from $1.9 million to $4.2
million each fiscal year. This much needed funding will assist each
TTAP center to adequately address the increasing need for
transportation technical assistances.
Infrastructure
After years of little investment in Tribal infrastructure, America
faces a national deficit of $14.2 trillion that is prompting federal
budget reductions that are likely to severely impede economic
investment and undermine any progress towards establishing an Indian
Country economy. As federal spending become more limited the need for
enhancing infrastructure in Indian Country will continue to grow.
To help address the tough economy and budget deficit,
infrastructure development is still essential for Tribal economic
growth. To achieve this there are some issues we would like this
Committee and Congress to address that would spur infrastructure
development:
Establishing a Tribal infrastructure bank that would form an
independent financial institution owned by the government and
Tribes. This would give Tribes the ability obtain funding for a
broad range of infrastructure projects, and to be able to sell
or issue general purpose bonds to raise funds for lending and
investment.
The equitable access to transportation is more critical in
rural Tribal communities because many Tribal members do not own
personal vehicles and must travel long distances to get to a
job or school, or even see a healthcare professional.
Supporting the Tribal public transportation is essential to
improving transportation infrastructure in Indian Country.
Extending the Indian Self Determination Act and Educational
Assistance Act (ISDEAA) to the Department of Transportation and
its modal administrations will streamline the negotiation,
execution and implementation of grant, contract and funding
agreements for federal transportation program funding available
to Tribes and more effectively target program dollars to the
improvement of our Tribal transportation system.
In order for Tribes to construct road projects or improve
existing road routes, Tribes have to go to the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to acquire rights-of-way. It has been articulated by
Tribes that obtaining the rights-of-way is a frustrating time-
consuming and costly which hampers the transportation
infrastructure development.
Tribal Infrastructure Bank
Last week, the President proposed the ``American Jobs Act'' that
included the establishment of a National Infrastructure bank. In the
proposal, the President has asked Congress to fund the infrastructure
bank with $10 billion to assist in leveraging with private and public
capital to invest in infrastructure projects. This would provide the
ability to fund a broad range of infrastructure projects; it would make
loans and loan guarantees and leverage private capital. It should be
able to sell or issue general purpose bonds to raise funds for lending
and investment, sell specific project bonds when necessary, and invite
private investment, along with Tribal government pension plan
investments.
To address Tribal specific transportation infrastructure needs,
NCAI would like Congress to establish a Tribal Infrastructure Bank with
an initial capital investment of $10 million per year for five years.
Section 350 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995,
Public Law 104-59, authorized the U.S. Department of Transportation to
establish the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Pilot Program. A SIB is a
revolving fund mechanism for financing a wide variety of highway and
transit projects through loans and credit enhancement. SIBs were
designed to complement traditional Federal-aid highway and transit
grants by providing States increased flexibility for financing
infrastructure investments. Under the initial SIB Pilot Program, ten
states were authorized to establish SIBs. In 1996 Congress passed
supplemental SIB legislation as part of the DOT Fiscal Year (FY) 1997
Appropriations Act that enabled additional qualified states to
participate in the SIB pilot program. This legislation included a $150
million General Fund appropriation for SIB capitalization. Since then,
Congress has continued to support the SIB program, and specifically
reauthorized it in SAFETEA-LU.
The Tribal Infrastructure Bank (TIB) Pilot Program under which
Tribes would be eligible to obtain infrastructure funds in the form of
capital investments for use on authorized transportation projects. The
TIB would operate much like the SIBs. The TIB would be initially funded
with Federal start-up capital, with the goal of becoming self-
sufficient through its capital lending program. Tribes would be
eligible to leverage their IRR program and other Federal transportation
funds to obtain financing from the TIB at reasonable rates as one
preferred method of the flexible financing techniques described above.
Loans from the TIB shall not exceed a 20 year period.
Transit
All transportation infrastructures including transit are important
to economic growth in Indian Country. Tribal transit is a necessary
element to transportation infrastructure because it offers Tribal
members access to employment, health, education and commerce for
Tribes. Lack of employment has continuously been a difficult issue for
Tribes. Currently, the approximate unemployment rate for on-reservation
Indians is 18.6 percent, while for Alaska Native villages it is 25.1
percent. In addition, 15 percent of Tribal members have to travel over
100 miles to access basic services such as a bank or ATM. The
combination of high unemployment and the long distances to travel to
access basic services result in a great need for public transportation
infrastructure in Indian Country and surrounding non-Indian rural
communities.
In 2005, the enactment of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),
Public Law 109-59, authorized the U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to administer Section 5311 (c),
the ``Public Transportation on Indian Reservations Program'' or as it
is referred to as, Tribal Transit Program. The purpose of the Tribal
Transit Program is to fund capital, operating, planning, and
administrative expenses for public transit projects in rural Tribal
communities.
The Tribal Transit Program provides grant transit funding through a
national competitive process to federally-recognized Tribes. The Tribal
Transit Program funding level began at $8 million for FY 2006 and
increased to $15 million for FY 2010. Since the initiation of the
Tribal Transit Program, FTA has awarded approximately 236 grants to
Tribes totaling $60 million. However, the total amount requested by
Tribes who have applied for the Tribal Transit program is approximately
$189 million. So, even though the amounts that have been awarded thus
far are a good start on addressing the immense need for public
transportation in Indian Country, the overall need is much greater.
Many Tribes utilize the Tribal Transit Program to begin or maintain
their transit services on Tribal lands. NCAI is conscious of the
significant role that public transportation infrastructure plays in
Indian Country, and how much Tribes rely on this transit funding to
further their transportation infrastructure. It is important Congress
continues to sustain the Tribal Transit Program.
NCAI recommends the following: (1.) Funding: increase funding for
Tribal Transit Program to $35 million for FY2012 with stepped increases
of $10 million for every year thereafter to $85 million; and (2.)
Transit Planning: raise the current cap for Transit Planning Grants to
$50,000. Currently, Tribes are capped at $25,000 to use for planning
and design. This cap is a hindrance for Tribes who do not possess the
financial resources to initially establish a reliable transit system on
their Tribal land.
Extend the ISDEAA to all DOT Programs
Since the implementation of the Indian Self Determination Act and
Educational Assistance Act in 1975, infrastructure needs for many
Tribes have grown. Tribes opted to contract their own services in
health, government and education, capital-intensive programs, it has
spurred infrastructure development. New local jobs became available and
many professional Tribal members returned back to their Tribal
communities. Because of the diversity of Tribal operations that were
created as result of building local capacity, Tribal governments were
elevated to full-time operations.
Under the past few reauthorizations, Congress has sought to extend
greater authority to Tribes to carry out the Indian Reservation Roads
(IRR) Program under ISDEAA agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs
and the Federal Highway Administration. As a result, Tribes have
succeeded in reducing transaction costs and eliminating
counterproductive bureaucratic practices in order to maximize federal
investment in roads infrastructure and to put more people to work.
Still, conflicting grant conditions and contract requirements
arising from other federal transportation programs continue to obstruct
the efficient and cost-effective transportation infrastructure
development Congress has envisioned for Indian Country. Few Tribal
governments have the staff or resources for negotiations to conform
these extensive conditions and requirements to Tribal-specific legal
and policy considerations or to establish duplicative administrations
for managing disparate contract and grant requirements--and they should
not have to. In other agencies, Tribal implementation of federal
programs under the ISDEAA has allowed Tribes to adopt uniform and more
cost-effective accounting, management, procurement and reporting
systems. Under ISDEAA, Tribes spend less on program administration and
more on program services and activities.
NCAI recommends the ISDEAA be extended to all Department of
Transportation (DOT) programs serving Tribes, including programs
administered by the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA), FHWA-
Federal Lands Highway, Federal Transit Administration, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration and other federal transportation
agencies. Extending the ISDEAA to the DOT and its modal administrations
will streamline the negotiation, execution and implementation of grant,
contract and funding agreements and more effectively direct program
dollars to enhancing our nation's transportation infrastructure system.
Right of Way
Congress has the opportunity to significantly enhance efficiency
and cost-savings in infrastructure investment by requiring BIA to
maintain adequate rights-of-way (ROW) records. Currently, BIA has no
streamlined process to assist Tribes in securing proof of ROW quickly
or in processing trust allotted land ROW applications in a short,
defined timeline. Tribes preparing infrastructure improvements too
frequently face delays and additional costs in their project
administration because the BIA lack records of rights-of-way the Agency
acquired, disposed of, or otherwise transferred long ago. For example,
right now the Oglala Sioux Tribe has been working on securing BIA
assistance to examine rights of way in the BIA's Land Title Records
Office for a 21 mile project on Pine Ridge; to date, BIA has not been
helpful. This echoes examples for numerous Tribes when attempting to
develop road projects on Tribal lands. And, the timeline in receiving
ROW varies depending on many variables including ownership of the road
(State, county, BIA, or Tribal route), the length in miles of the
project, the reservation, whether the project crosses fee, restricted
fee, allotted, or trust lands, whether the project is new construction
or reconstruction of an existing route, the agency or regional office
involved, the Tribe involved, etc.
To mitigate delays, NCAI recommends this Committee and Congress to
require that BIA respond to a Tribe's request for right-of-way
documentation for routes on its priority construction list within 120
days. If the BIA lacks right-of-way documentation, the BIA--and not the
Tribe--should be responsible for the costs associated with obtaining
enforceable rights-of-way. To fulfill this objective, NCAI proposes
that Congress launch a $10 million initiative for the Department of
Interior to catalogue, organize, update and computerize right-of-way
documentation.
Safety
State governments spend between $4,000 and $5,000 per road mile on
state road and highway maintenance. In contrast, road maintenance
spending in Indian Country is less than $500 per road mile. Indian
Country has an unmet immediate need of well over $258 million in
maintenance funding for roads and bridges. Tribal members and
communities are threatened by unsafe and often inaccessible roads,
bridges, and ferries. Indian people suffer from injury and death by
driving and walking along reservation roadways at rates far above the
national average. According to Center Disease Control, ``American
Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN) are at increased risk of motor-
vehicle related injury and death with rates 1.5 to 3 times higher than
rates for other Americans.'' \4\ And, other data shows 5,962 fatal
motor vehicle crashes were reported on Indian reservation roads between
1975 and 2002 with 7,093 lives lost. The trend is on the increase, up
nearly 25 percent, to over 284 lives lost per year in the last five
years of study. While the number of fatal crashes in the nation during
the study period declined 2.2 percent, the number of fatal motor
vehicle crashes per year on Indian reservations increased 52.5 percent.
American Indians also have the highest rates of pedestrian injury and
death per capita of any racial or ethnic group in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Center for Disease Control, Injuries Among American Indians/
Alaska Natives (AI/AN): CDC Activities (2011), http://www.cdc.gov/
motorvehiclesafety/Native/research.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal communities share many similar concerns and obstacles as
rural communities in addressing how to improve the safety needs. NCAI
has worked diligently with Tribal governments to find solutions for
improving the safety and infrastructure of Indian Country. Presently,
Tribes receive a two percent set aside of the total allocation from the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA); the funding is
then allocated to BIA where the BIA Highway Indian Safety Program
administers the programs. The purpose of this program is to assist
Tribes with their proposed highway safety projects, which are intended
to reduce traffic crashes and impaired driving crashes; increase
occupant protection education; provide emergency medical service
training; and increase police traffic services. The two percent set
aside is equivalent to $14 million annually, and it is a competitive
grant process. NCAI has heard concerns from Tribal leaders about the
inadequate effectiveness of the BIA Highway Indian Safety Program. In
the past, there has been significant employee and leadership turnover
within the BIA office. This has created a lack of guidance and support
to Tribes. For example, Tribes have been denied competitive grant
funding, but were not informed of the reasons for the denial. As a
result, Tribes contacted the office for a rationale for denial but were
not provided assistance nor a return phone call.
NCAI recommends this Committee and Congress assist in confronting
the high injury and fatalities on Tribal roadways and to resolve the
concerns about the BIA Highway Indian Safety Program by (1)
establishing a two percent Tribal funding set-aside within the High
Risk Rural Roads Program, (2) creating a new Tribal Traffic Safety
Program within the FHWA-Federal Lands Highways office, and (3) funding
each NHTSA, at $50 million annually to dramatically reduce the
incidence of death and injury on America's Indian reservation roads.
The creation of these new programs would help to reduce the safety and
behavioral problems that contribute to the high rates of death and
injury on Indian reservation roads.
Gas Excise Tax
To date, there are over 140,000 miles in the Indian Reservation
Roads (IRR) system but yet it is the most underdeveloped road network
in the nation, \5\ and it is the primary transportation system for all
residents of and visitors to American Indian and Alaska Native
communities. Over two-thirds of the roads on the system are unimproved
dirt or gravel roads, and less than 12 percent of IRR roads are rated
as good. \6\ The condition of IRR bridges is equally troubling. Over 25
percent of bridges on the system are structurally deficient. \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Bureau of Indian Affairs, Transportation Serving Native
American Lands: TEA-21 Reauthorization Resource Paper (2003).
\6\ Id.
\7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal economies, education systems, health care and social service
programs are threatened by unsafe and often inaccessible roads, bridges
and ferries. A recent Federal traffic safety study showed that Indian
Tribes suffer the highest per capita traffic fatality rate in the
Nation, more than four times the national average. \8\ Each year,
drivers on the IRR system travel over 2 billion vehicle miles on a
system that is a clear health and safety hazard for our communities and
an impediment to meaningful economic development. \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis, Fatal Motor
Vehicle Crashes on Indian Reservations: 1975-2002, (2004).
