PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 14, 2025
Wildfire Response Improvement Act
This bill expands certain wildfire management assistance to beyond the time when the fire occurs and requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to update various programmatic guidance relating to wildfire response and cost-effectiveness criteria for wildfire mitigation projects.
Currently, in general, government entities’ costs for fighting wildfires are only eligible for assistance under the Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) Program if the costs are incurred during the incident period (i.e., time during which the fire occurs). The bill requires FEMA to modify the FMAG Program so that assessments and emergency stabilization to protect public safety are eligible for FMAG assistance regardless of when the incident period begins or ends.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill also requires FEMA to review and update its evaluation criteria for the cost-effectiveness of wildfire mitigation projects proposed under the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program or Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and prioritize projects accordingly.
Additionally, FEMA must update its policy guide for the Public Assistance program to include guidance on challenges with wildfire recovery, including the resulting toxicity of drinking water resources.
People & committees
Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-4] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 24, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1393 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1393 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1393 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1393 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-14 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposal would require the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to address wildfire recovery challenges and update how it evaluates projects intended to reduce wildfire harm. It would also require recommendations to make public-safety assessments and emergency stabilization eligible for assistance regardless of the designated incident period for a declared fire. The changes concern communities recovering from wildfires and projects intended to protect people, property, and water resources.
the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall recommend such regulations or guidance as are necessary to make eligible assessments and emergency stabilization to protect public safety, including for the fire management assistance program under section 420 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5187), irrespective of the incident period for a declared fire.
include guidance on wildfire-specific recovery challenges, including debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the resulting toxicity of drinking water resources.
update criteria for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of mitigation projects under sections 203 and 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5133; 5170c) based on the results of the review conducted under subsection (a)
The bill would be called the Wildfire Response Improvement Act.
This Act may be cited as the Wildfire Response Improvement Act.
Within one year after enactment, FEMA's Administrator would have to recommend regulations or guidance to make public-safety assessments and emergency stabilization eligible, including under the fire management assistance program, regardless of a declared fire's incident period. This requires recommendations; it does not itself direct an assistance payment.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall recommend such regulations or guidance as are necessary to make eligible assessments and emergency stabilization to protect public safety, including for the fire management assistance program under section 420 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5187), irrespective of the incident period for a declared fire.
Within one year after enactment, FEMA would have to amend its Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide to address wildfire recovery challenges. The guidance would have to cover debris removal, emergency protective measures, and toxic contamination of drinking water resulting from wildfires.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall amend the Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to include guidance on wildfire-specific recovery challenges, including debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the resulting toxicity of drinking water resources.
FEMA would have to review how it evaluates whether wildfire harm-reduction projects under Stafford Act sections 203 and 404 provide benefits that justify their costs. The review would cover preset benefit estimates for common defensible-space projects—projects intended to create protective space against wildfire—as well as infrastructure using natural features and vegetation management.
The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall conduct a review of the criteria for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of projects intended to mitigate the impacts of wildfire under sections 203 and 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5133; 5170c), including— (1) the establishment of pre-calculated benefits criterion for common defensible space mitigation projects for wildfire mitigation; (2) the use of nature-based infrastructure in wildfire mitigation; (3) considerations for vegetation management for wildfire mitigation;
The cost-effectiveness review would also have to consider reducing wildfire smoke's harm to public health and reducing wildfire damage to water infrastructure. These are required review topics, not demonstrated outcomes of the bill.
shall conduct a review of the criteria for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of projects intended to mitigate the impacts of wildfire
(4) reducing the negative effects of wildfire smoke on public health; and (5) lessening the impact of wildfires on water infrastructure.
Within one year after enactment, FEMA would have to issue necessary guidance updating the cost-effectiveness criteria for projects under Stafford Act sections 203 and 404 based on its review. It would also have to issue guidance to prioritize projects under those sections using the updated criteria.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue such guidance as is necessary to— (1) update criteria for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of mitigation projects under sections 203 and 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5133; 5170c) based on the results of the review conducted under subsection (a); and (2) prioritize projects under such sections based on the criteria updated under paragraph (1).
The supplied actions snapshot, updated June 24, 2025, records introduction in the House and referrals to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and its Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management on February 14, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-06-24T20:18:43Z. 2025-02-14: Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management. 2025-02-14: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 2025-02-14: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-14. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status in accompanying materials cannot be assessed.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jun 24, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI