OPA

(Tulsa, Oklahoma) Senator Dewey F. Bartlett, R-Okla., today called for action by Congress on Indian legislation now pending.

Bartlett, the ranking minority member of the Senate Interior Subcommittee on Indian Affairs, in a speech before the 30th Annual Conven­tion of the National Congress of American Indians in Tulsa, Oklahoma, said, "To carry out a new policy self-determination for Indian tribes), the Administration drafted and submitted to the Congress seven proposals which were designed to implement the new policy he (President Nixon) had recently announced. That was in 1970. We are fast approaching the end of Calendar Year 1973, and we have yet to see any one of the proposals enacted into law. The Congress itself can accept responsibility for this fact.

Bartlett added, "I believe this Administration is trying to keep its promises--but Congress must act on the President I s proposals before this can happen."

He went on to say, "To simply undo the wrongs committed against Indian people is not enough. We must take whatever steps are necessary to insure the Indian people that they will not be accorded a repeat performance and in so doing, direct our efforts in such a manner as to improve upon and strengthen the services delivered to them, and further to insure that from this day forward, Indian people will play a vital role in all actions taken by the Federal Government on their behalf. "

Bartlett zeroed in on three pieces of legislation for special attention.

The injustices suffered by the Menominee people because of termination have been very clearly documented, and I feel very strongly that the Federal Government has no other alternatives but to abide by the wishes of the Menominee and reinstitute them as a federally recognized tribe," Bartlett stated. ­­

Bartlett added that he has introduced legislation to do just said, "I sincerely hope that the Congress, with the proven effects of such a policy fresh in their minds, will see fit to take expeditious action to repudiate this policy and replace it with one that expresses the wishes and desires of the Indian people."

On another front, Bartlett called for the establishment of an Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs in the Department of the Interior.

I feel very strongly that the proper place for that position is at a level that would insure a direct line of authority to and direct contact with the Secretary of the Interior," he said.

Bartlett contends that any obstacles, "human and otherwise” that interfere with that direct line of authority and direct contact with the Secretary of the Interior should be removed.

According to Bartlett, this appointee, "should be given full responsibility for the administration of programs of the BIA, after consultation with Indian tribes; should have final say subject to the Secretary of the Interior, on all matters pertaining to their operation.

After noting recently-nominated BIA Commissioner Mr. Morris Thompson's "dedication to serving faithfully the Indian people," Bartlett said, " it confirmed, he will need the full support and cooperation of all Indian people throughout these United States if he is to be success in achieving the stated goals of the Indian people "

Bartlett also mentioned a third piece of legislation which is desi6ned to moderate a comprehensive review of the policies, practices and structures of Federal agencies charged with protecting Indian resources and providing services to Indians; examine existing statutes and procedures; consider methods of strengthening tribal government, and secure adequate protection of fundamental rights from official arise.

Bartlett voiced his support of the concept of this legislation and said, a study of this scope is long overdue.

Bartlett said he had amended this bill to establish a private sector task force to conduct a management study of the BIA.

A study of this kind should be able to make recommendations which result in savings which would "swing the pendulum" in the direction of more appropriated funds reaching the reservation.

A similar study was made of state government operation during Bartlett's tenure as Oklahoma's Governor and resulted in "an annual savings of $20 million and a great increase in efficiency."

"It is this same kind of study that I envision for the BIA," he said Bartlett said he opposes legislation proposed by Senator James A. Abourezk, D-S .D., to require an annual authorization of appropriations for the BIA. "This bill could result in good programs expiring because of Congressional inaction or interest in other areas of responsibility Bartlett said.

added, “It is my strong feeling that enactment of this legislation would be a step backward in the Federal Government's efforts to improve services to Indian people, a. step which the Indians can ill afford.”

Speech of Marvin L. Franklin,

Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs,

At the Student-Faculty Center,

Oklahoma City University,

Oklahoma Education Association Convention, Indian Education Division,

October 19, 1973

I am greatly honored to have the opportunity to respond to your invitation to speak to thi1 distinguished group of Indian educators. It has been my pleasure to appear before other divisional of the Oklahoma Education Association in years gone by and I have participated in many of the annual meetings of the Association.

Many of you are aware that Oklahoma is my native state -­but few of you know that Oklahoma City University is my Alma Mater. For these two reasons I am especially pleased to be here. But most of all, I take this opportunity to pay tribute to you -- for it is you and your co-worker that have made Indian education the most successful and progressive system in the United States!

Your Secretary of the Interior, Rogers C. B. Morton shares that view and it is my great pleasure to extend to each of you his personal greetings. I have recently travelled with him to some of our reservation areas and shared his feelings of concern and compassion for the American Indian, particularly the youth in those matters of education and his economic future.

Too few in America really understand or appreciate the true role Indian education plays in the life of the Indian student or the Indian parent. It ii most unique -- and certainly a role without parallel in our modern society. It is difficult for those in the dominate culture of the United States, particularly in these affluent times, to understand the need for boarding schools -- or, the need for bilingual education. Fortunately the Indian community is well aware of the facts -- and I might say, grateful for the fact that their children have facilities which provide a home, comfortable surroundings, food and medical care in addition to academic achievement opportunities.

Since many of those in this division of the Oklahoma Education Association are teachers for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and in my official capacity I have observed the results of your endeavors, I want to congratulate each of you for the splendid work you are doing in the Indian School in Oklahoma. The Indian community is proud of what you have done, and are doing for our Indian youth in this great State. By any standard of measurement, your achievements have exhibited a competence and dedication that goes unexcelled in school administration and teaching performance. As professional educators, you have met your challenge to nourish young minds and develop talents that make good citizens for our State, and for our nation.

