THIS APPEAL came before the Appeals Court from an order entered by Honorable Howard Bemer on June 25, 1991, ordering that:

    1. Sole custody, care and control of April Dennise Roll, a minor child, be awarded to Isabelle Florence Youpee, (Appellee).

    2. Dennis Roll (Appellant) shall have no visitation with the child until he, first, successfully complete a court-approved alcohol treatment program, and second, establishes an appropriate father/daughter relationship with the child.

    3. Appellant shall pay $350.00 per month as and for child support until the child reaches the age of 18 year of age or completes high school, whichever occurs later. This child support obligation shall be calculated back to the date of the child’s birth, with deductions allowed Appellant has actually paid in child support.

    4. Appellant shall obtain and maintain a life insurance policy on himself with a face value of $100,000.00, designating April Dennise Roll as the sole, non-revocable beneficiary.

    5. Appellant shall obtain and maintain a health insurance policy for the benefit of April Dennise Roll.

    ARGUED:    December 13, 1991         DECIDED:    January 17, 1992

    APPEARING FOR APPELLANT, DENNIS ROLL:  Mary L Zemyan, Attorney at Law, P.O. Box 1094, Wolf Point, Montana 59201.

   APPEARING FOR APPELLEE, ISABELLE FLORENCE ROLL:  Rene A. Martell, Attorney at Law, Montana Legal Services, 204 1st Avenue South, Wolf Point, Montana 59201.

    OPINION by Gerard M. Schuster, Chief Justice, joined by Gary James Melbourne, Associate Justice and Debra A. Johnson, Associate Justice.

    THE JUDGMENT IS REMANDED AS TO THE FOLLOWING:

    An amended petition filed on February 19, 1991 asked for child support from the date of the child’s birth. A response was filed on March 4, 1991.

    This matter was heard on April 24, 1991 before Chief Judge Howard Bemer. Petitioner was present with her counsel, Rene Martell; respondent appeared by himself. Judge Bemer ordered the parties to submit alcohol evaluations and homestudy reports.

    An order was issued on June 25, 1991. Notice of the entry of Judgment was sent to Dennis Roll on June 28, 1991. The petition for review and request for stay was filed on July 16, 1991.

    The child, APRIL DENNISE ROLL, has lived with her mother since birth. Dennis Roll had contact with the child until March of 1988 when the parties separated, but has had little contact with the child during the past three (3) years. There are disputed facts as to the reasons for the minimal recent contact. There is evidence on record regarding Appellant's history of alcohol abuse and DUI arrests.

    There was also disputed testimony regarding Appellant’s ability and/or motivation to provide child support, life insurance and medical payments.

    THE ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE COURT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. Whether there was substantial evidence to support the findings and order of the Tribal Court in regard to Appellant’s ability and/or motivation to provide child support, health insurance and life insurance.

2. Whether there was substantial evidence to support the findings and order that Appellant’s visitation should be conditioned as stated in the order.

I.

    In reviewing this Court’s standard of review in cases of this nature, 1 CCOJ §202 provides:

"The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals shall extend to all appeals from final orders and judgments of the Tribal Court. The Court of Appeals shall review all determinations of the Tribal Court on matters of law, but shall not set aside any factual determinations of the Tribal Court if such determinations are supported by substantial evidence...." (emphasis made)

    Judge Bemer made the following findings of fact in his order on this matter:

    The Tribal code on child support is as follows:

VI CCOJ 304(b):

... Where appropriate, the Tribal Court may also order that the non-custodial parent make periodic payments to cover a portion or all of the expenses of care and education of the child....

    The record here shows that Appellant, Dennis Roll, had a variety of jobs, and was capable of earning as high as $36,000.00 annually (TR., page 51 and 53). However, that wage experience was outside of his educational field of Agricultural Engineering (TR., page 50). The transcript also shows that the parties reported 1985 income (on W-2’s) was $11,737.00 (TR. page 52).

    We strongly feel that Appellant has a support obligation to his daughter. However, we do not agree with the Court's conclusion that the $36,000.00 figure should be the basis for the child support calculation, absent a clear showing that Appellant chooses to remain underemployed to minimize his support obligation, and that this is a justifiable figure to impute to determine the obligation.

    We therefore REMAND on Issue 1 to the Court for a hearing as to determine an equitable amount of support for Respondent to pay; and further, when the obligation should commerce.

    Appellant will be required, however, to pay a minimal support of $125.00 per month pending further order of the Court; and shall be given credit for support so paid in any retroactive order.

II.

    The Fort Peck Code provides under VI CCOJ 304(a):

    This Court has consistently held that the intent of the custody statute is to assure minor child frequent and continuing contact with both parents. IN RE THE CUSTODY OF R.F. AND J.F., MINORS, Fort Peck Appeals Court No. 80, 1990; BAUER v. BAUER, Fort Peck Appeals Court No. 59, 198; IN RE THE CUSTODY OF CHERISH MIRANDA YOUPEE, Fort Peck Appeals Court No. 143, 1992.

    Here, the record reflects that Appellant Dennis Roll has abused alcohol, but is not alcoholic. REF. evaluation of George Lehner, May 9, 1991. Appellant has had DUI arrests. (TR. 59).

... "to assure minor children frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing...." BAUER, page 13.

    Accordingly, we also remand for purpose of establishing reasonable guidelines for visitation purposes, including supervised visitation on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, if deemed necessary, and in the child’s best interest.

    We find that the record supports the Court’s orders regarding custody, life insurance requirements and health insurance, and these issues were not generally contested on appeal; we therefore affirm said orders.

    THEREFORE, the order of the Court is affirmed as to the following:

3. APPELLANT SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN A HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY FOR THE BENEFIT OF APRIL DENNISE ROLL.

    THEREFORE, the order of the Court is remanded as to the following:

    DATED this _____ day of January, 1992.

                                                        BY_________________________________
                                                            GERARD M. SCHUSTER, CHIEF JUSTICE

                                                        BY_________________________________
                                                            DEBRA A. JOHNSON ASSOCIATE JUSTICE

                                                        BY_________________________________
                                                            GARY JAMES MELBOURNE ASSOCIATE JUSTICE

    PER CURIAM:

    The issue of timeliness of filing s as to this appeal and will be addressed by the Court in a separate Opinion.

BY THE COURT OF APPEALS:

_________________________________
GERARD M. SCHUSTER, CHIEF JUSTICE