What changed between these versions
A complete substitute amendment. v2 entirely removes the proposed Water Conveyance Improvement Program and significantly alters the funding and scope of the Environmental Restoration Program, including removing specific appropriations. The Large-Scale Water Recycling and Reuse Program also sees its direct appropriation removed and its definition of "construction" deleted, though other reauthorization elements remain.
Overview
Extensive changes throughout the bill, including the complete removal of a major new program. · v2 fundamentally restructures the bill by removing a substantial new program, altering funding mechanisms, and narrowing the scope of environmental restoration activities, while making minor adjustments to other reauthorized programs.
The most significant change in v2 is the complete deletion of the proposed Water Conveyance Improvement Program, which was a major new initiative in v1. Additionally, v2 removes specific authorizations of appropriations for both the Large-Scale Water Recycling and Reuse Program and the Environmental Restoration Program, shifting the latter to a cooperative agreement model without direct funding authorization. The scope of environmental restoration activities is also narrowed, focusing more specifically on certain geographic areas and facilities.
Deletions
This section established a comprehensive new Water Conveyance Improvement Program within the Bureau of Reclamation. It included definitions for various project types and entities, detailed provisions for Reclamation-led and non-Federal projects, cost-sharing requirements with special provisions for multi-benefit projects (safe drinking water for low-income communities and environmental benefits), selection criteria, and an authorization of $500,000,000 for fiscal years 2028 through 2032.
The deletion removes a major new federal program aimed at improving water conveyance infrastructure in Reclamation States, eliminating significant potential funding and a framework for multi-benefit projects that included specific provisions for low-income communities and environmental restoration. This fundamentally alters the bill's scope and ambition regarding water infrastructure development.
v1 inserted a new definition for "Construction" into Section 40905(a) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, clarifying its meaning by referencing the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act, with a specific modification for "storage" to be "infrastructure".
The removal of this specific definition means that the term "construction" within the large-scale water recycling and reuse program will revert to its meaning under existing law or general interpretation, potentially impacting the scope of eligible activities for grants.
v1 added a new subsection (l) to Section 40905 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, authorizing $450,000,000 to be appropriated to the Secretary for the large-scale water recycling and reuse program for the period of fiscal years 2028 through 2032.
The deletion removes the specific authorization of appropriations for this program, which was a direct funding commitment. While the program itself is reauthorized, the absence of this specific funding authorization changes the mechanism and certainty of future appropriations.
v1 amended Section 1602(g) of the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize $550,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2028 through 2032 for water recycling and reuse projects.
This deletion removes a specific authorization of appropriations for the broader water recycling and reuse projects under the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act, impacting the direct funding commitment for these types of projects.
v1's amendment to Section 4010(b)(2) of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIN Act) included a specific authorization of $250,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2028 through 2032 for actions benefiting endangered species, important habitat, and water bodies.
The removal of this direct authorization of appropriations significantly changes the funding certainty for environmental restoration activities. While v2 still allows the Secretary to undertake or enter into cooperative agreements for these activities, the absence of a specific funding amount makes future appropriations less certain.
Modifications
This modification explicitly includes feasibility studies as an eligible activity for grants under the large-scale water recycling and reuse program, ensuring that early-stage project development can receive funding.
Before
v1 struck and replaced subsection (b) of Section 40905 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), establishing a program to provide grants for the development of feasibility studies, planning, design, and construction of large-scale water recycling and reuse projects.
After
v2 modifies subsection (b) by inserting "feasibility studies for and" before "the planning".
This modification clarifies that federal share can be provided for feasibility studies, aligning with the change in Section 2(b). The increase in the federal share cap from 30% to 60% for eligible projects makes it easier for entities to secure funding for these projects by reducing the non-federal burden.
Before
v1's Section 2(d)(4) changed the federal share cap from 30% to 60%. The preceding text referred to the federal share "to an eligible project".
After
v2's Section 2(d) modifies the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking "to an eligible project" and inserting "for an eligible project, or for a feasibility study for an eligible project,". It also changes paragraph (4) from "30" to "60".
Both versions extend the program's authority by 5 years (from 5 to 10 years) and ensure that projects already under construction are not affected by the termination date. v2 achieves this by integrating the exception directly into the existing paragraph, rather than creating a new one.
Before
v1 modified subsection (k) to extend the authority termination from 5 to 10 years and added a new paragraph (2) to create an exception for projects under construction as of the termination date.
After
v2 modifies subsection (k) by striking "5" and inserting "10", and by inserting ", except for any project under construction as of that date" before the period at the end of the existing paragraph (1).