\9\ BIA Paper, supra note 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding for Tribal Transportation Systems
The current scheme for funding surface transportation in the United
States is based on a federal-state motor fuel taxation regime that
precludes Tribes from participating in the system on an equitable
basis. While the system of using federal fuel tax revenue for road
construction and state fuel tax revenue for maintenance has worked to
dramatically improve roads in many parts of the nation, it has failed
miserably in Indian Country.
Like states, Indian Tribes receive some funding for road
construction from the federal Highway Trust Fund, but the amount given
to Tribes is much less than what states receive. Currently, Indian
Reservation Roads make up nearly three percent of federal roadways, but
they receive less than 0.5 percent of total federal highway funding.
\10\ At the current funding levels, the IRR program receives only about
half the amount per road mile that states receive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
TEA-21, A Summary (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Government also makes some funds available to Tribes
for IRR maintenance under the BIA Maintenance Program. This Program is
also woefully inadequate. The BIA spends less than $1000 per mile for
road maintenance, compared to estimates of $4,000-$5,000 per mile used
by states to fund non-IRR maintenance. \11\ Moreover, the states, who
receive federal funding for their own roads that fall within
reservations, frequently shirk their obligation to improve or maintain
these roads and instead siphon off the funds for use elsewhere. \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Brief of Amicus Curiae the Inter-Tribal Transportation
Association in Wagnon v. Prairie Band of Potawatomi, available at
http://www.narf.org/sct/richardsvpbp/ITA%20amicus%20final.pdf.
\12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Faced with a severe inadequacy of funding from federal and state
sources, Tribal governments have looked for other sources of revenue,
including levying their own motor fuel taxes. While Tribes have the
same authority as other governments to collect taxes, the ability of
Tribes to tax fuel on Tribal lands has been severely diminished by the
Supreme Court. The Court has upheld the authority of the states to
reach onto Tribal land to collect a state motor fuel tax. The dual
taxation that would result if both states and Tribes impose a motor
fuel tax makes it impractical for Tribes to generate revenue through
motor fuel taxes. Although some Tribes and states have been able to
negotiate motor fuel tax revenue-sharing agreements, those cases are
the exception rather than the rule. In most areas, the state
governments' collection of motor fuel taxes in Indian country displaces
the ability of Tribal governments to collect motor fuel taxes.
NCAI encourages this Committee to explore alternate sources of
revenue for reservations roads. Given the dire conditions of
reservation roads, it is unconscionable that the IRR program does not
enjoy parity with the amount given to other governments through the
Highway Trust Fund. NCAI feels strongly that this inequity of
distribution must be addressed in whatever new system is devised to
fund transportation systems across the nation. In addition, if motor
fuel taxes are to remain the primary source of funding for road
construction and maintenance, we urge the Committee to recommend that
Congress clarify authority of Indian Tribes to collect this tax on
Tribal lands. Finally, if the Committee recommends a dramatic change to
the way revenue is raised for transportation costs, NCAI recommends
that any such system be devised in a manner that treats Indian Tribal
governments equitably and gives them the same authority as state and
local governments to raise revenue to fund the costs associated with
building and maintaining transportation infrastructure.
Conclusion
This testimony has highlighted the unique challenges Tribes and
their members have faced for generations. NCAI's member Tribes, and
their citizens, face significant challenges--particularly in the midst
of the budget reduction climate. However, as we move forward in
addressing these challenges, it is critical to realize that Tribal
communities offer unique innovations that can make significant
contributions to the policy debate regarding the economic crisis and
the prospects for a fair and equitable recovery for all Americans.
Indian Tribes recognize that transportation infrastructure is vital to
the enhancement of Indian Tribal economic development and to provide
safe and reliable transportation infrastructure to Tribal communities
and surrounding non-Tribal areas. NCAI look forward to partnering with
the Committee, as critical members of the federal policymaking
community, to ensure Tribes are included in developing and paving a way
for Tribal transportation.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Keel, for your
testimony.
Mr. Healy, will you please proceed with your testimony?
STATEMENT OF C. ``JOHN'' HEALY, SR., PRESIDENT, INTERTRIBAL
TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION
Mr. Healy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Committee.
Senator Franken. Mr. Healy, I really apologize. I have to
leave, but thank you for your testimony, and I will be
absorbing it. Thank you.
Mr. Healy. Thank you. Nice to meet you. I liked Saturday
Night Live.
[Laughter.]
Senator Franken. Thanks for remembering.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Healy. Good afternoon, members of the Committee, Mr.
Chairman, staff. I would just like to thank everybody for
holding this hearing on this very crucial issue for Indian
Country. I would also like to thank my Native brothers and
sisters in the back of me for attending. As you can see, it is
a very important subject we are taking up today.
As President of the InterTribal Transportation Association,
our founding father, so to speak, we were created and organized
back in 1993 with the hopes of having a seat at the table, as
we are here today. Back then, Tribal transportation was of
course just being recognized and Tribes were just starting to
get into Tribal transportation. So I am glad to see that we
have actually come a long way since 1993 with the help of our
congressional delegations, dedicated staff, such as Mark.
So we have come a long way in Tribal transportation over
the years. Of course, we would like to continue that. We have,
in my written comments that I submitted, I have many points I
brought up, which I won't go into them all right now. But I
agree with much of what has been said so far as far as
streamlining the process. I attended the roundtable here in
May. I also submitted some testimony then. In that I mentioned
some of the points about streamlining.
As far as advocating for Indian Country, we partnered with
NCAI back in 2007. We formally created the NCAI-ITA Joint Task
Force on Tribal Transportation. Within that group, we have
created, you have probably seen the national leadership paper,
it was called, or white paper. In that, it points out many
areas that the Tribes are concerned with as a whole across the
Country.
We have tried to garner comments from Tribes across the
Country on common Tribal transportation issues, and of course,
over the last year or so, it has been concentrating on
reauthorization and some of the funding levels the Tribes would
like to see in the next Highway Bill.
Of course, the continued funding of these programs would be
much appreciated. Being that ITA represents Tribes across the
Nation, small, medium and large, we try to not really get into
the controversial issues. However, there are some issues out
there of controversy. But as was mentioned by panel one, those
issues are being addressed.
Some of the funding issues, I will touch on these real
quick, of course we would like to continue funding of the IRR
program. Continued funding for transit, transit is a very, very
important avenue for Tribes out there to pursue. There are many
Tribes into Tribal transit now. It goes along with the
sustainability and livability concepts that DOT has adopted as
well. Because as Native Americans, of course, some of the areas
we live are very isolated. So having a Tribal transit system
comes in very handy for a lot of people. It gets them to jobs,
school, many college students use these Tribal transit systems.
Students, elderly, it is open to the public and it saves people
a lot of money plus it is directly tied into economic
development as well. So we would like to continue our Tribal
transit program.
The streamlining, we have some suggestions in our packet
about streamlining funding, some direct funding is needed for
some of the programs. With that, Mr. Chairman, you have my
written testimony and I will answer any questions that you
have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Healy follows:]
Prepared Statement of C. ``John'' Healy, Sr., President, InterTribal
Transportation Association
Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony today.
On behalf of the InterTribal Transportation Association (ITA),
Executive Committee and Member Tribes we formally submit these written
comments at the Senate Committee of Indian Affairs (SCAI), Hearing
today.
ITA's involvement with NCAI, and our involvement in the development
of the National Tribal Leadership Paper on Tribal Transportation (White
Paper), is in line with our Strategic Plan Objectives. Since ITA
inception (circa 1993), one of the goals was to partner with
organizations to assist in getting the Tribes voices heard. I believe
we have accomplished this over the last four years, without this
partnership I don't think we would have developed such a comprehensive
document.
We must show unity to the furthest extent possible, there is
strength in numbers, there will always be issues we have differences
on, however let us show unity on the big issues that will help us
prosper as a Nation, as a family.
We have for many years viewed the Indian Reservation Roads (IRR),
Program as a Jobs Program at the local reservation level. Each year our
construction crews employee many enrolled members which supports their
families not only during the construction months but year round.
This is why were pleased to hear in the President's speech of his
plan for job creation to reinvigorate the economy.
We support the rebuilding our deficient roads and bridges. There is
no shortage of these roads on reservations across the nation.
We support the ``American Jobs Act.''
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21):
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW): released
an bipartisan outline titled, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century, or MAP-21 in mid-July. The bill supports is a 2 year
reauthorization with a total cost of $109 billion or $54.5 billion a
year. There is still the issue of how to pay for this bill, and it will
be up to the Senate Finance Committee to figure this out, and as
mentioned numerous times raising the gas tax is not an option.
We support President Obama's jobs bill and the benefit it will have
for Indian Country.
Areas That Can Be Addressed During the Reauthorization Process
Key points that address needed improvements to Tribal
transportation.
1) Fund the IRR Program with annual 50 million dollars
increases starting at 800 million in FY-12 and increasing
annually reaching 1,050,000,000 in FY-16 and restore the
obligation limitation deduction exemption that existed for the
IRR Program under ISTEA.
2) Increase funding for BIA Road Maintenance Program to at
least 150 million annually
3) Increase FTA's Tribal transit Grant Program to:
FY 2012: $35,000,000
FY 2013: $45,000,000
FY 2014: $55,000,000
FY 2015: $65,000,000
FY 2016: $75,000,000
4) Increase funding for IRR Bridge Program to:
FY 2012: $75,000,000
FY 2013: $87,500,000
FY 2014: $100,000,000
FY 2015: $100,000,000
FY 2016: $100,000,000
5) Enforce the statutory requirement in SAFETEA-LU which
mandates the BIA to make IRR Program funds ``immediately
available'' for Tribes within 30 days of the BIA's receipt of
funds from FHWA.
6) Simplify the award process by which Federal transportation
funds are distributed to Tribes by creating uniform grant
eligibility, application, and administration criteria
7) Develop model funding agreements for use by DOI and DOT to
facilitate the efficient transfer of transportation funding and
program authority to the Tribes.
8) Increase the number of DOT Programs which Tribes may
participate in as direct funding recipients from the Federal
Government, rather than as sub recipients through the States.
9) Establish a Federal Lands Highway Safety Program for Indian
reservation roads, establish a Tribal set aside for the High
Risk Rural Road Program, Increase funding to the TTAP's to at
least 2.5 million annually.
10) Promote the use of innovative financing techniques in
standard Indian Self- Determination contracts and self
governance agreements to provide Tribes with better tools to
reduce their road construction backlog.
11) Carry out Right of Way reform in Indian Country to reduce
costs and expedite the design, construction and reconstruction
of Tribal roads and bridges.
Indian Reservation Roads (IRR), Issue
Various Tribal Organizations such as Council of Large Land Based
Tribes, MT-WY Tribal Leaders Council, Transportation Sub-committee, &
the Great Plains Tribal Chairman's Association have voiced their view
on several issues/concerns regarding the implementation of Question #10
of 25 CFR Part 170, Subpart C, Indian Reservation Roads Program over
the last several years (since 2006).
ITA has membership from small, medium and large Tribes, therefore
we have been very careful in our comments, we would however like to
offer our assistance in this matter in the way of facilitating meetings
to come up with solutions to the matter. This also falls within our
Strategic Plan.
The large land-based and rural Tribes are losing millions of
dollars because the BIA is misinterpreting the provisions of SAFETEA-
LU. Dollars continue to hemorrhage from our reservations and people to
those BIA Regions that have included countless miles of state and
county roads. With this, the IRR program has become a program dominated
by state and county roads within the inventory that drives the funding
formula.
Over the past four years Large Land Based Tribes have expressed
their concerns with regard to the ``uncontrolled implementation'' of
the IRR Inventory system due to a misapplication and/or erroneous
interpretation of 25 CFR 170 on numerous occasions with little or no
response. This correspondence also included language which provided
recommended solutions to the misapplication of the regulations.
This has proven to be detrimental to large land-based Tribes. There
are critical issues the BIA and FHWA must address in order to arrest
the uncontrolled implementation of inventory data that is allowing non-
BIA and non-Tribal roads to generate enormous formula amounts.
Tribes have been told the only way to fix the problem is when
reauthorization of the Federal Highway Bill is being considered.
The Time Is Now
Tribes have been very frustrated in attempting to get some action,
much less even a response to our concerns. The issue of uncontrolled
inventory updates, the issue remains urgent to large land-based Tribes
since they deal with massive on-reservation vehicular transportation
needs. Needs arise from Tribal and BIA roads, and meeting them relies
primarily on IRR funding. The geographic isolation of most large land-
based Tribes prohibit them from competing in a system of adding
Interstates/NHS highways, State and County roads onto the IRR system
just to reap the inflated formula amounts. Also most large land-based
Tribes' priorities are not others' interstate or state roads, but the
very roads they must travel to get the basic medical and educational
services. On the BIA system alone, there is a documented backlog of $13
Billion just to improve the system to a safe and adequate standard. At
present funding levels, and without further deterioration of the
system, it would take 28 years to address this need. Allowing State and
County roads into the IRR system simply to generate funding is
siphoning off critical road construction funding for Tribes whose only
source of funding is the IRR program.
The direct nature of the Tribes comments is a reflection of the
frustration the Tribes have experienced over the last several years
attempting to elevate this issue, however it is in no way intended as
an indictment of any Tribal entity or of the BIA/FHWA itself. In fact
we are confident that this problem can be solved and that 25 CFR 170 is
workable regulation.
