Telecommunications: Challenges to Assessing and Improving	 
Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands 	 
(07-MAR-06, GAO-06-513T).					 
                                                                 
An important goal of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 
is to ensure access to telecommunications services for all	 
Americans. This testimony is based on GAO's January 2006 report  
GAO-06-189, which reviewed 1) the status of telecommunications	 
subscribership for Native Americans living on tribal lands; 2)	 
federal programs available for improving telecommunications on	 
these lands; 3) barriers to improvements; and 4) how some tribes 
are addressing these barriers.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-513T					        
    ACCNO:   A48537						        
  TITLE:     Telecommunications: Challenges to Assessing and Improving
Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands 	 
     DATE:   03/07/2006 
  SUBJECT:   Census						 
	     Data collection					 
	     Federal aid to localities				 
	     Indian lands					 
	     Native Americans					 
	     Policy evaluation					 
	     Population statistics				 
	     Surveys						 
	     Telecommunication policy				 
	     Telecommunications 				 
	     Telecommunications systems 			 
	     Telephones 					 
	     Universal service					 
	     1990 Decennial Census				 
	     2000 Decennial Census				 
	     2010 Decennial Census				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-513T

     

     * Background
     * Tribal Telephone Subscribership Rate is Substantially Below
     * Native Americans Can Benefit from Several General and Tribal
     * Multiple Barriers Exist to Improving Telecommunications on T
     * Tribes Are Addressing Barriers to Improved Telecommunication
     * Summary
     * Contact and Acknowledgements
     * GAO's Mission
     * Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
          * Order by Mail or Phone
     * To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
     * Congressional Relations
     * Public Affairs

Testimony

Before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. Senate

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

For Release on Delivery Expected at 10 a.m. EST Tuesday, March 7, 2006

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Challenges to Assessing and Improving Telecommunications for Native
Americans on Tribal Lands

Statement of Mark Goldstein, Director Physical Infrastructure Issues

GAO-06-513T

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Co-Chairman, and Members of the Committee:

I am pleased to be here today to discuss the findings and recommendations
of our January 2006 report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving
Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands.1 According to the
2000 Census, about 588,000 Native Americans were residing on tribal
lands.2 Telephone subscribership rates on these lands have historically
lagged behind the overall national rate. In 1990, only 47 percent of
Native American households on tribal lands had telephone service compared
to about 95 percent of households nationally. In our report we discuss: 1)
the current status of telecommunications subscribership for Native
Americans living on tribal lands; 2) federal programs available for
improving telecommunications on these lands; 3) barriers to improvements;
and 4) the ways in which some tribes are addressing these barriers.

To address these issues, we reviewed Census data and interviewed officials
at federal agencies that support telecommunications on tribal lands. We
also interviewed officials representing telecommunications providers and
industry organizations. Additionally, we interviewed officials of 26
tribes in the lower 48 states and 12 Alaska regional native nonprofit
organizations, chosen on the basis of demographics and other factors, such
as actions being taken on their land to improve telecommunications. We
also visited 6 tribal lands to learn more about the challenges the tribal
members were facing, and actions they were taking to improve their
telecommunications services.3 We performed our work in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards from August 2004 to
December 2005. For more information about the methodology used, see our
report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving Telecommunications for
Native Americans on Tribal Lands.

1 GAO-06-189 , (Washington, D.C., Jan. 11, 2006). Available through GAO's
Web site ( www.gao.gov ).

2For our report, GAO defined tribal lands as lands that include any
federally recognized Indian tribe's reservation, off-reservation trust
lands, pueblo, or colony, and Alaska Native regions established pursuant
to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Pub. L. No. 92-203, 85 Stat.
688 (1971) (codified as amended at 43 U.S.C. S:S: 1601 et seq.) Tribal
lands do not include Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas, and the population
figure of 588,000 does not include the 325,000 Native Americans living on
OTSAs. The source of the data that GAO used throughout this report was the
Census 2000 American Indian and Alaska Native Summary File. The term
"Native Americans" is used to refer to people who identified themselves as
American Indians and/or Alaska Natives alone or in combination with one or
more races.

3The six tribes are: Coeur D'Alene Tribe of the Coeur D'Alene Reservation,
Idaho; Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington;
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina; Oglala Sioux Tribe of
the Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota; Mescalero Apache Tribe of the
Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico; and Navajo Nation in Arizona, New
Mexico, and Utah.

