Senate Agriculture Committee discussion draft · Chairman Boozman
Agricultural Act of 2026 (“Farm Bill 2.0”)
USDA FSA total CRP enrolled acres in the September 2027 CRP Monthly Summary — conditional on enactment of a 27,000,000-acre FY2027–31 ceiling versus no enacted FY2027–31 ceiling by 2027-09-30.
Both arms were preregistered through the trusted docket on 2026-08-03 — chronology witnessed before any forecasting. Every documented attempt failed closed and published nothing: the two August 3 rolls made four generation attempts (two failed before producing run manifests; two produced candidate cells that failed anchor validation — all visible in the public workflow logs), and after a generation ticket was minted on 2026-08-04 (public record), the ticketed local run refused when the FSA statistics site failed to serve the official summary (fetch timeout — no observations, no invented values); the refusal report on issue #128 is public, while the raw refusal trace is retained off-repo. FSA was unreachable on 2026-08-04 and still unreachable at the pair's published seven-day grace deadline (2026-08-10 18:15 UTC), so both registrations terminated together on the record rather than forecasting against a stale information set. A fresh pair may be registered if the source recovers.
Fresh post-recovery registration: USDA FSA total CRP enrolled acres in the September 2027 CRP Monthly Summary — conditional on enactment of a 27,000,000-acre FY2027–31 ceiling versus no enacted FY2027–31 ceiling by 2027-09-30.
FSA recovered on 2026-08-13 at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/tools/informational/reports/conservation-statistics/crp. The trusted docket now stages a fresh pair from that post-recovery information set, while the refused 2026-08-03 pair above remains immutable history. Its new target ids end in ceiling_27_million_source_recovered_2026_08_13 and no_fy2027_31_ceiling_source_recovered_2026_08_13. No forecast has been published yet; after both fresh arms publish, their forecast surface will appear alongside the retained refusal history.
Registered context series — forecast regardless of this bill
These series are tracked because the bill made them worth watching. They are not resolutions of any bill metric; each entry states what the series is not.
Private child-day-care annual-average employment
Admitted to the docket — the first registered forecast arrives with the next roll.
National private child-day-care payroll employment context. Not rural-county employment, all-ownership coverage, self-employment, slots/affordability/capacity, or any employment change caused by or attributable to the bill.
Provisions
Title II — Conservation
1. §§2101, 2105, and 2401(1): Conservation Reserve Program scale, grazing infrastructure, and payments
Title II — Conservation
1. §§2101, 2105, and 2401(1): Conservation Reserve Program scale, grazing infrastructure, and payments
Section 2101, “Conservation Reserve,” extends the program through 2031 and sets its acreage ceiling — the 27-million-acre cap quoted below. It also directs USDA, “to the maximum extent practicable,” to maintain at least 2,000,000 acres in the reserve at any one time in FY2027–31 and caps the land category cross-referenced in §1231(b)(3) at 12,000,000 acres. Land with cost-shared grazing infrastructure becomes eligible for consideration for reenrollment. Section 2105, “Payments,” adds cost sharing for grazing and water infrastructure under each contract when grazing is in the conservation plan and addresses a resource concern, and for management activities other than haying or grazing. Section 2105 bases a tract’s rental rate on its three predominant cropland soils, bars an inflation adjustment to payments, and raises the rental-payment limitation from $50,000 to $125,000. Section 2401(1) provides $100 million in each of FY2027–31 for the new grazing and water infrastructure cost share on “acreage not enrolled under section 1231(d)(2).”
Quoted from the bill ▸
“during fiscal years 2027 through 2031 not more than 27,000,000 acres.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 2101. CONSERVATION RESERVE. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1231(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2031’’. (b) ELIGIBLE LAND.—Section 1231(b) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(b)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ‘‘the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018’’ and inserting ‘‘the Agricultural Act of 2026’’; (2) in paragraph (5)(E), by adding ‘‘or’’ at the end; (3) in paragraph (6)(B)(ii), by striking ‘‘; or’’ and inserting a period; and (4) by striking paragraph (7). (c) ENROLLMENT.—Section 1231(d) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(d)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘during—’’ in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) and all that follows through the period at the end of subparagraph (E) and inserting ‘‘during fiscal years 2027 through 2031 not more than 27,000,000 acres.’’; (2) in paragraph (2)(A)— (A) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; and (B) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the following: ‘‘(ii) in carrying out clause (i), to the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary shall maintain not fewer than 2,000,000 acres in the conservation reserve at any one time during fiscal years 2027 through 2031; and ‘‘(iii) the Secretary shall not maintain in the conservation reserve more than 12,000,000 acres of land described in sub- section (b)(3).’’; and (3) in paragraph (6)— (A) in subparagraph (A)(i)— (i) in subclause (II), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; and (ii) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(IV) land that will be enrolled under the State acres for wildlife enhancement practice established by the Secretary; and’’; and (B) in subparagraph (B)— (i) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘2023; and’’ and inserting ‘‘2031.’’; (ii) by striking clause (ii); and (iii) by striking ‘‘paragraph (1)—’’ in the matter preceding clause (i) and all that follows through ‘‘the Secretary’’ in clause (i) and inserting ‘‘paragraph (1), the Secretary’’. (d) ELIGIBILITY FOR CONSIDERATION.—Section 1231(h) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(h)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(3) LAND WITH GRAZING INFRASTRUCTURE.— On the expiration of a contract entered into under this subchapter that covers land that includes grazing infrastructure established with cost sharing assistance under section 1234(b)(1)(B)— ‘‘(A) the Secretary shall consider that land to be planted for purposes of subsection (b)(1)(B); and ‘‘(B) that land shall be eligible for reenrollment in the conservation reserve, subject to the requirements of this subchapter.’’. · · · SEC. 2105. PAYMENTS. (a) COST SHARING PAYMENTS.—Section 1234(b) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3834(b)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)— (A) by striking ‘‘establishing water’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘establishing— ‘‘(A) water’’; (B) in subparagraph (A) (as so designated), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and (C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(B) grazing infrastructure and water infrastructure under each contract, for all practices, if grazing is included in the conservation plan and addresses a resource concern.’’; and (2) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following: ‘‘(B) MANAGEMENT PAYMENTS.—The Secretary shall make cost sharing payments to an owner or operator under this subchapter for any management activity described in section 1232(a)(5), except for those management activities relating to haying or grazing.’’. (b) ANNUAL RENTAL PAYMENTS.—Section 1234(d)(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3834(d)(1)) is amended— (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (C) as clauses (i) through (iii), respectively, and indenting appropriately; (2) in the matter preceding clause (i) (as so redesignated), by striking ‘‘the Secretary shall consider—’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘the Secretary— ‘‘(A) shall determine for a tract of land a rental rate based on the 3 predominant soils of cropland on that tract, and apply that rental rate to any land within that tract that is enrolled in the conservation reserve under this subchapter; ‘‘(B) subject to subparagraph (A), shall consider—’’; (3) in subparagraph (B)(iii) (as so designated), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and (4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(C) notwithstanding clauses (i) through (iii) of subparagraph (B), shall not apply an adjustment based on the rate of inflation to any payment, overall rental payment, or other payment that an owner or operator receives under this subchapter.’’. (c) PAYMENT LIMITATION FOR RENTAL PAYMENTS.—Section 1234(g)(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3834(g)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘$50,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$125,000’’. Subtitle B—Environmental Quality Incentives Program · · · SEC. 2401. FUNDING. Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and (C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(C) $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 to provide cost sharing payments under section 1234(b)(1)(B) for acreage not enrolled under section 1231(d)(2).’’; (2) in paragraph (3)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking clauses (i) through (vi) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(ii) $2,600,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(iii) $2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(iv) $2,900,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(v) $3,255,000,000 for fiscal year 2031; and’’; and (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking clauses (i) through (vi) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) $1,275,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(ii) $1,300,000,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(iii) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(iv) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(v) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.’’; and (3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(5) The Forest Conservation Easement Program under subtitle I, using, to the maximum extent practicable— ‘‘(A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(B) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(C) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(D) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(E) $65,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Program scale — ceiling, not target
The 27-million-acre number permits enrollment up to that level; it does not require USDA to reach it. Enrollment can remain below the cap if offer volume, rental-rate competitiveness, program allocation, or administrative capacity is insufficient.
Participation — nominal cap versus real value
Raising the payment limit can make large contracts more attractive. All else equal, the express ban on an inflation adjustment erodes a given payment’s real value relative to an indexed payment as prices rise, likely reducing later-year offer and reenrollment rates at the margin. It does not prevent new-contract rates from changing for other statutory or market reasons.
Adversarial mechanism — tract averaging
Applying one rate based on three predominant cropland soils to all enrolled land on a heterogeneous tract can overcompensate lower-productivity portions and undercompensate higher-productivity portions. It also creates an incentive to configure tract or offer boundaries around favorable soils.
Land-use durability — infrastructure lock-in
Cost-shared fences and water systems can make grazing economically durable after a CRP contract. That may retain grass cover, but it also shifts part of CRP toward subsidized production and can increase conflict between forage use and habitat objectives.
Concentration — higher payment ceiling
More total rental assistance can flow to a single owner or operator. Without a published recipient-distribution series, staff cannot assume that the higher ceiling mainly reaches previously constrained family-scale participants.
Implementation barriers
FSA county offices and soil/rental systems bear the burden
They must identify the three predominant cropland soils, apply the result to heterogeneous enrolled acreage, explain disputes, and keep the method consistent across counties. The text does not say how the three-soil rule works for a tract with no cropland or fewer than three qualifying soil map units.
Producers and conservation planners bear a new documentation burden
Grazing must be in the conservation plan and address a resource concern. At scale, plan amendments, practice eligibility, construction verification, and reenrollment crosswalks become the queue.
Program managers must reconcile composition constraints with actual demand
The minimum and maximum acreage rules cross-reference categories in existing law; a national cap can be available while a category-specific constraint binds.
Candidate outcome metrics
USDA Farm Service Agency, Conservation Reserve Program Statistics, using the dated CRP Monthly Summary or the fixed September 30 snapshot: active enrolled acres, contracts, farms, annual rental payments, and dollars per acre by program category. Do not call the 27-million-acre ceiling a target.
USDA FSA, CRP Enrollment and Rental Payments by State/County and CRP Practices (Acres) by County. Freeze the first workbook or PDF captured after the preregistered date because live workbooks may be replaced.
No suitable recurring official series links these amendments to habitat quality, contract-level post-CRP land use, or the distribution of payments by ultimate beneficial owner. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(FSA active CRP enrolled acres at September 30 in FY2027–31 follow path a_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(FSA CRP category shares and average annual rental dollars per acre follow path r_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(FSA CRP contracts and enrolled acres per participating farm follow path c_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
Title II — Conservation
2. §§2102 and 2104: CREP water conservation and emergency haying/grazing
Title II — Conservation
2. §§2102 and 2104: CREP water conservation and emergency haying/grazing
Section 2102, “Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program,” provides that an agreement permanently retiring water rights receives the irrigated-acre payment rate, while an agreement permitting dryland agricultural use receives the difference between the irrigated- and dryland-acre rates. Section 2104, “Duties of the Secretary,” permits emergency haying “on certain practices” on no more than 50 percent of contract acres under a site-specific plan when any one of three tests is met — the drought, forage-loss, and disaster-determination triggers quoted below. It bars haying or grazing during the final two weeks of the primary nesting season when that use would cause long-term damage to vegetative cover for supported wildlife populations, and it exempts the new haying and grazing exceptions from review under the National Environmental Policy Act.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“the county is designated as D2 (severe drought) or greater according to the United States Drought Monitor”; “there is at least a 40 percent loss in forage production in the county”; or USDA, “in coordination with” the State technical committee, makes the specified natural-disaster determination.
Full section text ▸
SEC. 2102. CONSERVATION RESERVE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM. Section 1231A of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831a) is amended— (1) in subsection (a)(4), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting ‘‘(other than an agreement described in subsection (e))’’ after ‘‘this subchapter’’; (2) in subsection (b)— (A) in paragraph (2)(A)(vi), by inserting ‘‘or other appropriate practices, such as dryland agricultural uses and grazing,’’ after ‘‘conservation practices’’; and (B) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(C) UPDATES TO EXISTING AGREEMENTS.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.— ‘‘(I) OPTION TO UPDATE.—The Secretary shall provide an option to signatories to an agreement under this subsection to update the agreement, without renegotiating other provisions of the agreement, to include new incentives made available under this subchapter beginning on January 1, 2018, such as riparian forest buffer management payments. ‘‘(II) MATCHING FUNDS.—Requirements for matching funds described in paragraph (2)(B) shall not apply to the updates to an agreement described in subclause (I). ‘‘(ii) DROUGHT AND WATER CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS.—In the case of an agreement covered by subparagraph (B) of subsection (c)(5) entered into before the date of enactment of that subparagraph under which the payment rate is lower than the payment rate that would be calculated for the agreement under that subparagraph, the Secretary shall modify the agreement by calculating the payment rate in accordance with that subparagraph.’’; (3) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(5) DROUGHT AND WATER CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS.— ‘‘(A) RETIREMENT OF WATER RIGHTS.—In the case of an agreement described in sub- section (e) that includes a permanent retirement of water rights, the payment rates for annual payments shall be equal to the irrigated acre payment rates determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(B) DRYLAND AGRICULTURAL USES.—In the case of an agreement described in sub- section (e) that permits dryland agricultural uses pursuant to paragraph (2) of that subsection, the payment rates for annual payments shall be equal to the difference between— ‘‘(i) the irrigated acre payment rates determined by the Secretary; and ‘‘(ii) the dryland acre payment rates determined by the Secretary.’’; and (4) in subsection (e)(3), by inserting ‘‘subject to subsection (c)(5),’’ before ‘‘calculate’’. · · · SEC. 2104. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY. Section 1233(b) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3833(b)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)— (A) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by inserting ‘‘subject to subclauses (I) and (III) of clause (i), and subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (ii), of subparagraph (B),’’ before ‘‘are subject to’’; and (B) in subparagraph (B)(i)— (i) by redesignating subclauses (I) through (VI) as subclauses (II) through (VII), respectively; (ii) by inserting before subclause (II) (as so redesignated) the following: ‘‘(I) emergency haying in response to a localized or regional drought, flooding, wildfire, or other emergency, on certain practices, outside the primary nesting season or during the final 2 weeks of the primary nesting season, on not more than 50 percent of contract acres, as identified in the site-specific plan, when— ‘‘(aa) the county is designated as D2 (severe drought) or greater according to the United States Drought Monitor; ‘‘(bb) there is at least a 40 percent loss in forage production in the county; or ‘‘(cc) the Secretary, in coordination with the State technical committee, determines that the program can assist in the response to a natural disaster event without permanent damage to the established cover;’’; and (iii) in subclause (II) (as so redesignated), in the matter preceding item (aa), by striking ‘‘emergency haying, emergency grazing, or other emergency use’’ and inserting ‘‘emergency grazing or other emergency use’’; and (2) in paragraph (2)(B)— (A) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iv); and (B) by inserting after clause (i) the following: ‘‘(ii) DAMAGE TO COVER FOR WILDLIFE POPULATIONS.—Haying or grazing described in paragraph (1) shall not be permitted on land subject to a contract under the conservation reserve program, or under a particular practice, if haying or grazing during the final 2 weeks of the primary nesting season under that practice, as applicable, would cause long-term damage to vegetative cover for wildlife populations supported by the applicable practice on that land. ‘‘(iii) APPLICABILITY OF NEPA.—The exceptions described in clauses (i) and (ii) shall not be subject to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Water use — parcel-level conservation
Paying the irrigated rate for permanent retirement should increase retirement offers and reduce irrigation on enrolled parcels.
Adversarial mechanism — adverse selection and leakage
Payment depends on irrigated status and administratively determined rates, not a statutory demonstration of historical consumptive use saved. Low-use or weak rights may enroll first, and saved water may be pumped or diverted elsewhere unless State law retires the consumptive entitlement at the relevant basin scale.
Relief — faster forage access
A disjunctive trigger makes emergency haying available in more circumstances and can lower emergency feed and transport costs.
Adversarial mechanism — threshold and timing effects
A D2 boundary creates a cliff between otherwise similar counties. Allowing use in the last two weeks of the primary nesting season can still harm late nests; the safeguard depends on a rapid prediction of “long-term” vegetative-cover damage, not direct nest outcomes.
Procedural tradeoff — NEPA exclusion
Removing NEPA review can accelerate a time-sensitive response. It also removes a structured channel for identifying cumulative or repeated habitat effects and may shift disputes to later enforcement or litigation.
Implementation barriers
State water administrators, FSA, and applicants must make “permanent” real
Water-right retirement, transfer, abandonment, and return-flow treatment differ across States. A Federal contract alone may not extinguish the relevant State-law right.
FSA must establish defensible irrigated and dryland rates
A generous spread can overpay paper or rarely used rights; a narrow spread can kill take-up among high-value users.
County offices lack a uniform high-frequency forage-loss series
The bill specifies a 40 percent county loss but not the data product, baseline, estimator, or appeal process. This invites inconsistent proof and delay precisely during emergencies.
Site-specific administration is spatially demanding
FSA must map the 50 percent limit, determine applicable practices, and make wildlife-cover findings fast enough for hay to remain useful.
Candidate outcome metrics
USDA FSA, Conservation Reserve Program Statistics / CRP Monthly Summary, using separately published CREP acres and contracts. Do not add CREP rental payments without naming and verifying an exact official table/field.
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, Irrigation and Water Management Survey, for irrigated acres and water applied in an ex ante panel of pre-enactment CREP States or water-resource regions that the product actually publishes. Do not select the panel using future awards or participation. The survey is periodic, self-reported, and too coarse to identify CREP retirements.
the weekly U.S. Drought Monitor, published jointly by the National Drought Mitigation Center, USDA, and NOAA, for county D2+ status. It is not an outcome of the provision.
No recurring national official series was identified for acre-feet of consumptive use permanently retired, water rights retired, CRP acres actually emergency-hayed or grazed, forage obtained, or resulting wildlife-cover damage. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(FSA CREP enrolled acres and contract count follow path e_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(NASS irrigated acres and water applied in a fixed panel of pre-enactment CREP States or published water-resource regions at each Irrigation and Water Management Survey release | enactment vs non-enactment) There is no defensible direct conditional cell for realized emergency haying or its habitat effect until USDA publishes a stable use-and-acreage series. D2+ exposure should be preregistered as a conditioning variable, not substituted for use.
Title II — Conservation
3. §2401(2): the literal FY2028 conservation-funding cliff
Title II — Conservation
3. §2401(2): the literal FY2028 conservation-funding cliff
Section 2401, “Funding,” replaces the first funding sequence in Food Security Act §1241(a)(3) with the four amounts quoted below. The $2,600,000 figure is the literal supplied text. This report does not silently turn it into $2.6 billion. The codified paragraph/program crosswalk should be verified against the underlying statute before enrollment in a registry; the surrounding title and conventional cross-reference identify this as the EQIP funding line, but the amendatory extract itself does not restate the program label.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“$2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2027”; “$2,600,000 for fiscal year 2028”; “$2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 2029”; “$2,900,000,000 for fiscal year 2030”; and “$3,255,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 2401. FUNDING. Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and (C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(C) $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 to provide cost sharing payments under section 1234(b)(1)(B) for acreage not enrolled under section 1231(d)(2).’’; (2) in paragraph (3)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking clauses (i) through (vi) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(ii) $2,600,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(iii) $2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(iv) $2,900,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(v) $3,255,000,000 for fiscal year 2031; and’’; and (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking clauses (i) through (vi) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) $1,275,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(ii) $1,300,000,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(iii) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(iv) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(v) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.’’; and (3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(5) The Forest Conservation Easement Program under subtitle I, using, to the maximum extent practicable— ‘‘(A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(B) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(C) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(D) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(E) $65,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.’’.
Countersignable goals
$2,600,000,000?Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Adversarial mechanism — literal statutory cliff
If enacted exactly as supplied, the FY2028 amount is about 99.9 percent below FY2027 and then rebounds by more than one thousandfold in FY2029. Agencies cannot cure missing zeroes through implementation guidance.
Pipeline disruption
A one-year collapse would force deferrals, State allocation changes, staff and partner underutilization, and a bulge of demand in FY2029. Multiyear practice planning would not match the statutory funding path.
Distribution
Scarce FY2028 dollars would intensify ranking effects. High-capacity applicants and States with ready-to-obligate projects would be better positioned to capture the residual funds.
Forecast risk
Treating the number as an obvious typo rather than as law would make both budget and outcome forecasts wrong if Congress failed to correct it.
Implementation barriers
Congress bears the primary burden
this requires a legislative correction before enactment or a later technical-corrections law.
NRCS bears the operational burden if it is not fixed
it would need to unwind allocations and applicant expectations, then rebuild the pipeline for FY2029.
Thesis bears a version-control burden
the registered policy must preserve whether the analyzed text is the literal draft, a manager’s amendment, or enrolled law. A forecast based on a corrected number is a different policy cell.
Candidate outcome metrics
USDA NRCS, Financial Assistance Program Data and the Resource Conservation Assessment Data Viewer, using obligations, contracts, and contracted acres for the affected program after the statutory crosswalk is confirmed.
U.S. Treasury Bureau of the Fiscal Service, USAspending.gov award/transaction data, using the relevant USDA assistance listing and federal_action_obligation, frozen at a fixed lag after fiscal-year close.