Your attendance at this annual meeting, as members of the Oklahoma Education Association, is further evidence of your concern and your desire to do an even better job of educating Indian students.

You can be proud of the achievements in Indian education. The 1970 census report, for example, revealed remarkable gains in the past decade. The number of high school graduates in the Indian community over 24-yeara of age had almost doubled. And perhaps, more significantly, the median year of schooling for the group between the ages of 20 to 24 was beyond the high-school range -- a median of 12.2 years.

According to the census report, the number of Indian college students doubled between 1960 and 1970. Bureau figures indicate an even greater increase! In 1960 only 612 Indian students received higher education assistance. In 1970 the number was 4,271. This year it is expected the Bureau will provide some $20-million and will assist approximately 15,000 students with grants for higher education.

The surge of Indian students onto the college campuses of this nation ii a significant indicator of the progress made in Indian education at all levels. Not only have new horizons been opened -­new ambitions have been kindled. Graduation from high school for the Indian student has been surpassed as a goal and ii now a steppingstone to higher education.

Evidence of a new era in Indian education is found in many forms -- the professions particularly. Many have become outstanding educators of the nation. Some have become leading technicians, especially in the field of medicine -- a few have achieved the distinction of a physician or surgeon. A good example is the field of law. Seven year ago there were only a few Indians in the legal profession.

Today, through a special law school program, funded by the Bureau and administered by the Univer1ity of New Mexico, more than 100 Indian student are enrolled in some 40 law schools throughout the country.

Our goal, of course, ii one that would acquire an adequate opportunity for the development of Indian lawyers, doctors, engineers, architects, educator and other professional to serve the needs of the American Indian and his communities.

In addition to the achievements on the part of Indian students as individuals there have been other accomplishments in recent years most worthy consideration.

First, there has been an important development in the role of the Indian parent. They are exercising an influential voice in the directing of educational programs for their children. Since 1969, Indian advisory school boards have been in existence at all federally operated schools. Special training is provided for school board members to increase their effectiveness.

The administration and operation of various components of education programs have been contracted to tribal groups, including, summer programs. Elementary and Secondary Education Act “Title” programs and in some areas, the administration of Johnson-O’Malley public school assistance funds.

A significant new development of the 1970’s has been the beginning of the first Indian operated community colleges.

All schools receiving Johnson-O’Malley funds from the Bureau of Indian Affairs are now required to have Indian education committees involved in the planning, development, and monitoring of the program for Indian children public schools. This alone has led to a greater general involvement in public school operations because we now see some 80 public school boards are predominantly Indian.

Finally, we see the trend of tribal groups expressing a desire to operate their own schools with funding by the Bureau under a contract agreement. Two of the requirements are a parent referendum indicating the community’s desired to operate its own school and tribal council resolution supporting this option. Today there are thirteen school operated by Indian communities and it is expected that other BIA schools will be turned over to tribal control in the future.

The general public and even some of us closer to the situation have difficulty comprehending the complexity of the Federal School System operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Geographically the schools are located from the Artie Circle to Southern Florida. There are 199 school serving more than 51,000 1tudent1, 76 are boarding schools and 121 are day school. The BIA education budgets is slightly over $200-aillion for the current year.

The President, the Congress, and indeed the Nation, are becoming increasingly aware of the needs of Indian people and are responsive to these needs. Special educational approaches and material, have been initiated, if not fully developed, Bilingual education is an essential element in some areas. Bicultural curriculum materials are equally important in other areas. Pre-school pilot programs and the establishment of special education schools or classes are a reality. Our goal -- yours, mine and those thousands of others involved in Indian Education, is to make the 701 1 the greatest period of achievement in the history of Indian education. And why not? With modern facilities, parental involvement, a cooperating private and public sector -- and moat of all with your enthusiastic leadership, we can give our Indian youth their greatest opportunity.

It would be an injustice to leave this forum without making a few remarks about the Bureau of Indian Affairs as it relates generally to the American Indian. Having headed an Indian Tribe for a number of year and being intimately familiar with many reservations prior to my duties an assistant to the Secretary, it has not been difficult to find the companion and understanding necessary to measure performance.

Just before my arrival in Washington the Bureau had suffered an unprecedented amount of disarray. The Commissioner had been dismissed, the top leadership had left, the building had been wrecked with records stolen or destroyed. Field offices and schools had been forced to seek protective measure -- and even tribal governments felt threatened. Wounded Knee, with its roots of unrest having been planted in the fall became a full bloomed confrontation at the time I assumed office •

There were four goals I had set for myself that seemed most important to secure the future for the Indian community:

A constitutional amendment to prevent the unilateral termination of federal services to a federally recognized lndian Tribe.

An improved financial condition for the American Indian by having a more responsive budget, revenue financing for physical improve­ment1, and a banking institution owned by Indians.

An intensive ten-year reservation renewal program that would not only improve reservation conditions but alleviate the chronic unem­ployment situation and develop turn-over dollar capabilities through the establishment of consumer goods and service outlets, and,

A thorough study of all the laws, codes, rules and regulations with a view to bringing them into harmony without modern education – our technological advances – and our present day need.

All but one of these goals are now a reality in some form of actual progress. A bill has been promised in the Senate for the agricultural amendment. The budget processes have been improved and the American Indian National Bank has been chartered with its opening scheduled for November 15, 1973. A bill has been introduced in the senate to establish a commission to revise all laws and regulations pertaining to Indians. Only the reservation renewal goal remains to be acted upon and model legislation is being drafted.

It has always been my belief and it continues to be my belief and it continues to be my belief that the Bureau of Indian Affairs is a “resource” of the American Indian. The Secretary of the Interior exercises his trust responsibilities entrusted to him by treaty, agreement or statute, but the important thing to remember is that our American Indian has the exclusive right to shape the destiny of the manner in which the many services shall be delivered. To this proposition I am totally dedicated and will resist all elements of society that tend to diminish this right.

Viewing the progression of events from today’s vantage point, it is clear to me that the complexity and magnitude of those functions conferred upon the Bureau of Indian Affairs commands the dedicated services of a very special group of people. I see in this room today an excellent sampling of that group. I urge you to continue the loyal dedication that you have so generously exhibited in the past and keep the image of the Indian youth ever before you. It is that youth that represents not only the future but the inheritance of a rich and meaningful culture. That future will be even more meaningful because of you. I wish you continued success.

It is indeed an honor TO represent the Secretary of the Interior at this 30th Annual Convention of the National Congress of American Indians.

I am also pleased to have the privilege of representing your Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Secretary Morton has requested me to convey his best wishes for the continued success of NCAI and extend his personal regards to Mr. Leon Cook, Mr. Charles E. Trimble, along with other officers and directors for the excellent work done in the past year.

It has been traditional during, the NCAI Convention to use this portion of the program to tell the Indian Community about the new goals and ambitions of Government --and how that new thrust will better serve his needs. This I will not do such rhetoric without performance is outmoded and totally unacceptable. Rather, I choose to define the resources and say to you, "How shall we use them jointly to better the individual lives of ~ American Indian?"

Note I have used the word "resources," and not without reason. The Bureau of Indian Affairs your resource --only have the exclusive right to use it. No other class of citizenship has an agency in Government that protects its property, educates its children, provides a variety of unique services and benefits, and serves as an advocate for both the individual and the collective body of individuals.

Needless to say, there are many, who by design or unwittingly, believe the Indian is not entitled to such preferred treatment. It does not take a master-mind to interpret the effects of ill-designed legislation --such as House Concurrent Resolution 108 which not only resulted in the termination of the Menominee’s a decade ago, but to this day remains on the books as expressing the sense of the Congress as favoring the termination of the special relationship of Indians to the Federal Government. Nor does it take a master-mind to recognize the insidious encroachment upon the property and individual Indian rights in the many Federal Court cases each year. And no one need to be reminded of the abundant conflict of interest situations that arise in the complexity of bureaus and departments in our Executive Branch of Government.

I cannot emphasize too strongly the urgent need for to protect resource --and here are a few reasons why:

The general public does not have the slightest concept of the real functions of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Take for instance the matter of those who are served. How many in these United States really understand that the Bureau is restricted to serving only those Indian tribes that have a special relationship with the Federal Government.? And this is by statute! Thus, only about one-half the total Indian population--of the United States is eligible for BIA services.

How many in the general public know that the Bureau of Indian Affairs does not provide the health care, hospitalization and medical needs of the American Indian? That this is a function of Health, Education, and Welfare Department.

Who in the general public can recognize the difference in responsibility of the many Government agencies that also share in the delivery of services to the Indian Tribes -- Department of Commerce, through its Economic Development Administration, that has had its share of success and failure on Indian reservations --Office of Economic Opportunity with its multiplicity of social programs --Housing and Urban Development with its faltering commitments for Indian housing?

Nor is it strange to us to find those that discover for the first time that the BIA is not the "lawyer" for the Indian people --that the Justice Department has that exclusive jurisdiction and the decision to litigate for the protection of Indian rights rests primarily in their hands.

And I doubt seriously that any of us could clearly define the parallel or overlapping roles of Health, Education, and Welfare in the "Title Programs" as they relate to Indian education.

I mention these things with a sense of urgency --urgency because this failure to understand on the part of the general public is placing your resource in jeopardy.

If you studied as many editorials, read as many articles, and answered as much Congressional correspondence as I do, you would be equally concerned. I welcome the inquiries of the Indian constituency of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, no matter what channel of communications is used, because their questions arise from a knowledgeable experience. But I must say with all sincerity that the general public equates the Bureau of Indian Affairs as that all embracing arm of Government and heaps its wrath upon that agency for all commissions or omissions, real or imagined, that relate to the Indian. This is damaging to your resource.

Only the Congress can extend services to the non-federally recognized tribes, or to those vast numbers of American Indian citizens who were never associated with an organized tribe. The urban Indian, in many cases unjustly separated from the base of services, is in dire need of Federal attention --much more than the casual courtesy services permitted by statute to the BIA. What are some of those resources that ~ need to be protecting? As complex as they are, the major categories are:

1. The capability of protecting the property and rights of Indian individuals and tribes delineated as "trust responsibilities" as defined in the treaties and statutes, and broadly interpreted by use.

2. The capability of providing education to the Indian youth and Indian adult.

3. The delivery of those Indian services included in such broad categories as the development of tribal government, welfare, community services and general tribal operations.

4. The development of reservation resources, both natural and human, creating economic betterment, job opportunities and skill development.

