Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58)

Changes from February 16, 2022 to March 21, 2024

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the
~~February 16, 2022~~March 21, 2024
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ~~(P.L.~~
Charles V. Stern
(P.L. 117-58)
Specialist in Natural Specialist in Natural
Resources Policy Resources Policy
In the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, also referred to as the Bipartisan In the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, also referred to as the Bipartisan

Infrastructure Law; P.L. 117-58), Congress provided a major influx of funding for the Bureau of Infrastructure Law; P.L. 117-58), Congress provided a major influx of funding for the Bureau of
Anna E. Normand
Reclamation (Reclamation), a water resources management agency within the Department of the Reclamation (Reclamation), a water resources management agency within the Department of the
~~Analyst~~Specialist in Natural in Natural
Interior. Congress provided $8.3 billion to Reclamation in the IIJA Interior. Congress provided $8.3 billion to Reclamation in the IIJA and made the funds available Resources Policy in equal installments for each of the five fiscal years from FY2022 to FY2026 (i.e., $1.66 billion per year). The resources directed to ~~. The resources directed to~~
~~Resources Policy~~
Reclamation under the act were almost five times Reclamation’s FY2021 enacted appropriation Reclamation under the act were almost five times Reclamation’s FY2021 enacted appropriation

and more than eight times Reclamation’s and more than eight times Reclamation’s previously largest supplemental funding appropriation. previously largest supplemental funding appropriation.
~~Congress provided~~IIJA included funding for the following funding for the following ~~areas:~~

areas (listed in the order in which they appear in the legislation): • $1.05 billion for water storage projects, including projects authorized under Section 4007 of P.L. 114-322 $1.05 billion for water storage projects, including projects authorized under Section 4007 of P.L. 114-322
• $100 million for small water storage project grants $100 million for small water storage project grants
• $3.2 billion for aging infrastructure projects $3.2 billion for aging infrastructure projects
• $1.0 billion for rural water projects $1.0 billion for rural water projects
• $1.0 billion for water recycling and reuse projects $1.0 billion for water recycling and reuse projects
~~ $500~~• $250 million for million for ~~dam safety~~water desalination projects projects
~~ $400 million for water and energy efficiency and other grant projects~~
~~ $300 million for Colorado River drought contingency plan projects~~
~~ $250 million for water desalination projects~~
• $500 million for safety of dams projects • $400 million for WaterSMART water and energy efficiency and other grant projects • $250 million for a new program for $250 million for a new program for aquatic ecosystem restoration projects ecosystem restoration projects
• $100 million for the Cooperative Watershed Management Program $100 million for the Cooperative Watershed Management Program
• $100 million for a new program for watershed health $100 million for a new program for watershed health improvement projects projects
~~ $50 million for Upper~~ • $300 million for Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan projects • $50 million for Colorado River endangered Colorado River endangered ~~fish~~ species species recovery projects projects
In addition to the $8.3 billion Congress provided directly to Reclamation in the IIJA, the act provided $2.5 billion to the In addition to the $8.3 billion Congress provided directly to Reclamation in the IIJA, the act provided $2.5 billion to the
Secretary of the Interior for a newly created Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund. Secretary of the Interior for a newly created Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund. ~~Observers expect some of this~~
~~funding to go to Reclamation for the implementation of previously authorized Indian water rights settlements. Other funding~~
~~is to be distributed directly to tribes for settlement implementation.~~
Congress included limited guidance for Reclamation funding in the IIJA. The act provided several individual Reclamation Congress included limited guidance for Reclamation funding in the IIJA. The act provided several individual Reclamation
programs with more funding than the programs had received—in cumulative terms—since their initial authorizations, and programs with more funding than the programs had received—in cumulative terms—since their initial authorizations, and
directed significant funding toward entirely new Reclamation authorities. Congress also enacted new authorities for directed significant funding toward entirely new Reclamation authorities. Congress also enacted new authorities for
Reclamation that did not receive funding within the act or that clarified existing law. Reclamation that did not receive funding within the act or that clarified existing law.
Reclamation Reclamation ~~released its Initial Spend Plan for IIJA projects on January 14, 2022. This plan laid~~published its plans for its annual spending under the IIJA in FY2022, FY2023, FY2024, and FY2025. These plans lay out funding allocations for out funding allocations for
the portion of Reclamation’s IIJA funding available in the portion of Reclamation’s IIJA funding available in ~~FY2022~~each of those years (i.e., $1.66 billion). (i.e., $1.66 billion). ~~Additional program~~Reclamation also has released additional program- and project-specific and project-specific
~~allocations are expected in the future.~~

annual allocations and addendums since enactment of the IIJA. Some Reclamation programs have solicited applications or grant proposals for IIJA-funded activities (depending on the activity), while other areas have allocated IIJA funding through internal processes, resulting in project- or program-specific funding allocations. Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

he Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), an agency within the Department of the Interior he Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), an agency within the Department of the Interior
(DOI), manages and develops water resources in the 17 conterminous states west of the (DOI), manages and develops water resources in the 17 conterminous states west of the
T Mississippi River, often referred to as the T Mississippi River, often referred to as the Reclamation states.1 Reclamation operates more .1 Reclamation operates more
than 180 individual than 180 individual Reclamation projects for multiple purposes. The primary purpose of most for multiple purposes. The primary purpose of most
Reclamation projects is agricultural irrigation, but the agency also operates projects for Reclamation projects is agricultural irrigation, but the agency also operates projects for
hydropower, flood control, recreation, municipal and industrial water supplies, and fish and hydropower, flood control, recreation, municipal and industrial water supplies, and fish and
wildlife benefits. Water users are responsible for repaying their share of project costs. wildlife benefits. Water users are responsible for repaying their share of project costs.
~~Reclamation currently faces many challenges. One such challenge is~~One of Reclamation’s recent challenges has been maintaining the portfolio of maintaining the portfolio of
existing Reclamation projects as they age.existing Reclamation projects as they age. ~~In addition, in~~ In recent years, Congress has directed recent years, Congress has directed
Reclamation to participate in the construction of new and augmented surface water storage Reclamation to participate in the construction of new and augmented surface water storage
projects. Congress also has increased projects. Congress also has increased ~~financial support~~funding to Reclamation for various types of to Reclamation for various types of
nonfederal water project development, including water reuse and recycling projects, grants for nonfederal water project development, including water reuse and recycling projects, grants for
water and energy conservation efforts, and funding for rural water projects and water water and energy conservation efforts, and funding for rural water projects and water
infrastructure associated with congressionally authorized Indian water rights settlements, among infrastructure associated with congressionally authorized Indian water rights settlements, among
other activities. other activities.
In the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, also referred to as the Bipartisan In the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, also referred to as the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law; P.L. 117-58), Congress provided $8.3 billion to Reclamation. The resources Infrastructure Law; P.L. 117-58), Congress provided $8.3 billion to Reclamation. The resources
directed to Reclamation in the IIJA were almost five times Reclamation’s FY2021 enacted directed to Reclamation in the IIJA were almost five times Reclamation’s FY2021 enacted
discretionary appropriation discretionary appropriation (the year before the first IIJA appropriation) and more than eight times Reclamation’s previously largest and more than eight times Reclamation’s previously largest
supplemental funding appropriation. For several Reclamation programs, the IIJA provided more supplemental funding appropriation. For several Reclamation programs, the IIJA provided more
funds than the programs had received cumulatively since their original authorizations. In other funds than the programs had received cumulatively since their original authorizations. In other
cases, Congress directed significant funding toward entirely new Reclamation authorities. cases, Congress directed significant funding toward entirely new Reclamation authorities.
Congress also enacted several new Reclamation authorities that did not receive funding within the Congress also enacted several new Reclamation authorities that did not receive funding within the
act or that clarified existing law. act or that clarified existing law.
This report discusses Reclamation funding that Congress enacted in the IIJA. It provides This report discusses Reclamation funding that Congress enacted in the IIJA. It provides
background on the programs and authorities funded, discusses congressional guidance in the background on the programs and authorities funded, discusses congressional guidance in the
legislation, and legislation, and ~~presents potential oversight and implementation issues for congressional~~
~~consideration. It also includes updated information on funding allocations and spending plans~~
~~issued under the act.~~
~~IIJA Funding~~ provides information on funding allocations and spending plans issued in accordance with the act. The report also includes potential oversight and implementation issues for congressional consideration. IIJA Summary
The IIJA provided significant new funding authorizations to Reclamation: $8.3 billion in Division The IIJA provided significant new funding authorizations to Reclamation: $8.3 billion in Division
D, Title IX, of the act. Congress appropriated this funding in Division J, Title III, of the IIJA and D, Title IX, of the act. Congress appropriated this funding in Division J, Title III, of the IIJA and
made the funds available in equal installments for each of the five fiscal years from FY2022 to made the funds available in equal installments for each of the five fiscal years from FY2022 to
FY2026 (i.e., $1.66 billion per year). Congress provided this funding to Reclamation in the FY2026 (i.e., $1.66 billion per year). Congress provided this funding to Reclamation in the
following areasfollowing areas (listed in the order they appear in the legislation): •:
 $1.05 billion ( $1.05 billion (~~approximately~~ 13% of Reclamation’s funding in the act) for water 13% of Reclamation’s funding in the act) for water
storage storage projects, including projects authorized under Section 4007 of the Water projects, including projects authorized under Section 4007 of the Water
Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322), as Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322), as
well as other authorities well as other authorities
• $100 million (1%) for a new grant program for small water storage projects $100 million (1%) for a new grant program for small water storage projects
• $3.2 billion (39%) for aging infrastructure projects (including several $3.2 billion (39%) for aging infrastructure projects (including several
subcategories of projects) subcategories of projects)

1 The 17 Reclamation states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New 1 The 17 Reclamation states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1 1

link to page link to page 67 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

• $1 $1.0 billion (12%) for authorized rural water projects billion (12%) for authorized rural water projects
• $1 $1.0 billion (12%) for authorized water recycling and reuse projects (i.e., the billion (12%) for authorized water recycling and reuse projects (i.e., the
Title Title XVI program), including a new “large-scale” water reuse and recycling XVI program), including a new “large-scale” water reuse and recycling
category category
• $250 million (3%) for authorized water desalination projects • $500 million (6%) for authorized dam safety projects $500 million (6%) for authorized dam safety projects
• $400 million (5%) for nonfederal water and energy efficiency and other grant $400 million (5%) for nonfederal water and energy efficiency and other grant
projects under Reclamation’s WaterSMART Program projects under Reclamation’s WaterSMART Program
~~ $300 million for projects associated with the Upper and Lower Colorado River~~
~~Basin drought contingency plans (4%)~~
~~ $250 million (3%) for authorized water desalination projects~~
• $250 million (3%) for a new program for ecosystem restoration projects $250 million (3%) for a new program for ecosystem restoration projects
• $100 million (1%) for the Cooperative Watershed Management Program $100 million (1%) for the Cooperative Watershed Management Program
• $100 million (1%) for a new program for watershed health projects $100 million (1%) for a new program for watershed health projects
~~ $50 million (0.6~~• $300 million (4%) for projects associated with the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basin drought contingency plans • $50 million (< 1%) for projects associated with Colorado River endangered fish %) for projects associated with Colorado River endangered fish
species species.
Congress provided additional guidance for several of the aforementioned categories, including Congress provided additional guidance for several of the aforementioned categories, including
sub-allocations or set-asides for specific types of projects. It also directed prioritization and cost sub-allocations or set-asides for specific types of projects. It also directed prioritization and cost
sharing for other authorities receiving funding under the IIJA. Most of the authorities funded sharing for other authorities receiving funding under the IIJA. Most of the authorities funded
under the act were enacted and have been funded previously by Reclamation. However, some of under the act were enacted and have been funded previously by Reclamation. However, some of
the authorities that Congress funded in the IIJA the authorities that Congress funded in the IIJA ~~had not been funded previously and~~ were newly were newly
created. The IIJA also included a section clarifying nonfederal partners’ ability to use certain created. The IIJA also included a section clarifying nonfederal partners’ ability to use certain
~~Coronavirus~~coronavirus relief funds for water resources project cost sharing. relief funds for water resources project cost sharing.
In addition to the $8.3 billion provided directly to Reclamation, the IIJA provided $2.5 billion to In addition to the $8.3 billion provided directly to Reclamation, the IIJA provided $2.5 billion to
the Secretary of the Interior for previously approved Indian water rights settlements in a newly the Secretary of the Interior for previously approved Indian water rights settlements in a newly
created Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund.created Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund. ~~Because most federal settlements of~~
~~this type are funded through Reclamation and/or the Bureau of Indian Affairs, observers expect~~
~~that some of this $2.5 billion will go toward Reclamation implementation of enacted Indian water~~
~~rights settlements.~~
The influx of Reclamation funding enacted under the IIJA is significant relative to the bureau’s The influx of Reclamation funding enacted under the IIJA is significant relative to the bureau’s
historic budgetary resources historic budgetary resources (Figure 1). The following sections discuss major areas of . The following sections discuss major areas of
Reclamation funding in the IIJA, as well as other relevant provisions.2 Each section includes Reclamation funding in the IIJA, as well as other relevant provisions.2 Each section includes
background on the Reclamation program funded in the IIJAbackground on the Reclamation program funded in the IIJA, and a description of the act’s relevant a description of the act’s relevant
provisionsprovisions~~, and a discussion of implementation questions and potential issues for Congress.~~

. 2 This report does not include information about other supplemental funding proposals for the Bureau of Reclamation, 2 This report does not include information about other supplemental funding proposals for the Bureau of Reclamation,
such as those proposed in the Build Back Better Act (H.R. 5376). such as those proposed in the Build Back Better Act (H.R. 5376).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2 2

~~link to page 8~~

Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

Figure 1. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA): Bureau of Reclamation ~~Funding~~
Funding Compared with Other Appropriations Legislation
(comparison with recent enacted discretionary and supplemental appropriations legislation) (comparison with recent enacted discretionary and supplemental appropriations legislation)

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on Bureau of Reclamation funding data and P.L. 117-58, P.L. 116-Reclamation funding data and P.L. 117-58, P.L. 116-
260, and P.L. 111-5. 260, and P.L. 111-5.
Notes: Does not reflect suballocations within all programs. ARRA = American Recovery and Reinvestment Act : Does not reflect suballocations within all programs. ARRA = American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 (P.L. 111-5); CO Riverof 2009 (P.L. 111-5); CO River = Colorado River; DCP = drought contingency plans; IIJA = Infrastructure = Colorado River; DCP = drought contingency plans; IIJA = Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58); m = mil ion. Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58); m = mil ion.
~~Water Storage and Conveyance Projects~~
~~In Section 4007 of the WIIN Act, Congress enacted new construction authority for Reclamation~~
~~to build surface and groundwater storage projects.3 Prior to the IIJA’s enactment, Congress~~
~~appropriated a total of approximately $603 million under this authority between FY2016 and~~
~~FY2021.~~
~~In the IIJA, Congress built on the storage authority initiated in the WIIN Act. In Section 40901 of~~
~~the IIJA, Congress authorized a total of $1.05 billion for water storage projects in accordance~~
~~with Section 40902 of the act.4 Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-~~
~~FY2026) in Division J of the act. Section 40902 delineated the circumstances under which~~
~~projects are eligible for this funding and provided that most of this funding may be used for~~

~~3 For more information on this authority, see CRS In Focus IF10626,~~ ~~Reclamation Water Storage Projects: Section~~
~~4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act, by Charles V. Stern.~~
~~4 While the total authorization was for $1.15 billion for water storage projects, Congress stipulated that $100 million of~~
~~this funding go toward a newly established grant program for small water storage projects, as established in Section~~
~~40903 of the IIJA. See below section, “Small Water Storage Project Grants.”~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

