The Strong American Wood Act (H.R. 10906) would require federal buildings to use domestic timber when available, backed by revolving loan funds and trade measures. The bill awaits committee review across nine House panels, with no current procurement requirements or funded solicitations yet established.

KEY SIGNALS
- Strong American Wood Act would mandate domestic timber in federal buildings when available
- Bill ends Buy American waivers for wood products available from domestic forest sources
- Canadian softwood duty deposits totaling $7B could seed revolving loan funds for domestic wood construction
- Legislation designates US pulp, paper, hardwood, and softwood supply chains as critical to national security
- Referred to nine House committees with full text not yet published; no current procurement requirements

Bipartisan lawmakers introduced the Strong American Wood Act (H.R. 10906) in October 2026, a bill that would fundamentally reshape how federal buildings source construction materials. Sponsored by Arkansas Republican Bruce Westerman, a forester by trade who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee, alongside Washington State Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, the legislation mandates that federal buildings use domestic timber when available. The bill arrives amid significant distress in the American wood products industry, with 277 sawmill and wood-business closures since 2021 and more than 50 mills closing or curtailing operations in just 15 months, according to Westerman's office. The national lumber association counts 40,000 jobs lost since 2022. Westerman framed the legislation in straightforward terms: "We want to have strong markets, so that we can have strong infrastructure."

The procurement implications for federal construction contractors and timber suppliers are substantial. The bill would end Buy American rule exemptions for any government component available as a domestic forest product, directly affecting sourcing decisions across federal building projects. Current Buy American waivers allow agencies to procure foreign materials under certain conditions; this legislation would eliminate that flexibility for wood products specifically. Companies bidding on federal construction contracts would need to verify domestic timber availability before specifying materials, potentially altering supply chain strategies for projects ranging from military installations to federal office buildings. The requirement applies whenever domestic timber is available, creating a preference that federal contractors must incorporate into their procurement planning and bid proposals.

The bill's trade and financing provisions carry equally significant procurement intelligence value. The legislation proposes directing duties collected on Canadian softwood lumber into revolving loan funds for new homes built with domestic wood products, with Canadian lumber companies having already paid $7 billion in duty deposits by May last year. An additional portion would promote US softwood lumber. Westerman's office is advocating for a statutory US response to the EU Deforestation Regulation, which they contend unfairly targets American wood products. The bill would impose secondary inspections on wood and wood-look-alike imports, requiring importers to disclose full chemical inputs. It would also designate domestic pulp and paper, hardwood, and softwood supply chains as critical to national security, ordering investigations into whether imports undermine these industries. Mills would receive tariff exemptions on machinery imports used for modernization and expansion where no US factory manufactures the equipment. Westerman indicated at Anthony Timberlands' sawmill in Malvern, Arkansas, that he wants the Commerce Department to review Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs, signaling a comprehensive trade policy overhaul for forest products.

The bill's current status demands careful attention from government contracting professionals. It has been referred to nine House committees for review, and its full text had not been published on Congress.gov as of October 26, 2026. Critically, the proposals are not current procurement requirements or funded solicitations. Federal contractors should monitor committee proceedings and wait for published legislative text before adjusting compliance strategies. The revolving loan funds could create financing opportunities for homebuilding once established, but no available funding opportunity exists at this stage. Companies can use the committee review period and pending text publication to assess potential procurement impacts, but should not treat any provisions as current contract requirements. The bill represents a potential sea change in federal timber procurement, but it remains subject to the legislative process, including committee markups, floor votes, and potential amendments that could alter its final scope.
    
Source: samsearch.co