5. The constant surveillance of legislation that affects individuals, tribes and Indian rights, services, and resources. These services are the real mission of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. And in addition, this resource has a host of technicians that are unequalled in this country for their expertise and dedication to assist Indians. Bill Veeder, for example, is a renowned architect in the planning and adjudication of Indian water rights. We are indeed fortunate to have this type of capability --but what a pity his competence as a lawyer cannot be used in the courtroom except in an advisory capacity when the adjudication actually takes place, merely because that is not a function of the BIA.

Procrastination in the Federal Government in matters pertaining to the American Indian is not an exclusive trademark of the Executive Branch. The Congress has had important legislative proposals before it for consideration for the past three years that would permit the Indian Community to achieve the goals it sets for itself.

The Indian Trust Counsel Authority would, for example, provide independent legal counsel and representation on behalf of Indians and Alaska Natives in the assertion of their natural resource rights. Such an authority is needed to remedy a conflict of interest on the part of the Federal Government.

The Authority would be under the direction of a three-man Board of Directors, two of whom must be Indians.

Amending the Johnson-O'Malley Act to authorize the Department of the Interior to channel funds appropriated under the Act directly to Indian tribes and communities. This amendment will add new authority to contract directly with Indian tribes, bands, groups, or communities who run their own educational institutions, enabling the Secretary to arrange for direct Indian involvement in Indian education, agricultural assistance, and social welfare.

A proposal to afford Indians greater control over activities conducted on their reservations concerning the areas of livestock trespass traders.

Enacted, this would place with tribal governments the ultimate decision as to whether Federal law, or their own trading ordinances, would be the regulating authority on the reservations.

A Bill providing for the assumption of the control and operation by Indian tribes and communities of certain programs and services provided for them by the Federal Government.

This proposal would enable any Indian tribe, band, group or community to request and assume control of any program or service now extended to it by the Bureau of Indian Affairs of the Department of the Interior or the Indian Health Service program of the Public Health Service of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

As companion legislation, we propose that Civil Service employees be allowed transfer with the program or service and retain the coverage that they now enjoy as civil servants.

The Indian Financing Act that would improve the revolving loan fund and authorize loan guarantees to commercial banks for Indian projects.

­ I would most sincerely suggest that the Senate Subcommittee on Indian Affairs address itself to the pressing " problem of "equal treatment" for all our American Indian citizens by recommending legislation to extend Federal Services to those Indian tribes not now served by Government, and particularly to those urban Indians who are in need of health and housing services.

The proposal of this committee to establish a commission to study Indian needs and services available is laudable and should be enacted quickly. This is the kind of positive approach Indians need from this committee and I urge your support of the proposal.

I have always achieved success by setting goals and making every effort a move toward reaching such goals. When I came to the Interior I announced four objectives:

A constitutional amendment to prevent the termination of services to a federally recognized tribe by that unilateral action of-any branch of Government.

A better financial posture for Indians by an improved budget process, revenue financing and an Indian banking system.

A massive Indian Reservation Renewal program that would provide $2.5 billion over a ten-year period to improve reservations, eliminate unemployment and create a gross national product for reservations by developing the need for, and capability in the delivery of consumer goods and services at the reservation level.

--A revision of all the laws, rules, regulations, codes and manuals that affect the delivery of services and protection of rights and resources.

It is with a great degree of pride that I can say that Senator Abourezk has agreed to introduce a bill in the Senate addressing the subject of a constitutional amendment. Senator Domenici has introduced legislation to create a commission to review and revise laws pertaining to Indians. There will be an improved budget that will reflect the priorities established by the Indian tribes; package funding to specific tribes on a pilot basis, which would give tribes more control of the priority of the use of BIA funds on their reservation and which would be keyed into other sources of revenue; revenue financing is now being used in isolated cases; and the American Indian National Bank will be opened on November 15. It is my sincere hope that model legislation being drafted for ~n Indian Reservation Renewal Act will be received favorably.

Let us use our organizations to achieve goals.

Let us use our individual talents to develop skills.

Let us be tolerant and hear the other out.

--And above all --let us respect our elders and be active in the teaching and guidance of our youth. Only then will we have the necessary elements to preserve the rich heritage and culture this country --and, in fact, this world needs for its future security.

Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs Marvin L. Franklin today announced the publication of a new Bureau of Indian Affairs booklet on the current status of Indian education.

Indian Education: Steps to Progress in the 70's is a 60 page booklet that gives a comprehensive outline of the numerous Bureau of Indian Affairs programs underway to raise the American Indians' level of education.

Commenting on the new publication and the information it contains, Franklin said: "Education is one of the most important of our activities. History, someone has said, is a race between education and catastrophe. The Indian education program is designed, with the Indian's help, to meet the Indian's educational needs. We hope to move forward with the Indians to the promise of greater advances in the 1970's.

"Children of Indians from tribes recognized by the Federal Government are for the most part educated in public schools (68% of them in 1970). For the approximately 25% that are receiving their educational instruction in Bureau of Indian Affairs operated schools this pamphlet will be very informative, as well as for those children in public schools assisted by grants from the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

This booklet will help acquaint the reader with Federal education programs serving Indian students and the challenge that faces the Indian community and the Government to forward education in the 1970's.

Included in the illustrated booklet are details of programs presently in use in Indian schools and public schools which have a large Indian enrollment. Some of the topic headings are: Federal schools, boarding schools, colleges and universities, adult education, teacher training, and pre-school programs. Also included are explanations of different teaching techniques such as bilingual education (with English as a second language), model schools, open classrooms, and special education.

The booklet is available from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D.C., at a price of $1.05. The' stock number for the publication is 2402-0032.

