New Federal Building Act Mandates U.S.-Sourced Mass Timber, Prioritizing Wood from Wildfire Prevention Efforts

The Mass Timber Federal Buildings Act of 2025 is setting up a new mandate for how the government constructs or leases its properties. Simply put, this bill requires the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) to prioritize using domestically sourced mass timber and other innovative wood products whenever they build, alter, acquire, or lease a public building. This isn't just about using wood; it’s about ensuring that wood comes from U.S. forestlands and is processed in a U.S. facility, essentially creating a 'Made in America' requirement for federal construction materials (SEC. 2).

The 'Made in America' Timber Mandate

For those who work in construction, manufacturing, or supply chains, this is a significant shift. The bill specifies that the wood must be “responsibly sourced,” meaning it must either meet independent certification standards or come from public lands that already follow best management practices. This effectively locks out foreign suppliers of mass timber, aiming to boost domestic manufacturing and forestry jobs. However, this domestic sourcing mandate could potentially increase material costs for federal projects if the U.S. supply chain can’t meet demand competitively, which is a factor that could affect the budgets of future government contracts.

Prioritizing Wood from Ecosystem Restoration

Here’s where the policy gets specific about forestry: the GSA and DoD must give preference to wood products sourced from specific types of forestry work. This includes materials coming from forest management activities focused on ecosystem restoration or actions taken to protect communities and critical infrastructure from major wildfires. They also have to prioritize wood supplied by underserved forest owners, like small family forests and Tribes (SEC. 2). For a logger or a small forest owner in a fire-prone region, this creates a guaranteed, high-priority buyer (the U.S. government) for the wood they thin out during necessary wildfire mitigation projects, turning a cost of management into a revenue stream.

The Environmental Fine Print: Lifecycle Assessments

To ensure this wood-first policy is actually better for the planet, the bill requires the GSA Administrator, in collaboration with the Secretary of Agriculture, to conduct a full “cradle-to-gate” lifecycle assessment within 180 days of the law’s enactment. This assessment must measure the global warming potential of these new public buildings using mass timber. This data will then be reported to Congress and made public. This is a crucial step for transparency, giving taxpayers a clear look at the environmental benefit—or lack thereof—of this new construction mandate. It’s the government putting its money where its mouth is regarding the carbon footprint of its infrastructure.

The Catch: When is it 'Reasonably Possible'?

While the mandate is strong, there’s a key piece of language that gives agency heads a lot of wiggle room: they must prioritize mass timber “whenever it’s reasonably possible” (SEC. 2). This phrase grants significant discretion to the GSA Administrator and the Secretary of Defense. If using mass timber is deemed too expensive, too complex, or simply impractical for a specific project—say, a highly specialized military facility—they can bypass the requirement. This ambiguity means the actual adoption rate of mass timber in federal buildings will heavily depend on how the GSA and DoD interpret and enforce that “reasonably possible” standard against cost and timeline pressures.