No official national series directly measures input savings or environmental benefits attributable to the funded precision-agriculture technologies in §§2201–2202. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(NRCS FY2028 obligations and new contracts under the affected §1241(a)(3)(A) program follow path q_t | enactment with the literal $2.6 million vs non-enactment)
P(NRCS FY2027–31 obligations and contracted acres follow path q_t | corrected enactment vs non-enactment) These are separate cells. They must not be blended into one “enactment” scenario.
Title II — Conservation
4. §§2701–2702 and 2401(3): Forest Conservation Easement Program
Title II — Conservation
4. §§2701–2702 and 2401(3): Forest Conservation Easement Program
Section 2701, “Forest Conservation Easement Program,” inserts a new subtitle directing USDA to establish the program, in the terms quoted below. Forest land easements protect working forests while allowing production under a forest management plan. Their ordinary Federal share is 50 percent of fair market value and may reach 75 percent for a forest of special environmental significance or land owned by a socially disadvantaged forest landowner. Forest reserve easements target listed and other at-risk species; permanent-easement plans may receive up to 100 percent of eligible restoration costs, capped at $500,000 per easement or 30-year contract. Section 2702 repeals the Healthy Forests Reserve Program but preserves existing contracts, agreements, and easements through transition rules. Section 2401 lists an FCEP path of $25 million, $50 million, $50 million, $50 million, and $65 million in FY2027–31, “to the maximum extent practicable.”
Quoted from the bill ▸
“The Secretary shall establish a program, to be known as the ‘Forest Conservation Easement Program’, for the conservation and restoration of eligible land and natural resources through the acquisition of forest land easements or forest reserve easements.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 2701. FOREST CONSERVATION EASEMENT PROGRAM. (a) IN GENERAL.—Title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.) is amended— (1) by redesignating subtitle I (16 U.S.C. 3871 et seq.) as subtitle J; and (2) by inserting after subtitle H (16 U.S.C. 3865 et seq.) the following: ‘‘Subtitle I—Forest Conservation Easement Program ‘‘SEC. 1267. DEFINITIONS. ‘‘In this subtitle: ‘‘(1) ACREAGE OWNED BY AN INDIAN TRIBE.— The term ‘acreage owned by an Indian Tribe’ means— ‘‘(A) land that is held in trust by the United States for an Indian Tribe or individual Indian; ‘‘(B) land the title to which is held by an Indian Tribe or individual Indian, subject to a Federal restriction against alienation or encumbrance; ‘‘(C) land that is subject to rights of use, occupancy, and benefit of 1 or more Indian Tribes; ‘‘(D) land that is held in fee title by an Indian Tribe; ‘‘(E) land that is owned by a Native corporation established under— ‘‘(i) section 17 of the Act of June 18, 1934 (commonly known as the ‘Indian Reorganization Act’) (25 U.S.C. 5124); or ‘‘(ii) section 8 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1607); and ‘‘(F) any combination of 1 or more types of land described in subparagraphs (A) through (E). ‘‘(2) ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—The term ‘eligible entity’ means— ‘‘(A) an agency of State or local government or an Indian Tribe (including a land resource council established under State law); and ‘‘(B) an organization that is— ‘‘(i) organized for, and at all times since the formation of the organization has been operated principally for, 1 or more of the conservation purposes specified in clause (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv) of section 170(h)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; ‘‘(ii) an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of that Code that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of that Code; or ‘‘(iii) described in— ‘‘(I) paragraph (1) or (2) of section 509(a) of that Code; or ‘‘(II) section 509(a)(3) of that Code, and is controlled by an organization described in section 509(a)(2) of that Code. ‘‘(3) ELIGIBLE LAND.—The term ‘eligible land’ means private land or acreage owned by an Indian Tribe— ‘‘(A) that is— ‘‘(i) forest land; or ‘‘(ii) being restored to forest land; ‘‘(B) in the case of a forest land easement— ‘‘(i) the enrollment of which would protect working forests and related conservation values by conserving land; or ‘‘(ii) the protection of which will further a State or local policy in accordance with the purposes of the Program; and ‘‘(C) in the case of a forest reserve easement, the enrollment of which will maintain, restore, enhance, or otherwise measurably— ‘‘(i) increase the likelihood of recovery of a species that is listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533); or ‘‘(ii) improve the well-being of a species that— ‘‘(I) is not listed as endangered or threatened under that section; but ‘‘(II)(aa) is a candidate for that listing or listing as a State-listed species or a species of special concern; or ‘‘(bb) is designated by a State wildlife action plan as a species of greatest conservation need. ‘‘(4) FOREST LAND EASEMENT.—The term ‘forest land easement’ means an easement or other interest in eligible land that— ‘‘(A) is conveyed to an eligible entity for the purpose of protecting the natural resources and forest nature of the eligible land; and ‘‘(B) permits the landowner the right to continue working forest production and related uses, in accordance with an applicable forest management plan. ‘‘(5) FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The term ‘forest management plan’ means— ‘‘(A) a forest stewardship plan described in section 5(f) of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2103a(f)); ‘‘(B) a forest plan approved by the applicable State forester or State forestry agency; ‘‘(C) a forest plan developed under a thirdparty certification system determined appropriate by the Secretary; and ‘‘(D) any other plan determined appropriate by the Secretary. ‘‘(6) FOREST RESERVE EASEMENT.—The term ‘forest reserve easement’ means an easement or other interest in eligible land that— ‘‘(A) is conveyed by the landowner to the Secretary for the purpose of protecting the natural resources and forest nature of the eligible land; and ‘‘(B) permits the landowner the right to continue working forest production and related uses, in accordance with the applicable forest reserve easement plan developed under section 1267C(e)(1). ‘‘(7) PROGRAM.—The term ‘Program’ means the Forest Conservation Easement Program established under section 1267A(a). ‘‘(8) SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED FOREST LANDOWNER.—The term ‘socially disadvantaged forest landowner’ means a forest landowner who is a member of a socially disadvantaged group (as defined in section 2501(a) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 2279(a))). ‘‘SEC. 1267A. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSES. ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish a program, to be known as the ‘Forest Conservation Easement Program’, for the conservation and restoration of eligible land and natural resources through the acquisition of forest land easements or forest reserve easements. ‘‘(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the Program are— ‘‘(1) to protect the viability and sustainability of working forests and related conservation values of eligible land and limit the negative effects of nonforest uses; ‘‘(2) to protect and enhance forest ecosystem and landscape functions and values; ‘‘(3) to promote the restoration, protection, and improvement of habitats of species that are threatened, endangered, or otherwise at-risk; and ‘‘(4) to carry out the purposes and functions of the healthy forests reserve program established under title V of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6571 et seq.) (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this section). ‘‘SEC. 1267B. FOREST LAND EASEMENTS. ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—As part of the Program, the Secretary shall facilitate and provide funding in accordance with this section for— ‘‘(1) the purchase by eligible entities of forest land easements on eligible land; ‘‘(2) the development of forest management plans; and ‘‘(3) technical assistance to implement this section. ‘‘(b) APPLICATIONS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—To be eligible to receive assistance under this section, an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require. ‘‘(2) CRITERIA.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish evaluation and ranking criteria with respect to applications submitted under this subsection to maximize the benefit of Federal investments under the Program. ‘‘(B) CONSIDERATIONS.—In establishing the criteria under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall emphasize support for— ‘‘(i) protecting working forests and related conservation values of eligible land; ‘‘(ii) reducing fragmentation of forest land; and ‘‘(iii) maximizing the areas protected from conversion to nonforest uses. ‘‘(3) PRIORITY.—In evaluating applications under this subsection, the Secretary shall give priority to an application for the purchase of a forest land easement— ‘‘(A) that maintains the viability of a working forest, as determined by the Secretary; and ‘‘(B) on eligible land for which a forest management plan has been developed at the time of application. ‘‘(4) FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If eligible land proposed to be subject to a forest land easement under the Program does not have in effect a forest management plan on the date on which an application relating to the eligible land is submitted under this subsection, the landowner, in partnership with the applicable eligible entity, shall develop a forest management plan for that eligible land as a condition of acquisition of the forest land easement. ‘‘(B) REIMBURSEMENT.—The Secretary may reimburse a landowner for the cost of development of a forest management plan under subparagraph (A). ‘‘(5) TREATMENT.—The Secretary may evaluate and rank applications submitted under this sub- section by eligible entities for the purchase of forest land easements from landowners who are socially disadvantaged forest landowners separately from applications submitted for the purchase of forest land easements from other landowners. ‘‘(c) COST-SHARE ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall protect working forests, and related conservation values of eligible land, through cost-share assistance to eligible entities for purchasing forest land easements. ‘‘(2) AGREEMENTS.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—As a condition of receipt of cost-share assistance under the Program, an eligible entity shall enter into an agreement with the Secretary to stipulate the terms and conditions under which the eligible entity is permitted to use the cost-share assistance. ‘‘(B) DURATION.—An agreement under subparagraph (A) shall be for a term of not less than 3, but not more than 5, years, unless the Secretary determines that a longer term is justified. ‘‘(C) MINIMUM TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— An eligible entity shall be authorized to use such terms and conditions as the eligible entity determines to be appropriate for a forest land easement purchased using assistance under this section, subject to the condition that the Secretary shall determine that those terms and conditions— ‘‘(i) are consistent with— ‘‘(I) the purposes of the Program; and ‘‘(II) the forestry activities to be conducted on the eligible land; ‘‘(ii) permit effective enforcement of the conservation purposes of the forest land easement; ‘‘(iii) include a requirement to implement a forest management plan on eligible land subject to the forest land easement, subject to the condition that the forest management plan shall not be incorporated in, or attached to, the deed for the forest land easement; ‘‘(iv) include a limit on the impervious surfaces to be allowed that is consistent with the forestry activities to be conducted; and ‘‘(v) include a right of enforcement for the Secretary that— ‘‘(I) may be used only if the terms and conditions of the forest land easement are not enforced by the eligible entity; and ‘‘(II) does not extend to a right of inspection unless— ‘‘(aa)(AA) the holder of the forest land easement fails to provide monitoring reports in a timely manner; or ‘‘(BB) the Secretary has a reasonable and articulable belief that the terms and conditions of the forest land easement have been violated; and ‘‘(bb) prior to the inspection, the Secretary notifies the eligible entity and the landowner of the inspection and provides a reasonable opportunity for the eligible entity and the landowner to participate in the inspection. ‘‘(D) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—An eligible entity may include any additional terms and conditions for a forest land easement purchased using assistance under this section that— ‘‘(i) are intended to keep the eligible land subject to the forest land easement in active forest management, as determined by the Secretary; ‘‘(ii) allow subsurface mineral development on the eligible land subject to the forest land easement, in accordance with applicable State law, if the Secretary determines that— ‘‘(I) the subsurface mineral development— ‘‘(aa) has a limited and localized impact; ‘‘(bb) does not harm the forest use and conservation values of the eligible land; ‘‘(cc) does not materially alter or affect the existing topography; ‘‘(dd) complies with a subsurface mineral development plan that— ‘‘(AA) includes a plan for the remediation of impacts to the forest use and conservation values of the eligible land; and ‘‘(BB) is approved by the Secretary prior to the initiation of mineral development activity; ‘‘(ee) is not accomplished by any surface mining method; ‘‘(ff) is within the impervious surface limits of the forest land easement under subparagraph (C)(iv); and ‘‘(gg) uses practices and technologies that minimize the duration and intensity of impacts to the forest use and conservation values of the eligible land; and ‘‘(II) each area impacted by the subsurface mineral development is reclaimed and restored by the holder of the mineral rights at cessation of operation; and ‘‘(iii) include other relevant activities relating to the forest land easement, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(E) SUBSTITUTION OF QUALIFIED PROJECTS.—An agreement under subparagraph (A) shall allow, on mutual agreement of the parties, substitution of qualified projects that are identified at the time of the proposed substitution. ‘‘(F) EFFECT OF VIOLATION.—If a violation of a term or condition of an agreement under subparagraph (A) occurs, the Secretary may— ‘‘(i) terminate the agreement; and ‘‘(ii) require the eligible entity to refund all, or any part of, the payments received by the eligible entity under the Program, with interest on the payments as determined to be appropriate by the Secretary. ‘‘(3) SCOPE.— ‘‘(A) FEDERAL SHARE.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in clause (ii), an agreement under paragraph (2) shall provide for a Federal share of 50 percent of the fair market value of the forest land easement, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(ii) EXCEPTION.—An agreement under paragraph (2) may provide for a Federal share of not more than 75 percent of the fair market value of a forest land easement in the case of eligible land that is— ‘‘(I) a forest of special environmental significance, as determined by the Secretary; or ‘‘(II) owned by a socially disadvantaged forest landowner. ‘‘(B) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Under an agreement under paragraph (2), the eligible entity shall provide a non-Federal share that is equivalent to the remainder of the fair market value of the forest land easement not provided by the Secretary under subparagraph (A). ‘‘(ii) PERMISSIBLE FORMS.—The nonFederal share provided by an eligible entity under this subparagraph may comprise— ‘‘(I) cash resources; ‘‘(II) a charitable donation or qualified conservation contribution (as defined in section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) from the private forest landowner from whom the forest land easement will be purchased; ‘‘(III) costs associated with securing a deed to the forest land easement, including the costs of appraisal, survey, inspection, and title; and ‘‘(IV) other costs, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(C) DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE.—For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary shall determine the fair market value of a forest land easement using— ‘‘(i) the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; ‘‘(ii) an areawide market analysis or survey; or ‘‘(iii) another industry-approved method. ‘‘(d) METHODS OF ENROLLMENT.—On acquisition of a forest land easement by an eligible entity using assistance provided under this section, the Secretary shall enroll the eligible land subject to the forest land easement in the Program through the use of— ‘‘(1) a permanent easement; or ‘‘(2) an easement for the maximum duration allowed under applicable State law. ‘‘(e) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary may provide technical assistance, on request, to assist in compliance with the terms and conditions of a forest land easement under this section. ‘‘SEC. 1267C. FOREST RESERVE EASEMENTS. ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—As part of the Program, the Secretary shall provide to landowners of eligible land assistance to restore, protect, and enhance the eligible land through— ‘‘(1) acquisition by the Secretary of forest reserve easements on eligible land; ‘‘(2) assistance in developing forest reserve easement plans under subsection (e); and ‘‘(3) technical assistance to implement this section. ‘‘(b) OFFERS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—To be eligible to grant to the Secretary a forest reserve easement under this section, a landowner of eligible land shall submit to the Secretary an offer at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require. ‘‘(2) CRITERIA.—The Secretary shall establish evaluation and ranking criteria with respect to offers submitted under this subsection. ‘‘(3) PRIORITY.—In evaluating offers under this subsection, the Secretary shall give priority to an offer for a forest reserve easement that provides the greatest conservation benefit— ‘‘(A) primarily, to a species listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533); and ‘‘(B) secondarily, to any species that— ‘‘(i) is not listed as endangered or threatened under that section; but ‘‘(ii)(I) is a candidate for that listing or listing as a State-listed species or species of special concern; or ‘‘(II) is designated by a State wildlife action plan as a species of greatest conservation need. ‘‘(4) OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.—The Secretary may give additional consideration to eligible land the enrollment under this section of which will— ‘‘(A) improve biological diversity; ‘‘(B) restore a native forest ecosystem; ‘‘(C) conserve forest land that provides a habitat for any species described in paragraph (3); ‘‘(D) reduce fragmentation of forest land; or ‘‘(E) increase carbon sequestration. ‘‘(5) TREATMENT.—The Secretary may evaluate and rank offers submitted under this subsection by landowners who are socially disadvantaged forest landowners separately from offers submitted by other landowners. ‘‘(c) METHODS OF ENROLLMENT.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enroll eligible land under this section— ‘‘(A) through the use of— ‘‘(i) permanent easements; ‘‘(ii) 30-year easements; or ‘‘(iii) easements for the maximum duration allowed under applicable State law; and ‘‘(B) in the case of acreage owned by an Indian Tribe, through the use of— ‘‘(i) 30-year contracts, the compensation for which shall be equivalent to the compensation for 30-year easements; or ‘‘(ii) permanent easements. ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—Not more than 10 percent of amounts made available to carry out this section for a fiscal year may be used for 30-year easements under this subsection. ‘‘(d) EASEMENTS.— ‘‘(1) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A forest reserve easement shall include terms and conditions that— ‘‘(i) are consistent with the purposes of the Program and the forestry activities to be conducted on the eligible land; ‘‘(ii) are consistent with— ‘‘(I) the management objectives of the landowner of the eligible land; and ‘‘(II) the implementation of the relevant forest reserve easement plan developed under subsection (e)(1); ‘‘(iii) permit effective enforcement of the conservation purposes of forest reserve easements; ‘‘(iv) provide for the efficient and effective establishment or enhancement of forest ecosystem functions and values; and ‘‘(v) include such additional provisions as the Secretary determines to be appropriate— ‘‘(I) to carry out the Program; or ‘‘(II) to facilitate the practical administration of the Program. ‘‘(B) REQUESTED TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—A landowner of eligible land may request that a term or condition be included in a forest reserve easement, and the Secretary may include the term or condition, if the Secretary determines that the term or condition— ‘‘(i) is consistent with— ‘‘(I) the management objectives of the landowner; and ‘‘(II) the implementation of the relevant forest reserve easement plan; and ‘‘(ii) does not conflict with any term or condition included under subparagraph (A). ‘‘(2) COMPENSATION.— ‘‘(A) PERMANENT EASEMENTS.—In the case of eligible land enrolled in a permanent easement under this section, the Secretary shall pay to the landowner of the eligible land an amount equal to the difference between, as determined by the Secretary— ‘‘(i) the fair market value of the eligible land before enrollment in the permanent easement; and ‘‘(ii) the fair market value of the eligible land as encumbered by the permanent easement. ‘‘(B) OTHER.—The Secretary shall pay to the landowner of eligible land enrolled under this section in a 30-year contract, a 30-year easement, or an easement for the maximum duration allowed under applicable State law not less than 50 percent, and not more than 75 percent, of the compensation that would be paid under subparagraph (A) if the land were enrolled in a permanent easement under this section. ‘‘(C) DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE.—For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary shall determine the fair market value of eligible land using— ‘‘(i) the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; or ‘‘(ii) another industry-approved method. ‘‘(e) FOREST RESERVE EASEMENT PLANS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Eligible land enrolled in a forest reserve easement under this section shall be subject to a forest reserve easement plan, to be developed jointly by the landowner and the Secretary, that describes such activities to be carried out on the eligible land as are necessary to restore, maintain, and enhance habitat for species described in sub- section (b)(3). ‘‘(2) PRACTICES AND MEASURES.—A forest reserve easement plan under paragraph (1) may include, with respect to the eligible land subject to the plan— ‘‘(A) vegetative management and silviculture practices; ‘‘(B) structural practices and measures; ‘‘(C) practices to increase carbon sequestration; ‘‘(D) practices to improve biological diversity; and ‘‘(E) other practices and measures, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(3) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide to landowners of eligible land enrolled in a forest reserve easement under this section financial assistance to carry out the activities, practices, and measures described in the forest reserve easement plan developed for the eligible land under paragraph (1). ‘‘(B) PAYMENTS.—With respect to financial assistance under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall pay— ‘‘(i) in the case of a forest reserve easement plan for eligible land enrolled in a permanent easement, an amount equal to not more than 100 percent of the eligible costs described in subparagraph (C), as determined by the Secretary; and ‘‘(ii) in the case of a forest reserve easement plan for eligible land enrolled in a 30-year contract, a 30-year easement, or an easement for the maximum duration allowed under applicable State law, an amount equal to not less than 50 percent, and not more than 75 percent, of the eligible costs described in subparagraph (C), as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(C) ELIGIBLE COSTS.—The costs eligible for payments under this paragraph are the costs of activities, practices, and measures described in the applicable forest reserve easement plan that are associated with restoration or enhancement of the habitat conditions specified for the applicable species described in the forest reserve easement plan. ‘‘(D) TIMING.— ‘‘(i) DETERMINATION.—As soon as practicable after the commencement on eligible land enrolled in a forest reserve easement of an activity, practice, or measure described in subparagraph (C), the Secretary shall determine whether the activity, practice, or measure is established in accordance with appropriate standards and specifications. ‘‘(ii) PAYMENT.—A payment under this paragraph shall be made for an activity, practice, or measure only, and as soon as practicable, after the Secretary makes a positive determination under clause (i) with respect to that activity, practice, or measure. ‘‘(E) LIMITATIONS.—A payment provided by the Secretary under this paragraph may not exceed $500,000 per easement or 30-year contract. ‘‘(f) PROTECTIONS AND MEASURES.— ‘‘(1) PROTECTIONS.—In the case of a landowner who enrolls eligible land in a forest reserve easement, and whose conservation activities under the forest reserve easement plan developed for that eligible land result in a net conservation benefit for a species described in subsection (b)(3), the Secretary shall make available to the landowner safe harbor or similar assurances and protection under— ‘‘(A) section 7(b)(4) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(b)(4)); or ‘‘(B) section 10(a)(1) of that Act (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)). ‘‘(2) MEASURES.—If protection under paragraph (1) requires the taking of measures that are in addition to the measures covered by the forest reserve easement plan developed for the applicable eligible land, the cost of the additional measures, and the cost of any related permit, shall be considered to be costs eligible for payments under subsection (e)(2). ‘‘(g) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall provide to landowners of eligible land technical assistance to assist the landowners in— ‘‘(A) developing a forest reserve easement plan under subsection (e); and ‘‘(B) complying with the terms and conditions of a forest reserve easement, including the implementation of a forest reserve easement plan. ‘‘(2) CONTRACTS OR AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary may enter into 1 or more contracts or agreements with a Federal, State, or local government agency, nongovernmental organization, Indian Tribe or Tribal organization, or private entity to provide technical assistance described in paragraph (1), if the Secretary determines that the contract or agreement will advance the purposes of the Program. ‘‘(h) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.