[Senate Hearing 112-414]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-414
CLOSING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE:
CONNECTING NATIVE NATIONS AND COMMUNITIES TO THE 21ST CENTURY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 5, 2011
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
74-487 PDF 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
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas,
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts Ranking
BARBARA BOXER, California OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BILL NELSON, Florida JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota ROY BLUNT, Missouri
TOM UDALL, New Mexico JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
MARK WARNER, Virginia PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania
MARK BEGICH, Alaska MARCO RUBIO, Florida
KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
Ellen L. Doneski, Staff Director
James Reid, Deputy Staff Director
Bruce H. Andrews, General Counsel
Ann Begeman, Republican Staff Director
Brian M. Hendricks, Republican General Counsel
Rebecca Seidel, Republican Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on April 5, 2011.................................... 1
Statement of Senator Inouye...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 35
Statement of Senator Begich...................................... 39
Witnesses
Myron P. Naneng, Sr., President, Association of Village Council
Presidents (AVCP).............................................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Geoffrey Blackwell, Chief, Office of Native Affairs and Policy,
Federal Communications Commission.............................. 9
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Alapaki Nahale-a, Chairman, Hawaiian Homes Commission; and
Director, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.................... 15
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Loris Taylor, Native Public Media and National Congress of
American Indians (NACI) Telecommunications Subcommittee........ 20
Prepared statement........................................... 22
John Badal, CEO, Sacred Wind Communications, Inc................. 23
Prepared statement........................................... 26
Appendix
National Translator Association, prepared statement.............. 45
CLOSING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: CONNECTING NATIVE NATIONS AND COMMUNITIES
TO THE 21ST CENTURY
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:28 p.m. in room
SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye,
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Inouye. I have been authorized by Chairman
Rockefeller to preside over this very important hearing.
In my 33 years of service on the Indian Affairs Committee,
I've been fortunate to learn about the history of our country
and its relations with the indigenous Native People who occupy
and exercise sovereignty on this continent.
As a nation we have changed courses many times in the
policies governing our dealings with Native Americans; and
Native People, history shows, have suffered greatly.
Finally, over the last several decades we adopted a policy
of recognizing and supporting the rights of this nation's first
Americans: Native Americans, Alaskan Natives and Native
Hawaiians, and we must continue our resolve to uphold this
policy; and telecommunications is an important investment we
can make in the future.
In 2004 I chaired a Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
hearing on the Native American Connectivity Act. That hearing
focused on ways to help tribal Governors develop the necessary
telecommunications infrastructure so that native communities
can have access to basic telephone service as well as broadband
and wireless technology.
While some progress has been made over the years, as
clearly outlined in the Federal Communications Commission's
National Broadband Plan, there are significant unmet needs and
opportunities in Indian and native communities.
Today's hearing will examine the ongoing communication
challenges facing native communities, including Indian tribes,
Alaska Native Villages and Hawaiian Homelands.
Native Hawaiians have had a special political and legal
relationship with the United States for the past 183 years, as
evidenced through treaties with the United States, and are
included in more than 188 federal statutes.
Historically, native communities had less access to
telecommunication services than any other segment of the United
States population. The lack of good, reliable and affordable
telecommunications infrastructure impedes economic development,
educational opportunities, language retention and preservation,
and access to healthcare and emergency services.
According to the most recent data, less than 70 percent of
the households on tribal lands have basic telephone service,
compared to the national average of approximately 98 percent.
And, let me repeat this again: less than 70 percent of
households on tribal lands have basic telephone service,
compared to the national average of approximately 98 percent.
Further, it is estimated that broadband reaches less than
10 percent--less than 10 percent--of tribal lands compared to
95 percent of households nationwide.
In Hawaii, native communities face the challenge of being
rural, remote and noncontiguous, both an island, as well as
between islands. And Alaska shares many of these same
challenges, since its rural and remote villages are isolated
and not connected to road systems.
So, I'm very pleased that the Federal Communications
Commission has taken an active interest in identifying and
working to meet the needs of native communities through its
adoption of the National Broadband Plan and creating the Office
of Native Affairs and Policy with Geoffrey Blackwell as its
chief.
The adoption of multiple agenda items of great interest to
native communities last month is a testament to these efforts.
I also appreciated the time Chairman Julius Genachowski and
Mr. Blackwell spent in Hawaii learning firsthand about the
special challenges facing native Hawaiian communities.
Identifying the needs and how best to address them is only
part of the equation. Reducing barriers and providing
sufficient support to help native communities will be critical
to the success.
Of the $7.2 billion provided in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act to fund broadband-related projects, only $46.3
million was awarded to Native American awardees by the Commerce
Department's Broadband Technology Opportunities Program.
An additional $285 million was adopted for projects which
claimed some benefit to tribes.
The rural utility service, through its Broadband
Improvement Program, provided $158 million in grants and loans
to native communities or providers whose service may have
touched native communities.
Given the magnitude of the needs this can only be
considered a small downpayment. Unfortunately, given the cost-
cutting environment on Capitol Hill, creative funding
mechanisms will be necessary to support efforts to fully
connect native communities.
The worst thing we can do is to provide for an empty
promise. Too much of that has gone on over these many years; we
have much to make up for in terms of our nation's commitments
to the native people of this land.
So, I look forward to hearing from our distinguished panel
of witnesses on these important issues and working with the FCC
and native communities to achieve our common goals.
As you know, we have a whole panel here, but I was just
notified that the President of the Association of Village
Council Presidents, Myron P. Naneng, Sr., has to return
immediately because there was a death in his family.
And, so, if I may call upon President Naneng to give his
testimony at this time.
Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF MYRON P. NANENG SR., PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF
VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS (AVCP)
Mr. Naneng. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Inouye. I'd
like to thank you for the opportunity to speak on broadband's
potential impact in rural Alaska, and more potentially, the
positive impact that broadband will have in rural Alaska as
well as for education and other issues that are affecting
people that live in rural Alaska.
My name is Myron P. Naneng, Sr., President of the
Association of Village Council Presidents, representing 56
villages on the Yukon/Kuskokwim Delta, which is the size of the
State of Oregon.
I am a member of the State of Alaska Broadband Task Force,
representing Alaska Federation of Natives, which is a statewide
native organization.
I have also served as chairman of a telephone company that
provided local exchange, cellular and Internet services, United
Utilities, from 1980 to 2008 when we sold the company.
I will be providing copies of letters from AFN to
Department of Commerce as part of the testimony to the
Committee.
If cellular services and usage is of any indication of the
need for connectivity in rural Alaska today, it's proven with a
large demand of use by people who live in the villages.
The cell phone service provider was not prepared for a high
usage by people during the initial stages that it was
introduced. Broadband has the same potential of making a bigger
impact. It will enable users to obtain information quicker and
make information available that was not even available 5 years
ago.
Today, our people in the villages want to be connected. I
have a 3-year-old granddaughter who can--who is proficient in
the use of an iPhone and an iTouch. This is the wave of today
for young people in our villages; and it's quite amazing
considering that there was only one phone in the villages in
the 1970s that everybody had to share within their communities.
Communication trends have been changing for the better; and
opportunities that come with it have been embraced by all.
Improved connectivity provides users with information on
educational training and business opportunities as well as
keeping up with current worldwide events.
Information on jobs and opportunities that young people can
apply for will be at their fingertips. This is going to create
an information flow that is not available today and we all know
that this is--this is now becoming a preferred method of
communication for all our young people.
In rural Alaska the only way to travel to most villages is
by small airplane operated by hub based carriers. When a health
emergency occurs, the villages who have health aides who are
the first responders and who communicate with health
professionals, doctors, nurse and counselors, when they
encounter a health situation.
With the expanded broadband will provide better
connectivity; thereby better communications between regional
hospitals, even major hospitals, in cities to support our
village healthcare system, many of which have tele--
telemedicine communication systems. Many of the regional health
corporations have established sub-regional clinics; and within
the Y/K Delta we have five sub-regional clinics extended
throughout the region.
These sub-regional clinics have doctors and other
healthcare professionals who support the villages in the
surrounding areas as well. Even those regional clinics
utilizing telemedicine communication systems to talk to a
diagnosing of symptoms of those they're administrating
healthcare to.
Broadband with the expansion of bandwidth will also allow
schools to expand the educational and training opportunities of
students in a village school, especially in villages that are
not meeting the No Child Left Behind requirements. Educational
programs and other training opportunities would not be
available to students in rural communities because of
remoteness or size; and it can be made available with broadband
Most of the students in villages, even though they graduate
from high school and continue on to higher education
institutions still have to take remedial courses to prepare for
college. We seek the implementation of broadband to help reduce
this requirement and give more students an opportunity to
succeed in courses they take in universities or training
courses.
Adults may not be able to travel to universities due to
families and/or other reasons, can take educational courses
through the expanded system from an accredited college that
offer courses through the Internet.
Nowadays we are seeing more young people getting their
education by staying home and taking courses through the
Internet. There are other--there are also many employer-
sponsored training opportunities that can be delivered
electronically if the infrastructure is in place.
Again, a reminder that the Yukon/Kuskokwim Delta is the
size of the State of Oregon and there are no roads in rural
Alaska, so the cost of everything especially is really, really
expensive. To get to training we have to travel to a regional
hub such as Bethel, St. Mary's Aniak and on to Anchorage; and
further if the training is out of state. The cost of a round-
trip ticket from any one of our villages to Bethel can range
between $150 to $900; and that's just to Bethel.
To consider the opportunities that will come with increased
broadband, bandwidth and connectivity I think this will help in
reducing the cost for people who live in rural Alaska.
Another consideration is the fact that in rural Alaska
there is no choice of providers and connectivity--connection;
and the connection is weak. We currently do not have cell phone
or Internet connections in many remote parts of Alaska; where
we do, the signal is not strong, resulting in many lost calls
or no connectivity. Because we have no choice in providers we
are limited to the provider of the service area, and at the
mercy of the provider with regards to options, plan designs and
costs.
For many villages and their leaders the ability to identify
funding which can be used for village purposes will be a major
step for economic sustainability. Jobs can be created with this
new technology that otherwise does not exist today.
Grant submissions for granting agencies, especially now
with the requirements to submit grants via Internet or
paperless are hindering many of our villages to submit grant
application and financing reporting today. Some have lost
opportunities, so broadband will make it easier for villages
and even regional organizations, such as AVCP, to submit grant
applications before deadlines occur.
This will create infrastructure expansion for both villages
and regional entities that are working with villages, and
create more job opportunities that currently do not exist in
any of our villages.
We see the benefits to broadband; the expansion of
bandwidth; the positive changes it will bring, and
opportunities in getting information and expanding local
village economies.
The potential use--the potential uses in search and rescue
operations: telecommunications for health and--health services,
education in schools and even public safety. Broadband
expansion will help provide law enforcement with a better means
of communications between village public safety officers who
lead search and rescue operations and other law enforcement
duties with other law enforcement personnel.
A child from one of the European villages can most likely
communicate with a Yupik, Cupik or Athabascan child from rural
Alaska. Maybe even today it can be expanded through broadband.
They might learn from our children that we do not have iced-
piped sewer systems or igloos, but that honey buckets are still
in the villages that cause health concerns in villages that
don't have water and sewer systems that are taken for granted
in most of the United States communities.
Maybe even our leaders in Congress or the Oval Office would
realize that many Americans still lack the infrastructure that
can improve the quality of life. For Americans who live in
rural Alaska, broadband will bring the things into real time
views, not just from Discovery Channel of Alaska shows but
directly from people who live in rural Alaska and real people.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify and
provide a short summary of what we anticipate will make a
difference in rural Alaskan villages. And, we know that big--we
know will make a bigger impact on educating not only those who
live in rural Alaska, but those who live in urban America as
well.
And, I'd like to add a comment from one of the teachers in
one of the schools a broadband can do and stated. It's a
principal from the village high school of Hooper Bay who made
the comments, regarding--and for informational purposes, Hooper
Bay's closer to Russia than a lot of people think. It's out in
the Bering Sea Coast.
Regarding high speed Internet service for Hooper Bay School
students and community, currently our educational programs have
become very dependent on reliable high speed Internet
connectivity with corresponding bandwidth to meet the demands
of our students logging into computer-aided instructional
program through the Internet. My Skills Tutor and Carnegie Math
are two programs that are Internet dependent along with general
instruction programs for Internet access provides the basis for
research projects in all content areas. We frequently face a
situation where broadband or band width cannot meet the needs
of over 100 of our 400 students requiring timely access to the
Internet.
When teachers assign a lesson dependent on Internet access
and students cannot connect or get bumped off the connection it
has serious consequences for the effectiveness of instruction
and student engagement.
Additionally, student access in community to complete
homework assignments is not available at this time again
compromising the potential of our students and expansion of our
curriculum beyond the walls of the school.
With that, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Naneng follows:]
Prepared Statement of Myron P. Naneng, Sr., President,
Association of Village Council Presidents (AVCP)
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Senate Commerce
Committee. I thank you for this opportunity to share my views on
potential impacts, more for the positive what broadband will do in
rural Alaska. My name is Myron P. Naneng, Sr., President of Association
of Village Council Presidents, representing 56 villages on the Yukon/
Kuskokwim Delta, an area the size of the State of Oregon. I am a member
of the State of Alaska Broadband Task Force, representing Alaska
Federation of Natives, a Statewide Alaska Native Organization. I have
also served as Chairman of a telephone company that provided local
exchange, cellular and Internet services, United Utilities, Inc., from
1980 to 2008, when we sold the company. I am providing copies of
letters from AFN to Department of Commerce as part of the testimony to
the Committee.
If cell phone service and usage is any indication of the need for
connectivity in rural villages today, it was proven with the large
demand by people in many villages. The cell phone provider was not
prepared for the high percentage of users in the initial stages.
Broadband has a potential of making a bigger impact. It will enable
users to obtain information quicker and make information available that
was not available even 5 years ago. Today people want to be connected.
I have a 3-year-old granddaughter who can proficiently use the iTouch.
This is the wave of today and the future, and is quite amazing
considering there was only one phone in each village for the villagers
to share in the early 70s. Communication trends have been changing for
the better, and the opportunities that come with it are embraced by
all. Improved connectivity provides users with information on
educational, training and business opportunities as well as current
world wide events. Information on jobs and opportunities that young
people can apply for will be at their fingertips. This is going to
create an information flow that is not available today in many villages
and we all know this is the preferred method of communication for all
young people.
In rural Alaska, the only way to travel to most villages is by
small airplanes operated by hub based carriers. When a health emergency
occurs, the villages have health aides who are the first responders and
who communicate with health professionals, doctors, nurses or
counselors when they encounter a health situation.
An expanded bandwidth of broadband will be provided better
connectivity, thereby better communication between the regional
hospitals or even major hospitals in cities to support the village
health care systems--many of which have telemedicine communication
systems. Many of the regional health corporations have established
subregional clinics in the Y/K delta, the Yukon Kuskokwim Health
Corporation has five subregional clinics that extend throughout the
region. These subregional health clinics have doctors and other
professional health care providers who support the villages in
surrounding areas. Even these regional clinics utilize the telemedicine
communication systems to talk through the diagnosis of symptoms of
those they are administering health care to.