Assistant to the Secretary office "Interior' for Indian Affairs Marvin L. Franklin today announced the award of a $2.3 million contract to expand the facilities of Sherman Indian School, Riverside, California. This is the second phase of a $5.2 million effort to modernize the school

The contract was awarded to Buster and Schuler Construction, lnc. Redland, California.

A construction program for the 72-year-old school began last year. At that time, a contract to build administrative and academic facilities was let for $2.9 million. When construction is completed, the school will be able to accommodate 1,000 instead of the 800 it has served

"Education of Indian people is a critical need,” Franklin said. "We cannot expect Indian young people to progress beyond their parents in yesterday’s school plant. “

The present contract --for the second phase of construction --is for the building of a physical education center, a physical education laboratory, a fine arts center, and to remodel the existing buildings that make up the student center and warehouses

Secretary of the Interior Rogers C. B. Morton has appointed William L. Rogers as his Special Assistant for the 10 - state Missouri Basin Region, with headquarters in the Denver Federal Center. The post has been vacant and the appointment is effective immediately.

Rogers, 52, is a professional engineer who joined Interior in June, 1970, to serve as Deputy Under Secretary. He has handled a variety of top-level assignments in the Department, serving most recently as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs.

"Mr. Rogers' professional training and his extensive background in Interior programs make him an excellent choice for this new assignment," Secretary Morton said. "Natural resources challenges in the Missouri Basin include balancing the pressures to develop new fuel supplies from such sources as oil shale and low sulfur coal deposits, with a mandate to protect the high quality natural environ­ment. They also include new concepts in land use and water resources management, as well as services to the area's large Indian population.

"As Special Assistant to the Secretary, Mr. Rogers will function as a direct extension of my office in the Missouri Basin region. He will coordinate the many activities of the Department of the Interior in this Region and assist the Regional Directors of our various Bureaus in their efforts to serve the people in the 10 Missouri Basin States. He will provide a point of contact for other Federal agencies, State and local agencies wherever my office can assist in solving problems of the region. I will look to him for recommendations of steps we might take to improve Interior's service to the region," Secretary Morton added.

The Missouri Basin Region includes the states of Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.

Before joining Interior, Rogers was an executive in the aero jet-General Corporation in Sothern’s California for more than 27 years. He held numerous positions in the company -- from assistant department chief to vice president and general manager of its electronics division.

Rogers was born in Pendleton, Oregon, on March 19, 1921. He attended junior college in Boise, Idaho, and is a graduate of the California Institute of Tech­nology. He is a Fellow Member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, a life member of the Navy League and belongs to Tau Beta Pi -­national engineering honor society -- and many other professional organizations.

He lived in San Marino, California, before moving to Washington, D.C. three years ago. He will make his home in Denver.

Secretary of the Interior Rogers C. B. Morton today called President Nixon's nomination today, of Morris Thompson! 34, of Juneau, Alaska, to be Commissioner of Indian Affairs "a key step in assuring constructive progress in helping our Indian citizens move forward."

"Morris Thompson, an Indian himself, will bring to the Bureau of Indian Affairs the professional qualifications and leadership which are needed to meet the urgent challenges facing the Indian people today," Secretary Morton said.

"We have begun to move and move in a very orderly way to upgrade our delivery system and our service to the Indians and I think the time has been well-spent in our search for exactly the right man for this job," Morton added.

Thompson is an Athabascan Indian, born in Tanana, Alaska, September 11, 1939. On March 1, 1971, he was named by then Commissioner of Indian Affairs Louis R. Bruce as the Alaska Area Director of the Bureau. Thompson was the first Alaska Native to be Alaska Area Director and was the youngest man ever to be named to a BIA Area Director post. He will also be the youngest man to serve as Commissioner.

Prior to his Alaska assignment, Thompson had served in the Department of the Interior as an assistant to Commissioner Bruce and a special assistant for Indian Affairs to former Secretary Walter J. Hickel.

Thompson attended the University of Alaska, majoring in civil engineering with a minor in political science. He was graduated from the RCA Institute of Technology in Los Angeles in 1965 and from 1965 to 1967 he worked as a technician at the RCA satellite tracking facility at Gilmore Creek near Fairbanks, Alaska. While employed there he served as chairman of the board of the Fairbanks Native Association. In 1967 and 1968 he served as deputy director for rural development for the State of Alaska and in 1968 and 1969 he was executive secretary of the NORTH Commission which advised the Governor of Alaska on matters relating to the development of the Arctic regions in northern Alaska. Thompson is married and has three children.

Thompson succeeds Louis R. Bruce, whose resignation as Commissioner was announced December 8, 1972, and became effective January 20, 1973. On February 7, 1973, Secretary Morton announced the appointment of Marvin L. Franklin to the new position of Assistant to the Secretary for Indian Affairs. Since his appointment, Franklin, who reports directly to the Secretary, has been responsible for Department programs concerning Indian and Alaska Native people.

WASHINGTON. D.C.--Senator James Abourezk today asked Interior Secretary Rogers C. B. Morton to take immediate personal charge of the Bureau of Indian Affairs until a commissioner of that agency is legally appointed. Abourezk is chairman of the Senate Interior Subcommittee on Indian Affairs.

Abourezk said that the intervention or the Interior Secretary is required immediately to stop the BIA from going ahead with a reorganization plan which is being implemented "prematurely, illegally and without realistic involvement of the Indian tribes."