3

~~link to page 8~~ Congressional Research Service 3 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) Spending Plans and Allocation of Funds In the past, Reclamation has allocated funding appropriated by Congress in spend plans; it has continued this practice for IIJA funding. Reclamation has released spend plans for IIJA for FY2022, FY2023, FY2024, and FY2025. These spend plans allocate annual funding in terms of categories and sections where Reclamation received IIJA funding.3 Each spend plan allocates the available $1.66 billion in funding for the upcoming fiscal year and updates prior year allocation levels. Generally speaking, these allocations have not been in equal shares compared with their overall allocation in the IIJA (Table 1). For instance, some of the more established, ongoing Reclamation programs and projects (e.g., Title XVI water recycling/reuse and Rural Water Projects) received FY2022 spend plan allocations in excess of their overall IIJA Reclamation funding allocation (in terms of percentage of the total allocation), whereas other new authorities received no funding in the FY2022 spend plan (e.g., Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration and Protection). However, these programs have received more funding in subsequent years, after program guidance and related funding criteria were established. In addition to funding for items outlined in the IIJA, Reclamation’s spend plans also set aside funding for administrative activities (capped at $49.8 million, or 3% of Initial Spend Plan funding) and a flexible reserve to be used on “emerging requirements” ($281 million, or 17% of Initial Spend Plan funding). Reclamation also has released addendums that allocate these funds at project and program levels and has in some cases provided specific information about how various projects and programs are to be implemented. 3 Spend plans and related documents are available at Bureau of Reclamation, “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Investments,” https://www.usbr.gov/bil/index.html. Congressional Research Service 4 link to page 10 link to page 10 Table 1. Bureau of Reclamation Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA): Funding and Annual Allocations (funding in millions of dollars) Total IIJA FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 Program/Project Appropriations Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation Funding Distribution Water Storage and Conveyance Projects $1,050.0 $255.1 $106.9 $242.0 $207.3 Internal Formulation Small Surface Water and Ground Water Storage Project Grants $100.0 — $20.0 $25.0 $26.0 Funding Opportunities Aging Infrastructure (general) $3,000.0 $240.3 $649.0 $680.0 $670.4 Application Periods Aging Infrastructure: Critical Facilities $100.0 $3.5 $85.0 $3.5 $2.5 Application Periods Aging Infrastructure: Carey Act Dams $100.0 — $5.0 $30.0 $31.0 Application Periods Rural Water Projects $1,000.0 $450.0 $248.0 $108.0 $82.0 Internal Formulation Title XVI Water Recycling and Reuse $550.0 $309.8 $150.0 $29.0 $22.4 Funding Opportunities Title XVI Water Recycling and Reuse: Large-Scale Projects $450.0 — $50.0 $130.0 $128.3 Funding Opportunities Desalination Projects $250.0 $15.0 $8.1 $16.0 $101.7 Funding Opportunities Safety of Dams Projects $500.0 $100.0 — $130.0 $127.5 Internal Formulation WaterSMART Grants $300.0 $120.0 $112.5 $50.5 $8.0 Funding Opportunities WaterSMART Grants: Natural or Nature-Based Features $100.0 $40.0 $37.0 $17.0 $1.5 Funding Opportunities Cooperative Watershed Management Program $100.0 $18.0 $20.0 $20.0 $19.5 Funding Opportunities Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration and Protection $250.0 — $45.0 $65.0 $66.3 Funding Opportunities Watershed Health Improvement $100.0 — $20.0 $25.0 $26.0 Funding Opportunities Lower Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan $250.0 $50.0 $25.0 $25.0 $71.3 Internal Formulation Upper Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan $50.0 — $8.7 $29.8 $5.0 Internal Formulation Colorado River Endangered Species Recovery $50.0 $8.5 $20.0 $20.0 — Funding Opportunities No Funding in IIJA Reserve for Emerging Requirementsa NA — — $14.3 $14.3 NA Administrative Activitiesa [$240.0] $49.8 $49.8 — $38.6 NA Total $8,300.0 $1,660.0 $1,660.0 $1,660.0 $1,660.0 CRS-5 Total IIJA FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 Program/Project Appropriations Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation Funding Distribution Non-Reclamation Funding Indian Water Rights Settlements Settlement Completion Fund $2,500.0 — $460.0 $207.0 — Internal Formulation Source: CRS, based on P.L. 117-58 and Bureau of Reclamation, “IIJA/Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Annual Spend Plans for FY2022-FY2025,” https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. Notes: Reflects final allocations for FY2022-FY2024 and initial allocation for FY2025 (if available). NA = Not Applicable. a. The IIJA did not include explicit funding for these activities. The act capped the portion of funding that may be used for administrative expenses at 3% (or no more than $249 mil ion total ($49.8 mil ion per year)). CRS-6 link to page 13 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) IIJA Funding by Category Water Storage and Conveyance Projects Prior to 2016, Congress had not authorized significant new Reclamation water storage and conveyance projects dating to the late 1970s. In Section 4007 of the WIIN Act, Congress enacted new construction authority for Reclamation to build surface and groundwater storage and conveyance projects.4 Prior to the IIJA’s enactment, Congress appropriated a total of approximately $603 million under this authority between FY2016 and FY2021. In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized a total of $1.05 billion for water storage projects in accordance with Section 40902 of the act.5 Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Section 40902 delineated the circumstances under which projects are eligible for this funding and provided that most of this funding may be used for ~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

feasibility studies and construction of water storage projects, provided certain criteria are met. In feasibility studies and construction of water storage projects, provided certain criteria are met. In
Section 40902(a)(1)(A) of the IIJA, Congress provided that three kinds of feasibility studies are Section 40902(a)(1)(A) of the IIJA, Congress provided that three kinds of feasibility studies are
eligible for funding authorized under Section 40901: eligible for funding authorized under Section 40901:
1. Feasibility studies authorized by Congress by the date of 1. Feasibility studies authorized by Congress by the date of ~~the IIJA’s enactment;~~enactment of the IIJA
2. Feasibility studies with funding approved under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act 2. Feasibility studies with funding approved under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act;
~~and~~
~~3. The~~ 3. Feasibility studies carried out under the Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Project (AZ) and the Tualatin River Project (AZ) and the Tualatin River
Basin Project (OR)Basin Project (OR).56
Similar to the IIJA’s approach for feasibility studies, Similar to the IIJA’s approach for feasibility studies, in Section 40902(a)(2) of the act Section 40902(a)(2) of the act ~~Congress~~
provided that one or more criteria must be met for a project to be eligible for construction funding provided that one or more criteria must be met for a project to be eligible for construction funding
authorized under Section 40901. Specifically, a project is eligible for IIJA construction funding if authorized under Section 40901. Specifically, a project is eligible for IIJA construction funding if
any of the following has occurred as of the date of the IIJA’s enactment: any of the following has occurred as of the date of the IIJA’s enactment:
1. An act of Congress authorized construction funding 1. An act of Congress authorized construction funding;
. 2. Congress approved construction funding under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act 2. Congress approved construction funding under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act~~; or~~
. 3. Congress approved feasibility study funding for a project, as detailed above, 3. Congress approved feasibility study funding for a project, as detailed above,
provided that the Secretary of the Interior must find that the project is technically provided that the Secretary of the Interior must find that the project is technically
and financially feasible, that sufficient nonfederal funding is available for the and financially feasible, that sufficient nonfederal funding is available for the
nonfederal cost share, and that the project is in the public interest and nonfederal cost share, and that the project is in the public interest and
recommended for construction.recommended for construction.67
Cost shares for construction projects under this section are to be made in accordance with project- Cost shares for construction projects under this section are to be made in accordance with project-
specific authorizing legislation; the WIIN Act (for projects approved in accordance with that specific authorizing legislation; the WIIN Act (for projects approved in accordance with that
legislation); or, for all other projects, 50% for federally owned projects and 25% for nonfederal legislation); or, for all other projects, 50% for federally owned projects and 25% for nonfederal
~~projects, as applicable.7~~ 4 For more information on this authority, see CRS In Focus IF10626, Reclamation Water Storage Projects: Section 4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act, by Charles V. Stern. 5 While the total authorization was for $1.15 billion for water storage projects, Congress stipulated that $100 million of this funding go toward a newly established grant program for small water storage projects, as established in Section 40903 of the IIJA (P.L. 117-58). See this report’s section “Small Water Storage Project Grants.” 6 P.L. 117-58, §40902(a)(1)(A). In its Initial Spend Plan, Reclamation reported that it had approved an appraisal report for the Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Project, thus that project would be eligible for feasibility study funding. Reclamation, “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Spend Plans,” https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. Hereinafter, Bureau of Reclamation, “Spend Plans.” 7 P.L. 117-58, §40902(a)(2). Congressional Research Service 7 link to page 9 link to page 12 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) projects, as applicable.8 Two types of projects are explicitly noted as Two types of projects are explicitly noted as ineligible for construction for construction
funding: (1) projects for which Congress did not approve recommended funding in at least one funding: (1) projects for which Congress did not approve recommended funding in at least one
year prior to the act and (2) projects for which state funding was rescinded prior to the enactment year prior to the act and (2) projects for which state funding was rescinded prior to the enactment
of IIJA. These requirements appear to exclude the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement of IIJA. These requirements appear to exclude the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement
Project and the Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation from construction funding. Project and the Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation from construction funding.
Table 1 includes a preliminary list of projects that appear to meet criteria for study funding and
~~that may be eligible for construction funding.~~ Based on the Congressional Research Service’s Based on the Congressional Research Service’s
(CRS’s) preliminary review, as many as 15 projects in five states could be eligible for feasibility (CRS’s) preliminary review, as many as 15 projects in five states could be eligible for feasibility
study funding under Section 40902 of the IIJA.study funding under Section 40902 of the IIJA.89 Furthermore, as many as 13 projects in the same Furthermore, as many as 13 projects in the same
five states five states could be eligible for construction funding under Section 40902 of the IIJA. However, be eligible for construction funding under Section 40902 of the IIJA. However,
whether all of these projects will actually be eligible for and receive funding depends in part on whether all of these projects will actually be eligible for and receive funding depends in part on
the result of feasibility studies, including a recommendation for construction by the federal the result of feasibility studies, including a recommendation for construction by the federal
~~government.~~

~~5 P.L. 117-58, §40902(a)(1)(A). In its Initial Spend Plan Reclamation reported that it had approved an appraisal report~~
~~for the Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Project, thus that project would be eligible for feasibility study funding.~~
~~6 P.L. 117-58, §40902(a)(2). Specifically, for a feasibility study to receive construction funding, upon completion of the~~
~~project feasibility study.~~
~~7 P.L. 117-58, §40902(b).~~
~~8 Some of these studies have been completed, put on hold, or no longer be pursuing study funding for other reasons.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

4

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~Table 1. Section 40902 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58):~~
~~Potential Water Storage Projects~~
~~Meets One or~~
~~Potentially~~
~~More Criteria~~
~~Eligible for~~
~~for Study~~
~~Construction~~
~~Project~~
~~State~~
~~Funding?~~
~~Funding?~~
~~B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir Expansion~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Boise River Basin Feasibility Study~~
ID
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Del Puerto Water District Feasibility Study~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Delta Mendota Canal Subsidence Correction~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Friant-Kern Canal Subsidence Challenges Project~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Los Vaqueros Reservoir Phase 2 Expansion~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Sacramento Regional Water Bank~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~San Luis Low Point Improvement Project~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project~~
CA
~~Yes~~
No
~~Sites Reservoir Storage Project~~
CA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Tualatin River Basin Project~~
OR
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation~~
CA
~~Yes~~
No
~~Upper Yakima System Storage Feasibility Study~~
WA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Project~~
AZ
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~government. The funding that Congress provided for water storage projects in the IIJA is almost twice as much as was appropriated for these projects from FY2016 to FY2021. Combined with prior appropriations, this funding could meet much of the outstanding federal cost-share obligations for these projects, which to date have mostly been located in the state of California. The extent to which Reclamation is successful in implementing these projects may determine whether Congress continues to appropriate funding for new Reclamation water storage construction in the future. Allocations/Implementation For water storage projects under Section 40902 of IIJA, Reclamation generally has focused its funding allocations to date on a few projects. The majority of funding allocated to date has gone to two projects: the Arkansas Valley Conduit in Colorado and Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion in California. In its FY2024 and FY2025 spend plans, Reclamation allocated additional funding of $242 million and $207.3 million for all projects (Table 1), but it had not announced project-level allocations for this funding as of the date of this report. Table 2 provides Reclamation’s IIJA water storage project allocations to date. Table 2. Bureau of Reclamation Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Water Storage Project Allocations (funding for eligible projects in millions of dollars) Potentially Eligible Projects (State) FY2022 FY2023 Arkansas Valley Conduit (CO) $60.0 $100.0 B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir Expansion $25.0 $10.0 (CA) Boise River Basin Feasibility Study (ID) — — Del Puerto Water District Feasibility Study — — (CA) Delta Mendota Canal Subsidence Correction — — (CA) Friant-Kern Canal Subsidence Challenges — — Project (CA) Dry Redwater Regional Water System $3.0 — Feasibility Study (MT) 8 P.L. 117-58, §40902(b). 9 Some of these studies have been completed, put on hold, or are no longer pursuing study funding for other reasons. Congressional Research Service 8 link to page 11 link to page 11 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) Potentially Eligible Projects (State) FY2022 FY2023 Los Vaqueros Reservoir Phase 2 Expansion $82.0 $10.0 (CA) Sacramento Regional Water Bank (CA) — — San Luis Low Point Improvement Project (CA) — — Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement — — Project (CA) Sites Reservoir Storage Project (CA) $30.0 $30.0 Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage — — Investigation (CA) Upper Yakima System Storage Feasibility Study — $1.0 (WA) Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Project $5.0 — Feasibility Study (AZ) Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement $5.0 $1.0
~~Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement~~ Project: Cle Elum Pool Project: Cle Elum Pool
WA
~~Yes~~
~~Yes~~
~~Raise~~Raise (WA) Total $210.0 $152.0
Source: CRS, based on CRS, based on ~~analysis of the IIJA and previously enacted legislation.~~
Notes: For projects to receive construction funding, the Secretary of the Interior must find that the project is
~~technically and financially feasible, that sufficient nonfederal funding is available for the nonfederal cost share, that~~
~~the project is in the public interest, and that the project is recommended for construction, among other things.~~
~~Projects are ineligible for construction funding if Congress did not approve Administration-recommended~~
~~funding in at least one year prior to the act, or if state funding was rescinded prior to the enactment of IIJA.~~
~~The funding that Congress provided for water storage projects in the IIJA is almost twice as much~~
~~as was appropriated for these project from FY2016 to FY2021. Combined with prior~~
~~appropriations, this funding appears likely to meet much of the outstanding federal cost-share~~
~~obligations for these projects, which to date have mostly been located in the state of California.~~
~~Issues for Congress may include Reclamation’s ability to promptly obligate these funds, along~~
~~with baseline appropriations for these projects, to address drought in California and other parts of~~
~~the West. Congress also may wish to gauge Reclamation’s efforts to coordinate with states and~~
~~local sponsors on nonfederally led projects, since these efforts represent a new approach for~~
~~Reclamation’s involvement in water storage construction. The extent to which Reclamation is~~
~~successful in implementing these projects may determine whether Congress continues to~~
~~appropriate funding for new Reclamation water storage construction in the future.~~
~~Small Water Storage Project Grants~~
~~In Section 40903 of the IIJA, Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to establish a new~~
~~competitive grant program for small water storage projects, which are allocated $100 million of~~
~~the total water storage funding authorized under Section 40901. Congress appropriated this~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

5

~~link to page 6 link to page 10~~ ~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Eligible projects are defined~~
~~as projects in Reclamation states, Hawaii, or Alaska with water storage capacity of 2,000-30,000~~
~~acre-feet (AF) or that convey water directly or indirectly from surface or groundwater storage.~~
~~Federal costs under this section are to be no more than the lesser of 25% of the project’s total~~
~~costs or $30 million.9~~
~~The IIJA grant authority for small water storage projects allows Reclamation to operate a new~~
~~program funding nonfederal water storage projects within the limits authorized by Congress. The~~
~~cost shares for this authority are similar to that available to nonfederal projects initiated under the~~
~~WIIN Act’s authorities (see above section, “Water Storage and Conveyance Projects”). Although~~
~~these projects are hypothetically eligible to pursue WIIN Act funding, the new grant program sets~~
~~aside funding for these projects to compete with one another. Similar to Reclamation’s funding~~
~~for nonfederal WIIN Act projects, this program continues a trend of Reclamation (and the federal~~
~~government) serving as a project reviewer/participant, as opposed to a project owner.~~
~~Aging Infrastructure~~
~~Aging infrastructure represents a significant challenge for Reclamation. Most of the bureau’s~~
~~facilities are 60-100 years old; as of 2015, Reclamation estimated the total replacement value of~~
~~these facilities at approximately $99.0 billion.10~~the Bureau of Reclamation IIJA spend plan addendums for storage projects for FY2022 and FY2023, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. Notes: Does not reflect regular funding. FY2024 and FY2025 project allocations have not been reported as of the date of this report. Small Water Storage Project Grants In Section 40903 of the IIJA, Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to establish a new competitive grant program for small water storage projects, which are allocated $100 million of the total water storage funding authorized under Section 40901. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Eligible projects are defined as projects in Reclamation states, Hawaii, or Alaska with water storage capacity of 200-30,000 acre-feet (AF) or that convey water directly or indirectly from surface or groundwater storage. Federal costs under this section are to be no more than the lesser of 25% of the project’s total costs or $30 million.10 The IIJA grant authority for small water storage projects allows Reclamation to operate a new program that funds nonfederal water storage projects within the limits authorized by Congress. The cost shares for this authority are similar to that available to nonfederal projects initiated under the authorities of the WIIN Act (see above section, “Water Storage and Conveyance Projects”). Although these projects are hypothetically eligible to pursue WIIN Act funding, the new grant program sets aside funding for these projects to compete with one another. Similar to Reclamation’s funding for nonfederal WIIN Act projects, this program continues a trend of Reclamation (and the federal government) serving as a project reviewer/funder/participant, as opposed to a project owner. 10 P.L. 117-58, §40903(c). Congressional Research Service 9 link to page 14 link to page 9 link to page 15 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) Allocations/Implementation Reclamation published the first grant funding opportunity for small water storage projects on September 14, 2022; the application period closed on December 9, 2022. Projects had to have a completed feasibility study to be deemed eligible for the grant funding opportunity. Reclamation announced its first funding allocation for these projects in FY2023, allocating $20 million to four projects in California and Utah (Table 3). Reclamation has allocated another $25 million for grant awards in this category in both FY2024 and FY2025 (Table 1) but has yet to announce the recipients. Table 3. Bureau of Reclamation Small Water Storage Projects: Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA): FY2023 Funding Allocations (in millions of dollars) Project Name (State) FY2023 Imperial Irrigation District Upstream Operational Reservoir Storage Project (CA) $9.47 Kern Fan Groundwater Storage Project- Phase 1 (CA) $4.74 Washington County Water District Ash Creek Project—Toquer Reservoir (UT) $4.74 Del Puerto Water District: Orestimba Creek Groundwater Recharge and Recovery $1.04 Expansion Project (CA) Source: Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Addendum-WaterSMART – WEEG, Drought Contingency Plan for LC & UC, Small Storage FY2023, and Water Desal Spend Plan, May 2, 2023, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2023/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-05-02-2023.pdf. Notes: No funding was made available for these projects in FY2022. Although Reclamation released FY2024 and FY2025 spend plans, no water storage project allocations have been reported as of the date of this report. Aging Infrastructure Aging infrastructure represents a significant challenge for Reclamation; most of the bureau’s facilities are 60-100 years old. As of 2015, Reclamation estimated the total replacement value of these facilities at approximately $99 billion.11 In April 2021, Reclamation estimated needs of In April 2021, Reclamation estimated needs of
$2.3 billion over the FY2021-FY2025 period for appropriated non-dam safety projects, along $2.3 billion over the FY2021-FY2025 period for appropriated non-dam safety projects, along
with additional needs for dam safety projects and projects such as power facilities, which with additional needs for dam safety projects and projects such as power facilities, which
typically are not funded with typically are not funded with ~~appropriation~~sappropriati ons (Figure 2).12 This amount ~~(Figure 2).11 Although this amount represents a~~
~~fraction of the value of Reclamation facilities, on an annualized basis, it~~ is significantly more than is significantly more than
Reclamation typically requests to meet these needsReclamation typically requests to meet these needs.