In summary, we found that:

           o  The most recent census data, from the year 2000, indicate that
           the telephone subscribership rate for Native American households
           on tribal lands is still substantially below the national rate.
           About 69 percent of these households in the lower 48 states had
           telephone service, which is about 29 percentage points less than
           the national rate of about 98 percent. About 87 percent of Native
           American households in Alaska native villages had telephone
           service, also considerably below the national rate. We do not know
           the rate for Internet subscribership for tribal lands due to a
           lack of such data from either the Census Bureau or the Federal
           Communications Commission (FCC).
           o  The Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service and the
           FCC have several general programs to improve telecommunications in
           rural areas and make service affordable for low-income groups,
           which would include tribal lands and their residents. In addition,
           FCC created some programs targeted to tribal lands, including
           programs to provide discounts on the cost of telephone service to
           residents of tribal lands, and financial incentives to encourage
           wireless providers to serve tribal lands. However, we found that
           FCC is not collecting sufficient data to assess the extent to
           which its efforts to increase telecommunications deployment and
           subscribership on these lands are succeeding. Also, one of FCC's
           programs to support telecommunications for libraries has
           legislatively based eligibility rules that preclude tribal
           libraries in at least two states from being eligible for this
           funding.
           o  Native American officials, service providers, and others cited
           several barriers to improving telecommunications on tribal lands.
           The most frequently mentioned were the rural, rugged terrain of
           tribal lands and the tribes' limited financial resources. These
           barriers increase the costs of deploying infrastructure and limit
           the ability of service providers to recover their costs. Other
           barriers cited include the shortage of technically trained tribal
           members and the service providers' difficulty in obtaining rights
           of way to deploy their infrastructure on tribal lands.
           o  Some tribes are making significant progress in addressing these
           barriers. For example, we found that several tribes are moving
           toward owning or developing their own telecommunications systems
           using federal grants, loans, or partnering with the private
           sector. Some are focusing on wireless technologies, which can be
           less expensive to deploy over rural rugged terrain. Two tribes of
           the six tribes we visited are bringing in wireless carriers to
           compete with wireline carriers on price and service. In addition,
           some tribes have developed ways to address the need for technical
           training, and one tribe we visited has worked to expedite the
           tribal decisionmaking process for rights-of-way approvals.

           Our report has two matters for congressional consideration. First,
           Congress should consider directing FCC to determine what
           additional data is needed to help assess progress toward the goal
           of providing access to telecommunications service on tribal lands,
           including advanced services such as high-speed Internet, and how
           this data should collected. Second, Congress should consider
           amending the Communications Act of 1934 to facilitate and clarify
           the eligibility of tribal libraries for funding under FCC's
           telecommunication support program for libraries.

           I would now like to present additional detail on the results of
           our work.

           Tribal lands vary dramatically in size, demographics, and
           location, ranging from the Navajo Nation, with 24,000 square miles
           and over 176,000 Native American residents, to tribal land areas
           in California comprising less than 1 square mile with fewer than
           50 Native American residents. Most tribal lands are located in
           rural or remote locations, though some are near metropolitan
           areas. Also, some tribal lands have a significant percentage of
           nonNative Americans residing on them.

           Tribes are unique in being sovereign governments within the United
           States. Their sovereign status has been established by the U.S.
           Constitution, treaties, and other federal actions. To help manage
           tribal affairs, tribes have formed governments or subsidiaries of
           tribal governments that include schools, housing, health, and
           other types of corporations. In addition, the Bureau of Indian
           Affairs (BIA) in the Department of the Interior has a fiduciary
           responsibility to tribes and assumes some management
           responsibility for all land held in trust for the benefit of the
           individual Native American or tribe.

           Native American tribes are among the most economically distressed
           groups in the United States. According to the 2000 Census, about
           37 percent of Native American households had incomes below the
           federal poverty level-more than double the rate for the U.S.
           population as a whole. Residents of tribal lands often lack basic
           infrastructure, such as water and sewer systems, and
           telecommunications systems.

