PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Dec 10, 2016
Tribal Infrastructure and Roads Enhancement and Safety Act or the TIRES Act
(Sec. 3) This bill modifies the approval process used for certain transportation projects on Indian reservations by allowing categorical exclusions from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements.
A "categorical exclusion" is a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and which have been found to have no such effect in procedures adopted by a federal agency in implementing environmental regulations and for which, therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
A "tribal transportation safety project" is one that is eligible for assistance under the tribal transportation program and that:
corrects or improves a hazardous road location or feature, or
addresses a highway safety problem.
The Department of the Interior shall review existing categorical exclusions for tribal transportation program projects and identify tribal transportation safety projects that meet categorical exclusion requirements.
The bill prescribes requirements for the expedited review and approval of tribal transportation safety projects under NEPA or other federal laws.
(Sec. 4) Interior shall enter into five-year programmatic agreements with Indian tribes that establish efficient administrative procedures for carrying out environmental reviews for tribal transportation projects, including whether any project is categorically excluded from the preparation of an environmental assessment or impact statement under NEPA.
People & committees
Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee substitute withdrawn by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7148)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S7147-7149; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S7147-7148)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 378.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Barrasso with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 114-217.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Barrasso with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 114-217.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S5131)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 4, 2026. 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 S.1776 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 S.1776 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 S.1776 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 S.1776 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.