~~9 P.L. 117-58, §40903(c).~~
10 on an annualized basis. 11 Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Reclamation, Infrastructure Investment Strategy, May 2015, p., May 2015, p. 1, ~~1, at~~ https://www.usbr.gov/infrastructure/https://www.usbr.gov/infrastructure/
docs/Infrastructure_Investment_Strategy_Final_Report_1SEP15.pdf. docs/Infrastructure_Investment_Strategy_Final_Report_1SEP15.pdf.
1112 Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Reclamation, Asset Management Report Pursuant to the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management,
and Recreation Act of March 12, 2019, April 2021, , April 2021, at https://www.usbr.gov/infrastructure/mrr/docs/asset-management-https://www.usbr.gov/infrastructure/mrr/docs/asset-management-
report-to-congress.pdf. report-to-congress.pdf.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

610

Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

Figure 2. Bureau of Reclamation: Major Rehabilitation and Repair (MR&R) Needs
(five-year MR&R (five-year MR&R ~~deeds by Interior/Reclamation region~~needs as of 2021) as of 2021)

Source: Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Reclamation, Asset Management Report Pursuant to the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation,
Management, and Recreation Act of March 12, 2019, April 2021. 9, April 2021.
Reclamation generally operates under a Reclamation generally operates under a beneficiary-pays model in which Congress must model in which Congress must
appropriate funding for repairs and project sponsors must repay this funding. However, most appropriate funding for repairs and project sponsors must repay this funding. However, most
Reclamation contractors do not own the facilities from which they benefit and therefore may have Reclamation contractors do not own the facilities from which they benefit and therefore may have
difficulty financing their share of project repairs.difficulty financing their share of project repairs.1213 In the context of aging infrastructure, this In the context of aging infrastructure, this
situation poses a challenge for upkeep of Reclamation facilities. situation poses a challenge for upkeep of Reclamation facilities.
To address Reclamation’s aging infrastructure issues, Congress established an Aging To address Reclamation’s aging infrastructure issues, Congress established an Aging
Infrastructure Account in Section 9603 of the Omnibus Lands Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11) and Infrastructure Account in Section 9603 of the Omnibus Lands Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11) and
amended this authority in Section 1101, Title XI, of P.L. 116-260. The account is authorized to amended this authority in Section 1101, Title XI, of P.L. 116-260. The account is authorized to
receive congressional appropriations for Reclamation to provide for the conduct of extraordinary receive congressional appropriations for Reclamation to provide for the conduct of extraordinary
operation and maintenance work at a Reclamation facility that is to be repaid by users over operation and maintenance work at a Reclamation facility that is to be repaid by users over
periods of up to 50 years, in accordance with existing project cost allocations. In turn, these periods of up to 50 years, in accordance with existing project cost allocations. In turn, these
repayments would be available for expenditures, without further appropriation, for future projects repayments would be available for expenditures, without further appropriation, for future projects
(i.e., a revolving fund). (i.e., a revolving fund).
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized a total of $3.2 billion for the Aging~~
~~Infrastructure Account, with $200 million of this funding designated for specific purposes under~~
~~Section 40904 of the act. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026)~~
~~in Division J of the act. The funding is Reclamation’s first such funding for this account. One~~

~~12 To provide borrowers with financial support, some creditors require collateral in the form of the borrower’s~~
~~infrastructure assets. If the borrower does not possess the assets for which it is borrowing funding, it can be difficult to~~
~~obtain financing.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

7

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

13 To provide borrowers with financial support, some creditors require collateral in the form of the borrower’s infrastructure assets. If the borrower does not possess the assets for which it is borrowing funding, it can be difficult to obtain financing. Congressional Research Service 11 link to page 17 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized a total of $3.2 billion for the Aging Infrastructure Account, with $200 million of this funding designated for specific purposes under Section 40904 of the act. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. The funding is Reclamation’s first such funding for this account. One hundred million dollars of this funding authorized under Section 40904(a) was set aside for hundred million dollars of this funding authorized under Section 40904(a) was set aside for
Reclamation projects built prior to 1915 that suffered critical failures within the past two years; Reclamation projects built prior to 1915 that suffered critical failures within the past two years;
this funding was designated by Congress as nonreimbursable (i.e., a 100% federal expense, not this funding was designated by Congress as nonreimbursable (i.e., a 100% federal expense, not
subject to repayment).subject to repayment).1314 An additional $100 million of the Aging Infrastructure Account funding An additional $100 million of the Aging Infrastructure Account funding
was set aside for dam rehabilitation, replacement, and construction under Section 40904(b), was set aside for dam rehabilitation, replacement, and construction under Section 40904(b),
which authorizes funds for dam safety efforts at specific dams that were constructed after 1905, in which authorizes funds for dam safety efforts at specific dams that were constructed after 1905, in
accordance with the Carey Act of 1894, with repair costs in excess of $50 million.accordance with the Carey Act of 1894, with repair costs in excess of $50 million.1415 Whereas Whereas
funding under Section 40904(a) is stipulated as nonreimubursable, no such designation was made funding under Section 40904(a) is stipulated as nonreimubursable, no such designation was made
for Section 40904(b). for Section 40904(b).
~~The appropriation for the Aging Infrastructure Account constitutes the account’s first funding and~~
~~will form the basis for Reclamation’s largest-ever bureau-wide expenditures to rehabilitate and~~
~~repair its infrastructure.15 In implementing this program, Reclamation may need to address a~~
~~number of questions in guidance, including how entities will apply for funding from the account,~~
~~how these funds will be distributed and prioritized, and how Reclamation intends to conduct~~
~~oversight of this funding. Implementation guidance will likely need to address the extent to which~~
~~funding under this authority is available for project repairs and rehabilitation only, rather than for~~
~~project upgrades and enhancements. In addition to these questions, Reclamation will need to~~
~~determine eligibility for the narrower funding allocations in the IIJA for critical facility failures~~
~~and Carey Act dams, respectively. Reclamation initiated the first application period for aging~~
~~infrastructure funding under the IIJA on December 29, 2021.16~~Allocations/Implementation As stated above, some portion of the aging infrastructure funding is expected to be repaid over time and is subject to the terms of a repayment contract with Reclamation (i.e., similar to traditional reclamation project funding). To be eligible for federal funding under this authority, the work must be major, nonrecurring maintenance that is intended to continue the delivery of project benefits, and it must meet a cost threshold that is greater than either $100,000 or 10% of the operating budget for that facility. Potential applicants include transferred works operators and project beneficiaries that are responsible for a share of reimbursable costs on the relevant facility. Tribes are included as eligible applicants. Reclamation has solicited funding requests and awarded funding for aging infrastructure projects under Section 40902, with the first funding notice (for FY2022 funds) in December 2021. Reclamation reported that demand for those initial funds exceeded the $240 million in funding that it had available for awards in FY2022 but that a much larger percentage of project applications were funded in FY2023, when Reclamation made available $585 million (Table 4). Reclamation allocated another $680 million for these projects in each of FY2024 and FY2025, although it has yet to announce project awards for these allocations (Table 1). In December 2023, Reclamation reported that a total of seven contractors (six from FY2022 and one from FY2023) decided to decline the funding allocated to their projects; thus, these funds were to remain in the aging infrastructure account and be made available to other projects.16 14 Other projects funded by the Aging Infrastructure Account are subject to reimbursement by project users, in accordance with project cost allocations. 15 43 U.S.C. §641. 16 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum—Rural Water, WaterSMART Environmental, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, December 19, 2023, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2024/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-12-19-2023.pdf. Congressional Research Service 12 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) Table 4. Bureau of Reclamation Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Extraordinary Maintenance Requests and Allocations (funding as of March 2024 in millions of dollars) Number of Projects Requested Number of Requested Funding Project Awards Funding Awards FY2022 136 $1,081 46 $240 FY2023 89 $2,084 83 $585 Total 225 $3,165 129 $825 Source: Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), FY2022 and FY2023 IIJA Aging Infrastructure reports, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. Notes: Reclamation has reported that seven contractors (six in FY2022 and one in FY2023) decided not to accept funding allocations.
Rural Water
Since 1980, Congress has authorized Reclamation to undertake the design and construction, and Since 1980, Congress has authorized Reclamation to undertake the design and construction, and
sometimes the operations and maintenance (O&M), of specific sometimes the operations and maintenance (O&M), of specific rural water supply projects
intended to deliver potable water supplies to rural communities in western states.17 These projects intended to deliver potable water supplies to rural communities in western states.17 These projects
are largely located in North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and New Mexico and serve tribal are largely located in North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and New Mexico and serve tribal
reservations and nontribal rural communities with nonexistent, substandard, or declining water reservations and nontribal rural communities with nonexistent, substandard, or declining water
supply or water quality. Many rural water projects are large in scope, taking water from one supply or water quality. Many rural water projects are large in scope, taking water from one
location and moving it across long distances to tie to existing systems. Although municipal and location and moving it across long distances to tie to existing systems. Although municipal and
industrial portions of most Reclamation water supply facilities require 100% repayment with industrial portions of most Reclamation water supply facilities require 100% repayment with
interest, in various laws Congress has authorized rural water projects that receive some or all interest, in various laws Congress has authorized rural water projects that receive some or all
~~costs~~funding from the federal government on a nonreimbursable basis (i.e., a de facto grant). For from the federal government on a nonreimbursable basis (i.e., a de facto grant). For
example, the federal government pays up to 100% of costs for tribal rural water supply projects, example, the federal government pays up to 100% of costs for tribal rural water supply projects,
including O&M. For nontribal rural water supply projects, the federal cost share for current including O&M. For nontribal rural water supply projects, the federal cost share for current
projects ranges from 75% to 80%.projects ranges from 75% to 80%.18
Reclamation continues to construct rural water projects Reclamation continues to construct rural water projects (and to provide O&M assistance for some and to provide O&M assistance for some
tribal componentstribal components~~). For example, Congress provided $145 million in both FY2020 and FY2021~~

~~13 Other projects funded by the Aging Infrastructure Account are subject to reimbursement by project users, in~~
~~accordance with project cost allocations.~~
~~14 43 U.S.C. 641.~~
~~15 Typically, Reclamation’s annual budget for major repair and rehabilitation ranges from $50 million to $100 million.~~
~~16 Bureau of Reclamation, “Reclamation application period gets underway for aging infrastructure with funding from~~
~~Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” press release, December 29, 2021, at https://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/#/news-release/~~
~~4066.~~
. Each rural water project authorization requires the construction cost ceilings in the authorizing law to be adjusted for inflation. In early 2020, Reclamation reported that $1.2 billion was needed to complete the construction for its five authorized, ongoing rural water projects.19 In addition to the five ongoing projects, in the Clean Water for Rural Communities Act (Division FF, Title XI, Section 1110, of P.L. 116-260), Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a cooperative agreement to provide assistance at a 65% federal cost share for the planning, design, and construction of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System.20 17 For more background on these projects, see CRS Report R46308, 17 For more background on these projects, see CRS Report R46308, Bureau of Reclamation Rural Water Projects, by , by
Anna E. Normand. Anna E. Normand.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

8

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~for construction and O&M of rural water projects.18 Each rural water project authorization~~
~~required the construction cost ceilings in the authorizing law to be adjusted for inflation to~~
~~include the rising cost of materials and labor, estimated to be 4% annually. As a result, the overall~~
~~cost of authorized rural water projects has risen and continues to rise, due in part to actual federal~~
~~appropriations for projects falling short of the optimal funding scenarios assumed under planning~~
~~projections.19 In early 2020, Reclamation reported that $1.2 billion was needed to complete the~~
~~construction for its five authorized, ongoing rural water projects.20 Additionally, in the Clean~~
~~Water for Rural Communities Act (Division FF, Title XI, Section 1110, of P.L. 116-260),~~
~~Congress authorized another rural water project; the act directed the Secretary of the Interior to~~
~~enter into a cooperative agreement to provide assistance at a 65% federal cost share for the~~
~~planning, design, and construction of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System.21~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $1.0~~18 Personal correspondence between CRS and Reclamation on January 9, 2020. 19 At the time of reporting the backlog, Reclamation and the Jicarilla Apache Nation were not in discussions regarding the incomplete Jicarilla Apache Rural Water System project. Personal correspondence between CRS and Reclamation on February 21, 2020. 20 The Clean Water for Rural Communities Act (Section 1110 of Title XI of Division FF of P.L. 116-260) authorized appropriations at $56.7 million subject to cost indexing for the 2014 cost estimate of the feasibility report. The act also authorized $5.0 million for reviewing the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System submitted to Reclamation (continued...) Congressional Research Service 13 link to page 18 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $1 billion for Reclamation’s rural water billion for Reclamation’s rural water
projects. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of projects. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of
the act. Congress limited eligibility for this funding to Reclamation rural water projects that were the act. Congress limited eligibility for this funding to Reclamation rural water projects that were
authorized in an act of Congress before July 1, 2021, in accordance with the Reclamation Rural authorized in an act of Congress before July 1, 2021, in accordance with the Reclamation Rural
Water Supply Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. §§2401 et seq.).Water Supply Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. §§2401 et seq.).~~22 Based on the activities Reclamation~~
~~conducted under the authority of the Rural Water Supply Act of 2006, the following rural water~~

~~18 Over 80% of this funding was for construction. See Bureau of Reclamation budget justifications and additional~~
~~spending plans at Reclamation, “Bureau of Reclamation Budget,” at https://www.usbr.gov/budget/.~~
~~19 Nonfederal sponsors generally have met their cost-share requirements prior to the federal government meeting its~~
~~cost-share requirements; therefore, nonfederal sponsors are less subject to index increases. Reclamation,~~ ~~Assessment of~~
~~Reclamation’s Rural Water Activities and Other Federal Programs That Provide Support on Potable Water Supplies to~~
~~Rural Communities in the Western United States, October 7, 2014, at https://www.usbr.gov/ruralwater/docs/Rural-~~
~~Water-Assessment-Report.pdf. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Inspector General,~~ ~~Program Assessment~~
~~Rating Tool, Progress Evaluation, Bureau of Reclamation, Rural Water Supply Projects, ER-RR-BOR-0002-2008,~~
~~February 2009, at https://www.doioig.gov/sites/doioig.gov/files/2009-I-0007.pdf.~~
~~20 Authorized, ongoing rural water projects in early 2020 included the Garrison Diversion Unit of the Pick-Sloan~~
~~Missouri Basin Program, Fort Peck Reservation/Dry Prairie Rural Water System, Lewis and Clark Rural Water System,~~
~~Rocky Boy’s/North Central Montana Rural Water System, and Eastern New Mexico Water Supply. Another~~
~~uncompleted rural water project was the Jicarilla Apache Rural Water System; but, as of October 2019, Reclamation~~
~~and the Jicarilla Apache Nation were not in discussions regarding this project. Personal correspondence between CRS~~
~~and Reclamation on February 21, 2020.~~
~~21 The Clean Water for Rural Communities Act (Section 1110 of Title XI of Division FF of P.L. 116-260) authorized~~
~~appropriations at $56.7 million subject to cost indexing for the 2014 cost estimate of the feasibility report. The act also~~
~~authorized $5 million for reviewing the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System submitted to Reclamation on~~
21 Allocations/Implementation Reclamation has allocated IIJA funding in FY2022 through FY2024 for construction of various authorized rural water projects as outlined in spend plans and press releases (see Table 5). Reclamation stated that it plans to allocate $82.0 million in FY2025. While IIJA funding was anticipated to address much of the authorized federal backlog for rural water construction projects, Congress has appropriated and Reclamation continues to request and allocate funding through the annual appropriations process for a number of projects. Table 5. Bureau of Reclamation Rural Water Construction Funding in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (millions of dollars) Rural Water Project FY2022a FY2023b FY2024c Garrison Diversion Unit, ND $51.0 $26.3 $27.0 Fort Peck Reservation – Dry Prairie, MTd $7.0 $15.0 — Rocky Boy’s / North $57.5 $77.6 $11.0 Central Montana, MT Jicaril a Apache, NMe — $12.0 $10.0 Lewis & Clark, SD, IA, and MN $75.5 $60.0 $7.0 Eastern New Mexico, NM $160.0 $62.1 $7.0 Musselshell-Judith, MT $37.0 $25.0 $3.0 Source: Spend plan and budget request documents at Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Spend Plans,” https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html; Reclamation, “Bureau of Reclamation Budget,” https://www.usbr.gov/budget/; and Reclamation, “Share Biden-Harris Administration Announces $65 Mil ion in Rural Water Funding from President’s Investing in America Agenda,” October 30, on September 1, 2010, and for completing any additional work to ensure the study complied with Reclamation’s feasibility September 1, 2010, and for completing any additional work to ensure the study complied with Reclamation’s feasibility
standards. standards.
2221 Section 40901 of Title IX of Division D and Title III of Division J of the IIJA. The Rural Water Supply Act of 2006 Section 40901 of Title IX of Division D and Title III of Division J of the IIJA. The Rural Water Supply Act of 2006
(Title I of P.L. 109-451) created the Rural Water Supply Program, a structured program for developing and (Title I of P.L. 109-451) created the Rural Water Supply Program, a structured program for developing and
recommending future rural water supply projects. This program was to replace the previous process of authorizing recommending future rural water supply projects. This program was to replace the previous process of authorizing
projects individually—often without the level of analysis and review (e.g., feasibility studies) required for projects individually—often without the level of analysis and review (e.g., feasibility studies) required for
Reclamation’s other projects. Under the Rural Water Supply Program, Congress authorized Reclamation to work with Reclamation’s other projects. Under the Rural Water Supply Program, Congress authorized Reclamation to work with
rural communities and tribes to identify municipal and industrial water needs and options to address such needs through rural communities and tribes to identify municipal and industrial water needs and options to address such needs through
appraisal investigations and feasibility studies. Congress would then consider feasibility studies recommended by the appraisal investigations and feasibility studies. Congress would then consider feasibility studies recommended by the
Administration before authorizing specific project construction in legislation. In 2015, the Central Montana Rural Administration before authorizing specific project construction in legislation. In 2015, the Central Montana Rural
Water Authority submitted the Water Authority submitted the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System Feasibility Study to Reclamation for technical to Reclamation for technical
review under this program. Ultimately, Reclamation did not recommend and Congress did not authorize any projects review under this program. Ultimately, Reclamation did not recommend and Congress did not authorize any projects
before the authority for the program expired in 2016. However, the Clean Water for Rural Communities Act authorized before the authority for the program expired in 2016. However, the Clean Water for Rural Communities Act authorized
federal assistance for the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System in 2020. In addition, pursuant to Section 104 of P.L. federal assistance for the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System in 2020. In addition, pursuant to Section 104 of P.L.
109-451, the Secretary of the Interior developed a comprehensive assessment of the status and plans for completing the 109-451, the Secretary of the Interior developed a comprehensive assessment of the status and plans for completing the
design and construction of rural water supply projects that were individually authorized prior to enactment of the Rural design and construction of rural water supply projects that were individually authorized prior to enactment of the Rural
Water Supply Act of 2006. Water Supply Act of 2006.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

914 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) 2023, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-announces-65-mil ion-rural-water-funding-presidents. Notes: IIJA = Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58). a. IIJA FY2022 spend plan also included $32.0 mil ion of reserved funding. IIJA FY2025 spend plan adjusted the total provided to Rural Water in FY2022 from $420.0 mil ion to $450.0 mil ion. b. IIJA FY2024 spend plan stated that $30.0 mil ion of these funds were carryover from FY2022. c. IIJA FY2024 spend plan stated that Reclamation plans allocate $108 mil ion in FY2024, but only one press release announced $65.0 mil ion in funding to the projects as listed as of March 2024. d. FY2024 budget requests state that the project was anticipated to be substantially completed in FY2023. e. The Jicaril a Apache, NM, project was on hold until allocation of IIJA funding.