           The federal government has long acknowledged the difficulties of
           providing basic services, such as electricity and telephone
           service, to rural areas of the country. The concept of universal
           telephone service has its origins in Section 1 of the
           Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Communications Act) which
           states that the FCC was created "for the purpose of regulating
           interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio
           so as to make available, so far as possible, to all people of the
           United States, a rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide wire
           and radio communication service with adequate facilities at
           reasonable charges . . . ."4 The goal of universal service is to
           ensure that all U.S. residents have access to quality telephone
           service regardless of their household income or geographic
           location. A 1995 report by the Census Bureau based on 1990 census
           data noted that about 47 percent of Native American households on
           tribal lands had telephone service, compared to about 95 percent
           of households nationally.5 In June 2000, the FCC Chairman noted
           that telephone subscribership among the rural poor was roughly 20
           percent lower than the rest of the nation, while Native Americans
           living on tribal lands were only half as likely as other Americans
           to subscribe to telephone service.

           As of 2000, the telephone subscribership rate for Native American
           households on tribal lands had improved since 1990, but was still
           substantially below the national rate, while the rate for Internet
           subscribership on tribal lands was unknown due to a lack of data.
           According to data from the 2000 decennial census, about 69 percent
           of Native American households6 on tribal lands in the lower 48
           states had telephone service, which was about 29 percentage points
           less than the national rate of about 98 percent. About 87 percent
           of Native American households in Alaska native villages had
           telephone service, also considerably below the national rate.
           Telephone subscribership rates for Native American households on
           individual tribal lands in 2000 varied widely. A few tribal lands
           had rates above the national level, but the majority of them had
           rates below the national level. To get a better understanding of
           telephone subscribership rates by individual tribe and population
           size, we reviewed data for the 25 tribal lands with the highest
           number of Native American households. These 25 tribal lands
           represent about 65 percent of all Native American households, as
           shown in Census 2000 data, and had a range in telephone
           subscribership rates from 38 percent for the Navajo Nation
           Reservation and Off-Reservation Trust Land (located in Arizona,
           New Mexico, and Utah) to 94 percent for the Turtle Mountain
           Reservation and Off-Reservation Trust Land (located in Montana,
           North Dakota, and South Dakota).

           While Census data indicate that the average subscribership rate
           for Native Americans on tribal lands has increased from about 47
           percent of households in 1990 to about 69 percent in 2000, changes
           in telephone subscribership rates since the 2000 decennial census
           are not known. In order to provide more current data, the U.S.
           Census Bureau (Census Bureau) has begun to gather telephone
           subscribership data through a new, more frequent survey that will
           provide demographic and socioeconomic data on communities of all
           sizes, including tribal lands. However, because it will take time
           to accumulate a large enough sample to produce data for small
           communities, annual reports will not be available for all small
           communities, including tribal lands, until 2010.

           The rate of Internet subscribership for Native American households
           on tribal lands is unknown because neither the Census Bureau nor
           FCC collects this data at the tribal level. One survey performed
           by the Census Bureau that collects data on Internet subscribership
           can provide estimates for the nation as a whole, but the survey's
           sample cannot provide reliable estimates of Internet
           subscribership on tribal lands. The Census Bureau's new survey
           will provide data on tribal lands but does not include a question
           on Internet subscribership. Without current subscribership data,
           it is difficult to assess progress or the impact of federal
           programs to improve telecommunications on tribal lands.

           FCC collects data on the deployment of advanced telecommunications
           capability in the United States, but this data cannot be used to
           determine Internet subscribership rates for tribal lands.7
           Pursuant to section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, FCC
           is required to conduct regular inquiries concerning the
           availability of advanced telecommunications capability for all
           Americans. To obtain this data, FCC requires service providers to
           report a list of the zip codes where they have at least one
           customer of high-speed service. Because the providers are not
           required to report the total number of their residential
           subscribers in each zip code, because tribal lands do not
           necessarily correspond to zip codes, and because these data do not
           include information on "dial-up" users (i.e., those who access the
           Internet without a broadband connection), these data cannot be
           used to determine the number of residential Internet subscribers
           on tribal lands. The FCC has recognized that its section 706 data
           collection efforts in rural and underserved areas need improvement
           to better fulfill Congress' mandate.8

           The Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service and FCC
           are responsible for several general programs designed to improve
           the nation's telecommunications infrastructure and make services
           affordable for all consumers, which can benefit tribes and tribal
           lands. The Rural Utilities Service has grant, loan, and loan
           guarantee programs for improving telecommunications in rural
           areas. FCC has several programs (known as "universal service"
           programs) to make telephone service more affordable for low-income
           consumers and consumers living in areas, such as rural areas,
           where the cost to provide service is high.

