MARAD's $498M Port Round Spent the Last IIJA Dollar. The FY2027 Program Now Depends on a $538M House Bill.
October 31, 2026 · 7 min read
Granted Research Team · Editorial policy
The Maritime Administration announced its FY2026 Port Infrastructure Development Program awards on October 27, 2026: nearly $498 million for 35 projects in 19 states, spread across coastal, Great Lakes, and inland river ports. Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy said in the announcement that "the strength of our nation's economy is directly tied to the state of our ports."
The more important fact for next year sits in the funding stack. $450 million of this round came from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the fifth and final installment of the law's $2.25 billion, five-year commitment to PIDP. Trade press reporting put the rest at about $38.6 million in FY2026 appropriations plus about $19 million in unspent funds recovered from earlier awards.
When the IIJA money is gone, the guaranteed base is gone too. After this round, PIDP runs on whatever Congress appropriates each year. And this round was already the smallest of the IIJA era. MARAD's previous round, announced in April, awarded $774 million to 37 projects.
The FY2026 round at a glance
| Metric | FY2026 PIDP |
|---|---|
| Announcement | October 27, 2026 (award list published October 28) |
| Total awarded | ~$498 million |
| Projects | 35 |
| States | 19 |
| IIJA share | $450 million (final installment of $2.25B, FY2022–FY2026) |
| Other sources (reported) | ~$38.6M FY2026 appropriations; ~$19M recovered prior-year funds |
| Largest award | $50.6M, City of Whittier, Alaska |
| Previous round | $774M to 37 projects (announced April 2026) |
The reported components add up to slightly more than the headline total, about $507.6 million against $498 million. MARAD hasn't publicly reconciled the gap. The most likely explanation is that some recovered or appropriated funds are being held back for administration or later obligation. Applicants should rely on the official award list rather than the component figures.
What won
The named awards show what MARAD's reviewers rewarded.
| Recipient | Award | Project |
|---|---|---|
| City of Whittier, AK | $50,593,488 | Replace the DeLong Dock; seasonal floating dock, dock manager building, three pedestal cranes, integrated tug and barge |
| Port Everglades, FL | $30.75M | Harden the liquid bulk terminal and widen a slip for larger vessels so fuel operations continue through severe weather |
| Paducah, KY | $40,019,903.61 | Paducah Riverport-West full buildout |
| Milwaukee, WI | $30,407,281 | Lake Michigan Marine Highway transportation energy project |
| North Carolina State Ports Authority (Morehead City) | $11.25M | Heavy-lift deck, crane rail, two on-dock rail extensions, security and cargo-tracking technology |
| Peoria, IL | $11,250,000 | Peoria Multimodal River Terminal |
| Ports of Indiana (Burns Harbor) | $11,205,600 | Container-handling modernization, including a mobile harbor crane and reach stackers (about $14M total project) |
| Muskogee, OK | $11,073,832 | Barge safety and efficiency improvements |
| Grundy County (Morris), IL | $10,987,800 | Multimodal terminal expansion |
| Red Wing Port Authority, MN | $10,161,985 | Rebuild barge-loading system above the Mississippi floodplain |
| Port Freeport, TX | $9,412,500 | Replace a 25-year-old bulk rice loader; expand berthing at Inner Harbor Berth 3 |
| Rock Island, IL | $9,015,143 | Port expansion and rehabilitation |
| Port of Corpus Christi, TX | ~$7.15M | Digital twin and monitoring for pipeline, rail, road, and waterway assets |
| Granite City, IL | $6,772,000 | Rail reconstruction |
| Bay St. Louis, MS | $6,000,000 | Intermodal facility on Site 4 |
| Port of Avoyelles (Simmesport), LA | $4,000,000 | Truck-to-barge grain transfer facility |
| Rockport Harbor, ME | $698,750 | 20-by-30-foot timber pier for commercial seafood operations |
| Chicago (Lake Calumet), IL | $600,000 | Terminal modernization planning study |
The Waterways Journal counted 14 awards to inland, Gulf, and Great Lakes ports. Illinois alone appears five times among the named projects.
Four patterns in the award list
1. Inland and agricultural ports did very well. Red Wing's barge loader, Freeport's rice loader, Avoyelles' truck-to-barge grain transfer, and Muskogee's barge work are all bulk agricultural export projects. The pitch is direct: farm goods reach world markets more cheaply and reliably. That fits the administration's framing of ports as cost-of-goods infrastructure, and it fits PIDP's statutory criteria on freight movement and economic competitiveness.
2. Resilience still wins, framed as continuity of operations. Port Everglades' award isn't described as climate adaptation. It's described as keeping fuel flowing during severe weather. Red Wing's project raises infrastructure above the floodplain. Applicants who used to write resilience narratives in climate language won this round by writing them as supply-chain uptime.