Broadband with the expansion of bandwidth will also allow schools
to expand the educational and training opportunities of the students in
school, especially in villages that are not meeting the No Child Left
Behind requirements. Educational programs and other training
opportunities that would not be available to students in rural
communities because of remoteness or size will be available through
broadband. Most of the students in villages, even though they graduate
from high school and continue onto higher education institutions still
have to take remedial courses to prepare for college. We see the
implementation of broadband reduce this requirement and give more
students an opportunity to succeed in courses they take in universities
or training courses.
Adults who may not be able to travel to universities due to family
and or other reasons can take educational courses through the expanded
system from accredited colleges that offer courses through the
Internet. Nowadays, we are seeing more young people getting their
education by staying home and taking courses through the Internet.
There are also many employer sponsored training opportunities that can
be delivered electronically if the infrastructure is in place. Again,
the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta is the size of Oregon and there are no roads
in rural Alaska so the cost of everything is really really expensive.
To get training we have to travel first to a regional HUB (Bethel, St
Marys, Aniak) then on to Anchorage and further if the training is out
of state. The cost of a round trip ticket from any one of our villages
to Bethel can range from $150-$900--and that is just to Bethel. So
consider the opportunities that will come with increased broad band
width and connectivity.
Another consideration is the fact that in Rural Alaska there is no
choice of provider and the connection is weak. We currently do not have
cell phone and Internet connection in many remote parts of Alaska and
where we do the signal is not strong, resulting in many lost calls or
no connectivity. Because we have no choice in providers we are limited
to the provider of the service area and are at the mercy of the
provider with regard to options, plan design and cost.
For many villages and their leaders, the ability to identify
funding which can be used for village purposes will be a major step for
economic sustainability. Jobs can be created with this new technology,
that otherwise does not exist today. Grant submissions to granting
agencies, especially now with the requirements to submit grants via
Internet or paperless is hindering many of our villages to submit grant
applications and finance reporting today. Some have lost opportunities,
so broadband will make it easier for villages and even regional
organizations, such as AVCP to submit grant applications before
deadlines occur. This will create infrastructure expansion for both
villages and regional entities that are working with villages and
create more job opportunities that currently does not exist in many
villages.
We see benefits to broadband and expansion of bandwidth, the
positive changes it will bring and provide opportunities in getting
information and expanding local economies in villages. The potential
uses in search and rescue operations, the telecommunication for health
services and education in schools.
Broadband expansion will also help in providing law enforcement
with a better means of communication between Village Public Safety
Officers, who lead search and rescue operations and other law
enforcement duties with other law enforcement personnel.
A child from one of the European countries can most likely
communicate with a Yupik', Cupik' or Athabascan child from a rural
Alaska village. They might learn from our children that we don't have
iced piped sewer systems, or igloos, and that honey buckets are still
in use in villages that cause health concerns in villages that don't
have water and sewer systems that are taken for granted in most of the
United States communities.
Maybe, our leaders in Congress and Oval office will realize that
many Americans still lack the infrastructure that can improve the
quality of life for Americans who live in rural Alaska, broadband will
bring things into real time views, and not just from Discovery Channel
of Alaska shows but by direct communications with real people.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify and providing a short
summary of what we anticipate will make a difference in rural Alaska
and villages, that we know will make a bigger impact on educating not
only those who live in rural Alaska, but those who live in urban
America as well.
Quyana, Thank you.
Addendum
Comments by Hooper Bay HS Principal Scott Ballard
Regarding high speed Internet service for Hooper Bay School
students and community: Currently our educational programs have become
very dependent on reliable high speed Internet connectivity with
corresponding bandwidth to meet the demands of our students logging in
to computer-aided instructional programs through the Internet.
My Skills Tutor and Carnegie Math are two programs that are
Internet dependent, along with general instructional programs where
Internet access provides the basis for research projects in all content
areas. We frequently face a situation where our bandwidth cannot meet
the needs of over 100 out of our 400 students requiring timely access
to the Internet. When teachers assign a lesson dependent on Internet
access and students cannot connect or get bumped off the connection, it
has serious consequences for the effectiveness of instruction and
student engagement.
Additionally, student access in the community to complete homework
assignments is not available at this time, again compromising the
potential of our students and the expansion of our curriculum beyond
the walls of the school.
Quyana, Thank you.
Senator Inouye. Mr. President, I thank you very much for
your testimony, and I realize because of death in your family
you will have to rush off, so I have submitted questions for
your consideration.
But without objection, I'd like to recognize your Senator,
Senator Begich for comments he may have.
Senator Begich. Myron, thank you very much for being here,
and I express my condolences for your loss. And, I know you
have to leave. So, if I could again, first thank the Chairman
for having this hearing, but ask if I could, just one question.
We'll have more for the record, but I know you need to go.
So, the Universal Service Fund, which myself and Senator
Thune have put a letter out asking other Senators to support us
on this effort, impacts the 56 rural communities that you
represent. How would you rate the importance of the Universal
Service Fund for connectivity and accessibility for the
villages? How important was it to really utilize?
Mr. Naneng. Yes, it's a very important part of being able
to connect even the telephone systems within the village. Like
I state in my testimony, there's one phone for each village
back in the 1970s. Universal Service Fund has given the
telephone companies the opportunity to expand to each home.
And, you know, if I could give an example for myself: I
lived up at Fairbanks at the University of Alaska while going
to school. My wife-to-be lived at Scammon Bay. Long distance
dating by one telephone was not a very good situation, but I
think--I believe that the Universal Service Fund has really
made a big difference in making phones available to each and
every home that was--is within the current system; and I think
that Universal Service Fund can also be expanded to provide
opportunities and expansion of the Internet and cellular phone
systems.
Senator Begich. Very good. Thank you, Myron. And I think
the only comment I'll make is, I appreciate your testimony,
because I think many times it's hard for people to understand
the value of communication within rural Alaska. You know,
without it we can't deliver medical services, educational
services, as you just described, and basic commerce.
But the one piece of the whole, as I travel throughout
rural Alaska is the whole issue with medical clinics, and the
utilization and what it's doing now to transform the villages
to have the same kind of healthcare that any urban area could
have through the Internet. And, that to me is most amazing.
But, it takes bandwidth.
Mr. Naneng. Yes.
Senator Begich. We may be connected, but we're the slowest
in the nation when it comes to bandwidth. Without that
bandwidth, some of the clinics that are run through your
villages will not have access that many of the rural
communities or urban communities have; is that a fair
statement?
Mr. Naneng. Yes, it is.
Senator Begich. Very good. Again, Myron, I don't want to
take much more of your time, but I really appreciate you
traveling this distance, but I know you have to get back; and I
really appreciate you being here today.
Mr. Naneng. Yes. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much.
And now may I call upon the Chief of the Office of Native
Affairs and Policy, Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau of
the Federal Communications Commission, Mr. Geoffrey Blackwell.
STATEMENT OF GEOFFREY BLACKWELL, CHIEF, OFFICE OF NATIVE
AFFAIRS AND POLICY, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Mr. Blackwell. Thank you, Chairman and Senator Inouye. Mr.
Chairman, Senator Inouye and members of the Committee, hushchay
and thank you for this opportunity to testify today.
The lack of communication services in Native America is
alarming. Only 67 percent of residents in native nations have
basic telephone service; less than 10 percent have access to
broadband, which is fast becoming the lifeblood of our 21st
century economy, education, healthcare and public safety.
Broadband can do much to level the negative historical
impacts on native communities, but it must be available,
accessible and affordable to meet its promise.
Diverse and comprehensive needs makes it clear that one
size fits none. The enormity of our mission is vast. The
purpose of the Office of Native Affairs and Policy is to change
the way we approach the communications problems of native
nations and communities. We are charged with developing and
driving a native agenda across the Commission, but changing our
rules alone is not enough. We cannot, and will not only sit in
Washington, make minor tweaks to our rules to do what we think
will work and wait to see if they do. Complex problems dictate
the need for new policies and procedures and well thought out
solutions.
Under Chairman Genachowski's leadership, with the entire
Commission and all of its bureaus and offices, and in
particular with the long-standing support of Commissioner
Copps, there is a new way of doing native business at the
Commission.
Native Nations are front and center in that new paradigm.
Our work with them is a strategic partnership in which we
exercise the Commission's trust relationship with Native
Nations. To fulfill our mission we are fostering the
Commission's ongoing government-to-government dialogue by
working directly with Native Nations to understand their needs
and empower them to provide solutions.
Our approach is to work together to identify and remove
barriers and build models that engage their anchor
institutions. We seek to place Native Nations themselves in the
center of those solutions; whether is through self provisioning
of services or through new tribal centric methods of deployment
with industry, public or private partners.
This active involvement of Native Nations is critically
important to finding lasting solutions. To fulfill our mission
and transform the landscape our office cannot be just another
outside from Washington. Instead, it must be a knowledgeable
and respected Native Nations insider.
Immediately after the unanimous vote that established our
office we hit the ground running, actually, rolling out the
office in Native America, while at the same time working across
the Commission to surface actions and proposals. We logged
thousands of miles on a listening tour from here west to the
Hawaiian Home Lands. We went deep into Native Nations, seeking
the input of American Indian, Alaskan Native and Native
Hawaiian leaders.
In distance diagnosis sessions and classes from the native
end of the signals we saw the human element of the lack of
services, and the limitations of connectivity, speed, and
reliability. Several times, we had to reset our phones, log off
and log back in.
After we kicked the dirt with the Native Nations we
returned to Washington with knowledge in hand; and then, under
the chairman's leadership the commission launched a series of
groundbreaking proceedings at its March 3rd open meeting, named
Native Nations Day.
From rules expanding prioritized broadcasting
opportunities, to proposed rules for new mobile wireless
licensing, to an omnibus inquiry on a range of issues related
to broadband adoption and deployment, the proceedings of Native
Nations Day will serve as a foundation for consultation as a
critical component of the Commission's rulemaking process.
These include an inquiry on a Native Nations priority, to
remove barriers to entry, the creation of a Native Nations
broadband fund for myriad deployment purposes, and a
commission-wide, uniform definition of tribal lands.
Critical to the work of our office is also our close
coordination with others across the commission, and we will
continue to provide guidance on a variety of rulemakings and
actions.
One of our other top priorities is to overhaul, update and
increase the collaborative value of the commission's Indian
Telecom Initiatives outreach program. In addition, our work
with the FCC Native Nations Broadband Task Force will ensure
that concerns are considered in all relevant proceedings and
that new recommendations are developed.
In conclusion, we have heard several recurring themes from
native leaders: continue to meet with us; listen to us, and use
what we tell you to bring connectivity to our communities. The
over-arching message is that if consultations are to be
successful, if education and training sessions are to be
productive, and if efforts to place Native Nations at the
center of the process are to succeed, we must do our work
within--we must do our work with Native Nations largely within
their communities.
Native Nations are aware of our office's abilities. Many
have told us that in order to best help them, we must see the
problems firsthand; work with them where the problems exist and
endeavor to find the solutions in concert with them.
We welcome all of these opportunities.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify this
afternoon. Mado. I look forward to any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Blackwell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Geoffrey Blackwell, Chief, Office of Native
Affairs and Policy, Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Hutchison, and members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about the
critical communications issues facing Native Nations and the
Commission's efforts to find solutions.
The lack of telecommunications services in Indian Country is
alarming. After over 70 years of development and expansion of the
telecommunications industry, only 68.9 percent of residents in Native
Nations have basic telephone service. The statistics for broadband
penetration are even more troubling--less than 10 percent of residents
of Native Nations have access to what is fast becoming the lifeblood of
our 21st century economy, educational opportunities, health care, and
public safety.
However, the oft-cited statistics paint only part of the picture--
behind them lurks a stark reality. The negative impacts of history fell
particularly hard on Tribal and Native Communities, and aspects of this
history resulted in an alarming lack of critical infrastructures.
Broadband opportunities can do much to level this history in bringing
health care, education, and jobs to Native Nations, but it must be
available, accessible, and affordable to meet its promise. The purpose
of the Office of Native Affairs and Policy is to change the way we
approach the communications problems of Native Nations and Communities.
There are numerous and comprehensive communications needs throughout
Indian Country, and there is great diversity within those critical
needs. That is, the need for telemedicine is greatest for some Native
Nations, while the needs for educational technology or public safety
are paramount for other Native Nations. In many places, connectivity
occurs only in border towns and along major transportation routes
inside Native Nations. It is clear that one size fits none, and the
enormity of our mission is vast. Changing our rules alone is not
enough. We cannot--and will not--be able to only sit here in
Washington, make minor tweaks to our rules to do what we think will
work, and wait to see if they do. Complex problems dictate the need for
new policies and procedures, and well thought-out solutions.
That is the mission of the Office of Native Affairs and Policy,
created by a unanimous vote of the Commission on August 12, 2010,
implementing a recommendation of the National Broadband Plan. The
Office is charged with developing and driving a Tribal agenda at the
Commission and serves as the Commission's primary point of contact on
Native issues. Under Chairman Genachowski's leadership, and with the
involvement of the entire Commission and all of its Bureaus and
Offices, there is a new way of doing Native business at the Commission,
and Native Nations are front and center in that new paradigm. Our work
with Native Nations is a strategic partnership, one in which we
effectuate and exercise the trust relationship that the Commission
shares with Native Nations.
The Office is charged with bringing the benefits of a modern
communications infrastructure to all Native communities by, among other
things, ensuring robust government-to-government consultation with
Federally-recognized Tribal governments and other Native organizations;
working with Commissioners, Bureaus, and Offices, as well as with other
government agencies and private organizations, to develop and implement
policies for assisting Native communities; and ensuring that Native
concerns and voices are considered in all relevant Commission
proceedings and initiatives.
The Efforts of the Office of Native Affairs and Policy
To fulfill its mission, the Office is fostering the Commission's
ongoing government-to-government dialogue with Native Nations by
working directly with them to understand their needs and empower them
to provide their own solutions. New opportunities must be created for
Native Nations and those who work with them to find sustainable
solutions. Our approach is to work together to identify and remove
barriers to solutions and build models with Native Nations that engage
their core community or anchor institutions. We seek to place Native
Nations themselves in the center of those solutions, whether it is
through actual self-provisioning of communications services or through
new ``Tribal-'' or ``Native-centric'' methods of deployment with
industry, public, or private partners. As Native Nations uniquely know
and govern their communities, this active involvement is a critically
important component to finding lasting solutions in their communities.
Immediately after being established, we hit the ground running,
actually rolling out our introduction of the Office in Native America,
while at the same time working across the Commission to surface actions
and proposals. We logged thousands of miles on a ``listening tour''
from here to the Hawaiian Home Lands, seeking the input of American
Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian leaders. We went deep into
the Native Nations, meeting collectively and individually with Native
leaders and Native associations, Tribally-owned and operated
communications providers, as well as talking with Native consumers and
businesses.
To obtain a firsthand view of the complexity of the problems, in
places where the Commission had never been before, we engaged in
distance education discussions from classrooms at the Native end of the
signals. In remote health care clinics, accepting gracious invitations
of the patients at the Native end of the line, we sat in on their
diagnosis sessions with their far away doctors. We saw the human
element of the lack of services, and the limitations of connectivity,
speed, and reliability. Side-by-side with our Native Nation colleagues,
we ``kicked the dirt'' within the Native Nations, to discuss how we can
all help them with their development and deployment plans. Several
times, we have had to reset our phones and blackberries, log off and
log back in, and set our out-of-office automatic reply messages to let
folks know we are traveling in unconnected regions.