— ‘‘(1) DELEGATION.— ‘‘(A) FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES.— The Secretary may delegate any of the management, monitoring, or enforcement responsibilities of the Secretary under this section to another Federal agency or a State agency that has the appropriate authority, expertise, and resources necessary to carry out the delegated responsibilities. ‘‘(B) CONSERVATION ORGANIZATIONS.— The Secretary may delegate any of the management responsibilities of the Secretary under this section to a nonprofit conservation organization, if the Secretary determines that the organization has the appropriate expertise and resources necessary to carry out the delegated responsibilities. ‘‘(2) INVOLVEMENT BY OTHER AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary may consult with— ‘‘(A) private forest landowners; ‘‘(B) other Federal agencies; ‘‘(C) State forestry agencies; ‘‘(D) State fish and wildlife agencies; ‘‘(E) State environmental quality agencies; ‘‘(F) other State conservation agencies; and ‘‘(G) nonprofit conservation organizations. ‘‘SEC. 1267D. ADMINISTRATION. ‘‘(a) INELIGIBLE LAND.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall not use amounts made available to carry out the Program for purposes of acquiring any easement on— ‘‘(A) land owned by a Federal agency, other than land that is acreage owned by an Indian Tribe; ‘‘(B) land owned in fee title by a State, including an agency or a subdivision of a State, or a unit of local government; ‘‘(C) land subject to an easement or deed restriction that, as determined by the Secretary, provides similar protection as would be provided by enrollment in the Program; or ‘‘(D) land the enrollment in the Program of which would undermine the purposes of the Program due to onsite or offsite conditions, such as risk of hazardous substances, permitted or existing rights-of-way, infrastructure development, or adjacent land uses. ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—The Secretary shall not limit the eligibility of land, except in the case of land owned by a foreign entity or foreign individual from a country that is a foreign adversary described in section 791.4(a) of title 15, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation), for purposes of the Program based on— ‘‘(A) acreage size; ‘‘(B) the type of private forest landowner or the size of their ownership; or ‘‘(C) the presence of severed mineral rights. ‘‘(b) SUBORDINATION, EXCHANGE, MODIFICATION, AND TERMINATION.— ‘‘(1) SUBORDINATION.—The Secretary may subordinate any interest in eligible land, or a portion of such an interest, administered by the Secretary (including for the purposes of utilities and energy transmission services) directly or on behalf of the Commodity Credit Corporation under the Program if the Secretary determines that the subordination— ‘‘(A) increases conservation values or has a limited negative effect on conservation values; ‘‘(B) minimally affects the acreage subject to the interest in eligible land; and ‘‘(C) is in the public interest or furthers the practical administration of the Program. ‘‘(2) MODIFICATION AND EXCHANGE.— ‘‘(A) MODIFICATION.— ‘‘(i) AUTHORITY.—The Secretary may approve a modification of any interest in land, or a portion of such an interest, administered by the Secretary, directly or on behalf of the Commodity Credit Corporation, under the Program if the Secretary determines that the modification— ‘‘(I) will support the viability and sustainability of working forests and the conservation values of the applicable easement; ‘‘(II) will result in equal or increased conservation values; ‘‘(III) is consistent with the original intent of the easement; ‘‘(IV) is consistent with the purposes of the Program; and ‘‘(V) is in the public interest or furthers the practical administration of the Program, including correcting errors and exercising reserved rights. ‘‘(ii) LIMITATION.—In modifying an interest in land, or a portion of such interest, under this subparagraph, the Secretary may not, except in the case of a modification that includes a change to an easement to add acreage, increase any payment to an eligible entity. ‘‘(B) EXCHANGE.— ‘‘(i) AUTHORITY.—The Secretary may approve an exchange of any interest in land, or a portion of such an interest, administered by the Secretary, directly or on behalf of the Commodity Credit Corporation, under the Program if the Secretary determines that— ‘‘(I) no reasonable alternative to the exchange exists; ‘‘(II) the effect of the exchange on the interest in land is avoided or minimized to the maximum extent practicable; and ‘‘(III) the exchange— ‘‘(aa) results in equal or increased conservation values; ‘‘(bb) results in equal or increased economic value to the United States; ‘‘(cc) is consistent with the original intent of the easement; ‘‘(dd) is consistent with the purposes of the Program; and ‘‘(ee) is in the public interest or furthers the practical administration of the Program. ‘‘(ii) LIMITATION.—In exchanging an interest in land, or a portion of such an interest, pursuant to this subparagraph, the Secretary may not increase any payment to an eligible entity. ‘‘(3) TERMINATION.—The Secretary may approve a termination of any interest in eligible land, or a portion of such an interest, administered by the Secretary, directly or on behalf of the Commodity Credit Corporation, under the Program if the Secretary determines that— ‘‘(A) termination is in the interest of the Federal Government; ‘‘(B) the United States will be fully compensated for— ‘‘(i) the value of the interest in the land, as determined by the Secretary; ‘‘(ii) any costs relating to the termination; and ‘‘(iii) any damages determined appropriate by the Secretary; and ‘‘(C) the termination will— ‘‘(i) address a compelling public need for which there is no practicable alternative even with avoidance and minimization; and ‘‘(ii) further the practical administration of the Program. ‘‘(4) CONSENT.—The Secretary shall obtain consent from the landowner and eligible entity, if applicable, for any subordination, exchange, modification, or termination of an interest in eligible land, or portion of such an interest, under this subsection. ‘‘(5) NOTICE.—Not less than 90 days before taking any termination action described in paragraph (3), the Secretary shall provide written notice of that action to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives. ‘‘(c) L AND ENROLLED IN OTHER PROGRAMS.—In accordance with section 2702(b) of the Agricultural Act of 2026, land enrolled in the healthy forests reserve program established under title V of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6571 et seq.) on the day before the date of enactment of this section shall be considered to be enrolled in the Program. ‘‘(d) PAYMENT LIMITATIONS EXCEPTIONS.—The attribution of payments limitation described in section 1001(e) and the adjusted gross income limitation described in section 1001D(b)(1) shall not apply to any payment or other assistance under the Program.’’. (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— (1) Section 1201(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801(a)) is amended— (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘subtitles A through I:’’ and inserting ‘‘subtitles A through J:’’; and (B) by striking paragraph (14) and inserting the following: ‘‘(14) INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘Indian Tribe’ has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304).’’. (2) Title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.) is amended— (A) by striking ‘‘Indian tribes’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Indian Tribes’’; and (B) by striking ‘‘Indian tribe’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Indian Tribe’’. (3) Section 1231A(a)(3)(C) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831a(a)(3)(C)) is amended by striking ‘‘(as defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304))’’. (4) Section 1241(e)(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(e)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘subtitle I’’ and inserting ‘‘subtitle J’’. (5) Section 1244 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3844) is amended— (A) in subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii), by striking ‘‘(as defined by the Secretary)’’; and (B) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘I.’’ and inserting ‘‘J.’’. · · · SEC. 2702. HEALTHY FORESTS RESERVE PROGRAM. (a) REPEAL.—Title V of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6571 et seq.) is repealed. (b) TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS.— (1) EFFECT ON EXISTING CONTRACTS , AGREEMENTS, AND EASEMENTS.—The repeal made by sub- section (a) shall not affect— (A) the validity or terms of any contract, agreement, or easement entered into by the Secretary under title V of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6571 et seq.) before the date of enactment of this Act; or (B) any payment or technical assistance required to be made in connection with a contract, agreement, or easement described in subparagraph (A). (2) FUNDING.— (A) USE OF PRIOR YEAR FUNDS.—Not withstanding the repeal made by subsection (a), any funds made available from the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out the healthy forests reserve program established under title V of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6571 et seq.) (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act) for any of fiscal years 2019 through 2026 shall be made available to carry out contracts, agreements, or easements referred to in paragraph (1)(A). (B) OTHER.—The Secretary may use funds made available to carry out the Forest Conservation Easement Program established under subtitle I of the Food Security Act of 1985 (as amended by section 2701) to continue to carry out contracts, agreements, or easements referred to in paragraph (1)(A) using the provisions of law (including regulations) in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act that are applicable to those contracts, agreements, and easements. (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— (1) The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–148; 117 Stat. 1887) is amended by striking the items relating to title V. (2) Section 1271A(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3871a(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting the following: ‘‘(D) The Forest Conservation Easement Program established under subtitle I.’’. Subtitle H—Other Conservation Programs · · · SEC. 2401. FUNDING. Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and (C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(C) $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 to provide cost sharing payments under section 1234(b)(1)(B) for acreage not enrolled under section 1231(d)(2).’’; (2) in paragraph (3)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking clauses (i) through (vi) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(ii) $2,600,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(iii) $2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(iv) $2,900,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(v) $3,255,000,000 for fiscal year 2031; and’’; and (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking clauses (i) through (vi) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) $1,275,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(ii) $1,300,000,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(iii) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(iv) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(v) $1,325,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.’’; and (3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(5) The Forest Conservation Easement Program under subtitle I, using, to the maximum extent practicable— ‘‘(A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; ‘‘(B) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2028; ‘‘(C) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2029; ‘‘(D) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2030; and ‘‘(E) $65,000,000 for fiscal year 2031.’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Land protection
Permanent and long-duration easements should reduce development conversion on enrolled parcels and preserve working-forest uses.
Adversarial mechanism — additionality
Ranking may buy easements on land that was unlikely to convert, especially when inexpensive acres maximize the reported area protected. Enrolled acres can rise without a commensurate reduction in counterfactual forest loss.
Selection
Priority for land with an existing forest management plan favors owners and eligible entities already able to finance planning. Separate ranking for socially disadvantaged owners is discretionary (“may”), so it does not guarantee a portfolio share.
Regulatory bargain
ESA safe-harbor or similar assurances can increase participation, but they also encourage plans built around the minimum defensible net conservation benefit rather than maximum species recovery.
Adversarial mechanism — extraction conflict
Forest land easements may permit subsurface mineral development under detailed conditions. “Limited and localized” effects, remediation, impervious-surface limits, and restoration all require continuing judgment; failures may emerge long after the award.
Distribution and capitalization
Payment-attribution and adjusted-gross-income limits do not apply. Some subsidy will likely capitalize into land/easement values or pay owners who would have retained forest anyway.
Implementation barriers
The eligible-entity connectors appear defective
New §1267(2) joins subparagraph (A), a State/local agency or Indian Tribe, to subparagraph (B), an organization, with “and.” Read literally, an applicant must satisfy both categories; ordinary governments and ordinary land trusts could each fail. Within subparagraph (B), the conservation-purpose, §501(c)(3), and §509 tests are in turn joined as alternatives by “or,” potentially making the organizational test too broad if the first connector is fixed alone. The intended connector pattern needs legislative confirmation; this is a program-blocking drafting issue, not something USDA can safely cure through outreach.
NRCS must launch two legally different easement tracks while migrating HFRP
Different holders, terms, plans, cost shares, appraisal rules, species criteria, and enforcement rights must work in a single national program.
Eligible entities carry permanent obligations under short administrative agreements
The forest-land cost-share agreement is ordinarily three to five years, while the easement is permanent or the maximum State-law duration. Monitoring and enforcement capacity must survive staff, funding, and institutional changes.
Appraisals and title work will bind before dollars do
Fair-market-value determinations, severed mineral rights, Tribal land status, surveys, and lien/easement priority can stall closings. If USDA exercises §1267D(a)(2)’s authority to limit eligibility for land owned by a foreign entity or individual from a listed foreign-adversary country, the resulting ownership screening adds another burden; the text permits that limit but does not categorically impose it.
Species and carbon claims lack a required public protocol
The statute uses “measurably” improved species well-being and permits carbon sequestration as a consideration, but it does not prescribe a recurring public measurement method.
The portfolio is small relative to the mandate
The listed path totals up to $240 million over five years, “to the maximum extent practicable,” for acquisition, restoration, planning, technical assistance, monitoring, and transition, with no acreage target.
Candidate outcome metrics
USDA NRCS, Easement Program Data / Easement Program Data Download, for published HFRP records. Start with the pre-enactment HFRP inventory and deduplicate by a stable agreement/easement identifier. The bill deems land already enrolled in HFRP to be enrolled in FCEP, so later summing HFRP and FCEP labels without record-level deduplication can count the same land twice.
U.S. Geological Survey, Annual NLCD Land Cover Change. Use archived Collection 1.2, which ends with observation year 2025, only to fix the pre-enactment forest-county panel and baseline. Define observation year t from the first Annual NLCD release containing year t, captured at a fixed lag; alternatively preregister one common future vintage after the full horizon, but do not mix the two revision rules. “Forest-to-developed acreage” is an analyst-derived measure, so freeze the source and destination classes, pixel-area calculation, county-boundary version, and transition treatment. Annual NLCD’s CONUS coverage makes it unsuitable as a nationwide FCEP measure that includes Alaska. Forest-to-nonforest is a weaker alternative because it can reflect harvest, temporary disturbance, or classification change rather than permanent conversion.
No officially published FCEP field or series exists today. Do not assume that a future download will contain acquisition-payment dollars, restoration fields, or stable program/easement-type codes. No tracked series.
No recurring official, program-linked national series measures working-forest viability, fragmentation avoided, easement-level habitat quality, species recovery, or carbon sequestration. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(NRCS publishes a stable FCEP program/easement-type field with unique identifiers and closed acres by date d | enactment) — a one-sided implementation forecast; the non-enactment observation is missing, not zero.
Conditional on that publication protocol: P(cumulative unique acres in the pre-enactment HFRP inventory plus genuinely new FCEP forest-reserve closures follow path f_t | enactment). Until then this is not first-print resolvable.
P(analyst-derived Annual NLCD forest-to-developed acreage, using fixed class/pixel/boundary rules and the first release containing year t, follows path l_t in a fixed pre-enactment forest-county panel | enactment vs non-enactment) — landscape-level and likely noisy, not program-attributable by itself.
Title II — Conservation
5. §2805: State Conservation Assistance
Title II — Conservation
5. §2805: State Conservation Assistance
Section 2805, “State Conservation Assistance,” creates FY2027–31 grants to eligible States and Indian Tribes for programs that improve soil health or wildlife habitat or address other local resource concerns. Eligibility requires an existing or new program that is meeting or exceeding State-set performance measures — the operative phrase is quoted below. The eligible-Indian-Tribe definition contains the parallel phrase with “the Indian Tribe.” Applications must describe those performance measures and expected results and promise that Federal grants will supplement rather than supplant State or Tribal spending. A grant may not exceed the lesser of $5 million and 50 percent of a State program’s cost or 75 percent of a Tribal program’s cost.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“meeting or exceeding performance measures established by the State for the program.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 2805. STATE CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE. Chapter 5 of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 is amended by inserting after section 1240O (16 U.S.C. 3839bb–2) the following: ‘‘SEC. 1240P. STATE CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE. ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: ‘‘(1) AGRICULTURAL LAND.—The term ‘agricultural land’ means— ‘‘(A) cropland; ‘‘(B) grassland; ‘‘(C) rangeland; ‘‘(D) pasture land; ‘‘(E) nonindustrial private forest land; and ‘‘(F) other land in agricultural areas (including wetlands, marshes, and agricultural land used or capable of being used for the production of livestock), as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(2) CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.— The term ‘conservation assistance program’ means a program implemented by an Indian Tribe or State to improve soil health or wildlife habitat or address other local resource concerns on agricultural land that— ‘‘(A) is broadly consistent with the conservation principles of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, as determined by the Secretary, including the use of perennial grasses; and ‘‘(B) may include— ‘‘(i) technical assistance; ‘‘(ii) financial assistance; ‘‘(iii) on-farm research and demonstration; ‘‘(iv) education, outreach, and training; ‘‘(v) monitoring and evaluation; or ‘‘(vi) such other components as the Secretary determines to be appropriate. ‘‘(3) ELIGIBLE INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘eligible Indian Tribe’ means an Indian Tribe that is— ‘‘(A) implementing a new or existing conservation assistance program for the area over which the Indian Tribe has jurisdiction; and ‘‘(B) meeting or exceeding performance measures established by the Indian Tribe for the program. ‘‘(4) ELIGIBLE STATE.—The term ‘eligible State’ means a State that is— ‘‘(A) implementing a new or existing conservation assistance program for the State; and ‘‘(B) meeting or exceeding performance measures established by the State for the program. ‘‘(b) AVAILABILITY AND PURPOSE OF GRANTS.—For fiscal years 2027 through 2031, the Secretary shall make grants to eligible States and eligible Indian Tribes for the purpose of improving soil health or wildlife habitat or addressing other local resource concerns on agricultural land through the implementation of State and Tribal conservation assistance programs. ‘‘(c) APPLICATIONS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—To receive a grant under this section, an eligible State or eligible Indian Tribe shall submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such a manner, and containing such information as the Secretary shall require, which shall include— ‘‘(A) a description of performance measures to be used to evaluate the State or Tribal conservation assistance program and the expected results of any activities carried out using grant funds received under this section; and ‘‘(B) an assurance that grant funds received under this section will supplement, and not supplant, the expenditure of State or Tribal funds. ‘‘(2) TRIBAL OPTION.—An Indian Tribe shall have the option, at the sole discretion of the Indian Tribe, to be incorporated into the application submitted by an eligible State under paragraph (1). ‘‘(d) GRANTS.— ‘‘(1) AMOUNT.—The amount of a grant to an eligible State or eligible Indian Tribe under this section for a fiscal year shall not exceed the lesser of— ‘‘(A) $5,000,000; and ‘‘(B) as applicable— ‘‘(i) 50 percent of the cost of implementing the State conservation assistance program in the fiscal year; or ‘‘(ii) 75 percent of the cost of implementing the Tribal conservation assistance program in the fiscal year. ‘‘(2) TERM.—A grant under this section shall be for a term of not longer than 5 years at the discretion of the eligible State or eligible Indian Tribe, and may be renewed in accordance with paragraph (3). ‘‘(3) RENEWAL.—If the Secretary determines that a grant under this section has met or exceeded the objectives of the State or Tribal conservation assistance program, the Secretary may renew the grant through an expedited noncompetitive process. ‘‘(e) AUDITS AND REVIEWS.—An eligible State or eligible Indian Tribe receiving a grant under this section shall submit to the Secretary— ‘‘(1) for each year for which the State or Indian Tribe receives such a grant, the results of an audit of the expenditures of the grant funds; and ‘‘(2) at such intervals as the Secretary shall establish, a review and evaluation of the State or Tribal conservation assistance program. ‘‘(f) EFFECT OF NONCOMPLIANCE.—If the Secretary, after reasonable notice to an eligible State or eligible Indian Tribe receiving a grant under this section, finds that the State or Indian Tribe has failed to comply with 1 or more terms of the grant, the Secretary may disqualify, for 1 or more years, the State or Indian Tribe from receipt of future grants under this section. ‘‘(g) ADMINISTRATION.— ‘‘(1) DEPARTMENT.—The Secretary shall not use more than 3 percent of the funds made available to carry out this section for a fiscal year for administrative expenses. ‘‘(2) STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES.—An eligible State or eligible Indian Tribe receiving a grant under this section shall not use more than 7 percent of the grant funds for a fiscal year for administrative expenses. ‘‘(h) FUNDING.—Of the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Secretary shall use to make grants under this section $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031.’’. TITLE III—TRADE Subtitle A—Food for Peace Act
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Local adaptation
The broad eligible menu—technical and financial assistance, demonstrations, outreach, monitoring, and evaluation—can support policy experimentation fitted to local soil, habitat, and production conditions.
Adversarial mechanism — fiscal-capacity selection
Match requirements and the requirement to be already implementing a program favor jurisdictions with staff, revenue, and grant systems. The places most in need of startup capacity may be least able to qualify.
Adversarial mechanism — metric gaming and non-comparability
Each applicant establishes its own performance measures and is eligible by meeting or exceeding those measures. Easy targets improve eligibility and renewal prospects but prevent a comparable national account of results.
Scale
A $5 million cap limits Federal exposure and spreads awards, but it may be too small to justify a new administrative and audit apparatus in large States or under-resourced Tribes.
Crowd-out risk
“Supplement, not supplant” language cannot by itself stop a legislature from reducing what it otherwise would have appropriated. The counterfactual budget is unobservable.
Implementation barriers
USDA must judge unlike against unlike
“Broadly consistent” with NRCS principles and self-defined performance measures require review across heterogeneous program rules, evidence, and time horizons.
States and Tribes bear fixed audit and evaluation costs
Annual expenditure audits and Secretary-timed reviews can consume a disproportionate share of a small or first-time program’s capacity.
USDA must police a counterfactual
Supplement-not-supplant enforcement requires baselines, treatment of one-time funds, and legislative-budget histories that the text does not standardize.