Increased IRR funding three and four fold by inappropriately
applying the regulations regarding generation of funding on state,
county, and proposed routes that have been added to the IRR Inventory.
The core issues regarding the uncontrolled implementation of the
IRR Inventory. The heart of this issue is threefold and includes;
relaxing the protocol which requires minimum attachments supporting
each update; inconsistent interpretation of the Program regulations at
25 CFR 170 and in defining an ``Indian Reservation Road''; and allowing
an uncontrolled expansion of the IRR system.
Solution
Minimum Attachments must be required. Explicitly defined
Attachments were originally required in the IRR road inventory update
process to substantiate each request. These requirements provide a
fundamental tool to the BIA for quality assurance of each update. In
order to concur with a recommended update, BIA officials must at least
be assured that the facility exists (section photo), that the
documented physical attributes of the facility are accurately reflected
in the database (representative section photo), that facility ownership
is confirmed and post-improvement maintenance responsibility is
acknowledged (MOA Owner Agreement), and that each facility is
incorporated into the Tribal Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). It
is inconceivable to think that waiving the requirement of these
fundamental tools results in an adequate, representative IRR database.
In fact, this measure is counterproductive, at the least requiring more
in-depth, time-consuming inquiries at the Regional/BIADOT level, or,
more likely, simply disregarding the confirmation process and approving
unverified records.
It is also recommended that surface condition ratings be
supplemented by a wearing surface calculation worksheet along with
representative photo to verify published indices. Being somewhat
subjective by nature, backup documentation will result in more
accurate, objective results in incorporating SCI into the crucial CTC
calculation.
An Indian Reservation Road ``providing access to an Indian
reservation or Indian trust land'' must be interpreted consistently.
Vague, inconsistent interpretations of IRR roads have resulted in gross
misrepresentation of the relative need across Indian country. Refining
the regulations did not redefine the definition. We recommend that
federal officials provide written guidance and direction in defining
precisely what qualifies as an IRR and provide training to all BIA
Regional Road Engineers and BIA/DOT personnel to ensure uniformity and
consistency in the interpretation and application of the update
process.
Many reservations possess a network of Tribal roads which provide
public rural local access to remote Tribal lands within the exterior
boundaries of the reservation. These routes are included on the IRR
system as construction need miles to support the economic development
of large land-based Tribes. In order to promote Tribal self
determination through economic development as it was intended, these
facilities must be enhanced. Contesting, or otherwise rejecting these
routes from inclusion as a Rural Local road, regardless of the surface
type, prevents the LLBT's from quantifying their relative need, which
is ultimately reflected in the distribution of Program funds.
Large land-based Tribes are generally located in remote/rural areas
in which a majority of the public access roads are BIA or Tribally
owned. In order to enhance public health and safety on these
facilities, we are solely reliant on IRR Program funds. As funds are
shifted to roads owned by state and local governments, the trust
responsibility of the federal government is severely compromised, in
turn jeopardizing the general health and welfare of the traveling
public on these facilities.
There are thousands of miles of non-BIA/Tribal routes on the IRR
inventory that are not in compliance with 25 CFR 170. By regulation, at
25 CFR 170 Appendix C to Subpart C, under no circumstances should any
non-BIA/Tribal route generate 100 percent funding. Likewise, National
Highway System/Interstate highways should never generate funding.
County-owned facilities which meet the precisely established criteria
(as recommended above) of an IRR road shall generate at the federal
sliding scale percentage, however state-owned facilities, which meet
the precisely established criteria of an IRR road, shall not generate
funding unless a project exists for said route, and then only at the
non-federal share until construction of the facility. NonBIA/Tribal
roads, particularly state-owned roads, are adequately maintained and
funded through 23 USC and state-owned roads were never intended to be
included in ascertaining the relative need of Indian Tribes.
The IRR Inventory has experienced an unprecedented growth rate in
the past 3 years. Of particular significance is the expansion of the
very definition of an IRR road. Inconsistent determinations of IRR
eligible facilities have resulted in a skewed system which is
detrimental to those Tribes who rely solely on the IRR Program to
address public health and safety on public roads within Indian
reservations. BIA must limit the growth rate of the Program to a
respectable, realistic level.
Proposed roads have had a major impact on the funding distributions
in the IRR Program. These forever funded facilities include numerous
miles which will never be built, but are simply added to the database
to generate funding. A well-established justification in the LRTP must
be submitted with each update to assure that these proposed roads are
in fact included in the future development plans of the respective
Tribe(s) as a project. Further, proposed roads should only generate
funding for up to five years, at which time inactivity results in CTC =
0 VMT = 0.
In order to assure that Road Inventory Field Data System (RIFDS)
records portray the spirit and character of the IRR Program, a review
team consisting preferably of Tribal officials or an outside, impartial
review team should be employed to assess the interpretation of BIADOT
and assure each submitted record lies within the scope of the
regulations.
In accordance with 25 CFR 170.444(f), the BIA provides each Tribe
with copies of the Relative Need Distribution Factor (RNDF)
distribution percentages by August 15 of each year. Providing this
information allows Tribes to plan and prepare the IRR Program for the
upcoming fiscal year, including preparing budgets and funding
Agreements; procuring materials, equipment, and manpower for upcoming
projects; and identifying projects to be including onto the Tribal
Transportation Improvement Program (TTIP). However, the FY 2008
distribution percentages were not published until July 2008. This
situation creates an extreme burden on the Tribes in their efforts to
deliver an efficient, productive Program from year to year.
Issue
Another concern which is directly related to the funding issues, is
the BIA DOT review and approval of RIFDS records. The Program
regulations, at 25 CFR 170.444, explicate the process by which the IRR
inventory is updated. In order to provide the RNDF distribution
percentages by August 15th.
Solution
Action must be taken on the inventory update submittals, i.e. they
must be approved or rejected, and discharged within this timeframe.
There has been no consistency in this process since the promulgation of
the Final Rule in 2004. Communication is obviously the missing element
in delivering this process with efficiency and accuracy, particularly
in providing feedback to the Regional offices regarding the records
submitted by the Tribes. The BIA must correct this process and take
action on RIFDS records in order that these overriding issues do not
continue to trickle down to the Tribal programs, hindering our
abilities to function efficiently and productively.
The Montana/Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council have identified many
issues and shared with
Mike Black, Director Of The Bureau Of Indian Affairs on April 30,
2010
Regulations governing the Indian Reservation Roads program are
having a negative effect on how funding is calculated for Land Based
Tribes and Tribes seek to rectify those issues through the
administrative process. Issues that were brought to Mr. Black's
attention were as follows:
Bogus data being allowed into the IRR inventory:
Surface Condition Ratings require a visual inspection of the road
surfaces and a mathematical calculation to determine the Pavement
Condition Index (PCI). Many of the paved surfaces of roads owned by
Agencies other than the BIA or Tribes are given a rating of exactly 60
or below. It is theoretically impossible to derive a pavement rating of
60 when applying the many components of field data that must be
considered in the calculation of the pavement rating.
Field observations of surface conditions were not conducted and
actual calculations were not made on thousands of miles included in the
IRR inventory.
Solution
All non-BIA system roads included in the IRR inventory be reviewed
for accuracy and all routes that do not have evidence of an actual
computation of the PCI be removed from the system.
Tribes are allowed to include roads in the inventory that
are not located within or provide access to the reservation or trust
lands.
25 CFR 170.5 defines an Indian Reservation Road as ``a public road
that is located within or provides access to an Indian reservation or
Indian trust land, or restricted Indian land that is not subject to fee
title alienation without the approval of the Federal government, or
Indian or Alaska Native Villages, groups, or communities in which
Indians and Alaska Natives reside, whom the Secretary of the Interior
has determined are eligible for services generally available to Indians
under Federal laws specifically applicable to Indians.''
The BIA is allowing Tribes to include State (including Federal
Highway System roads) and County roads into their IRR inventory that
are not located within nor do they provide access to the reservation or
trust lands. In several cases, these routes are allowed to generate IRR
funding at 100 percent.
It is our understanding that a road that provides access to an
Indian reservation or trust lands must physically connect to the
reservation or trust land. We know of a Region that is allowing State
and County roads into the system that are 10 to 15 miles away from the
reservation.
We are requesting that all routes that do not physically connect to
the Reservation or Trust lands be removed from the system.
Certain Tribes are allowed to generate funding on State
and County roads included in the inventory without evidence that a
project will ever be constructed on the route.
The 3rd category of Question 10 of Appendix C to Subpart C, 25 CFR
170, stipulates that ``The facility is eligible for funding for
construction or reconstruction with Federal funds, however, the Public
Authority responsible for maintenance of the facility provides
certification of maintenance responsibility and its inability to
provide funding for the Project.
23 USC 101(a) definition of a project is as follows: The term
``project'' means and undertaking to construct a particular portion of
a highway, or if the context so implies, the particular portion so
constructed or any other undertaking eligible for assistance under this
title.''
The same Section defines Construction as follows: The term
``Construction'' means the supervising, inspecting, actual building,
and incurrence of all costs incidental to the construction or
reconstruction of a highway.
There are thousands of miles of roads owned by others (States and
Counties) that are included into IRR inventory and generating funding,
(many miles generating at 100 percent) without any evidence that a
project or any type of construction is planned on the route. The BIA is
encouraging and allowing Tribes to include routes owned by others into
the IRR inventory only to generate funding.
We are requesting that all non-BIA system routes that do not have a
project agreement in place with the owning agency be removed from the
system.
Some Tribes are allowed to generate funds over and above
the local match/non-Federal Federal share amount.
Tribes in certain Regions are allowed to generate IRR funding at
100 percent on State and County routes. On approved projects, Tribes
can coop a project with another Public Authority, however the funding
they provide for the project is limited to the non-Federal share or
local match.
23 U.S.C. states: ``Before approving as a project on an Indian
reservation road any project eligible for funds apportioned under
section 104 or section 144 of this title in a State, the secretary must
determine that the obligation of funds for such project is
supplementary to and not in lieu of the obligation, for obligation of
funds for such project is supplementary to and not in lieu of the
obligation, for projects on Indian reservation roads, of a fair and
equitable share of funds apportioned to such State under section 104 of
this title.''
We are requesting that all non-BIA routes that are generating IRR
funds over and above the non-Federal share be removed from the system.
Other Issues
We are also requesting to begin start a dialog on the following
issues:
Definition of Access
Definition of Indian Reservation Road
Legality of Question 10
Definition of Project
Proposed Roads
Road Maintenance
Establishment of and Inventory Oversight Committee
Comprehensive Inventory by Federal Highway Administration
On June 3-4, 2009 I was honored to attend several meetings in our
nation's capitol with a delegation of Tribal leaders from the Rocky
Mountain Region.
As we were leaving the U.S. Capitol Building and walking through
the Rotunda I couldn't help but to think about the history of the
United States. More specifically the history of the Native American
relative to transportation as many of the highways that exist to this
day are built over the path of a hunting trail or path the Native
American traveled. This gave me a renewed strength to advocate for the
interest of the ITA Executive Committee and member Tribes. I believe
these DC trips were beneficial for ITA and our member Tribes.
It was with the people in mind that ITA was formed on that blustery
day in May of 1993 in Polson, Mt. Formed so we may go forth into the
future with one thought in mind, with one ideal in mind, and with
service to the people in our heart.
I think we can all agree that to build strong Tribal nations,
Indian Tribes must build a transportation infrastructure that permits
safe travel and promotes economic expansion. Connecting people within
Tribal communities and Tribal communities to the surrounding area means
greater economic development and improved delivery of Tribal government
services. Yet many Indian reservation roads and bridges are known more
for their impassable condition than for their use as a safe means of
transportation. The poor condition of many Tribal roads and bridges
jeopardizes the health, safety, security and economic well-being of our
Tribal members. Tribal roads and bridges are often in such disrepair
that children are prevented from attending school, sick and injured
people are prevented from reaching hospitals and emergency responders
are delayed in providing timely assistance to people in need.
It is with that thought in mind that we must move on and be
persistent in our efforts to continue the educational process for our
people.
The SCAI timely leadership can help Tribes expand on the gains that
have been made in the transportation arena. We look forward to working
with you and your staff to continue improving the quality of
transportation infrastructure for the benefit of our Tribal members and
our surrounding communities.
I thank you for this opportunity to submit these written comments.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Healy, for your
testimony.
This question is for both of our witnesses. One of the
recommendations the Committee has heard throughout the years is
that Tribes need direct access to more transportation programs.
And we would like to pursue that line. So my question to both
of you is, in your view, do your members have the capacity to
carry out safety and other programs now handled through the
States? Mr. Keel?
Mr. Keel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question. The
answer is yes, there are some Tribes that have the capacity to
carry out all those programs, safety, planning, engineering,
event the architecture. There are some Tribes that simply do
not, because of their infrastructure and their Tribal structure
itself.
But the transit program, having access to more of those
programs, in fact, the Jobs Act, the Jobs bill, included in
that Jobs bill was $310 million, I believe, for the Indian
Reservation Roads and Tribal transportation. Of that, there is
only $7 million that was provided for the transit program,
which is a competitive grant program.
So $7 million doesn't go very far when you have 565 Tribes
competing for those dollars. So we would ask that that be
increased, so that those Tribe that do have the capacity for
planning and taking some of those programs could access those
funds and thereby help greatly.
Additionally, there are Tribes that have a good working
relationship with the State departments of transportation.