Abourezk said that acting BIA commissioner Marvin L. Franklin has issued a memorandum purporting to carry out his reorganization plan.

Last month the Senator cited an opinion set forth by the Law Division of the Library of Congress that Franklin has been acting illegally as head or the BIA for six months. That opinion declared that for Franklin, or anyone else to serve as BIA head the President must submit his name for Senate confirmation within thirty days.

"If' Mr. Franklin is to continue to make decisions regarding the Bureau of' Indian Affairs why hasn't his nomination been sub­mitted so we can get on with confirmation hearings?" Abourezk asked Morton.

The Senator said that the Interior Subcommittee was advised that a steering committee had been set up by Secretary Morton to direct any reorganization efforts, but a memorandum dated August 17 reports that the committee has not reached any conclusions on its review.

­­­ "Many tribes have told me of their opposition to the entire reorganization plan. The Interior Department pledged to the committee that it would withhold this reorganization until the Indian tribes had an opportunity to be realistically involved.

"I have repeatedly requested that reorganization be delayed until these tribes can be realistically involved and until we have completed our hearings. Despite Interior Depart­ment officials pledging cooperation with the committee, Franklin continues to proceed with this reorganization."

"I strongly urge your immediate action," the Abourezk letter concluded, "in putting a stop to these actions, reprimanding those who are acting without proper authority and taking personal charge of the Bureau of Indian Affairs until such time as a commissioner is legally appointed."

NOTE TO EDS: A copy of Abourezk's letter to Morton is attached.

Honorable Rogers C. B. Morton

Secretary of the Interior

Department of the Interior

Washington, D. C. 20240

Dear Hr. Secretary:

A memorandum to all Bureau of Indian Affairs employees from Marvin L. Franklin which purports to carry out Mr. Franklin's reorganization plan, has come to my attention. That memorandum, dated August 17, 1973, is extremely ill-advised for the following reasons:

1. Mr. Franklin's authority to reorganize is very much in doubt. In spite .of the opinion of the Interior Solicitor which, although disagreeing with the previous Library of Congress opinion, failed to bring in any new facts or law and reached a conclusion that has very little if any documented support. If Mr. Franklin is to continue to make decisions regarding the Bureau of Indian Affairs, why hasn’t the nomination for Commissioner been submitted so we can get on with his confirmation hearings?
2. We were advised that the Steering Committee, composed of Interior officials and established by you would direct any effort toward recognition. The August 17 memorandum states that the Steering Committee has not reached a conclusion. Therefore, Mr. Franklin is acting beyond the scope of his claimed authority and his prior assurance to the Committee that these decisions would not be made by the Bureau staff alone by prematurely implementing the reorganization.
3. There is no indication that there has been any realistic involvement of Indian tribes in this reorganization nor has there been any approval by the tribes. In fact many tribes have notified me of their opposition to the whole package and requested that I take stronger action to assure that the reorganization was not considered. Information coming to me was that the previous plan had been set aside and that Mr. Sid Freeman had joined your staff to begin a rather thorough analysis of the present organization with the intention of designing a plan more compatible with Indians' needs and desires.
4. When your Department testified before us on the Authorization hearings your witness said that the Bureau was willing to cooperate with the Committee at all times. I have repeatedly requested your withholding this particular reorganization until you had consulted with Indian people and we had an opportunity to complete our headings. Mr. Franklin action flies in the dace of that request.
5. In spite of the stay in the “Manceri Decision” by the Supreme Court, many very capable Indian employees are being pushed aside while non-Indians are being placed in charge of the programs those Indians have previously directed.

In Summary, this appears to be a bureaucracy acting beyond the law. To this I must strongly protest.

I strongly immediate action in putting a stop to those actions, reprimand hose who are acting without proper authority and take personal charge of the Bureau of Indian Affairs until such time as a Commissioner is legally appointed.

Thanking you in advance for your cooperation, I remain

Sincerely,

James Abourezk

United States Senator

Distribution of Indian Claims Commission judgments totaling over

$5.5 million awarded to the Miami Indians of Oklahoma and Indiana, will be made beginning about July 19, Marvin L. Franklin, Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, announced today.

The payment, totaling awards in several dockets made to the Miamis, represents the difference in what the tribe received for lands ceded in Indiana in the 1800's and their actual fair value. Funds to cover the awards have been appropriated and on deposit since 1969, and are being paid out under an Act of Congress of June 2, 1972, authorizing distribution.

"A total of 5,078 Miamis will be eligible for payment,” Franklin stated. ''Each individual share is expected to be about $1,100. 11

Checks to individual Miamis will be processed through the Treasury Department's regional disbursing office in Denver and mailed directly to each person whose name and address appears on the final roll of those eligible to share in the award. Shares for Miami members under 18 years of age will be placed in minors' trust accounts.

Preparation of the final roll has been underway in the Muskogee Area of' the Bureau of Indian Affairs since passage of the distribution Act about a year ago.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN:

The President has recent­ly received a number of letters concerning the pro­posed Trans-Alaska pipe­line. He has asked me to share with you our view of some of the issues raised.

Now that the Supreme Court has declined to review the Court of Appeals decision in the Alaska Pipeline case, Congress must enact new right-of-way legisla­tion before I can authorize construction of any major pipeline across the public lands. Prompt adoption of such legislation is required by our overall national in­terest. It is also in our na­tional interest that the Alaska pipeline be built as soon as possible and that the Congress not force a delay of this project while further consideration is given to a pipeline through Canada.