The incomplete source prevents a full burden assessment
Staff should obtain the continuation before assessing sanctions, cure periods, recovery, or total program funding.
Candidate outcome metrics
USDA NASS, Census of Agriculture / Quick Stats, using cover-crop acres or no-till/reduced-till acres in a fixed set of jurisdictions chosen before awards. The five-year cadence, self-reporting, Tribal geography gaps, and post-program timing make this a weak primary cell.
No distinct State Conservation Assistance identifier or officially published program series exists. The supplied text also creates no standardized national soil-health or wildlife-habitat measure and does not require grantee audits or evaluations to be public or comparable. NRCS conservation-effects assessments are periodic/model-based, not a clean annual first-print series. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(USDA/Treasury publishes State Conservation Assistance awards under a distinct stable identifier by date d | enactment) — a one-sided implementation forecast; the non-enactment observation is missing, not zero.
P(NASS cover-crop or no-till acres in a fixed pre-enactment jurisdiction panel for the 2027 and 2032 Census of Agriculture reference years, using each first release | enactment vs non-enactment) — slow, indirect, and not recommended as the sole success metric.
Title VI — Rural Development
1. §6101: Streamlining Broadband Authorities / ReConnect Program
Title VI — Rural Development
1. §6101: Streamlining Broadband Authorities / ReConnect Program
Section 6101, “Streamlining Broadband Authorities,” codifies the ReConnect Program in §601 of the Rural Electrification Act. It makes three distinct threshold changes: the highest-priority benchmark rises from 10/1 Mbps to 25/3 Mbps; the share of households in a proposed service territory that must lack sufficient access rises from 50 percent to 90 percent; and minimum acceptable service rises from 25/3 Mbps to 100/20 Mbps. It also prioritizes applicants with network-operating experience and networks that can scale speeds over time, in the terms quoted below. It limits applicant data, permits an investment-grade bond rating in place of financial documentation, allows alternative security in place of a Federal first lien on grant-funded assets, simplifies reporting and procurement, and creates rules for areas subject to other providers’ deployment obligations. It requires use of FCC maps and interagency data sharing. A new annual USDA report must publish the ReConnect funding distribution, the locations where service was made available and where it was used, and the highest service level at each location, and go to the relevant congressional committees.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“easily scale speeds over time … to meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6101. STREAMLINING BROADBAND AUTHORITIES. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 601 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 950bb) is amended— (1) by striking the section heading and inserting ‘‘RECONNECT PROGRAM’’; (2) in subsection (b)— (A) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and (B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following: ‘‘(3) RECONNECT PROGRAM.—The term ‘ReConnect Program’ means the program established under this section.’’; (3) in subsection (c)— (A) in paragraph (2)(A)— (i) in clause (i)— (I) in subclause (I), by striking ‘‘10-Mbps’’ and inserting ‘‘25-Mbps’’; and (II) in subclause (II), by striking ‘‘1-Mbps’’ and inserting ‘‘3-Mbps’’; (ii) in clause (iii), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; and (iii) by striking clause (iv) and inserting the following: ‘‘(iv) give priority to applications from applicants that have demonstrated the technical and financial experience required to construct and operate broadband networks; and ‘‘(v) give priority to applications from applicants that ensure that the network built under the project can easily scale speeds over time, as determined by the Secretary— ‘‘(I) to meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses; and ‘‘(II) to support the deployment of 5G wireless technology, successor wireless technologies, and other advanced services.’’; and (B) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(5) APPLICATIONS.—The Secretary shall establish an application process for grants, loans, and loan guarantees under this section that— ‘‘(A) reduces the amount of data required to apply by limiting the required data to only— ‘‘(i) the entity applying, excluding any parent or affiliate entity that is not a party to the application, to the greatest extent practicable; and ‘‘(ii) the geographic area affected by the application, if a parent or affiliate is not a party to the application; ‘‘(B) simplifies the data interfaces for submission to the greatest extent practicable; and ‘‘(C) allows all applicants, regardless of whether an applicant is publicly traded, to rely on a bond rating of at least investment grade (when bond ratings are available) in place of financial documentation.’’; (4) in subsection (d)— (A) in paragraph (1)— (i) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘subsection (j)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (l)’’; and (ii) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(C) REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary— ‘‘(i) shall not restrict the eligibility of an entity for a grant, loan, or loan guarantee under this section based on the legal structure of the entity; ‘‘(ii) in determining the financial ability of an entity to carry out a project using a grant, loan, or loan guarantee under this section, shall allow the entity to demonstrate that financial ability by methods that— ‘‘(I) the Secretary determines to be the least burdensome; and ‘‘(II) subject to clause (iv), in the case of a project using a grant, are not limited to providing the Federal Government an exclusive first lien on all grant-funded assets during the service obligation of the grant; ‘‘(iii) subject to clause (iv), in determining the required collateral to secure grant funds or to secure performance during the service obligation of a grant, shall allow an awardee to offer alternative security, such as a letter of credit or performance bond, in lieu of providing the Federal Government an exclusive first lien on all grant-funded assets; and ‘‘(iv) if the Secretary reasonably determines that alternative methods or alternative security established under clause (ii)(II) or (iii) are insufficient to secure performance with respect to a project under this section— ‘‘(I) may require an entity to provide the Federal Government an exclusive first lien on all grant-funded assets during the service obligation of the grant; and ‘‘(II) may release that lien after the Secretary determines that the entity is performing to the satisfaction of the Secretary.’’; and (B) in paragraph (2)— (i) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking ‘‘50’’ and inserting ‘‘90’’; and (ii) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(D) OBLIGATIONS TO PROVIDE BROADBAND SERVICE IN THE SAME SERVICE TERRITORY.— ‘‘(i) DEFINITION OF BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE.—In this subparagraph, the term ‘broadband infrastructure’ means any cables, fiber optics, wiring, or other permanent infrastructure that is integral to the structure, including fixed wireless infrastructure, that— ‘‘(I) is capable of providing access to internet connections in individual locations; and ‘‘(II) offers an advanced telecommunications capability (as defined in section 706(d) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 1302(d))). ‘‘(ii) OTHER PROVIDERS.—The Secretary shall consider a proposed service territory with respect to which an eligible entity submits an application for grant funding to carry out a project under this section to be served by broadband service if a broadband service provider other than that eligible entity is subject to an obligation by a Federal, State, or local government entity to build broadband infrastructure and offer broadband service in that service territory, subject to conditions— ‘‘(I) under a Federal, State, or local funding award program; or ‘‘(II) otherwise required by the Federal, State, or local government entity. ‘‘(iii) OTHER FUNDING.—Subject to clause (iv), the Secretary shall not be required to consider a proposed service territory with respect to which an eligible entity submits an application for grant funding to carry out a project under this section to be served by broadband service if that eligible entity has accepted an obligation under a Federal, State, or local funding award program to build broadband infrastructure and offer broadband service in that service territory, if the proposed project under this section— ‘‘(I) would not be duplicative of the obligation under the other award program; and ‘‘(II) would build broadband infrastructure that results in faster speeds or expedited milestones of deployment of broadband infrastructure in that service territory, as compared to the obligation under the other award program. ‘‘(iv) OTHER OBLIGATIONS FOR LOWER TRANSMISSION CAPACITY.—The Secretary shall consider a proposed service territory with respect to which an eligible entity submits an application to carry out a project under this section to be unserved by broadband service if an obligation under another award program described in clause (iii) would not provide broadband service of at least— ‘‘(I) a 25-Mbps downstream transmission capacity; and ‘‘(II) a 3-Mbps upstream transmission capacity. ‘‘(E) REQUIREMENTS FOR FUNDING.— ‘‘(i) SEPARATE OWNERSHIP OR OPERATION OF NETWORK.—A grant, loan, or loan guarantee under this section may be used to construct networks that will be owned and operated by another entity other than the eligible entity receiving the grant, loan, or loan guarantee, subject to the condition that the eligible entity, the other entity, or both, as the Secretary determines to be necessary, shall provide adequate security for the grant, loan, or loan guarantee. ‘‘(ii) REPORTING AND AUDITING.— The Secretary shall— ‘‘(I) simplify, to the maximum extent practicable, ongoing reporting and auditing requirements for recipients of a grant, loan, or loan guarantee under this section; and ‘‘(II) allow a recipient described in subclause (I) whose financial information is consolidated with the financial information of a parent entity to rely on that consolidated financial information in complying with the requirements described in that subclause if the parent entity is providing an adequate guarantee on behalf of a subsidiary of the parent entity with respect to the grant, loan, or loan guarantee. ‘‘(iii) PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING.—The Secretary— ‘‘(I) shall simplify, to the maximum extent practicable, requirements for recipients of a grant, loan, or loan guarantee under this section relating to the procurement of materials and retention of contractors; and ‘‘(II) shall not unreasonably restrict the ability of a recipient described in subclause (I) to obtain goods and services from affiliated entities.’’; (5) in subsection (e)(1)— (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘25Mbps’’ and inserting ‘‘100-Mbps’’; and (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘3Mbps’’ and inserting ‘‘20-Mbps’’; (6) by redesignating subsection (k) as sub- section (m); (7) by striking subsection (j) and inserting the following: ‘‘(j) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Agricultural Act of 2026, the Secretary shall issue regulations to carry out this section in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States Code. ‘‘(k) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of the Agricultural Act of 2026, and not less frequently than annually thereafter, the Secretary shall— ‘‘(1) publish a report describing— ‘‘(A) the distribution of amounts made available under the ReConnect Program for the preceding year; ‘‘(B) the number of locations at which broadband service was made available using amounts under the ReConnect Program for the preceding year; ‘‘(C) the number of locations described in subparagraph (B) at which broadband service was used; and ‘‘(D) the highest level of broadband service made available at each location described in subparagraph (B); and ‘‘(2) submit the report described in paragraph (1) to— ‘‘(A) the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate; ‘‘(B) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate; ‘‘(C) the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives; and ‘‘(D) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives. ‘‘(l) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031, to remain available until expended.’’; and (8) in subsection (m) (as so redesignated), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2031’’. (b) SUNSET.—Beginning on the date that is 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, section 779 of division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115–141; 132 Stat. 399), shall have no force or effect. (c) TRANSFER OF AMOUNTS.—The unobligated balance, as of the date that is 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, of any amounts made available to carry out the pilot program described in section 779 of division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115–141; 132 Stat. 399)— (1) is transferred to, and merged with, amounts made available to carry out section 601 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 950bb); and (2) shall remain available, until expended, and without further appropriation, to carry out the ReConnect Program established under that section. (d) EFFECT.—Title VI of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 950bb et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘SEC. 608. EFFECT. ‘‘Nothing in this title authorizes the Secretary to regulate rates charged for broadband service.’’. (e) PUBLIC NOTICE, ASSESSMENTS, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.—Section 701 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 950cc) is amended— (1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘ AND REPORTING’’ and inserting ‘‘ REPORTING, AND COORDINATION’’; (2) in subsection (a)— (A) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting ‘‘, including a complete shapefile map’’ after ‘‘applicant’’; and (B) in paragraph (2)(D), by striking ‘‘(c)’’ and inserting ‘‘(d)’’; (3) by redesignating subsections (b) through (e) as subsections (c) through (f), respectively; (4) by inserting after subsection (a) the following: ‘‘(b) CHALLENGE PROCESS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a transparent, evidence-based, and expeditious process for challenging, with respect to any area for which assistance is sought under an application described in subsection (a)(1), whether that area has access to broadband service. ‘‘(2) NOTICE.—If the Secretary denies an application described in subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall provide to the applicant a written notice of the denial, including a detailed description of the reasons for the denial.’’; and (5) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(g) PUBLIC NOTICE OF ELIGIBLE FUNDING AREAS.—Prior to making available to the public the database under subsection (a), the Secretary shall make available to the public a fully searchable database on the website of the Rural Utilities Service that contains information on areas eligible for assistance, as identified by the Secretary in accordance with subsection (i). ‘‘(h) INTERAGENCY COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall coordinate with the heads of other relevant Federal departments and agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Department of the Treasury, in the deployment of broadband service using Federal funding to prevent overbuilding. ‘‘(i) FCC MAPS.— ‘‘(1) USE OF FCC MAPS.—The Secretary shall identify areas eligible for assistance under broadband programs administered by the Secretary using the maps created by the Federal Communications Commission under section 802(c)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 642(c)(1)). ‘‘(2) DATA SHARING.—The Secretary shall ensure that any broadband service data collected is made available to the Chair of the Federal Communications Commission and the Administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration for inclusion in any broadband maps or data sets maintained by the Federal Communications Commission or the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.’’. (f) CONSULTATION.—Section 6212 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (7 U.S.C. 950bb–6) is amended— (1) in subsection (a), in the first sentence, by inserting ‘‘and State broadband offices’’ after ‘‘Assistant Secretary’’; and (2) in subsection (b)(1)— (A) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary’’; and (B) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(B) RECONNECT PROGRAM.—On awarding a grant, loan, or loan guarantee under the ReConnect Program established under section 601 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 950bb), the Secretary shall notify the Commission of that award.’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Access and speed
With appropriations, higher performance requirements and scale priority should increase the number of rural locations with service capable of supporting modern applications.
Adversarial mechanism — 90-percent eligibility cliff
Raising the proposed-territory unserved threshold from 50 to 90 percent excludes mixed-service areas with substantial unserved pockets. Applicants may redraw boundaries around the best qualifying blocks, leaving harder interspersed locations outside viable network designs.
Entry
Alternative security for grant-funded projects and less parent/affiliate documentation can widen participation. Letting rated applicants substitute an investment-grade bond rating, however, disproportionately helps large or established firms that already have ratings.
Adversarial mechanism — served-on-paper lockout
For a ReConnect grant application, a territory generally counts as served when another provider has an enforceable governmental obligation to build there. A household can therefore be excluded before it receives service; delayed or defaulted commitments can strand locations while blocking a competing grant award.
Adversarial mechanism — affordability gap
New §608 says nothing authorizes USDA to regulate broadband rates. Availability can rise while subscriptions remain flat because price, contract terms, installation charges, or digital skills remain binding.
Adversarial mechanism — related-party costs
The bill permits separate network ownership/operation and says USDA shall not unreasonably restrict procurement from affiliates. That can ease efficient corporate delivery, but it weakens arm’s-length price discipline and complicates audit of subsidized costs.
Federal grant performance/recovery risk
Alternative security and later lien release reduce recipient burden but can leave the Government with less security for performance or recovery when a grant-funded project fails.
Implementation barriers
RUS must reconcile incompatible maps and award systems
FCC Broadband Data Collection locations, NTIA and Treasury programs, State/local commitments, and RUS shapefiles differ in identifiers, vintages, speeds, challenge status, and completion milestones.
The deadlines are internally awkward
The first annual report is due within 120 days, while regulations are due within 180 days; the appropriations pilot also sunsets and transfers unobligated balances at day 120. RUS must report and manage transition before the final rule deadline.
“Used” is harder than “available.”
RUS needs a consistent location-level adoption definition and provider data while protecting subscriber information. Installed capability, a passed location, an activated subscription, and actual use are different events.
Challenge and overlap decisions are case-intensive
A searchable eligible-area database, detailed denial notices, complete shapefiles, and evidence-based challenges increase transparency but require staff, geospatial infrastructure, and appeal-quality records.
Candidate outcome metrics
U.S. Treasury Bureau of the Fiscal Service, USAspending.gov award/transaction data, awarding agency USDA/RUS, Assistance Listing 10.752. Keep award types separate: use federal_action_obligation for grants; use original_loan_subsidy_cost for the Federal budgetary cost of direct or guaranteed loans; and, if financing volume is the object, separately report face_value_of_direct_loan_or_loan_guarantee. Preserve negative actions and separate transferred unobligated balances from new awards. Freeze the result at a set lag, such as 90 days after fiscal-year close. **
Federal Communications Commission, Broadband Data Collection Fixed Broadband Availability Data / National Broadband Map, using the number or share of broadband-serviceable locations in a fixed rural geography lacking fixed terrestrial 100/20 service at each June/December collection. Hold a baseline BSL universe fixed, or use the FCC’s Fabric Change Reports to decompose added, removed, and attribute-changed locations; merely naming each new Fabric version does not make denominators longitudinally comparable. Pin the collection date, technology set, rural crosswalk, and denominator. This is provider-reported advertised availability, not verified performance, subscription, adoption, or affordability.
The bill requires a new public §601(k) USDA ReConnect annual report, but that report has not been published and is therefore not a current candidate series. It has no pre-enactment observation or assured schema. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(new ReConnect grant obligations and loan subsidy cost, kept as separate paths under a fixed fiscal action-date rule, follow paths o_t and s_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(FCC BDC fixed-baseline rural broadband-serviceable locations lacking at least 100/20 service follow path b_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(USDA publishes the §601(k) ReConnect report with separate made-available and used fields by its statutory deadline | enactment) — a one-sided implementation forecast; the non-enactment observation is missing, not zero.