To fulfill our mission and transform the communications landscape,
the Office of Native Affairs and Policy cannot be just another outsider
from Washington. Instead, the Office must be a knowledgeable and
respected Native Nations and Tribal lands insider. Collectively, our
four senior staff members have over 40 years of experience working in
the trenches of the Commission and directly with Native Nations. We
stand ready for the challenge.
Our work has just begun. Under the Chairman's leadership, the
Commission launched a series of groundbreaking endeavors at its March
3rd Open Meeting, on a day the Commission named ``Native Nations Day.''
It was a day of ``firsts''--the first time that the Commission used its
meeting agenda to address matters entirely and specifically developed
for Native Nations; the first time that Tribal leaders formally
addressed the Commission at the start of an Open Meeting; and the first
time that the Commission initiated a comprehensive inquiry and
rulemaking proceeding focused exclusively on Native communications
needs.
From rules expanding broadcast opportunities, to proposed rules for
new mobile wireless licensing opportunities, to an omnibus inquiry on a
range of issues related to broadband adoption and deployment on Tribal
lands, the proceedings of Native Nations Day will in part serve as the
foundation for the nation-to-nation consultation with Native Nations
that is a critical component of the Commission's rulemaking process.
The Proceedings of Native Nations Day--New Commission Approaches
The Rural Radio Tribal Priority Order. Native Nations want to
provide information and community news to their people, and are looking
at radio programming to promote and preserve Native culture and
language, and to advance cultural dialogue. Last year, the Commission
took steps to address the imbalance in the number of radio stations
licensed to Native Nations and communities, as compared to the rest of
the country, when it adopted an historic Tribal Priority designed to
award a decisive preference to any federally recognized American Indian
Tribe or Alaska Native Village seeking to establish its first non-
commercial radio station on its Tribal lands. The Tribal Priority was
greeted with enthusiasm by Native Nations, but it was noted that
certain Native Nations, because of their historical or geographic
circumstances, might not be able to take advantage of the priority. In
a Second Report and Order adopted on Native Nations Day, the Commission
addressed these special circumstances by adopting provisions to address
the needs of non-landed Native Nations and those with small or
irregularly shaped lands that make it difficult to meet some of the
requirements of the Tribal Priority. In addition, the Commission
adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on proposals to
apply the Tribal Priority to certain commercial FM channel allotments
and potentially obviating the need to go to auction. The hope is that
these new mechanisms can help Native Nations deploy services in this
critical and widely adopted media technology, as they also build
designs and resources for new advanced broadband platforms.
The Wireless Spectrum Tribal Lands Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
While competitive market forces have spurred robust wireless
communications services in many areas of our country, wireless
connectivity for Native Nations remains at significantly lower levels.
Native Nations have expressed to us many concerns that the situations
they face at home involve the very basics of public safety--the
inability to make a wireless call in an emergency. Native Nations have
asked the Commission for greater access to robust wireless spectrum to
meet the challenges of terrain and distance that many Native
communities face and, for some time now, the need for this action has
been critical. On Native Nations Day, the Commission adopted a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking to promote greater use of spectrum to help close
the communications gap on Tribal lands and to ensure that Native
Nations are at the center of the decision-making process. This NPRM,
one of the most important requests from Native Nations in the last
decade, strives to put licenses in the hands of those who will value
the spectrum and build out on Tribal lands. Three of the five proposals
launched in the NPRM would create new opportunities for Native Nations
to gain access to spectrum through Wireless Radio Services licenses,
while the other two proposals are designed to create new incentives for
existing licensees to deploy wireless services on Tribal lands.
The Native Nations Notice of Inquiry. The Commission has said on
many occasions that broadband is indispensable infrastructure for
economic growth and job creation, and nowhere is that need more acutely
felt than on Tribal lands. The lack of robust broadband services--and,
in fact, even basic communications services--contributes to the
challenges Native Nations face in building strong economies with
diverse businesses and development projects. On Native Nations Day,
therefore, the Commission launched a broad-based inquiry into a wide
range of communications issues facing Native Nations--an inquiry that
will provide a foundation for updating the Commission's rules and
policies to provide greater economic, market entry, and communications
adoption opportunities and incentives for Native Nations. The result of
a broad collaborative effort across the Commission, led by the Office
of Native Affairs and Policy, the Notice will lay the groundwork for
policies that can help Native Nations build economic and educational
opportunities for their own Tribal lands. The Notice seeks comment on
the best ways to support sustainable broadband deployment, adoption,
and digital literacy training on Tribal lands. Among other important
questions, the Commission also asks about the possibility of expanding
the Tribal Priority concept into a Native Nations Priority, to identify
and remove barriers to entry, rather than using a case-by-case waiver
approach, thus making it easier for Native Nations to provide other
services--wireless, wireline, and satellite--to their communities. The
Commission also asks about opportunities to use communications services
to help Native Nations address public safety challenges on Tribal
lands, including the broad lack of 911 and E-911 services, and the
needs of persons with disabilities on Tribal lands.
Recognizing that, given their unique challenges and significant
obstacles to broadband deployment, Native Nations need substantially
greater financial support than is presently available, the Notice of
Inquiry also seeks comment on a recommendation of the National
Broadband Plan to establish a Native Nations Broadband Fund. The
National Broadband Plan notes that grants from a new Native Nations
Broadband Fund could be used for a variety of purposes, including
bringing high-capacity connectivity to governmental headquarters or
other anchor institutions, deployment planning, infrastructure build
out, feasibility studies, technical assistance, business plan
development and implementation, digital literacy, and outreach. In the
Notice of Inquiry adopted on Native Nations Day, the Commission seeks
comment on a number of issues associated with the establishment of the
Native Nations Broadband Fund, including the need for such a fund, the
purposes for which it would be used, and the level of funding.
The Low-Income Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Low-Income
program of the universal service fund, commonly known as Lifeline and
Link Up, has been, and continues to be, a critically important
component in extending the reach of communications services to Native
Nations. But with a telephone penetration rate hovering below 70
percent and a broadband penetration rate well below ten percent, much
remains to be done. According to Gila River Telecommunications, Inc., a
Tribally-owned telecommunications company, the telephone penetration
rate for the Gila River Indian Community stands at 86 percent, still
well below the national average of 98 percent but significantly above
the average on Tribal lands. Gila River attributes its success in
expanding the reach of telephone service largely to Lifeline, given
that roughly 91 percent of the Community's elders participate in
Lifeline. At the afternoon session of its March 3d Open Meeting, the
Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in which it proposes
to reform and modernize Lifeline and Link Up--issues of great interest
to Native Nations.
The FCC-Native Nations Broadband Task Force. One of the top
requests from Native Nations in the National Broadband Plan was the
creation of a new FCC-Native Nations Broadband Task Force that would
ensure that the Commission's consultation with Native Nations is an
ongoing, continuous dialogue and a shared effort between partners.
Chairman Genachowski fulfilled this request when, on Native Nations
Day, he appointed to the Task Force 19 members representing Native
Nations and 11 members representing Bureaus and Offices across the
Commission. The Task Force will ensure that Native concerns are
considered in all relevant Commission proceedings and will work to
develop additional recommendations for promoting broadband deployment
and adoption on Tribal lands. The Task Force will also coordinate with
external entities, including other Federal departments and agencies.
These efforts will culminate in more efficient ways of working with our
Native Nation partners, the industries, and the institutions of Native
Nations.
Conclusion: Coordinating and Consulting on a Commission-wide Native
Agenda
Critical to the work of the Office of Native Affairs and Policy is
its close coordination with other Bureaus and Offices across the
Commission. Major rulemakings now always include the involvement of
Native interests. For example, working closely with the Wireline
Competition Bureau in the universal service reform context, the Office
ensured that Native concerns were heard about losing voice service
while undergoing a transition to new broadband technologies that may
take longer to embed themselves in Native America than in other parts
of America. To that end, the Office ensured that the Commission sought
comment on whether a separate mechanism would be appropriate for Native
Nations. Similarly, the Office of Native Affairs and Policy is working
closely with the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau as they develop the
Mobility Fund, which is a set of initiatives to promote deployment of
broadband and mobile services and to provide an investment in wireless
infrastructures, through a financially sensible transformation of the
universal service fund. With our help and guidance, the Commission
proposes to address Mobility Fund support for Tribal lands on a
separate track to provide adequate time to coordinate with Native
Nations, seek their input, and find good solutions. We will continue to
provide guidance on a variety of rulemakings and initiatives throughout
the Commission.
The Office of Native Affairs and Policy is ready to roll up our
sleeves and pull out our laptops as we continue our mission. Native
Nations Day was a success, and the Commission is proud of the work it
has done so far. However, we must build on that success and the success
of our other activities since the creation of the Office a mere eight
months ago. Among other things, one of our top priorities is to
overhaul, update, and increase the collaborative value of the
Commission's Indian Telecom Initiatives, or ITI, program, moving it
from version 2.0 to version 10.0 and even beyond. We look forward to
increasing the effectiveness and value of these regional workshops,
trainings, consultation, and networking events. We also look forward to
establishing a Federal interagency broadband working group that engages
other Federal agencies concerned with Native Nations and with missions
on Tribal lands related to broadband and communications deployment,
such as education, health, public safety, energy, cultural
preservation, and economic empowerment. With a new inter-agency
initiative on Native broadband, the Federal government can coordinate
both internally and directly with Native Nations on broadband-related
policies, programs, and initiatives.
Internally, we look forward to working with colleagues across the
Commission to increase the value of the information tools that the
Commission has for Native Nations and Communities. For example, the
Commission's Spectrum Dashboard 2.0, which was unveiled last month,
allows users to view the licenses and spectrum leases that cover
specific or all Tribal lands. We plan to continue holding meetings with
Native Nations to discuss how this and other Commission information
tools can be improved and more responsive to the needs of Tribal
communications planners. We also look forward to reviving an internal
training and speaker series for decision makers and colleagues across
the Commission on how to work with Native Nations and the basics of how
to coordinate and conduct consultations with Native Nations.
In conclusion, we have heard several recurring themes in our
conversations with Native leaders--continue to meet with us, listen to
us, and use what we tell you to bring communications on Tribal lands
into the 21st century. The overarching message is that, if
consultations are to be successful, if future education and training
sessions are to be well-attended and productive, and if efforts to
inform, educate, and put Native Nations at the center of the decision-
making process are to succeed, we must do our work with Native Nations
largely within their Native communities. Native Nations are aware of
our Office's abilities and many have told us that, in order to best
help them solve communications problems, we must work with them where
the problems exist, see the problems first-hand, and endeavor to find
the solutions in concert with them. We welcome all of these
opportunities.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify this afternoon. I
look forward to answering any questions you may have.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Chief Blackwell.
Regretfully, I must advise all of you that there's a roll
call ending at this moment so I will call this hearing to a
recess, but I'll be back in about 10 minutes.
[Recessed.]
Senator Inouye. Sorry to keep you waiting.
Our next witness is the Chairman of the Department of
Hawaiian Homelands, Mr. Alapaki Nahale-a.
Mr. Chairman.
STATEMENT OF ALAPAKI NAHALE-A, CHAIRMAN, HAWAIIAN HOMES
COMMISSION; AND DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
Mr. Nahale-a. Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Begich,
Chairman Inouye, and members of the Committee aloha. My name is
Alapaki Nahale-a, and I am the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission, which was created by Congress via the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act of 1921.
As the Chairman of the Commission, I also serve as the
Director of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, charged with
filling the purpose of the Act, to provide homestead
opportunities for Native Hawaiians on the 200,000 acres held in
trust for their benefit. It is especially an honor for me to
sit before you because I am a direct beneficiary of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. I was only five when our family
received our homestead, but I remember it like it was
yesterday. The program was a turing point for my family, giving
us the opportunities that come with home ownership and proving
us a solid foundation upon which I could build a quality life
for my own family.
And so, today, with gratitude in my heart and hopes for a
better future, I thank you for this time to share the needs of
the Hawaiian Community and the opportunities that broadband
brings for the continued improvement of Native Hawaiians and
all native people.
About 20 percent of the nearly one and a half million
residents of the State of Hawaii are Native Hawaiian, and this
percentage will continue to rise. While most people associate
Hawaii with Honolulu and Waikiki, at its heart, Hawaii is still
a rural state.
Broadband is a powerful tool that can be used to transform
and advance our people with a greater level of economic self-
sufficiency, educational achievement and cultural awareness and
pride.
Native Hawaiians, like American Indians and Alaska Natives,
face similar social, economic challenges, and we can better
address these problems and help to improve our chances for
success through the use of technology and access to broadband.
Broadband is a great equalizer for Hawaiians. It is the
tool that will allow us to remain in our home communities and
still thrive. We can be safe with reliable access to police and
fire protection; our young people can take advantage of college
courses without having to move to another island; we can raise
our families within our community because of enhanced economic
opportunities; we can spread native language as a living
language with high-speed connectivity between the schools,
between the islands and beyond; and we can access healthcare
specialists via teleconferencing from our local doctors'
offices.
Ensuring equitable access to broadband is an important step
in Congress' clear intent with advancing rehabilitation and
welfare of Native Hawaiians.
Let me share with you some real examples: Last week I had
the privilege to travel to the Island of Maui to visit Kahiki
Nui, a 20,000 acre Hawaiian Homelands Community on the Slopes
of Haleakala. It is the largest and most remote of our active
homelands. Getting there involves a three- hour, four-wheel
drive off-road adventure; and while residents there have no
grid of electricity or running water, they do have telephone
and broadband service. They can surf the net, get e-mail and
Skype with friends and family.
With broadband access, remote parcels like Kahiki Nui can
be opened up for greater homesteading possibilities. It allows
my department to provide not only urban developer-built
subdivisions, but also farming and ranch opportunities in
remote areas.
Broadband deployment also serves as incubators for economic
development. Hawaiian Homes Technology or HHT is a job creation
and community capacity-building initiative which began in the
Native Hawaiian Homestead Community of Anahola on the Island of
Kauai. Through the use of broadband the opened a business that
converts legacy data from files, microfilm, microfiche,
diagrams, blueprints and images into digital, electric files.
HHT has been able to create living wage technology jobs and
economically challenge the Native Hawaiian Communities and
develop homegrown technology and managerial skills.
Through broadband and information technology, Native
Hawaiians can choose to live and work in the communities where
they grew up without having to move away to support their
families.
On the education front, prior to being appointed to the
Hawaiian Homes Commission, I was the Executive Director of a
culturally based public charter school located on Hawaiian
Homelands in Keaukaha on Hawaii Island. And, toward the end of
my tenure we began planning for long distance learning
opportunities so our students could take courses via the
Internet that currently were not available to them. It's
similar to what Federal Communications Commission Chairman
Julius Genachowski witnessed when he visited the rural Native
Hawaiian Community of Nanakuli, where he witnessed firsthand
how broadband connected the gifted high school student to an
advanced placement calculus class being taught virtually from
another island.
Broadband has allowed our cash-strapped public school
system to leverage limited teaching resources, to reach
multiple campuses and more students.
In conclusion, broadband will allow Native Hawaiian
Communities to leapfrog over the digital divide that has
historically held us back, enabling us to succeed in the 21st
Century and beyond.