           In addition to these general programs, FCC has recognized the need
           to make special efforts to improve tribal telecommunications and
           established four programs specifically targeted to improving
           telecommunications for residents of tribal lands. The Tribal Land
           Bidding Credit program provides financial incentives to wireless
           service providers to serve tribal lands. The Indian
           Telecommunications Initiative disseminates information to tribes
           and tribal organizations on telecommunications services on tribal
           lands, including universal service programs and other areas of
           interest. Enhanced Link-Up, which provides a one-time discount on
           the cost of connecting a subscriber to the telephone network, and
           Enhanced Lifeline, which provides ongoing discounts on the cost of
           monthly service, provide more support per customer than the
           regular Link-up and Lifeline programs. As with FCC's other
           universal service programs, the service providers are reimbursed
           from FCC's universal service fund for the discounts they give to
           the programs' participants.

           Regarding Enhanced Lifeline, we found that, at present, data
           provided to the program administrator9 from the service providers
           can be broken out by state, but not by tribal land, because the
           reporting form does not ask service providers to indicate the
           number of participants and amount of funding by tribal land.
           Because FCC does not have data on program participation and
           funding by individual tribal land, some basic questions cannot be
           answered: what percentage of residents of particular tribal lands
           are benefiting from the programs and how have the participation
           rates on individual tribal lands changed over time?

           An additional universal service program, known as E-rate, provides
           discounts on telecommunications services for schools and libraries
           nationwide. One of our key findings is that some tribal libraries
           are not eligible to receive E-rate funds because of an issue
           involving federal eligibility criteria. The current statutory
           provision under the Communications Act does not allow tribal
           libraries to obtain E-rate funding for libraries unless the tribal
           library is eligible for assistance from a state library
           administrative agency under Library Services Technology Act
           (LSTA). In at least two cases, tribes have not applied for E-rate
           funds because their tribal libraries are not eligible for state
           LSTA funds.

           Tribal and government officials, Native American groups, service
           providers, and others with whom we spoke cited several barriers to
           improving telecommunications service on tribal lands. The rural
           location and rugged terrain of most tribal lands and tribes'
           limited financial resources were the barriers to improved
           telecommunications most often cited by the officials of tribes and
           Alaska Native Villages we interviewed. Generally, these factors
           make the cost of building and maintaining the infrastructure
           needed to provide service higher than they would be in urban
           settings. For example, more cable per customer is required over
           large, sparsely populated areas, and when those areas are
           mountainous, it can be more difficult and costly to install the
           cable. The Rural Task Force, formed by the Federal-State Joint
           Board on Universal Service,10 documented the high costs of serving
           rural customers in a report issued in January 2000, which stated
           that the average telecommunications infrastructure cost per
           customer for rural providers was $5,000, while the average
           infrastructure cost per customer for non-rural providers was
           $3,000.11 Officials from 17 tribes and 11 Alaska regional native
           non-profit organizations we interviewed told us that the rural
           location of their tribe is a telecommunications barrier.

           Tribes' limited financial resources are also seen as a barrier to
           improving telecommunications services on tribal lands. Many tribal
           lands-including some of those we visited, such as the Navajo, the
           Mescalero Apache, the Yakama, and the Oglala Sioux-have poverty
           rates more than twice the national rate, as well as high
           unemployment rates. The 2000 U.S. Census showed that the per
           capita income for residents on tribal lands was $9,200 in 1999,
           less than half the U.S. per capita income of $21,600. Officials of
           33 of the 38 Native American entities we interviewed told us that
           lack of financial resources was a barrier to improving
           telecommunications services.

           These two barriers, the rural location of tribal lands (which
           increases the cost of installing telecommunications
           infrastructure) and tribes' limited financial resources (which can
           make is difficult for residents and tribal governments to pay for
           services) can combine to deter service providers from making
           investments in telecommunications on tribal lands, resulting in a
           lack of service, poor service quality, and little or no
           competition. For example, a representative of the company that
           provides service to the Coeur d'Alene tribe told us that
           high-speed Internet was only available in certain areas of the
           Coeur d'Alene tribal land and that there were cost issues in
           providing this service to the more remote and less densely
           populated parts of the reservation. Another provider's
           representative told us that providing digital subscriber lines
           (DSL)12 to most parts of the Eastern Band of Cherokee's
           reservation would not be profitable because the land is rugged and
           to connect many of those who live out in remote rural areas would
           require an investment that would be difficult to justify.