Title VI — Rural Development
2. §6104: Last Mile Broadband Deployment / Last Acre Program
Title VI — Rural Development
2. §6104: Last Mile Broadband Deployment / Last Acre Program
Section 6104, “Last Mile Broadband Deployment,” inserts a new §607, the “Last Acre Program.” Within one year USDA must establish competitive grants and loans to covered providers for 100/20 “qualifying connectivity” across unserved and underserved agricultural land, including field devices, wireless networks, towers, and retrofits. An application must describe the qualifying-connectivity plan for the land — including the acreage scope quoted below. The process publishes land from initial bids, allows incumbent challenges, and solicits competing bids. It directs USDA to select “the applicant that” both presents the lowest Federal cost and best demonstrates the ability to meet on-farm needs. Buildout may take up to four years. Recipients must use a layered cybersecurity defense and maintain a configuration-management plan. The section authorizes $25 million annually for FY2027–31 and orders NASS to add farm-site subscription, speed, and precision-agriculture questions to its computer usage and ownership survey and to the census of agriculture.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“the entire acreage in need of qualifying connectivity.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6104. LAST MILE BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT. (a) AMENDMENT.—Title VI of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 is amended by inserting after section 606 (7 U.S.C. 950bb–5) the following: ‘‘SEC. 607. LAST ACRE PROGRAM. ‘‘(a) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are— ‘‘(1) to advance precision agriculture connectivity nationwide; and ‘‘(2) to augment last mile broadband deployment for agricultural producers by expanding highspeed internet access across the last acre. ‘‘(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: ‘‘(1) BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE.—The term ‘broadband internet access service’ has the meaning given the term in section 8.1(b) of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation). ‘‘(2) BROADBAND MAPS.—The term ‘broadband maps’ means any map created under— ‘‘(A) section 802(c)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 642(c)(1)); or ‘‘(B) section 60105 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (47 U.S.C. 1704). ‘‘(3) COMMISSION.—The term ‘Commission’ means the Federal Communications Commission. ‘‘(4) CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT PLAN.— The term ‘configuration management plan’, with respect to a covered provider, means a comprehensive description of the roles, responsibilities, policies, and procedures intended to improve the integrity of the systems and networks of the covered provider. ‘‘(5) COVERED PRODUCER.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘covered producer’ means a person or entity that is described as eligible under section 311(a)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1941(a)(1)). ‘‘(B) INCLUSION.—The term ‘covered producer’ includes agricultural research centers of the Agricultural Research Service. ‘‘(6) COVERED PROVIDER.—The term ‘covered provider’ means— ‘‘(A) with respect to the provision of qualified connectivity to eligible land, a provider of broadband internet access service; or ‘‘(B) with respect to the provision of wireless solutions using or extending the range of network connectivity, a provider of wireless equipment or communications services, in association with an entity described in subparagraph (A). ‘‘(7) ELIGIBLE LAND.—The term ‘eligible land’ means cropland, grassland, rangeland, pastureland, farm sites, and other agricultural land used for the active production of agricultural commodities or livestock. ‘‘(8) FARM SITE.—The term ‘farm site’ means a portion of land contiguous to land actively devoted to agricultural production and that includes improvements that are agricultural or horticultural in nature. ‘‘(9) LIMITED RESOURCE FARMER OR RANCHER.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), the term ‘limited resource farmer or rancher’ means a covered producer— ‘‘(i) with direct or indirect gross farm sales in each of the previous 2 years of not more than $100,000, as adjusted for changes in inflation since 2002 using the Prices Paid by Farmer Index compiled by the National Agricultural Statistics Service; and ‘‘(ii) that has a total household income that is— ‘‘(I) at or below the national poverty level for a family of 4; or ‘‘(II) less than 50 percent of the county median household income in each of the previous 2 years. ‘‘(B) DOCUMENTATION.—For purposes of determining if a covered producer is a limited resource farmer or rancher, the Secretary may require the submission of sufficient documentation to verify the status of the covered producer. ‘‘(C) EXCLUSION.—For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘covered producer’ does not include the agricultural research centers described in paragraph (5)(B). ‘‘(10) PRECISION AGRICULTURE.—The term ‘precision agriculture’ means managing, tracking, or reducing crop or livestock production inputs, including seed, feed, fertilizer, chemicals, water, and time, at a heightened level of spatial and temporal granularity to improve efficiencies, reduce waste, and maintain or improve environmental quality. ‘‘(11) QUALIFYING CONNECTIVITY.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘qualifying connectivity’ means the service offered by a covered provider as a result of assistance under subsection (c) that— ‘‘(i) is capable of a speed of not less than— ‘‘(I) a 100-Mbps downstream transmission capacity; and ‘‘(II) a 20-Mbps upstream transmission capacity; and ‘‘(ii) carries out not less than 1 of the activities described in subparagraph (B). ‘‘(B) ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED.—The activities referred to in subparagraph (A)(ii) are— ‘‘(i) providing broadband internet access service by any technology to structures and devices on eligible land, including tractors, combines, irrigation systems, drones, under-soil sensors, livestock facilities, and farm offices; ‘‘(ii) providing multipoint wireless network connectivity that facilitates data transmission between structures and devices on eligible land, including structures and devices described in clause (i); and ‘‘(iii) supporting— ‘‘(I) the construction of wireless infrastructure, including poles, towers, base stations, or other structures, regardless of whether the structure has an existing antenna facility, that is used or will be used for the provision of wireless service; or ‘‘(II) the retrofitting of existing towers or vertical structures, such as water towers, grain elevators, or center pivots, to accommodate wireless infrastructure. ‘‘(12) REMOTE AREA.—The term ‘remote area’ means the frontier and remote ZIP Code areas published by the Economic Research Service. ‘‘(13) UNDERSERVED.—The term ‘underserved’ means, with respect to eligible land, that the eligible land lacks access to broadband internet access service that is capable of a speed of not less than— ‘‘(A) a 100-Mbps downstream transmission capacity; and ‘‘(B) a 20-Mbps upstream transmission capacity. ‘‘(14) UNSERVED.—The term ‘unserved’ means, with respect to eligible land, eligible land that lacks access to broadband internet access service that is capable of a speed of not less than— ‘‘(A) a 25-Mbps downstream transmission capacity; and ‘‘(B) a 3-Mbps upstream transmission capacity. ‘‘(c) ESTABLISHMENT.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish a program, to be known as the ‘Last Acre Program’, to make grants and loans to covered providers on a competitive basis to provide qualifying connectivity to unserved and underserved eligible land. ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—Of the amounts made available under subsection (k) for a fiscal year for assistance under paragraph (1), the Secretary may award not more than 10 percent to agricultural research centers described in subsection (b)(5)(B). ‘‘(d) USE OF FUNDS.— ‘‘(1) CYBERSECURITY.—The Secretary may allow a covered provider to use a portion of the assistance provided to the covered provider under sub- section (c), as necessary, to address the cybersecurity requirements under subsection (g). ‘‘(2) PROHIBITION.—The Secretary shall not award any assistance under subsection (c) for broadband internet access service— ‘‘(A) to an inhabitable residence that is identified as serviceable or as to be served due to an enforceable commitment to deploy on the broadband maps; or ‘‘(B) on a commercial basis to surrounding areas outside the eligible land. ‘‘(3) FEDERAL SHARE.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the Federal share of a project carried out using assistance under sub- section (c) shall be not more than 80 percent of the total cost of the project. ‘‘(B) LIMITED RESOURCE FARMERS OR RANCHERS.—The Secretary may increase the Federal share of the costs described in subparagraph (A) to 90 percent if the covered producer of the applicable eligible land is a limited resource farmer or rancher. ‘‘(e) BID APPLICATIONS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—To apply for assistance under subsection (c), a covered provider shall submit to the Secretary an application in such manner and containing such information as the Secretary may require, including— ‘‘(A) the measures by which the covered producer has engaged with the covered provider to identify the appropriate qualifying connectivity plan to serve the eligible land of the covered producer; ‘‘(B) a description of how the assistance provided under subsection (c) would be used to establish qualifying connectivity on the unserved or underserved eligible land of a covered producer, including the entire acreage in need of qualifying connectivity; ‘‘(C) the amount of the Federal share for the project and the amount of the non-Federal share for the project; ‘‘(D) whether the covered provider is capable of carrying out the specific funded activities in compliance with all Federal, State, and local laws; ‘‘(E) whether the covered provider has the financial and managerial capacity to meet the specific commitments contained in the application, including buildout obligations; ‘‘(F) whether the covered provider has the technical and operational capability to construct and operate broadband networks; ‘‘(G) whether the eligible land of the covered producer— ‘‘(i) is unserved or underserved; and ‘‘(ii) is not subject to an enforceable commitment to deploy broadband by the applicant or another covered provider, as determined according to the broadband maps; and ‘‘(H) any additional information that the Secretary determines necessary to ensure the effective function of the program under this section. ‘‘(2) REGISTRATION OF COVERED PROVIDERS.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than the date on which the Secretary establishes the program under this section pursuant to subsection (c), the Secretary shall create an online portal within which covered providers may register voluntarily with the Secretary for purposes of the program under this section. ‘‘(B) REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS.—To register with the Secretary under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall require a covered provider to submit the minimum amount of information necessary for the covered provider to demonstrate to the Secretary that the covered provider— ‘‘(i) is capable of carrying out activities for which assistance is provided under subsection (c) in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws; ‘‘(ii) has the financial and managerial capacity to meet commitments necessary to carry out the projects for which assistance is received under subsection (c); and ‘‘(iii) has the technical and operational capability— ‘‘(I) to construct and operate broadband networks; and ‘‘(II) to meet the requirement described in paragraph (1) of subsection (g) and provide the cybersecurity certification required under paragraph (2) of that subsection. ‘‘(C) PROHIBITIONS.—In registering covered providers under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall not— ‘‘(i) require a covered provider to provide any proprietary business information for purposes of registering under that subparagraph; or ‘‘(ii) require a covered provider to participate in the program under this section. ‘‘(D) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary may make a list of covered providers registered under subparagraph (A) publicly available. ‘‘(3) BIDDING.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—After the Secretary receives a complete initial bid application under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall allow covered providers registered under paragraph (2)(A) that operate contiguous to, near, or partially on the eligible land that is the subject of the initial bid application to submit competing bid applications for the proposed service area. ‘‘(B) NOTIFICATION TO COVERED PROVIDERS.—Not less frequently than once every 30 days, the Secretary shall— ‘‘(i) post on an internet website of the Secretary that is accessible to covered providers the necessary identifying information of eligible land contained in a complete initial bid application; and ‘‘(ii) not later than 24 hours after the time at which the information described in clause (i) is posted, send notice of that post to covered providers registered under paragraph (2)(A) by electronic mail. ‘‘(C) CHALLENGES.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 45 business days after the date on which the Secretary posts the information described in subparagraph (B)(i), a covered provider may submit to the Secretary notice of a challenge of any posted eligible land at which— ‘‘(I) the qualifying connectivity of the covered provider is available to the entire portion of land in the initial bid application without assistance under subsection (c); ‘‘(II) the covered provider could initiate qualifying connectivity through a routine installation within 10 business days of a request with no extraordinary monetary charges or delays attributable to the extension of the network of the covered provider; or ‘‘(III) the covered provider has an enforceable commitment to deploy broadband to the eligible land. ‘‘(ii) ADJUDICATION OF CHALLENGES.— ‘‘(I) PROCESS.—The Secretary shall establish a transparent, evidence-based, and expeditious process for adjudicating a challenge submitted under clause (i) with respect to a location within 90 business days of the date on which the Secretary posts the information described in subparagraph (B)(i). ‘‘(II) REQUIREMENT.—The process established by the Secretary under subclause (I) shall include making publicly available on the website of the Secretary a written notice describing the outcome and reason for the decision of the Secretary with respect to each challenge submitted under clause (i). ‘‘(III) LIMITATION.—The Secretary may not award any assistance under subsection (c) for a particular application until all challenges with respect to the eligible land described in that application have been fully adjudicated. ‘‘(iii) NEW SOLICITATION.—If, after adjudicating a challenge under clause (i), the Secretary determines that the land subject to the challenge is eligible land that is unserved or underserved, the Secretary shall transmit to each covered provider registered under paragraph (2)(A) a bid notification for the provision of qualifying connectivity to the eligible land. ‘‘(D) COMPETING BID APPLICATIONS.—A covered provider registered under paragraph (2)(A) that receives a notification under subparagraph (B)(ii) or a notification under subparagraph (C)(iii) and wishes to submit a competing bid application for provision of qualifying connectivity to the eligible land described in that notification shall, not later than 120 days after the date on which the covered provider registered under paragraph (2)(A) receives the notification, submit to the Secretary a competing bid application to provide that qualifying connectivity in accordance with paragraph (1). ‘‘(E) EVALUATION.—Not later than 30 business days after the date on which the 120day period described in subparagraph (D) ends, the Secretary shall evaluate the bid applications received and select the applicant that— ‘‘(i) presents the lowest cost to the Secretary for the provision of qualifying connectivity to the eligible land that is unserved or underserved; and ‘‘(ii) best demonstrates to the covered producer the ability to provide downstream and upstream transmission capacity that can reliably support the specific connectivity needs of all on-farm applications described in the bid application, including mobility, if mobility was included in the bid application. ‘‘(F) ENHANCED SPEEDS.— ‘‘(i) FINDING.—Congress finds that there are unique connectivity needs to support the adoption of precision agriculture. ‘‘(ii) PRIORITIZATION.—In selecting bid applicants under subparagraph (E), the Secretary may give priority to a covered provider that offers enhanced service speeds that are greater than those described in subsection (b)(11)(A)(i), if the applicant demonstrates that the proposal to serve the eligible land of a covered producer that is unserved or underserved requires such enhanced service speeds. ‘‘(G) TREATMENT OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The prohibition under paragraph (2)(C)(i) shall not apply to a covered provider in the submission of a bid application under this subsection, including a competing bid application under subparagraph (D) or a challenge under subparagraph (C), if the proprietary information is necessary for the Secretary— ‘‘(I) to determine the eligibility of a covered provider; or ‘‘(II) to evaluate an initial bid application, competing bid application, or challenge. ‘‘(ii) DISCLOSURE IN NOTIFICATION.— ‘‘(I) IN GENERAL.—In the notification required under subparagraph (B), the Secretary— ‘‘(aa) shall only disclose the necessary and appropriate information contained within an initial bid application for the purposes of facilitating competing bid applications; and ‘‘(bb) shall not divulge proprietary information of the applicable covered provider and covered producer in the application. ‘‘(II) REQUIREMENT.—In a bid application under this subsection, including a competing bid application under subparagraph (D) or a challenge under subparagraph (C), an applicant shall clearly mark any proprietary information with the term ‘confidential proprietary information’. ‘‘(iii) TREATMENT.—If a covered provider provides in a bid application under this subsection, including a competing bid application under subparagraph (D) or a challenge under subparagraph (C), proprietary information that constitutes a trade secret, proprietary commercial or financial information, confidential business information, or data affecting national security, the Secretary shall treat the information in confidence to the greatest extent permitted by law. ‘‘(iv) PRIVACY.—Nothing in this section affects the applicability to this section of section 1619 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 8791). ‘‘(4) TIMELINE.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For each project for which assistance under subsection (c) is provided, the Secretary shall establish service buildout milestones and periodic certifications by recipients of the assistance for purposes of project compliance and implementation. ‘‘(B) REQUIREMENT.—The milestones required under subparagraph (A) shall establish a maximum buildout timeframe of not more than 4 years from the date on which the assistance is provided. ‘‘(C) PENALTIES.—The Secretary shall establish and enforce standardized penalties, fines, and sanctions for noncompliance with a milestone or certification established under subparagraph (A). ‘‘(f) PRIORITY.—In providing assistance under sub- section (c), the Secretary shall give priority to applications to carry out projects in the following order: ‘‘(1) Unserved eligible land in remote areas. ‘‘(2) Other unserved eligible land. ‘‘(3) Underserved eligible land in remote areas. ‘‘(4) Other underserved eligible land. ‘‘(g) CYBERSECURITY.—As a condition on receipt of assistance under subsection (c), a covered provider shall— ‘‘(1) ensure that any structure, device, or system provided or constructed using the assistance incorporates a layered defense strategy as a means of defensible security architecture; and ‘‘(2) certify to the Secretary that the covered provider maintains a regularly updated configuration management plan. ‘‘(h) PROHIBITION.—In selecting recipients of assistance under subsection (c), the Secretary shall not advantage or disadvantage the selection of a recipient under this section based on consideration of the existence, or lack thereof, of any State law. ‘‘(i) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary shall, on an annual basis— ‘‘(1) submit to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives a report that describes the outcome of the bids that occurred during the previous fiscal year, including the number of parcels of eligible land for which initial bid applications were submitted during the previous fiscal year, the number of challenges filed under subsection (e)(3)(C) during the previous fiscal year, the outcomes of those challenges, the number of competing bid applications received under this section, and the respective amounts awarded for eligible land; and ‘‘(2) make the report required under paragraph (1) publicly available on the website of the Secretary. ‘‘(j) PROVISION OF DATA TO FCC.—The Secretary shall, on an annual basis, make the necessary data available to the Commission for inclusion on the broadband maps. ‘‘(k) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031.’’. (b) NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE DATA COLLECTION ON BROADBAND ADOPTION.—To provide for the collection and analysis by the National Agricultural Statistics Service of more comprehensive broadband usage data, the Secretary shall update the computer usage and ownership survey and the census of agriculture conducted under section 2 of the Census of Agriculture Act of 1997 (7 U.S.C. 2204g) to contain questions relating to— (1) whether the respondent subscribes to a broadband internet access service for a farm site (as defined in section 607(b) of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936); and (2) if the respondent subscribes to the broadband internet access service described in paragraph (1)— (A) the download and upload speeds of the broadband internet access service to which the respondent is subscribed; and (B) the purposes for which the internet access is used, including the use of precision agriculture (as defined in section 607(b) of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936). PART II—ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Production technology
Connected irrigation, machinery, sensors, and farm offices can increase precision-agriculture adoption and reduce some input, labor, and monitoring costs.
Adversarial mechanism — strategic delay
A provider gets 45 business days to challenge, while USDA’s deadline to adjudicate runs 90 business days from the original posting date and therefore overlaps that challenge window; competing bidders then get 120 days, USDA gets another 30 business days to evaluate, and no award may issue before all challenges are resolved. An incumbent can delay an entrant even when claimed service is marginal.
Adversarial mechanism — map mismatch
FCC maps describe broadband-serviceable locations, principally structures, while this program asks whether an entire farm’s acreage, devices, and mobility needs are served. A mapped farmhouse can coexist with dead zones across fields.
Adversarial mechanism — network fragmentation
Funds may not serve a residence already shown as serviceable or provide commercial service to surrounding areas outside eligible land. Preventing duplication can also eliminate shared-network revenue and require artificial network or accounting boundaries, weakening the business case for remote builds.
Reverse-auction risk
The conjunctive lowest-cost and best-capability tests encourage aggressive bidding; an apparent winner can later produce quality shortfalls, change requests, or sanctions.
Match and documentation
A 20 percent non-Federal share can screen out cash-poor farms. USDA may raise the Federal share to 90 percent for a limited-resource farmer or rancher, but that reduction is discretionary; proving the status requires two years of farm-sales and household-income information.
Implementation barriers
USDA must invent an acreage-level service test
A 100/20 speed at one point does not establish capacity, latency, uptime, or mobility across an entire parcel. Drive testing, device testing, or coverage modeling is not specified.
The bid-selection connector can block an award
The text requires one applicant to be both lowest-cost and the best demonstration of capability, but supplies no rule when different bidders win those tests and no tie-breaking or tradeoff method. USDA cannot safely turn the conjunction into weighted factors without legislative or regulatory risk.
The portal is both a procurement and privacy system
It must identify land to potential bidders without disclosing protected farm or proprietary business information, then maintain challenge-quality evidence.
Providers bear a bespoke application cost for small awards
Parcel-specific engineering, farm engagement, maps, cybersecurity certification, and four-year milestones may cost more than the expected subsidy on difficult properties.
Cybersecurity terms are underspecified
“Layered defense strategy” and a “regularly updated” plan have no incorporated standard, audit interval, or minimum control set.
Candidate outcome metrics
USDA NASS, Technology Use (Farm Computer Usage and Ownership), for existing computer, internet-access, connection-method, and internet-use fields. It does not supply the existing precision-agriculture measure. The bill-created farm-site subscription and upload/download fields have not yet been published and are not current candidate series.
USDA NASS, 2022 Census of Agriculture, Table 41, for the count/share of farms reporting use of precision-agriculture practices. This item was new for 2022—2017 is not a baseline—and has a five-year Census cadence. It is distinct from the bill-created question conditioned on a broadband subscription being used for precision agriculture, which has not been published.
The bill requires a future public §607(i) USDA annual report covering initial-bid parcels, challenges and dispositions, competing bids, and amounts awarded. It has not been published, and even when published it need not report completed buildout, served acreage, tested speed, uptime, subscriptions, or precision-agriculture use. No tracked series.
FCC BDC data do not measure coverage across farm acreage or devices. No recurring official series currently measures agricultural acres with reliable 100/20 field connectivity, realized precision-agriculture connectivity, or uptime. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(NASS share of farms reporting internet access follows path n_t | enactment vs non-enactment) — comparable but too broad to be a stand-alone Last Acre outcome.
P(NASS Census of Agriculture count/share of farms using precision-agriculture practices in the 2027 reference year, from its first release, relative to the fixed 2022 baseline follows path p_t | enactment vs non-enactment) — only one pre-enactment observation and a five-year cadence.
P(NASS publishes the bill-created farm-site subscription, speed, and broadband-conditioned precision-agriculture-use fields by date d | enactment) — a one-sided measurement-availability forecast; do not splice those fields into the existing Census item.
P(USDA publishes the §607(i) Last Acre report with initial-bid, challenge, and award fields by date d | enactment) — a one-sided implementation forecast; the non-enactment observation is missing, not zero. Treat future bill-created survey fields the same way until they have an observed release. No direct outcome cell should be described as resolved until USDA or another official publisher releases completed-acreage, tested-speed, uptime, and use data.
Title VI — Rural Development
3. §6206: Rural Water and Wastewater Cybersecurity Circuit Rider Program
Title VI — Rural Development
3. §6206: Rural Water and Wastewater Cybersecurity Circuit Rider Program
Section 6206 creates a circuit-rider program, structured like the existing water circuit-rider authority, to provide rapid cyber assessments, reasonable protocols, help with inadequate protection plans, and documentation of protection for rural water supplies. Providers must have the experience and certification described in the quoted text below. Funded entities report annually to USDA which utilities and communities they served and which activities they performed. The section authorizes $10 million in each of FY2027–31 and permits essential work to continue during a funding lapse using previously appropriated unobligated balances.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“the necessary experience and certification to effectively carry out the activities … as determined by the Secretary.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6206. RURAL WATER AND WASTEWATER CYBERSECURITY CIRCUIT RIDER PROGRAM. Section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)) is amended by inserting after paragraph (22) the following: ‘‘(23) RURAL WATER AND WASTEWATER CYBERSECURITY CIRCUIT RIDER PROGRAM.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a cybersecurity circuit rider program, which shall be structured similar to the general authorities under paragraph (22), to provide technical assistance to associations described in paragraph (1) that operate rural water or wastewater systems— ‘‘(i) to provide rapid assessments of the current ability or inability of those associations— ‘‘(I) to respond to cybersecurity threats; and ‘‘(II) to protect the cyberinfrastructure of those associations and public health; ‘‘(ii) to develop reasonable protocols to enhance cybersecurity protection; ‘‘(iii) to provide assistance to address inadequate cyber protection plans; and ‘‘(iv) to document the state of cyber protection with respect to the water supplies of those associations. ‘‘(B) REPORT REQUIREMENT.—An entity or entities delivering the circuit rider program that receive funding under this paragraph shall submit to the Secretary an annual report documenting— ‘‘(i) the utilities and communities served by the entity or entities under this paragraph; and ‘‘(ii) the activities performed by the entity or entities under this paragraph. ‘‘(C) REQUIREMENTS FOR CIRCUIT RIDERS.—To provide technical assistance under subparagraph (A), an entity shall possess the necessary experience and certification to effectively carry out the activities described in that subparagraph, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(D) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this paragraph $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031. ‘‘(E) CONTINUITY OF ESSENTIAL CYBERSECURITY CIRCUIT RIDER ACTIVITIES.—Activities carried out under this paragraph that are necessary to prevent imminent harm to life or property shall be treated as excepted activities and may continue during a lapse in appropriations, using unobligated balances previously appropriated under the heading ‘Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account’.’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Capacity
Shared specialists can raise baseline cyber hygiene, incident planning, and awareness at utilities with very small staffs.
Adversarial mechanism — assessment without remediation
The statute funds assessments and assistance but sets no remediation deadline or capital funding rule. It can produce a growing inventory of known vulnerabilities without the money, downtime, or staff to fix them.
Adversarial mechanism — specialist capture
A narrow pool of certified cyber and water-system professionals can absorb much of a small national authorization through travel and consulting costs, leaving sparse repeat coverage.
Information risk
Detailed vulnerability records held by circuit riders or utilities are operationally useful but sensitive. The required USDA report covers utilities/communities served and activities performed, not detailed findings; a centralized Federal “threat map” risk arises only if USDA separately requires or receives granular assessment records.
Thin accountability
Required reports count utilities and activities, not reduced vulnerabilities, response time, incidents, or service continuity.
Implementation barriers
USDA must define the credential market
“Necessary experience and certification” does not identify acceptable cyber, control-system, or operator credentials, reciprocity, conflicts, or continuing education.
Rural utilities bear remediation and coordination burdens
Staff must grant system access, validate inventories, schedule downtime, procure fixes, and maintain protocols after a rider leaves.