Sadly, nearly half of our homestead land does not have
broadband connection. The FCC's National Broadband Plan
recommends establishing a Native Broadband Fund; we fully
support this. We believe that the deployment of broadband into
Hawaiian Homelands and rural Native Hawaiian Communities
accelerates our ability to address the social, health,
education, and economic challenges we face.
With modern technology, imagination, and hard work,
broadband infrastructure will allow Native Hawaiians to excel
into the next century and beyond.
Mahalo.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nahale-a follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alapaki Nahale-a, Chairman, Hawaiian Homes
Commission; and Director, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
Senator Inouye and members of the Committee, my name is Alapaki
Nahale-a. I am the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission which was
created by Congress through the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1921.
As the Chairman of the Commission, I also serve as the Director of the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, charged with carrying out the
mission of the Act to provide housing and economic opportunities for
Native Hawaiians utilizing the 200,000 acres that are held in trust for
their benefit. It is especially an honor for me to sit before you, as I
am among the 37,800 beneficiaries under this Act, born and raised on
Hawaiian Home Lands in Keaukaha on the Island of Hawaii. Thank you for
this opportunity to share with you the needs of the Hawaiian community.
Broadband is a powerful tool to transform and advance our people to a
greater level of economic self-sufficiency, educational achievement,
and cultural awareness and pride.
The eight primary islands and the immediate surrounding ocean area
cover roughly 79,625 square miles which is slightly larger than the
State of Nebraska. While most people associate Hawaii with Honolulu and
Waikiki, Hawaii is, at its heart, a rural state. I have taken the
liberty of attaching a map with my written testimony to illustrate the
truly rural non-contiguous nature of our state.
Today, Hawaii's population is approximately 1.4 million people.
Native Hawaiians make up about 20 percent of the state's population and
are most concentrated on rural Oahu and the neighbor islands. Our
population is growing with Native Hawaiian students making up 28
percent of public school enrollment. Moreover, this percentage grows to
37 percent when you exclude Oahu schools.
Native Hawaiians, like American Indians and Alaska Natives, face
similar social-economic challenges. They are overrepresented in the
negative indicators including income levels, health and well-being,
educational levels, prison populations, and homelessness. It is my
belief that we can address these problems and improve our chances for
success through the use of technology and access to broadband.
The State of Hawaii, and its rural Native Hawaiian communities in
particular, face unique hardships in accessing broadband because of the
state's non-contiguous configuration in the middle of the Pacific
Ocean. Connectivity is provided by a combination of submarine fiber
optic systems and terrestrial fiber systems. Since modern fiber optic
systems no longer require a regeneration point in Hawaii, fewer trans-
Pacific cables are located in Hawaii. Ultimately, this reduces Hawaii's
connectivity to the rest of the world and results in higher costs to
users which directly impact the state's ability to conduct advanced
research, expand distance education, and further tele-health services
for its citizens.
In order for rural and remote Native Hawaiian communities to have
access to broadband, the infrastructure must first reach the State of
Hawaii before it can be deployed to the rural areas of Oahu and the
difficult to reach remote communities on the neighbor islands. Once
within our state's borders, our islands are separated by miles of open
ocean. As such broadband systems require both a heavily armored
submarine and a protected terrestrial fiber optic network that is able
to withstand the natural disasters that have historically plagued the
Hawaiian Islands. This means higher costs for carriers to deploy and
maintain network facilities with little means of recovering these
expenses. In fact, some rural Native Hawaiian communities are relegated
to dial-up service because service providers determined that any
further upgrades were not cost-effective.
Broadband is a great equalizer for our Native Hawaiian communities.
It is a tool that will allow us to remain in our communities and
thrive. We can be safe with reliable access to police and fire
protection. Our young people can take college courses without having to
move to another island. We can raise our families in our community
because we have economic opportunities. We can access health care
specialists in Honolulu via teleconferencing and tele-health
technologies.
In July 2010, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius
Genachowski visited Hawaii to see firsthand the challenges that Hawaii
and Native Hawaiians face. He addressed a Native Communications
Roundtable attended by American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native
Hawaiian leaders and community members who came to discuss their
telecommunications challenges. Interestingly enough, whether the
speaker represented the Inupiat people from northwestern Alaska, the
Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation from the great plains of North
Dakota, or a Native Hawaiian homesteader from rural Waimea on Hawaii
Island, the message was consistent--their biggest telecom challenges
were the geographic isolation of their communities and the lack of
capital to invest in a broadband infrastructure. These native leaders
discussed with Chairman Genachowski the value of establishing a Tribal
Broadband fund to support sustainable broadband deployment and adoption
for native communities. He was given an aerial tour of Hawaii Island to
see its expansive, remote nature, and the difficulty of reaching and
connecting with many in Hawaiian communities.
Chairman Genachowski also witnessed how broadband connected a
gifted high school student from the rural Native Hawaiian community of
Nanakuli on Oahu to an Advanced Placement calculus class being taught
on the Island of Maui. In the early days, instructor Michele Sera
taught students on other islands via the telephone, and later through a
dial-up Internet connection. Today, she is able to effectively teach
students from multiple locations through video-conferencing. Broadband
allows our cash-strapped public school system to leverage limited
teaching resources to reach multiple campuses. This gifted student was
able to take an advanced class not offered at his campus without having
to travel long distances from his rural neighborhood. He was not left
behind. This enlightened example must be expanded to other courses and
programs throughout the state. This can only happen with broadband
connectivity.
Native Hawaiians have led the way in the perpetuation of their
native language. Their efforts have resulted in a highly regarded
program where children learn and speak their native language from age
three all the way through a doctoral program at the University of
Hawaii at Hilo. Imagine how far and how fast this Native language
renaissance can spread as a ``living language'' with high-speed
connectivity between the schools, between the islands, and beyond.
Embedded in the native language revival is a healthy dose of self-
esteem about the literary greatness of our ancestors to propel our
young people forward with self-confidence and optimism.
Broadband deployment into Native Hawaiian communities can also
serve as incubators for economic development. Hawaiian Homes Technology
(HHT) is a job creating and capacity building initiative which began in
the Hawaiian homestead community of Anahola on the Island of Kauai.
Through the use of broadband, they opened a digitization business,
converting legacy data from files, microfilm, microfiche, diagrams,
blueprints, and images into electronic files. HHT has been able to
create living wage technology jobs in economically challenged Native
Hawaiian communities. Through broadband and information technology,
Native Hawaiians can choose to live and work in the communities where
they grew up without having to move away to support their family. With
broadband infrastructure in more communities, a person's imagination,
entrepreneurship, and old-fashioned hard work will be the only
limitation to success.
Broadband deployment can also be a powerful tool to preserve Native
Hawaiian culture and history. One such project, Ho`olaupa`i, focuses on
digitizing daily newspapers published in the Hawaiian language between
1834 and 1949. For years, these newspapers languished in museum
archives, many too fragile for people to access. Today, the newspaper
pages are individually digitally scanned and converted into searchable
text files using optical character recognition software. After being
reviewed by language experts, these files are uploaded to
www.nupepa.org, where members of the public can explore the wealth of
information and wisdom stored in these pages.
Hawaiian cultural treasures, locked safely behind the climate
controlled walls of the Bishop Museum, can also now be shared with the
community at large without ever stepping foot on the museum's Honolulu
campus. The website www.hawaiia
live.org features images of Hawaiian artifacts and cultural treasures,
along with primary source materials which educators utilize to teach
Hawaiian history and culture. The educational resources include
contemporary videos, historic footage, archival audio files of songs
and chants, essays, and lesson plans which are tied to the public
school benchmarks. Through broadband, students and teachers now have
unprecedented access to authentic Hawaiian educational resources.
Broadband is just beginning to provide rural Native Hawaiian
patients with quality acute health care services using tele-health
technology which eliminates the time and expense of traveling to major
hospitals on Oahu. On the rural island of Molokai, a Native Hawaiian
cancer patient utilized video conferencing for a virtual consultation
with her Molokai medical providers and her oncology specialists in
Honolulu. The system was not perfect, and at times the screen images
would pixilate or even freeze. Nevertheless, the patient and her
husband explained how much they valued the videoconference tool,
without which she would have had to travel to Oahu for each oncology
treatment. Every trip is expensive, time-consuming, stressful, and
emotionally and physically draining. The Molokai medical team even
shared anecdotally that without the videoconferencing, some Native
Hawaiian patients would forego treatment with specialists in Honolulu
because of the cost and stress.
Unfortunately this tele-health option is not yet widespread.
However with improved technology and broadband infrastructure, the
reliability and viability of this service will undoubtedly expand to
other health care services.
Despite the challenges of geography and expense, broadband can be
the great equalizer for Native peoples, particularly those residing in
rural communities. We believe it will allow Native Hawaiian communities
to leapfrog over the digital divide that has historically held us back,
enabling us to succeed in the 21st century and beyond.
The FCC's National Broadband Plan recommends establishing a Native
Nations Broadband fund. We fully support this. We believe that the
deployment of broadband into Hawaiian Home Lands and our rural Native
Hawaiian communities accelerates our ability to address the social,
health, education, and economic challenges we face. Thus far the Native
Hawaiian community is beginning to recognize the transformative effect
of broadband. With modern technology, imagination, and the necessary
broadband infrastructure, Native Hawaiians will be able to excel into
the next century and beyond.
Senator Inouye. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, now it's my pleasure to call upon the President and
Chief Executive Officer of the Native Public Media, Ms. Loris
Ann Taylor.
Ms. Taylor.
STATEMENT OF LORIS TAYLOR, NATIVE PUBLIC MEDIA AND NATIONAL
CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS (NACI)
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
Ms. Taylor. Thank you. Chairman Inouye, Senator Udall,
members of the Committee, on behalf of the National Congress of
American Indian and Native Public Media, I am honored to
provide testimony on how to close the digital divide for our
country's Native Nations.
In the United States, there are 565 federally recognized
American Indian tribes and approximately 4.1 million American
Indians and Alaska and Hawaiian Natives. Thirty-two percent of
this population still is without basic telephone service.
Twenty-five percent live at or below the poverty line. Twenty-
two percent are unemployed. Ninety percent of Native Americans
have no access to high speed Internet. Less than 0.3 percent of
the broadcast stations in this country are licensed to Native
Americans.
The absence of adequate communications services in Native
America is no accident. Decades of failed Federal policy,
market forces, and the socioeconomic conditions of Native
American populations, located in some of the most remote areas
of the country, result in high build-out costs for all media.
Because of these factors, wire-line carriers frequently end
their deployments at the borders of tribal land or serve the
populated fringes, not the entire reservation.
In February 2010, the Federal Communications Commission
adopted a proposal that promotes the sovereign rights of tribes
by giving them a priority in the allocation of spectrum that
serves tribal lands. The Native Nations priority is currently
limited to broadcast spectrum and to tribes with reservations.
Two hundred fifty-three tribes, almost half of the 565
federally recognized tribes, are landless. For the Native
Nations priority to be truly meaningful, it must be extended to
all tribes and to all forms of spectrum.
We applaud recent FCC proceedings that explore that
potential.
Last year, the FCC established the Office of Native Affairs
and Policy to coordinate Federal Communications' policy and
redress years of policy neglect of Native Nations. Within
months of its creation, the Commission launched three
proceedings. Those proceedings seek to extend the broadcast
tribal priority to improve access to mobile wireless
communications, and to inquire into ways of improving broadband
deployment to Indian country and strengthening the FCC's
nation-to-nation consultation process.
Collectively, these proceedings focus more attention on the
communication needs of Native Americans than has been the case
for the preceding history of the Communications Act.
It is critical that this attention not be fleeting or
symbolic. With a budget sufficient for its mission, the Office
of Native Affairs and Policy cannot carry out its mission of
consultation with tribes on a government-to-government basis.
There is currently no line item in the FCC's budget for the
Office of Native Affairs and Policy and its consultation with
tribes. We ask that you take this office and its functions as
seriously as we do by assuring that it is adequately funded.
NCAI has proposed a budget of $1.5 million for the Office
of Native Affairs and Policy.
Only a handful of tribes and tribal organizations received
grants from the Broadband Initiatives Program and the Broadband
Technology Opportunities Program administered by the Department
of Commerce and the Department of Agriculture. It is not too
late to assure that funds intended to stimulate service to
unserved and underserved areas can achieve that goal by
bringing broadband service to tribal lands.
We recommend that funds returned to those programs be
reserved for the deployment of broadband services to tribal
lands.
We also support the establishment of a Native Nations
Broadband Fund targeted to the needs of Indian country. We also
believe that grants should not be limited to deployment costs.
Access is part, and only part of the problem. Unlike telephone
and broadcast services, which are instantaneously available,
broadband technologies cannot effectively be used without
training.
Programs that teach digital literacy are needed, and Native
Americas are eager to learn. A study conducted by Native Public
Media and the New America Foundation shows that where Native
Americans had Internet access, their rates of use intended to
be higher than the national average.
We therefore support the creation of a Native Nations
Broadband Fund, with the ability to award grants for the
advancement of digital literacy, as well as for providing
service to tribal headquarters and other tribal anchor
institutions.
In reforming the Universal Service Fund to make broadband
services more available, it is important not to destroy the
traditional high cost, Lifeline and Link-up programs that make
basic analog phone service affordable to many in Indian
country. Existing programs are equally essential for
traditional broadcast services, which remain the simplest,
cheapest, and most effective form of mass communications.
For the first time in 7 years the FCC in 2007 accepted
applications for new non-commercial FM stations and has awarded
construction permits that would double the number of native
stations.
Because of the economic recession and threatened cutbacks
in Federal funding to MTIA's Public Telecommunications
Facilities Program many of those permits are now at risk of
expiring.
If these permits expire, the opportunity for reapplying is
not likely to arrive for many years to come.
We urge action on two fronts: first, to give the holders of
these permits a chance to extend fundraising efforts, a 1-year
tolling of the construction period for these permits; and
second, the preservation of funding to the Public
Telecommunications Facilities Program and Corporation for
Public Broadcasting
Without continued support for station operations from CPB,
all native stations are in jeopardy. Some day Indian country
will have access to high speed Internet services, wireless
communications, multiple platforms and all the wonders of new
technology, but that day has not yet arrived, and will not
arrive for some time to come.
For the foreseeable future we need your help in preserving
and expanding the Public Broadcast System in Indian country.
And, on behalf of the National Congress of American Indians
and Native Public Media, I again thank you for the opportunity
to share this testimony with you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Taylor follows:]
Statement of Loris Taylor, Native Public Media and National Congress of
American Indians (NACI) Telecommunications Subcommittee
Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Hutchison, members of the
Committee, on behalf of the National Congress of American Indians
(``NCAI'') and Native Public Media (``NPM''), I am honored to provide
testimony on how to close the digital divide for our country's Native
Nations.
In the United States, there are 565 federally recognized American
Indian Tribes and approximately 4.1 million American Indians and Alaska
Natives. Thirty-two percent of this population still is without basic
telephone service. Twenty-five percent live at or below the poverty
line. Twenty-two percent are unemployed. Ninety percent of Native
Americans have no access to high speed Internet. Less than 0.3 percent
of the broadcast stations in this country are licensed to Native
Americans.
The absence of adequate communications services in Indian Country
is no accident. Decades of failed Federal policy, market forces, and
the socioeconomic conditions of Native American populations located in
some of the most remote areas of the country result in high build-out
costs for all media. Because of these factors, wireline carriers
frequently end their deployments at the borders of Tribal land or serve
the populated fringes, not the entire reservation.
