PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

St. Mary Diversion and Conveyance Works and Milk River Project Act of 2006

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held in Havre, MT. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 109-764.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 23, 2006

St. Mary Diversion and Conveyance Works and Milk River Project Act of 2006 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct studies to determine: (1) the feasibility of rehabilitating and improving the St. Mary Diversion and Conveyance Works (a portion of the Milk River Project, a Bureau of Reclamation project in Montana, that is located within the Blackfeet Reservation) to provide for sustained environmental and economic benefit within the St. Mary and Milk River basins; and (2) the environmental impact of such rehabilitation project.

Directs the Secretary to: (1) initiate the planning, design, and construction of the project alternative that is selected; and (2) develop and implement an emergency response plan to be followed in the event of a catastrophic infrastructure failure. Establishes in the Treasury an emergency response plan fund.

Requires: (1) the Milk River Project to be operated primarily for irrigation purposes; and (2) the Secretary to prioritize Project structures in need of rehabilitation and improvement.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Directs the Secretary to: (1) ensure that land and water rights held in trust for the benefit of the Blackfeet Tribe are protected; (2) resolve tribal claims against the United States; (3) identify appropriate Blackfeet projects to improve economic conditions on the Reservation; (4) complete studies to determine the feasibility of carrying out such projects; and (5) conduct studies to determine the feasibility of rehabilitating and improving Blackfeet irrigation project structures determined to be in need based on the appraisal investigation and of developing a safe and adequate rural, municipal, and industrial water supply project for the residents of the Fort Belknap Reservation and surrounding communities.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Burns, Conrad R. [R-MT] · R–MT

Committees

  • Energy and Natural Resources Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held in Havre, MT. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 109-764.

  2. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  3. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6458-6459)

  4. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.3563 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.3563 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.3563 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.3563 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.

View full prompt & sources