           The third barrier most often cited by tribal officials is a
           shortage of technically trained tribal members to plan and
           implement improvements on tribal lands. Officials of 13 of the 38
           Native American tribes and tribal organizations we interviewed
           told us that lack of telecommunications training and knowledge
           among tribal members is a barrier to improving their
           telecommunications. Some of these officials said they needed more
           technically trained members to plan and oversee the implementation
           of telecommunications improvements, as well as to manage existing
           systems. An official of the Coeur d'Alene tribe, who has technical
           training, also told us that tribes without technically trained
           staff would be at a disadvantage in negotiating with service
           providers. This official added that having tribal members trained
           in telecommunications was necessary to ensure that a tribe's
           planned improvements included the equipment and technology the
           tribe wanted and needed.

           A fourth barrier cited by tribal officials and other stakeholders
           is the complex and costly process of obtaining rights-of-way for
           deploying telecommunications infrastructure on tribal lands, which
           can impede service providers' deployment of telecommunications
           infrastructure. In part, this is because BIA must approve the
           application for a right-of-way across Indian lands and to obtain
           BIA approval, service providers are required to take multiple
           steps and coordinate with several entities during the application
           process.

           From our interviews of officials of 26 tribes and 12 Alaska
           regional native non-profit organizations, we found that 22 are
           addressing the need to improve their telecommunications services
           by developing or owning part, or all, of their own local
           telecommunications network. Some of those we spoke to told us that
           they were doing this because their provider was unwilling to
           invest in improved telecommunications services, in part due to the
           barriers of the tribe's rural location, rugged terrain, and
           limited financial resources. An additional 10 tribes told us that
           they have considered or are considering owning part or all of
           their telecommunications systems.

           The tribes we visited are using federal grants, loans, or other
           assistance, long-range planning, and private-sector partnerships
           to help improve service on their lands. In addition, some tribes
           have addressed these barriers by focusing on wireless
           technologies, which can be less costly to deploy across large
           distances and rugged terrain. For example, the Coeur d'Alene Tribe
           in Idaho is using a Rural Utilities Service grant to overcome its
           limited financial resources and develop its own high-speed
           wireless Internet system.

           Some tribes are addressing the shortage of technically-trained
           tribal members to plan and implement improvements on tribal lands
           through mentoring and partnerships with educational institutions.
           For example, the Yakama Nation has proposed to connect a local
           university to its telecommunications system in exchange for
           technical training for its staff. The Mescalero Apache Tribe has
           improved its technical capacity by hiring technically trained
           staff and pairing them with less trained staff, creating a
           technical mentoring program.

           To help reduce the time and expense required to obtain a
           right-of-way across tribal lands, one tribe is developing a
           right-of-way policy to make the tribal approval process more
           timely and efficient. Also, a BIA official acknowledged that
           portions of the federal regulations for rights-of-way over Indian
           lands, including the section on telecommunications infrastructure,
           are outdated. BIA is currently revising the regulations to better
           apply to modern utility technologies, including advanced
           telecommunications infrastructure, though the timeframes for
           completion of this work have not been established.

           Our report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving
           Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands, contains
           more information on these and other tribal initiatives, as well as
           detailed case studies of six tribes' efforts to improve their
           telecommunications infrastructure and services.

           Under the principles of universal service, as established by
           Congress, FCC has recognized the need to promote
           telecommunications deployment and subscribership on tribal lands.
           Despite improvements in both deployment and subscribership of
           telecommunications services, as of 2000, Native American
           households on tribal lands still lag significantly behind the rest
           of the nation. Progress in dealing with the underlying causes of
           this problem is difficult to assess because of a paucity of
           current information about both deployment and subscribership of
           telecommunications for Native Americans on tribal lands. Moreover,
           this lack of adequate data makes it difficult for FCC and Congress
           to assess the extent to which federal efforts designed to increase
           telecommunications deployment and subscribership on these lands
           are succeeding.

