Mass timber and modular construction gain traction as pilot projects but face code and supply limits
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Witnesses described Army and Navy pilots using mass timber and industrialized (modular/prefab) construction to shorten timelines and lower costs, but members heard limits on multi‑story use, supply, and appropriations timing.
Members of the House Appropriations Subcommittee heard testimony that mass timber and industrialized construction (off-site fabrication and modular assembly) are moving from demonstration to early project execution but remain constrained by codes, supply and sequencing of appropriations.
Dave Morrow of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said the Corps recently designed the Army’s first barracks “made primarily with mass timber structural elements” and is at 35% design for a mass-timber barracks at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, an FY2025 MilCon project conditioned on appropriation. “We are encouraging all of our designers and design-build contractors to bring any innovative technology that’s both code compliant and meets the mission,” Morrow told the committee.
NAVFAC Chief Engineer Keith Hamilton described a cross-laminated timber child development center in Hampton Roads that is entering construction and said the service is also using industrialized construction for repeatable facility types. Hamilton said modular fabrication can yield “tremendous benefits” by creating economies of scale when components are produced off-site and assembled on site.
Why it matters: Several members pressed witnesses on timing and appropriations. Witnesses said one barrier is the mismatch between multi-year supply needs (long lead equipment and factory setup) and single-year appropriations for many O&M-funded repair projects. NAVFAC and USACE officials said longer appropriation horizons or more flexible funding would make industrialized approaches and supplier investment more viable.
Technical and regulatory limits: Panelists noted that mass timber offers lifecycle carbon benefits when sustainably sourced, but must meet code and sustainability criteria. For 3D-printed or alternative materials, USACE and NAVFAC cited seismic and multi-story testing limits at ERDC’s Champaign lab before proving suitability for taller or higher-seismic-area buildings. Members asked whether life-cycle costs actually fall even if first costs rise; witnesses said higher first costs can be offset by lower life-cycle costs in some cases but cautioned that each project needs analysis.
Supply chain and workforce: Witnesses and lawmakers raised supply constraints for cross-laminated timber and the need for industrial fabrication capacity in the U.S. to scale modular construction. NAVFAC and USACE said they are tracking market conditions and cost indexes and piloting projects to develop repeatable approaches.
Ending: Lawmakers urged the services to identify statutory or regulatory changes that would let the services engage contractors earlier in design, and several members asked for follow-up on barriers and needed policy changes. No formal actions were taken at the hearing.