The Tribal Priority
In February 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
adopted a proposal that promotes the sovereign rights of Tribes by
giving them a priority in the allocation of spectrum that serves Tribal
lands. The Native Nations Priority is currently limited to broadcast
spectrum and to Tribes with reservations. Two hundred fifty-three
Tribes, almost half of the 565 federally recognized Tribes, are
``landless.'' For the Native Nations Priority to be truly meaningful,
it must be extended to all Tribes and to all forms of spectrum. We
applaud recent FCC proceedings that explore that potential.
The Office of Native Affairs and Policy
Last year, the FCC established the Office of Native Affairs and
Policy to coordinate Federal communications policy and redress years of
policy neglect of Native Nations. Within months of its creation, the
Commission launched three proceedings. Those proceedings seek to extend
the broadcast ``tribal priority''; to improve access to mobile wireless
communications; and to inquire into ways of improving broadband
deployment to Indian Country and strengthening the FCC's nation-to-
nation consultation process. Collectively, these proceedings focus more
attention on the communications needs of Native Americans than has been
the case for the preceding history of the Communications Act.
It is critical that this attention not be fleeting or symbolic.
Without a budget sufficient for its mission, the Office of Native
Affairs and Policy cannot carry out its mission of consultation with
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. There is currently no line
item in the FCC's budget for the Office of Native Affairs and Policy
and its consultation with Tribes. We ask that you take this Office and
its functions as seriously as we do by assuring that it is adequately
funded. NCAI has proposed a budget of $1.5 million for the Office of
Native Affairs and Policy.
BIP and BTOP Programs
Only a handful of tribes and tribal organizations received grants
from the Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP) and the Broadband
Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) administered by the Department
of Commerce and Department of Agriculture. It is not too late to assure
that funds intended to stimulate service to unserved and underserved
areas can achieve that goal by bringing broadband service to Tribal
Lands. We recommend that funds returned to those programs be reserved
for the deployment of broadband services to Tribal Lands.
The Native Broadband Fund
We support the establishment of a Native Nations Broadband Fund
targeted to the needs of Indian Country. We also believe that grants
should not be limited to deployment costs. Access is part, but only
part of the problem. Unlike telephone and broadcast services, which are
instantaneously available, broadband technologies cannot effectively be
used without training. Programs that teach digital literacy are needed,
and Native Americas are eager to learn. A study conducted by Native
Public Media and New America foundation shows that where Native
Americans had Internet access, their rates of use tended to be higher
than the national average. We therefore support the creation of a
Native Nations Broadband Fund, with the ability to award grants for the
advancement of digital literacy, as well as for providing service to
Tribal headquarters and other tribal anchor institutions
Traditional Forms of Communications
In reforming the Universal Service Fund to make broadband services
more available, it is important not to destroy the traditional High
Cost, Lifeline and Link-up programs that make basic analog phone
service affordable to many in Indian Country. Existing programs are
equally essential for traditional broadcast services, which remain the
simplest, cheapest, and most effective form of mass communications. For
the first time in 7 years, the FCC, in 2007, accepted applications for
new noncommercial FM stations. It has awarded construction permits that
would double the number of Native stations. Because of the economic
recession, and threatened cut-backs in Federal funding to NTIA's Public
Telecommunications Facilities Program, many of those permits are now at
risk of expiring. If these permits expire, the opportunity for
reapplying is not likely to arise for many years to come. We urge
action on two fronts: first, to give holders of these permits a chance
to extend fundraising efforts, a 1-year tolling of the construction
period for these permits; and second, the preservation of funding to
PTFP and CPB. Without continued support for station operations from
CPB, all Native stations are in jeopardy.
Some day Indian Country will have access to high speed Internet
services, wireless communications on multiple platforms, and all the
wonders of new technology. But that day has not yet arrived and will
not arrive for some time to come. For the foreseeable future, we need
your help in preserving and expanding the public broadcast system in
Indian Country.
On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians and Native
Public Media, I again thank you for the opportunity to share this
testimony with you.
Senator Inouye. And, thank you very much, Madam President.
And, now may I call upon the Chief Executive Officer of
Sacred Wind Communications, Mr. John Badal.
STATEMENT OF JOHN BADAL, CEO,
SACRED WIND COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Mr. Badal. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I want
to thank you for the opportunity and the invitation to speak to
you today about something that I feel very passionate about.
I also want to especially recognize my Senator, Senator Tom
Udall from New Mexico, who has worked diligently and has the
same passion as I in bridging the digital divide on Navajo
Lands in New Mexico.
I will briefly summarize the information I've given to the
Committee, Mr. Chairman earlier this week.
The three major actions that can be taken to deliver
broadband to unserved tribes in our perspective is localize the
service provider, create incentives and coordination with the
Departments of Commerce and Agriculture, and the FCC, for
tribal or rural telephone company ownership of the Telecom's
Systems serving the tribes, amend Federal rights of regulations
that hamstring rural companies need to install infrastructure
on federally-managed lands, continue and expand Federal
programs that assure affordable services on tribal lands that
promote--also promote computer literacy and broadband education
for the adult population in poor areas.
Sacred Wind Communications is a private rural telephone
company that was formed in 2004 to resolve the digital divide
on the Navajo Reservation in New Mexico. We were created solely
and simply to change a telecommunications formula that has not
succeeded in reaching Navajo homes over the past seven decades.
That formula, still applied on other parts of the Navajo
Reservation and on many tribes and other rural areas of this
country can be described as follows: The wrong class of
company, using a single technology, lacking local synergies, is
charged with the obligation to serve the most costly areas of
the country.
For example, in 2004 there were five national telephone
companies that provided basic telephone services on portions of
Navajo Nation, covering three states, and approximately the
size of West Virginia.
All were owned by an out-of-state company whose most
unprofitable exchanges, more than likely, were the Navajo lands
that they served. All were copper landline-oriented in their
solutions approach, which ran afoul of the tribe's
sensitivities to land preservation and to the BIA's rights of
way processing. None had ventured into the wireless world, to
reach into remote homes in a distance and land use friendly
alternative to landline.
The result for the Navajos was, and is, some of the lowest
telecommunications availability in the country, on par with the
Third World.
The Navajo Nation is one of the poorest areas in the United
States, with over 40 percent of the population below the
national poverty level, who live in one of the highest costing
areas to provide telecommunication services.
Less than 60 percent of Navajo households have access to
basic telecommunication services and far fewer have access to
broadband. Where the Navajo Nation scores highest is in the
instances of poverty, teen suicide, teen pregnancy, diabetes
and disabling accidents.
Sacred Wind in 2006 acquired the Last Mile assets of one of
those five companies earlier referenced, and secured a $70
million loan from the USDA's Rural Utility Service.
At the time of acquisition only 26 percent of our customers
had access to basic telephone service, and 1 percent of those
living on the border with the nearby towns had access to
broadband Internet service.
Not only is it our mission to reach the elderly in remote
areas with basic phone service, but an interesting statistic,
and our experiences, cause us to believe that broadband will be
popular in remote areas of Navajo lands. Sixty-one and a half
percent of the grandparents on Navaho lands are the caregivers
to their grandchildren.
We, Sacred Wind, introduced the very first broadband link
to the Navajo community in Northern New Mexico in 2007. We
applied for and received the USDA RUS Grant to establish the
very first personal computer and Internet training center in
our territory. The center was visited by over 4,000 people in a
2-year period and was declared by the RUS to be one of their
top success stories.
That center was used for academics, for job searches and
for the sale of Navajo arts and crafts.
Following that model, Sacred Wind developed a broadband
service that is content-rich for our tribal customers. We have
even added the newly produced Rosetta Stone Navajo Language
training as an integral part of our broadband package.
Our Internet subscriptions grew more than 100 percent in
the last 12 months.
Sacred Wind is unique in that we're not a tribally-owned
company, but in always our focus is tribal. We hire and train
mostly Navajo and other tribal individuals, a number of whom
are Army, Navy and Marine veterans who bring with them well-
developed technical skills and a solid work ethic.
Sacred Wind was recognized as--nationally in 2009 as the
most inspiring small business in America, as part of an
American Express NBC Shine-A-Light contest.
And the nine or so telecommunications companies today that
are owned by the tribes they serve have similar success
stories, and along with Sacred Wind, tested--testified to the
value of local ownership increasing basic and broadband avail--
availability to over 90 percent of our populations.
A chief factor in delivering adequate tele--telecom
services to tribal areas involves the ability to use Federal
lands for infrastructure development. Unlike the permitting
processes in place within boundaries of municipalities or
counties, the permitting processes on federally-managed lands
often serves as an impediment to development.
In fact, the 4-year achievements of Sacred Wind might have
been accomplished in three or even two, had a more efficient
permitting process been made available. Generally, it takes
Sacred Wind 2 years to develop--or receive, rather,
authorization to place any infrastructure via
telecommunications power or a copper wire on tribal lands or
allotted lands.
The Navajo Nation manages a professional and effective land
use review operation, which includes a land department review
of the network plan, an environmental office review, a
historical preservation office review, fish and wildlife, land
appraisal, and Tribal Department of Justice review.
After all that, the same documentation is then submitted to
the BIA. The Navajo Nation and any tribe that builds its own
rights of way review operations should be able to authorize
infrastructure development on its own lands for their own
people.
Similarly, tribes should be given the opportunity to
influence their own telecommunications future. The Federal
Government through the Departments of Commerce and Agriculture
and the FCC should coordinate targeted programs that would
encourage and enable tribes to own and operate their own
systems, which in many cases, might call for a partnership with
a rural local telephone company, and assuming the service
responsibilities of the out-of-state companies.
Those should include regulatory changes that encourage the
creation of privately owned service territories and wireless
spectrum allocations that are coincident to tribal boundaries.
Such programs should not be limited to infrastructure
development, but also computer literacy and Internet training
that would accompany the expansion of broadband in unserved
tribal areas.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you very much. Thank you,
members of the Committee. I am honored, sir.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Badal follows:]
Prepared Statement of John Badal, CEO, Sacred Wind Communications, Inc.
Sacred Wind Communications is a private rural telecommunications
company that was formed in 2004 to resolve the digital divide on the
Navajo Reservation in New Mexico. We were created solely and simply to
change a telecommunications formula that had not succeeded in reaching
Navajo homes over the past 7 decades. That formula, still applied on
other parts of the Navajo Reservation and on many tribal and other
rural lands across our country can be described as follows:
The wrong company, using the wrong technology, lacking adequate
resources, is required to serve the most costly areas of the country.
Or, algebraically: X+Y+Z = F-
1. The company: A non-rural national or regional company, with
bigger, more profitable markets elsewhere, will usually avoid
too much attention to high-cost, low-return areas;
2. The technology: Urban network (and marketing) solutions are
applied in cookie cutter fashion to geographically and
demographically diverse areas;
3. The resources: With the more remote rural areas included in
a larger telecom company's rate base, the telecom company does
not fully qualify for the Federal programs that support
development of infrastructure in those remote areas.
For example, in 2004 there were five local telecom companies that
provided basic telephone services to portions of the Navajo Nation, an
area the size of West Virginia:
--All were owned by an out-of-state company whose most unprofitable
area, likely, was the Navajo area they served;
--All were copper landline-oriented in their solutions approach,
which ran afoul of the tribe's sensitivities to land
preservation and to the BIA's rights of way process;
--None owned and operated a mobile wireless affiliate, which
prevented them from seeking service alternatives.
The result for the Navajos was, and is, some of the lowest
telecommunications availability in the country, on par with parts of
Africa.
``Localize'' Service Delivery
Sacred Wind acquired the ``last mile'' assets of one of those
companies in 2006 and secured a $70 Million loan from the USDA's Rural
Utilities Service. At the time of acquisition, only 26 percent of our
customers had access to basic telephone service and 1 percent of those,
those living on the border with a nearby town, had access to broadband
Internet service.
Despite the U.S. Census Bureau's data showing that over 50 percent
of the Navajo households in this area were below the national poverty
level, only 1 percent of our customers were participating in the
federal Tribal Lifeline Program, a low income discount program, when we
started. Part of the reason for this, we discovered, was that the
Navajo tribal members living on the reservation shared the same
telephone prefix numbers with the nontribal people living in nearby
towns. Thus, the phone company's employees could not easily identify a
tribal resident from a nontribal resident. Another reason, though, for
this omission can be attributed to the local phone company's out-of-
town ownership--it's just too costly for them to focus on a high
maintenance, low return customer base.
The stories we hear about the elderly, without access to basic, let
alone broadband, telecommunications services, surviving alone for 3
days with a broken leg or hemorrhaging as a result of a feral dog
attack are not exaggerated. Such tragedies occur regularly in our
remote areas. And, our intuitive assumptions that broadband will
benefit tribal and other rural people to the same degree that urban
populations are benefitted by broadband are borne out in the successes
of tribally-oriented companies. Sacred Wind, for example, introduced
the very first broadband link to a Navajo community in northern New
Mexico and concurrently, under the auspices of an USDA-RUS Internet
training grant, established the very first Personal Computer (PC) and
Internet training center in that unserved area. The center was visited
by over 4,000 people in a two-year period and was declared by the RUS
to be one of their top success stories. We saw people applying for jobs
online, we saw children using the Internet for academic research, and,
one of the most popular uses of the Internet, we heard from many people
who were able for the first time to e-mail and send photos to their
family members in Iraq and Afghanistan. One young girl brought into the
center a report she wrote for her class--it was the very first ``A''
she ever received. Such was the demand for selling Navajo handcrafts
online, we developed an arts and crafts website for the community and
witnessed that the artisans were able to sell their handcrafts for
about 3 times what they would receive from the local trading posts.
Following that model, Sacred Wind provided PC and Internet training
to another Navajo community just prior to our rolling out broadband
service in their areas. After an 8-month trial period, 64 percent of
our customers were still subscribing to Internet services, though the
majority at speeds under 768 Kbps. Nonetheless, we have experienced
throughout our service territory an increase in our broadband
subscriptions of over 100 percent just in the last year.
Our experiences at the Internet training center led us to
understand, too, that, in order to create a broadband service even more
attractive to our customers, we had to develop a product that carried
some cultural significance with it. It was not enough to advertise
broadband service by a rate of speed and assume that our customers
would realize the worth of that speed. Sacred Wind has designed, in
collaboration with Navajo customers and Navajo government employees, a
broadband service that offers ready access to Navajo history, to Navajo
traditions, to modern preventative medical advice and traditional
medicines, and to governmental programs. Just recently we signed an
agreement with a Navajo language revival group to include, as a
cornerstone in our service and integrated into our higher capacity
broadband packages, Rosetta Stone's Navajo Language online instruction.
This is the most comprehensive, tribally focused broadband product
available on Navajo lands today.
Sacred Wind is unique in that we are not a tribally-owned company,
but in all ways our focus is tribal. We hire and train mostly Navajo
and other tribal individuals, a number of whom are Army, Navy, and
Marine veterans who bring with them well developed technical skills and
a solid work ethic. We have designed a fully Internet Protocol (IP)-
based network tailor made for our geography: a robust fixed wireless
tower infrastructure and fiber optic and copper landline network that
now can reach over 60 percent of the unserved homes in our territory
with both basic voice services and broadband. The remaining 40 percent
will be reachable with the further installation of one or more relay
poles from our main towers, a final stage that should be completed by
2013. Using the most efficient technology for a geographically
challenging area, the company has increased basic telecommunications
availability from 26 percent to 60 percent in four (4) years and
broadband availability from 1 percent of its landline-served customers
to 99 percent, and to 100 percent broadband availability to its fixed
wireless-served customers.
