The bill amends 10 U.S.C. §2391 to add Indian tribes to the list of eligible participants in the Defense Community Infrastructure Program (DCIP). It revises statutory language that previously referenced only local governments to include tribal governments and inserts a statutory definition of “Indian tribe” by reference to the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304).
That change is narrowly focused on eligibility: it does not change the program’s stated purposes, funding authorities, or grant mechanics in the text of the bill. Practically, the amendment makes tribes explicit DCIP applicants and partners, which matters for planners, DoD program managers, and tribal officials who oversee infrastructure projects near military installations or on tribal lands.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill modifies 10 U.S.C. §2391 to add the phrase “Indian tribes” alongside governments and local governments in several eligibility and definitional provisions, and it adds a statutory cross-reference defining “Indian tribe” (25 U.S.C. 5304). The statutory edits are limited to language changes to include tribes as eligible entities under the Defense Community Infrastructure Program.
Who It Affects
Federally recognized Indian tribes and their governments, Department of Defense program offices that administer DCIP, local governments and states that currently compete for DCIP funding, and consultants and contractors that deliver defense-community infrastructure projects in tribal areas. It also affects agencies that coordinate infrastructure planning near installations.
Why It Matters
The change gives tribes explicit standing to apply for and receive DCIP support, removing any ambiguity about tribal eligibility. Because DCIP funds are competitive and limited, adding tribes shifts the applicant pool and raises operational questions about tribal consultation, jurisdictional eligibility (on- vs off-reservation projects), and DoD administrative processes.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
This bill amends a single statute—10 U.S.C. §2391, which governs the Defense Community Infrastructure Program—to make Indian tribes explicit recipients and participants. Where the statute now references “local governments” or similar terms, it inserts “Indian tribes” so that tribal governments are written into the eligibility language.
The amendment also adds a statutory definition by referring to the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act’s definition of “Indian tribe.”
The text itself is narrow: it changes enumerations and phrasing rather than adding new funding authorities, new types of projects, or novel grant conditions. That means the existing DCIP goals—supporting infrastructure that strengthens military installations and the communities that support them—remain the program’s guiding purpose.
What changes is who can apply and be listed as a partner or recipient: tribal governments now appear in the statute alongside states and local governments.Practically, inclusion will require DoD offices that run DCIP competitions to update application materials, outreach, and internal guidance to reflect tribal eligibility. Tribes will need to assess whether projects meet DCIP criteria: proximity or service to defense installations, capacity to execute construction or planning grants, and coordination with other federal programs.
The bill defers these implementation details to DoD’s existing processes, so important operational questions—how DoD treats projects on trust lands, whether tribes will need to demonstrate matching funds, and how tribal sovereignty and procurement rules interact with grant conditions—are left for regulatory or administrative guidance.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill amends 10 U.S.C. §2391 to insert “Indian tribes” into multiple eligibility and reference points for the Defense Community Infrastructure Program.
It revises subsection (d)(1)(A) and subsection (d)(2)(B) language to include tribal governments alongside local governments in DCIP provisions.
It alters subsection (e)(4)(A)(ii)(I) to replace instances of “local government” with “government, local government, or Indian tribe.”, It adds a new paragraph (7) to subsection (e) defining “Indian tribe” by reference to section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304).
The bill is limited to eligibility and definitional changes and does not, on its face, change DCIP funding levels, program objectives, or introduce new grant modalities.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the bill as the "Defense Community Infrastructure Program Tribal Eligibility Act of 2026." This is purely a caption and has no substantive effect on program administration, but it signals the bill’s narrow focus on tribal eligibility.
Insert Indian tribes into eligibility listings
Subsection (d) of §2391 is altered so that paragraph (1)(A) explicitly lists “Indian tribes” after “local governments,” and paragraph (2)(B) replaces each occurrence of “local government” with “government, local government, or Indian tribe.” These are direct textual insertions that make tribes express participants in the statutory list of eligible governments and partners for DCIP activities.
Conforming substitution in program criteria language
The bill updates an eligibility reference in subsection (e)(4)(A)(ii)(I) by substituting “government, local government, or Indian tribe” for “local government.” This is a targeted conforming change to ensure that the program’s selection criteria and references treat tribes the same as other governmental entities within the statute.
Statutory definition of ‘Indian tribe’
Adds paragraph (7) to subsection (e) to define “Indian tribe” using the definition in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304). By importing that cross-reference, the bill limits the term to the ISDEAA definition (which generally targets federally recognized tribes), rather than attempting a standalone statutory definition.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Defense across all five countries.
Explore Defense in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Federally recognized Indian tribes — They gain explicit statutory eligibility to apply for DCIP grants and to be listed as recipients or partners, improving access to defense-related infrastructure funding.
- Tribal communities near military installations — Inclusion enables tribes to seek funds for roads, utilities, and community facilities that support both tribal residents and DoD mission requirements.
- Tribal planning and construction firms — Firms that contract with tribes may see increased opportunities for project work funded through DCIP awards.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Defense program offices — DoD will need to update outreach, application guidance, and review processes to accommodate tribal applicants, increasing administrative workload without new appropriation language.
- Current DCIP applicant pool (states and local governments) — Competition for finite DCIP funds will broaden to include tribal applicants, potentially reducing the share available to other jurisdictions.
- Tribal governments themselves — Tribes will need to marshal project planning, compliance, and grant-administration capacity to compete effectively, which can incur staffing and consultant costs even if the award covers construction.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between expanding equitable access to defense-related infrastructure dollars for tribal governments and the reality of limited program resources and administrative complexity: including tribes addresses a longstanding access and equity issue but creates competition, jurisdictional questions, and additional compliance demands that DoD and tribes must resolve without new statutory funding or implementation detail.
The bill’s text is deliberately narrow: it adds tribal governments to enumerations of eligible entities and imports a definitional cross-reference. That narrowness leaves several consequential implementation questions unresolved.
First, the finance constraint: DCIP is a competitive grant program with limited appropriations. Including tribes changes the applicant landscape but does not add money.
DoD will need to decide whether to set aside funds for tribal applicants, treat tribal projects as a priority category, or leave tribes to compete directly with states and localities. Each choice produces different equity and political outcomes.
Second, the statute imports the ISDEAA definition of “Indian tribe,” which generally limits the term to federally recognized tribes. The bill does not address whether Alaska Native entities, tribal consortia, or tribal corporations are eligible; neither does it specify how projects on trust land, allotted land, or off-reservation tribal communities will be treated.
Those jurisdictional distinctions matter for permitting, procurement, matching requirements, and the application of federal trust responsibilities. Finally, the bill does not resolve how DCIP awards will interact with overlapping federal programs (e.g., BIA infrastructure funds, HUD Indian Housing) or how DoD will accommodate tribal procurement rules and sovereign immunity in grant terms.
Implementing guidance will need to reconcile tribal sovereignty with federal grant conditions, a nontrivial administrative and legal task.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.