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~projects authorized prior to July 1, 2021, may be eligible to receive the appropriations provided~~
~~by the IIJA for the share of federal costs.23~~
~~ Garrison Diversion Unit of the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program~~
~~ Fort Peck Reservation/Dry Prairie Rural Water System~~
~~ Lewis and Clark Rural Water System~~
~~ Rocky Boy’s/North Central Montana Rural Water System~~
~~ Eastern New Mexico Water Supply~~
~~ Jicarilla Apache Rural Water System24~~
~~ Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System25~~
~~Assuming no major changes to existing project construction cost estimates, the $1 billion~~
~~provided by the IIJA for Reclamation rural water projects could satisfy nearly all of the federal~~
~~responsibilities for existing authorized projects. Potential issues for Congress in relation to~~
~~Reclamation rural water activities include the following:~~
~~ How will Reclamation distribute the IIJA funds to eligible rural water projects?~~
~~What oversight activities will Reclamation perform on the use of these funds?~~
~~ How much federal responsibility remains for funding Reclamation’s rural water~~
~~activities (e.g., construction, O&M) after IIJA funding is obligated? Will~~
~~Congress continue to provide annual appropriations to meet federal~~
~~responsibilities, and how would it prioritize those appropriations among projects~~
~~and activities?~~
~~ Will Congress continue to authorize Reclamation to review rural water feasibility~~
~~studies and to provide federal assistance for rural water projects upon completion~~
~~of feasibility studies?~~
Title XVI Water Recycling/Reuse
Reclamation’s Title XVI program provides assistance for nonfederal studies and construction Reclamation’s Title XVI program provides assistance for nonfederal studies and construction
projects to reclaim and reuse wastewater and naturally impaired surface and groundwater.projects to reclaim and reuse wastewater and naturally impaired surface and groundwater.2622 The The
original Title XVI legislation, authorized under the Reclamation Projects Authorization and original Title XVI legislation, authorized under the Reclamation Projects Authorization and
Adjustment Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575), approved construction of five reclamation wastewater Adjustment Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575), approved construction of five reclamation wastewater
projects and six wastewater and groundwater recycling/reclamation studies. Congress added new projects and six wastewater and groundwater recycling/reclamation studies. Congress added new
projects between 1992 and 2009, resulting in the authorization of 53 individual, geographically projects between 1992 and 2009, resulting in the authorization of 53 individual, geographically
specific Title XVI projects.specific Title XVI projects.2723
Amendments to the Title XVI program Amendments to the Title XVI program, enacted in December 2016 under Section 4009(c) of the enacted in December 2016 under Section 4009(c) of the
WIIN ActWIIN Act, approved a new mechanism to authorize Title XVI projects approved a new mechanism to authorize Title XVI projects~~: the~~. The WIIN Act authorized WIIN Act authorized
the Secretary of the Interior to accept and review nonfederal Title XVI feasibility studies to the Secretary of the Interior to accept and review nonfederal Title XVI feasibility studies to

~~23 It is unclear whether funds also may be provided for reviewing the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System~~
~~feasibility report as authorized in the Clean Water for Rural Communities Act at $5 million.~~
~~24 Reclamation and the Jicarilla Apache Nation would need to restart communication and their agreement to execute~~
~~this authorized project.~~
~~25 Per the Clean Water for Rural Communities Act, Reclamation must first establish that the current project is~~
~~substantially similar to the 2015 feasibility report.~~
~~26 The program name refers to the bill’s authorization for these projects, Title XVI of P.L. 102-575.~~
~~27 Many of these projects are complete or are no longer seeking funding.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

10

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

determine eligibility for future planning, design, and construction funding. To be eligible for determine eligibility for future planning, design, and construction funding. To be eligible for
federal funding, projects must be transmitted to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, then federal funding, projects must be transmitted to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, then
recommended for funding by the Secretary, and ultimately designated by Congress to receive recommended for funding by the Secretary, and ultimately designated by Congress to receive
funding in enacted appropriations legislation.funding in enacted appropriations legislation.2824 From 2017 to 2021, this process resulted in the From 2017 to 2021, this process resulted in the
approval of 61 additional projects and multiple rounds of project-specific funding. Accounting for approval of 61 additional projects and multiple rounds of project-specific funding. Accounting for
inactive and completed projects, CRS estimates that total remaining federal contributions for inactive and completed projects, CRS estimates that total remaining federal contributions for
active Title XVI projects prior to enactment of the IIJA were in excess of $700 million.active Title XVI projects prior to enactment of the IIJA were in excess of $700 million.2925
Title XVI project funding is awarded as grants to sponsors of nonfederal projects. Reclamation Title XVI project funding is awarded as grants to sponsors of nonfederal projects. Reclamation
conducts separate grant solicitations for those projects authorized individually by Congress and conducts separate grant solicitations for those projects authorized individually by Congress and
those authorized and approved pursuant to the WIIN Act. For most Title XVI projects, the federal those authorized and approved pursuant to the WIIN Act. For most Title XVI projects, the federal
cost share is up to 25% of project costs, not to exceed $20 million.cost share is up to 25% of project costs, not to exceed $20 million.3026
In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized a total of $1 billion for water recycling and In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized a total of $1 billion for water recycling and
reuse projects. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division reuse projects. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division
J of the act. Of the $1 billion for these projects, Congress designated $550 million for Title XVI J of the act. Of the $1 billion for these projects, Congress designated $550 million for Title XVI
projects in general. For projects funded in the IIJA, Congress waived the WIIN Act’s requirement projects in general. For projects funded in the IIJA, Congress waived the WIIN Act’s requirement
that these projects be designated by name in enacted appropriations legislation.that these projects be designated by name in enacted appropriations legislation.~~31 Title XVI~~
27 Title XVI 22 The program name refers to the bill’s authorization for these projects, Title XVI of P.L. 102-575. 23 Many of these projects are complete or are no longer seeking funding. 24 43 U.S.C. §390h(g)(2). 25 CRS analysis of Bureau of Reclamation data, updated in May 2021. 26 43 U.S.C. §390h-13. Although the $20 million statutory cap for these projects was authorized to be indexed to October 1996 prices, as of enactment of the IIJA, Reclamation continued to apply a cap of $20 million for most Title XVI projects. 27 P.L. 117-58, §40901(4)(A)(ii). Congressional Research Service 15 link to page 9 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) projects eligible under the IIJA appear to include not only projects that Reclamation has approved projects eligible under the IIJA appear to include not only projects that Reclamation has approved
but also future projects that may be approved under the WIIN Act authority. but also future projects that may be approved under the WIIN Act authority.
The remaining $450 million in funding is reserved for grants to “large-scale water recycling and The remaining $450 million in funding is reserved for grants to “large-scale water recycling and
reuse” projects, as authorized under Section 40905 of the IIJA. Congress defined these projects to reuse” projects, as authorized under Section 40905 of the IIJA. Congress defined these projects to
include water recycling and reuse projects (including conveyance projects) in a Reclamation state include water recycling and reuse projects (including conveyance projects) in a Reclamation state
with total costs in excess of $500 millionwith total costs in excess of $500 million for each project. In contrast to traditional Title XVI projects (which are . In contrast to traditional Title XVI projects (which are
limited to the lesser of $20 million or 25% federal cost share), projects under this section are limited to the lesser of $20 million or 25% federal cost share), projects under this section are
entitled to a federal cost share of 25% of project costs with no dollar cap on federal support. entitled to a federal cost share of 25% of project costs with no dollar cap on federal support.
Several projects approved for Title XVI support appear to meet the eligibility criteria for this Several projects approved for Title XVI support appear to meet the eligibility criteria for this
funding; however, this authority is not limited to previously approved Title XVI funding; however, this authority is not limited to previously approved Title XVI projects. Allocations/Implementation Reclamation allocated $309.8 million in IIJA funding for 24 Title XVI projects in FY2022, $150 million for these projects in FY2023, $29 million for these projects in FY2024, and $22.4 million for these projects in FY2025 (Table 1). Based on responses to funding solicitations, Reclamation has announced project-specific allocations for 24 projects selected to receive FY2022 funds; Reclamation reported that the total funding level was an increase from initially announced allocation levels due to the “high quality” of the applications received.28 Reclamation allocated no funding for large-scale projects in FY2022 but allocated $50 million for these projects in FY2023, $130 million for these projects in FY2024, and $128 million for these projects in FY2025 (Table 1). Desalination Projects Reclamation and other offices within DOI have supported desalination research and development since the early 1950s. In recent decades, Reclamation has worked to advance desalination with internal research, grants on specific topics of interest, and, at Congress’s direction, construction and operations of a facility for testing brackish desalination technologies.29 Section 4009(a) of the WIIN Act expanded the federal role in desalination facilities by authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to provide federal funding of up to 25% of the total cost of an eligible desalination project in a Reclamation state.30 The authority includes desalination of both seawater and brackish water and applies to facilities constructed, operated, or sponsored by an entity of a state. Similar to the process for Title XVI projects, a project may apply for and receive grant funding under the WIIN Act authority only after Reclamation has recommended the project for funding and Congress has approved it by name in an enacted appropriations bill.31 Between 2016 and 2021, Reclamation approved 13 desalination projects for potential funding under this authority and began to recommend funding for individual projects.32 28 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum-August to January 14, 2022, Initial Spend Plan, August 31, 2022, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2023/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-05-02-2023.pdf. 29 Most of these activities were formally authorized in the Water Desalination Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-298). 30 §4009(a) of the WIIN Act included no per-project cap on grant funding. Reclamation previously has capped these awards at the lesser of 25% of total project costs or $20 million. 31 42 U.S.C. §10301 note. 32 For individual project eligibility and awards, see Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART, Desalination,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/desalination/index.html. Congressional Research Service 16 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $250 million for desalination project grants pursuant to Section 4009(a) of the WIIN Act. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division D of the IIJA. As with the waiver it provided for WIIN Act Title XVI projects in the IIJA, Congress waived the WIIN Act requirement for desalination projects to be designated by name in enacted appropriations legislation.33 Eligible desalination projects appear to include not only projects that Reclamation has approved but also future desalination projects approved under the WIIN Act authority. Unlike the Title XVI funding in the IIJA, there is no carve-out of IIJA desalination funds for larger facilities that are exempt from administrative caps, and the legislation did not place a cap on per-project funding under this authority. Allocations/Implementation Reclamation requested $15 million for IIJA desalination project funding in FY2022. For FY2023 funding, Reclamation allocated $8.1 million. For FY2024, Reclamation allocated a net of $16 million to the program (i.e., after a transfer to the Colorado River Endangered Species line, see below), and for FY2025 Reclamation allocated $101.7 million for desalination projects (Table 1). Reclamation also published grant solicitations for these allocations, and in 2023 announced awards for planning and feasibility study activities associated with desalination in 2023.34 Safety of Dams Projects Reclamation manages 489 dams throughout Reclamation states.35 Reclamation’s Dam Safety Program provides for inspection and repairs to qualifying projects at Reclamation dams.36 Reclamation conducts dam safety inspections through the Safety Evaluation of Existing Dams (SEED) program.37~~projects.~~
~~According to Reclamation, Congress appropriated $840 million for Title XVI projects from the~~
~~inception of the Title XVI program in 1992 through January 2021.32 Thus, the IIJA’s influx of~~
~~funding over five years represents more resources than have been made available for the program~~
~~in the previous 30 years combined. Although there is considerable demand for Title XVI funding~~
~~and projects, the maturity of individual projects, as well as the ability of local project sponsors to~~
~~fund their project cost shares, varies widely. Additionally, it is unclear how many projects will~~
~~benefit from the new large-scale water recycling and reuse authority and to what extent. For~~
~~example, under the Title XVI WIIN Act authority, Reclamation in May 2021 approved a project~~
~~by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California with total estimated costs of $2.7~~
~~billion. Without a dollar cost cap, 25% of this project’s costs would be $675 million. Thus,~~
~~Reclamation may not fund the full 25% of project costs as authorized under this authority but still~~
~~could provide funding for this project well in excess of the previous project caps.~~

~~28 43 U.S.C. §390h(g)(2).~~
~~29 CRS analysis of Bureau of Reclamation data, updated in May 2021.~~
~~30 43 U.S.C. §390h-13. Although the $20 million statutory cap for these projects was authorized to be indexed to~~
~~October 1996 prices, as of enactment of the IIJA, Reclamation continued to apply a cap of $20 million for most Title~~
~~XVI projects.~~
~~31 P.L. 117-58, §40901(4)(A)(ii).~~
~~32 CRS analysis of Bureau of Reclamation data as of January 2021.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

11

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~Congress may be interested in future project-based allocations under this authority and the extent~~
~~to which the de facto exemption to previous Title XVI cost shares authorized under the new large-~~
~~scale water recycling and reuse authority alleviates pressure on regular Title XVI allocations~~
~~and/or leads to calls for other changes to the program’s cost-sharing requirements. Some in~~
~~Congress have called for Reclamation to increase the federal cost-share cap of $20 million for~~
~~most Title XVI projects. Congress originally authorized this cap of $20 million in federal costs~~
~~indexed to 1996 costs. Advocates note that if Reclamation adopted such an adjustment, the new~~
~~federal cap would be $35 million and the IIJA could increase its support for individual projects.33~~
~~Safety of Dams Projects~~
~~Reclamation manages 491 dams throughout Reclamation states.34 Reclamation’s Dam Safety~~
~~Program provides for inspection and repairs to qualifying projects at Reclamation dams.35~~
~~Reclamation conducts dam safety inspections through the Safety Evaluation of Existing Dams~~
~~(SEED) program.36~~ Reclamation carries out corrective actions, if necessary, through the Initiate Reclamation carries out corrective actions, if necessary, through the Initiate
Safety of Dams Corrective Action (ISCA) program. With ISCA appropriations, Reclamation Safety of Dams Corrective Action (ISCA) program. With ISCA appropriations, Reclamation
funds modifications on priority structures based on an evolving identification of risks and needs. funds modifications on priority structures based on an evolving identification of risks and needs.
In April 2021, Reclamation estimated the needs for dam safety projects over the FY2021-FY2025 In April 2021, Reclamation estimated the needs for dam safety projects over the FY2021-FY2025
period at $1.4 billion.period at $1.4 billion.3738 The analysis provided further details on estimated needs over a 30-year The analysis provided further details on estimated needs over a 30-year
period (FY2021-FY2050) for dam safety projects: $2.1 billion for 12 projectsperiod (FY2021-FY2050) for dam safety projects: $2.1 billion for 12 projects~~, including~~. More than half of this amount would be for the B.F. the B.F.
Sisk Dam modification projectSisk Dam modification project, ~~(estimated at $1.1 billion).38 In FY2021, Congress provided~~
~~$107.1 million for Reclamation’s Dam Safety Program, including $86.5 million for the ISCA~~
~~program to fund construction of five projects and preconstruction activities for seven projects.39~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $500 million for the Dam Safety Program, in~~
~~accordance with the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978, as amended (43 U.S.C. §§506 et~~
~~seq.). Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the~~
~~IIJA. Reclamation may provide funding for various activities of Reclamation’s Dam Safety~~
~~Program, including SEED and ISCA activities. A nonfederal cost share may be required for some~~
~~of these activities. The Reclamation Safety of Dams Act Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-404)~~
~~required a 15% cost share from sponsors for dam safety modifications when modifications are~~
~~based on new hydrologic or seismic data or on changes in state-of-the-art design or construction~~