Scale breaks at follow-through
A rapid first assessment can be standardized; remediation across legacy control systems, unsupported software, vendor contracts, and scarce operators cannot.
The shutdown carve-out is narrower than it sounds
Work must be necessary to prevent imminent harm and can use only previously appropriated unobligated balances; someone must make and document that classification during the lapse.
Candidate outcome metrics
EPA’s ECHO SDWA Dataset and EPA/State Drinking Water Dashboard, sourced from SDWIS, track regulatory compliance, not cyber incidents or readiness.
annual grantee submissions to USDA will identify utilities/communities served and activities performed, but the text does not require USDA to publish them, standardize a denominator, or report outcomes.
No recurring, officially published national series was identified for rural water cyber incidents, vulnerability closure, readiness, recovery time, or cyber-caused outages. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
No defensible public outcome cell exists now.
P(USDA publishes standardized circuit-rider coverage and remediation-follow-up fields by date d | enactment) is a possible one-sided measurement-availability forecast. Without that publication protocol, a coverage or remediation outcome cell is not resolvable and should not be registered.
Title VI — Rural Development
4. §§6201, 6203, 6210, and 6213: rural water access, regionalization, and affordability finance
Title VI — Rural Development
4. §§6201, 6203, 6210, and 6213: rural water access, regionalization, and affordability finance
Section 6201, “Water, Waste Disposal, and Wastewater Facility Grants,” lets demonstrated-need grants cover up to 100 percent of the cost of developing a complete application and raises specified project limits and authorizations. Section 6203, “Rural Water, Wastewater, and Waste Disposal Facility Direct Loans,” gives highest priority to a qualifying direct-loan or grant application in the community type quoted below. Section 6210, “Assistance to Provide Water and Wastewater Services in Financially Distressed Rural Areas,” lets an experienced nearby association serve a distressed system that voluntarily agrees, including through governance/management consolidation or a regional partnership. Only the distressed system’s population counts for eligibility after consolidation, and its financial assistance must benefit residents of that service area. Section 6213, “Additional Assistance for Rural Water Systems,” permits grants of up to 75 percent of project cost, zero- or 1-percent-interest loans of up to 100 percent, and forgiveness, modification, or refinancing of existing loans — though loans made under the new authority itself cannot be forgiven.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“in a low-income rural community with a population of less than 10,000.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6201. WATER, WASTE DISPOSAL, AND WASTEWATER FACILITY GRANTS. Section 306(a)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(2)) is amended— (1) in subparagraph (A)(ii)— (A) by striking ‘‘per centum’’ and inserting ‘‘percent’’; and (B) by striking ‘‘area.’’ and inserting ‘‘area, except that in the case of demonstrated need, as determined by the Secretary, the amount of a grant made under the authority of this subparagraph for necessary expenses of developing a complete application to carry out an eligible project under this subparagraph may exceed 75 percent, but shall not exceed 100 percent, of those expenses to be incurred.’’; and (2) in subparagraph (B)— (A) in clause (iii), by striking ‘‘$200,000’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘$500,000’’; and (B) in clause (vii), by striking ‘‘$15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023’’ and inserting ‘‘$30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031’’. · · · SEC. 6203. RURAL WATER, WASTEWATER, AND WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY DIRECT LOANS. Section 306(a)(13) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(13)) is amended— (1) by striking ‘‘(13) In the making of’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘(13) PRIORITIES FOR WASTE DISPOSAL AND WATER FACILITIES LOANS AND GRANTS.— ‘‘(A) LOW POPULATION COMMUNITIES.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—In making’’; (2) in subparagraph (A) (as so designated)— (A) in clause (i) (as so designated), in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘(ii) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary’’; and (B) in clause (ii) (as so designated)— (i) by striking ‘‘Soil Conservation Service’’ and inserting ‘‘Natural Resources Conservation Service’’; (ii) by striking ‘‘paragraph’’ and inserting ‘‘subparagraph’’; and (iii) by striking ‘‘he’’ and inserting ‘‘the Secretary’’; and (3) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(B) LOW-INCOME COMMUNITIES.—In making direct loans under paragraph (1) and grants under paragraph (2) for community waste disposal and water facilities, the Secretary shall accord highest priority to the application of an association described in paragraph (1) to carry out a project in a low-income rural community with a population of less than 10,000.’’. · · · SEC. 6210. ASSISTANCE TO PROVIDE WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES IN FINANCIALLY DISTRESSED RURAL AREAS. Section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)) (as amended by section 6209) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(28) ASSISTANCE TO PROVIDE WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES IN FINANCIALLY DISTRESSED RURAL AREAS.— ‘‘(A) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: ‘‘(i) DISTRESSED WATER SYSTEM.— The term ‘distressed water system’ means an association described in paragraph (1) that— ‘‘(I) is unable to provide water and wastewater services to the residents of an eligible area because the association— ‘‘(aa) lacks the capacity— ‘‘(AA) to operate, maintain, or manage water and wastewater facilities or services; or ‘‘(BB) to provide for the continued availability and use of those facilities or services at reasonable user rates and charges; or ‘‘(bb) lacks the financial, technical, or managerial capability to consistently comply with pertinent Federal and State laws and requirements; and ‘‘(II) voluntarily agrees to the provision of water or wastewater services in the eligible area described in subclause (I) by an eligible association the service area of which is contiguous to, or in the locality of, the eligible area. ‘‘(ii) ELIGIBLE AREA.—The term ‘eligible area’ means a rural area that is a low-income community or an economically distressed area, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(iii) ELIGIBLE ASSOCIATION.—The term ‘eligible association’ means an association described in paragraph (1) that— ‘‘(I) currently receives, or is eligible for, assistance under a rural water or wastewater program; and ‘‘(II) is experienced in, and currently, providing functioning water and wastewater services to the residents of a rural area. ‘‘(iv) RURAL WATER OR WASTEWATER PROGRAM.—The term ‘rural water or wastewater program’ means a water or wastewater program under this subsection. ‘‘(B) ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(i) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.— The Secretary may provide financial assistance under a rural water or wastewater program to an eligible association for construction costs relating to providing water and wastewater services to the residents in the service area of a distressed water system that is contiguous to, or in the locality of, the service area of the eligible association. ‘‘(ii) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.—The Secretary may provide grants to qualified nonprofit technical assistance organizations with demonstrated experience in working with rural communities on regionalization, consolidation, and independent assessment, planning, and implementation projects to provide technical assistance to— ‘‘(I) an eligible association for the purpose of providing water and wastewater services to the residents in the service area of a distressed water system that is contiguous to, or in the locality of, the service area of the eligible association; and ‘‘(II) a distressed water system in deciding whether to voluntarily agree to allow an eligible association to provide the services described in subclause (I). ‘‘(C) CONSOLIDATION AND REGIONALIZATION.— ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of providing water and wastewater services using assistance provided under subparagraph (B), an eligible association and a distressed water system may— ‘‘(I) consolidate governance, management, and financial functions; or ‘‘(II) enter into a regional partnership. ‘‘(ii) EFFECT ON POPULATION LIMITATION.—If an eligible association and a distressed water system consolidate or enter into a regional partnership pursuant to clause (i), the Secretary shall only consider the population of the service area of the distressed water system for purposes of eligibility for assistance under subparagraph (B). ‘‘(iii) USE OF SYSTEMS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an eligible association may use assistance provided under subparagraph (B) to provide water or wastewater services to the service area of a distressed water system using— ‘‘(I) the system of the eligible association; ‘‘(II) a system located in the service area of the distressed water system; or ‘‘(III) a combination of both systems. ‘‘(D) LIMITATION.—An eligible association that receives financial assistance under subparagraph (B)(i) shall only use that assistance for the benefit of the residents in the service area of the distressed water system.’’. · · · SEC. 6213. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR RURAL WATER SYSTEMS. Subtitle A of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act is amended by inserting after section 306A (7 U.S.C. 1926a) the following: ‘‘SEC. 306B. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR RURAL WATER SYSTEMS. ‘‘(a) DEFINITION OF ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—In this section, the term ‘eligible entity’ means a rural water, wastewater, or waste disposal facility with respect to which assistance may be provided under a water, wastewater, or waste disposal program under section 306(a), 306A, 306C, or 306D. ‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(1) GRANTS AND LOANS.—The Secretary may provide to an eligible entity— ‘‘(A) a grant in an amount that is not more than 75 percent of the cost of the project carried out by the eligible entity; ‘‘(B) a zero percent interest loan; or ‘‘(C) a 1 percent interest loan for not more than 100 percent of the cost of the project carried out by the eligible entity. ‘‘(2) EXISTING LOANS.—The Secretary may— ‘‘(A) forgive principal or interest or modify any term or condition of an outstanding loan made to an eligible entity; or ‘‘(B) refinance part or all of any other loan (if the purpose of the loan is an eligible purpose under section 306(a)(1) or 306C) made to an eligible entity. ‘‘(3) LIMITATION.—The Secretary may not provide forgiveness under paragraph (2)(A) with respect to a loan made under paragraph (1). ‘‘(c) ELIGIBLE PURPOSES.—The Secretary may provide assistance to an eligible entity under subsection (b) as the Secretary determines is necessary— ‘‘(1) to ensure that the eligible entity has the necessary resources to improve or construct public utilities or to otherwise maintain or enhance public health, safety, affordability, or order; or ‘‘(2) to address financial hardships of the eligible entity, if the eligible entity is located in a disadvantaged or economically distressed area, as determined under subsection (d). ‘‘(d) DETERMINATION.—To determine whether an eligible entity may receive assistance pursuant to subsection (c)(2), the Secretary shall establish— ‘‘(1) a residential indicator of affordable water services in each State or local or geographic area, calculated using the average cost per household as a percentage of median household income; or ‘‘(2) factors relating to disadvantaged or economically distressed areas.’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Access and compliance
Up-front application support and concessionary finance should move some previously infeasible projects into the pipeline and help systems address health-based deficiencies.
Scale economies
A capable neighboring association can spread operators, procurement, billing, compliance, and emergency capacity over a larger base.
Adversarial mechanism — governance holdout
Participation is voluntary. Distressed-system leaders or customers may resist loss of control; a stronger neighbor may demand protection against inherited liabilities. The systems with the greatest need can remain orphaned.
Adversarial mechanism — cost shifting
Customers of the stronger association can inherit operating or capital risk. Conversely, the rule that §6210 financial assistance benefit only residents of the distressed service area forces difficult cost allocation across an integrated system and can deter the stronger partner.
Eligibility-boundary effects
Counting only the distressed service area’s population prevents a regional merger from automatically losing eligibility. It also encourages transaction structures and boundary choices designed to preserve rural status.
Adversarial mechanism — debt-relief expectations
Discretionary forgiveness can save a failing system, but repeated use may weaken incentives to maintain reserves or set adequate rates and can appear to penalize systems that acted earlier.
Distribution hidden by averages
Average cost as a share of median income can label a system affordable while its lowest-income households face severe burdens.
Implementation barriers
USDA must define threshold terms
“low-income,” “economically distressed,” “contiguous,” “in the locality,” “reasonable user rates,” and financial/managerial incapacity all drive eligibility but lack a common operational test here.
Applicants face State-law and infrastructure integration
utility commission approval, debt covenants, labor and operator licenses, asset condition, rate harmonization, governance, and interconnection engineering can outlast the Federal award cycle.
Integrated systems need auditable cost allocation
§6210 restricts financial assistance under its subparagraph (B)(i)—not the separate technical-assistance grants—to the distressed-area residents’ benefit even when facilities and staff serve both systems.
The flexible authorities do not reserve a funding pool
Regionalization, refinancing, forgiveness, and concessionary loans compete for available rural-water program resources; statutory eligibility does not ensure an award.
Data identifiers do not align
USDA borrower and award records must be crosswalked to EPA public-water-system IDs and service areas; county location is not the same as the population actually served.
Neither affordability nor regionalization is required to be published as a standard series
Candidate outcome metrics
U.S. Treasury, USAspending.gov award/transaction data, USDA/RUS, Assistance Listing 10.760. Keep grant federal_action_obligation, direct-loan original_loan_subsidy_cost, and face_value_of_direct_loan_or_loan_guarantee as separate series rather than pooling Federal budgetary cost and financing volume. Loan modifications or forgiveness may not be consistently observable.
Environmental Protection Agency, ECHO SDWA Dataset and EPA/State Drinking Water Dashboard, sourced from SDWIS, using the share of active community water systems with at least one health-based violation in calendar year t. “Rural” is not a directly published EPA field: it requires a preregistered analyst crosswalk from system/service-area geography to a fixed rural definition. Archive a dated extract; preregister system-weighted versus population-weighted denominators and late corrections. Private wells are excluded.
EPA, Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. It is official and useful for scale, but periodic and too slow for a primary near-term first-print forecast.
No recurring official national series measures rural household water bills as a share of income at the service-area level. USDA’s new affordability indicator is not required to be public. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(share of active rural community water systems with at least one EPA health-based violation follows path v_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(USDA/RUS Water and Waste Disposal grant obligations and direct-loan subsidy cost follow separate paths g_t and d_t | enactment vs non-enactment) — implementation/input; any loan face-value path is a third, separately labeled financing measure.
P(share of a fixed rural public-water-system panel in EPA ECHO Serious Violator/enforcement-priority status follows path x_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
Title VI — Rural Development
5. §6216: Healthy Drinking Water Affordability Assistance / Healthy H2O
Title VI — Rural Development
5. §6216: Healthy Drinking Water Affordability Assistance / Healthy H2O
Section 6216 inserts §306F, the “Healthy Drinking Water Affordability Assistance Program.” Within 180 days USDA must establish grants for qualified testing and for certified point-of-use or point-of-entry treatment products, installation, replacement filters, and maintenance. Eligible end users need documented contamination and generally must be at or below 80 percent of the State or territory’s nonmetropolitan median household income, using the most recent decennial census. Private wells receive priority. The bill specifies third-party product standards and installer qualifications and authorizes $10 million annually for FY2027–31. USDA must publish an annual report with test counts, treatment types, affordability, operation, efficacy, lifecycle performance, and contamination trends. The operative purpose is the grant purpose quoted below.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“to provide grants to eligible grant recipients to improve drinking water quality of eligible end users.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6216. HEALTHY DRINKING WATER AFFORDABILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. Subtitle A of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act is amended by inserting after section 306E (7 U.S.C. 1926e) the following: ‘‘SEC. 306F. HEALTHY DRINKING WATER AFFORDABILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: ‘‘(1) APPROVED INSTALLATION.—The term ‘approved installation’ means the installation of an eligible drinking water quality improvement product or a certified filter component by a qualified third-party installer that— ‘‘(A) complies with all local and State regulations; and ‘‘(B) follows the installation instructions of the manufacturer. ‘‘(2) APPROVED MAINTENANCE.—The term ‘approved maintenance’ means required maintenance— ‘‘(A) performed on an eligible drinking water quality improvement product that includes maintenance and replacement of the certified filter component; ‘‘(B) performed by a qualified third-party installer; ‘‘(C) that complies with all local and State regulations; and ‘‘(D) that follows the maintenance instructions of the manufacturer. ‘‘(3) CERTIFIED FILTER COMPONENT.—The term ‘certified filter component’ means a replaceable or replacement filter component— ‘‘(A) for which approved maintenance can be performed; and ‘‘(B) that is certified by a third-party certifier as compliant with— ‘‘(i) NSF P231; ‘‘(ii) NSF/ANSI Standard 42, 44, 53, 55, 58, or 401; or ‘‘(iii) another successor or relevant consensus-based standard for drinking water treatment units or systems that addresses health contaminant reduction, as determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(4) ELIGIBLE DRINKING WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PRODUCT.—The term ‘eligible drinking water quality improvement product’ means a pointof-use or point-of-entry system— ‘‘(A) incorporating a certified filter component; and ‘‘(B) that is certified by a third-party certifier to meet standards described in paragraph (3)(B)— ‘‘(i) for material safety and performance; and ‘‘(ii) to improve drinking water quality. ‘‘(5) ELIGIBLE END USER.—The term ‘eligible end user’ means a person or entity located in a rural area (as defined in section 343(a)(13)(B)) that is— ‘‘(A)(i) a homeowner; ‘‘(ii) an individual lessee or renter of a home, apartment, or other dwelling; ‘‘(iii) a property owner of a multi-unit residential building with 25 or fewer owned, leased, or rented dwelling units; ‘‘(iv) a licensed child-care facility; or ‘‘(v) an owned, leased, or rented facility; and ‘‘(B) supported by a finding of need through— ‘‘(i) a qualified water quality test demonstrating the presence of 1 or more health contaminants; or ‘‘(ii) other documentation determined to be satisfactory by the Secretary demonstrating the presence of 1 or more health contaminants. ‘‘(6) ELIGIBLE GRANT RECIPIENT.—The term ‘eligible grant recipient’ means— ‘‘(A) an eligible end user; or ‘‘(B) a nonprofit organization that uses a grant provided under this section for the purposes described in subsection (c)(2). ‘‘(7) HEALTH CONTAMINANT.—The term ‘health contaminant’ means— ‘‘(A) a health contaminant found in drinking water, including lead, arsenic, nitrate, nitrite, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, hexavalent chromium (chrome-6), and volatile organic compounds; and ‘‘(B) any other contaminant— ‘‘(i) that can be reduced by an eligible drinking water quality improvement product or a certified filter component; and ‘‘(ii)(I) with respect to which the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency has established— ‘‘(aa) a primary drinking water regulation (as defined in section 1401 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f); ‘‘(bb) a maximum contaminant level goal established in accordance with section 1412(b) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 300g–1(b)); or ‘‘(cc) a health advisory issued pursuant to section 1412(b)(1)(F) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 300g– 1(b)(1)(F)); or ‘‘(II) that is regulated by a State agency. ‘‘(8) IMPROVE DRINKING WATER QUALITY.— The term ‘improve drinking water quality’ means to improve the quality of the water supplied between its source and human consumption by reducing or removing 1 or more health contaminants. ‘‘(9) QUALIFIED THIRD -PARTY INSTALLER.— The term ‘qualified third-party installer’ means a person who— ‘‘(A) is— ‘‘(i) a professionally qualified, certified, or licensed water treatment product installation professional, including such a professional credentialed through a manufacturer or third party; ‘‘(ii) a licensed plumber or individual who holds a license or certification related to water treatment technologies issued by a State or local government; or ‘‘(iii) a company or plumbing contractor employing individuals described in clause (i) or (ii); and ‘‘(B) regularly completes, or requires applicable employees to complete, continuing education on water treatment technology and other subjects that enhance the services provided under this section. ‘‘(10) QUALIFIED WATER QUALITY TEST.—The term ‘qualified water quality test’ means a baseline analysis of the bacterial and chemical characteristics of concern from a drinking water sample collected at the point of consumption and tested by a laboratory certified to conduct water quality testing— ‘‘(A) that is provided to— ‘‘(i) the Secretary; and ‘‘(ii) as applicable— ‘‘(I) a person seeking a grant under this section; ‘‘(II) an eligible end user receiving a grant under this section; or ‘‘(III) an eligible grant recipient receiving a grant under this section and any eligible end users served by the eligible grant recipient; and ‘‘(B) that includes information that provides— ‘‘(i) guidance on test interpretation, including whether the bacteria or chemical characteristic of concern meets or exceeds a prescribed health-based contaminant level; and ‘‘(ii) sources and citations that eligible grant recipients, independent third-party organizations and institutions, and government agencies may review and consult— ‘‘(I) to determine available eligible drinking water quality improvement products for addressing detected contaminants; and ‘‘(II) to evaluate efficacy across eligible drinking water quality improvement products. ‘‘(11) THIRD-PARTY CERTIFIER.—The term ‘third-party certifier’ means an independent certification body accredited to ISO Standard 17065, ‘Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services’, by an entity domiciled in the United States that is a signatory to the International Accreditation Forum Multilateral Recognition Arrangement, such as the Water Quality Association, NSF International, the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, and the International Code Council Evaluation Service. ‘‘(b) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall promulgate regulations to establish, and shall carry out, a clean drinking water program, to be known as the ‘Healthy Drinking Water Affordability Assistance Program’ or the ‘Healthy H2O Program’, to provide grants to eligible grant recipients to improve drinking water quality of eligible end users. ‘‘(c) ELIGIBLE USES OF GRANTS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A grant under this section shall be used, as directed by the Secretary, for— ‘‘(A) the purchase of an eligible drinking water quality improvement product or a replacement certified filter component; ‘‘(B) the approved installation by a qualified third-party installer of an eligible drinking water quality improvement product; ‘‘(C) the purchase and approved installation by a qualified third-party installer of a replacement certified filter component; ‘‘(D) the approved maintenance of an eligible drinking water quality improvement product; or ‘‘(E) qualified water quality tests to support products and services described in subparagraphs (A) through (D). ‘‘(2) NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.—A nonprofit organization that receives a grant under this section shall use the grant, in a manner consistent with the uses described in paragraph (1) and as directed by the Secretary— ‘‘(A) to offer qualified water quality tests for eligible end users on a voluntary basis; ‘‘(B) to facilitate the analysis of qualified water quality test results for eligible end users; ‘‘(C) to assist an eligible end user in determining the response options available and supporting the selection by the eligible end user of a response that best fits the needs of the eligible end user, informed by— ‘‘(i) a qualified water quality test; and ‘‘(ii) an understanding of the relevant plumbing systems and environmental factors that will impact point-of-use or pointof-entry water safety; and ‘‘(D) to coordinate or facilitate the approved installation by a qualified third-party installer of the eligible drinking water quality improvement product selected by an eligible end user. ‘‘(d) GRANT LIMITATIONS.— ‘‘(1) AMOUNT.—The amount of a grant under this section shall not exceed the reasonable costs, as determined by the Secretary, of the purposes described in subsection (c) for which the grant is provided. ‘‘(2) INCOME.—No grant provided under this section shall be used to assist an eligible end user who is a member of a household the members of which have a combined income, or an eligible end user with business income, for the most recent 12month period for which the information is available, that is more than 80 percent of the median nonmetropolitan household income for the State or territory in which the eligible end user resides, according to the most recent decennial census of the United States. ‘‘(e) GRANT ADMINISTRATOR.—The Secretary shall appoint an officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture to administer and manage grants provided under this section. ‘‘(f) GRANT ALLOCATION.—In providing grants under this section to eligible grant recipients, the Secretary shall allocate funds and make grants available in a manner that— ‘‘(1) responds to a range of water quality challenges; ‘‘(2) prioritizes funding to eligible end-users the sources of drinking water of which are private wells; ‘‘(3) improves local and regional capacity to respond to contamination; and ‘‘(4) ensures reasonable access to funds for— ‘‘(A) eligible end users seeking a grant under this section; and ‘‘(B) nonprofit organizations seeking a grant under this section. ‘‘(g) REPORTS.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this section, and not less frequently than annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress, and make publicly available, a report— ‘‘(1) identifying ongoing barriers to universal safe drinking water prior to and after filtration or other treatment; ‘‘(2) analyzing conditions impacting eligible grant recipients, including— ‘‘(A) sources of contamination or degradation of water resources, especially groundwater resources or upstream resources that recharge stores of drinking water; ‘‘(B) trends in bioaccumulation and attenuation of contaminants and nutrients; and ‘‘(C) impacts of infrastructure materials, crop and land management practices, waste management, and other factors that impact drinking water quantity and quality; ‘‘(3) providing a comprehensive analysis of— ‘‘(A) technologies available to and purchased by eligible grant recipients; and ‘‘(B) the emerging safe drinking water needs of rural and other homeowners, renters, residential multi-unit property owners, licensed child-care facilities, and other groups, as determined by the Secretary; ‘‘(4) that includes information describing— ‘‘(A) the types of treatment systems and filter components used under the program established under this section; ‘‘(B) the number of qualified water quality tests conducted under the program established under this section; ‘‘(C) emerging and changing trends relating to steps taken to ensure safe drinking water in communities and households; and ‘‘(D) trends relating to the availability and use of eligible drinking water quality improvement products, including— ‘‘(i) affordability at purchase and through the lifecycle of the products; ‘‘(ii) consistency of operation as intended by the manufacturer and installer, including effectiveness across systems and technologies at achieving stated health protections; and ‘‘(iii) lifecycle product performance, energy use, and environmental impact; ‘‘(5) providing recommendations regarding the best methods to increase access to— ‘‘(A) grants under this section; and ‘‘(B) the products and services described in subsection (c); ‘‘(6) that incorporates input from relevant— ‘‘(A) nongovernmental organizations; and ‘‘(B) certification institutions that oversee the criteria for products and training of installation and maintenance professionals; and ‘‘(7) the purposes of which are— ‘‘(A) to improve data on health contaminants in drinking water; ‘‘(B) to provide educational resources on water testing and water quality improvement products and services to eligible grant recipients with drinking water contamination issues; ‘‘(C) to collect information that improves understanding of water testing and water quality improvement products and services, including their associated health and economic benefits; and ‘‘(D) to increase public awareness of water quality issues and treatment options. ‘‘(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031.’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Speed
Point-of-use or point-of-entry treatment can reduce exposure much faster than a new public system, source remediation, or well replacement.