Those Tribes do a very good job of managing those programs and
working in partnership with them. There are some Tribes who do
not, and who do not enjoy that same level of cooperation.
I hope that answers your question.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Mr. Healy?
Mr. Healy. Thank you. Yes, I believe many Tribes out there
do have the capacity. We hear success stories all the time
about Tribes working with States and/or counties on their
particular projects. Most recently, there has been a lot of
success in Tribes working with the Public Lands Highway
discretionary grants. Of course, those were supposed to go
through the State as well.
But with some of the new direct funding agreements that
have been created over the last few years, the Tribes do get
direct funding. I believe they do have the capacity to
administer these projects.
The Chairman. Thank you. I would like to extend a further
question to both of you. Can you describe the impact the road
condition and lack of adequate infrastructure have on a Tribe's
ability to create jobs and attract economic development to
Native communities? Mr. Keel?
Mr. Keel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Once again, there are Tribes that have the capacity, as I
said, to develop, have economic development within their areas.
It is very difficult to attract businesses to the reservation
or to our areas when the infrastructure is seemingly not very
well maintained or unkempt or in disarray.
So the answer is, a well-maintained transportation system
is vital to economic development in Indian Country or anywhere
else, for that matter.
The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Healy?
Mr. Healy. Thank you. I would agree with that. Many
businesses, when they want to locate to a reservation, one of
the first things they research is your transportation system
and how they can move their goods and services from Point A to
Point B. Of course, sometimes they make a site visit. If in
their mind they feel the transportation infrastructure system,
roads, are not up to their standard, they may go down the road
and go somewhere else, which of course affects economic
development initiatives.
So yes, I believe maintaining a good, safe transportation
system is vital, not only to economic development but for the
safety of our children. As was mentioned, safety is a key issue
for Indian Country, as well as the ambulances traveling these
roads, school buses. So yes, I do believe it is very important.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, thank you very much.
And now I would like to call on Senator Hoeven for any
comments or questions he may have for our witnesses.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank both of these gentlemen for being here with us today. I
will start by asking Mr. Keel to just talk a little bit about
what he perceives as both the real needs in terms of
transportation on the reservations and how we can most
effectively address it.
Mr. Keel. Well, as has already been stated, the needs in
Indian Country on particularly our reservation roads, because
of the bridges that are structurally deficient, it affects not
only the safety or our ability to attract businesses to our
communities, but the fact of the matter is that many of our
people depend on those roads. Some of our citizens don't have
adequate transportation to get to and from work.
So the needs there are multiplied by the fact that when a
bridge or road washes out, for instance, or we have a natural
disaster, we don't have the funding to maintain or repair those
roads in a timely manner. Those needs then are exacerbated. So
the need cannot be understated.
I would like to point out also that last week, the
President proposed in the American Jobs Act the establishment
of a national infrastructure bank. We believe that a Tribal
infrastructure bank would work, thereby giving the Tribes the
ability to leverage dollars that we receive. We would propose a
$10 million bank, which is relatively small in terms of a bank.
But for Indian Country, it would be significant in that we
could take that and leverage those dollars and make some
improvements, necessary improvements that we have.
I hope that answers your question.
Senator Hoeven. And I would just follow up with a question
actually to both of you gentlemen. In addition to Federal funds
for roads, do you have any other funding sources, are there any
local or State funding sources that any of the Tribes receive
to help on their roads?
Mr. Healy. For Tribes in the rural areas, the IRR program
is the only funding source. So being from a rural area, in
Montana, the IRR program is very key to our sustainability as a
Tribe, as a nation, as a people. It is very key to our
livelihood.
Senator Hoeven. Mr. Keel, are you aware of any other? Have
any of the Tribes developed any other funding sources that you
are aware of?
Mr. Keel. Many of the Tribes today supplement the funding
that they receive, even through the Indian Reservation Roads
program. There are Tribes that have a good relationship, as I
stated earlier, with their State departments of transportation
and local county commissioners. And they are able to repair,
make repairs locally in some cases. But not necessarily from
funding, they simply supplement the funding that they receive.
Senator Hoeven. The reason I ask is, in the State of North
Dakota, one of the things we have done is that the State gas
tax, the portion that is collected on the reservations goes
back to the reservations. So they have that as a funding source
in our State. I am just wondering if other States and other
Tribes have developed some funding sources to help, given the
pressure on Federal dollars. Particularly when we are talking
about some of the rural reservations, where you have so many
miles of road and not a large number of people. It is a real
challenge to maintain those roads.
So that is why I was just looking for any other ideas at
the local, State, or Tribal level. Are there any other ideas
that either of you might be aware of to help fund roads, in
addition to the Federal funds?
Mr. Keel. Yes, in fact, there is very limited funding. In
the State of Oklahoma, for instance, there is an agreement, or
compacts, there are several Tribes that have compacts with the
State in terms of collecting the Federal gasoline tax, for
instance. Those funds are then returned to the Tribes and they
can use that for a variety of things. But they are very
specific in what they can be used for, health, education and in
some cases transportation and safety.
Senator Hoeven. Right. That is exactly the kind of thing I
was referring to. I was just wondering if there are any others
that either one of you had run cross.
Mr. Keel. I am not aware of any.
Senator Hoeven. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Hoeven.
I want to thank this panel very much. I have further
questions that I will send to you and other members may have
that, too. So I thank you so much, because we are trying to put
this together and deal with the problem of transportation
mainly, and with that, of course, jobs for the Tribes. So we
look forward to keeping in close contact with you and
continuing to work with you on this.
So thank you very much, panel two.
I would like to invite the third panel to the witness
table. Serving in our third panel is the Honorable Charles W.
Murphy, Chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe; the
Honorable Wes Martel, Co-Chairman of the Joint Business Council
for the Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes of the Wind River Indian
Reservation; also Mr. Paulson Chaco, Director of the Division
of Transportation for the Navajo Nation; and Ms. Jacque
Hostler, Chief Executive Officer of the Cher-Ae Heights Indian
Community of the Trinidad Rancheria.
Mr. Murphy, will you please proceed with your testimony?
STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES W. MURPHY, CHAIRMAN, STANDING ROCK
SIOUX TRIBE; ACCOMPANIED BY PETE RED TOMAHAWK, TRANSPORTATION
DIRECTOR
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Charles Murphy. I am the Chairman of the
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. I want to thank you, Senator, for
paving the way for jobs and safety for Native communities.
I heard testimony earlier, but what I would like to say,
Mr. Chairman, is that I live on a reservation where we deal
with several emergencies each day. One of them is that the
Corps did not mange the water properly going into the community
or headquarters of Fort Yates, North Dakota. Fort Yates is a
community that takes care of eight districts within our 2.3
million acres.
What happened is if that road should wash out, we would
lose emergency, health needs, water needs to several of our
district people. Number one is that roads is the number one
thing for our reservation. They play a big part within Standing
Rock.
Because our reservation is so large, we have to use snow
plows in the winter time to take the ambulance out to bring our
people into the hospital into Fort Yates, which sometimes may
be a round trip of 180 miles.
The other thing, Mr. Chairman, is that we have bridges that
are over 50 years old. Because of the high floods, high water,
we had knocked the pillars down or the joists. We had to have
our kids walk across the bridge so that way we do not have
anything happen to our kids, so we can get our kids to school
and back from school.
Mr. Chairman, if there is any way that we could get funding
directly to the Tribes without going through all the other
branches I think that we would have a better and safer place to
live within our reservations and also create more jobs within
our reservation. We have, again, we have dialysis people that
we have to worry about, not only in the summer time, but in the
winter time. Like I stated earlier, if that road should wash
out, we would have been, and Bismarck would not have been able
to take those 64 people that were on dialysis, too. So there
was no way for us to get them off this island.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I have written testimony and I
support what was said earlier about direct funding to Tribes.
And we need more infrastructure on our reservation. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Murphy follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Charles W. Murphy, Chairman, Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Hoeven?
Senator Hoeven. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I have a meeting of
our appropriations committee at the same time, and the
subcommittee of which I am ranking member has to present
subcommittee budget for legislative branch, which, Mr.
Chairman, you know that is pretty important, so that we address
that. Since I will have to leave in a few minutes, if I could,
take just a minute to say a few words about Chairman Murphy.
The Chairman. Please proceed, Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
I want to welcome all of our guests, but I would like to
say just a few words about Chairman Murphy. I think that
Chairman Murphy is now serving his sixth term as the Chairman
of the Standing Rock people. I have had the wonderful good
fortune to work with him for over a decade now.
It is very appropriate that he is here talking about
transportation today, because he was an absolute leader in our
State of North Dakota in transportation. And he is right, his
reservation used to be Fort Yates, now it is Standing Rock
Reservation, which covers a big part of two States, both in
North Dakota and in South Dakota. So geographically, it is
very, very large, and the Missouri River runs through the area
they serve, so there are many challenges geographically.
And one of the things that Chairman Murphy did is that he
was instrumental in putting together an agreement with the
individual who was governor before I was Governor Schafer, that
really provided a collaborative working agreement between the
reservation, the Tribe and the counties throughout the entire
area. So that when it came to maintaining roads, plowing roads,
getting snow off the roads, and addressing a lot of these
issues, they had a cooperative agreement so that they could
work together on the roads, both on-reservation and off, which
was frankly a very cost-effective way to do it.
It was his leadership in setting up those types of
agreements that really led us to gas tax agreements with all
the Tribes in North Dakota. And we have parts, or all, of five
reservations in our State, and many Tribes. It was that
leadership that led to resources going not only to his own
people at Standing Rock, but to all of the Tribes, because it
was the model of the cooperative road maintenance agreement
that we followed.
Chairman Murphy is a Vietnam veteran. He is somebody who
has been a leader not just to his people on his reservation in
North Dakota and South Dakota, but a State leader in North
Dakota. So when we talk about somebody who has great respect,
Chairman Murphy has great respect. When he is here talking
about transportation issues, he is somebody who isn't just here
talking about them, he is dealing with them every single day,
between floods, tornadoes, and fires. We have been out there
fighting fires with Blackhawk helicopters and pulling water out
of the Missouri River.
And here he is again, although he is a young man still in
his sixth term, again leading the Standing Rock Sioux and doing
a great job. So it is wonderful to have you here.
Mr. Murphy. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. I know one of the points that you are going
to make, and I would like to emphasize it as well, Mr.
Chairman. We have to do everything we can with the dollars we
have. It is hard right now, because we are in a financially
difficult situation.
So every dollar we use, we have to use as effectively as we
can. I think one of the ways to use them most effectively is
exactly what you and I talked about last week when I was home,
and I know you will be here talking about it today, and I hope,
Chairman Akaka, that you have an opportunity to hear more from
Chairman Murphy. We have to make sure those dollars get to the
local leaders like Chairman Murphy, so that they can use them
for best effect on the reservation.
So we have challenges with dollars, and of course we have
so many miles of road in areas that are not heavily populated.
In our case we also have energy impacts, where we have a lot of
traffic and big trucks running on these roads that put ruts in
them and can make them more dangerous. Both from a traffic
standpoint and from a wear on the roads standpoint, it is
really important that we get these dollars to the local leaders
like Chairman Murphy.
Any way we can work to do that and streamline the process
through Interior and through BIA to get those dollars down to
the local leaders is very important. I think there may be some
ways we can work on that, and I look forward to working with
you on it. Chairman Murphy, I hope as you have time to present
more testimony that you are able to go into that a little bit.
I think it is a very good idea. It is an idea that you brought
to me and I very much agree with, and I want to help you to do
all we can in that regard.
It is certainly true in transportation, it is true in other
areas, too, health services and so forth. But certainly
transportation, if we can get those dollars to the local level.
And then too, following up on the question I asked the earlier
panel, leverage those dollars. For example, where you have been
able to bring in local gas tax dollars and work with the State
and the counties to leverage those dollars, I think you have
really been a leader there and I hope we can do more of those
things.
Thank you for being here, Chairman Murphy. Thank you to our
other panel members for being here. Mr. Chairman, thank you for
letting me present for just a minute.
The Chairman. Senator Hoeven, thank you for being here, and
thank you for your comments. I have to say, thank you for your
sound advice. It is for sure that we need to try to use
whatever funds we have as wisely as we can. And I think this is
a point in time when we can do that. So we have to do it
together. I look forward to working with Senator Hoeven and our
other members and with also you and the Tribes. So thank you
very much for your comments.
Now let me go on to our next witness, Mr. Martel, for your
testimony, please.
STATEMENT OF HON. WES MARTEL, VICE CHAIRMAN,
EASTERN SHOSHONE BUSINESS COUNCIL; ACCOMPANIED BY JIM
SHAKESPEARE, CHAIRMAN, NORTHERN ARAPAHO BUSINESS COUNCIL, JOHN
P. SMITH, TRANSPORTATION
DIRECTOR, SHOSHONE AND ARAPAHO TRIBES, AND
JIM GARRIGAN, TRANSPORTATION PLANNER, RED LAKE
BAND OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS
Mr. Martel. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Committee. My name is Wes Martel and I am the Co-Chairman of
the Eastern Shoshone Tribe, Wind River Reservation, in Wyoming.
On behalf of the Joint Business Council of the Eastern
Shoshone Tribe and the Northern Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River
Reservation, I thank you for this opportunity to provide
testimony concerning transportation issues in Indian Country. I
also am pleased that Chairman Jim Shakespeare, from the
Northern Arapaho Tribe, is accompanying me today, as is John
Smith and Jim Garrigan, who are our transportation technical
support team.
