Key Takeaways
- •Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) examined S.953, a $5 billion settlement providing water security for three Arizona tribes and establishing the first permanent reservation for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
- •Buu Nygren (President, Navajo Nation) testified that one-third of Navajo households lack running water, arguing the settlement is a cost-effective alternative to decades of expensive federal litigation.
- •Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) pressed Scott Cameron (Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, U.S. Department of the Interior) on a funding gap, confirming existing funds cannot cover S.953.
- •While both parties affirmed the federal trust responsibility to tribes, members expressed concern over the $13 billion total cost of pending settlements and the lack of a dedicated funding source.
- •Congress must determine how to fund authorized settlements as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds deplete, with Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) planning legislation to create a stable, dedicated funding source.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Hearing Analysis
Overview
The Senate Indian Affairs Committee held an oversight hearing on March 11, 2026, to examine federal policies governing Indian water rights settlements, with a specific focus on S.953, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. Chaired by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Vice Chairman Brian Schatz (D-HI), the hearing addressed the massive backlog of unfunded tribal water settlements and the specific needs of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. The central tension of the hearing involved the federal government’s trust responsibility to provide "wet water" (actual infrastructure) versus the significant fiscal challenge of funding settlements that now total over $13 billion in pending claims.
Key Testimony
The primary legislative focus, S.953, introduced by Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), seeks to resolve decades of litigation in Northeastern Arizona. The bill carries an estimated federal cost of $5.1 billion. It would quantify water rights for the three tribes, authorize the construction of a major pipeline to deliver drinking water, and ratify a 26-year-old treaty to establish a permanent reservation for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. Scott Cameron, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science at the U.S. Department of the Interior, testified that while the administration supports the goals of the settlement, it has "real concerns" regarding the $5 billion price tag. Cameron noted that the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) currently faces a significant funding gap, as the $2.5 billion provided by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is nearly exhausted, and the Reclamation Water Settlement Fund only provides $120 million annually through 2029.
Tribal leaders provided emotional and data-driven testimony regarding the necessity of the settlement. Dr. Buu Nygren, President of the Navajo Nation, testified that one in three Navajo households lacks running water, forcing families to haul water over 30 miles at an average cost of $600 per month. President Nygren highlighted a major compromise in the updated bill: the tribes agreed to limit water leasing to 17,050 acre-feet per year—half of what was previously used by the now-closed Navajo Generating Station (NGS)—to appease concerns from Upper Basin states. Lamar Keevama, Chairman of the Hopi Tribe, emphasized that the settlement would protect shared groundwater and provide the first reliable source of renewable water for the Hopi people, who have been "landlocked" by the federal government. Johnny Lehi Jr., Vice President of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, testified that his tribe remains the only federally recognized tribe in Arizona without an exclusive reservation, a status S.953 would finally rectify by ratifying a 2000 land treaty with the Navajo Nation.
Overview
The hearing also touched on broader regional water issues. Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) advocated for the Northern Montana Water Security Act to settle the rights of the Fort Belknap Indian Community. He noted that the Milk River, which serves as the lifeblood for Montana’s "High Line" agricultural region, is over-leveraged and relies on 100-year-old infrastructure. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) pressed the Department of the Interior on the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project, expressing frustration over funding delays and the need for a stable, mandatory funding source for all settlements. Sen. Lujan announced he would soon introduce legislation to create a dedicated funding stream to ensure the federal government meets its settlement obligations without relying on unpredictable annual appropriations.
Key Testimony
A significant policy debate emerged regarding "inter-basin transfers." S.953 would allow the Navajo and Hopi to lease Upper Basin Colorado River water to users in the Lower Basin within Arizona. While some Upper Basin states expressed concern over the precedent this might set, President Nygren and Mr. Cameron noted that the Navajo Nation is uniquely situated in both basins, making the situation a "one-off" rather than a broad policy shift. Mr. Cameron stated that the Department of the Interior supports the flexibility for tribes to lease their water to realize its full economic value.
Overview
The committee members and witnesses largely agreed that negotiated settlements are preferable to the "uncertainty and cost" of litigation. However, the path forward remains complicated by the sheer scale of the required investment. Sen. Murkowski noted that S.953 alone is double the amount Congress allocated for all settlements in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The hearing concluded with a commitment from the Department of the Interior to work with the committee on "creative" funding solutions, such as annual payments rather than upfront lump sums, to address the $13 billion liability.
