Disaster Recovery and Resilience Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Foxx, Virginia [R-NC-5]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Oct 1, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to accelerate and simplify disaster recovery efforts by reducing regulatory burdens, enhancing inter-agency coordination, and integrating pre-planned infrastructure upgrades to improve resilience.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to streamline disaster recovery by providing temporary waivers for the Jones Act and the Davis-Bacon Act following a major disaster declaration. It also establishes an Emergency Recovery Board to review recovery processes and recommend improvements, clarifies environmental review requirements for hazard mitigation projects, and mandates the installation of prescheduled technological improvements during the repair of damaged facilities.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill will significantly expedite disaster recovery by removing bureaucratic hurdles, such as the Jones Act and Davis-Bacon requirements, which can delay the delivery of aid and increase costs. They contend that establishing an Emergency Recovery Board will improve future disaster responses through systematic review and recommendations, while clarifying environmental reviews and allowing for pre-scheduled upgrades will make infrastructure more resilient and efficient.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that waiving the Jones Act could undermine domestic maritime industries and national security, while suspending Davis-Bacon requirements could depress wages for construction workers involved in critical recovery efforts. Concerns could also be raised that clarifying environmental reviews might inadvertently add layers to an already complex process, potentially delaying critical mitigation projects.
The bill is concise and its provisions are relatively straightforward, making it accessible for a quick review by interested parties.
Section 2(a), amending Stafford Act, Section 431(a)
Jones Act Exemption for Disaster Relief
This provision allows the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating to exempt vessels from certain requirements of the Jones Act for a period of 180 days after a major disaster declaration. This exemption applies if the vessel owner or operator demonstrates it is needed to provide disaster relief to the affected area.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that temporary Jones Act waivers are essential during major disasters to ensure the rapid and cost-effective delivery of critical supplies and personnel, especially when domestic shipping capacity is insufficient or unavailable due to damage.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that waiving the Jones Act undermines the domestic maritime industry, which is vital for national security and economic stability, and that such waivers should be rare and carefully considered rather than codified.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the urgent need for rapid disaster relief with concerns about supporting the domestic maritime industry and national security interests.
Section 2(a), amending Stafford Act, Section 431(b)
Davis-Bacon Act Waiver for Disaster Repair Projects
This provision waives the requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act for any project carried out under Title IV of the Stafford Act that is related to the repair of damage caused by a major disaster. This waiver applies for the duration of the disaster repair project.
Section 2(b), amending Stafford Act, Section 432
Establishment of Emergency Recovery Board
This section mandates the President to establish an Emergency Recovery Board within 30 days of the first major disaster declaration for each category of disaster in a calendar year. The board, comprising federal, state, and local officials, along with congressional staff, is tasked with reviewing recovery processes and procedures. It must submit an initial report within 30 days with recommendations on immediate barriers and a secondary report within 90 days with legislative or regulatory change recommendations.
Section 2(c), amending Stafford Act, Section 404(d)(1)
Clarification of Environmental Review for Hazard Mitigation
This provision amends the Stafford Act to explicitly require compliance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 during environmental reviews for hazard mitigation projects. This clarifies that these specific environmental statutes must be considered in addition to existing environmental reviews.
Section 2(d), amending Stafford Act, Section 406(f)
Allowance for Prescheduled Technological Improvements
This provision requires the President to ensure that any prescheduled technological improvement for a facility is installed during its repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement following a major disaster. A 'prescheduled technological improvement' is defined as one that was scheduled, procured, and had funding set aside before the major disaster declaration.
This amendment explicitly adds compliance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to the list of applicable environmental reviews for hazard mitigation projects.
Section 2(c), amending Stafford Act, Section 404(d)(1)
Why it matters:This could be standard legislative practice to ensure comprehensive environmental compliance, or it could be a subtle way to reinforce environmental protections that might otherwise be overlooked or implicitly relaxed during expedited disaster recovery efforts.
Case for: Supporters argue that this clarification is crucial for ensuring that hazard mitigation projects, while necessary for safety, do not inadvertently cause long-term environmental damage or violate existing federal environmental laws.
Case against: Critics might contend that explicitly listing these acts could add layers of review and potential delays to already urgent hazard mitigation projects, potentially hindering the speed of resilience-building efforts.
Estimated impact: Potentially significant for environmental projects, ensuring higher standards of review and compliance, which could affect project timelines and costs.