~~33 Letter from Dianne Feinstein, United States Senator, and Alex Padilla, United States Senator, to Deb Haaland,~~
~~Secretary of the Interior, December 17, 2021, at https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/f/0/f08d000e-~~
~~ad89-4a99-8716-8efe81c981df/3F93F947159E449312688743A4671C79.water-priorities-letter-v2.pdf.~~
~~34 Of the total dams, 364 dams at 243~~estimated at $1.1 billion.39 33 P.L. 117-58, §40901(5)(B). 34 Bureau of Reclamation, “Reclamation Invests $28.97 Million to Assist with Planning and Feasibility Study Development for 31 Water Recycling and Desalination Projects,” press release, September 27, 2023, https://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/news-release/4639. 35 Of the total dams, 361 dams at 241 facilities are classified as high and significant hazard (i.e., dam failure could facilities are classified as high and significant hazard (i.e., dam failure could
result in fatalities and/or significant economic destruction). Reclamation, result in fatalities and/or significant economic destruction). Reclamation, ~~FY2022~~FY2024 Bureau of Reclamation Budget
Justifications, , ~~2021, p. BW-11, at~~2023, p. GS-4, https://www.usbr.gov/budget/. https://www.usbr.gov/budget/.
3536 Funding for Reclamation’s dam safety program also supports the Department of the Interior Dam Safety Program Funding for Reclamation’s dam safety program also supports the Department of the Interior Dam Safety Program
($1.3 million in ($1.3 million in ~~FY2021~~FY2023). The Commissioner of Reclamation serves as the Department of the Interior’s coordinator for ). The Commissioner of Reclamation serves as the Department of the Interior’s coordinator for
dam safety and advises the Secretary of the Interior on program development and operation of the department’s dam dam safety and advises the Secretary of the Interior on program development and operation of the department’s dam
safety programs. safety programs.
3637 Bureau of Reclamation, Reclamation, Dam Safety Public Protection Guidelines: A Risk Framework to Support Dam Safety Decision-Making, ,
2011, 2011, at https://www.usbr.gov/ssle/damsafety/documents/PPG201108.pdf. https://www.usbr.gov/ssle/damsafety/documents/PPG201108.pdf.
3738 Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Reclamation, Asset Management Report Pursuant to the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management,
and Recreation Act of March 12, 2019, April 2021, , April 2021, at https://www.usbr.gov/infrastructure/mrr/docs/asset-management-https://www.usbr.gov/infrastructure/mrr/docs/asset-management-
report-to-congress.pdf. report-to-congress.pdf.
3839 The median estimate of need per project over the 30-year timeframe was $39.0 million. The median estimate of need per project over the 30-year timeframe was $39.0 million.
~~39 Funding also included $19.3 million for the Safety Evaluation of Existing Dams program and $1.3 million for the~~
~~Department of the Interior’s Dam Safety Program.~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

12

~~link to page 6~~ 17 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $500.0 million for the Dam Safety Program, in accordance with the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978, as amended (43 U.S.C. §§506 et seq.). Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the IIJA. Reclamation may provide funding for various activities within its Dam Safety Program, including SEED and ISCA activities. A nonfederal cost share may be required for some of these activities. The Reclamation Safety of Dams Act Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-404) required a 15% cost share from sponsors for dam safety modifications when modifications are based on new hydrologic or seismic data, or changes in state-of-the-art design or construction criteria that are deemed necessary for safety purposes. Congress directed Reclamation to allocate costs resulting from age and normal deterioration or from lack of maintenance according to the purpose for which the structure was authorized for construction.40 Allocations/Implementation Reclamation allocated $100.0 million in~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~criteria that are deemed necessary for safety purposes. Reclamation is to allocate costs resulting~~
~~from age and normal deterioration or from lack of maintenance according to the purpose for~~
~~which the structure was authorized for construction.40~~
~~It is unclear whether IIJA funding for the Dam Safety Program also may apply to developing~~
~~additional project benefits in conjunction with dam safety modifications. In 2015, Section 203 of~~
~~P.L. 114-113 amended the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act to authorize the Secretary of the~~
~~Interior to develop additional project benefits while making dam safety modifications, if such~~
~~additional benefits are deemed necessary and in the interests of the United States and the~~
~~project.41 Nonfederal entities or partners and Reclamation must agree to a cost share related to the~~
~~additional project benefits. Some projects under this authority, such as the B.F. Sisk Dam Raise~~
~~and Reservoir Expansion, were proposed for funding under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act.42~~
~~The IIJA provides nearly five times the annual funding for Reclamation’s Dam Safety Program~~
~~than Congress provided to Reclamation in FY2021. Reclamation’s distribution of~~ IIJA funding IIJA funding
~~for its Dam Safety Program could be a subject of congressional oversight, including questions~~
~~about the amount of funding provided for dam safety modification projects and whether funds are~~
~~provided for the SEED program or Reclamation’s Dam Safety Program. For example, IIJA~~
~~funding could complete most of the 12 dam safety projects listed in an April 2021 report~~
~~estimating Reclamation’s dam safety needs. However, $500 million would not complete either of~~
~~the two most expensive dam safety projects listed in that report. In addition, IIJA dam safety~~
~~funding may be eligible for providing the federal cost share of project benefits constructed in~~
~~addition to dam safety modifications. The level of future annual appropriations for Reclamation’s~~
~~Dam Safety Program also could draw congressional attention.~~
for one authorized dam safety project—B.F. Sisk Dam—in its FY2022 spend plan.41 According to a 2022 press release, Reclamation used both IIJA and annual appropriations for the initial construction of the project.42 For FY2023, Reclamation stated, the “Safety of Dams Program has sufficient funds in the FY2023 request to support all ongoing activities and will not require additional [Bipartisan Infrastructure Law] funding during this period.”43 In its FY2025 spend plan, Reclamation stated it allocated $130.0 million in FY2024, but did not specify which projects would receive the funding.44 The FY2025 spend plan also stated that Reclamation plans to allocate $127.5 million in FY2025. WaterSMART Grants
Reclamation provides federal funding for projects in four categories under its WaterSMART Reclamation provides federal funding for projects in four categories under its WaterSMART
Grants program: water and energy efficiency, small-scale water efficiency, water marketing strategy, and program: water and energy efficiency, small-scale water efficiency, water marketing strategy, and
environmental water resources projects. Congress originally approved authority for WaterSMART environmental water resources projects. Congress originally approved authority for WaterSMART
grants in Section 9504 of the Secure Water Act (Title IX of P.L. 111-11) and has amended the grants in Section 9504 of the Secure Water Act (Title IX of P.L. 111-11) and has amended the
authority multiple times.authority multiple times.4345 The program’s initial focus was The program’s initial focus was ~~providing~~ water and energy water and energy efficiency grants, but Reclamation has administratively added other, related grant opportunities over time, such as those for~~efficiency~~
~~grants. In FY2017, Reclamation expanded grant opportunities to include~~ small-scale water small-scale water
efficiency projects and water marketing strategy efficiency projects and water marketing strategy ~~development.44 The federal government funds up~~
~~to 50% of project costs for each of these three grant types. Pursuant to P.L. 116-260, Reclamation~~
~~began funding a fourth category of grants for environmental water resources projects in FY2022;~~
~~the maximum potential federal cost share for these projects is 75%.~~
development (added in FY2017) and for environmental water resources projects (added in FY2022).46 Section 9502 of the Secure Water Act, as amended, defined eligible applicants for WaterSMART Section 9502 of the Secure Water Act, as amended, defined eligible applicants for WaterSMART
grants to include states, Indian tribes, irrigation districts, water districts, grants to include states, Indian tribes, irrigation districts, water districts, and other organizations with other organizations with
water or power delivery authority, as well as nonprofit conservation organizations acting in water or power delivery authority, as well as nonprofit conservation organizations acting in

40 43 U.S.C. §508. 41 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum-DS to January 14, 2022, Initial Spend Plan, March 22, 2022, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2022/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Dam-Safety-Addendum-DS-3-21-2022.pdf. 42 Bureau of Reclamation, “Interior Department Invests $100 Million in First Dam Safety Project Through President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” March 22, 2022, at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-invests-100-million-first-dam-safety-project-through-president. 43 Bureau of Reclamation, “Spend Plans.” 44 Bureau of Reclamation, “Spend Plans.” 45 42 U.S.C. §10364. 46 For more information on the newest category, see Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART, Environmental Water Resources Projects,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/ewrp/index.html. Congressional Research Service 18 link to page 9 ~~40 43 U.S.C. §508.~~
~~41 43 U.S.C. §509b.~~
~~42 See prior section, “Water Storage and Conveyance Projects.”~~
~~43 42 U.S.C. §§10361 et seq.~~
~~44 WaterSMART grants initially were referred to as Challenge Grants and were first funded during FY2009 based on~~
~~supplemental funding made available in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5). In 2010, the~~
~~broader WaterSMART Program was established within the department and the grant program’s name was changed to~~
WaterSMART grants.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

13

Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

partnership with one of the aforementioned organizations. partnership with one of the aforementioned organizations.~~45 As with most Reclamation programs,~~
~~applicants must be located in a Reclamation state or territory~~47 Applicants also must be located in a Reclamation State or Territory (as identified in the Reclamation Act of 1902, as amended) or in Alaska, Hawaii, or Puerto Rico. The statutory maximum amount per . The statutory maximum amount per
grant is generally $5 million; in practice, grant is generally $5 million; in practice, ~~though,~~ Reclamation has set lesser caps for Reclamation has set lesser caps for ~~the various~~
~~categories of these grants.46~~various WaterSMART grant categories.48 The federal government funds up to 50% of project costs for most WaterSMART grants; however, the maximum potential federal cost share for environmental water resource projects (authorized in P.L. 116-260) is 75%.
In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $400 million for WaterSMART grants. In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $400 million for WaterSMART grants.
Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act.
The only additional stipulations for this funding under the IIJA are that $100 million must be The only additional stipulations for this funding under the IIJA are that $100 million must be
made available for WaterSMART projects that would improve natural or nature-based features, as made available for WaterSMART projects that would improve natural or nature-based features, as
defined in Section 5504 of P.L. 111-11.defined in Section 5504 of P.L. 111-11.~~47 It is unclear whether the IIJA funding would be solicited~~
~~separately or would be combined with future discretionary grant funding for the same purposes.~~
~~Coupled with the 2020 amendments to the WaterSMART grants authority in the Secure Water~~
~~Act, the $400 million for WaterSMART grants funding in the IIJA is a significant influx of~~
~~funding that expands the number and types of WaterSMART grant projects funded by~~
~~Reclamation. Congress may be interested in the extent of nonfederal demand for this funding,~~
~~including in the $100 million in funding for projects with natural and nature-based features~~
~~(presumably similar to the aforementioned environmental water resource project category~~
~~authorized in P.L. 116-260). Although WaterSMART grants typically have been limited to~~
~~Reclamation states and territories, if these areas do not generate sufficient demand for IIJA~~
~~funding, representatives from non-Reclamation states might propose rescission of funds, or else~~
~~expansion of eligible recipient locations to areas they represent. Congress also may be interested~~
~~in how certain WaterSMART authorizing provisions (e.g., cost-share caps) are applied in the~~
~~context of the funding increases under the IIJA and the extent to which this practice affects the~~
~~success of the WaterSMART grant program.48~~
~~Colorado River Drought Contingency Plans~~
~~As part of its authorized federal role and the large number of federally managed projects in the~~
~~Colorado River Basin, the federal government has led multiple efforts attempting to improve the~~
~~basin’s water supply outlook. The latest of these efforts culminated in the 2019 approval by~~
~~Reclamation and the basin states, as well as by Congress (in the Colorado River Drought~~
~~Contingency Plan Authorization Act; P.L. 116-14), of drought contingency plans (DCPs) for the~~
~~Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins. Among other provisions, the DCPs required reductions~~
~~beyond previous curtailment plans based on Lake Mead storage levels, committed Reclamation to~~
~~additional water conservation efforts, and put in place plans to coordinate Upper Basin operations~~
~~to enhance Lake Powell storage levels and hydropower generation.49~~

~~45 42 U.S.C. §10362.~~
~~46 For more information and grant solicitation links, see Reclamation, “WaterSMART,” at~~ 49 Allocations/Implementation Reclamation allocated $120 million in IIJA funds for WaterSMART grants in FY2022, $112.5 million in FY2023, $50.5 million in FY2024, and $8 million in FY2025 (Table 1). This funding has been used for sub-awards in multiple categories of WaterSMART grants, including water and energy efficiency projects, drought resiliency projects, and small scale water efficiency projects.50 Apart from “traditional” categories of WaterSMART grants, Reclamation has also allocated funding from the $100 million appropriated for natural or nature-based projects: $40 million in FY2022, $37 million in FY2023, $17 million in FY2024, and $1.5 million in FY2025. Reclamation has combined solicitation of the latter funding with two other related categories of its IIJA funding (Cooperative Watershed Management Program and Watershed Health Improvement, see below) under the WaterSMART Environmental Water Resources Projects grant “umbrella,”51 and has reported on funding awarded in each category in spend plan addendums. For instance, Reclamation reported individual project awards totaling $51.1 million for Environmental Water Resources Projects in FY2023 and FY2024; of this total, $23.6 million was for natural or nature-based features projects, $10 million was for Cooperative Watershed Management projects, and $17.5 million was for Multi-Benefit Watershed Health Improvement projects.52 Cooperative Watershed Management Program Subtitle A of Title VI of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11 as amended, 16 U.S.C. §§1015 et seq.) authorized the Cooperative Watershed Management Program (CWMP), which provides funding to form watershed groups in the West that develop local 47 42 U.S.C. §10362. 48 For more information and grant solicitation links, see Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART,” https://www.usbr.gov/https://www.usbr.gov/
watersmart/index.html. watersmart/index.html.
~~47 42 U.S.C. §10364.~~
~~48 For example, some in Congress have called for Reclamation to uniformly apply the maximum cost share of $5~~
~~million per project for WaterSMART grants (instead of applying a lesser cap for some projects, as is currently the~~
~~practice). See Letter from Dianne Feinstein, United States Senator, and Alex Padilla, United States Senator, to Deb~~
~~Haaland, Secretary of the Interior, December 17, 2021, at https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/f/0/~~
~~f08d000e-ad89-4a99-8716-8efe81c981df/3F93F947159E449312688743A4671C79.water-priorities-letter-v2.pdf.~~
~~49 For more information about drought contingency plans and the Colorado River, see CRS Report R45546,~~
Management of the Colorado River: Water Allocations, Drought, and the Federal Role, by Charles V. Stern and
~~Pervaze A. Sheikh.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