I am pleased that our Senator Barrasso and his keen
understanding of our issues and concerns helps provide input
and dialogue between the Tribe and the Select Committee. I will
now summarize my remarks.
The Federal Lands Highway Program and Indian Reservation
Roads program represents for us a major avenue through which
the United States Government fulfills its trust
responsibilities and honors its obligations to the Wind River
Tribes and to other Indian Tribes. This program is vital to the
well-being of all Native people living on Indian lands
throughout the United States. Because of its great importance,
reform of the Indian Reservation Roads program has become a top
legislative priority for many Tribes.
While Congress has been responsive, it is painful for me to
tell you that the manner by which the BIA allocates money
through the IRR system has become a disaster. For our 2.2
million acre reservation, it is not doing what Congress
intended to do when you enacted SAFETEA-LU. We pray that the
leaders of this Committee, who have helped pass highway bills
for the benefit of Tribes will once again weigh in and help fix
the formula problems that the BIA seems incapable of fixing
itself.
BIA officials have turned a blind eye to the fact that
millions and millions of IRR funds are being diverted,
sometimes through illegal and fraudulent fashion, to non-BIA
and non-Tribal roads. These actions are also contrary to the
trust responsibility the BIA owes my Tribes.
For the past six years, the Council of Large Land-Based
Tribes has been attempting to correct the misinterpretation and
misapplication by the BIA and the Federal Highway
Administration of the enacted regulation of the Indian roads
program as contained in 25 C.F.R. 170. This misinterpretation
and misapplication manifested itself as the uncontrolled
implementation of the road inventory update process which is
used to generate formula shares for all Tribes.
Because of this uncontrolled implementation of the
inventory update process, that part of the inventory which
generates formula shares amounts for the land-based Tribes has
been reduced significantly from 76 percent in 2006 to less than
20 percent in 2011, and is declining at an alarming rate.
Mr. Chairman, I ask you to consider the implications of
this incredible situation. Only 20 percent of the money
Congress appropriates for Indian Reservation Road program is
being used on BIA and Tribal reservation roads. Surely this is
not what Congress intended.
You will hear from the BIA that the problems identified
above are as a result of a negotiated rulemaking process. First
of all, that process was flawed. But as importantly, it must be
noted that after the rulemaking committee issued its
recommendations, the BIA took those recommendations and on
their own, arbitrarily and unilaterally made changes before
they were finalized and placed in the Federal Register. The
impact of those changes resulted in reducing the funding
allocations as much as 60 percent to land-based Tribes by
allowing some Tribes to indiscriminately add State, county
roads and proposed roads into their IRR inventory without
justification.
Roads on Indian reservations are considered Federal roads
due to the fact that the Indian reservations are considered
Federal lands and the Federal Government is responsible for
constructing and maintaining these roads. State and county
roads are not considered Federal roads, and they have separate
funding sources and should not be siphoning off critical
funding meant for Indian reservations.
To allow the diversion of funds away from land-based
reservations to continue is a travesty, and land-based Tribes
will never be able to reduce the tragic statistics that are
discussed in previous testimony and testimony that we will be
submitting in our written presentations. Allowing State and
county roads into the IRR system simply to generate funding is
siphoning off critical road construction funding for Tribes
whose only source of funding is the IRR program.
Based on the above, the Wind River Tribes have identified
several items that must be incorporated into a new
reauthorization bill in order to make 25 C.F.R. 170 a usable
rule. Replace the Tribal Transportation Allocation Methodology,
TTAM. The Tribal Transportation Allocation Methodology, TTAM,
as contained in 25 C.F.R. 170, has been so misconstrued by BIA,
TTAM, that it favors only those direct service Tribes whose
trust lands are surrounded by high volume State and county
roads, and it has resulted in pitting Tribes against Tribes.
The most fair and equitable solution to the problem is for
the Secretary of Interior to suspend 25 C.F.R. 170 until it be
corrected to reflect the actual intent of Congress. The
previous rule should be temporarily put into effect during the
time period that the existing rule is scrutinized.
Define access. The current statute and regulation does not
define access, nor does it place any limit onto what extent the
route can be included in the IRR inventory. Because of this
ambiguity, the Bureau of Indian Affairs is allowing tens of
thousands of non-BIA miles or non-Tribal system routes into the
IRR inventory. These routes include interstate highways,
national highway system roads, State, county and township
roads, Federal forest roads and proposed roads. Most of these
routes are not located within nor do they provide access to
Indian or Native lands, with some even roadless and wilderness
areas. Some BIA regional road engineers are allowing this abuse
and others are prohibiting it as they believe such annexing is
not allowed.
Restrict proposed roads into IRR inventory. Proposed roads
are being added indiscriminately to the IRR system. The BIA and
the Federal Highway Administration are allowing thousands of
miles of proposed roads into the IRR inventory only to generate
huge funding amounts.
Establish an IRR inventory oversight committee. From the
uncontrolled and indiscriminate manner in which inventory is
being added into the IRR inventory, 33 plus thousand miles in
2004, now in 2011 that is 140,000 miles, it is obvious that
neither the BIA nor the Federal Highways are providing any
quality control or quality assurance of the inventory data that
is being used to calculate funding for IRR distribution.
An inventory oversight committee made up of Tribal
transportation officials must be established to monitor the
inventory data that is being submitted. This committee will
review all inventory data and will decide what data is eligible
to be included into the official inventory.
The Chairman. Mr. Martel, will you please summarize your
statement?
Mr. Martel. It seems inevitable, the only practical
solution we see for this problem is that since the roads on the
BIA system are considered Federal roads, we must look at other
options to get that funding in there. We want to work with
Congress any way we can to get that in place.
Thank you for inviting us to give testimony. If we can
answer any questions, we will be glad to do that.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Martel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Wes Martel, Vice Chairman, Eastern Shoshone
Business Council
The Chairman. Thank you. All of your full statements will
be placed in the record.
Mr. Chaco, will you please proceed with your testimony.
STATEMENT OF PAULSON CHACO, DIVISION DIRECTOR, NAVAJO NATION
DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Chaco. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and esteemed
members of the Committee.
My name is Paulson Chaco and I am the Director for the
Navajo Nation Division of Transportation. Today I would like to
speak with you about four major concerns of Navajo Nation
transportation.
First, I will discuss the issue of direct funding, followed
by job creation and road maintenance. And briefly ending with
the Navajo Nation's great concern with Question 10 of 25
C.F.R., Part 170, regarding the definition of Indian
Reservation Roads.
The Navajo Nation has gone to great measures over the years
to create a sophisticated level of government and ensure
quality public service for the Navajo people and everyone who
may be guests on Navajo land. As a people and a nation, we
continue to grow and progress, continually looking forward to
the emerging global economy to pave a path for the Navajo
people.
However, in 2011, our Nation finds itself being held to a
different set of standards. And in many regards, second class
citizens. While the United States has made great strides to
foster a more positive relationship with Tribal nations, there
are still improvements to be made.
Perhaps the greatest issue facing the Navajo Nation is
access to direct funding. Many programs, such as the TIGER
grants, transit, emergency relief for federally-owned roads and
safety grants are not truly available to Tribes unless we have
partnered with a State. We ask the question, why is this?
The Navajo Division of Transportation is a sophisticated
and quality public service. There is no reason we should not
have the ability to apply for all the same funding as any State
in the Union. Allowing the Navajo Nation access to direct
funding will allow for greater oversight in planning and
management. Additionally, the decision where the funding is to
be utilized will rest in the hands of the Navajo Nation,
allowing for more services to be provided in the areas not of
interest to any particular State Government.
My division is tasked with the construction and maintenance
of roads. Many of these roads are the only access our people
may have for public service and basic human necessities. Yet
today we find ourselves at the mercy of other departments of
transportation. This is an issue that clearly needs to be
addressed through legislation, so that the Navajo Nation and
other Tribal nations can begin to acquire direct access to
transportation funding.
Job creation is an integral part of the Navajo's current
agenda, just as it is across the entire Nation. Unlike the
majority of the Country, Navajo and other rural or large land-
based Tribes have a unique problem. Tribal members lack access
to job opportunities because of inadequate roadways. For 2011,
the Navajo Nation used ARRA funding for eight separate road
projects on the Navajo Nation, including Western Agency,
Eastern Agency, Fort Defiance and Shiprock. All funding was
used within the allotted time frame and to date, all projects
are completed.
This funding was instrumental not only in creating Navajo
construction jobs, but secondary industries as well,
specifically merchants and food vendors saw an increase in
revenue from our presence, and the creation of roads allowed
more people more efficient access to job opportunities
throughout the Navajo Nation.
Additionally, many of the social ills that plague Native
American communities are a direct result of unemployment and
lack of job opportunities. As roads are created and employment
and access to opportunities increases, we have a greater
ability to curtail these countless social problems that have
hurt so many of our community members.
While road creation does assist the Navajo people in
accessing employment opportunities, receiving all forms of
public service and obtaining basic human necessities, it is
only half the battle. Once the roads are built, the question
for the Navajo Nation and all Tribes is, how do we maintain
them? Currently the transportation funding received by the
Navajo Nation is never specifically for road maintenance,
meaning that the roads can be built, but not maintained. This
is a major obstacle for the Navajo Nation.
Unlike State governments that have an array of methods for
generating revenue to assist in road maintenance, the Navajo
Nation is not so fortunate. This is not a problem unique to the
Navajo, but is a reality across Indian Country and stems from
systematic inequalities in taxation, taxation methods, economic
development. Until the underlying issues are addressed,
discretionary transportation funding needs to also include road
maintenance.
Mr. Chairman, it is common knowledge throughout Indian
Country that there is a growing great concern over the
definition of Indian Reservation Roads for transportation.
Funding purposes specifically proposed an access road as
described in 25 C.F.R. Part 170. While I will not go into great
length on this issue, I will state that the Navajo Nation does
firmly believe that the roads which are continuously and
systematically maintained by the State and county governments
should be excluded from the definition of true Indian
reservation roads.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to reiterate that
the Navajo Nation hopes to see greater access to direct funding
which in turn allows for greater employment opportunities and
job creation. Additionally, it is essential to allow separate
funding based on total number of BIA and Tribal road miles and
bridges for the road maintenance, and there must be legislation
addressing the definition of Indian Reservation Roads under 25
C.F.R. Part 170.
I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman Akaka and other
esteemed members of the Committee for inviting me here to
speak. The Navajo Nation understands that this is a difficult
economy. Many hard decisions have to be made that will affect
the great citizens of this great Country.
However, when it comes to transportation issues, it is
important to remember that in order to grow and progress, there
must be a path for people to follow. Without this path, there
is no greater destination for the people than the circumstances
in which they currently live. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Chaco follows:]
Prepared Statement of Paulson Chaco, Division Director, Navajo Nation
Division of Transportation
Good Afternoon Mr. Chairman and esteemed members of the Committee;
My name is Paulson Chaco and I am the Division Director for the
Navajo Nation Division of Transportation. Today I would like to speak
to you about four major concerns that the Navajo Nation has regarding
transportation. First, I will discuss the issue of Direct Funding,
followed by Job Creation and Road Maintenance, and briefly ending with
the Navajo Nation's concerns with question 10 of 25 CFR part 170
regarding the definition of Indian Reservation Roads.
The Navajo Nation has gone to great measures over the years to
create a sophisticated level of government and ensure quality public
services for the Navajo people and everyone who may be guests on Navajo
Land. As a people and a Nation we continue to grow and progress,
continually looking forward in this emerging global economy to pave a
path for the Navajo people. However, in 2011, our Nation still finds
itself being held to a different set of standards and in many regards
as second---class citizens. While the United States has made great
strides to foster a more positive relationship with Tribal Nations
there are still improvements to be made.
Direct Funding
Perhaps the greatest issue that faces Navajo Transportation is
access to direct funding.
Many programs such as TIGER GRANTS, TRANSIT, EMERGENCY RELIEF FOR
FEDERALLY OWNED ROADS and SAFETY GRANTS are not truly available to
Tribes unless they have partnered with a State. Why is this? The Navajo
Nation Division of Transportation is a sophisticated and quality public
service. There is no reason that we should not have the ability to
apply for all the same funding as any state in the union. Allowing the
Navajo Nation access to direct funding will allow for greater oversight
in planning and management of funding. Additionally, the decision of
where the funding is to be utilized will rest in the hands of the
Navajo Nation, allowing for more services to be provided in areas not
of interest to any particular state government.
My Division is tasked with the construction and maintenance of
Navajo roads. Many of these roads are the only access our people may
have for public services and basic human necessities. Yet today, we
still find ourselves at the mercy of other departments of
transportation. This is an issue that clearly needs to be addressed
through legislation so that the Navajo Nation and other Tribal Nations
can begin to acquire direct access to Transportation funding.
Job Creation
Job creation is an integral part of the Navajo Nation's current
agenda, just as it is across the entire Nation. Unlike the majority of
the Country, Navajo and other rural or large land-based Tribes have a
unique problem: Tribal member access to job opportunities because of
inadequate roadways.
For 2011, the Navajo Nation used A.R.R.A funding for eight separate
road projects in the Western Agency, Eastern Agency, Fort Defiance and
Shiprock. All funding was used within the allotted timeframe and to
date all projects are completed. This funding was instrumental in not
only creating Navajo construction jobs but in secondary industries as
well. Specifically, merchants and food vendors saw an increase in
revenues from our presence and the creation of roads allowed people
more efficient access to job opportunities throughout the Navajo
Nation. Additionally, many of the social ills that plague Native
American communities are a direct result of unemployment and lack of
opportunity. As roads are created, and employment and access to
opportunities increase, we have a greater ability to curtail these
countless social problems that have hurt so many in our community.
