New Hampshire lawmakers are advancing a bill that would require state-funded construction projects to specify American-sourced lumber — putting New Hampshire lumber producers ahead of Canadian competitors when the state builds. Senate Bill 529, which passed the Senate by voice vote in late January 2026, cleared its House committee public hearing on March 24 and is expected to reach a committee vote within days.
The legislation targets a technical but economically significant problem: for three decades, a lumber grading gap has given Canadian softwood a quiet structural advantage in US construction markets, and New Hampshire’s forest industry has been absorbing the cost.
The SPFs Problem: A Grading Gap Thirty Years in the Making
The issue traces back to 1991, when the United States and Canada completed full-scale testing of North American framing lumber and landed on separate grading systems. Canadian spruce, pine, and fir was grouped under the designation SPF — Spruce-Pine-Fir — overseen by the National Lumber Grades Authority. American wood of the same species mix was classified as SPFs, with the lowercase “s” denoting “South” of the Canadian border. Eight species sit in the Canadian group; nine in the American.
The problem is what happened to the design values. Despite the wood being biologically similar, the SPFs designation received lower allowable strength ratings. In structural calculations, that translates to a real penalty: allowable spans for SPFs framing lumber run 4.3% to 8.7% shorter than equivalent Canadian SPF, depending on grade, spacing, and anticipated load. Engineers writing construction specs have a rational incentive to call out Canadian SPF — it lets them push spans slightly further.
Over time, this created a feedback loop. Architects and structural engineers defaulted to specifying SPF because the numbers worked better on paper. Suppliers stocked what got specified. New Hampshire sawmills, processing timber grown in the same northern latitudes as Canadian forests, found their product at a systemic disadvantage — not because of the wood’s actual quality, but because of how a grading committee had sliced the numbers in 1991.
Proponents of the current legislation argue that the disparity is particularly unfair for New Hampshire’s north country, where growing conditions closely mirror those across the border. Citizens Count reporting on the issue noted that lawmakers cannot rewrite international industry standards — but they can control how the state itself buys lumber.
What SB 529 Actually Does
SB 529 is a targeted, procurement-side fix. It amends state building requirements to specify that material specifications for any state-funded building project shall give preference to lumber harvested in the United States. For softwood framing specifically, design documents must reference US-sourced SPFs lumber. An exception is allowed only when design criteria genuinely require imported materials — so engineers are not forced to compromise structural standards.
The bill takes effect 60 days after passage. It adds no new funding and creates no new positions. The New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services described the fiscal impact as “indeterminable,” citing variable factors including lumber prices and ongoing tariff uncertainty — a reflection of how tightly US construction supply chains are now tangled with escalating duties on Canadian softwood.
Senate Bill 529 is sponsored by Sen. David Rochefort (R, District 1), with co-sponsors Sen. Kevin Avard, Sen. Dan Innis, Sen. Howard Pearl, Rep. Arnie Davis, and Rep. Mike Ouellet — a bipartisan-flavored group drawing representation from Coos County, New Hampshire’s northernmost and most heavily forested region.
Industry Support and Engineering Pushback
The New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association (NHTOA) supports SB 529 and its companion bills, describing them as “narrowly focused — as opposed to overhauling the code for all tree species and points of timber origin.” The organization has tracked all three related bills through the 2026 session: SB 529, SB 503 (which would require SPFs lumber milled in NH to be accepted wherever SPF is specified in state codes), and HB 1204 (which passed the full House on March 5 and would allow NH-grown timber at or above 44°N latitude to qualify for the SPF designation outright).
Not everyone is convinced. Dan Martel, President of the Structural Engineers of New Hampshire, pushed back at hearings, arguing that equating the two lumber grades was “like saying two different recipes with different ingredients were the same.” His concern is that flattening the grading distinction could introduce risk into structural calculations — an argument the engineering community has made consistently whenever the SPFs disparity is challenged.
The tension is real but manageable, proponents say, because SB 529 does not force engineers to abandon established design values. It simply ensures that when the state is the client, American wood gets first consideration.
The Bigger Picture: US Lumber in a Tariff-Charged Market
SB 529 does not exist in a vacuum. It arrives as the US–Canada softwood lumber trade war continues to escalate, with US countervailing and antidumping duties on Canadian lumber compounding supply-side pressure across the construction sector. Federal policy is moving in a similar direction: the Build America, Buy America Act already requires US-origin lumber on federally funded infrastructure projects.
New Hampshire’s bill extends that logic downward to the state level — and does so through the lens of a domestic industry that argues it has been competing with one hand tied behind its back since 1991. If the legislation succeeds, it won’t rewrite the grading rulebooks, but it will redirect public dollars toward the mills and forests that generate jobs in one of the most forested states in the country.
The shifting demand picture for US wood fiber makes that redirection more consequential than it might appear on paper. Every state contract that moves from Canadian SPF to domestic SPFs lumber is a small signal to a market that has been slow to revalue American product.
What Comes Next
The House Public Works and Highways Committee is expected to vote on SB 529 the week of March 30, 2026, per the NHTOA’s March 27 legislative update. If the committee recommends passage, the bill goes to a full House floor vote. HB 1204 is moving through the Senate simultaneously. SB 503 is also in House committee review.
Should all three bills pass, New Hampshire would have a layered statutory framework: one that adjusts procurement preferences, one that modifies building code acceptance of NH-grown timber, and one that gives domestic SPFs formal standing wherever Canadian SPF is currently specified under state codes. It would represent the most significant shift in New Hampshire lumber policy in decades — built on a foundation of correcting a grading quirk that most people in construction have simply accepted as the way things are.