14

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~One of the primary federal contributions to the DCPs approved by Congress in P.L. 116-14 was~~
~~additional grant support for voluntary conservation projects in the Colorado River Basin whose~~
~~water savings are dedicated to basin-wide system water.50 Congress originally authorized federal~~
~~participation in these efforts in 2015 (Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act,~~
~~2015; P.L. 113-235, Division D). As of September 2019, Reclamation estimated the Lower Basin~~
~~program had conserved 175,347 AF of system water, at an average cost of $170.14 per AF.51 Both~~
~~the Upper and the Lower Basin DCPs included provisions to expand these efforts.~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $300 million for the DCPs. Congress~~
49 42 U.S.C. §10364. 50 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum, ESA & WaterSMART, December 2022, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2023/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-ESA%20WaterSMART12-27-2022.pdf. 51 For more information, see Bureau of Reclamation, “Environmental Water Resources Projects,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/ewrp/index.html. 52 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum—Rural Water, WaterSMART Environmental, Aquatic Ecosystem, December 19, 2023, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2024/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-12-19-2023.pdf. Congressional Research Service 19 link to page 9 link to page 22 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) solutions to address water management needs. These groups are self-sustaining, consensus-based stakeholder groups. Funding recipients must be grassroots, nonregulatory entities that address water availability and quality issues within a watershed, represent a diverse group of stakeholders, and are capable of promoting water supply reliability.53 As of 2021, CWMP funding supported two separate phases for projects. Phase I funds watershed group development and watershed restoration projects, providing funds for start-up costs, restoration planning, and project design.54 Phase II funds implementation of watershed management projects, providing cost-shared assistance to watershed groups to implement projects. Reclamation awarded $10.0 million in funding for the establishment and development of 108 watershed groups and $3.0 million for the implementation of 18 watershed management projects from FY2012 through FY2021.55 In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $100.0 million for watershed management projects (i.e., Phase II projects) in accordance with Title VI, Subtitle A, of P.L. 111-11 (i.e., CWMP). Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Allocations/Implementation Reclamation allocated $18.0 million in IIJA funds for the CWMP in FY2022, $20.0 million for FY2023, $20.0 million for FY2024, and $19.5 million for FY2025 (Table 1).56 Reclamation chose to solicit project grants under Phase II of the program as “Environmental Water Resources Projects,” a new category of WaterSMART grants as of FY2022 (see previous section, “WaterSMART Grants”). To date, Reclamation has reported on grant recipients and allocations for the FY2022 and FY2023 Environmental Water Resources Projects grants. However, through the annual appropriations process, Reclamation is using appropriations for the Cooperative Watershed Management line item to fund both Phase I and Phase II activities.57 Watershed Health Improvement In Section 40907 of the IIJA, Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program by November 15, 2022, to award competitive grants to eligible applicants for the design, implementation, and monitoring of multi-benefit habitat restoration projects. These projects are to improve watershed health in a river basin that is adversely impacted by a Reclamation water project.58 Eligible applicants may include states, tribal or local governments, organizations with 53 For more information, see Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART, Cooperative Watershed Management Program,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/cwmp/index.html. 54 Phase I projects may receive assistance of up to $50,000 per year for a period of up to two years (i.e., $100,000 total), with no nonfederal cost share required. Funding caps are less than those authorized in the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11). For more information on the status of the program, which currently only includes Phase I grants, see Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART, Cooperative Watershed Management Program,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/cwmp/index.html. 55 Bureau of Reclamation, FY2023 Bureau of Reclamation Budget Justifications, 2022, p. BW-73, https://www.usbr.gov/budget/. 56 Bureau of Reclamation, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Annual Spend Plan Update, FY2024 Submission, at https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. 57 Reclamation still intends to include annual appropriations for Phase II projects under the Environmental Water Resources Projects WaterSMART grant solicitations. Bureau of Reclamation, FY2025 Bureau of Reclamation Budget Justifications, 2024, p. BW-72, https://www.usbr.gov/budget/. 58 Projects must provide one or more of the following objectives: ecosystem benefits; restoration of native species; (continued...) Congressional Research Service 20 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) power or water delivery authority, regional authorities, or nonprofit conservation organizations. The federal cost share for projects is limited to 50% but may be up to 75% for projects where the water conservation and habitat restoration benefits of the project account for at least 75% of the project cost. In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $100.0 million for these multi-benefit projects to improve watershed health, in accordance with Section 40907 of the IIJA. In Division J of the act, Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026). Allocations/Implementation Reclamation allocated $20.0 million of funding for this program in FY2023 (Table 1), which was part of the Environmental Water Resources Projects WaterSMART grant solicitation.59 In FY2024, Reclamation allocated $25.0 million of IIJA funding for these activities, and $26.0 million in FY2025. As stated above, Reclamation has reported on grant recipients and allocations for FY2023 Environmental Water Resources Projects grants, which was authorized to include Watershed Health Improvement activities. Outside of IIJA funding, Reclamation has not requested, and Congress has not provided, appropriations specifically for Watershed Health Improvement activities. Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Reclamation has performed aquatic ecosystem restoration and other environmental mitigation activities in the Reclamation states; however, prior to 2021, Reclamation often conducted these activities to fulfill requirements in federal laws (e.g., for the conservation of species listed under the authorities of the Endangered Species Act [ESA])60 or pursuant to a site-specific authorization. Congress has since provided Reclamation with a broad aquatic ecosystem restoration authority. Section 1109 of Division FF of P.L. 116-260 (33 U.S.C. §2330c) authorized ~~the act. The only~~
~~additional stipulations for this funding under the IIJA are that $50 million must be made available~~
~~for efforts associated with the Upper Basin DCP.~~
~~DCP signees aim to conserve an overall amount of water in the Colorado River system using~~
~~federal seed funding, but there is no comprehensive estimate of the potential water savings~~
~~(including likely costs per AF) associated with future DCP-related grant agreements for system~~
~~conservation and other efforts. For instance, it is unclear how future grant agreements might~~
~~compare with the aforementioned 2015-2019 Lower Basin efforts and to what extent future~~
~~system conservation might be more costly than earlier efforts. Congress may be interested in the~~
~~geographic distribution of future grants and other financial assistance, as well as the relative~~
~~efficiency (in terms of water savings per dollar) of DCP water conservation efforts over time and~~
~~the potential for these efforts to serve as a model for other areas.~~
~~Colorado River Endangered Species Activities~~
~~As part of Reclamation’s role in Upper Colorado River Basin water management, Reclamation~~
~~and its partners operate several programs that fund activities to protect and restore fish species in~~
~~the Colorado River and its tributaries. Some of these programs provide the basin’s federal and~~
~~nonfederal project compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 87 Stat. 884, 16 U.S.C.~~
~~§§1531-1544). These programs include the following:~~
 The Upper Colorado and the San Juan River Basins Endangered Fish
Recovery Programs (Fish Programs). The Fish Programs were established in
~~1988 and 1992, respectively, and were formally authorized by Congress in P.L.~~
~~106-392. The programs provide compliance with ESA and allow federal and~~
~~nonfederal water and power projects in the Upper Basin to operate without~~
~~violating ESA.~~
~~ The Lower Colorado River Multispecies Conservation Program (MSCP).~~
~~The MSCP is a 50-year, multi-stakeholder initiative to maintain ESA compliance~~
~~and conserve 27 special status species (including 8 species listed under ESA)~~
~~along the Lower Colorado River, while maintaining water and power supplies for~~
~~users. DOI formally established the program in 2005, and Congress authorized it~~
~~under Subtitle E of Title IX of P.L. 111-11.~~
~~ The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP). The AMP~~
~~was established in 1997 in response to a directive from Congress under the Grand~~

~~50 System water refers to water that is provided to increase water supplies as a whole, without being directed toward~~
~~additional consumptive use for specific contractors or water users.~~
~~51 Lower Colorado Region, “Pilot System Conservation Program,” at https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/~~
~~PilotSysConsProg/pilotsystem.html.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

15

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~Canyon Protection Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575).52 Among other aims, the AMP~~
~~attempts to integrate dam operations, downstream resource protection and~~
~~management, and monitoring and research in the river south of Glen Canyon~~
~~Dam.~~
~~Pursuant to their authorizing legislation, for more than two decades, the Fish Programs and the~~
~~AMP were funded by Upper Basin hydropower revenues transferred from the Department of~~
~~Energy’s Western Area Power Administration.53 However, due to a revised statutory~~
~~interpretation, additional appropriations from Congress have been required to make these funds~~
~~available since FY2019. The MSCP typically is funded with discretionary appropriations for~~
~~Reclamation’s Lower Colorado River Operations program.~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $50 million for the Fish Programs, the AMP,~~
~~and the MSCP. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division~~
~~J of the act. Congress did not specify how the funding is to be allocated among individual~~
~~programs.~~
~~The additional funding for the Fish Programs and the AMP in the IIJA may supplement potential~~
~~funding shortfalls faced by these programs. However, it is unclear to what extent this funding will~~
~~address the programs’ long-term structural issues (in particular, those issues faced by the Fish~~
~~Programs). Reclamation’s decisions related to the exact allocation and disbursement of funds~~
~~among the programs may be of interest to Congress; although all of these authorities generally~~
~~benefit environmental activities in the Colorado River Basin, their specific benefits are~~
~~concentrated in different parts of the basin and affect different basin interests to varying extents.~~
~~Desalination Projects~~
~~Reclamation and other offices within DOI have supported desalination research and development~~
~~since the early 1950s. In recent decades, Reclamation has worked to advance desalination with~~
~~internal research, grants on specific topics of interest and, at Congress’s direction, construction~~
~~and operations of a facility for testing brackish desalination technologies.54 Section 4009(a) of the~~
~~WIIN Act expanded the federal role in desalination facilities by authorizing~~ the Secretary of the the Secretary of the
~~Interior to provide federal funding of up to 25% of the total cost of an eligible desalination project~~
~~in a Reclamation state.55 The authority includes desalination of both seawater and brackish water~~
~~and applies to facilities constructed, operated, or sponsored by an entity of a state. Similarly to the~~
~~process for Title XVI projects, a project may apply for and receive grant funding under the WIIN~~
~~Act authority only after Reclamation has recommended the project for funding and Congress has~~
~~approved it by name in an enacted appropriations bill.56 Between 2016 and 2021, Reclamation~~
~~approved 13 desalination projects for potential funding under this authority and began to~~
~~recommend funding for individual projects.57~~

~~52 In P.L. 102-575, Congress provided that Reclamation operate Glen Canyon Dam “in such a manner as to protect,~~
~~mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National~~
~~Recreation Area were established.”~~
~~53 Normally, these funds would be slated for repayment of Colorado River Storage Project costs to the Treasury.~~
~~54 Most of these activities were formally authorized in the Water Desalination Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-298).~~
~~55 §4009(a) of the WIIN Act included no per project cap on grant funding. Reclamation previously has capped these~~
~~awards at the lesser of 25% of total project costs or $20 million.~~
~~56 42 U.S.C. 10301 note.~~
~~57 For individual project eligibility and awards, see Reclamation, WaterSMART, “Desalination,” at~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

16

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $250 million for desalination project grants~~
~~pursuant to Section 4009(a) of the WIIN Act. Congress appropriated this funding over five years~~
~~(FY2022-FY2026) in Division D of the IIJA. As with the waiver it provided for WIIN Act Title~~
~~XVI projects in the IIJA, Congress waived the WIIN Act’s requirement for desalination projects~~
~~to be designated by name in enacted appropriations legislation.58 Unlike recent desalination~~
~~projects funded under the WIIN Act authorities, no additional congressional approval is required~~
~~for Reclamation to release IIJA desalination project grant funding to individual projects. Eligible~~
~~desalination projects appear to include not only projects that Reclamation has approved but also~~
~~future desalination projects approved under the WIIN Act authority.~~
~~From FY2018 to FY2021 (i.e., prior to enactment of the IIJA), Congress approved $12 million~~
~~per year in annual discretionary funds for desalination project grants under Section 4009(a) of the~~
~~WIIN Act. The $250 million in the IIJA represents a significant increase in funding for~~
~~desalination projects under this authority. Although the IIJA funds are likely to facilitate the~~
~~completion of smaller desalination projects eligible for this funding, some larger desalination~~
~~facilities are expected to cost several hundred million dollars to construct, and the administrative~~
~~limitations that Reclamation has previously applied to the program have capped individual project~~
~~awards at $20 million. Additionally, unlike the Title XVI funding in the IIJA, there is no carve-~~
~~out of IIJA desalination funds for larger facilities that are exempt from administrative caps. The~~
prior cap for desalination projects was established administratively (i.e., it was technically not
~~provided in law under the WIIN Act); thus, Reclamation may revisit this policy. Any such change,~~
~~along with decisions related to the timing and distribution of these funds, may be of interest to~~
~~Congress in its oversight capacities.~~
~~Ecosystem Restoration~~
~~Reclamation has performed aquatic ecosystem restoration and other environmental mitigation~~
~~activities in the Reclamation states; however, Reclamation often conducted these activities to~~
~~fulfill requirements in federal laws (e.g., for the conservation of ESA-listed species) or pursuant~~
~~to a site-specific authorization. These site-specific authorizations have included authorizations~~
~~related to Reclamation projects and regional programs to benefit ecosystems and species in~~
~~particular river basins. For example, the Water Supply, Reliability, and Environmental~~
~~Improvement Act (P.L. 108-361) authorized DOI, including Reclamation, to implement~~
~~ecosystem restoration projects and activities in the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers’ Delta in~~
~~California, and the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 (Section 515 of P.L. 110-229)~~
~~authorized the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to~~
~~coordinate with states and federal agencies to implement the Platte River Recovery~~
~~Implementation Program. Congress provided Reclamation with a broad aquatic ecosystem~~
~~restoration authority under P.L. 116-260.~~
~~Section 1109 of Division FF of P.L. 116-260 (33 U.S.C. 2330c) authorized the Secretary of the~~
~~Interior to enter into agreements with eligible entities to fund the design, study, and construction~~
~~of aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection projects in Reclamation states. The projects must~~
~~aim to improve the health of fisheries, wildlife, or aquatic habitat and may include habitat~~
~~restoration and improved fish passage (e.g., dam removal, fish way construction).59 The Secretary~~

Interior to enter into agreements with eligible entities to fund the design, study, and construction of aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection projects in Reclamation states.61 The projects must aim to improve the health of fisheries, wildlife, or aquatic habitat and may include habitat restoration and improved fish passage (e.g., dam removal, fish way construction).62 To initiate these projects, eligible entities must enter into an agreement with the Secretary of the Interior to pay no less than 35% of project costs and 100% of operation, mitigation against the impacts of climate change on fish and wildlife habitats; protection against invasive species; ecosystem restoration; enhancement of commercial, recreational, subsistence, or tribal ceremonial fishing; and enhancement of river-based recreation. 59 Bureau of Reclamation, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Annual Spend Plan Update, FY2024 Submission, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. 60 87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544. 61 Eligible entities may include states, Indian tribes, irrigation districts, or water districts; state, regional, or local authorities with a water or power delivery authority; other entities or organizations that own a facility eligible for upgrade, modification, or removal; nonprofit conservation organizations acting in partnership with a previously listed entity for a project involving land or infrastructure owned by that entity; combinations of previously listed entities; and agencies established under state law for the joint exercise of powers. 62 The Secretary of the Interior also must ensure the project will not hinder existing water delivery obligations; will not negatively affect the environment; is consistent with trust responsibilities for federally recognized Indian tribes; complies with applicable treaties, compacts, and agreements; is in the federal interest; and complies with all federal and state laws. Congressional Research Service 21 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation costs.63 Section 1109 of P.L. 116-260 authorized appropriations of $15.0 million annually from FY2022 through FY2026. Applicants must be located in a Reclamation state or territory.64 In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $250.0 million for the design, study, and construction of aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection projects in accordance with Section 1109 of Division FF of P.L. 116-260 (33 U.S.C. §2330c). Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the IIJA. The IIJA provided the first appropriations for the Section 1109 authority. Allocations/Implementation Reclamation allocated $45.0 million in IIJA funds for Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration projects in FY2023 (Table 1), thereby initiating the first application cycle. It allocated an additional $65.0 million for these projects in FY2024 and plans to allocate $66.3 million in FY2025.65 Congress also provided the program with $100,000 in annual discretionary funding in FY2022, $5.0 million in FY2023, and $6.5 million in FY2024.66 Through its solicitation, Reclamation has specified that applicants can request study and design grants from $500,000 to $2.0 million and construction project grants from $3.0 million to $20.0 million.67 As of the date of this report, Reclamation has not reported on grant recipients and allocations for the first application cycle. Colorado River Drought Contingency Plans As part of its authorized federal role and the large number of federally managed projects in the Colorado River Basin, the federal government has led multiple efforts attempting to improve the basin’s water supply outlook. In 2019 Reclamation and the basin states, as well as Congress (in the Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan Authorization Act; P.L. 116-14), approved the drought contingency plans (DCPs) for the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins. Among other provisions, the DCPs required reductions beyond previous curtailment plans based on Lake Mead storage levels, committed Reclamation to additional water conservation efforts, and put in place plans to coordinate Upper Basin operations to enhance Lake Powell storage levels and hydropower generation.68 One of the primary federal contributions to the DCPs approved by Congress in P.L. 116-14 was additional grant support for voluntary conservation projects in the Colorado River Basin whose 63 Reclamation states that this cost sharing requirement is not applicable to American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, or the Virgin Islands. Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/aquatic/index.html. 64 Unlike WaterSMART grants, projects in Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico are not eligible. 65 Unlike the previous two sections, the Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program is separate from Environmental Water Resources Projects WaterSMART grants. Bureau of Reclamation, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Annual Spend Plan Update, FY2024 Submission, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. 66 Bureau of Reclamation, FY2024 Bureau of Reclamation Budget Justifications, 2023, p. W&RR-6, https://www.usbr.gov/budget/. 67 Bureau of Reclamation, “WaterSMART, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program,” https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/~~desalination~~aquatic/index.html. 68 Reclamation and the basin states approved another set of similar, but more stringent, reductions in 2023 (i.e., after the IIJA was enacted). For more information about drought and the Colorado River, see CRS Report R45546, Management of the Colorado River: Water Allocations, Drought, and the Federal Role, by Charles V. Stern and Pervaze A. Sheikh. Congressional Research Service 22 link to page 27 ~~/index.html.~~
~~58 P.L. 117-58, §40901(5)(B).~~
~~59 With respect to a project that removes a dam or modifies a dam causing a reduction in storage or diversion capacity,~~
~~the Secretary of the Interior must ensure compliance with requirements for certain aspects of the project before entering~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

17

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~of the Interior is to prioritize projects that are developed jointly by a diverse array of stakeholders,~~
~~provide regional benefits that affect water resources management in two or more river basins, are~~
~~part of a broader strategy to address aging facilities while ensuring continued project benefits, and~~
~~restore ESA-listed anadromous fish species.~~
~~To initiate these projects, eligible entities must enter into an agreement with the Secretary of the~~
~~Interior to pay no less than 35% of project costs and 100% of operation, maintenance,~~
~~replacement, and rehabilitation costs. Eligible entities may include~~
~~ states, Indian tribes, irrigation districts, or water districts;~~
~~ state, regional, or local authorities with a water or power delivery authority;~~
~~ other entities or organizations that own a facility eligible for upgrade,~~
~~modification, or removal;~~
~~ nonprofit conservation organizations acting in partnership with a previously~~
~~listed entity for a project involving land or infrastructure owned by that entity;~~
~~ combinations of previously listed entities; and~~
~~ agencies established under state law for the joint exercise of powers.~~
~~The Secretary of the Interior also must ensure the project will not hinder existing water delivery~~
~~obligations; will not negatively affect the environment; is consistent with trust responsibilities for~~
~~federally recognized Indian tribes; complies with applicable treaties, compacts, and agreements;~~
~~is in the federal interest; and complies with all federal and state laws.~~
~~Section 1109 of P.L. 116-260 authorized appropriations of $15 million annually from FY2022~~
~~through FY2026. Reclamation requested $1 million for FY2022 to establish criteria for the~~
~~Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program and to allocate available funding to priority aquatic~~
~~ecosystem restoration efforts, such as mitigation for endangered species and species recovery.60~~
~~Reclamation stated it would structure program objectives to complement the climate adaptation~~
~~and resiliency priorities in Executive Orders 13990 and 14008 and would develop a framework~~
~~for the new program.61~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $250 million for the design, study, and~~
~~construction of aquatic ecosystem restoration and protection projects in accordance with Section~~
~~1109 of Division FF of P.L. 116-260 (33 U.S.C. 2330c). Congress appropriated this funding over~~
~~five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the IIJA. The IIJA provided the first appropriations~~
~~for the Section 1109 authority.~~
~~As noted, the $250 million appropriation for the Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program~~
~~constitutes the authority’s first funding. Reclamation will need to take basic administrative steps~~
~~to stand up the program before spending this funding. Implementation guidelines for the program~~
~~could raise issues of congressional interest, such as how entities approach Reclamation with~~
~~project proposals, what type of agreement is signed between Reclamation and entities, and how~~

~~into a funding agreement. For the design or study of such project, the Secretary of the Interior must receive consent~~
~~from the dam owner. For the construction of such project, the Secretary of the Interior must identify eligible entities~~
~~that receive water or power from the facility; notify each eligible entity of the project request; and not receive, within~~
~~120 days of notification, a written objection to the project by one or more eligible entities that collectively receive at~~
~~least a third of the water or power from that facility.~~
~~60 Reclamation, FY2022 Bureau of Reclamation Budget Justifications, 2021, p. BW-10, at https://www.usbr.gov/~~
~~budget/.~~
~~61 Executive Office of the President, “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle~~
~~the Climate Crisis,” 86 Federal Register 7037-7043, January 20, 2021; Executive Office of the President, “Tackling the~~
~~Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,” 86 Federal Register 7619-7633, January 27, 2021.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