Adversarial mechanism — source-remediation substitution
A filter grant can defer well repair, public-system extension, or upstream pollution control. It treats exposure at the tap while the source remains contaminated.
Adversarial mechanism — maintenance cliff
Protection decays when filters are not replaced or systems are not maintained after assistance ends. The program may create a recurring household cost that eligible families still cannot bear.
Adversarial mechanism — rural vendor bottleneck
Accredited certifiers, enumerated standards, qualified third-party installers, State/local licenses, continuing education, certified labs, and manufacturer instructions narrow the supplier pool. Travel and compliance costs can consume a large share of a small grant.
Targeting error
A Statewide nonmetropolitan median and the most recent decennial census can be stale and geographically coarse. Households with similar resources can fall on opposite sides of the threshold.
Measurement response
More funded baseline tests can increase detected contamination even if exposure falls. A rising contamination count may therefore indicate better discovery rather than worse water.
Implementation barriers
Applicants and nonprofits face a documentary chain
income, rural status, a qualified baseline test or other contamination documentation satisfactory to USDA, contaminant interpretation, product/standard match, installer qualifications, installation, maintenance, and replacement components.
USDA must build a product-and-professional compliance regime in 180 days
Statutory references to specific NSF/ANSI and ISO-based certification arrangements can age or change; the successor-standard clause helps but still requires active determinations.
Private household data are sensitive
Water-test results, addresses, income, tenancy, and child-care-facility status need access controls and a clear publication aggregation rule.
Landlord/tenant incentives conflict
A renter may qualify while the property owner controls plumbing and installation; the bill does not resolve consent, ownership, or post-tenancy maintenance.
The reporting mandate outruns the measurement design
A “qualified water quality test” is defined as a baseline analysis; standardized post-installation tests and a fixed eligible-household denominator are not clearly required.
Candidate outcome metrics
EPA SDWIS excludes private wells; USGS National Water Information System water-quality samples are official but not a representative household before/after-treatment series.
The bill requires a public §306F(g) USDA annual report with qualified-test counts and treatment/filter types, but no such product exists yet and the statute does not guarantee a standardized post-treatment contaminant-reduction field. No recurring official nationwide series measures point-of-consumption private-well contaminants before and after household treatment. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(USDA publishes the §306F(g) report with a numeric qualified-water-test field by its statutory deadline | enactment) — a one-sided implementation forecast; the non-enactment observation is missing, not zero. Do not add a numeric product or treatment count unless USDA actually publishes one with a stable definition. No health-improvement cell is defensible unless USDA standardizes and publishes post-treatment results and a denominator.
Title VI — Rural Development
6. §§6301 and 6311: rural care-economy priorities and operating support
Title VI — Rural Development
6. §§6301 and 6311: rural care-economy priorities and operating support
Section 6301, “Improving the Rural Care Economy; Prioritizations,” maps different FY2027–31 priorities to different programs. USDA must prioritize Distance Learning and Telemedicine projects providing substance-use-disorder or mental/behavioral-health services; Community Facilities projects developing health-care or mental/behavioral-health facilities; and, separately, Community Facilities projects developing child-care facilities. USDA may prioritize the listed child-care activities in specified rural business programs. Community Facilities child-care awards may use a capped share of funds for staffing, quoted below. At least 10 percent of Business and Industry guaranteed-loan funding must be made available to support child care and health care. Section 6301(a)(1)(B) says USDA “shall not make any reprioritizations” within the affected Community Facilities and Distance Learning and Telemedicine programs during FY2027–31. Read literally, that bars USDA from adjusting those priorities within the affected programs for the entire FY2027–31 window, whatever conditions emerge.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“shall not use more than 25 percent of the direct loan or grant funds for staffing purposes.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6301. IMPROVING THE RURAL CARE ECONOMY; PRIORITIZATIONS. (a) INVESTING IN THE RURAL CARE ECONOMY.— (1) IMPROVING RURAL HEALTHCARE ACCESS.— (A) PRIORITIZATIONS.—The Secretary shall make the following prioritizations for fiscal years 2027 through 2031: (i) DISTANCE LEARNING AND TELEMEDICINE.—In addition to the priorities under section 2333(d) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa–2(d)), in selecting recipients of financial assistance under chapter 1 of subtitle D of title XXIII of that Act (7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.), the Secretary shall give priority to telemedicine projects that— (I) provide substance use disorder prevention services, treatment services, recovery services, or any combination of those services; or (II) provide mental or behavioral health services. (ii) COMMUNITY FACILITIES DIRECT LOANS AND GRANTS.— (I) IN GENERAL.—In selecting recipients of direct loans or grants for the development of essential community facilities under section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)), the Secretary shall give priority to entities eligible for those direct loans or grants to develop— (aa) healthcare facilities; or (bb) mental or behavioral health facilities, including certified community behavioral health clinics described in section 223 of the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (42 U.S.C. 1396a note; Public Law 113–93). (II) USE OF FUNDS.—In addition to the eligible uses of direct loans or grants for the development of essential community facilities under section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)), an entity described in subclause (I) that receives a direct loan or grant for a purpose described in that subclause may use the direct loan or grant funds for— (aa) providing medical equipment to increase medical surge capacity; (bb) increasing telehealth capabilities, including underlying health care information systems; and (cc) engaging in any other efforts to support rural development determined to be critical to address the health care or mental or behavioral health needs of rural areas, as determined by the Secretary. (B) LIMITATION ON OTHER REPRIORITIZATIONS.—For fiscal years 2027 through 2031, the Secretary shall not make any reprioritizations within the Community Facilities direct loan and grant programs or the Distance Learning and Telemedicine programs under section 608 of the Rural Development Act of 1972 (7 U.S.C. 2204b–2). (2) IMPROVING CHILDCARE IN RURAL AMERICA.— (A) DEFINITION OF CHILDCARE PROGRAM.— (i) IN GENERAL.—In this paragraph, the term ‘‘childcare program’’ means a program that— (I) provides quality care and early education for young children who— (aa) are in kindergarten; or (bb) have not yet entered kindergarten; and (II) is operated by— (aa) an eligible childcare provider described in section 658P(6)(A) of the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858n(6)(A)); or (bb) a childcare provider that, on the date of enactment of this Act— (AA) is licensed, regulated, or registered in the State, territory, or Indian Tribe in which the provider is located; and (BB) meets applicable State, Tribal, territorial, and local health and safety requirements. (ii) INCLUSIONS.—In this paragraph, the term ‘‘childcare program’’ includes— (I) a school-based program described in clause (i); (II) a program described in clause (i) that accommodates nontraditional working hours; (III) a facility used for a program described in clause (i); and (IV) a service provided under a program described in clause (i). (B) PRIORITIZATIONS.—The Secretary shall make the following prioritizations for fiscal years 2027 through 2031: (i) COMMUNITY FACILITIES DIRECT LOANS AND GRANTS.— (I) IN GENERAL.—In addition the priorities described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii), in selecting recipients of direct loans or grants for the development of essential community facilities under section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)), the Secretary shall give priority to entities eligible for those direct loans or grants to develop facilities used for a childcare program, subject to the condition that the childcare program that uses those facilities shall employ staff that have appropriate expertise and training in childcare. (II) USE OF FUNDS.—In addition to the eligible uses of direct loans or grants for the development of essential community facilities under section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)), an entity described in subclause (I) that receives a direct loan or grant for the purpose described in that subclause may use the direct loan or grant funds to support the staffing needs of the facility described in that subclause, subject to the condition that the eligible entity shall not use more than 25 percent of the direct loan or grant funds for staffing purposes. (ii) RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAMS.—In selecting recipients of financial assistance under the rural business development grant program under section 310B(c) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(c)), the rural cooperative development grant program under section 310B(e) of that Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(e)), and the rural microentrepreneur assistance program under section 379E of that Act (7 U.S.C. 2008s), the Secretary may give priority to entities eligible for financial assistance under those sections— (I) to provide technical or financial assistance for the acquisition, construction, renovation, or improvement of facilities used for a childcare program; (II) to provide technical, financial, or managerial assistance to childcare programs; (III) to assist in securing private sources of capital financing for childcare programs or other low-income community development; or (IV) to address the needs of licensed childcare programs located in the home of the childcare program provider. (C) EVALUATION.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the projects carried out under this paragraph to improve access to childcare programs in rural areas, including a description of— (i) the types of projects carried out under this paragraph; (ii) the communities in which those projects are carried out; (iii) the organizations and entities participating in those projects; (iv) the types of partnerships developed to carry out those projects; and (v) the economic and social impacts of investments in rural childcare programs. (b) ACCESS TO CREDIT FOR CARE INDUSTRIES.—Of the amount made available for business and industry guaranteed loans under section 310B(g) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(g)) for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031, the Secretary shall make available not less than 10 percent for supporting childcare programs (as defined in subsection (a)(2)(A)) and healthcare. (c) SUNSET.—Effective beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 6101(a) of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (Public Law 115–334; 132 Stat. 4726) shall have no force or effect. · · · SEC. 6311. DISTANCE LEARNING AND TELEMEDICINE. (a) USE OF GRANTS FOR OPERATING EXPENSES.— Section 2333 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa–2) is amended— (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ‘‘and operation’’ after ‘‘construction’’; (2) in subsection (c)— (A) in paragraph (1)(B), by adding ‘‘and’’ at the end; and (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘or extend’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘extend, or operate’’; (3) in subsection (f)— (A) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end; (B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and (C) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following: ‘‘(4) operation of the programming, equipment, or facilities referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2); or’’; and (4) by striking subsection (g) and inserting the following: ‘‘(g) OPERATING EXPENSES.—Not more than 15 percent of the amount of financial assistance provided to a recipient under this chapter may be used for operating expenses and administrative expenses that are reasonable and allocable to the project carried out by the recipient.’’. (b) WAIVER OF MATCHING REQUIREMENT.—Section 2334 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa–3) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(g) WAIVER OF MATCHING REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary shall waive any requirement for a recipient of financial assistance under this chapter to provide nonFederal matching funds— ‘‘(1) in a case of demonstrated need or if the matching requirement would create a substantial burden, as determined by the Secretary; or ‘‘(2) if the recipient is a federally recognized Indian Tribe.’’. (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 2335A of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa–5) is amended by striking ‘‘2019 through 2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2027 through 2031’’. (d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 1(b) of Public Law 102–551 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa note) is amended by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2031’’.
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Access and take-up
Match waivers and limited operating/staff support should help low-capacity and Tribal applicants open or sustain projects that capital-only awards would not.
Adversarial mechanism — zero-sum priority
Most provisions redirect existing loan/grant programs rather than create commensurate new budget authority. More care projects can mean fewer fire, public-safety, library, utility, or other community-facility projects.
Adversarial mechanism — operating cliff
One-time staffing or operating assistance can open slots or services that close when the award ends. Using debt proceeds for payroll can also weaken repayment capacity.
Pipeline mismatch
A fixed 10 percent credit reservation can go underused if care projects cannot satisfy underwriting, or can displace stronger non-care projects if administrators press to fill it.
Adversarial mechanism — statutory freeze
The ban on any reprioritizations through FY2031 reduces agency flexibility in a new disaster, economic shock, or emerging rural need and may collide with the same section’s later child-care instruction.
Eligibility lock
One alternative child-care definition turns on providers licensed, regulated, or registered “on the date of enactment.” Later entrants must fit the separately incorporated eligibility route or risk exclusion.
Implementation barriers
USDA must stack priorities without a ranking rule
Health care, behavioral health, child care, existing statutory priorities, and geography can all claim preference.
The internal reprioritization conflict needs a legislative answer
USDA is told both to make a Community Facilities child-care priority and not to make any Community Facilities or DLT reprioritizations in the same years. Reading “any” as “any additional” would insert language that is not in the draft.
Underwriters must treat temporary operating support as nonrecurring
Staffing plans need a post-award revenue source; otherwise the Federal investment creates unusable capacity.
State, Tribal, and territorial licensing systems differ
USDA must verify provider status and “appropriate expertise and training” without a national child-care license.
The required two-year child-care evaluation lacks a fixed outcome definition, baseline, comparison group, and express publication/schema requirement
Award coding is weak for evaluation
Official program fields may not reliably distinguish child-care or health use; free-text classification would be an analyst-created measure, not an official series.
Candidate outcome metrics
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), NAICS 624410 Child Day Care Services, using annual-average establishments and employment in a fixed pre-enactment rural-county panel from the first annual QCEW release for calendar year t. Freeze the release lag and missing/suppression treatment; do not interchange quarterly and annual-average paths. QCEW omits self-employed and some home providers; jobs are not child-care slots or affordability.
Treasury USAspending.gov, USDA Community Facilities Loans and Grants, Assistance Listing 10.766, and Distance Learning and Telemedicine Loans and Grants, Assistance Listing 10.855. Analyze current DLT grant federal_action_obligation separately; for Community Facilities keep grant obligations, direct-loan original_loan_subsidy_cost, and loan face value separate. A care-specific split is suitable only if an official structured purpose code exists; text mining does not become an official series merely because the source is official.
Treasury USAspending.gov, Business and Industry Loans, Assistance Listing 10.768, can support separate total guaranteed-loan subsidy-cost and face-value series. No established structured care-sector field was identified, so it cannot currently resolve the bill’s child-care/health-care share. No tracked series for the care-specific split.
No standardized recurring Federal series measures national rural child-care slots, waitlists, prices, hours, or travel time. The §6301 evaluation is not specified as a recurring public data product. No tracked series.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(QCEW annual-average child-day-care establishments and employment in a fixed rural-county panel, from the first annual release for calendar year t, follow path k_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(DLT grant obligations and Community Facilities grant obligations/direct-loan subsidy cost follow separate paths j_t, c_t, and l_t | enactment vs non-enactment) — program inputs, not care-specific unless official coding permits; do not pool loan financing with grant obligations. Do not register a Business and Industry care-sector share unless an official structured field is published; if that occurs, specify whether the dollar measure is Federal subsidy cost or guaranteed-loan face value.
Title VI — Rural Development
7. §§6302–6303: Rural Hospital Revitalization and Rural Health Care Facility Assistance
Title VI — Rural Development
7. §§6302–6303: Rural Hospital Revitalization and Rural Health Care Facility Assistance
Section 6302 inserts §310A, directing USDA to make temporary zero-interest Community Facilities direct loans to eligible rural hospitals for replacement, renovation, or improvement. Default eligibility includes a county below 20,000 residents; a distance, Critical Access Hospital, or Rural Emergency Hospital test; at least 30 years of continuous local licensure; specified project need; and ordinarily at least 30 days cash on hand and a projected debt-service-coverage ratio of 1.2. The last financial tests may be waived for sufficient community impact. Zero interest is not a payment holiday: principal is repaid during the first five years on an amortization schedule of up to 40 years. After five years USDA assesses whether to refinance at prevailing Community Facilities rates; one renewal is available in specified circumstances. Section 6303 broadens refinancing and technical assistance from rural hospitals to eligible health care facilities generally: refinancing must serve listed sustainability purposes, applicants must receive financial-planning assistance and prepare a long-term financial plan, an insolvency waiver is available, and a stand-alone technical-assistance program is created.
Quoted from the bill ▸
“to improve the long-term financial position and operational efficiency”; “to prevent the closure”; and “to strengthen the delivery of health care in rural areas.”