Road Maintenance
While road creation does assist The Navajo Nation people in
accessing employment opportunities, receiving all forms of public
services and obtaining basic human necessities, it is only half the
battle. Once the roads are built the question for the Navajo Nation,
and all Tribes, is ``how do we maintain them? ''
Currently, transportation funding received by the Navajo Nation is
never earmarked for road maintenance, meaning that the roads can be
built but not maintained. This is a major obstacle for the Navajo
Nation. Unlike State Governments that have an array of methods for
generating revenue to assist in road maintenance, the Navajo Nation is
not so fortunate. This is not a problem that is unique to the Navajo,
but is a reality across Indian Country and stems from systematic
inequalities in taxation methods and economic development. Until those
underlying issues are addressed, discretionary transportation funding
needs to also include road maintenance.
Defining Indian Reservation Roads Under Question 10 Of 25 CFR Part 170
It is common knowledge throughout Indian Country that there is a
growing concern over the definition of an ``Indian Reservation Road''
for Transportation funding purposes, specifically proposed and access
roads as described in 25 CFR Part 170. While I will not go into great
length on this issue--I will state that the Navajo Nation does firmly
believe that roads, which are continuously and systematically
maintained by State and County governments, should be excluded from the
definition of a true ``Indian Reservation Road.''
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that the Navajo Nation
hopes to see greater access to direct funding, which in turn allows for
greater employment opportunities and job creation. Additionally, it is
essential to allow separate funding based on the total number of BIA
and Tribal road miles and bridges for Road Maintenance and there must
be legislation addressing the definition of Indian Reservation Roads
under 25 CFR Part 170.
I would like to thank Chairman Akaka and the other esteemed members
of the Committee for inviting me here to speak today. The Navajo Nation
understands that in this difficult economy many hard decisions are to
be made that will affect all citizens of our great Country. However,
when it comes to Transportation issues it is important to remember that
in order to grow and progress there must be a path for people to
follow. Without this path, there is no greater destination for them
than the circumstances in which they currently live. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chaco, for your
testimony.
Ms. Hostler, will you please proceed with your testimony?
STATEMENT OF JACQUE HOSTLER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, CHER-AE HEIGHTS INDIAN COMMUNITY OF THE
TRINIDAD RANCHERIA
Ms. Hostler. Thank you, Senator Akaka. It is my extreme
honor and pleasure to be here today. My name is Jacque Hostler.
I am the Chief Executive Officer of the Cher-Ae Heights Indian
Community of the Trinidad Rancheria in Northern California.
I am honored to present this testimony on behalf of my
Tribal chairman, who sends his greetings, the Honorable Garth
Sundberg, and the Tribal council of the Trinidad Rancheria, as
well as the Northern California Tribal Chairmen's Association,
representing 11 Tribes.
My testimony is informed by my experience in the
construction industry as well as my experience in building
capacity and infrastructure in Indian Country for Tribal
governments and my family, who are Hoopa Tribal members. My
testimony honors my deceased husband today, who was a Hoopa
Tribal councilman. He began the first transit program for his
Tribe in 1987. Today the Hoopa Tribe, the Yurok Tribe and the
Karuk Tribe partner with a local provider to provide
transportation to Tribal members that cover an area of
approximately 150 miles spanning three reservations and three
rivers. This is one of the numerous success stories, due to
perseverance and the determination of SAFETEA-LU.
Lives are lost in Northern California on roads, as well,
that are not maintained and safety issues are not addressed.
Services are over one and two hours away to medical facilities.
We need your understanding and help, as well. We need your
commitment to work with us to protect the Tribal transportation
gains made in the last seven years. As we continue to address
the critical issues across Indian lands, both large and small
land-based Tribes. We understand that.
As the Committee is well aware, the unmet transportation
needs have been discussed, the $69 billion unmet transportation
infrastructure need in Indian Country, while the IRR program
receives $454 million per year. Through SAFETEA-LU's funding,
increases to the Indian Reservation Roads program and program
enhancements, Tribes have been able to build lasting
improvements that have positively impacted Indian Country. The
IRR program, in conjunction with other Federal transportation
programs, has enabled Indian Tribes to build critical capacity
and deliver major projects that have improved the safety of
Tribal communities and have brought jobs to Tribal members and
the local community.
California has one of the largest Native American
populations in the Nation and is home to over 110 Tribes.
Tribal governments have learned to maximize IRR dollars. I am
sorry that Senator Hoeven is not here. Because we have had to
go into our local communities where there have been no monies.
California's unratified treaties checkerboarded the lands.
County and State roads do bisect our reservations that the
lands were taken. We have no control over that. But we still
have the duty to provide for safe communities for our Tribal
members and families.
The economic indicators, we have all talked about that.
Nearly one quarter of Native Americans live in poverty compared
to a national average of 11.6 percent. And in Trinidad
Rancheria, we are located on a remote north coastline. We have
struggled for some time with a loss of jobs in the logging and
forest products industry and commercial fishing industry. With
the Recovery Act, we were able to develop capacity and deliver
projects. We have a North Coast Tribal Transportation
Commission that is home to 11 Tribes. And my full testimony
talks about what those Tribes have accomplished.
A joint Yurok Tribal-Humboldt County project utilizing
multiple funding sources including Recovery Act funding, I can
go on and on. One of the major projects we have been working on
is a regional marine facility, a pier for Trinidad Rancheria,
that promotes the economy. We are driving piles as we speak.
By working together, Tribal programs are leveraging their
internal capacity. And by coordinating with State and regional
agencies, we are able to leverage our funding resources and
plan projects that are mutually beneficial. Separately, we
cannot be effective. Together, we cross over and leverage our
funds, save lives, create jobs and improve our communities.
On the North Coast, the Tribal transportation commission
has provided technical support to all of the Tribes in our
region. I have four specific ways I am recommending to improve
and build upon the successes in SAFETEA-LU, which are, increase
funding for Tribal transportation, authorizing direct access to
a broader range of Federal funded programs, to maximize the
Federal investment and reduce bureaucratic red tape. There are
ways to save dollars in streamlining the Federal investment and
also streamlining the environmental review and permitting
process.
On behalf of the Trinidad Rancheria, the Northern
California Tribal Chairmens Association, the California Tribes
and my Hoopa family, we thank the Committee for this
opportunity to provide testimony. We look forward to the
Committee's continued effort to build upon this success in the
coming transportation reauthorization. And for your dedication,
Senator Akaka, and your fellow Committee members, to improve
the lives of Tribal people.
May God bless you, may God bless the Tribal nations, and
may God bless America.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hostler follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jacque Hostler, Chief Executive Officer, Cher-Ae
Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the Committee
on Indian Affairs. My name is Jacque Hostler, and I am the Chief
Executive Officer of the Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the
Trinidad Rancheria (referred to herein as the ``Tribe'' or ``Trinidad
Rancheria''). I am honored to present this testimony on behalf of the
Tribe, and I bring the greetings of the Tribal Council and Tribal
Chairman and thank the Committee for this opportunity. While I am
providing testimony today solely in my capacity as a representative of
the Trinidad Rancheria, my testimony is informed by my experience
serving as the Representative for the Pacific Region and Vice-Chair of
the Indian Reservation Road Program Coordinating Committee, a
representative on the Caltrans Tribal Advisory Committee, the
Chairperson of the North Coast Tribal Transportation Commission, and my
previous experience as a Tribal transportation coordinator and
construction manager.
The Trinidad Rancheria would like to commend the Committee for
holding this important and timely hearing and for your continued
attention to Tribal transportation issues. As reflected in the title of
today's hearing, Tribal transportation is a critical component of
Tribal economies and Tribal government. Although Indian Tribes continue
to suffer disproportionately from substantial unmet transportation and
infrastructure needs, the Indian Reservation Road (IRR) Program, as
implemented under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), has been an
important success. The IRR Program in conjunction with other federal
transportation programs in which Tribes directly participate has
enabled Indian Tribes to build critical Tribal capacity and deliver
major transportation projects that improve safety of Tribal
communities, bring jobs to Tribal members and the community at large,
support Tribal economic development and enhance the delivery of
government services. For many Tribes, SAFETEA-LU's funding increases
and program enhancements have allowed Tribes to build lasting
improvements that serve the Tribal community in all these sectors.
Congress' investment in Tribal transportation and infrastructure
produces solid and meaningful returns and constitutes a critical way
for Congress to fulfill its unique trust obligations to Indian Tribes.
The achievements Indian Tribes have generated through SAFETEA-LU
are vitally important to Indian Tribes, and we must build upon this
record of success and continue to move forward to build a more
prosperous and safe future for our Tribal communities. We cannot afford
any steps backwards.
The Cost of Existing Tribal Transportation and Infrastructure
Deficiencies
As the Committee is well aware, there are tremendous unmet
transportation and infrastructure needs in Indian country. In order to
consider how to improve Tribal transportation and infrastructure, we
must first recognize the current condition of transportation facilities
on the IRR System and the adverse impacts these unmet transportation
and infrastructure needs cause to Tribal communities.
Indian Tribes rely on the roads on the IRR System to travel within
our communities, to commute to work and school, to access health care.
Our livelihood and welfare depend on these roads, yet an assessment
prepared by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) described the IRR System
as the most underdeveloped road network in the United States. The BIA
has further estimated that the backlog of improvement needs for
selected State and local Indian reservation roads exceeds $11.8 billion
for BIA-owned roads and 9.1 billion for State, Tribal, and locally
owned roads. In previous testimony before this Committee, John Baxter,
Associate Administrator for Federal Lands for the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), observed that these conditions make it very
difficult for residents of Tribal communities to travel to hospitals,
stores, schools, and employment centers.
The BIA further determined that the IRR System is a clear health
and safety hazard for Tribal communities and an impediment to
meaningful economic development. A federal traffic safety study shows
that Indian Tribes suffer the highest per capita traffic facility rates
in the United States--more than four times the national average. A
report prepared by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
observed grimly that, although the number of traffic fatalities is
declining nationally, the number of fatal crashes on Indian
reservations has increased by 52.5 percent. Data indicate that American
Indians also have the highest rates of pedestrian injury and death per
capita of any racial group in the United States. As alarming as these
statistics are, they do not adequately convey the true human and
economic toll, which Tribal communities know too well.
Economic indicators underscore the need for job creation on Indian
reservations, and Tribal transportation projects can bring not only
construction jobs but also spur economic growth within Tribal
communities. Nearly one-quarter of Native Americans live in poverty
compared to a national average poverty rate of 11.6 percent. The BIA's
Indian Labor Force Report also calculates that 49 percent of the total
Indian labor force living on or near reservations was unemployed. The
economic situation faced by the Trinidad Rancheria reflects these
statistics. We are located on the remote north coast of California,
which has struggled for some time with the loss of jobs in the logging
and forest products industry and the commercial fishing industry.
Unemployment for the Tribe is 52 percent, and bringing jobs to this
economically distressed areas is a top priority for the Tribe.
Achievements Realized Under SAFETEA-LU
Expanding Access and Building a Foundation
Prior to SAFETEA-LU, the IRR Program was a smaller program that
served a relatively narrow slice of the national Tribal transportation
needs. Many Tribes, expecially in California, were not able to
participate directly in the IRR Program and their transportation needs
were not addressed through the program. Congressional action in TEA-21,
the IRR Program negotiated rulemaking and funding increases in
SAFETEALU have opened participation in the IRR Program to all Tribes,
with funding to be allocated according to relative need and
construction challenges. The Indian Reservation Road System (IRR
System) was similarly opened up to include all public roads that
provide access to Indian reservations and Indian and Alaska Native
communities, regardless of road ownership.
These changes have enabled Tribes throughout the United States to
develop transportation programs to plan and deliver projects that
tackle long-standing transportation and infrastructure needs. For
example, on the Trinidad Rancheria, the annual funding we receive from
the IRR Program has enabled the Tribe, for the first time, to establish
a Tribal roads department, conduct a thorough inventory of the roads
eligible for the IRR System, assess the Tribe's transportation and
infrastructure needs, and develop a Tribal plan to address these needs.
Thanks to SAFETEA-LU, the Tribe has developed the capacity to
administer its own roads program through a direct program agreement
with the FHWA, and, as discussed below, it has allowed us to develop
major transportation projects and leverage the additional funds
necessary to deliver these projects. We are also better able to
coordinate with federal, state and regional transportation agencies.
Planning and Building Projects and Delivering Jobs
SAFETEA-LU authorizes Tribes to identify their transportation
needs, develop a Tribal transportation improvement program, and plan
and deliver transportation infrastructure projects. Indian Tribes have
used this authority to develop their capacity to carry out these
functions, and the records maintained under the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) demonstrates the internal capacity Tribes have
established.
In 2009, Congress appropriated $310 million to the IRR Program (the
``ARRA IRR Program''), above the annual IRR Program funding for FY
2009. The BIA and the FHWA have reported that 99 percent of the ARRA
IRR Program funds were obligated on 518 projects and that 94 percent of
these funds were obligated through contracts or compacts with Indian
Tribes. Under the ARRA IRR Program, Indian Tribes developed and
submitted the ARRA transportation improvement plans to fund 20 bridge
projects, 1,300 road construction projects covering 1,300 miles of
road, 17 transit projects, 60 road maintenance projects, and 320 design
projects. The success of the ARRA IRR Program shows that not only is
there a great unmet transportation infrastructure need, but that Indian
Tribes have the capacity to plan and deliver these transportation
projects.