18

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~funds will be distributed and prioritized. For precedents, Reclamation could consider the U.S.~~
~~Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) for aquatic~~
~~ecosystem restoration (Section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, as~~
~~amended; 33 U.S.C. §2330).~~
~~Cooperative Watershed Management Program~~
~~Subtitle A of Title VI of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11 as~~
~~amended, 16 U.S.C. 1015 et seq.) authorized the Cooperative Watershed Management Program~~
~~(CWMP), which provides funding to form watershed groups in the West that develop local~~
~~solutions to address water management needs. These groups are self-sustaining, consensus-based~~
~~stakeholder groups. Funding recipients must be grassroots, nonregulatory entities that address~~
~~water availability and quality issues within a watershed, represent a diverse group of~~
~~stakeholders, and are capable of promoting water supply reliability.62~~
~~As of 2021, CWMP funding supported two separate phases for projects. Phase I funds watershed~~
~~group development and watershed restoration projects, providing funds for start-up costs,~~
~~restoration planning, and project design. Phase II funds implementation of watershed~~
~~management projects, providing cost-shared assistance to watershed groups to implement~~
~~projects.63 Reclamation awarded $7.5 million in funding for the establishment and development~~
~~of 84 watershed groups and $2.9 million for the implementation of 19 watershed management~~
~~projects from 2012 through 2020.64~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $100 million for watershed management~~
~~projects in accordance with Title VI, Subtitle A, of P.L. 111-11 (i.e., CWMP). Congress~~
~~appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Congress~~
~~provided no instructions for how Reclamation should allocate these funds.~~
~~As with other Reclamation appropriations in the IIJA, the CWMP funds represent a significant~~
~~influx of funding relative to recent years. Congress may be interested in the level of demand for~~
~~the IIJA’s CWMP funds, as well as how much funding Reclamation releases for these projects in~~
~~future grant announcements and any administrative changes to the program in light of the IIJA’s~~
~~additional funding.~~
~~Watershed Health Improvement~~
~~In Section 40907 of the IIJA, Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to establish a~~
~~program by November 15, 2022, to award competitive grants to eligible applicants for the design,~~
~~implementation, and monitoring of multi-benefit habitat restoration projects. These projects aim~~
~~to improve watershed health in a river basin that is adversely impacted by a Reclamation water~~

~~62 For more information, see Reclamation, WaterSMART, “Cooperative Watershed Management Program,” at~~
~~https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/cwmp/index.html.~~
~~63 Phase I projects may receive assistance of up to $50,000 per year for a period of up to two years (i.e., $100,000~~
~~total), with no nonfederal cost share required. Phase II projects receive up to $300,000 per applicant and require a~~
~~nonfederal cost share of at least 50% of project costs. The funding caps are less than those authorized in the Omnibus~~
~~Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11), which authorized three phases: Phase I (with maximum funding~~
~~of $100,000 per year over a maximum of three years); Phase II (with maximum funding of $1 million per year over a~~
~~maximum of four years); and Phase III (with maximum funding of $5 million per year over a maximum of five years).~~
~~64 Reclamation, FY2022 Bureau of Reclamation Budget Justifications, 2021, p. BW-71, at https://www.usbr.gov/~~
~~budget/.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

19

~~link to page 20~~ ~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~project. Eligible applicants may include states, tribal or local governments, organizations with~~
~~power or water delivery authority, regional authorities, or nonprofit conservation organizations.~~
~~Projects must provide one or more of the following objectives: ecosystem benefits; restoration of~~
~~native species; mitigation against the impacts of climate change on fish and wildlife habitats;~~
~~protection against invasive species; ecosystem restoration; enhancement of commercial,~~
~~recreational, subsistence, or tribal ceremonial fishing; and enhancement of river-based recreation.~~
~~The federal cost share for projects is limited to 50% but may be up to 75% for projects where the~~
~~water conservation and habitat restoration benefits account for at least 75% of the project cost.~~
~~In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $100 million for these multi-benefit projects to~~
~~improve watershed health, in accordance with Section 40907 of the IIJA. In Division J of the act,~~
~~Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026).~~
~~In establishing and implementing this new program, Reclamation will need to determine~~
~~administrative guidance on the application process for grants, how funds will be distributed and~~
~~prioritized, and how Reclamation intends to conduct oversight of this funding. It is unclear~~
~~whether this section authorizes funding for modifications at Reclamation project sites (as the~~
~~Section 1135 CAP authority does for USACE);65 if it does not, Congress may consider whether to~~
~~amend the authority to provide for such modifications. Congress also may be interested in how~~
~~this program will complement or duplicate existing funding for restoration at site-specific~~
~~Reclamation projects and other programmatic authorities, such as Reclamation’s Section 1109~~
~~ecosystem restoration authority (see “Ecosystem Restoration,” above).~~
~~Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund~~
~~Indian water rights settlements stem from Indian reserved water rights, first recognized by the~~
~~Supreme Court in Winters v. United States in 1908.66 Under the Winters doctrine, when Congress~~
~~reserves land (i.e., for an Indian reservation), it implicitly reserves water sufficient to fulfill the~~
~~purpose of the reservation.67 Although Winters effectively provided many Indian tribes with~~
~~senior water rights, the quantification of these rights is in many cases undetermined. In lieu of~~
~~litigation to quantify Indian water rights, negotiated settlements have been the preferred means~~
~~among many (including the federal government) for resolving Indian water rights disputes.68~~
~~These settlements can be attractive because they include terms and conditions that resolve long-~~
~~standing uncertainty and end conflict by avoiding litigation.~~
~~Many Indian water rights settlements require congressional approval and/or federal funding for~~
~~implementation. As of~~ Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) water savings are dedicated to basin-wide system water.69 Congress originally authorized federal participation in these efforts in 2015 (Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015; P.L. 113-235, Division D). As of September 2019, Reclamation estimated the Lower Basin program had conserved 175,347 AF of system water, at an average cost of $170.14 per AF.70 Both the Upper and the Lower Basin DCPs included provisions to expand these efforts. In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $300 million for implementation of the 2019 DCPs. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. The only additional stipulations for this funding under the IIJA are that $50 million must be made available for efforts associated with the Upper Basin DCP. DCP signees aim to conserve an overall amount of water in the Colorado River system using federal seed funding, but there is no comprehensive estimate of the potential water savings (including likely costs per AF) associated with future DCP-related grant agreements for system conservation and other efforts. Apart from IIJA funding for the DCPs, in August 2022 Congress approved another $4 billion for general drought mitigation in Reclamation river basins (with a focus on the Colorado River Basin) in P.L. 117-169, popularly known as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).71 Allocations/Implementation For FY2022-FY2025, Reclamation allocated funding for both Lower and Upper Colorado River DCP activities, as authorized in the IIJA (Table 6). Reclamation announced project-specific allocation of some of its FY2022 and FY2023 Lower Basin DCP funds in an addendum to the FY2023 spend plan, including $82.2 million for the Gila River Indian Community Reclaimed Water Pipeline. The same addendum announced $8.7 million in funding for “limited-duration data-gathering and analysis program needs” in the Upper Basin.72 Table 6. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan (DCP) Allocations IIJA Appropriations FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 Lower Basin Colorado River $250.0 $50.0 $25.0 $25.0 $71.3 DCP Upper Basin Colorado River $50.0 — $8.7 $29.8 $5.0 DCP Total $300.0 $50.0 $33.7 $54.8 $76.3 Source: Bureau of Reclamation, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Annual Spend Plans for FY2022-FY2025, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. 69 System water refers to water that is provided to increase water supplies as a whole, without being directed toward additional consumptive use for specific contractors or water users. 70 Lower Colorado Region, “Pilot System Conservation Program,” https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/PilotSysConsProg/pilotsystem.html. 71 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF12437, Bureau of Reclamation Funding in the Inflation Reduction Act (P.L. 117-169), by Charles V. Stern and Anna E. Normand. 72 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum-WaterSMART – WEEG, Drought Contingency Plan for LC & UC, Small Storage FY2023, and Water Desal Spend Plan, May 2, 2023, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2023/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-05-02-2023.pdf. Congressional Research Service 23 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) Colorado River Endangered Species Activities As part of Reclamation’s role in Colorado River Basin water management, Reclamation and its partners operate several programs that fund activities to protect and restore fish species in the Colorado River and its tributaries. Some of these programs provide the federal and nonfederal project compliance with the ESA. These programs include the following: • The Upper Colorado and the San Juan River Basins Endangered Fish Recovery Programs (Fish Programs). The Fish Programs were established in 1988 and 1992, respectively, and were formally authorized by Congress in P.L. 106-392. The programs provide compliance with the ESA and allow federal and nonfederal water and power projects in the Upper Basin to operate without violating ESA. • The Lower Colorado River Multispecies Conservation Program (MSCP). The MSCP is a 50-year, multi-stakeholder initiative to maintain ESA compliance and conserve 27 special status species (including 8 species listed under ESA) along the Lower Colorado River, while maintaining water and power supplies for users. DOI formally established the program in 2005, and Congress authorized it under Subtitle E of Title IX of P.L. 111-11. • The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP). The AMP was established in 1997 in response to a directive from Congress under the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575).73 Among other aims, the AMP attempts to integrate dam operations, downstream resource protection and management, and monitoring and research in the Lower Colorado River. Pursuant to their authorizing legislation, for more than two decades, the Fish Programs and the AMP were funded by Upper Basin hydropower revenues transferred from the Department of Energy’s Western Area Power Administration.74 However, due to a revised statutory interpretation, additional appropriations from Congress have been required to make these funds available since FY2019. The MSCP typically is funded with discretionary appropriations for Reclamation’s Lower Colorado River Operations program. In Section 40901 of the IIJA, Congress authorized $50 million for the Fish Programs, the AMP, and the MSCP. Congress appropriated this funding over five years (FY2022-FY2026) in Division J of the act. Congress did not specify how the funding is to be allocated among individual programs. The additional funding for the Fish Programs and the AMP in the IIJA supplement potential funding shortfalls faced by these programs. Although all of these authorities generally benefit environmental activities in the Colorado River Basin, their specific benefits are concentrated in different parts of the basin and affect different basin interests to varying extents. 73 In P.L. 102-575, Congress provided that Reclamation operate Glen Canyon Dam “in such a manner as to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were established.” 74 Normally, these funds would be slated for repayment of Colorado River Storage Project costs to the Department of the Treasury. Congressional Research Service 24 link to page 9 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) Allocations/Implementation Reclamation announced funding allocations of $8.5 million for these programs in FY2022, $20 million in FY2023, $20 million in FY2024,75 and no funding in FY2025 (Table 1). The FY2022 funding went entirely to one project under the MSCP.76 Reclamation announced some FY2023 programmatic funding, including funding for Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Programs in Colorado ($6.4 million) and Utah ($2.8 million), as well as the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program ($3.0 million) and the MSCP in both California and Arizona ($6.0 million).77 Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund Indian water rights settlements stem from Indian reserved water rights, first recognized by the Supreme Court in Winters v. United States in 1908.78 Under the Winters doctrine, when Congress reserves land (i.e., for an Indian reservation), it implicitly reserves water sufficient to fulfill the purpose of the reservation.79 Although Winters effectively provided many Indian tribes with senior water rights, the quantification of these rights is in many cases undetermined. In lieu of litigation to quantify Indian water rights, negotiated settlements have been the preferred means among many (including the federal government) for resolving Indian water rights disputes.80 These settlements can be attractive because they include terms and conditions that resolve long-standing uncertainty and end conflict by avoiding litigation. Many Indian water rights settlements require congressional approval and/or federal funding for implementation. As of enactment of the IIJA in late 2021, 38 Indian water rights settlements had been federally approvedlate 2021, 38 Indian water rights settlements had been federally approved (35 of those approved by Congress), ,
with total estimated costs in excess of $8with total estimated costs in excess of $8.0 billion. billion.6981 Congress often supports these settlements Congress often supports these settlements
with discretionary funds in annual appropriations bills and has appropriated mandatory funding with discretionary funds in annual appropriations bills and has appropriated mandatory funding

~~65 Section 1135 of WRDA 1986, as amended; 33 U.S.C. §2330. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)~~
~~Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) authorizes USACE to restore environmental quality through modifications at~~
~~either a USACE project site or other locations that have been affected by the construction or operation of a USACE~~
~~project.~~
~~66 Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564, 575-77 (1908).~~
67for certain settlements.82 Congress typically specifies funding agencies and vehicles in authorizing legislation, with most settlements funded by Reclamation or the Bureau of Indian Affairs (or both). A prominent source of mandatory funding for these settlements in recent years has been the Reclamation Water Settlements Fund; pursuant to P.L. 111-11, Reclamation is allocating $1.2 billion over 10 years ($120 million per year) in mandatory funds to qualifying tribal settlements. 75 For FY2024, the funding allocation was increased to $20 million via transfers from the Desalination allocation from the prior year. See Bureau of Reclamation, Annual Spend Plan Update, 2025 OMB Submission, at https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2025/FY-2025-Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan.pdf. 76 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum-August to January 14, 2022, Initial Spend Plan, August 31, 2022, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2022/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-August-Addendum-8-31-2022.pdf. 77 Bureau of Reclamation, Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Addendum- ESA & WaterSMART – to FY2023 Initial Spend Plan, and to FY2022 and FY2023 Spend Plans, December 2022, https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2023/Reclamation-BIL-Spend-Plan-Addendum-ESA%20WaterSMART12-27-2022.pdf. 78 Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564, 575-77 (1908). 79 Some tribes also have time immemorial rights to water resources based on tribal water uses that preceded the Some tribes also have time immemorial rights to water resources based on tribal water uses that preceded the
establishment of reservations. These rights are commonly referred to as establishment of reservations. These rights are commonly referred to as aboriginal water rights. water rights.
6880 For more information on Indian water rights settlements in general, see CRS Report R44148, For more information on Indian water rights settlements in general, see CRS Report R44148, Indian Water Rights
Settlements, by Charles V. Stern. , by Charles V. Stern.
6981 CRS estimate as of December 2021. CRS estimate as of December 2021.
82 This includes mandatory funding of $120 million per year, from FY2020 to FY2029, which was appropriated by Congress in 2009 under Title X of P.L. 111-11. Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2025

Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

~~for certain settlements.70 Congress typically specifies funding agencies and vehicles in~~
~~authorizing legislation, with most settlements funded by Reclamation or the Bureau of Indian~~
~~Affairs (or both).~~
In Division G, Section 70101, of the IIJA, Congress established an Indian Water Rights In Division G, Section 70101, of the IIJA, Congress established an Indian Water Rights
Settlement Completion Fund in the Treasury of the United States and provided that, on the date of Settlement Completion Fund in the Treasury of the United States and provided that, on the date of
the the ~~IIJA’s enactment~~enactment of the IIJA, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit $2.5 billion into this fund, to , the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit $2.5 billion into this fund, to
remain available until expended. Subsection 70101(c) of the IIJA authorized the Secretary of the remain available until expended. Subsection 70101(c) of the IIJA authorized the Secretary of the
Interior to use these funds “for transfers to funds or accounts authorized to receive discretionary Interior to use these funds “for transfers to funds or accounts authorized to receive discretionary
appropriations, or to satisfy other obligations identified by the Secretary of the Interior, under an appropriations, or to satisfy other obligations identified by the Secretary of the Interior, under an
Indian water settlement approved and authorized by an Act of Congress before the date of Indian water settlement approved and authorized by an Act of Congress before the date of
enactment of this Act.” This provision appears to allow the Secretary of the Interior to transfer enactment of this Act.” This provision appears to allow the Secretary of the Interior to transfer
resources from the new fund to any enacted Indian water rights settlement, based on secretarial resources from the new fund to any enacted Indian water rights settlement, based on secretarial
determinations, as long as the settlement was enacted prior to November 5, 2021. determinations, as long as the settlement was enacted prior to November 5, 2021.
The IIJA funding for Indian water rights settlements offsets a major area of Reclamation The IIJA funding for Indian water rights settlements offsets a major area of Reclamation
budgetary needs that is not addressed elsewhere in the bill. However, budgetary needs that is not addressed elsewhere in the bill. However, ~~because~~ Congress provided Congress provided
no specific criteria for the Secretary of the Interior to use in allocating funds and did not designate no specific criteria for the Secretary of the Interior to use in allocating funds and did not designate
a a timeframe for allocations. Allocation/Implementation There is no formal reporting process for Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund projects. The Department of the Interior has announced Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund allocations for individual settlements, in amounts combined together with the Reclamation Water Settlement Fund allocations. For FY2023, the department reported that it allocated $460 million from the Indian Water Rights Completion Fund for 14 settlements ($580 million from both funds combined).83 For FY2024, the department allocated $207 million for 11 settlements ($327 million from both funds combined).84 ~~timeframe for allocations, the IIJA leaves a number of important determinations to secretarial~~
~~discretion, including allocations among agencies implementing settlements and within the~~
~~settlements themselves. These determinations could be a subject for congressional oversight,~~
~~along with related prioritization criteria that differentiate among settlement awards. Some in~~
~~Congress also may be interested in how this new fund affects the status and need for other Indian~~
~~water settlement funding, such as annual discretionary funding and/or the mandatory Reclamation~~
~~Water Settlements Fund (which currently expires in FY2030 and has been proposed for extension~~
~~over various timeframes).~~
Authorization-Only Provisions
Congress included several Congress included several authorization-only provisions (i.e., authorizations without a provisions (i.e., authorizations without a
corresponding appropriation) in the IIJA. These related to rehabilitation of the pumping plant at corresponding appropriation) in the IIJA. These related to rehabilitation of the pumping plant at
Grand Couleee Dam (Section 40113), pumped storage hydropower (Sections 40335 and 40336), Grand Couleee Dam (Section 40113), pumped storage hydropower (Sections 40335 and 40336),
and groundwater recharge (Section 40910). Congress also included one section (Section 40909) and groundwater recharge (Section 40910). Congress also included one section (Section 40909)
clarifying the use of previously appropriated coronavirus relief funding for Reclamation project clarifying the use of previously appropriated coronavirus relief funding for Reclamation project
cost shares. These provisions are discussed below. cost shares. These provisions are discussed below.
Pumped Storage Hydropower
Reclamation and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) both have authorities to Reclamation and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) both have authorities to
permit nonfederal hydropower development at Reclamation facilities. Reclamation permits this permit nonfederal hydropower development at Reclamation facilities. Reclamation permits this
development via Lease of Power Privilege for small conduit and hydropower-authorized dams at development via Lease of Power Privilege for small conduit and hydropower-authorized dams at
its facilities, while FERC is charged with permitting hydropower at Reclamation dams its facilities, while FERC is charged with permitting hydropower at Reclamation dams ~~not~~
that are not explicitly authorized for hydropower. As with the division of responsibility for Reclamation dams, pumped authorized for hydropower. As with the division of responsibility for Reclamation dams, pumped
storage hydropower projects involving Reclamation reservoirs are subject to either storage hydropower projects involving Reclamation reservoirs are subject to either ~~the FERC~~
~~permitting process or Reclamation’s Lease of Power Privilege process, based on whether the~~
~~Reclamation facility was originally authorized for hydropower development.~~

