Built To Last Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 29, 2026
Bottom line
The 'Built To Last Act of 2026' aims to integrate federal long-term climate and extreme weather projections into national building codes and standards to improve infrastructure resilience against future environmental challenges.
What it actually does
This bill mandates the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (NOAA) to identify and support research for a consistent, federal set of forward-looking long-term meteorological information, including future extreme weather events and environmental trends. It then requires the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to make this information publicly available and provide technical assistance to organizations developing building codes and standards, helping them incorporate this future-oriented data to enhance infrastructure resilience.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill is a critical step towards future-proofing American infrastructure against the escalating impacts of climate change and extreme weather. By leveraging federal scientific expertise to inform building codes, it will enhance public safety, reduce long-term disaster recovery costs, and ensure that new construction is built to withstand anticipated environmental conditions, thereby promoting national resilience and economic stability.
Opponents contend
Opponents might contend that mandating the use of long-term meteorological projections in building codes could lead to increased construction costs, potentially making housing and development less affordable. Concerns could also be raised about the reliability and specificity of long-term, mesoscale climate models for local building applications, suggesting that such federal intervention could be an overreach into traditionally state and local regulatory domains, potentially stifling innovation or imposing unnecessary burdens.
The bill is concise and straightforward, allowing for a quick and comprehensive reading, which provides ample time for detailed evaluation of its provisions and implications.
Section 2(a)
Definitions for Key Terms
This section establishes the definitions for critical terms used throughout the Act, such as 'Director' (of NIST), 'Under Secretary' (of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere), 'extreme weather,' 'other environmental trends,' 'Mitigation Framework Leadership Group,' 'United States Global Change Research Program,' and 'long-term.' These definitions are fundamental for understanding the scope and application of the bill's mandates to federal agencies and the types of information to be identified and disseminated.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that clear and consistent definitions are essential for effective interagency coordination and for ensuring that all stakeholders understand the precise scope and intent of the legislation, thereby facilitating smoother implementation.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against definitional sections themselves, though the breadth of terms like 'extreme weather' or the flexibility in defining 'long-term' could be points of future debate regarding the bill's practical application.
Tradeoffs
The primary tension lies in balancing the need for precise definitions to guide implementation with sufficient flexibility to adapt to evolving scientific understanding and unforeseen environmental challenges.
Section 2(b)
NOAA's Role in Identifying Forward-Looking Meteorological Information
This provision requires the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (NOAA) to identify and support research that enables a consistent, federal set of forward-looking long-term meteorological information. This information must model future extreme weather events, other environmental trends, projections, and up-to-date observations, making it suitable for use in developing building standards. Additionally, NOAA must provide mesoscale meteorological information to the NIST Director upon request or when deemed appropriate.
Section 2(c)
NIST's Role in Disseminating Information and Providing Technical Assistance
This section directs the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in consultation with NOAA, to make the identified meteorological information publicly available. NIST is also tasked with identifying federal and non-federal efforts in developing standards, building codes, and voluntary certifications. Crucially, NIST must then advise and provide technical assistance to organizations that develop these standards, model building codes, or voluntary certifications, helping them appropriately incorporate the forward-looking long-term meteorological information. This is to be carried out through existing NIST authorities, including the Fire Research Center and the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program.
Section 2(d)
Interagency Working Group for Research Coordination
This section mandates the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), in coordination with the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group (MFLG), to establish a working group. This group will consist of representatives from various federal agencies deemed appropriate by the OSTP Director. Its primary purpose is to identify and support the research necessary for NOAA to fulfill its mandate under subsection (b) regarding the identification of forward-looking meteorological information.
The term 'long-term' is defined as having 'such meaning as the Director, in consultation with the Under Secretary, considers appropriate for purposes of this section.' This grants significant discretion to NIST and NOAA in determining the temporal scope of the forward-looking meteorological information.
Section 2(a)(7)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative practice to provide implementing agencies with flexibility to define technical terms that may evolve with scientific understanding or practical considerations, avoiding a rigid definition that could quickly become outdated or impractical.
Case for: Supporters argue that allowing scientific experts at NIST and NOAA to define 'long-term' ensures that the most current and appropriate scientific understanding of climate projections guides the bill's implementation, allowing for adaptability as climate science evolves.
Case against: Critics might contend that this open-ended definition grants too much power to unelected agency officials, potentially leading to an overly expansive or inconsistent interpretation of 'long-term' that could impose unforeseen costs or regulatory burdens on stakeholders without direct congressional oversight.
Estimated impact: High, as the definition of 'long-term' will directly dictate the temporal horizon of all meteorological information identified and disseminated under the Act, profoundly influencing the stringency, scope, and cost implications of any updated building codes.