           We found there is a statutory provision in the Communications Act
           which precludes some tribal libraries from benefiting from a
           universal service program. The Act stipulates that a library's
           eligibility for E-rate support is dependent on whether the library
           is eligible for certain state library funds. Yet the tribal
           libraries in at least two states are precluded under state law
           from being eligible for such funds, which has the effect of making
           these libraries ineligible to apply for E-rate funds. FCC
           officials told us that modifying the federal eligibility criteria
           to resolve this situation would require legislative action by the
           Congress. Clarifying this issue could help bring high-speed
           Internet access to more residents of tribal lands through their
           tribal libraries.

           In a draft of our report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving
           Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands, provided
           for agency comment, we recommended that FCC determine what data is
           needed to assess progress toward the goal of providing access to
           telecommunications services to Native Americans living on tribal
           lands and how this data should be collected, and then report to
           Congress on its findings. FCC agreed that more data is needed but
           maintained that it is not the organization best positioned to
           determine what that data should be. Given FCC's response, we added
           as a matter for congressional consideration that Congress should
           consider directing FCC to determine what additional data is needed
           to help assess progress toward the goal of providing access to
           telecommunications services, including high-speed Internet, for
           Native Americans living on tribal lands; determine how this data
           should regularly be collected; and report to Congress on its
           findings. We also suggested that to facilitate Internet access for
           tribal libraries, Congress should consider amending the
           Communications Act of 1934 to allow libraries eligible for Library
           Services and Technology Act funds, provided by the Director of
           Institute of Museum and Library Sciences to either a state library
           administrative agency or to a federally recognized tribe, to be
           eligible for funding under the E-rate program.

           This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to
           answer any questions that you or other members of the committee
           may have about our findings.

           For questions regarding this testimony, please contact me on (202)
           512-2834 or [email protected] . Individuals making key
           contributions to this testimony include Carol Anderson-Guthrie,
           Edda Emmanuelli-Perez, John Finedore, Michelle Fejfar, Logan
           Kleier, Michael Mgebroff, John Mingus, Mindi Weisenbloom, Alwynne
           Wilbur, Carrie Wilks, and Nancy Zearfoss.

           The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
           investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in
           meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve
           the performance and accountability of the federal government for
           the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
           evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
           recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
           informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
           commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
           accountability, integrity, and reliability.

           The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at
           no cost is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday,
           GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on
           its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted
           products every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe
           to Updates."

           The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies
           are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the
           Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
           Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are
           discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

           U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax:
           (202) 512-6061

           Contact:

           Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
           [email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or
           (202) 512-7470

           Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400
           U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
           512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW,
           Room 7149 Washington, D.C. 20548

                                   Background

 Tribal Telephone Subscribership Rate is Substantially Below the National Level
                     and Internet Subscribership Is Unknown

447 U.S.C. S:151.

5Bureau of the Census, Housing of American Indians on
Reservations-Equipment and Fuels, Statistical Brief, S/B95-11,
(Washington, D.C.: April 1995).

6The Census 2000 data in this report are for the American Indian and
Alaska Native alone or in combination with one or more other races.
Households are classified by the race of the householder. When the term
Native American households is used, it refers to the total number of
occupied housing units where the race of the householder is American
Indian and/or Alaska Native alone or in combination with one or more other
races.

 Native Americans Can Benefit from Several General and Tribal-Specific Federal
                Programs to Improve Telecommunications Services

7Section 706(c)(1) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 defines advanced
telecommunications, without regard to any transmission media or
technology, as high-speed, switched, broadband telecommunications
capability that enables users to originate and receive high-quality voice,
data, graphics, and video telecommunications using any technology. See,
Pub. L. No. 104-104, Title VII, S: 706, Feb. 8, 1996, 110 Stat. 153,
reproduced in the notes under 47 U.S.C. S: 157.

8Local Telephone Competition and Broadband Reporting, 19 FCC Rcd 22340
(2004).

    Multiple Barriers Exist to Improving Telecommunications on Tribal Lands

9FCC designated a not-for-profit corporation, the Universal Service
Administrative Company (USAC) to carry out the day-to-day operations of
the universal service programs, although FCC retains responsibility for
overseeing the programs' operations and ensuring compliance with the
commission's rules.