~~70 This includes mandatory funding of $120 million per year, from FY2020 to FY2029, which was appropriated by~~
~~Congress in 2009 under Title X of P.L. 111-11.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

21

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

83 Department of the Interior, “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Supports $580 Million Investment to Fulfill Indian Water Rights Settlements,” press release, February 2, 2023, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/bipartisan-infrastructure-law-supports-580-million-investment-fulfill-indian-water. 84 Department of the Interior, “President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda Supports $327 Million Investment to Fulfill Indian Water Rights Settlements,” press release, October 26, 2023, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/president-bidens-investing-america-agenda-supports-327-million-investment-fulfill. Congressional Research Service 26 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58) the FERC permitting process or Reclamation’s Lease of Power Privilege process, based on whether the Reclamation facility was originally authorized for hydropower development. Title V, Sections 40335 and 40336, of the IIJA both deal with Reclamation and FERC’s Title V, Sections 40335 and 40336, of the IIJA both deal with Reclamation and FERC’s
authorities for pumped storage hydropower development. Section 40335 clarifies that authorities for pumped storage hydropower development. Section 40335 clarifies that
Reclamation has the sole authority to develop pumped storage hydropower at facilities involving Reclamation has the sole authority to develop pumped storage hydropower at facilities involving
only Reclamation reservoirs (i.e., regardless of whether these facilities were authorized for only Reclamation reservoirs (i.e., regardless of whether these facilities were authorized for
hydropower). Section 40336 lays out specific requirements that Reclamation must adhere to hydropower). Section 40336 lays out specific requirements that Reclamation must adhere to
before it can permit a specific proposed Lease of Power Privilege project—the Banks Lake before it can permit a specific proposed Lease of Power Privilege project—the Banks Lake
Pumped Storage Project at Roosevelt Lake and Banks Lake in Washington. (Because of Section Pumped Storage Project at Roosevelt Lake and Banks Lake in Washington. (Because of Section
40335, this project would now be under Reclamation’s exclusive jurisdiction). To proceed with 40335, this project would now be under Reclamation’s exclusive jurisdiction). To proceed with
this project, the lessee and the Secretary must enter into an agreement with and make certain this project, the lessee and the Secretary must enter into an agreement with and make certain
accommodations for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Spokane Tribes. accommodations for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Spokane Tribes.
Both tribal reservations border Lake Roosevelt and possess water rights for waters involved in Both tribal reservations border Lake Roosevelt and possess water rights for waters involved in
this development. this development.
In Section 40113 of the IIJA, Congress included a project-specific pumped storage hydropower In Section 40113 of the IIJA, Congress included a project-specific pumped storage hydropower
funding authorization for Reclamation. Congress authorized $100 million in nonreimbursable funding authorization for Reclamation. Congress authorized $100 million in nonreimbursable
budget authority for Reclamation to rehabilitate the John W. Keys Pump Generating Plant, a budget authority for Reclamation to rehabilitate the John W. Keys Pump Generating Plant, a
pumped storage plant that originally came online in 1951 at Grand Coulee Dam in Washington. pumped storage plant that originally came online in 1951 at Grand Coulee Dam in Washington.
~~Typically, these rehabilitation costs would be reimbursed by project power users.~~
~~The aforementioned pumped storage provisions in the IIJA would have the combined effect of~~
~~shifting some of these activities to Reclamation and potentially facilitating this type of power~~
~~development in certain locations. Congress may be interested in the extent to which Reclamation~~
~~increases pumped storage projects and generation by implementing these provisions and to what~~
~~extent they generate interest in similar development elsewhere.~~
Apart from this specific authorization under the IIJA, these rehabilitation costs typically would be reimbursed by project power users. Groundwater Recharge Authority
Groundwater storage, aquifer recharge, and similar projects are increasingly viewed as an option Groundwater storage, aquifer recharge, and similar projects are increasingly viewed as an option
in lieu of (or in addition to) traditional water development projects or as a means to reduce in lieu of (or in addition to) traditional water development projects or as a means to reduce
groundwater pumping. Reclamation has some authorities to facilitate groundwater storage groundwater pumping. Reclamation has some authorities to facilitate groundwater storage
projects and aquifer recharge, storage, and recovery efforts, including authority to provide projects and aquifer recharge, storage, and recovery efforts, including authority to provide
financial support for groundwater storage projects under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act.financial support for groundwater storage projects under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act.7185 In In
Section 40910 of the IIJA, Congress authorized the Secretary of the Interior to provide technical Section 40910 of the IIJA, Congress authorized the Secretary of the Interior to provide technical
or financial assistance for, participate in, and enter into agreementsor financial assistance for, participate in, and enter into agreements for—including agreements with —including agreements with
irrigation entities—irrigation entities—~~for~~ groundwater recharge, aquifer storage and recovery projects, and water groundwater recharge, aquifer storage and recovery projects, and water
source substitution for aquifer protection projects.source substitution for aquifer protection projects.7286 For a project to receive construction For a project to receive construction
assistance under this authority, it must meet the same criteria as the WIIN Act project assistance under this authority, it must meet the same criteria as the WIIN Act project
requirements under Section 40902(a)(2)(C)(ii) of the IIJA.requirements under Section 40902(a)(2)(C)(ii) of the IIJA.~~73 That~~87 The section stipulates that to receive section stipulates that to receive
funding, the Secretary of the Interior must first find that (1) a project is technically and financially funding, the Secretary of the Interior must first find that (1) a project is technically and financially
feasible, (2) sufficient nonfederal funding is available for the nonfederal cost share, (3) a project feasible, (2) sufficient nonfederal funding is available for the nonfederal cost share, (3) a project
is in the public interest, and (4) the project is recommended for construction. Congress provided is in the public interest, and (4) the project is recommended for construction. Congress provided
no appropriation for this new authority in the IIJA. no appropriation for this new authority in the IIJA.
~~If Congress chooses to appropriate funds for this authority, it could allow Reclamation to fund~~
~~groundwater storage projects beyond those that might qualify for construction assistance under~~

71 85 For example, Division FF, Title XI of P.L. 116-260 included new flexibilities for Reclamation to support aquifer For example, Division FF, Title XI of P.L. 116-260 included new flexibilities for Reclamation to support aquifer
storage and recharge efforts with project facilities and water. Reclamation also has authority under Section 4007 of the storage and recharge efforts with project facilities and water. Reclamation also has authority under Section 4007 of the
WIIN Act to provide financial support for both surface water WIIN Act to provide financial support for both surface water and groundwater storage projects. For additional groundwater storage projects. For additional
information, see CRS Report R45259, information, see CRS Report R45259, The Federal Role in Groundwater Supply, by Peter Folger et al. , by Peter Folger et al.
7286 P.L. 117-58, §40910(a). P.L. 117-58, §40910(a).
7387 P.L. 117-58, §40910(c) and (d). P.L. 117-58, §40910(c) and (d).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

22

~~link to page 8 link to page 27~~ 27 Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)

~~Section 40902 of the IIJA (see Table 1). This provision also appears to provide new authority to~~
~~fund aquifer recharge and source water substitution projects and could expand Reclamation~~
~~activities in these areas.~~
Nonfederal Cost Sharing for Reclamation Projects
Nonfederal Reclamation project sponsors and other Reclamation project partners are required to Nonfederal Reclamation project sponsors and other Reclamation project partners are required to
share the costs of many Reclamation projects and grants. For example, WIIN Act water storage share the costs of many Reclamation projects and grants. For example, WIIN Act water storage
project sponsors must pay for 25%-50% of the total costs for these projects, depending on project project sponsors must pay for 25%-50% of the total costs for these projects, depending on project
type. In Section 40909 of the IIJA, Congress provided that the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery type. In Section 40909 of the IIJA, Congress provided that the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery
Fund and Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (i.e., holding funds previously appropriated Fund and Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (i.e., holding funds previously appropriated
for Coronavirus Disease 2019 response/recovery under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 for Coronavirus Disease 2019 response/recovery under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021
[P.L. 117-2]) may be used for Reclamation project cost-share requirements.[P.L. 117-2]) may be used for Reclamation project cost-share requirements.7488 Specifically, Specifically,
Congress directed that the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund may be used for “matching Congress directed that the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund may be used for “matching
requirements” for authorized Reclamation water projects and that both funds may be used for requirements” for authorized Reclamation water projects and that both funds may be used for
“matching, maintenance of effort, or other nonfederal expenditure requirement[s].” “matching, maintenance of effort, or other nonfederal expenditure requirement[s].”
The enactment of these provisions may allow Reclamation cost-sharing partners to use federal The enactment of these provisions may allow Reclamation cost-sharing partners to use federal
funds for some or all of their portion of costs for water resources projects receiving assistance funds for some or all of their portion of costs for water resources projects receiving assistance
from the IIJA, depending on how the Department of the Treasury (from the IIJA, depending on how the Department of the Treasury (~~who~~which oversees the funds) oversees the funds)
interprets the provisions.interprets the provisions.7589 Congress may be interested in Congress may be interested in ~~any specific~~whether guidance on these guidance on these
~~provisions~~provisions is sufficient to achieve congressional intent, in particular which specific projects and programs qualify for this support and the , in particular which specific projects and programs qualify for this support and the
extent to which the use of these funds facilitates expedited project extent to which the use of these funds facilitates expedited project implementation. Author Information Charles V. Stern Anna E. Normand Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Specialist~~implementation.~~
~~Initial Spending Plan and Other Developments~~
~~In the past, Reclamation has allocated funding appropriated by Congress in spending plans or~~
work plans and has indicated its intent to continue to operate in this manner for IIJA funding.
~~Reclamation released its Initial Spend Plan for IIJA funding for FY2022 on January 14, 2022.76~~
~~The document allocated the portion of funding available in FY2022 (i.e., $1.66 billion). It did not~~
~~allocate funds in equal shares to each category of projects compared with their overall allocation~~
~~in the IIJA (Table 2). For instance, some of the more established, ongoing Reclamation programs~~
~~and projects (e.g., Title XVI water recycling/reuse and Rural Water Projects) received FY2022~~
~~spending plan allocations in excess of their overall IIJA Reclamation funding allocation (in terms~~
~~of percentage of the total allocation), while other new authorities received no funding in the~~
~~Initial Spend Plan. These programs are expected to be funded in future years, after program~~
~~guidance and related funding criteria are established. In addition to funding for items outlined in~~
~~the IIJA, Reclamation’s Initial Spend Plan also set aside funding for administrative activities~~

~~74 For more on these funds, see CRS Insight IN11665,~~ ~~The American Rescue Plan Act, Section 9901—The Coronavirus~~
~~State Fiscal Recovery Fund, by Grant A. Driessen; and CRS Insight IN11664,~~ ~~The American Rescue Plan Act, Section~~
~~9901—The Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund, by Grant A. Driessen.~~
~~75 Regulations released in late January 2022 indicated that Treasury would provide further guidance to recipients on the~~
~~scope of projects and expenses covered by this provision, but as of the date of this report, no such guidance was~~
~~available. Department of the Treasury, “Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds,” 87 Federal Register~~
~~4416, January 27, 2022.~~
~~76 Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation,~~ ~~Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Initial~~
~~Spend Plan, January 14, 2022, at https://www.usbr.gov/bil/docs/spendplan-2022/Reclamation-~~
~~BIL_Spend_Plan_2022.pdf. Additional related documents are available at https://www.usbr.gov/bil/index.html.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

23

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~($49.8 million, or 3% of Initial Spend Plan funding) and a flexible reserve to be used on~~
~~“emerging requirements” ($281 million, or 17% of Initial Spend Plan funding).~~
~~Reclamation’s Initial Spend Plan also provided an initial summary of how various programs~~
~~would be implemented. Specifically, it noted whether individual projects would receive funding~~
~~via internal formulation by Reclamation, applications in response to funding opportunities (i.e.,~~
~~grants), or some combination of the two.77 The Initial Spend Plan also provided a timeline for~~
~~activities associated with some new and existing program and outlined initial strategies for~~
~~tracking program and project performance.~~
~~Table 2. Bureau of Reclamation IIJA Funding: Initial Spend Plan and Distributions~~
~~(funding in millions of dollars)~~
~~Initial Spend Plan~~
~~How Will Funding~~
~~Total Funding in~~
~~Funding for~~
~~be Distributed?~~
~~IIJA for FY2022-~~
~~FY2022 (% of~~
~~FY2026 (% of IIJA~~
~~Spend Plan~~
~~Program/Project~~
~~Funding)~~
~~Funding)~~
~~Water Storage, Groundwater Storage,~~
~~$1,050.0 (13%)~~
~~$210.0 (13%)~~
~~Internal Formulation~~
~~Conveyance Projects~~
~~Small Surface Water & Ground Water~~
~~$100.0 (1%)~~
—
~~Funding~~
~~Storage Project Grants~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Aging Infrastructure (general)~~
~~$3,000.0 (37%)~~
~~$100.0 (6%)~~
~~Application Periods~~
~~Aging Infrastructure: Critical Facilities~~
~~$100.0 (1%)~~
~~$2.5 (<1%)~~
~~Application Periods~~
~~Aging Infrastructure: Carey Act Dams~~
~~$100.0 (1%)~~
—
~~Application Periods~~
~~Rural Water Projects~~
~~$1,000.0 (12%)~~
~~$420.0 (25%)~~
~~Internal Formulation~~
~~Title XVI Water Recycling and Reuse~~
~~$550.0 (7%)~~
~~$245.0 (15%)~~
~~Funding~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Title XVI Water Recycling and Reuse:~~
~~$450.0 (6%)~~
—
~~Funding~~
~~Large-Scale Projects~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Desalination Projects~~
~~$250.0 (3%)~~
—
~~Funding~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Safety of Dams Projects~~
~~$500.0 (6%)~~
~~$100.0 (6%)~~
~~Internal Formulation~~
~~WaterSMART Grants~~
~~$300.0 (4%)~~
~~$160.0 (10%)~~
~~Funding~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~WaterSMART Grants: Natural or~~
~~$100.0 (1%)~~
—
~~Funding~~
~~Nature-Based Features~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Lower Colorado River Drought~~
~~$250.0 (3%)~~
~~$50.0 (3%)~~
~~Internal Formulation~~
~~Contingency Plan~~
~~Upper Colorado River Drought~~
~~$50.0 (<1%)~~
—
~~Internal Formulation~~
~~Contingency Plan~~
~~Cooperative Watershed Management~~
~~$100.0 (1%)~~
~~$18.0 (1%)~~
~~Funding~~
~~Program~~
~~Opportunities~~

~~77 The main example of this Reclamation discussed in its spend plan is its new program providing for critical~~
~~maintenance of aging infrastructure, which it expects to fund via an application period for eligible, interested project~~
~~sponsors.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

24

~~Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the IIJA (P.L. 117-58)~~

~~Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration and~~
~~$250.0 (3%)~~
—
~~Funding~~
~~Protection~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Watershed Health Improvement~~
~~$100.0 (1%)~~
—
~~Funding~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~Colorado River Endangered Species~~
~~$50.0 (<1%)~~
~~$8.5 (<1%)~~
~~Funding~~
~~Recovery~~
~~Opportunities~~
~~No Explicit Funding in IIJA~~

~~Reserve for Emerging Requirements~~
NA
~~$281.2 (17%)~~
NA
~~Administrative Activities~~
[$240.0] (3%)a
~~$49.8 (3%)~~
NA
~~Total~~
~~$8,300~~
~~$1,660.0~~

Source: CRS, based on P.L. 117-58 and Bureau of Reclamation, ~~Implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law:~~
~~Initial Spend Plan, January 14, 2022.~~
Notes: Percentages may not add due to rounding. Does not include Indian water rights settlement funding.
~~NA=Not Applicable.~~
~~a. The IIJA caps the portion of funding that may be used for administrative expenses at 3%.~~

~~Author Information~~

~~Charles V. Stern~~
~~Anna E. Normand~~
~~Specialist in Natural Resources Policy~~
~~Analyst~~ in Natural Resources Policy in Natural Resources Policy

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

88 For more on these funds, see CRS Insight IN11665, The American Rescue Plan Act, Section 9901—The Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund, by Grant A. Driessen; and CRS Insight IN11664, The American Rescue Plan Act, Section 9901—The Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund, by Grant A. Driessen. 89 Department of the Treasury, “Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds,” 87 Federal Register 4416, January 27, 2022. Congressional Research Service R47032 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED 28 ~~Congressional Research Service~~
~~R47032 · VERSION 1 · NEW~~
25