3. Equipment and modest-scope modernization get funded. Many of the awards are cranes, loaders, reach stackers, conveyors, and rail spurs, not new terminals. Ports of Indiana's $11.2 million funds most of a $14 million equipment package. Projects with clear unit costs, short delivery schedules, and immediate throughput benefits scored well.
4. Small ports remain competitive. Rockport Harbor's $698,750 timber pier and Chicago's $600,000 planning study sit on the same list as $50 million awards. PIDP's authorizing statute reserves a share of each year's funding for small ports, and MARAD has consistently funded sub-$1 million projects for working waterfronts and fisheries. A small port with a clearly defined, shovel-ready project doesn't need to compete with Houston.
The funding cliff
From FY2022 through FY2026, IIJA provided $450 million a year in advance appropriations on top of annual appropriations. Combined with annual funding, that kept IIJA-era rounds well above $500 million, and the April round reached $774 million. The $498 million FY2026 round, after the $774 million round that preceded it, shows how much the program depended on IIJA.
Demand hasn't fallen. The American Association of Port Authorities reports that from FY2019 to FY2024, PIDP drew 681 applicants for 169 awards, with ports requesting $4.51 for every $1 awarded. AAPA warns that PIDP funding "will fall sharply" next year without congressional action, and it's pressing for advance appropriations in the next surface transportation reauthorization. It cites a projected $10.9 billion port infrastructure investment gap over five years.
The near-term lifeline is the House FY2027 Transportation-HUD appropriations bill, which includes $538 million for PIDP. AAPA calls that the largest PIDP amount ever in an annual appropriations bill. It would roughly match FY2026's total even without IIJA. But it isn't law. The government is running on a continuing resolution through December 11, 2026, at prior-year levels. Under a CR, PIDP gets only its base annual appropriation, a fraction of what the IIJA years delivered. A full-year CR for FY2027 would be the worst case for ports.
Three scenarios for the FY2027 round:
- House number enacted (~$538M): Round size similar to FY2026. NOFO likely in spring 2027, matching this year's March opening, with awards next fall.
- Compromise level (Senate-House split): Smaller round, probably $250M–$450M. Competition rises sharply, especially for large projects.
- Full-year CR: PIDP funded only at its prior base appropriation. MARAD could still issue a NOFO, but the round would be a fraction of recent ones, and small-port reserves would take a larger share of a smaller pot.
A surface transportation reauthorization that adds new PIDP advance appropriations or contract authority would change this picture, but there's no sign one passes before 2027.
Positioning for FY2027
Assume the next round is smaller and more competitive. Even in the best case, FY2027 PIDP is unlikely to top FY2026, and the $4.51-to-$1 demand ratio will get worse. Applicants that lost in FY2025 or FY2026 should request a MARAD debrief now. Debriefs explain which merit criteria pulled a score down, and MARAD staff are more available in the late fall than during an open NOFO.
Tighten scope and unit costs. The FY2026 list favors equipment and modular projects with defensible costs. If your last application was a $40 million terminal rebuild, consider whether a $10 million to $15 million first phase with its own independent utility would score better. Ports of Indiana's award, which covers about 80 percent of a $14 million package, is a good template.
Rewrite the benefit narrative around freight costs and uptime. The winning projects were framed as lower shipping costs, faster cargo handling, agricultural exports, and operations that keep running through storms. Reviewers are reading against the administration's priorities, and benefit-cost analysis built on freight savings and avoided disruption travels well under any administration.
Lock in your non-federal share early. PIDP generally caps the federal share at 80 percent, with exceptions for small and rural projects. With a smaller program, applicants that bring more than the minimum match, or a state port authority commitment, will stand out. Several states run their own port programs, Florida's Seaport Transportation and Economic Development program among them, and those dollars can supply match. Line those commitments up before the NOFO.
Get environmental review moving. PIDP awards still require NEPA clearance before obligation, and readiness counts in the project-readiness review. Ports that start categorical exclusion documentation or environmental assessments this winter will have a stronger readiness score in 2027, and can obligate faster if they win.
Consider other channels. Port projects with highway or rail connectors may also qualify under INFRA, BUILD, or CRISI, and the Marine Highway Program supports designated marine highway routes like Milwaukee's. State freight formula funds can also support port-connector projects. Don't build a capital plan that depends on PIDP alone.
Small ports: watch the reserve. If FY2027 appropriations come in low, the statutory small-port reserve will matter more. Fisheries, ferry, and working-waterfront applicants should get applications ready early, since a smaller overall pot makes the reserve's dollars harder to win.
What to tell your board
FY2026 PIDP was the last round funded by IIJA's guaranteed $450 million a year. Ports that won should move quickly to grant agreements and NEPA clearance, because those dollars are appropriated and safe. Ports that didn't should plan for a smaller, more competitive FY2027 round whose size depends on whether Congress enacts something near the House's $538 million or falls back on a full-year continuing resolution. Either way, the projects most likely to win next year look like this year's list: well-costed, operationally urgent, framed around freight savings, and ready to build.