The 9 telecommunications companies today that are owned by the
tribe they serve have similar success stories and, along with Sacred
Wind, testify to the value of local ownership and local focus of a
community's telecom provider. But, even local ownership has limitations
when it comes to seeking land use authorization on federally managed
lands.
Amend Federal Rights-Of-Way Practices
A second chief factor in delivering adequate telecom services to
tribal areas involves the ability to use Federal lands for
infrastructure development. Unlike the permitting processes in place
for installing copper wire, fiber optic cable or telecommunications
towers within most municipal or county boundaries, the permitting
processes on federally managed lands often serve as an impediment to
growth. In fact, the four-year achievements of Sacred Wind described
above could have been accomplished in two (2) years had a more
efficient permitting process been made available.
On Navajo-occupied lands in New Mexico Sacred Wind has applied for
rights of way authorizations from the Navajo Nation, from the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service,
the county and the state. No process is as difficult as at the Bureau
of Indian Affairs. Generally, it takes Sacred Wind two (2) years to
receive authorization to place any infrastructure--be it a
communications tower or a copper or fiber line--on tribal land or
allotted lands. The Navajo Nation manages a professional and effective
land use review operation, which includes a land department review of
the network plan, an environmental office review, an historical
preservation office review, fish & wildlife, land appraisal, and tribal
department of justice review. After all that, the same documentation is
then submitted to the BIA.
There is no distinction in the land use review process between a
communications tower or fiber optic cable that is to serve only the
Navajo people and a gas pipeline that would traverse tribal lands to
supply off-reservation communities.
In the most recent example of how the permitting process affects
Sacred Wind's network development, we submitted 2\1/2\ years ago a
request to attach a fiber optic cable along 11.6 miles of an electric
pole line that has existed for over 30 years. That fiber route is
needed to add capacity to our fixed wireless and copper infrastructure
that serves over 500 customers. Because the fiber is to be attached to
an existing pole line within an existing utility easement, we asked the
BIA for a ``categorical exclusion'' from having to conduct a centerline
survey and an archaeological and environmental assessment along the
easement. We were told that, in order to qualify for the categorical
exclusions to have such surveys and assessments waived, we were
required to submit the centerline survey, archaeological and
environmental assessments to demonstrate no possible harm to the
easement! Such work cost us over $170,000; and the BIA appraised the
easement for fee purposes to be over $100,000; and we're still waiting
for a notice to proceed.
Coordinate Federal Government Policymaking
Finally, a third factor, in part related to the second, that
affects infrastructure development on tribal lands is the lack of
coordination of assistance and policy among various government offices.
With the U.S. Department of Agriculture's longtime leadership in
helping to develop telecommunications and broadband infrastructures in
rural areas, and the U.S. Department of Commerce's involvement in the
Broadband Stimulus Program that stemmed from the American Recovery &
Reinvestment Act, and the Federal Communications Commission's
commitment to develop a National Broadband Plan that would also benefit
rural and tribal areas, one would assume that the Federal government
speaks in unison in promoting the development of tribal and rural
infrastructures. Contrarily though, it appears that the very model of
rural telecommunications development is being torn apart. The local
rural local exchange carriers (RLECs)--which include Sacred Wind and
all tribally owned telecommunications carriers--are either handicapped
in facing off their competition or are being threatened with a change
in national telecommunications policy.
For example, the Federal Universal Service Fund's (USF) support for
rural carriers--even as it is being reformed as we speak--carries
restrictions in the use of the RLECs' infrastructure that often
penalize a company for the use of their networks for the provision of
unregulated services. RLECs generally receive most of their USF support
for provision of service along the ``local loop'' or last mile, and
receive other forms of support for provision of interexchange services
not associated with the local loop. Accordingly, when a company employs
its infrastructure for broadband services to customers outside of its
territory, or to deliver added capacity to others' cellular phone
towers, or to even use its own fixed wireless communications towers for
mobile wireless communications, the company can actually lose more
money from USF support than it could gain from free markets. As the
Federal USF is being reformed, encouraging USF recipients to seek other
sources of revenue could help sustain the company and the fund.
The FCC, too, has been hosting regional forums on ways to stimulate
telecommunications infrastructural development on tribal lands. I
believe they will conclude that local ownership is the answer. While
there is a state regulatory and FCC process for a tribe or rural local
exchange carrier to acquire a larger company's network, as the 9
telecom tribes and Sacred Wind have gone through, the process now
involves seeking waivers from rules that have ``frozen'' further
changes to forming new USF-supported territory. With the current USF
program's future uncertain, moreover, few USF-qualified companies would
risk any new rural acquisitions or service territory expansions until
the economics of such expansions were known. As it is, many RLECs in
this country, including tribally owned telcos and Sacred Wind, are
concerned about the USF reform's impact on our ability to pay down our
current construction loans.
Similarly, while the FCC schedules from time to time auctions for
the sale of spectrum licenses for mobile and fixed wireless
communications services, and offers small rural and tribal carriers a
discount from the auction sale price, the licensed territories are not
coincident with tribal lands or with a small RLEC's service territory.
Such change in spectrum license allocation, while less favorable to the
national or regional mobile wireless carriers, would make the bidding
price and the use of the license more attractive to the smaller
companies.
We RLECs indeed see ourselves caught in a policy war at the FCC
that we may not be winning. As stated above, the locally owned rural
carriers, among them all tribal telcos, have done a superlative job in
building telecom networks in their areas. It is the national telecom
companies that have fallen down in developing modern infrastructures in
many of their rural service territories. These RLECs should be used as
a model for further broadband development, but are threatened by the
FCC's apparent predilection toward mobility. With the FCC's inclusion
of mobile wireless carriers in the USF program, and the ultimate
disbursement of over $1.5 Billion annually from the fund to national
and regional mobile wireless carriers, less support for the past decade
has been made available to RLECs, the local companies. Much of the
contention surrounding USF reform today revolves around the FCC's
apparent abandonment of the RLEC-rural model in favor of a mobile
carrier-national model. If this move toward mobility impacts RLECs as
it portends to, rural employment, rural development, rural telecom
service, and RLECs' debt service may be adversely affected.
This is not to say that mobile services development should not be
encouraged in tribal and rural areas. It should be built around a
``localized'' model, though--one in which a tribe or RLEC would have
opportunities to offer such alternative services to its customers
either singly or in partnership with a larger carrier. But, as a policy
matter, it certainly should not preempt ``fixed'' services to the home.
No single technology is appropriate for Sacred Wind's entire
service territory where the distance between communities and the
population density make landline deployment unaffordable, where the
mountains and canyons within its territory, which separate hundreds of
Navajo homes in small clusters many miles from each other, make mobile
wireless communications unworkable in considerable parts of Navajo
lands. Along flatter terrain, linked to communications towers that
parallel a roadway, mobile wireless is appropriate. And, even satellite
broadband has its place. All such alternative solutions should be made
available to all Americans in as cost effective a manner as possible.
[To distinguish one wireless technology from another in geographically
challenging areas, fixed wireless systems take the antenna (and the
signal) to the home, while with mobile service the customer must travel
from the home to seek the antenna (and the signal)].
In either case of a mobile or satellite alternative for rural
areas, the local RLEC with a fixed wireless infrastructure already in
place offers the most viable solution: mobility can be added to the
incumbent RLEC's infrastructure and the RLEC's technicians can be
trained to service a satellite unit where the RLEC has partnered with a
satellite company to offer such complementary services. The health of
the RLEC is required in both cases.
To ensure that tribes are given the opportunity to influence their
own telecommunications future, the Federal government, through the
Departments of Commerce and Agriculture and the FCC should coordinate
to create more programs that would encourage RLECs to develop tribal-
oriented systems, and to encourage tribes to own and operate their own
systems, using all alternative telecommunications solutions to meet
their needs. Many tribes will need your help.
There exist in New Mexico, for example, three major tribes and 19
Indian Pueblos with populations that range from a few hundred to many
thousands. Most are poor and all but the Mescalero Apache Tribe and the
segment of Navajo lands served by Sacred Wind, are served by national
or regional carriers. If USF support systems remain intact and the
regulatory environment would be open to it, we believe that the
majority of those tribes could economically justify acquiring and
owning their own telecom systems or by way of tribal consortia. Only by
understanding how each tribe is served today can we reach conclusions
as to how they best can be served tomorrow. Resources for such
understanding are near at hand--talk to the tribes and seek council
from the nearest RLEC.
Recommendations
Our recommendations to help tribes bridge the digital divide are:
1. Create and implement programs that encourage local ownership
of telecom networks.
a. Create FCC regulations that incent tribal or RLEC
acquisitions.
b. Revise FCC spectrum allocations and processes for
tribal-specific spectrum use.
c. Ensure that any FCC USF reform does not reduce
tribal RLEC support.
2. Continue and expand telecommunications development plans for
tribal lands that take advantage of the most appropriate
technologies.
a. Departments of Commerce and Agriculture should help
tribes assess the viability of localizing telecom
systems.
b. Departments of Commerce and Agriculture should
coordinate grant/loan projects that would incent tribal
or local RLEC start-ups.
3. Remove land use impediments for tribal
infrastructures.
a. Departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Interior, FCC,
and Homeland Security should coordinate land use
policies that affect telecom infrastructures on
federally managed lands.
b. New land use policies should take into account a
system's services to tribal members.
c. Departments of Commerce and Interior should incent
tribes to establish their own rights of way procedures
and, where tribes have their own review operations in
place, remove the Federal government from the process.
d. Change the Federal utility easement application to
include use of the easement by telecom utilities.
e. Eliminate the archaeological & environmental study
requirement on pole attachments on in-place pole lines.
f. Eliminate the archaeological & environmental study
requirement in an easement or on a site where such
studies have already been conducted.
4. Continue and expand PC literacy and Internet training
programs for tribal members.
a. Establish and implement programs supporting the
development of broadband content that reinforces tribal
culture and values.
______
Attachment 1: Configuration of Fixed Wireless to Copper Landline
Network with Fiber Optic Backbone for Capacity. ``Distance
Friendly'' &
Economical in Serving Wide or Geographically Challenging
Unserved Tribal Areas
Attachment 2: Sacred Wind's Internet Training for Rock Springs Chapter
Members and at the Huerfano Chapter of the Navajo Nation,
Enabled by an USDA-RUS Community Connect Grant
Attachment 3: Fixed Wireless Antenna Attachment on the Home, West of
Yatahey, NM
Senator Inouye. Thank you, very much, Mr. Badal.
And, may I now begin the questioning.
Mr. Blackwell, I have several questions. I'll ask one, but
I'll submit the rest, if I may.
Mr. Blackwell, there are 565 federally-recognized tribes,
approximately 231 federally-recognized Native Alaskan entities
and about 38,000 beneficiaries of more than 200,000 acres of
Hawaiian Homelands held in trust throughout the Hawaiian Island
chain. And it's a lot of ground to cover. And the scope and
breadth of your responsibilities are, naturally, very great.
Do you feel that you office has sufficient resources to
fulfill your responsibilities and achieve your goals; if not,
how much do you need?
Now is a good time. I'm Chairman of the Appropriations
Committee.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Blackwell. I'm well aware of that, sir. Well, now that
we have an office we can do much--we can do much more than just
what one person can do. I was that single person for 6 years.
Now that we have an office, we can move forward on many fronts
at the same time.
The support that we have from the commission is clear and
unambiguous from the unanimous decisions to create the office,
and the Chairman is very supportive of our goals. These include
increasing the consultation and coordination with native
communities so that we can create more robust records for the
commission to act on. These goals include increasing the
overhauling and increasing the effectiveness of the
commission's ITI Outreach or Indian Telecommunications Outreach
program. And, it includes getting to places where the
commission has never before been in Native America.
Senator Inouye. You don't know how much you need?
Mr. Blackwell. Well, Senator, the offices----
Senator Inouye. Seriously.
Mr. Blackwell. I'm sorry?
Senator Inouye. Seriously.
Mr. Blackwell. Well, the office is still new. We are
evaluating the need and working with the Chairman's office and
the Offices of the Managing Director to ensure that we have the
resources that we need.
If you wish, I can follow up with you on that, sir.
Senator Inouye. Please do, because I've been advised that
you're overworked, and you don't have enough staff. So, I'll be
waiting for your response.
Mr. Blackwell. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. I'll now call upon the Chairman of the
Hawaiian Homelands.
Now, will you tell the Committee how many families
currently live on Hawaiian Homelands, and how many have access
to broadband?
Mr. Nahale-a. We have approximately 10,000 homesteads right
now; so, roughly, 10,000 families on the land. We don't have
hard numbers on how many access broadband. We estimate that
less than half. A lot of those families have access to
commercial broadband and so they're not connecting for cost
reasons.
But, I want to highlight that one of the big issues for us
is that less than half of our 200,000 acres has access to
broadband currently; so that's another issue for us, is how
to--how to develop in regions where there is currently no
broadband access.
Senator Inouye. I'm certain the Committee is not fully
aware of the history of Hawaiian Homelands.
Like most native people, when the Federal Government took
the responsibility of dealing with them, in the case of
Hawaiians, they put them out in the most remote areas, away
from Honolulu. Nanakuli, when it was established, had a trail;
same thing with Waimanalo. You would have to climb over a
mountain or go on a beach trail to reach that community.
The other homeland reservations were on other islands in
remote areas, and one can imagine the challenges you have.
What is the most remote? You mentioned one on Maui. Are
there other remote communities?
Mr. Nahale-a. There are. We have other areas on Maui,
Keanae and Hana. Hawaii Island we have land near, you know,
near the top of Mauna Kea. I think those would be our most
remote locations.
If I could share very quick stories, Senator, mentioning
other homesteads, my sister-in-law's father, who's already
passed, told us stories about--there was an old road into their
homestead, and so every day the material for their house, which
they built by hand, was dropped at the highway, which was about
a half-mile from the homestead; so every day after school on
the way home, they'd pick up a few pieces of lumber and walk it
into their homestead; and that's how they built their house.
That area since has urbanized, but I would hate to develop
Hawaiian homes in that fashion.
Senator Inouye. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I'll be submitting
a whole series of questions also for your consideration.
Mr. Nahale-a. Of course.
Senator Inouye. And now, Mr. Badal, in your testimony, you
recommended that the Departments of Commerce and Agriculture
should coordinate telecommunications grant and loan projects.
In prior hearings before this committee on the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act, some members questioned the need
for broadband programs in two departments.
Do you have any opinion on that?
Mr. Badal. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. I believe that unless
the tribes are given greater opportunity to develop
infrastructure on their own--on their own lands, and unless
they work--in many cases where they don't have the technical
skills within themselves--unless they work with the rural
telephone company that is proximate to the reservation and has
the telecommunications--has the telecommunications expertise,
and unless there are incentives for the rural telephone company
and the tribes, financial incentives, to start an in--an
operation on a very high costing area to serve with low
generation of income, this job is not going to get done any--in
our lifetimes.
