The bill amends the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to broaden how funds can be used for Carey Act projects. It adds a new eligibility pathway that allows the use of funds to rehabilitate, reconstruct, or replace dams developed under the Carey Act, using amounts available under Section 40901(2)(B).
These projects must meet specific determinations set by the Secretary. The change is narrowly scoped to Carey Act dams and relies on existing statutory references to the 1894 Carey Act framework.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds an 'ADDITIONAL PROJECTS' subsection to Section 40904(b) authorizing use of funds under 40901(2)(B) to rehab or replace Carey Act dams that meet defined criteria. It also requires two Secretary determinations to trigger funding.
Who It Affects
Federal agencies administering IIJA programs, dam owners and operators tied to Carey Act projects, irrigation districts, and state water managers overseeing these aged infrastructure assets.
Why It Matters
This creates a formal channel to deploy existing IIJA funds to aging Carey Act dam infrastructure, potentially improving safety and reliability for communities that rely on these projects while defining a narrow set of eligible projects.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
This bill makes a targeted change to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to free up funding for Carey Act dam projects. Specifically, it adds a new pathway under Section 40904(b) that allows funds described in Section 40901(2)(B) to be used for rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement of dams developed under the Carey Act of 1894.
The projects must be tied to dams that continue to operate and meet criteria described in the amended text. The funding trigger rests on two affirmative determinations by the Secretary: that the dams meeting the criteria have received the necessary funding to complete rehab work, and that the amounts under 40901(2)(B) remain available for use.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds an 'ADDITIONAL PROJECTS' subsection to the IIJA, expanding eligible uses for Carey Act dams.
Funding for these projects comes from amounts made available under IIJA Section 40901(2)(B).
Eligible projects are dams developed under the Carey Act that continue to operate under the 1894 Act framework (43 U.S.C. 641).
Two Secretary determinations are required before funding can be deployed: completion funding for rehab, and availability of the funds.
The amendment ties new funding to a historical dam program, balancing old infrastructure with modern federal funding mechanisms.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Eligibility and funding for Carey Act dam projects under IIJA
Section 1 adds an eligibility mechanism under the IIJA to finance additional Carey Act projects. It designates that on affirmative determinations described in the new subsection, the Secretary must use funds from 40901(2)(B) to support rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement of Carey Act dams. The provisions reference the historical Carey Act framework and set the stage for a narrow expansion of IIJA-funded water infrastructure work.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Infrastructure across all five countries.
Explore Infrastructure 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
- Irrigation districts operating Carey Act dams that meet the new criteria, which now have a dedicated funding pathway for rehab projects.
- Local agricultural producers and communities that rely on Carey Act dam-related irrigation, potentially gaining more reliable water supply and safety.
- State water managers and regulatory agencies that oversee aging federal- and state-supported irrigation infrastructure and must coordinate rehab efforts.
- The Secretary and relevant federal agencies responsible for implementing IIJA funds, which gain a clear, project-specific use case for Carey Act assets.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal taxpayers funding the rehab projects via existing IIJA allocations (410901(2)(B) funds).
- Federal agencies implementing the program incur administrative and oversight costs to evaluate criteria, confirm funding readiness, and monitor progress.
- Dam owners or operators may incur the administrative burden of coordinating applications, reporting, and compliance to meet the determinations.
- State and local agencies may bear additional compliance and coordination costs as projects align with Carey Act criteria and federal requirements.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing the desire to rehabilitate historical water infrastructure with the need for clear, enforceable criteria and predictable funding. Expanding IIJA’s use to Carey Act dams may improve safety and reliability when implemented transparently, but could complicate funding planning if determinations are delayed or contested, and may shift attention away from other infrastructure needs.
The bill creates a narrowly scoped path to use IIJA funds for aging Carey Act dams, but it does not specify the dollar amounts, funding windows, or detailed criteria beyond references to section numbers and prior acts. This leaves important questions about funding levels, implementation timelines, and environmental or safety standards to be resolved during rulemaking or future appropriations.
The mechanism depends on two affirmative determinations by the Secretary, but the bill does not define ‘necessary funding’ or the practical standards for assessing whether the criteria are met, creating potential ambiguity in administration.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.