PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 644.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Nov 14, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians Water Rights Settlement Act
(Sec. 4) This bill authorizes, ratifies, and confirms the Pechanga Settlement Agreement, entered into by the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, the Rancho California Water District (RCWD), and the United States, except to the extent that the agreement is modified by or conflicts with this bill.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 5) The bill confirms water rights that must be held in trust by the United States on behalf of the tribe and its allottees. (Allottees are individuals who hold a beneficial real property interest in an Indian allotment that is located within the reservation and held in trust by the United States.) Allotted land is entitled to a just and equitable allocation of water from the water rights for irrigation and domestic purposes.
Allottees may lease their land together with any water right.
The tribe must enact a Pechanga Water Code that governs the storage, recovery, and use of the water rights, subject to the Department of the Interior's approval. Interior must administer the water rights until the water code is enacted and approved.
(Sec. 7) The tribe and the United States (acting as trustee for the tribe and allottees) must waive all claims to water rights within the Santa Margarita River Watershed, except water rights recognized in the Pechanga Settlement Agreement and this bill.
The tribe and the United States (acting as trustee for the tribe) waive specified claims against the RCWD.
The tribe may waive claims against the United States regarding specified water rights and damages.
The waivers in this bill are enforceable on the date Interior publishes specified findings regarding deposits, waivers, and approved agreements.
(Sec. 8) Interior must provide the amounts necessary to fulfill the tribe's obligations under specified agreements regarding water infrastructure.
(Sec. 9) The bill establishes the Pechanga Settlement Fund. The fund is to be used to carry out this bill.
(Sec. 12) If Interior does not publish the findings required for enforcement of the waivers in this bill by April 30, 2021, or an alternative later date agreed to by the tribe and Interior, the provisions of this bill expire, related agreements are void, and funds are rescinded.
People & committees
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-42] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 644.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 114-821.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 114-821.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 10, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.5984 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.5984 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.5984 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.5984 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.