The Trinidad Rancheria is pleased to report that the Tribe has
recently commenced construction of a major transportation
infrastructure project to replace a deteriorating transportation
facility--the Trinidad Pier. This project, which is funded through a
combination of federal, state, and Tribal funds (including the IRR
Program and the IRR High Priority Program), is currently providing
significant construction jobs and supporting the employment of local
and regional suppliers. Moreover, the reconstructed pier will anchor
the Tribal and local regional economy by supporting the jobs of
commercial fishermen, recreational fishing businesses, various harbor
businesses operated by the Tribe (e.g., a restaurant, tackle shop, and
boat maintenance facilities), and the local hospitality industry.
Additionally, the project will benefit the unique marine environment in
Trinidad Harbor and help develop employment in the growing
environmental tourism industry.
Below are examples of transportation projects several member Tribes
of the North Coast Tribal Transportation Commission have delivered, or
are in the process of delivering, which provide jobs and address the
significant transportation needs:
The Yurok Tribe's Bald Hill Road Paving Project was a joint
Yurok Tribe- Humboldt County project utilizing multiple funding
sources, including Recovery Act funding.
The Karuk Tribe receives its IRR funding though a direct
agreement with the FHWA. Construction on Itroop Road became a
top priority when surface cracks on that road increased to more
than 8'' wide and threatened the viability of this sole access
route for residents of a multi-unit single family Tribal
housing community.
The Smith River Rancheria conducted one of the first
Tribally-led Road Safety Audit/Value Engineering (RSA/VE) study
in which a state DOT, county government and FHWA fully
participated. The study involved on-site field visits and
inspections at all hours and in different weather conditions in
order to experience, first hand, the road traffic and safety
conditions at play.
In the absence of public transit services in its region, the
Blue Lake Rancheria Tribe, working closely with CalTrans, the
California Highway Patrol, local hospitals and other groups,
made public transit a reality. Thanks to funding from FTA's
Tribal Transit Program, by 2010, the Tribe was providing 17,000
one way rides a year.
The Hoopa Valley Tribe has implemented the Bald Hill
Stabilization Project to prevent closure of an emergency exit
from the Reservation and avoid a lengthy detour for residents,
extended Redwood Grove Road for residential development, and
developed a project study to provide crosswalks, sidewalks and
medians on the Reservation.
To enhance safety, the Elk Valley Rancheria has designed
underpasses and trail corridors to accommodate pedestrians and
cyclists crossing highway 101 and is coordinating with a
wildlife scientist to incorporate elk crossing features.
These examples represent a small sample of transportation projects
being delivered by Indian Tribes. They all highlight the ability of
rural Tribes to deliver major projects to economically distressed
areas.
Partnering and Coordination
Partnerships and coordination among Tribes and between Tribes and
state and local agencies are a necessity for many Tribes, especially in
California where the IRR Program funding is relatively limited.
SAFETEA-LU has provided Tribes with the resources necessary to develop
such relationships. By working together, Tribal programs are leveraging
their internal capacity, and by coordinating with state and regional
agencies, we are able to leverage our funding resources and plan
projects that are mutually beneficial. On the North Coast of
California, we have formed the North Coast Tribal Transportation
Commission, which has eight member Tribes who work together on common
interests, provide mutual technical assistance, and coordinate with the
local regional transportation agencies and the California Department of
Transportation. Our Tribal transportation commission has successfully
built a number of productive partnerships. The Commission's successful
collaboration has been recognized by the Director of the California
Transportation Commission and received a Federal Highways Exemplary
Human Service Award.
Improving and Building Upon SAFETEA-LU
While SAFETEA-LU has advanced important policy and program
opportunities, in many respects it has showed us how much remains to be
done. Indeed, experience has shown that the funding and scope of Tribal
programs in SAFETEA-LU are insufficient to make sufficient progress
addressing transportation needs on the ground. In order to more fully
address the unmet infrastructure and safety needs of Indian Tribes we
need to build upon the progress made in SAFETEA-LU.
For several years a broad cross section of Indian Tribes have
worked with the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and the
InterTribal Transportation Association (ITA) joint task force to
develop a consensus set of Tribal priorities for the reauthorization of
SAFETEA-LU. These consensus priorities are set forth in the National
Tribal Leadership Paper on Tribal Transportation Priorities (``White
Paper''), which has been adopted by both NCAI and ITA. The Committee on
Indian Affairs clearly recognizes the significance of such a broad
interTribal consensus on these issues, and, in 2009, the Committee
Chairman released draft legislation which largely tracked these
provisions. Below are some of the key priorities identified in White
Paper.
Funding
While we understand that it is a difficult time to increase funding
for any government program and that many programs are facing budget
cuts. However, there is a strong justification providing an increase to
the IRR Program. In addition to the unmet need, Indian Tribes have
suffered from historical funding inequities. Although Indian
Reservation Roads make up nearly three percent of the federal roadways,
they receive less than 0.5 percent of the total federal highway
funding. The funding inequities are even sharper when the funding for
Tribal programs is compared to the funding provided to states. For
example, at the current funding levels, the IRR Program receives only
about half the amount per road mile that states receive. Moreover,
there is evidence that states, who receive federal funding for their
own roads that fall within reservations, do not fulfill their
obligation to improve or maintain these roads.
Any reduction to the IRR Program funding would seriously impair the
ability of Indian Tribes to deliver actual projects on the ground.
Under the SAFETEA-LU funding levels for FY 2009, Tribes with relatively
small transportation programs must coble resources together from a
number of sources and over several years to carry out solely the design
and permitting phase of a major project. If IRR Program funding is not
increased or even diminished, many Tribes may be precluded from
delivering major projects. Not only would this breach Congress' trust
obligation to Tribes, it would undermine the Tribal government capacity
which has been built under SAFETEA-LU.
Direct Access to a Broader Range of Federally Funded Programs
Transportation safety is DOT's highest priority, yet the data
clearly indicates that Congress and the Administration have not
succeeded in reducing the appalling rate of traffic fatalities in
Indian country. Under SAFETEA-LU Congress authorized $1.275 billion in
FY 2008 alone for State-administered High Risk Rural Road Program, and
nearly $700 million for the NHTSA-administered Highway Safety Programs.
However, Tribal governments, who face the greatest growing highway
safety problem, have not been able to access these programs. To
effectively combat the factors that contribute to highway accidents in
Indian country, Tribes must be provided direct access to these
programs, and to accomplish this the White Paper recommends
establishing a two (2) percent Tribal funding set aside within the High
Risk Rural Roads Program and creating new Tribal traffic safety
programs with FHWA and the National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration (NHTSA).
Maximize the Federal Investment
There is general agreement within Congress and the Administration
of the need to reduce bureaucratic hurdles that impair efficient
program administration and to increase program flexibility. This is
particularly important for Indian Tribes, which have extremely limited
program budgets. The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance
Act (ISDEAA) has a proven record as an effective and accountable way to
reduce administrative costs and studies show that programs administered
under ISDEAA have become engines for economic growth in their
communities. Congress has sought to extend greater authority to Tribes
to carry out the Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program under ISDEAA
agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and direct program
agreements with the Federal Highway Administration. By increasing the
scope of the programs that can be included in ISDEAA agreements,
Congress can maximize federal investment in roads infrastructure and to
put more people to work.
In particular, we support extending the ISDEAA agreements to all
Department of Transportation (DOT) programs serving Tribes, including
programs administered by the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA),
FHWA-Federal Lands Highway, Federal Transit Administration, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration and other federal transportation
agencies. The FHWA has successfully implemented direct program
agreements with Tribes, and the program has grown quickly over the last
two years. Based on this experience, we believe that DOT would be able
to establish and implement a successful Tribal transportation program
under the ISDEAA and we support extending such a program to DOT.
Streamline Environmental Review and Permitting Processes
The Administration and Congress have noted that it takes far too
long to deliver a transportation project and have indicated support for
streamlining the environmental review and permitting processes for
transportation projects. The Trinidad Rancheria wholeheartedly agrees.
Because many Tribal projects depend on both federal and state funding,
or involve transportation facilities located on state rights of way,
Tribes must often comply with overlapping federal and state
environmental review and permitting requirements, which can delay
projects for years and result in significant additional costs for even
modest projects. The Tribe supports the protection of environmental
resources and we have undertaken several projects to reduce existing
impacts to the environment. However, there must be balance, and we
respectfully urge the Committee to work with the Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee to ensure that Indian Tribes benefit equally
from any efforts to streamline these requirements for state projects.
Additionally, Tribal projects should not be burdened with any
additional state requirements or costs that are not imposed on projects
implemented by state or local government agencies.
Conclusion
On behalf of the Trinidad Rancheria, I thank the Committee for your
continued attention to Tribal transportation issues. Tribal
transportation is a critical component of Tribal economies and Tribal
government. The opportunities created by SAFETEA-LU and the Recovery
Act have led to numerous important successes in which Tribes have
improved safety of Tribal communities, brought jobs to Tribal members
and the community at large, supported Tribal economic development and
enhanced the delivery of government services. We look forward to the
Committee's continued effort to build upon these successes in the
coming transportation reauthorization.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Ms. Jacque Hostler, for
your testimony. I want to thank this panel for your testimony
today.
As we heard today, and this question is for the entire
panel, as we heard today, many of the Tribes have had a number
of natural disasters over the years, which have had significant
impacts on Tribal roads and bridges. We have heard that from
other witnesses.
My question to you is, what recommendations do you have for
ensuring that Tribes are able to repair and restore their roads
after natural disasters?
Mr. Murphy. Mr. Chairman, for the record, can I have Mr.
Pete Red Tomahawk answer that for our Tribe, the Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe? Because we have had several of them, and we talked
about this. I will let him explain that.
The Chairman. Yes. Thank you. Will you please give your
name and position?
Mr. Red Tomahawk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Pete
Red Tomahawk. I am a member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.
[Greeting in Native tongue]. Good afternoon.
The Chairman. Good afternoon.
Mr. Red Tomahawk. I see on your bio your birthday is coming
up. I want to wish you a happy birthday.
The Chairman. Mahalo, thank you very much.
Mr. Red Tomahawk. Mr. Chairman, we have been experiencing a
lot of disasters. First, we deal with the snow issue, and then
we get a lot of snow, 18, 20 feet of snow. Our road maintenance
can't handle that snow.
We go to the BIA and the BIA, when Mike Black was the
regional director, he contacted the Rocky Mountain Region,
their regional director. What they were able to do was contact
the Tribes within their region. They came together like the
Blackfeet, Fort Belknap, Fort Peck, the Assiniboine Sioux, the
Crow, the Northern Cheyenne and all these Tribes came together
and they brought equipment. And they came down and they helped
us, not only Standing Rock, but Cheyenne River. We were in
dire, dire need of help and they came and they helped us. They
helped us open the roads.
And them next comes the floods. As soon as the snow melts,
then we have a lot of water. This year was really bad, because
of the melted snow. It affected the whole Missouri River. This
is the first time there is dams on the Missouri River with Fort
Peck Garrison Dam, the Walhee Dam and Pier, Big Bed in Fort
Thompson, Fort Randall, the Gavins Point and looking at all
these dams here. This is the first time, with the Garrison Dam,
there are 28 spillways. And with the 28 spillways, this is the
first time all 28 spillways were open
There were 285,000 CFSs of water coming through the
spillways. As the water, it was just overwhelming all the
houses and looking at the community that Senator Hoeven comes
out of, looking at all that, it was just terrible. And one of
the Tribes, the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, they experienced death
where the water went over the road, and there were two elderly
ladies thinking that the water just went over the road. And it
created a huge tunnel underneath and the ladies lost their
lives. Later on there was another accident that took four more.
So this flood is really bad, and we are going into the fire
next. So we have back to back disasters on Standing Rock. That
is where it is at, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Martel?
Mr. Martel. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call on my
transportation director to update us, but before I do, last
year we had probably a thousand year flood on our reservation.
For some reason we got all this rain and snow, and we had a
real warm spring and all the snow melted at once and wiped out
one of our major bridges through the main thoroughfare on our
reservation, destroyed a lot of roads, threatened a lot of
homes. We were fortunate that we didn't lose any lives but we
utilized a lot of our local resources, FEMA was there to help
us. We are one of the reservations that has a pretty decent
relationship with the Wyoming Department of Transportation.
They lent their assistance and their expertise to us. But I
would like to ask our transportation director to give you a
little more detail on that.
Mr. Smith. Hapa. That is hello, friend. As far as our
opportunity this year, like Pete, it is our second year of
floods. In 2010, we experienced over $2.2 million worth of
damage to our roads and our bridges. As the Federal agency, the
emergency Federal aid that was provided to the Tribes, was
calculated to absorb two bridges that we have suffered huge
damages with and we have lost one total bridge between our two
reservation communities, which is the direct access for goods
and services. I think their Wal-Mart took a big hit last year,
because we weren't able to get down and have a lot of people.
And the bridge is passable at this time. Just as we were
reshaping up our roads and our bridges from last year, because
the money came in in December and January, where you can't work
in Wyoming very well, when the ice is flowing and so forth,
that we were just now cleaning up from the previous year's
flood damage and we got hit again.