Senator Inouye. Well, Mr. Badal, I will be submitting also,
several questions, if I may, for your consideration.
Mr. Badal. Sure.
Senator Inouye. I can imagine the problems you have because
I've visited Navajo lands several times; and as you noted, they
are much larger than some of the states of the union.
Mr. Badal. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. And, Ms. Taylor, if I may: Native Nations
and communities have always faced a communications divide. We
have seen it with traditional landline telephone services and
wireless communications, but how does lack of access to high-
speed Internet impact or divide our Native Nation's face? Does
it raise the stakes or make divide that we face more critical
to remedy?
Ms. Taylor. Thank you for that question. I think in the
context of tribal homelands and--and you've referred to
statistics earlier--ten percent broadband penetration rate. In
some communities where 911 doesn't exist, where roads remain
unpaved, and where telephone service is still for one in three
families--those are pretty dire situations in these
communities.
So, in terms of technology, if we want to spur the economy,
if we want to improve education, if we want to make health
available long distance, and if we want to improve education
for our young people, we need technology.
Last year, Native Public Media and the New America
Foundation did a study on the Internet use, media and
technology in Indian Country and found that where Native
Americans were provided access to the technology, they were
using it at a greater levels than their counterparts.
So, simply saying that--that without technology that people
are not willing to adopt this is a misperception. You know,
when we--when we think about the technology in terms of what
America takes for granted, as I was flying in yesterday on the
airplane, I saw all the towers that surround Washington, D.C.
In Hopi Country, or in Navajo, or in Sioux Country, or even
in the Hawaiian Homelands you--- you rarely see these towers
because they don't exist. If we're going to bridge the digital
divide, if we're going to bridge the media divide, we need to
have the technology.
Senator Inouye. And, you're maintaining that we don't at
this time, obviously.
Ms. Taylor. We don't at this time. Let me just tell you, I
come from the Village of Oraibi in Northeastern Arizona on the
Hopi Reservation. In my village, to this day we have no running
water, no electricity, no telephone, and certainly no broadband
service.
Last year, in 2010, at my home in Flagstaff, Arizona I
was--my home was flooded three times. I can tell you that not
only is technology important during a time when there's an
emergency, when you're looking for real time information about
the Red Cross or about the Forest Service, or about mitigation,
or where you're going to go in terms of shelter for that night,
you need information; and whether it comes through the
broadband technology, or whether it's Terrestrial Radio station
that, you know, that--this is something that is absent from
Indian country.
When you ride out to Hopi Country, for example, and where
you may not--where the nearest hospital may be an hour and a
half away, you literally are taking your life into your own
hands.
These conditions are prevalent, not just on the Hope
Reservation, but across the nation, and so, I have to submit
that we really are at a critical threshold. The longer we wait,
the longer Indian country remains or lags behind.
Senator Inouye. In other words, what we take for granted,
the other Americans, are not available to you at this moment.
Ms. Taylor. Correct.
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much. I have many other
questions I'd like to submit to you.
Now, may I call upon Senator Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chairman Inouye, and thank you
for your longstanding leadership on issues effecting Native
Americans and Native Hawaiians.
I know that the Chairman in many capacities has been a real
champion, both on the Indian Affairs Committee, I think several
times, and then with your role as Chairman of the
Appropriations Committee in this hearing, where you serve in
your role as pro tem, and the former Chair here. And it seems
like wherever you are you end up being a great champion for
tribes.
So, all of us very much appreciate that, and I think we
have benefited from it in our states, as Senator Begich and I
know over the years.
Senator Inouye. Would you like to run my campaign?
[Laughter.]
Senator Udall. I'd be happy to. I'd be happy to. I think
you just finished, though. And you didn't have much of a
problem. I think you might hurt yourself with me as a campaign
manager.
But, particularly, I'd like to thank all of the witnesses
today, and thank you, Mr. Badal, for your comments.
You know, most people probably can't imagine life without a
telephone; yet today, as Ms. Taylor said, more than 30 percent
of the households in Indian country don't have basic access to
telephone service.
For members of the Navajo Nation in particular, this
situation is even worse. And, statistics don't adequately
convey the hardships created by this lack of telephone service.
Not having a landline or cell phone reception can mean the
difference between life and death. Imagine not being able to
call an ambulance when you or your loved one is in medical
danger.
We recently had a man outside of Gallup, New Mexico, who
missed two opportunities for a lifesaving kidney transplant
because he lacked telephone service at home and could not be
contacted at home to notify him about the transplants.
Members of this committee know how essential it is that our
nation's rural areas and tribal lands are not bypassed when
broadband networks are built out across the Nation. And
although they are among the least connected, these areas are
precisely where broadband technology can help the most, I
think, as all of you have synthesized in your testimony.
By overcoming physical distances and geographic isolation,
broadband can help improve economic development; can help
improve education; and can help improve access to healthcare.
So, I was very pleased when FCC Chairman Genachowski paid
particular attention to this issue and all of the commissioners
pledged their support for addressing this appalling digital
divide affecting Native Americans and establish the office.
And, I hope they'll follow your advice, Ms. Taylor, on the
resources that are needed. And, I may have an opportunity here
in a minute to ask Mr. Blackwell about that.
But, Mr. Badal, maybe to start with you: Sacred Wind won a
nationwide award for the most inspiring small business, and I'm
pleased that you can be with us today to share that story. And,
as you know, western states like New Mexico have more public
lands and tribal lands than other areas in the country.
And, the southwest can also be a sensitive place to build
infrastructure, which is what we're talking about doing here in
many ways since we have archeological treasures and sites
considered sacred to the region's native communities.
However, I think in your testimony, as I've read it, you
have come up with several ways that you think we could do that
a little bit better.
Could you talk a little bit about how Federal agencies
could make it easier to use existing easements and rights of
way that have already been built; how to ensure the tribal
sovereignty in that process is respected; and how do we ensure
that local communities not feel like new infrastructure is
being punched through their lands without their approval?
Mr. Badal. Mr. Chairman--and thank you, Senator Udall. I'll
be glad to answer those questions.
I think one of the things that--that could be immediately
changed in Federal regulations is the--the establishment of
what we call all utility easements. You know, when--when one
utility company acquires, through a right-of-way process, which
involves archeological and environmental assessments and
centerline surveys, one--when one of those companies acquires
an easement, it should be allowed to be occupied with less of a
process by any other utility using the same easement.
Let me give you an example: We have been working for two
and a half years to string 11.6 miles of fiber along an
electric pole line that has been in existence for over 30
years. We were--we even applied for a categorical exclusion
from having to conduct archeological, environmental and
centerline surveys for that easement because it had been in
place for 30 years, and the archeological and environmental had
already been done 30 years ago.
Well, we were required to conduct the archeological,
environmental assessments and the centerline survey as part of
the application to apply for a categorical exclusion so that we
wouldn't have to conduct the archeological and blah, blah,
blah.
We're still waiting for our notice to proceed after two and
a half years.
Another thing that I think could be done to change Federal
regulations is to make a distinction in whether BIA, BLM or
whatever land use authorization regulations they have, to make
a distinction between infrastructure that is going to be
directly surveying the tribe on whose land the facilities we
placed from facilities that are placed on tribal lands across
the tribal lands serve elsewhere. And, an easy example is, if
a--well, an easy example: If Sacred Wind wants to install two
miles of fiber that would run across the tribal lands, or if a
telecommunications tower on--on tribal lands, the right- of-way
process for us is exactly the same as stringing a high--a high
voltage transmission line across Navajo lands to serve the City
of Gallup or serve the City of Farmington or Albuquerque, and I
think that's wrong.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that answer. And, I have other
questions also that I'd like to submit for the record, but I
have two quick more questions, just one to Mr. Blackwell:
And, not to get you into the budget issues, because I know
you're going to visit with the Chairman about that; but as
you're becoming operational, what resources or other
initiatives do you see as being vital to the FCC's success in
addressing the digital divide on tribal and Native Hawaiian
lands?
Mr. Blackwell. Well, thank you for the question.
Consultation coordination is essential; the ability to work
directly with native nations and native communities to find the
solutions that will be lasting. It's a--the process has lasted
70 years at a point where telephony has--has--the way in which
the rules were created then largely didn't result in--in
significant service. We--the statistics have been cited time
and time again.
Right now, one of our goals is to place the native nation
itself in the center of the process that it can be a unique
demand aggregator; it can be an entity that can bring new
solutions to--to the fore. And, whether it's the tribe serving
itself or working in concert with a partner, I believe that
that will provide new development models.
We have a notice of inquiry open at the commission right
now. All of these matters are being raised in it. We're looking
into the possibility of extending the native nation's priority
to other--identifying and removing other barriers to entry.
We're looking at employment and adoption models.
That consultation and that solution--that development of
solutions also has to occur within Native America. We can't
just sit here in Washington and try to come up with solutions.
We have to go where the problems exist; that is how one
best understands how to pull together the solutions.
Beyond that, there is an incredible need right now, with
the explosion of broadband, for additional training and
information.
Prior, when the Commission had a liaison to tribal
governments--the job that I had for a while--I spent a lot of
time pushing information into Indian country.
Now we have partner organizations that we can work with
that know their constituencies much better, can reach out and
touch their grassroots much better than we can.
It's our job to share that information, to get into a two-
way dialogue and return to Washington with--with that knowledge
in hand to further affect our rules and create new
opportunities.
So, in a nutshell that's the answer to your question.
Senator Udall. I appreciate that comment.
Ms. Taylor, you know we know how indigenous languages and
native languages are disappearing all across the world at a
dramatic rate, and we see that also in the United States, in
our tribes; Zuni, and Hopi, and Navajo, and others.
Could you talk a little bit about native radio stations and
new communication technologies that can be harnessed to
preserve and enrich cultural activities in native languages; I
know Mr. Badal talked a little bit about that in his testimony
on the Rosetta Stone.
Please.
Ms. Taylor. Thank you. You asked me about the right
subject. I love--radio is my life.
In this country, out of the 565 Native Nations and Native
Hawaiians and including the Alaska Natives, we have 42 native
stations that are on air today; approximately 11 of those
stations are streaming over the Internet. We have a great
demand for communications, a good robust, healthy backbone in
Native America. We have approximately 38 construction permits
right now to build new stations; and then we have a few more
that are still MX'ed across the country, and we hope that
they'll be untangled soon.
And, I lay that as the framework to--to say how vital these
stations are.
When you, again, look at the context of what we have in
terms of communications in Indian country or in Native America
we're--we don't have a lot. So, these Terrestrial Radio
stations in most tribal communities are the communication
systems that--if you don't have a tribal newspaper and if you
don't have television, if you don't have broadband, these
native stations are essential and critical in providing the
information that we need to make decisions on a day-to-day
basis; information about our own health; information about the
electoral process; whether it's a tribal election; whether it's
a national election in terms of culture and language
And, you're exactly right. A lot of tribal communities are
facing a--a--a real critical situation of--of language loss.
What--what these stations do for their communities is to
provide the vital, cultural and language programming. So, if
you come to Sioux country, you'll hear Sioux on the air. If you
come to Navajo, where we have six stations, you'll hear Navajo.
If you go to Hawaii, you'll hear Hawaiian language programming.
This is essential, because at the end of the day, localism
and diversity is important. With 565 nations and more, we
contribute to the intellectual capacity of this country. We
contribute to the diversity in terms of history, and culture,
and language. We contribute to--to civil society in many ways.
That's what this country is about. And, these stations allow us
to participate in democratic processes that's available to all
Americans.
And, so, we're really asking for something that--that other
Americans already have. And, so, in terms of--of just what
these stations play in--in tribal communities, I can't
emphasize enough. And so, so--so if we--if we're looking at a--
a--a serious defunding issue of public service media, which is,
I understand around $400 million, which is a lot of money, the
unseen consequences to the smallest stations in this country
that serve native nations is basically this: We will go dark if
we lose funding because over--all our stations rely on funding,
not just from PTFP and from CPB, of at least 50 to 100 percent.
So, literally, we are the last to come on board; we're
going to be the first to feel the consequences.
Senator Udall. I appreciate your comments.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important
hearing.
Senator Inouye. Thank you, very much.
Senator Begich?
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Begich. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you. I just want to echo Senator Udall's comments. You have
been a great ally for the Alaska Native community and this
hearing is a very important one because the new age of
connectivity, not just for--as Myron talked about, before he
had to leave--just having a phone to call someone, but it's the
commerce, the medical, the educational opportunities. It is
really determinative, at least in my state, of the future of
our rural community, especially the most remote.
Ms. Taylor, when you were describing your home community,
as you can imagine, I was thinking of many communities in
Alaska that have the same situation. And, in a lot of ways it's
appalling to think that we have that in this country with the
wealth and resources at our fingertips. To be very frank, it's
more of a comment. I have some questions I'm going to ask in a
second, but when you think about the unemployment levels that
we have--and I've heard the Chairman eloquently talk on the
floor, and I can't recite his exact quote, but I remember when
we were talking about unemployment might reach 10 percent and
the Chairman said in Indian country, that would be a blessing
if it could get to that.
And, he's right, because Myron, who was here earlier, his
community hit almost 22 percent unemployment. A lot of our
rural communities have 40-50 percent.
Senator Udall, I remember when we were doing the stimulus
bill, you made some incredible comments. You remember that 2
years ago we were running around this place trying to figure
out how to solve the unemployment problem, and it was reaching
eight, nine, 10 percent. But we have communities all throughout
rural America, and rural Alaska, for example, and Native
country, Indian country, that has 30, 40, 50 percent
unemployment; and if we're going to attack that issue, part of
it is going to be how we communicate.
As you can imagine, throughout this time we get a lot of
comments in our office about taxes. In rural Alaska, it will
take about 30 minutes to download a 1040-EZ form. I mean,
that's not the long form; it's the short form. Thirty minutes
to get the form, blank. And, then how they send it from there
is another question. We've seen already almost a 50 percent
drop in grant applications from rural communities because
everything's now done online, so in order to apply they have to
go online; and if they can't get online because they don't have
broadband or high speed broadband, it just complicates and
folds out the problem.
So, the hearing is important.
Let me, if I can, first to you, Ms. Taylor. I think your
comment on the Pullock service cuts of the Pullock T.V. radio.
As you describe those small communities, the small communities
will be the ones that really get hit; the small radio stations,
because they have the base funding that I know, Senator Inouye,
the late Senator Ted Stevens worked on aggressively to make
sure those small communities had some sort of communication.
So, I want to echo what you said, and I want to make sure I
heard it, that if we have dramatic cuts in public radio, rural
communities, Indian country communities, will be probably the
hardest hit because not only will the station go dark, it will
go off the air permanently because they have no other financial
resources they can tap into--am I hearing you right? I want to
make sure I'm not putting words in your mouth here.
Ms. Taylor. You are absolutely on the money. We have
stations that rely on funding from the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting for their day-to-day operations. As I mentioned
earlier, we have approximately 38 new stations that we would
like to bring on-air, and--and these are stations that are
self-service stations, primarily, that are being built to serve
Native America.
About 10 percent of these stations receive their operating
revenue from tribal government, from state, county, religious
organizations, and schools. And, that's a very small amount.
It--I think all of you are aware that the socioeconomic
conditions in Native America are--are much more pronounced.
