HR-726-119
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 670.
Sponsored by Troy Downing (R-MT)
What it does
This bill would amend the Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2010, repealing the original Municipal, Rural, and Industrial (MR&I) water system provision and replacing it with a new MR&I Projects framework administered directly by the Crow Tribe. It would create a new MR&I Projects Account within the Crow Settlement Fund, extend a Yellowtail Dam-related deadline from 15 to 20 years, clarify that title to and operation of infrastructure built with these funds stays with the Tribe, and specify that the federal government has no obligation to pay for operation, maintenance, or replacement of MR&I projects.
Who benefits
The Crow Tribe, which gains direct control over planning, construction, and management of its water infrastructure, along with expanded allowable uses of settlement funds including land purchases with water rights. Tribal members who depend on domestic, municipal, and wastewater infrastructure would benefit from more flexible, tribally-managed project administration. Tribal administrators also gain a longer window (20 years) related to Yellowtail Dam provisions.
Who is hurt
No group appears to bear a significant direct burden, though federal taxpayers and the Department of the Interior are relieved of ongoing operation and maintenance obligations for MR&I projects, shifting that long-term financial responsibility onto the Tribe itself. If the Tribe's revenue or federal appropriations for the MR&I Projects Account prove insufficient, tribal members could face infrastructure funding shortfalls in the future.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this bill gives the Crow Tribe greater self-determination and administrative flexibility to build and manage its own water infrastructure, correcting inefficiencies in the original 2010 system-based approach. They contend that clarifying tribal title to infrastructure and extending the Yellowtail Dam deadline reflects lessons learned from over a decade of implementation and better serves the Tribe's long-term water security needs.
Opponents argue
Opponents might argue that shifting full operation, maintenance, and replacement responsibility to the Tribe without a corresponding guarantee of adequate ongoing federal funding could leave critical water infrastructure underfunded over time. They contend that repealing the original MR&I system structure removes federal oversight mechanisms that were designed to ensure accountability for how settlement funds are spent on infrastructure.