The U.S. Senate recently passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (S.2296), a sweeping piece of legislation that, as always, shapes defense policy, military funding, and national security priorities. But buried within its hundreds of pages are provisions with potentially far-reaching implications for climate resilience, wildlife protection, and environmental accountability.
For those of us focused on sustainability and environmental justice, this year’s NDAA is more than just another defense budget. It is a signal that the Department of Defense (DoD)—one of the largest institutional energy users in the world—is being nudged toward policies that could ripple outward into broader environmental impacts. Let’s break down the key elements and why they matter for the fight against climate change and the protection of ecosystems.
👉 Explore more on climate action and sustainability here.
Key Environmental Provisions in the NDAA FY2026
Strengthening NEPA Implementation
The bill calls for the DoD to formalize its compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). While it doesn’t override NEPA, it does establish requirements for timely reviews and assigns a designated official for oversight. This is a small but significant step: NEPA reviews are often the frontline defense against harmful development in sensitive habitats and ecosystems. Reinforcing these processes means more rigorous checks on the environmental impact of military projects.
Wildfire Training and Response
Another provision directs the DoD to support training in wildfire prevention and response. With wildfires growing more destructive across the U.S. due to climate change, this move aligns defense capabilities with urgent ecological needs. Military bases often sit in high-risk fire zones, and training efforts could improve collaboration with local agencies while helping protect vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife.
Solid Waste Disposal Measures
The NDAA authorizes the use of expeditionary solid waste disposal systems for certain sensitive or illicit materials. While primarily framed as a logistical and security issue, it raises important questions about waste management in military operations. How these systems are implemented will determine whether they truly minimize environmental harm or simply shift risks elsewhere.
PFAS: Addressing “Forever Chemicals”
Perhaps the most consequential set of provisions deals with PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances)—toxic, persistent chemicals that have contaminated soil, water, and wildlife across the country, often near military bases. The bill:
- Authorizes the DoD to destroy or dispose of PFAS.
- Adjusts procurement rules for firefighting gear containing PFAS.
- Allows bottled water for communities affected by military-linked PFAS contamination.
- Repeals certain prohibitions on PFAS incineration and purchasing.
- Permits interim response measures to PFAS releases.
This represents an overdue acknowledgment of the DoD’s role in PFAS pollution and a step toward accountability. However, some environmental groups are wary of loopholes, particularly regarding incineration, which could shift contamination rather than eliminate it.
Energy Savings and Efficiency
The act also modifies how the DoD can use energy cost savings, potentially opening doors for conservation and efficiency initiatives. While the details remain limited, any measure that incentivizes energy efficiency within such a massive energy-consuming institution has the potential for significant emissions reductions.
Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP)
One of the more promising areas is funding for ERCIP projects, which focus on renewable energy, microgrids, and water resilience infrastructure. For FY2026, the bill includes:
- California (Mountain View): Microgrid/power generation (~$20.6M)
- Travis Air Force Base (CA): Microgrid (~$25.1M)
- Texas (Camp Swift / Fort Cavazos): Smart water grid (
$19.8M) and central energy plant ($34.5M) - Utah (Camp Williams): Microgrid (~$28.5M)
- Germany (Ansbach): Energy resilience infrastructure (~$723M)
These investments in low-carbon, resilient infrastructure not only strengthen military readiness but also demonstrate that renewable energy and water security are no longer “optional”—they’re strategic necessities.
How the NDAA Affects Climate, Wildlife, and Awareness
Climate and Resilience
By reinforcing NEPA and funding ERCIP projects, the NDAA helps reduce reliance on fossil fuels, promote energy efficiency, and improve resilience to extreme weather events. While the DoD’s primary mission isn’t climate protection, these steps indirectly contribute to cutting greenhouse gas emissions and advancing clean energy solutions.
Protecting Ecosystems and Wildlife
Wildfire prevention training is a clear example of defense policy overlapping with ecological needs. More resources for wildfire response mean better protection for forests, grasslands, and the species that depend on them. Similarly, stronger environmental review under NEPA can help safeguard habitats from large-scale construction or operational impacts.
PFAS Accountability
PFAS remains one of the most pressing environmental justice issues linked to the military. Communities near bases have dealt with contaminated drinking water, soil, and food sources for decades. The NDAA’s provisions don’t solve the crisis overnight, but they indicate progress in forcing the DoD to face its environmental responsibilities.
Raising Public Awareness
Including these measures in the NDAA also raises visibility. When a defense bill acknowledges climate resilience, wildfire threats, and PFAS contamination, it reinforces that these aren’t just “environmental issues”—they’re national security issues. That framing can help build momentum for broader, systemic change.
👉 Learn more about the intersection of defense policy and climate awareness here.
Why This Matters
The NDAA is passed every year, and it often feels like a routine defense authorization. But this year’s provisions remind us that environmental issues—from wildfires to PFAS contamination—are inseparable from questions of security, resilience, and sustainability.
If implemented effectively, the FY2026 NDAA could help reduce the DoD’s environmental footprint, support cleaner energy infrastructure, and bring long-overdue relief to communities living with PFAS contamination. At the same time, these measures highlight how much work remains to be done—and how important it is to keep climate and wildlife awareness at the center of policy discussions.
✅ Bottom line: The NDAA FY2026 is not an environmental bill, but it is quietly shaping the way America’s largest institutional energy user responds to climate change, pollution, and ecological resilience. It’s a reminder that the fight for sustainability reaches every corner of public policy—including the defense budget.