But several good things have happened with our technology
that we also use, it is satellite technology and GIS-GPS
surveying. So we knew where our danger spots were, so we shored
those up. To this year's damages, we are in the range of
$300,000. So even though we had more water, we were able to
absorb a lot of the damages.
But the unfortunate thing is, as Mr. Red Tomahawk can
attest, we get the money, but in order to get the money you
have to spend your existing IRR money. So that doesn't let you
build many projects that you had planned for in the years ahead
to get your money back and put those funds back into the
system. So it really hinders, a double whammy, so to speak, on
your road projects.
So we are very limited in projects we could perform this
year, because we do not have the allocation or the funds
available. And with the present system of funding as has been
dribbled out to us in appropriations in a segment process that
really defeats our long-term process of being able to complete
our projects. That is a real hindrance, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you. If I could answer any questions, I will be happy to.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chaco?
Mr. Chaco. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Committee. The question is, what recommendation. For Navajo, we
have our testimony, which is related to direct funding. Direct
funding for basically one is a streamlining of reimbursement
processes from FEMA. Secondly is the ability for the nations to
declare their own emergencies. The other one is the ability to
move the minimum funding requirements within FEMA. Normally
what happens, I came from a small Tribe, worked for a small
Tribe. In that case, we literally had to include several Tribes
in order to meet the qualifications under FEMA regulations.
So those are the recommendations that I pose forward.
The fourth is funding in road maintenance. Road maintenance
is funded under the Department of Interior budget. As other
Tribes have indicated, that has to be shored up in order to
maintain our roads, and includes road maintenance and washouts.
Right now, on Navajo, I have over 50 washouts of culverts as we
speak. The photos that you see on the pictures here is recent
rains and recent washouts that we have. We have families that
can't get across the washout.
So those are my recommendations, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Mr. Chaco.
Ms. Hostler?
Ms. Hostler. Senator Akaka, I managed over two emergencies
in the Hoopa Tribe for over three years. It took over a year to
get funding flowing in. And all of these gentlemen are exactly
correct: the biggest need is that direct access for immediate
emergency funds to come into the reservation.
Currently we have to wait for the Federal Highways
representative to make it to the reservation. Sometimes that
takes months. Then we have to wait for the partnership with the
Federal Highways representative and the regional road engineer.
That also takes weeks at times. Then we have to expend our own
maintenance funds, and oftentimes by the winter, those funds
are already expended. So in order to open roads and to have
safe passage we have to use any construction funding that may
be available, which oftentimes is not reimbursed for over a
year.
So I concur with all of my colleagues.
Additionally, those contracts that come through the BIA are
93-638 contracts and take months to initiate. It is a cost
reimbursable contract, most of the time. So all of those
bureaucracies add to the pain and suffering of the Tribal
members on the reservation.
The timing of the delivery of funding and again, Mr. Chaco
just mentioned the BIA maintenance money. If the roads have not
been maintained properly for any reason, whether it is lack of
funds or lack of time, those roads are not eligible. Because
they say, if the maintenance would have been done, those roads
would be eligible and those assessments can move forward. If I
didn't have funding to manage 300 miles of roads on the Hoopa
Tribe, I was only funded at 11 percent of need, then I could
not, I was not eligible for those roads to be reimbursed for
emergencies.
So there is a series of things that need to be corrected in
coordination with the agencies and that direct access to the
Tribe. Thank you.
The Chairman. I thank you very much for your testimonies
and your responses. And again, I want to express my mahalo to
the witnesses at today's hearing. The testimony we have heard
today is very valuable and the Committee will consider it as we
move forward to draft Tribal transportation legislation.
I am looking forward to working with my colleagues on the
Indian Affairs Committee and the other Senate committees that
deal with transportation issues to make sure that Tribal
priorities are considered as the Senate moves forward with
surface transportation reauthorization. So this is what we are
trying to get into before we arrive there.
So your responses have been very valuable. Again, mahalo,
thank you very much. This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:10 p.m, the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Michael Hoffman, Vice President, Association of
Village Council Presidents (AVCP)
Introduction
I wish to thank the Committee, and especially Chairman Akaka and
Vice Chairman Barrasso, as well as our wonderful Senator on this
Committee, Lisa Murkowski, for the time and attention the Committee is
giving to the crucial topic of transportation in Indian Country.
Background
The Association of Village Council Presidents (AVCP), headquartered
in Bethel, Alaska, is a Native organization providing social, economic
and educational services to 56 separate Tribal governments in the
Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. Our 56 member Tribes are scattered throughout
the YK-Delta in an area that is approximately 59,000 square miles and
roughly the size of the state of Oregon. Our villages are not connected
by road to one another nor to the rest of Alaska. Our unique geography
poses great challenges to our efforts to provide safe access to basic
essential services.
Summary Points--Safety and Access
AVCP has made it a top Tribal priority to maximize its utilization
of the authority granted to it in SAFETEA-LU so that our citizens can
have access to basic services and safe passage on par with the rest of
America. Access and safety is our goal. For decades, AVCP and the rest
of Native Alaska were left behind the rest of Indian Country when it
came to federal support for building transportation systems. As a
result, our unmet need became overwhelmingly huge. We have begun,
however, to make significant efforts toward meeting some of that unmet
need in the past five or six years. SAFETEA-LU has made that possible,
by placing Alaska Native Tribes at the table with our fellow Tribes
throughout Indian Country and offering us the opportunity to meet the
same rules and regulations that applied to other Tribes. Accordingly,
we have been able to begin to address critical issues that impact the
health and safety of our people. We strongly urge this Committee to
ensure that your colleagues do not alter the basic framework that was
put in place in SAFETEA-LU. We ask that you do everything within your
power to leverage additional resources to Indian Country because all of
our unmet needs for access to basic essential services and traffic
safety make a compelling case for a larger share of federal funding
when compared to the rest of America.
Funding Formula
In recent months, the funding formula that is required by SAFETEA-
LU has come under attack by some who believe that it has reallocated
funding away from true need. We believe the attack is without a basis
in fact. The funding distribution formula has resulted in an increased
pool of Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) funding that more precisely
identifies and addresses actual need for safety and access throughout
all of Indian Country.
An example of this is the eligibility of remotely located Native
villages who, until SAFETEA-LU, had no access to IRR funding for basic
access to essential health, education and work resources as well as
important cultural sites. Maintaining the existing statutory and
regulatory authority for proposed and primary access roads is an
extremely crucial issue for us, and we urge the Committee to resist all
calls to alter that framework that has begun to work for all corners of
Indian Country, especially those in its most remote locations.
Unity is Key
As we have urged our Tribal leader colleagues in forum after forum,
we believe it is in all of our best interests to join together to seek,
in unity, a greater share of the federal funding resources based upon
our combined unmet need for safe access to essential services, which
need is far greater than the needs of nearly every other group in
America.
Indian Country is, for the most part, located far from the services
most Americans take for granted. Safe and reliable access to basic
health care, education, commerce, and employment are a huge challenge
for most of Indian Country, and together, we can make the best case for
a greater share of federal resources. When this issue of ``access to
basic services'' is combined with the issue of how unsafe are the
transportation systems in much of Indian Country, we should have an
overwhelming claim to federal resources. Access and safety each
implicate life and death challenges that daily confront Native
communities throughout all of Indian Country. Access and safety should
be the rallying cry for all Indian Tribes and Native communities. We
urge this Committee to urge its colleagues to strengthen SAFETEA-LU
rather than weaken it.
Feasibility and Survival
Any effort to impose a ``feasibility'' standard or other length
limitation on eligibility is a proposal to forsake entire Native
communities and thwart Indian self-determination and the right to
preserve our own ways of life. Writing off entire communities simply
because they are home to ``too few'' people or are ``too remote'' for
some urbanites' notions of what is ``inhabitable'' is an affront to
Native culture and way of life and a direct and repulsive threat to our
future. We urge the Committee to resist calls to change SAFETEA-LU's
basic framework of eligible funding distribution formulas and inventory
eligible for funding. Any effort to place a length limitation on a
remotely Native village is to once again rule out their participation
in the IRR program and impede our progress to address critical safety
issues in our region.
Proposed and Primary Access Routes
We wish to re-emphasize to the Committee the importance that
proposed and primary access intermodal routes play in Alaska's very
underdeveloped transportation infrastructure; especially across the
large Native land areas that are not served by state or federal road
systems. Under SAFETEA-LU, we are delivering critical transportation
plans, projects, and programs to ``undeveloped'' and ``underdeveloped''
rural Alaska. We are providing primary access routes that connect our
people to basic health, education, safety, and employment resources
that are absolutely vital to the survival of many Tribal citizens who
struggle to survive across a vast Native land base.
We oppose the various suggestions that have been proposed that
would limit funding, including setting a defined mileage length, after
which a route would generate no funding under the IRR formula. Tribes
in Alaska collectively have a very unique land base. Any proposed
solution to any national Tribal issue that is based on land boundaries
would be fundamentally unworkable in Alaska. For example, one
suggestion has been to limit funding only to roads that extend no more
than 15 miles from a reservation boundary or Native village or
corporation boundary. Such boundaries in Alaska do not correspond with
transportation needs. They are far removed from population centers and
have no resemblance to reservation boundaries in the Lower 48. In
Alaska, where the federal and state highway system is virtually
nonexistent in most areas, and the unique landscape and land ownership
is diverse from Tribe to Tribe and region to region, trying to
implement such a radical proposal in a fair manner would be impossible.
Transportation and Access to Services
Notably, for purposes of service delivery, the BlA has long
considered the entire State of Alaska to be a single service delivery
area without boundaries, with nearly 80,000 Tribal members of 229
Tribes residing in communities throughout a large land area that is
over twice the size of Texas and larger than the combined area of the
22 smallest states. Likewise, the IHS has long considered the entire
State of Alaska to be one Contract Health Services Delivery Area for
purposes of providing health care to American Indians and Alaska
Natives. In providing federal support for transportation services, the
federal government uses the same approach it uses to provide support
for BIA and IHS services. Indeed, transportation without boundaries
throughout all of Alaska is absolutely necessary in order for SAFETEA-
LU to be of use in Alaska. It would be a callous and craven federal
policy to offer IHS and BIA services without boundaries but then deny
the supposed beneficiaries transportation access to those services.
Relative Need
We object to any effort to cap a Tribe's proposed routes by
limiting the proposed miles funded to no more than 2 percent of the
miles already built in the Tribe's inventory each year. Such a
proposal, if implemented, would have a destructive effect on all Tribes
who, like most of those in Alaska, have only recently become eligible
to participate in the IRR program under the new authority provided in
SAFETEA-LU. Before SAFETEA-LU, Alaska Tribes were unable to secure much
funding because of the way BIA distributed funds. With SAFETEA-LU, and
its focus on proposed and primary access roads, Alaska Tribes now have
authority and funding to begin address to decades of neglect and
isolation from basic human services.
While most Tribes in the Lower 48 states are likewise relatively
neglected and isolated, the BIA IRR program and surrounding state and
county transportation programs have been addressing their
transportation needs for at least four decades. In Alaska, however,
Tribes are much further behind not only the rest of America, but also,
much further behind the Tribes in the Lower 48 states, having had only
a few years of participation in the IRR program under SAFETEA-LU.
Alaska Offers Opportunity
By adhering to SAFETEA-LU authority, and by following the rules
promulgated under it, Alaska regional Tribes and Tribal organizations
have begun to make great strides toward improving safe and reliable
access of their citizens to essential services. We are rebuilding
access to villages for citizens who were forcibly removed by the United
States decades ago. We are rebuilding access to small, remote villages
whose way of life deserves to be preserved not abandoned.
Until SAFETEA-LU, the IRR program allocated very little funding to
address the staggering transportation needs of Tribes in Alaska. After
SAFETEA-LU and its Relative Needs Formula that was produced by a
negotiated rulemaking process in which everyone participated, Alaska
Tribes in the last several years began to receive a long overdue
relative needs share of the underfunded IRR program. The increases to
meet relative needs in Alaska have been lawfully allocated, in
compliance with the tools and authorities in SAFETEA-LU that are
available to all Tribes wherever situated. We urge the Committee to
resist all calls to weaken the SAFETEA-LU statute and instead ask the
Committee to reauthorize the law so that it can work as intended for
everyone.
Conclusion
Transportation needs in Indian Country for safe access to basic
essential services are much more acute than in the rest of America, and
the federal funding to meet those needs has been far from sufficient.
The increases in funding that accompanied SAFETEA-LU were the product
of a unified voice and approach from all of Indian Country that
compared the relative needs of Indian Country, including safe access to
health and other basic services, with the rest of America. We ask the
Committee to focus on this in its efforts to direct a greater portion
of federal transportation funding in Indian Country.
We thank you for this opportunity to speak on this very critical
issue. There is a lot at stake for us and our Tribal members. Safe
access to basic services is critical to our survival as a people. We
hope our diverse voices today will help inform your decisions on
reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU.
______
Joint Prepared Statement of Julia F. Dorris, President and Loreen J.
Steeves, Vice President, Village of Kalskag Traditional Council
______
Joint Prepared Statement of Zechariah C. Chaliak, Sr., President and
Wassilie Pleasant, Secretary, Native Village of Nunapitchuk (IRA
Council) Tribe
______
Prepared Statement of Jon Greendeer, President, Ho-Chunk Nation
______
Prepared Statement of Tex Hall ``Red Tipped Arrow'', Chairman, Mandan,
Hidatsa, Arikara, Three Affiliated Tribes, Great Plains Tribal
Chairman's Association