The United States is faced with a serious imbalance between domestic energy sup-ply and demand. Almost every region of our country and every sector of our economy is affected. Last year we imported 1.7 billion barrels of foreign oil at a cost in first-round balance of payments outflows of ap­proximately $6 billion. The President will, in the near future, address a special message to the Congress on the entire question of nation­al energy policy.

Despite all the efforts we can and must make to in­crease our domestic resource base, by 1980 we will prob­ably have to import about 4 billion barrels of oil with first-round balance of pay­ments outflows of about $16.0 billion, in the absence of oil from the North Slope of Alaska. The Alaska pipe­line will not avoid the necessity to purchase foreign oil, but it will reduce the amount we have to buy.

In the past few months, we have witnessed difficulties occasioned by too, large unfavorable balance of payments and too large an accumulation of dollars abroad. Because we must purchase abroad every bar­rel of oil that we do not get from the North Slope, for the next 10-20 years at least, I am fully convinced that it is in our national interest to get as much Alaska oil as possible delivered to the U.S. market as soon as possible. I am equally con­vinced that prompt construc­tion of a Trans-Alaskan pipeline is the best available way to accomplish both of these objectives.

Several of the letters we have received advocate that we abandon the Trans Alaska route in favor of a pipeline through Canada or at least delay the Alaska pipeline until we can con­duct further environmental studies of a Canadian route and initiate intensive nego­tiations with the Canadian government. In support of this position, it is argued that a Trans-Canadian pipe­line would be both environ­mentally and economically superior to a Trans-Alaska route, and that in view of the recent decision in the pipeline case, it is now quite likely that a pipeline could be built more quickly through Canada than through Alaska.

Let me explain why I dis­agree with these points.

First, a Canadian route would not be superior from an environmental point of view. No Canadian route has been specified. But the environmental impact statement prepared in connection with the Alaska route con­sidered various possible Canadian routes, and from the information available it is possible to make a judgment about the relative en­vironmental merits of the various Canadian routes and the proposed Alaska route. The Alaska and Canada routes are equal in terms of their effect on land based wildlife and on surface and ground water. However, it is clear that any pipeline through Canada would involve more unavoidable en­vironmental damage than the Alaska route. Because the Canadian route is about 4 times as long, it would affect more wilderness, dis­rupt more wildlife habitat, cross almost twice as much permafrost, and necessitate use of three or four times as much gravel that has to be dug from the earth; and it would obviously use about four times as much land.

The potential environmen­tal damage of these alter­natives is more difficult to assess. The two routes are approximately equivalent with respect to risks from slope failure and perma­frost. A Canadian route would not cross as much seismically active terrain or require a marine leg. It would, however, involve many more crossings of large rivers, which, experi­ence proves, are a major source of pipeline damage and, thus, environmental damage. River crossings pre­sent difficult construction problems; and the main hazard during operation comes from floods which scour out the river bed and bank, and if large enough, may expose the pipe to buffeting from boulders and swift currents and, thence, rupture. It is generally the rule that the wider the river, the greater the risks.

The environmental risks involved in the Alaska route are insurmountable. They be guarded against. The environmental and technical stipulations that I attach to the Alaska pipeline permit will assure that this pipeline is de­signed to withstand the larg­est earthquake that has ever been experienced in Alaska; it will be designed and con­structed more carefully than many buildings in known earthquake zones, such as Los Angeles and San Fran­cisco. Moreover, we are in­sisting that operation of the maritime leg be safer than any other maritime oil transport system now in operation. If our West Coast markets don't receive their oil from Alaska in U.S. tankers that comply with the requirements we are impos­ing, their oil will probably be imported in foreign flag tankers that are built and operated to much lower standards.

It is important to recog­nize that while we can go far to study and control the environmental risks that are involved in an Amer­ican-owned transportation system on American soil, we have no jurisdiction to take comparable actions on Cana­dian soil. I cannot, as re­quested in some of the let­ters, "immediately begin comprehensive environmen­tal studies of a Canadian pipeline route" because such an action would encroach on foreign sovereignty. I can­not order the more than 3,000 core samples in Can­ada of the type that were made of the Alaska route. I cannot even order a simple survey.

Our environmental impact study was based on the best information available about Canada. I believe it would be contrary to our national interests to delay this matter further by seeking additional detailed information about a route that has not been requested or designated by any of the companies or governments involved.

Second, it is clear that from the viewpoint of our national interest, as distin­guished from the interest of any single region, the Trans Alaskan route is economi­cally preferable. The United States Government has had a number of discussions with responsible Canadian officials about a possible pipeline through Canada. Some of these discussions w e r e through the State Depart­ment, and one year ago I per­sonally met with Mr. Donald MacDonald, the Canadian Minister of Mines, Energy and Resources. Responsible Canadian officials, at these ­­ meetings and in subsequent policy statements, have made it clear that there are cer­tain conditions that the gov­ernment of Canada would impose on any pipeline through Canada. These are:

(1) a majority of the equity interest in the line would have to be Canadian (in this connection, ownership by a Canadian subsidiary of an American company would not qualify as Canadian own­ership); (2) the manage­ment would have to be Canadian; (3) a major portion ( at least 50 % ) of the capac­ity of the line would have to be reserved for the transpor­tation of Canadian-owned oil, with the primary objec­tive being to carry Canadian oil to Canadian-not United States-markets; and (4) at all times preference would be given to Canadian-owned and controlled groups during the construction of the proj­ect and in supplying mate­rials. Since our meetings with the Canadians, these four re­quirements have been reiter­ated by them many times in public statements, and we have never had any indica­tion that their insistence on them has lessened. In fact, recent pronouncements from Canada suggest these four elements are more important than ever to the Canadian Government. The .question, then, is not simply whether Canada is willing to have a pipeline built through its ter­ritory (although no Cana­dian official has ever said it is willing), but also whether the four requirements Can­ada would impose are ac­ceptable in light of the United States national in­terest.