This modification fundamentally changes how environmental restoration activities are funded and implemented. The removal of direct appropriation makes funding less certain. The added requirement for Utah's agreement gives the state more control over projects in its jurisdiction. The narrowing of geographic and species scope means fewer areas and types of species may benefit, and the focus shifts more specifically to the Sacramento River basin and Shasta Dam operations.
Before
v1 amended Section 4010(b)(2) of the WIN Act by striking and replacing it. It authorized $250,000,000 for FY2028-2032 for various environmental restoration activities, including for the Great Salt Lake, Sacramento River and its tributaries (to benefit listed species, including Chinook salmon and steelhead trout, and other species of concern), aquatic habitat restoration, fish hatchery modernization, and structural improvements.
After
v2 also strikes and replaces Section 4010(b)(2). However, it removes the specific authorization of appropriations. Instead, it states the Secretary "may undertake or enter into cooperative agreements to support activities carried out during the period of fiscal years 2028 through 2032". It adds a requirement that activities in Utah for the Great Salt Lake must be at the request of and in agreement with the State of Utah. It narrows the scope of Sacramento River activities to specifically benefit species listed under the ESA (removing "other species of concern"). It also narrows the scope of real-time monitoring and temperature modeling to "Shasta Dam and Reservoir and related Central Valley Project facilities" and specifies fish hatchery projects "on the Sacramento River and its tributaries". It removes the clause about aquatic habitat restoration enhancing the ability to meet contractual water deliveries.
This changes the criterion for identifying inactive projects from whether funds were *obligated* (committed) to whether they were *appropriated* (legally set aside by Congress). This might lead to a different set of projects being identified for deauthorization, potentially including projects where funds were authorized but never appropriated.
Before
v1 stated that the interim deauthorization list would include projects "for which funding was not obligated during the fiscal year in which this Act is enacted or any of the preceding 7 fiscal years".
After
v2 changes this to "for which funding was not appropriated during the fiscal year in which this Act is enacted or any of the preceding 7 fiscal years".
This modification provides an additional year (total of 2 years instead of 1) for Congress to act, or for non-Federal sponsors to provide funding, before a project on the final deauthorization list is officially deauthorized. This offers a longer grace period for potentially inactive projects.
Before
v1 stated that a Reclamation project included on the final deauthorization list would be deauthorized "Effective beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of submission of the final deauthorization list".
After
v2 changes this to "Effective beginning on the date that is 2 years after the date of submission of the final deauthorization list".
Scope
Complete substitute — Changes are scattered throughout the bill, affecting multiple sections related to water recycling, environmental restoration, and project deauthorization. — v2 represents a significant change in policy direction by eliminating a major new water infrastructure program and shifting the funding approach for environmental restoration from direct appropriations to cooperative agreements, while also narrowing the scope of some environmental activities. — The changes primarily affect the specific programs and provisions targeted, but the removal of direct appropriations for certain programs could have broader implications for the Bureau of Reclamation's funding strategy and project pipeline.
Impact analysis
Reclamation States and eligible entities (States, Indian Tribes, municipalities, etc.)
Negative (loss of new program and funding opportunity)
v1 proposed a new Water Conveyance Improvement Program offering grants and federal participation for new or improved water conveyance facilities, including multi-benefit projects. v2 completely removes this program.
Entities seeking grants for large-scale water recycling and reuse projects
Mixed (procedural benefit in federal share and eligibility, but reduced funding certainty)
v1 authorized $450,000,000 for grants for these projects. v2 removes this specific authorization of appropriations. Both versions explicitly include feasibility studies as an eligible activity and increase the federal share cap from 30% to 60%.
Environmental restoration projects and related stakeholders in Reclamation States, particularly those focused on the Great Salt Lake, Sacramento River, and other inland water bodies
Negative (reduced funding certainty, narrowed scope, added procedural hurdles)
v1 authorized $250,000,000 for environmental restoration activities. v2 removes this direct appropriation and instead allows the Secretary to undertake or enter into cooperative agreements. It also narrows the geographic and species scope of eligible activities, focusing more on Shasta Dam and Sacramento River tributaries, and adds a requirement for State of Utah agreement for activities in Utah.
Project proponents and sponsors of inactive Reclamation projects
Mixed (potential change in identification criteria, but extended grace period)
v1 established a process to deauthorize projects for which funding was not *obligated* for 7 years, with a deauthorization effective date of 1 year after the final list submission. v2 changes the criterion to funding not *appropriated* for 7 years and extends the deauthorization effective date to 2 years.