10Section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 required FCC to
institute the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service. 47 U.S.C. S:
254 (a)(1). The board makes recommendations to implement the universal
service provisions of the Act. The board is comprised of FCC
commissioners, state utility commissioners, and a consumer advocate
representative.

11Rural Task Force, The Rural Difference: Rural Task Force White Paper 2,
(Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, January 2000),
http://www.wutc.wa.gov/rtf (downloaded August 25, 2005).

Tribes Are Addressing Barriers to Improved Telecommunications in Different Ways.

12Digital Subscriber Line is a broadband connection that provides greater
capacity for faster data transmission than can be provided over a
conventional telephone line.

                                    Summary

                          Contact and Acknowledgements

(543166)

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

GAO's Mission

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Congressional Relations

Public Affairs

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-GAO-06-513T .

To view the full product, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Mark Goldstein at (202) 512-2834 or
[email protected].

Highlights of GAO-06-513T , a testimony before the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation, United States Senate

March 7, 2006

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Challenges to Assessing and Improving Telecommunications for Native
Americans on Tribal Lands

An important goal of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, is to
ensure access to telecommunications services for all Americans. This
testimony is based on GAO's January 2006 report GAO-06-189, which reviewed
1) the status of telecommunications subscribership for Native Americans
living on tribal lands; 2) federal programs available for improving
telecommunications on these lands; 3) barriers to improvements; and 4) how
some tribes are addressing these barriers.

What GAO Recommends

In a draft of its report provided for agency comment, GAO recommended that
FCC determine what data is needed to assess progress toward the goal of
providing access to telecommunications services to Native Americans living
on tribal lands and how this data should be collected, and then report to
Congress on its findings. FCC agreed more data is needed but maintained
that it is not the organization best positioned to determine what that
data should be. Given FCC's response, Congress should consider directing
FCC to carry out our recommendation. In addition, Congress should consider
amending the Communications Act to facilitate and clarify tribal
libraries' eligibility for universal service funds.

Based on the 2000 decennial census, the telephone subscribership rate for
Native American households on tribal lands was substantially below the
national level of about 98 percent. Specifically, about 69 percent of
Native American households on tribal lands in the lower 48 states and
about 87 percent in Alaska Native villages had telephone service. This
data indicates some progress since 1990, though changes since 2000 are not
known. The U.S. Census Bureau is implementing a new survey that will
provide annual telephone subscribership rates, but the results for all
tribal lands will not be available until 2010. The status of Internet
subscribership on tribal lands is unknown because no one collects this
data at the tribal level. Without current subscribership data, it is
difficult to assess progress or the impact of federal programs to improve
telecommunications on tribal lands.

The Rural Utilities Service and the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) have several general programs to improve telecommunications in rural
areas and make service affordable for low-income groups, which would
include tribal lands. In addition, FCC created some programs targeted to
tribes, including programs to provide discounts on the cost of telephone
service to residents of tribal lands. However, one of FCC's universal
service fund programs, which supports telecommunications services at
libraries, has legislatively based eligibility rules that preclude tribal
libraries in at least two states from being eligible for this funding. FCC
officials told GAO that it is unable to modify these eligibility rules
because they are contained in statute and thus modifications would require
legislative action by Congress.

The barriers to improving telecommunications on tribal lands most often
cited by tribal officials, service providers, and others GAO spoke with
were the rural, rugged terrain of tribal lands and tribes' limited
financial resources. These barriers increase the costs of deploying
infrastructure and limit the ability of service providers to recover their
costs, which can reduce providers' interest in investing in providing or
improving telecommunications services. Other barriers include the shortage
of technically trained tribal members and providers' difficulty in
obtaining rights of way to deploy their infrastructure on tribal lands.

GAO found that to address the barriers of rural, rugged terrain and
limited financial resources that can reduce providers' interest in
investing on tribal lands, several tribes are moving toward owning or
developing their own telecommunications systems, using federal grants,
loans, or other assistance, and partnerships with the private sector. Some
are also focusing on wireless technologies, which can be less expensive to
deploy over rural, rugged terrain. Two tribes are bringing in wireless
carriers to compete with wireline carriers on price and service. In
addition, some tribes have developed ways to address the need for
technical training, and one has worked to expedite the tribal
decision-making process regarding rights-of-way approvals.
*** End of document. ***