These four requirements are probably reasonable from the point of view of Canada's national interests. They are unacceptable from the point of view of our national in­terests when we have the al­ternative of a pipeline through Alaska that will be built by American labor and will deliver its full capacity of American-owned oil to our markets. The Alaska route would be economically supe­rior from our point of view even if we could be assured of getting for our market all the Canadian oil a Trans- Canada pipeline would carry, because of the balance of payments costs we would incur by importing addi­tional foreign-owned oil. There is a prospect of even worse consequences from a Canadian pipeline. Recent estimates by the Canadian Energy Board show that Canada's demand for oil from her western provinces will soon equal or exceed production; and, unless ma­jor new sources are discov­ered, the eventual result will be the cessation of Canadian exports of oil to the United States. The seriousness of this developing situation was demonstrated just last month, when Canada imposed controls on the export of crude oil.

Third, even though the re­cent Court of Appeals de­cision has caused delay and the Supreme Court has re­fused to review the case, it is clear that a Trans-Alaska pipeline can be built much more quickly than a Trans Canadian line. The companies who own the North Slope oil have not indicated a de­sire to build through Canada. Before an- application for a Canadian route could be ap­proved, a number of time-consuming steps would be necessary that have already been accomplished for the Alaskan route : detailed en­vironmental and engineer­ing investigations, including thousands of core holes, would be required prior to design ; a complex, specific project description would have to be developed; fol­lowing that, another U.S. en­vironmental impact state­ment would have to be pre­pared for the portion (at least 200 miles) of the line in Alaska and its extensions in the "lower 48" states; per­mits from the provincial and National Energy Boards of Canada would have to be re­quested, reviewed, and ap­proved; and Canadian na­tive claims would probably have to be resolved, a process that took years in the United States. Moreover, specific arrangements be­tween the U.S. and Canadian governments would be neces­sary to protect U. S. national interests and provide an op­erating regime for this international pipeline. Finally, the task of arranging the financing of a Trans-Canada line would be extremely diffi­cult. The capital required to meet the condition of ma­jority Canadian equity own­ership would strain Canadian financial sources and final­ization of new financial ar­rangements could take years to complete. Whether all these steps are even pos­sible, however, must be viewed in the context of the political and environmental controversy in Canada about the wisdom and feasibility of a Canada pipeline and the recently repeated position of the Canadian Government that it has "no commitment to a northern pipeline at this stage."

In contrast, the only two remaining steps required to commence construction of the Trans-Alaskan route are for the Congress to grant me authority to issue permits necessary for a pipeline of this size and for the Courts to determine that the en­vironmental impact state­ment complied with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. Both steps are also required for a pipeline in Canada, because the recent Court of Appeals decision applies to the U.S. portion of any line through Canada.

I sincerely hope that a great deal of oil is discov­ered in Northern Canada and that these finds together with increased reserves of Alaskan oil soon justify a second pipe­line, or other delivery sys­tems, to bring oil, natural gas or both through Canada to our Midwest. It is in our interest to increase our se­cure sources of foreign oil as well as to increase our domestic resource base. How­ever, for all the reasons listed above, I do not believe it is in our interest to delay the Trans-Alaska pipeline any longer than required by the Court of Appeals decision and I do not believe it is now in our interest to re­quest negotiations with the Canadian government for a pipeline route through their country.

By stressing so strongly my belief that a Trans Alaska pipeline is in our national interest, I do mean to imply that we are insensitive to the energy re­quirements of the Midwest. The Administration has ta­ken, and will continue to take, such steps as are nec­essary to assure that these requirements are met; just last week, for example, oil import restrictions were lifted to bring additional oil to the. Midwest.

Moreover, some of the ad­vantages, to the Midwest that are claimed for a Trans­Canada pipeline will not, in fact, occur. For example, an oil pipeline through Canada will not affect fuel prices in that area, because price is set by the much greater vol­ume of oil coming north from the Gulf of Mexico and North Slope oil would pro­vide only a portion of the total Midwest demand. Nor is it true, as some claim, that the West Coast does not need nor cannot use all of the oil delivered by a Trans-Alaska pipeline. In 1972, demand in that area was 2.3 million barrels per day (MMbpd of which 1.5 million barrel was obtained from domestic resources and 0.8 million bar­rels was imported (0.3 MMbpd from Canada, 0.1 MMbpd from other Western Hemisphere sources and 0.4 MMbpd from relatively in­secure Eastern Hemisphere sources). The best available projections show that by 1980, and for subsequent years, the West Coast de­mand will exceed domestic production and Canadian ex­ports available in that area by at least the capacity of the Trans-Alaska pipeline.

As much as I would like to assure the Midwest even a marginal increase in the security of its total energy supply, it is more important now to assure that the total economic and energy secu­rity interests of all the people of the U.S. are served by getting as much Ameri­can-owned oil as possible to the U.S. market as soon as possible:

I hope the views expressed, in this letter will be helpful to you in your consideration of this issue.

Yours Sincerely,

Rogers C. B. Morton Secretary of the Interior