Fifty percent high unemployment rate, joblessness; but still,
most people will say, well, the creature needs our housing, you
know, food on the table, a roof over your head.
I would have to say that information is just as essential.
Without information, I don't know how society can function
adequately. I mean, right now, if you can just look at the
landscape of what's happening here in Washington, D.C., this--
this budget discussion that we're having at the national level
seeps down to families on tribal homelands. They want to know
what's going on here, just as the people in Los Angeles, or New
York, or any of the cities in Florida, and other states.
So, you are--you are absolutely correct, we are facing a
very serious situation.
Senator Begich. Thank you very much. And, we're very proud
of those stations, KBNA, which is a nationally renowned,
native-speaking great program, but maybe there's not an answer
to it, but more of a statement; maybe there's some that don't
want information to flow.
So, I'll leave it at that.
Let me ask Mr. Blackwell: First off, thank you for being
here; thanks for the focus that you're bringing to this issue,
and I, like Senator Udall, am anxious for you to get together
with the Chairman and indicate your needs, because we know this
is an important office for all the reasons that have already
been stated by the testimony.
One of the questions I have is about the FCC's Native Task
Force, how will you be working with that; and how will the FCC
and the Native Nations and Communities be working together to
implement some of that work that comes out of the task force?
Mr. Blackwell. Well, thank you for the question. That was
the--the task force is comprised of elected and appointed
tribal leaders from across Indian country, and we'll be working
directly with them to review existing proceedings at the
commission to--to use them as a--a sounding board for ideas
that--that are presently within the bureaus and offices. We
also hope that through these members--let me step back for a
second.
The--the FCC Native Nation Broadband Task Force is
comprised of elected and appointed tribal leaders and senior
officials from across the bureaus and offices at the
commission.
So--so that would be the body that was working together.
And, in our--we're looking right now at scheduling our first
meeting in the near future in a face-to-face format, and then
following up, routinely, and trying to meet together as often
as possible.
But, part of the work also, is not just reviewing and
making sure the Native voices are heard in all the relevant
commission proceedings, but also to surface new issues, new
recommendations.
We also hope that through the Native leadership on this
task force that it will become something of a watering hole for
other tribes that are on the learning curve to understanding
about what's--what's going on in the communications field, and
new opportunities, and hope that we will lead to more Native
Nations becoming involved in work with us at the Commission.
Senator Begich. Very good. Thank you very much.
Mr. Badal, I don't know if you noticed that the Chairman
and I were smiling a little bit when you were testifying
because the description you gave of the poles when you were
trying to put wires on them, and what you had to go through,
was amazing, to be very frank with you.
And, if I heard you right, did I hear you say, it's
regulatory requirements or it's statutory requirements?
Mr. Badal. Well, these requirements are embodied in the
Federal Government CFRs, and these are regulatory.
Senator Begich. Right.
Mr. Badal. They are founded somewhere in the statute. But,
I'll see if I could--those regulatory--I think those rules
require regulatory changes.
Senator Begich. Here's the question, and I think I know the
answer to this. I know, when I was mayor of Anchorage we had a
university campus area, kind of mixed use with the hospital and
university. What we did with them, because every building had
to go through zoning, was we did a campus-wide process which
they developed; and once they developed it, then they went
through it. We signed off on the process, but they made sure it
worked with their campus setting; and we no longer participated
until, of course, they went to the local city council to get
approval for it; but not in the process--because it seemed like
every time they'd come back, we'd have special parking
requirements in one building; and they'd build a building right
next door, have new requirements; and yet they wanted to share
the parking, because they operate different times; and so we
developed something where they kind of took control of that
with some guidance from us, but then we stepped back.
Is that something that would work on tribal lands? Because
it sounds like we have multiple agencies you may have to go
through to get a right-of-way.
I'm not going to comment for the Chairman, but two and a
half years to get something that already exists for something
else, when all you're doing is tacking another line on this
pole with some holes, seems a waste of money, a waste of time,
and the taxpayers and your rate payers are paying for this. Am
I wrong?
Mr. Badal. It is a waste of time and resources. The right-
of-way fees that we have to pay, I think, are unnecessary. We
work on a, almost a daily basis with different offices of the
Navajo Nation. I think we have a very good working relationship
with the Navajo Nation's Land Department that also often agrees
with us, that getting--or conducting archeological permit or
doing a centerline survey, or so.
And in conducting an archeological assessment during an
evaluation is--is unnecessary in certain instances where
facilities--the easement already exists, or we're replacing an
analogue pedestal with a broadband loop carrier cabinet, that
now provides broadband for everybody.
The Navajo Nation believes that--that it has to follow BIA
processes or their work gets bounced back.
Senator Begich. Gotcha.
Mr. Badal. So--and, we've had meetings then with us and
with the Navajo Nation with the BIA, and it's--everybody says
our hands are tied, our hands are tied because this is what is
written.
Senator Begich. But, they write the regulations.
Mr. Badal. Yes, sir.
Senator Begich. OK, I just want to make sure I'm not
missing the boat here. So, I'm going to leave it at that. I
look to the Chairman. I noticed in your written testimony you
have several written recommendations regarding some ideas of
changing procedures and, you know, to be very frank, BIA has a
lot of things to do. This should be the least of their worries
if they have tribal governments that are willing to manage that
for them, because obviously, the tribal governments are going
to manage for the best of their community, I would assume.
Mr. Badal. Yes.
Senator Begich. So, I think they'll do the right thing at
the end of the day, as long as the procedures are, you know,
approved; and they often let the tribes do that.
I mean, I'm perplexed, let me just say that, and maybe
there should be a 6th seat there, maybe for the BIA, but we'll
leave it at that.
But, I think your testimony and your recommendations are
very interesting and maybe ones that we should help proceed
with.
Thank you, very much, to all of you.
Senator Inouye. If I could follow up on my friends'
inquiries:
Mr. Badal, your problems were with the Bureau of Indian
Affairs.
Mr. Badal. Mr. Chairman, I'd hate to say my problems are--
and I don't mean to denigrate or criticize them. It's----
Senator Inouye. A challenge.
Mr. Badal. Yes, we have--we have challenges dealing with
several layers of--of government, but I think the--the
interpretation of the regulations are a little more stringent
on--on--in our experience, on the BIA side. Now, I work with an
Indian Pueblo, the Laguna Pueblo in New Mexico as well. They
have a BIA office right next door to the government offices,
and they have a different relationship altogether.
Senator Inouye. But, I assume that the BIA, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, would be specially concerned with the welfare
of Indian Country, and so I'm going to be chatting with them.
Mr. Badal. Thank you, sir, thank you.
Senator Inouye. And, Ms. Taylor, your testimony reminded me
that at one time there were 50 distinct languages among Indians
in this land. About how many are extinct now; do you have any
idea?
Ms. Taylor. Wow.
Senator Inouye. Because, for example, a Cherokee would not
be able to communicate with a tribe up in the Pacific
Northwest.
Ms. Taylor. Well, you know, I was just reading about
language families in indigenous Americas; 1491, the book--I
don't know if you read it--but they--the scientists estimated
that at one time there were approximately 62 language families
in America alone.
Senator Inouye. Sixty-two?
Ms. Taylor. Sixty-two, which is remarkable, that there's
such an expansive linguistic asset, I would say in North
America at one time. I don't know if that number is true or
correct. I don't have any way to validate, but I can say that--
that across the country, all the 565 federally-recognized
nations, Alaska Natives, and the Hawaiians, many of them still
speak their native language. And, in some communities they are
robust and healthy; in other communities they are facing a
serious language loss.
Senator Inouye. Thank you, very much, Ms. Taylor. I just
want to note that Mr. Blackwell had some training before he
became a member of the Federal Communications Commission. He
was a senior staffer on the Indian Affairs Committee, and his
passionate concerns for Native Americans, Alaskans and
Hawaiians, I'm happy to see, still exist in you.
So, keep it up. I'm serious, because I want you to do a
good job; and if you need more money to help these people,
we'll get it for you, believe me.
Mr. Badal. Thank you, sir. I will keep it up.
Senator Inouye. I want to thank the Chairman of the Office
of Hawaiian Homelands for being with us today. It's a long trip
to be here just to testify. I hope you found your presence here
meaningful.
Mr. Nahale-a. Absolutely. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. And, I will be carrying on a conversation
with you on how better to help your departments.
So, with that, thank you all very much for testifying
before the Committee.
And, I would like to announce that the record will be kept
open for 2 weeks; if you have any additional statement to
submit, please do so. If you want to make any changes to your
testimony, you're free to do so.
Thank you, very much.
Mr. Nahale-a. Thank you, it's an honor.
[Whereupon, at 4:19 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC 20554
In the Matter of )
)
Innovation in the Broadcast ) ET Docket No. 10-235
Television
Bands: Allocations, Channel )
Sharing, and
Improvements to VHF )
To: The Commission
COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL TRANSLATOR ASSOCIATION
The National Translator Association (``NTA'') hereby comments on
the above-captioned Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM''), released
November 30, 2010, and published in the Federal Register on February 1,
2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 5521). Comments were due within 45 days of Federal
Register publication and, accordingly, these Comments are timely filed.
NTA is dedicated to the provision of free over-the-air television
and audio service to all areas that do not receive adequate coverage
from a full complement of primary broadcast stations. Its membership
includes, but is not limited to, owners and operators of TV translator
and LPTV stations that rebroadcast the signals of full-service
television stations.
NTA urges the Commission to hold any decision on this Rulemaking in
abeyance until all rulemakings and the Table of Allotments are released
so that the entire rebanding plan can be considered. Many future
proposals will have an impact on the questions raised in this
proceeding. Further, the preamble to the instant Rulemaking states that
this Rulemaking is in furtherance of a ``National Broadband Plan.''
There is no such thing as a ``National Broadband Plan.'' The plan
forwarded to Congress by the Chairman's office was never adopted by the
Commission; from the timing, it appears that no other Commissioner saw
the plan before it was released, and the plan itself contained no
factual predicate for the need for 500 MHz of additional spectrum for
wireless that the Chairman specified.
There is a reason that, in the ordinary course of events--and prior
to any implementing proceedings, a draft of such a plan would be
released, public comment sought on the proposals, and the public policy
developed. Nothing purifies ideas better than sunlight.
Introduction
NTA is participating in this and related Commission proceedings not
because it believes that repurposing of up to 120 MHz of the existing
television bands (hereinafter, ``repacking'') is in the public
interest. but rather because the assumption at the highest levels of
the Commission appears to be that repacking is going to occur and the
only remaining questions concern the details.\1\ NTA believes that any
repacking, even if confined to primary stations, will be greatly
disruptive to the installed translator base. Translators have been
fitted in on channels selected to avoid interference to primary
stations and other translators. Any change in the primary stations'
channel assignments will have a ripple-down effect, as translators are
forced to dodge the new full-service assignments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Today the Commission is refusing to accept any new TV
translator applications, even in rural areas (see DA10-2070, October
28, 2010); the referenced notice states that the approximately 18
months that had been available for filing new applications was
sufficient time for filing all that were needed. This reasoning is
absolutely wrong, given the time it takes for planning, engineering,
and arranging funding. The freeze on acceptance of new TV translator
applications clearly demonstrates how repacking will result in the loss
of expanded service to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is presumed that a large sum of money will be generated by the
auction of the recovered spectrum. As described below, NTA urges the
Commission to include a funding plan to cover the cost of any
translator modifications made necessary by repacking changes, whether
made necessary directly by a primary station change or indirectly by
the forced change of another LPTV station or translator. It is
important that any program for covering costs be set up as a grant
program. Volunteer translator groups have trouble making initial
outlays associated with reimbursement plans.
Combining Multiple Program Streams Through a Single Translator
Channel
The NPRM discusses ``Broadcast Television Channel Sharing'' \2\ by
full service stations. The transmission of multiple program streams
from different primary stations is already permitted under the
translator rules, and a few translators are so operating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ NPRM, paras. 18-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a translator passes a single digital signal that has two or more
program streams already combined in it, no extra equipment is required.
The signal comes in fully encoded and goes out unchanged.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Many translators take the signal down to the transport stream
and apply the error correction capability of the 8VSB system, thereby
``cleaning up'' the signal before retransmitting it, but this
processing is the same regardless of the number of program streams in
the signal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a translator is to receive and combine two separate program
sources, however, the process gets much more complicated. It is
necessary to go down to video and audio and process both programs
through the full encoding routine. The extra equipment approximately
doubles the cost of the translator equipment. Because there is no
economic advantage and the quality (definition) of the combined
outgoing program streams is compromised, such combining has been little
used and only in those instances where two output channels are not
available.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Over the last 20 years, there have been many time periods
during which the FCC has declined to accept new applications, forcing
doubling up as new primary stations have become available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If repacking forces a translator to combine two or more program
sources at the translator input into one RF channel, substantial costs
will be incurred. Simple fairness requires that such costs be covered
from the auction proceeds.
Impact of Moving Primary Stations
If primary stations are forced to share one RF channel, there will
be many instances where one or both will be required to relocate a
significant distance as part of the process of combining programming
streams. There are many instances where a translator is sited at a
particular location because the input signal is uniquely available
there. Changes in the location of the sources of primary signals are
going to require modifications of a significant number of translator
systems, including some relocations.
Again the associated costs should be covered through a grant
program financed from the auction proceeds.
Forced Use of Low Band VHF Channels
A significant number of translators are ``stuck'' on low band VHF
channels, which are known to be undesirable for digital television. The
technical inferiority of the low band VHF channels is not being
accepted by the FCC as the basis for approving a minor change move to a
high band VHF or UHF channel, in the absence of an actual conflict.
Further, the Commission is not accepting major change
applications.\5\ Thus it is not possible to file an application to move
a low band VHF translator to a high band VHF or UHF channel as part of
the process of moving to digital operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Freeze on the Filing of Applications for New Digital Low Power
Television and TV Translator Stations, DA10-2070, October 28, 2010, at
para. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, NTA specifically requests that low band VHF
translators be allowed to displace to high band VHF or UHF channels as
a minor change when converting to digital operation.
Improving the Performance of Digital Stations on VHF Channels
NTA has already submitted comments in MB Docket No. 03-185,\6\ in
which it was suggested that the maximum ERP for digital LPTV stations
and translators be increased from 0.3 kW to 3.0 kW. As all translator
applications are tested by the FCC for outgoing interference to other
stations using the OET Bulletin 69 Longley-Rice Terrain Dependent
Algorithm, there is very little potential for interference arising from
such a power increase. NTA repeats the recommendation that the VHF ERP
limit be increased to 3.0 kW.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See NTA Comments in MB Doc 03-185, dated Dec. 17, 2010, page 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
When and if repacking occurs, there will be major disruptions of
existing translator systems. NTA urges the Commission to remain
constantly aware of the impact of repacking on the delivery of
television programming to the translator-served public.
NTA continues to believe that the Commission's refusal to accept
any new translator applications--even in rural areas--is unfair and
unwise, and asks that the freeze be lifted at the earliest possible
moment.
Respectfully submitted,
NATIONAL TRANSLATOR ASSOCIATION
By: /s/ Byron St. Clair
Byron St. Clair
President
/s/ George R. Borsari, Jr.
George R. Borsari, Jr.
Its Attorney
BORSARI & PAXSON
5335 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W.
Suite 440
Washington, DC 20015
(202) 296-4800
March 18, 2011