Full section text ▸
SEC. 6302. RURAL HOSPITAL REVITALIZATION. Subtitle A of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act is amended by inserting after section 310 (7 U.S.C. 1930) the following: ‘‘SEC. 310A. RURAL HOSPITAL REVITALIZATION LOANS. ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Under the community facilities direct loan program established under section 306(a)(1) (referred to in this section as the ‘community facilities direct loan program’), the Secretary shall make temporary zero-percent interest loans to eligible rural hospitals described in subsection (b) for the construction of replacement hospital facilities or the improvement or renovation of existing hospital facilities in accordance with this section. ‘‘(b) ELIGIBLE HOSPITALS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—An eligible rural hospital described in this subsection is a rural hospital— ‘‘(A) the campus (as defined in section 413.65(a)(2) of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations (or successor regulations)) of which is in a county with a population of less than 20,000 inhabitants; ‘‘(B)(i) the campus (as so defined) of which is not less than 35 miles from the nearest hospital; ‘‘(ii) if the campus (as so defined) of which is in an area with mountainous terrain or only secondary roads, as determined by the Secretary, such campus is not less than 15 miles from the nearest hospital; ‘‘(iii) that is a critical access hospital (as defined in section 1861(mm)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(mm)(1))); or ‘‘(iv) that is a rural emergency hospital (as defined in section 1861(kkk)(2) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(kkk)(2))); ‘‘(C) that has been continuously licensed as a hospital in the community in which the hospital is located for not less than 30 years; ‘‘(D) that submits to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information to determine eligibility under this paragraph and priorities under paragraph (2) and such other information as the Secretary may require, including— ‘‘(i) a statement demonstrating the need for the loan, which shall describe— ‘‘(I) the age and condition of existing facilities to be replaced, improved, or renovated, including a certification that funds from a loan under this section will not be used for facilities that have been significantly improved during the 10-year period preceding the date of the application; and ‘‘(II) the manner in which the use of the loan funds will address issues relating to the quality and viability of the facilities to preserve access to healthcare; ‘‘(ii) a demonstration that the hospital has had a positive impact in the community served by the hospital, which shall include— ‘‘(I) a positive impact on access to primary healthcare, emergency services, and services required under conditions of participation applicable under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.); and ‘‘(II) a meaningful economic impact; and ‘‘(iii) a statement of the anticipated health and economic impacts of the loan, including— ‘‘(I) an impact on sustaining the provision of services that the hospital currently provides; ‘‘(II) an impact on offering healthcare services that the hospital does not currently offer, as appropriate; ‘‘(III) an impact on the provision of community-based services, including such services that influence social determinants of health; ‘‘(IV) any other economic impacts; and ‘‘(V) impacts compared to the impacts if the loan funds were not made available; and ‘‘(E) that, subject to paragraph (3), is financially stable, as measured by having— ‘‘(i) not less than 30 days cash on hand; and ‘‘(ii) a projected debt-service coverage ratio of at least 1.2. ‘‘(2) PRIORITIES.—In making loans under this section, the Secretary shall give priority to an eligible rural hospital— ‘‘(A) that serves an area in which there are fewer than 6 inhabitants per square mile, taking into consideration— ‘‘(i) the distance from the hospital to a population center; ‘‘(ii) the travel time from the hospital to reach a population center or specific health service; and ‘‘(iii) seasonal variations in the need for access to healthcare services; ‘‘(B) that requires replacement, improvement, or renovation that is not financially feasible at the rates and terms offered under the community facilities direct loan program; ‘‘(C) for which not less than 50 percent of its inpatient days or discharges and outpatient visits during the most recent cost reporting period for which data are available were attributable to— ‘‘(i) individuals entitled to, or enrolled for, benefits under part A or enrolled for benefits under part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act, including individuals enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan under part C of such title; ‘‘(ii) individuals eligible for medical assistance under a State plan under title XIX of the Social Security Act (or a waiver of such a plan); or ‘‘(iii) self-pay individuals; or ‘‘(D) that meets 2 or more of the criteria described in subparagraphs (A) through (C). ‘‘(3) WAIVER.—The Secretary may waive the requirements described in paragraph (1)(E) in the case of a hospital that demonstrates sufficient community impacts described in paragraph (1)(D)(ii). ‘‘(4) ELIGIBILITY.—For purposes of making loans under this section, the Secretary shall consider an eligible rural hospital described in paragraph (1) to be eligible for the community facilities direct loan program. ‘‘(c) LOAN INTEREST AND TERMS.— ‘‘(1) INITIAL INTEREST -FREE LOAN.—Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a loan made under this section shall, for the first 5 years of the loan— ‘‘(A) have a zero percent interest rate; and ‘‘(B) require repayment of principal for a period of 5 years, amortized— ‘‘(i) in accordance with the expected amortization schedule of a loan under the community facilities direct loan program; and ‘‘(ii) over a period that is equal to the lesser of— ‘‘(I) the expected life of the facility being constructed or renovated; and ‘‘(II) a maximum term of 40 years. ‘‘(2) ASSESSMENT.—At the end of the 5-year period of a loan described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall conduct an assessment of the financial stability of the eligible rural hospital to determine whether the hospital has the financial strength for the loan to be refinanced at the prevailing rates offered under the community facilities direct loan program. ‘‘(3) REFINANCING.—If the Secretary determines through an assessment under paragraph (2) that an eligible rural hospital has sufficient financial strength to repay a loan under the community facilities direct loan program, subject to subsection (d)(2), the Secretary shall refinance the loan under this section into a loan under the community facilities direct loan program— ‘‘(A) at the prevailing interest rate applicable to a loan under the community facilities direct loan program; ‘‘(B) without a requirement of the payment of any interest on the amount of principal repaid during the period in which the interest rate of the loan was zero percent; ‘‘(C) based on the unpaid principal balance; and ‘‘(D) amortized in accordance with the community facilities direct loan program for the remaining term of the loan. ‘‘(d) RENEWALS.— ‘‘(1) FAILURE UNDER ASSESSMENT.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary determines through an assessment under subsection (c)(2) that an eligible rural hospital does not have sufficient financial strength to repay a loan under the community facilities direct loan program, the hospital may submit to the Secretary an application for a 1-time renewal of the zero-percent interest loan in accordance with the terms described in subsection (c)(1) for 1 additional term of not more than 5 years. ‘‘(B) REQUIREMENTS.—To be eligible for the renewal of a zero-percent interest loan under subparagraph (A), an eligible rural hospital shall demonstrate in the application submitted under that subparagraph that the hospital— ‘‘(i) has first applied for and accepted any available Federal technical assistance for rural hospitals to support operational improvements and improve financial stability; and ‘‘(ii) continues to meet all applicable community facilities direct loan program eligibility criteria. ‘‘(C) REFINANCING.—At the end of the period for which a zero-percent interest loan is renewed under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall refinance the loan into a loan under the community facilities direct loan program in accordance with subsection (c)(3). ‘‘(2) INTEREST RATE PROTECTION.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary determines through an assessment under subsection (c)(2) that an eligible rural hospital has sufficient financial strength to repay a loan under the community facilities direct loan program, and the interest rate applicable to a loan under the community facilities direct loan program is more than 2.5 percent, the hospital may submit to the Secretary an application for a 1-time renewal of the zero-percent interest loan in accordance with the terms described in subsection (c)(1) for 1 additional term of 5 years. ‘‘(B) REQUIREMENTS.—To be eligible for the renewal of a zero-percent interest loan under subparagraph (A), an eligible rural hospital shall demonstrate in the application submitted under that subparagraph that the hospital— ‘‘(i) has had a positive impact on access to primary healthcare, emergency services, and services required under conditions of participation applicable under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.) in the community served by the hospital; and ‘‘(ii) has had positive impacts in the community described in subsection (b)(1)(D)(ii). ‘‘(C) REFINANCING.—During the period of a zero-percent interest loan that has been renewed under subparagraph (A), at any time that the interest rate applicable to a loan under the community facilities direct loan program is 2.5 percent or less, the eligible rural hospital may elect to refinance the loan into a loan under the community facilities direct loan program in accordance with subsection (c)(3). ‘‘(3) DISAPPROVAL.—If the Secretary disapproves an application to renew a zero-percent interest loan under paragraph (1)(A) or (2)(A), the Secretary shall resolve the applicable issues in accordance with the procedures that apply to the community facilities direct loan program. ‘‘(e) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A hospital that receives a loan under this section shall be eligible for assistance through an award under a covered program to support operational improvements and improve financial stability during— ‘‘(A) the 5-year period of a zero-percent interest loan described in subsection (c)(1); and ‘‘(B) any renewal of a zero-percent interest loan for a lack of sufficient financial strength under subsection (d)(1). ‘‘(2) COVERED PROGRAM DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘covered program’ means— ‘‘(A) the Targeted Technical Assistance for Rural Hospitals Program of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and ‘‘(B) the Rural Hospital Technical Assistance Program carried out by the rural development mission area, in cooperation with the National Rural Health Association.’’. · · · SEC. 6303. RURAL HEALTH CARE FACILITY ASSISTANCE. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 342 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1990a) is amended— (1) by striking ‘‘a rural hospital’’ and inserting ‘‘an eligible health care facility’’; (2) by striking ‘‘rural community’’ and inserting ‘‘rural area’’; (3) by striking ‘‘hospital,’’ and inserting ‘‘eligible health care facility,’’; (4) by striking ‘‘Assistance’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘(a) REFINANCING OF CERTAIN RURAL HEALTH CARE FACILITY DEBT.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Assistance’’; and (5) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(2) REQUIREMENTS.—To promote the longterm sustainability and financial viability of an eligible health care facility, the Secretary shall— ‘‘(A) provide assistance described in paragraph (1) to an eligible health care facility for the purpose of— ‘‘(i) ensuring the facility has necessary resources to maintain public health, safety, or order; ‘‘(ii) addressing financial hardships of the facility, the patients of the facility, and the area served by the facility; and ‘‘(iii) identifying the financial stability of the facility, including— ‘‘(I) operational practices; ‘‘(II) revenue enhancements; ‘‘(III) policy revisions; ‘‘(IV) partnerships, regionalization, or consolidation of rural health systems; and ‘‘(V) contract services; and ‘‘(B) require an applicant for assistance described in paragraph (1)— ‘‘(i) to receive financial planning assistance; and ‘‘(ii) to prepare a long-term financial plan. ‘‘(3) WAIVER.—In the case of an application for refinancing pursuant to this subsection, the Secretary may waive the requirement of section 302(a)(1)(D) if the eligible health care facility is insolvent. ‘‘(b) RURAL HEALTH CARE FACILITY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In lieu of any other authority under which the Secretary may provide technical assistance to any eligible health care facility, the Secretary shall establish, and maintain, directly or by grant, contract, or cooperative agreement, a Rural Health Care Facility Technical Assistance Program (referred to in this subsection as the ‘Program’) to provide technical assistance and training, tailored to the capacity and needs of each eligible health care facility, to help eligible health care facilities— ‘‘(A) identify development needs for maintaining essential health care services and support action plans for operational and quality improvement projects to meet the development needs; ‘‘(B) better manage the financial and business strategies of the eligible heath care facilities, including providing financial planning assistance and preparing long-term financial plans; and ‘‘(C) identify, and apply for assistance from, loan and grant programs of the Department of Agriculture for which the eligible health care facilities are eligible. ‘‘(2) GOALS.—The goals of the Program shall be— ‘‘(A) to improve the long-term financial position and operational efficiency of eligible health care facilities; ‘‘(B) to prevent the closure of eligible health care facilities; ‘‘(C) to strengthen the delivery of health care in rural areas; ‘‘(D) to help eligible health care facilities better access and compete for loans and grants from programs administered by the Department of Agriculture; and ‘‘(E) to continue the activities of the Rural Hospital Technical Assistance Program (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this subsection). ‘‘(3) PROGRAM PARTICIPATION.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall engage in outreach and engagement strategies to encourage eligible health care facilities to participate in the Program. ‘‘(B) ELIGIBLE HEALTH CARE FACILITY SELECTION.—In selecting eligible health care facilities to participate in the Program, the Secretary— ‘‘(i) shall give priority to borrowers of loans and recipients of grants from the Rural Housing Service, the Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and the Rural Utilities Service; and ‘‘(ii) may consider— ‘‘(I) the age and physical state of the eligible health care facility involved; ‘‘(II) the financial vulnerability of the eligible health care facility and the ability of the eligible health care facility to meet debt obligations; ‘‘(III) the electronic health record implementation needs of the eligible health care facility; ‘‘(IV) whether the eligible health care facility is located in a health professional shortage area or a medically underserved area; ‘‘(V) whether the eligible health care facility serves a medically underserved population; and ‘‘(VI) such other criteria and priorities as are determined by the Secretary. ‘‘(4) REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate a written report describing the progress and results of the Program, including— ‘‘(A) a brief description of each project to provide technical assistance to an eligible health care facility under this subsection, including— ‘‘(i) the name and location of the facility; ‘‘(ii) a description of the assistance provided; ‘‘(iii) a description of the outcomes for completed projects; ‘‘(iv) the cost of the technical assistance; and ‘‘(v) any other information the Secretary determines to be appropriate; ‘‘(B) a summary of the technical assistance projects completed; ‘‘(C) a summary of the outcomes of the technical assistance projects; ‘‘(D) an assessment of the effectiveness of the Program; and ‘‘(E) recommendations for improving the Program. ‘‘(5) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this subsection not more than $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031. ‘‘(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: ‘‘(1) RURAL AREA.—The term ‘rural area’ has the meaning given the term in section 343(a)(13)(A). ‘‘(2) DEVELOPMENT NEEDS.—The term ‘development needs’ means— ‘‘(A) constructing, expanding, renovating, or otherwise modernizing health care facilities; ‘‘(B) increasing telehealth capabilities; ‘‘(C) acquiring or upgrading health care information systems, such as electronic health records; ‘‘(D) providing financial planning assistance and preparing a long-term financial plan; and ‘‘(E) such other needs as the Secretary determines to be critical to maintaining health care services in the community in which an eligible health care facility is located. ‘‘(3) ELIGIBLE HEALTH CARE FACILITY.—The term ‘eligible health care facility’ means a facility that is located in a rural area and is— ‘‘(A) a hospital (as defined in section 1861(e) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(e))); ‘‘(B) a psychiatric hospital (as defined in section 1861(f) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(f))); ‘‘(C) a home health agency (as defined in section 1861(o) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(o))); ‘‘(D) a rural health clinic (as defined in section 1861(aa)(2) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(aa)(2))); ‘‘(E) a critical access hospital (as defined in section 1861(mm)(1) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(mm)(1))); ‘‘(F) a religious nonmedical health care institution (as defined in section 1861(ss)(1) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(ss)(1))); ‘‘(G) a long-term care hospital (as defined in section 1861(ccc) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(ccc))); ‘‘(H) a rural emergency hospital (as defined in section 1861(kkk)(2) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(kkk)(2))); ‘‘(I) a sole community hospital (as defined in section 1886(d)(5)(D)(iii) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(5)(D)(iii))); and ‘‘(J) a community health center receiving funding under section 330 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254b). ‘‘(4) HEALTH PROFESSIONAL SHORTAGE AREA.—The term ‘health professional shortage area’ has the meaning given the term in section 332(a)(1)(A) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254e(a)(1)(A)). ‘‘(5) MEDICALLY UNDERSERVED AREA.—The term ‘medically underserved area’ has the meaning given the term in section 330I(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254c–14(a)). ‘‘(6) MEDICALLY UNDERSERVED POPULATION.—The term ‘medically underserved population’ has the meaning given the term in section 330(b)(3) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254b(b)(3)).’’. (b) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary shall issue regulations to carry out the amendments made by subsection (a). (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Except for purposes of issuing regulations under subsection (b), the amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the effective date of those regulations. PART II—OTHER MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Countersignable goals
Likely effects — shown regardless of the goals
Liquidity and capital
Five years without interest can reduce near-term debt service and make deferred renovation feasible, but scheduled principal repayment begins immediately; the provision does not preserve the full loan amount as operating cash for five years.
Adversarial mechanism — need versus bankability
Requiring 30 days cash and a 1.2 projected debt-service ratio can exclude hospitals closest to failure. A discretionary community-impact waiver favors applicants able to document impacts and navigate USDA underwriting.
Eligibility cliffs and use restriction
A county population of 19,999 versus 20,001, distance tests, and 30 continuous licensed years can separate otherwise similar hospitals, including newer but essential facilities. Separately, loan proceeds may not be used for facilities significantly improved during the preceding ten years; that is a project-use restriction, not a categorical bar on hospital eligibility.
Adversarial mechanism — refinancing cliff
The loan can move from zero interest to prevailing rates after five years, or during or after a one-time renewal of up to five additional years. An interest-rate-protection renewal may refinance during that period once the applicable rate is 2.5 percent or less. Higher debt service may arrive before patient volume, reimbursement, or workforce conditions improve.
Capital substitution
A new building cannot by itself solve weak reimbursement, clinician shortages, low volume, payer mix, or management problems. It can lock a declining system into excess fixed capacity.
Portfolio crowd-out
Section 6302 uses the existing Community Facilities direct-loan program and supplies no separate loan pool in the extracted text. Zero-interest hospital loans can consume loan-subsidy or portfolio capacity otherwise available to other rural community facilities.
Path dependence
§6303 gives priority to existing USDA borrowers and grant recipients, reinforcing access for facilities already inside USDA’s administrative network.
Implementation barriers
USDA must verify unusual eligibility facts
historical licensure, nearest-hospital distance and terrain, prior capital improvement, payer mix, cash, debt coverage, and “meaningful economic impact.”
Underwriting and health regulation use different records
USDA must reconcile applications with CMS provider numbers, cost reports, facility conversions, and State licenses.
Year-five reassessment creates a large future queue
Every loan needs a reproducible stability test, renewal or refinancing decision, and appeal-quality record.
§6303 has no regulatory deadline
Because effectiveness waits for the regulations, delay can postpone the entire expanded refinancing/technical-assistance scheme without violating a date certain.
Committee reports are not a clean public series
§6303 requires annual project descriptions, outcomes, costs, and effectiveness reports to Congress, but does not expressly require a standardized machine-readable public release.
Candidate outcome metrics
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Provider of Services File — Quality Improvement and Evaluation System (QIES), using active hospital, Critical Access Hospital, and Rural Emergency Hospital status for a fixed, pre-specified eligible-county/facility panel. Archive each first release and crosswalk CMS Certification Numbers so conversion to Rural Emergency Hospital status is not counted as closure.
CMS, annual Hospital Provider Cost Report, for financial-statement components, inpatient/outpatient volume, and payer mix. Total margin and days cash are analyst-derived ratios, not published fields, so preregister the exact worksheet lines, formula, fiscal-period treatment, missing-data rule, and the first archived annual dataset release—not the hospital’s first filing. Cost reports are revised and resubmitted.
Treasury USAspending.gov, Community Facilities Assistance Listing 10.766, publishes the broader portfolio, but no established structured hospital-purpose field was identified. Free-text descriptions are not official coding. If USDA creates a field, report original_loan_subsidy_cost as Federal budgetary cost and face_value_of_direct_loan_or_loan_guarantee separately as financing volume. No tracked hospital-specific series.
CMS does not publish a single clean recurring “rural hospital closure” series; current provider status, termination, and conversion must be carefully distinguished. No tracked series for the clean closure construct.
Conditional forecast sketches
P(CMS active eligible rural-hospital/CAH/REH facility count follows path m_t | enactment vs non-enactment)
P(total margin derived by a fixed formula and service volume from the first archived annual CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report release for a fixed eligible-hospital panel follow path i_t | enactment vs non-enactment) No hospital-loan input cell should be registered until USDA publishes an official structured hospital-purpose field under Assistance Listing 10.766. ## Cross-title implementation findings Five design patterns recur across the two titles: 1. **The bill often lowers one barrier by creating another verification layer.** Examples include simpler ReConnect applications paired with multi-program overlap checks, Last Acre subsidies paired with provider challenges and income proof, and Healthy H2O access paired with lab/product/installer certification chains. 2. **Hard thresholds create cliffs and strategic behavior.** D2 drought status, 25/3 and 100/20 broadband definitions, rural population cutoffs, income ratios, hospital distance, grant caps, and match rates all turn continuous need into binary eligibility. 3. **Local flexibility reduces comparability.** State-defined conservation metrics, USDA-determined water distress, site-specific CRP findings, and flexible easement terms may improve fit but make national evaluation harder. 4. **Policy-created measurement is not a symmetric forecast outcome.** ReConnect and Last Acre reports, new NASS questions, Healthy H2O reports, and grantee submissions may exist only after enactment. Their non-enactment path is missing, not zero. 5. **Several intended outcomes lack an official recurring series.** Where this report says “No tracked series,” the correct next step is a data-publication requirement or a narrower implementation cell—not an invented proxy. ## Recommended first Thesis registrations | Priority | Metric and official product | What it resolves | Thesis status from supplied materials | Principal preregistration risk | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | ReConnect grant obligations and loan subsidy cost, kept separate, Treasury **USAspending.gov**, AL 10.752 | Federal implementation/input | **Existing Thesis path** via USAspending adapter | Award-type separation, negative actions, action-date rule, pilot/statutory code continuity, live revisions | | 2 | Active CRP enrolled acres at September 30, USDA FSA **CRP Monthly Summary** | Direct program participation | **Not yet in Thesis** | Archive/freeze first publication; category definitions; cap is not target | | 3 | Fixed-baseline rural BSLs lacking fixed terrestrial 100/20, FCC **Broadband Data Collection** plus **Fabric Change Reports** | Broadband availability | Registry status unestablished | Fabric churn, challenges, rural crosswalk, advertised availability, price/adoption gap | | 4 | Analyst-derived forest-to-developed acres from USGS **Annual NLCD Land Cover Change** in a fixed forest-county panel | Downstream landscape outcome | Registry status unestablished | Collection 1.2 is baseline only; fixed transition/pixel/boundary rules; CONUS only; revisions; not program-attributable | | 5 | Analyst-crosswalked rural community-water-system health-based-violation rate, EPA **ECHO SDWA Dataset** | Public-water compliance outcome | Registry status unestablished | Dated snapshots, late corrections, service-area crosswalk, denominator, private-well exclusion | | 6 | Rural child-day-care establishments/employment, BLS **QCEW** | Care-economy proxy | Registry status unestablished | Suppression, revisions, home/self-employed exclusions, jobs are not slots | | 7 | Active eligible rural hospitals, CMS **Provider of Services File — Quality Improvement and Evaluation System (QIES)** | Facility continuity | Registry status unestablished | Certification lag, CCN changes, REH conversion versus closure | The first three are the strongest near-term cells. The FCEP, water, child-care, and hospital cells are usable only with the stated caveats and should not be presented as program-attributable without a design that fixes geography and exposure before outcomes are observed. ## Outcomes that should not yet be registered as if a tracked series existed
CRP acres actually emergency-hayed or grazed, forage obtained, or wildlife-cover damage.
Consumptive water rights or acre-feet permanently retired through CREP.
Last Acre whole-field/device coverage, tested 100/20 performance, uptime, or realized precision-agriculture use.
A standardized national State Conservation Assistance soil-health or habitat result.
Rural water-system cyber readiness, incidents, vulnerabilities closed, or cyber-caused outage duration.
Rural household water-bill affordability at service-area resolution.
Nationwide private-well contamination before and after household treatment.
National rural child-care slots, waitlists, prices, hours, or travel time.
FCEP-linked species recovery, fragmentation avoided, or carbon sequestration. For these outcomes, the forecastable object should remain explicitly “unavailable” until an agency publishes a recurring product with a stable definition, first-release archive, geography, and denominator.