Organizations & Entities
Organizations and Entities: - Navajo Nation: Represented by President Buu Nygren; the tribe is a primary beneficiary of S.953 and is seeking $5 billion for water infrastructure and rights. - Hopi Tribe: Represented by Chairman Lamar Keevama; the tribe is a party to the S.953 settlement and seeks to secure renewable water rights and infrastructure. - San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe: Represented by Vice President Johnny Lehi Jr.; the settlement would ratify their land treaty and establish their first exclusive reservation. - U.S. Department of the Interior: Represented by Scott Cameron; the agency expressed support for the settlement's goals but raised significant concerns about the $5.1 billion cost. - Bureau of Reclamation (BOR): Discussed as the agency responsible for constructing the pipelines and managing the Water Settlement Fund. - State of Arizona: A key party to the negotiated settlement in S.953, providing support for the tribal water allocations. - Fort Belknap Indian Community: Mentioned by Sen. Daines regarding their long-pending water settlement in Montana. - Navajo Generating Station (NGS): Referenced as the former user of water that the Navajo Nation now seeks to lease under the settlement. - State of New Mexico: Mentioned by Sen. Lujan and President Nygren regarding ongoing negotiations and the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project. - State of Montana: Discussed by Sen. Daines in the context of the Milk River Project and agricultural impacts. - U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ): Mentioned regarding the costs of litigating water rights cases versus settling them. - Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT): Referenced as a precedent for tribal water leasing authority. - Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT): Cited by Sen. Daines as a successful model for a completed water compact.
Transcript
Good afternoon. We're going to call this hearing to order. Today we are examining Federal policies associated with Indian water rights settlements. We will have an opportunity to review S.953, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act that has been introduced by our colleague, Senator Kelly. So welcome to the committee, Senator. For more than a century, disputes over water rights have endured in the American West. In regions where water is precious, questions about who is entitled to use it and in what quantity have shaped communities, economies, and landscapes. Tribal water rights are central to that story. Beginning with the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Winters v. United States, Federal law has recognized that when the United States established Indian reservations, it implicitly reserved sufficient water to fulfill the purposes of those reservations. These reserved rights are not simply policy choices. They arise from treaties, Federal actions, and the trust responsibility to tribal nations. Congress shares in the obligation to ensure those commitments are honored. At the same time, unresolved tribal water rights claims create uncertainty that extends beyond reservation boundaries. States, municipalities, irrigation districts, farmers, ranchers, and many others depend on clear and reliable water allocations. And when claims go unresolved, uncertainty can stall economic development, complicate water management, and strain relationships. And that's why negotiated settlements have long been recognized as the preferred path forward. Settlements allow parties to come together to craft durable solutions rather than spending decades in costly and uncertain litigation. As many in the West say, settlements deliver what we call wet water, not just paper rights. They provide tribes with the infrastructure and resources needed to actually access and use their water while also providing certainty and stability for non-tribal users who depend on the same systems. I appreciate that this administration has reaffirmed what many of us have long believed. Whenever possible, negotiated settlements are preferable to litigation. But we must also acknowledge a growing challenge. The Federal cost associated with Indian water rights settlements have increased dramatically in recent years. During development of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we focused on the delays that have plagued already authorized settlements. And we created the Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund and provided $2.5 billion to help complete settlements that had been approved but lacked funding to move forward. 17 settlements received support from that fund, finally finishing work that had been pending for years or even decades. The bill that we are considering today, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act, is a reminder that that job is not done. It seeks to resolve decades of litigation that has left the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe tied up in disputes over the waters of the Colorado River. For those tribes, this settlement is enormously important. The lack of access to clean water in native communities should shock us as Americans, particularly the effect on health. We remember the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 across Indian Country, where inadequate water and sanitation contributed to unconscionably high death rates of native people. Reliable access to clean water is foundational for public health and every aspect of life, including long-term economic opportunity. This bill will also provide certainty for all water users in Arizona who depend on the Colorado River system. But its estimated Federal cost, approximately $5 billion, is also double what we allocated under the infrastructure law. This is not the only water settlement proposal before Congress either. There are at least seven others under discussion with more likely to follow. So the question before us is clear. How do we continue to meet our solemn trust and treaty responsibilities while maintaining fiscal responsibility and balancing the many, many priorities that are facing Indian Country? And that's the conversation that we must have as we consider this legislation and think more broadly about the future of Indian water rights settlements in the years ahead. And with that, I turn to our Vice Chairman, Senator Schatz.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Not ready to subscribe?
Get a free daily digest with hearing summaries ranked by relevance.
Already have an account? Log in
